Hillshaded Digital Elevation Model of the Yuma Proving Ground area, with improved roads. The hydrologic analysis was performed for this entire area.

Soil map of the Yuma Proving Ground area.

Six training scenarios were simulated in the hydrologic assessment. Scenario 1 is no damage, Scenario 2 is all disturbances showing in the orthophoto along the MTI road, Scenario 3 is two tank turnarounds installed along the MTI road for the Hellfire training, Scenario 4 is Scenario 3 plus disturbing 100m on either side of the lower MTI road, Scenario 5 is Scenario 3 plus disturbing 100m on either side of the upper MTI road, and Scenario 6 is Scenario 3 plus disturbing 100m along either side of the North Target Road.

Example flow direction lines from Scenario 3 within the MTI Road area. The flow analysis took place over a much larger area than this, this is just a zoom to show the detail in the flow lines.

Water differences, Scenario 3 minus Scenario 1. Thickness of the stream lines indicates magnitude of water reduction. Units are number of 30m cells no longer contributing water to this cell, or, for a one inch rain event, a 30m x 30m x 1 inch volume of water which is no longer available to this cell. Water reduction is greatest in downhill/downstream areas.

Water differences, Scenario 3 minus Scenario 2. Not very different from 3 minus 1, since both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 have minimal disturbance.

Water differences, Scenario 4 minus Scenario 3.

Water differences, Scenario 5 minus Scenario 3.

Water differences, Scenario 6 minus Scenario 3.

Water differences as percent reduction, Scenario 3 minus Scenario 1. This is the proportion of water lost to total water available in each cell. Although greatest absolute water reductions occur in downhill/downstream sites, cells near the disturbed areas suffer the greatest proportion of reduction in water. Same over Landsat image

Water differences as percent reduction, Scenario 3 minus Scenario 2. Same over Landsat image

Water differences as percent reduction, Scenario 4 minus Scenario 3. Same over Landsat image

Water differences as percent reduction, Scenario 5 minus Scenario 3. Same over Landsat image

Water differences as percent reduction, Scenario 6 minus Scenario 3. Same over Landsat image

Orthophoto in the MTI Road area.

Detail of vehicular damage to desert pavement along MTI Road.

Scenario 3 damage areas overlain on orthophoto of MTI Road area.

Detail of flow direction pattern in MTI Road area.

Detail of flow difference calculations, Scenario 4 minus Scenario 3, in MTI Road area.

Available water in the model was compared with a survival threshold (1500 m³) and a growth threshold (5922 m³) to produce this map showing areas predicted to have enough water for tree survival and growth. Since porous soils are found only in wash areas, this coverage was clipped to wash areas to increase the accuracy of the spatial prediction. Washes appear as lighter areas in the Landsat 7 background image on these maps.

Here is a zoom on the unclipped and clipped tree survival and growth prediction maps. Finally, here is the predicted tree survival and growth map within the training area.

Difference calculations between predicted tree survival and growth maps for each scenario simulate areas where trees will be affected by differences in training scenarios. Detail of tree survival and growth difference calculations, Scenario 6 minus Scenario 3. Trees within 15 30m cells change from having enough water to grow to only having enough water to survive.

Detail of tree survival and growth difference calculations, Scenario 5 minus Scenario 3. Trees within 6 cells go from enough water to survive to not enough water to survive, and trees within 3 cells go from enough water to grow to only enough water to survive.

Detail of tree survival and growth difference calculations, Scenario 4 minus Scenario 3. Trees within 1 cell go from enough water to survive to not enough water to survive, and trees within 1 cells go from enough water to grow to only enough water to survive. No cells are predicted to change with respect to tree survival when changing from Scenario 3 to Scenarios 1 or 2.

Noise Assessment

MR_Nmap noise simulation of Apache Longbow helicopter attack runs. Five different attack ground tracks were simulated. Noise metric simulated is Lmax. Alternative zoomed extent.

MR_Nmap noise simulation of Apache Longbow helicopter attack runs. Noise metric simulated is SEL.

Noisemap noise simulation of Apache Longbow helicopter attack runs. Noise metric simulated is SEL.

Bnoise noise simulation of Hellfire missile explosion. Noise metric simulated is C-weighted SEL, innermost contour is 116 dB, 111 dB, 106 dB, 101 dB, 96 dB, and outermost contour is 91 dB CSEL. Shown with Noisemap helicopter noise contours.

For additional information contact:

William W. Hargrove

(423) 241-2748

(423) 241-3870 fax

hnw@fire.esd.ornl.gov