Communications Project

Document Type:Master's Thesis
Name:Nicole Fomchenko
Degree:Master of Science
Department:Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences
Committee Chair: Naraine Persaud
Committee Members:Walter L. Daniels
Michael Focazio
W. Michael Aust
Keywords:wetland hydrology, water budget, water balance, precipitation, evapotranspiration, runoff, stream flow, groundwater, water storage
Date of defense:April 23, 1998
Availability:Release the entire work for Virginia Tech access only.
After one year release worldwide only with written permission of the student and the advisory committee chair.


The design of wetlands to replace those lost to development requires quantitative understanding of the wetland water budget in order to estimate the amount of water available to the wetland over time. Many methods exist to estimate each component of the wetland water budget. In this study, monthly values of the water budget components namely, precipitation, runoff, evapotranspiration, and groundwater seepage were calculated using a water budget model and compared to on-site field measurements for a wetland in Manassas, Prince William County, VA. The monthly precipitation estimated from a weather station 32.18 km from the site differed from the on-site values by as much as 2.9 times. Runoff estimates calculated by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) method using antecedent moisture condition (AMC) II underpredicted runoff for every month by as high as 100 percent compared to the on-site measured runoff. The choice of AMC greatly affected the SCS runoff estimates. Runoff was the dominant water budget component at the Manassas wetland. The evapotranspiration (ET) estimates using the Thornthwaite method either over or underestimated ET when compared to ET calculated from diurnal cycles of the water table in the wetland. Groundwater seepage losses were calculated using Darcy's equation with an assumed hydraulic gradient of one, and with gradients measured with nested piezometers. Seepage losses at the Manassas wetland were negligible. Overall, the water budget model provided conservative estimates of the available water in the wetland during the 10-month period of observation.

List of Attached Files

10-fig8.pdf 11-fig9.pdf 12-fig10.pdf
13-fig11.pdf 14-fig12.pdf 15-fig13.pdf
16-fig14.pdf 17-fig15.pdf 18-fig16.pdf
19-fig17.pdf 1text.pdf 2-fig1.pdf
20-fig18.pdf 21-tables.pdf 22text.pdf
3-fig2.pdf 4text.pdf 5-fig3.pdf
6-fig4.pdf 7-fig5.pdf 8-fig6.pdf

At the author's request, all materials (PDF files, images, etc.) associated with this ETD are accessible from the Virginia Tech network only.

The author grants to Virginia Tech or its agents the right to archive and display their thesis or dissertation in whole or in part in the University Libraries in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. The author retains all proprietary rights, such as patent rights. The author also retains the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis or dissertation.