Groundwater Models

for
Wadi Rawnib & Ma'abar Depression
Freshwater Lenses, Sultanate of Oman

Dawood Shahid Muhammad

March 11, 2020

Presentation Outline
 Study Tasks
 Purpose and Scope
 Assumptions and Limitations
 Conceptual Model
 Model Results
• Wadi Rownib Freshwater Lens
• Ma'aber Freshwater Lens
 Conclusions
 Recommendations
 Study Tasks
 Review of the available data, reports and model files (if available)
 Conceptual models
 Numerical groundwater flow models
 Calibration
 Water Balance
 Development scenarios
Purpose and Scope
Predictive groundwater flow simulations to quantify sustainable
yield of Ma'aber Depression and Wadi Rownib freshwater lenses.

Assumptions
• Fully saturated single-phase flow
• Equivalent porous media
• Constant density flow
• Hydraulic head values of year 2015 used to simulate
steady-state groundwater flow conditions
 Limitations
The major limitations noticed in this study were:
• SS, Fars, Dammam & Rus were considered as one ‘Upper Unconfined’ aquifer
• Locations and abstraction rates of the farmers' wells in the Ma'abar area were
not available.
• Abstraction rates of water supply wells in the Wadi Rownib area were also not
available, except Rownib WSW-2.
• The hydraulic characteristics of the faults in the area were not available.
• The water levels used for the calibrations were generally being observed in
the water supply wells which are often tapping more than one
hydrogeological unit with long screens and represent blended water levels.
• Zones of hydraulic parameters were created on a very limited and sporadic
data.
• Recharged distribution and rates were not available, except an estimate of
total recharge of 15 Mm3 for the Wadi Rownib lens and a pulse of 340 mm
once in 10 years for the Ma'aber Depression.
 Wadi Rownib Model Area

Model Boundary

Model Dimensions
Easting: 390,000 m to 473,000 m, Length X = 83 km
Northing: 2050,000 m to 2100,000, Length Y = 50 km
 Model Area

Figure R2: Static Water Levels of 2015 in ‘Upper

Unconfined’ Aquifer
 Wadi Rownib Model Setup
No Flow
Constant Head
Constant Head

• 245 rows and 225 columns (55,125

cells per layer)
• finer grid spacing of 250 m x 125 m
• 14 layers: total # of cells = 771,750

No Flow
WCR-1

Figure R10: Wadi Rownib Model Boundary Conditions

Layers 1 to 10
SS/Fars/Dammam L2: thin layer using WCR3 data
L3&L4: main freshwater lens
L5: low K thin layer using WCR1 data
Figure R9: Cross-
L11 &L12: Rus
Section Showing
Model Layers at Y =
L13: UUeR
2,079,562.5 (Row
104)
L14: MUeR
 Hydraulic Conductivity Zones

Layer 5
Layers 1, 3 & 4 Layer 2

Layer 7 Layers 8, 9 &10

Layer 6

Layers 11 & 12
 Calibrated Recharge Distribution

150 mm
200 mm

80mm
350 mm
50 mm

30 mm

• The amount of recharge is not known, however, if 10 percent of the rainfall

finds its way via surface runoff into the wadi recharging alluvial fill, this
provides almost 15 Mm3 of annual recharge, or 15 percent of the lens potable
water volume (MWR, 1996).
• Model Calibrated Recharge = 14 Mm3
 Calibration

Figure R20: Locations of Calibration Points Figure R21a: Calibration Results (All Wells)

Figure R21b: Calibration Results (SS, Fars,

Dammam Wells)
Simulated Steady-State Flow Condition

Figure R22: Steady-State

Groundwater Flow in Model Layer 4
(Freshwater Lens)

Figure R23: Steady-State Groundwater

Flow in Model Layer 6
(below Freshwater Lens)
 Steady-State Water Balance

Figure R25: Steady-State Water Balance

• Difference (Influx-Exit) = -51.98 m3/day

• Percent discrepancy in mass balance = -0.05percent
 Solute Transport

 Relative concentration (CR) approach

 RC of pristine aquifer water = 1.0 mg/l
 RC of fresh recharge water = 0.0 mg/l

 Simulated concentration (i.e. mixing ratio) will

remain between 0.1 mg/l to 1.0 mg/l ; 0.5 mg/l
means that both water are mixed with the same
ratio at the point in the aquifer
Computed Time-Series: ‘Relative Concentration’

Figure R26: Simulated Time Series of RC (Base Case)

Simulated Freshwater Zone (Existing Condition)

(a) Layer 1 (b) Layer 2

(c) Layer 3 (d) Layer 4

Figure R27: Simulated Freshwater Zones at Pseudo-Steady State Condition (Base Case)
Predictive Scenarios

1. Sustainable abstraction with the same recharge rates as

used in the existing conditions (i.e. base case calibrated
model)

2. Impact on the groundwater system in case the recharge

reduces by half an amount than the existing conditions
 Simulated GW Flow Conditions (Scenario 1)

PWSA2

PWSA1

Area Well Northing Easting Proposed Q (m3/d)

PW-1 429015.5 2078025 1,680
Figure R28: Simulated Steady-State PW-2 430166.5 2078732 1,680
PWSA-1 PW-3 431200.3 2079586 1,680
Groundwater Flow in Model Layer 4 PW-4 432341.9 2080117 1,680
(Scenario 1) PW-5 433357.8 2080672 1,680
PW-6 438627.4 2082929 960
PW-7 440131.9 2083810 960
PWSA-1 PW-8 441907.6 2084813 960
PW-9 443802.4 2086050 960
PW-10 445823.9 2087075 960
Total 13,200
‘Relative Concentration’ (Scenario 1)

Figure R29: Simulated RC Time Series at Proposed

Abstraction Wells (Scenario 1)
 Simulated GW Flow Conditions (Scenario 2)

Figure R30: Simulated Steady-State Groundwater Flow in

Model Layer 4
(Scenario 2)
Scenario 2: Same abstraction as in Scenario 1 but
with half of the existing recharge
‘Relative Concentration’ (Scenario 2)

Figure R31: Simulated Time

Series of RC (Scenario 2)
 Calculated Drawdown at Pumping Wells
Table R7: Calculated Water Levels and Drawdowns in WMWs
Obs.
Calculated Water Level (masl) Calculated Drawdown (m)
Well Northing Easting
Initial Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 1 Scenario 2
P1_Obs 429018.1 2078024 40.173 21.3 2.4 18.8 37.8
P2_Obs 430170.2 2078731 38.78 19.0 -0.5 19.8 39.3
P3_Obs 431202.7 2079583 35.85 17.4 -0.5 18.5 36.3
P4_Obs 432344.3 2080115 31.37 15.1 -0.4 16.3 31.8
P5_Obs 433358.4 2080672 26.04 12.2 -0.3 13.8 26.4
P6_Obs 438631.9 2082927 2.16 1.7 1.4 0.4 0.8
P7_Obs 440137.4 2083808 2.11 1.5 1.0 0.7 1.1
P8_Obs 441907.5 2084813 1.57 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.9
P9_Obs 443802.7 2086050 0.96 0.8 0.6 0.2 0.4
P10_Obs 445824.4 2087073 0.74 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.3
 Ma’abar Model Area

Limits of the model area:

Easting:
420,000 m to 490,000 m, Length X = 70 km
Northing:
2180,000 m to 2232,000, Length Y = 52 km

Figure M8: Finite Difference Grid of the

Ma’aber Fresh Water Lens Model Area

M9: Vertical Descritization - Cross-section along Row 147 with Vertical Exaggeration of 50
 Constant Head

No Flow

No Flow

Constant Head

Figure M10: Ma’aber Model Boundary Conditions

 Calibration

50 mm/year
Recharge of 34 mm/year
was estimated but as a
34 mm/year pulse of 340 mm once in
10 years occurs along a 0.5
km wide and about 4km
long strip (MWR, 1995).

M12: Recharge Distribution Zones

Figure M13: Calibration Results

 Simulated Steady-State Flow Condition

Figure M14: Simulated Stead-State Flow – Layer 1

Figure M15: Simulated Stead-State Flow – Layer 2

 Water Balance

• Difference (Influx- Outflux) = 4.3 m3/day

• Percent discrepancy in mass balance = 0.37 percent
Computed Time-Series: ‘Relative Concentration’

Figure M19: Simulated Time Series of RC

Simulated Freshwater Zone (Existing Condition)
(a) Layer 1

(d) Layer 4

(b) Layer 2

(c) Layer 3

Figure M20: Simulated Freshwater Zones at Steady State Condition

Predictive Scenarios

 Transient groundwater flow conditions with

recharge occurrences once in 10 years and no
abstraction.

 Sustainable yield of the aquifer underlying the

perched freshwater lens with recharge once in 10
years.
Figure M21: Simulated Time Series of Water Levels With Recharge Once in 10 Years
(Scenario 1 – No Abstraction)
Figure M22: Simulated Time Series of RC with Recharge Once in 10 Years
(Scenario 1 – No Abstraction)
 Layer 2 Layer 4

Layer 3

Figure M23: Simulated Freshwater Mixing Zones After 100 Years

(Scenario 1 – No Abstraction)
 Well Northing Easting Proposed Q (m3/d)
PW-1 451800 2204500 -
PW-2 452500 2204300 -
PW-3 453100 2204300 50
PW-4 451900 2203900 50
PW-5 452500 2203700 50
PW-6 451900 2203500 50
PW-7 451200 2203200 50

Figure M24: Simulated Time Series of Water Levels With Recharge Once in 10 Years
(Scenario 2: 5 Pumping Wells)
Figure M25: Simulated Time Series of RC with Recharge Once in 10 Years
(Scenario 2: 5 Pumping Wells)
 Conclusions
Wadi Rownib
• The proposed area of PW-1 to PW-5 (PWSA1), is comparatively more
promising for the future development for the total abstraction of 8,400
m3/d.
• The proposed area of PW-6 to P-10 (PWSA2) is also suitable with some
compromise to water quality for the total abstraction of 4,800 m3/d.
• With the reduced (50 percent) recharge, the same amount of water can
be abstracted from the both areas, however, with higher ratio of the
regional saline aquifer water.

Ma’abar Depression
Total abstraction of 2,500 m3/d from the proposed wells is sustainable in
terms of quantity but with the risk of deterioration in water quality with
time.