Factors Influencing Point Measurement of Near‐surface Saturated Soil Hydraulic Conductivity in a Small Sicilian Basin

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 970-982 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giorgio Baiamonte ◽  
Vincenzo Bagarello ◽  
Francesco D'Asaro ◽  
Vincenzo Palmeri
2020 ◽  
Vol 589 ◽  
pp. 125159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simone Di Prima ◽  
Ryan D. Stewart ◽  
Mirko Castellini ◽  
Vincenzo Bagarello ◽  
Majdi R. Abou Najm ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 1491-1502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mauricio Fornalski Soares ◽  
Luana Nunes Centeno ◽  
Luís Carlos Timm ◽  
Carlos Rogério Mello ◽  
Douglas Rodrigo Kaiser ◽  
...  

CATENA ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 191 ◽  
pp. 104583
Author(s):  
Luana Nunes Centeno ◽  
Luís Carlos Timm ◽  
Klaus Reichardt ◽  
Samuel Beskow ◽  
Tamara Leitzke Caldeira ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (8) ◽  
pp. 908-919 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roya Jafari ◽  
Vahedberdi Sheikh ◽  
Mohsen Hossein-Alizadeh ◽  
Hasan Rezaii-Moghadam

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aparimita Priyadarshini Naik ◽  
Sreeja Pekkat

<p>Near surface soil hydraulic conductivity is an essential parameter for various hydrological, geotechnical, and environmental-related studies. Currently, many instruments are in practice for evaluating this parameter, both in field, and laboratory. The rainfall simulator (RS) and mini disc infiltrometer (MDI) are two instruments used for the indirect estimation of hydraulic conductivity by many researchers and engineers. However, both the devices differ in their working philosophy and evaluation methodology. While the RS works by considering large soil volumes and providing a positive soil pressure, the MDI works for small sampled volumes and supply negative boundary head. Therefore, the two devices can result in varying estimates of hydraulic conductivity. In this study, a comparative assessment is carried out between the saturated hydraulic conductivity (K<sub>s</sub>) estimates from the two instruments using laboratory experiments for two different soil textures (loam and sand). The infiltration results from the RS are analyzed using the Green-Ampt method, and from the MDI is analyzed using the Zhang's method followed by the Kutilek and Nielson method to produce K<sub>s</sub> values. The K<sub>s</sub> results from both the instruments are compared with the values obtained using the laboratory falling-head permeameter test. A one-way ANOVA and the Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) test as a posthoc test are carried out to analyze the statistical significance of the differences in the estimates of K<sub>s</sub> by the two devices. The results showed that the two devices produced varying K<sub>s</sub> results for both the soil textures, with the MDI mean values being one order higher than the RS mean. Compared with the permeameter values, the mean values from the RS were closer to the permeameter than the MDI. However, the ANOVA test and the Fisher’s LSD test reported that the variations between the two devices with that of the permeameter were not significant for both the soil textures. On the other hand, the RS and MDI variations were reported significant by the ANOVA and post hoc test.</p>


Soil Research ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 851 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. L. Libardi ◽  
P. L. Libardi ◽  
K. Reichardt ◽  
K. Reichardt

The method of Libardi to estimate soil hydraulic conductivity in the field, during the redistribution of soil water, is discussed and improved. It is shown that if the saturated soil water content is measured at the soil surface, values at any other depth can be calculated from the database used to compute hydraulic conductivity. Since the saturated soil water content is difficult to measure and critical to the establishment of the hydraulic conductivity functions, this is an important refinement of the method. It is also shown that the unit hydraulic gradient assumption, which is part of the methodology, does not introduce significant errors in the estimation of soil hydraulic conductivity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document