31
Evolution of the conceptual hydrogeologic and ground-water flow model for Las Vegas Valley, Clark County, Nevada David J. Donovan Southern Nevada Water Authority Geological Society of America Annual Meeting November 14, 2000

Evolution of the conceptual hydrogeologic and ground-water

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    2

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Evolution of the conceptual hydrogeologic and ground-water flow

model for Las Vegas Valley, Clark County, Nevada

David J. Donovan

Southern Nevada Water Authority

Geological Society of America Annual Meeting

November 14, 2000

Outline

• Model development

• Improvement in geologic understanding

Conceptual Model DevelopmentHydrologic Parameters

• Location, timing and value of:– Water levels– Ground water production / injection– Spring, creek flow– Major and minor wash flow– Water usage by bare-soil and pheatophytes– Natural recharge– Secondary recharge– Interbasin flow

Conceptual Model DevelopmentHydrogeologic Parameters

• Location, and value of:– Transmissivity - Horizontal permeability– Leakance - Vertical permeability– Storativity - Ability to store water

• Spatial distribution determined by a combination of geology and hydrology

• Assigned value primarily determined by hydrologic analysis (aquifer tests / modeling)

1981 MSS Image (2,3,1)

> 5,000 meters of fill

Me

ters

ab

ove

me

an

se

a l

eve

l

Topography of Las Vegas Valley

Major structures and lithologies in Las Vegas Valley

Hydrologic flow system and Hydrogeologic setting

-1000

-4000

-3000

-2000

-5000

2000

3000

0

1000LowerPaleozoicCarbonate Rocks

Carbonates ?PaleozoicLower

UpperPaleozoicTransitionalMesozic

SliciclasiticRocks

&Rocks Rocks

CratonalCambrian

Mesozoic to

?

pre-Cambrian

Basement

SPRING MOUNTAINS

Frenchman Mtn.Las Vegas

WashSpringsLas VegasMountain

La Madre

Alluvial FanRed Rock

Las Vegas Boulevard (Strip)

West EastEdge of Las Vegas Valley Hydrographic Basin

Ground water flow directions

0

-5000Hydrogeologic cross-section. Vertical exaggeration: 4 to 1

025005,0007,500

10,00012,500

-2,500-5,000-7,500

-10,000-12,500-15,000

??

UTM meters east (NAD 27)

Hydrologic flow system. Vertical exaggeration: 1 to 1

ToColorado

River

ToPahrump

High permeability area inLas Vegas Valley

High permeability area

Maxey and Jameson cross-section

East

INTERBEDDED SANDY GRAVELS

SILTY CLAYS

CALICHE WITH SAND AND GRAVEL

DISTRICTMAIN WELL FIELD

NEW WELLS

Generalized geologic cross-section of Las Vegas Valley

EXPLANATION

Modified from Maxey and Jameson (1948)

Vertical Exageration ~ 17.5U D

U D U D

500

250

(m)

West

0 5

KILOMETERS

CARBONATE BEDROCK

500

250

750

1000(m)

"Near-surface water""Shallow aquifer""Middle aquifer""Deep aquifer"

Concept of allostratigraphic units

Allostratigraphic units cross-section

"middle

0

250

500

Fault

CLASTIC ROCKS

UD Inferred

U

part""lower

part"

CARBONATE

750

West

1000

METERS

B

?

Surface Location of D TO D' cross-section

Vertical Exaggeration = 10X

B'

Land

Sand Sandy c-g deposits

KILOMETERS

Gravelly c-g depositsInterbeddedSandy silt

2.50

ROCKS

Unknown

East

Hydrostratigraphic units cross-section

24A

0

250

500

Fault

5

6 6B?

UD Inferred

U

4

4B

3B

750

West

1000METERS

B

(aquifer)

(aquifer)(aquitard)

3A1B

2

1A

1X

East

Surface Location of D TO D' cross-section

Vertical Exaggeration = 10X

B'

Land

Very high permeability

Low permeability Moderate permeability

KILOMETERS

Unknown

2.50

EXPLANATION

CarbonateRocks

Clastic Rocks

Hydrostratigraphic unit fence Diagram

1X1A

1B

1B

1A

1X

1X

4

4

4B

4B3A

2

5

66

5

3B 2

2

3A

2A

2B

4

6B?

3B

0 1 2 3 4 5

N

W

S

E

0

0

100

100

200

200

300

300

400

400

500

500

600

600

700

0

250

500

750

750

1000

Meters above

6?

Area OfInvestigationBoundary

D

D'

B

B'

Low Permeability

ModeratePermeability

HighPermeability

CarbonateBedrockClasticBedrock

PotentiometricSurface

Wells usedto create fence diagram

PotentiometricSurface

1A

1B

1X

2

2A

3A

3B

4

4A

4B

5

6

6B

2B

mean sea level

Elevation

Duck CreekAquifer

Las VegasSprings

Las VegasWash

Aquifer

Aquitard

Relationship between allostratigraphic and hydrostratigraphic units

Increase in sorting

Increasing distance from source

Locally cemented

Poorly sorted, cementedcoarse-graineddeposits

Well sortedlightly cemented

moderately coarse-graineddeposits

fine-grained deposits

Hydrostratigraphic Units

shallow geochemical zone

aquitard

aquitard

aquitard

aquitard

primary aquifer fornon-municipal wells

primary aquifer formunicipal wells

aquifer ?

aquifer ?

Las VegasWash

Aquitard

Las VegasSpringsAquifer

DuckCreekAquifer

(confiningunit)

Very Simplified diagram ofthe ground-water systemin the central part ofLas Vegas Valley

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

275

300

325

350

375

400

425

450

Model Layers - Gross Simplification

Layer 1 - Las Vegas Wash Aquitard

Leakance Boundary - Las Vegas Creek Aquifer Plus Twin Lakes Aquitard

Layer 2 - La Madre Mountain Aquifer

Leakance Boundary - Unnamed Aquitard at the Top of the Duck Creek Aquifer

Layer 3 - Duck Creek Aquifer

1

2

3

Transmissivity map Layer 1

8 Transmissivity Zones

Range of Values:

100 to 5,000 ft2/d

Upper Leakance layer

8 Leakance Zones

Range of Values:

1.0E-8 to 1.6E-4 ft2/d

Transmissivity map Layer 2

11 Transmissivity Zones

Range of Values:

50 to 30,000 ft2/d

Lower Leakance layer

6 Leakance Zones

Range of Values:

1.0E-8 to 1.0E-3 ft2/d

Transmissivity map Layer 3

6 Transmissivity Zones

Range of Values:

50 to 1,000 ft2/d

Table - TransmissivityTransmissivity

code Type Layer 1 Layer 2 Layer 30 Inactive 0 0 01 Carbonate Rock 101 551 1,0002 Clastic Rock 102 252 1003 Igneous/Metamorphic Rock 103 53 504 Cemented Alluvial Fan gravel 1,500 1,0045 U/F U/C Alluvial Fan Gravel/Sand 2,500 8,0056 Faulted Sands/Silts/Gravel 1,001 6,0067 Unfaulted/Undiff. Silts/Sands/Clays 1,000 307 5008 Local moderately permeable areas 5,000 12,6009 Very permeable areas 50,000 30,009

10 N/A11 Faulted Carbonate Rock 50112 Faulted Clastic Rock 5213 Faulted Igneous/Metamorphic Rock14 Local odd unit 1,214

Table - Leakance

Leakance L 1-2 L 2-3code Type

0 Inactive 0 01 Carbonate Rock 1.1E-06 1.0E-062 Clastic Rock 2.0E-08 2.0E-083 Igneous/Metamorphic Rock 1.0E-08 1.0E-084 Cemented Alluvial Fan gravel 1.5E-065 Alluvial Fan Gravel/Sand 1.6E-04 1.0E-046 Faulted Sands/Silts/Gravel 1.3E-05 1.0E-037 Unfaulted/Undiff. Silts/Sands/Clays 1.0E-07 1.0E-078 Local moderately permeable areas 1.5E-069 Very permeable areas

10 N/A11 Faulted Carbonate Rock12 Faulted Clastic Rock13 Faulted Igneous/Metamorphic Rock14 Local odd unit

Conclusions

• Hydrologeologic models primarily test geologic concepts

• Geologic understanding has increased in the last two decades

• Hydrologic data is the compilation of causes and effects on the ground-water system

• Most observed ground-water system changes are a result of multiple causes

Artesian wells in Las Vegas Valley

1912 1998

Table - StorativityStorage Layer 1 Layer 2 Layer 3

code Type0 Inactive1 Carbonate Rock 1.0E-01 1.001E-02 1.1E-032 Clastic Rock 1.0E-01 1.002E-02 1.2E-033 Igneous/Metamorphic Rock 1.0E-01 1.003E-02 1.3E-034 Cemented Alluvial Fan gravel 2.5E-01 1.004E-025 Alluvial Fan Gravel/Sand 8.050E-036 Faulted Sands/Silts/Gravel 1.006E-027 Unfaulted/Undiff. Silts/Sands/Clays 1.5E-01 1.070E-03 1.7E-038 Local moderately permeable areas 1.001E-019 Very permeable areas 5.009E-02

10 N/A11 Faulted Carbonate Rock12 Faulted Clastic Rock13 Faulted Igneous/Metamorphic Rock14 Local odd unit 1.101E-0115 Local odd unit 2 4.015E-02

Location of Las Vegas Valley

Allostratigraphic units

shallow geochemical zone

Tule SpringsAlloformation

Lone MountainAllogroup

ParadiseValley

Alloformation

silt

Very Simplified diagramof the basin-fill inthe central part ofLas Vegas Valley

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

275

300

325

350

375

400

425

450

gravel

silt

gravel with

silt

gravel

silt

gravel

caliche

(Las Vegas Fm.)

Major lithic types: Las Vegas Valley