Determining the soil hydraulic conductivity by means of a field scale internal drainage

2003 ◽  
Vol 273 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 234-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerardo Severino ◽  
Alessandro Santini ◽  
Angelo Sommella
Soil Science ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 184 (3) ◽  
pp. 101-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xi Zhang ◽  
Ole Wendroth ◽  
Christopher Matocha ◽  
Junfeng Zhu

CATENA ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 187 ◽  
pp. 104335
Author(s):  
Xi Zhang ◽  
Ole Wendroth ◽  
Christopher Matocha ◽  
Junfeng Zhu ◽  
Javier Reyes

2007 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 1219-1222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Durval Dourado Neto ◽  
Klaus Reichardt ◽  
Adriana Lúcia da Silva ◽  
Osny Oliveira Santos Bacchi ◽  
Luis Carlos Timm ◽  
...  

A software for the calculation of unsaturated soil hydraulic conductivity K(theta) is presented for commonly used methods found in the literature, based on field experiments in which a soil profile is submitted to water infiltration followed by internal drainage. The software is available at: [email protected].


1994 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. M. Villagra ◽  
P. Michiels ◽  
R. Hartmann ◽  
O.O.S. Bacchi ◽  
K. Reichardt

Experimentally determined values of unsaturated soil hydraulic conductivity are presented for an Alfisol of the county of Piracicaba, S.P., Brazil. Simultaneous measurements of soil water content and pressure head are made along a 125 m transect within an irrigated field during the internal drainage process. Calculations of the soil hydraulic conductivity were made using the instantaneous profile method (Watson, 1966) and the unit gradient method (LIBARDI et al., 1980). The spatial variability of the soil hydraulic conductivity manifested along the transect indicates the need to develop a field method to measure K(theta) within prescribed fiducial limits, taking into account quantitative evaluation of spatial and temporal variances associated with the mathematical model, instrument calibration and soil properties.


1993 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Reichardt

It is theoretically shown that unit hydraulic potential gradients cannot occur in homogeneous soils undegoing internal drainage process even though this assumption has been used successfully by several authors of soil hydraulic conductivity methods.


Soil Research ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Reza Neyshabouri ◽  
Mehdi Rahmati ◽  
Claude Doussan ◽  
Boshra Behroozinezhad

Unsaturated soil hydraulic conductivity K is a fundamental transfer property of soil but its measurement is costly, difficult, and time-consuming due to its large variations with water content (θ) or matric potential (h). Recently, C. Doussan and S. Ruy proposed a method/model using measurements of the electrical conductivity of soil core samples to predict K(h). This method requires the measurement or the setting of a range of matric potentials h in the core samples—a possible lengthy process requiring specialised devices. To avoid h estimation, we propose to simplify that method by introducing the particle-size distribution (PSD) of the soil as a proxy for soil pore diameters and matric potentials, with the Arya and Paris (AP) model. Tests of this simplified model (SM) with laboratory data on a broad range of soils and using the AP model with available, previously defined parameters showed that the accuracy was lower for the SM than for the original model (DR) in predicting K (RMSE of logK = 1.10 for SM v. 0.30 for DR; K in m s–1). However, accuracy was increased for SM when considering coarse- and medium-textured soils only (RMSE of logK = 0.61 for SM v. 0.26 for DR). Further tests with 51 soils from the UNSODA database and our own measurements, with estimated electrical properties, confirmed good agreement of the SM for coarse–medium-textured soils (<35–40% clay). For these textures, the SM also performed well compared with the van Genuchten–Mualem model. Error analysis of SM results and fitting of the AP parameter showed that most of the error for fine-textured soils came from poorer adequacy of the AP model’s previously defined parameters for defining the water retention curve, whereas this was much less so for coarse-textured soils. The SM, using readily accessible soil data, could be a relatively straightforward way to estimate, in situ or in the laboratory, K(h) for coarse–medium-textured soils. This requires, however, a prior check of the predictive efficacy of the AP model for the specific soil investigated, in particular for fine-textured/structured soils and when using previously defined AP parameters.


1980 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. L. Libardi ◽  
K. Reichardt ◽  
D. R. Nielsen ◽  
J. W. Biggar

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document