Yes, so the stress period in concept is where all input is read (stresses) and held constant for that period.
So if specify pumping as X and recharge as Y, had have a 365 day stress period, then it will hold X and Y constant for 365 days.
The time step is how many times it will solve the head solution, so if you set the time step to 365 steps, then you will get daily time steps,
if you set it to 12 steps, then you will get each time step length equal to 365/12 (assumes no time step multiplier).
Note again, that irrelevant of the number of time steps, all stresses are held constant (that is the same X pumping is used and Y recharge).
The time step multiplier allows for some acceleration by assuming the model approaches steady state during a stress period, but this can make post-processing a headache and most models use more advance packages such as SFR2, MNW2, and FMP, a multiplier does
not help because those packages change their stresses by the time step (rather then stress period).
I would disagree with Anderson (2016), that is kind of an arbitrary number they are throwing out.
You typically set stress periods to intervals that you know the stresses are changing with respect to groundwater and time steps relative to how accurate your solution needs to be.
That does sound generalized, but with groundwater you can use common sense. For example, a model with an annual stress period and daily time steps is silly because:
- You limit seasonal effects to a single value, smearing the stresses out over time.
- Daily time steps seem accurate, but groundwater is a slow moving process, plus with all stresses held constant for a year, makes the daily overkill.
Also there are limitations to the assumptions in MODFLOW.
For example, SFR assumes that the stress width is small compared to the cell width (actually area) and that the
travel time through the stream network is shorter than the time step (because it does not contain a storage term).
So if you have a
stream network that takes 3 days to flow from its upstream most point to its
downstream most point (with the model domain),
then you should always have your time steps greater than 3 days.
To add a bit more complexity, some packages do allow for time step input. I dont recommend this, but for some
applications it is helpful. For example, SFR can specify inflows using Tabfiles, Time Series Files, or LineFeed files, which can be read by stress period or by time step. This always stream flows, which typically have a better resolution for measurement, to
be applied at the time step level. Alse most of the FMP input accepts a keyword
BY_TIMESTEP,
which indicates the input should be read every time step rather than each stress period. Again, this has limited utility as groundwater tends to be slow to respond and often its better to refine stress periods rather than defining input by time step.
Most models I've worked with use monthly stress periods (honoring the number of days in each month) that are divided in to 2 or 4 time steps (which is ~2 weeks per step or ~weekly time steps).
If you are using MF-OWHMv2 you can define the time step length, rather than a time step count, so you can say that April is 30 days long with time step lengths being 7, 7, 8, 8 days to make the numbers even. This was added because reservoir operations often
expect a certain number of days for a particular action (see information about Surface Water Operations, SWO).
Or another method is to use the DIS Keyword option MONTHLY 2, which tells OWHM that you want monthly stress periods, whose length is equal to the number of days in each month, and 2 is the number of time steps per month.
(Note this option also requires that you specify a model starting calendar date so it can keep track of what stress period is associated with what month.)
If I have some extra time I may port those options into the BAS package, since that is where the starting date is specified (note I always keep backward compatibility with old options).
Here are a list of recommended BAS options are located at:
Lastly, if you are working with any of the MF-2005 flavor modflows, MF-OWHMv2 has a new download location located at:
Hope that helps out,
Scott
|
This email has been received from outside of DOI - Use caution before clicking on links, opening attachments, or responding.
|