840
Views
11
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Technical Note

Upward infiltration–evaporation method to estimate soil hydraulic properties

, , , &
Pages 1683-1693 | Received 10 Sep 2016, Accepted 13 Apr 2017, Published online: 03 Jul 2017

Figures & data

Table 1. Time intervals used in the simulation of the theoretical loam soil.

Figure 1. Diagram of the experimental set-up.

Figure 1. Diagram of the experimental set-up.

Table 2. Soil properties of the studied soils, applied pressures, evaporation rates and experimental times used in the upward infiltration overpressure step and evaporation processes.

Figure 2. Contours of the objective function Φ(K,α,n) for the upward infiltration curves in the (a) K–n, (b) α–n and (c) K–α planes, without (1) and with (2) an overpressure step of 5 cm at the end of the wetting process. The number of contour lines corresponds to a 70 × 70 parameter combination grid. The thick (red) line indicates the experimental contour line corresponding to a RMSE of 0.1 mm due to water level measurement.

Figure 2. Contours of the objective function Φ(K,α,n) for the upward infiltration curves in the (a) K–n, (b) α–n and (c) K–α planes, without (1) and with (2) an overpressure step of 5 cm at the end of the wetting process. The number of contour lines corresponds to a 70 × 70 parameter combination grid. The thick (red) line indicates the experimental contour line corresponding to a RMSE of 0.1 mm due to water level measurement.

Figure 3. Contours of the objective function Φ(K,α,n) for an evaporation process: one parameter is fixed and the other two are optimized in the (a) K–n, (b) α–n and (c) K–α planes. See caption for details.

Figure 3. Contours of the objective function Φ(K,α,n) for an evaporation process: one parameter is fixed and the other two are optimized in the (a) K–n, (b) α–n and (c) K–α planes. See Figure 2 caption for details.

Figure 4. Contours of the objective function Φ(K,α,n) for the upward infiltration curves plus the cumulative evaporation curves: one parameter is fixed and the other two are optimized in the (a) K–n, (b) α–n and (c) K–α planes, without (a) and with (b) an overpressure step of 5 cm at the end of the wetting process. See caption for details.

Figure 4. Contours of the objective function Φ(K,α,n) for the upward infiltration curves plus the cumulative evaporation curves: one parameter is fixed and the other two are optimized in the (a) K–n, (b) α–n and (c) K–α planes, without (a) and with (b) an overpressure step of 5 cm at the end of the wetting process. See Figure 2 caption for details.

Table 3. Soil bulk density (ρb), saturated (θs) and residual water contents (θr), saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks), the n and α parameters of the van Genuchten (Citation1980) water retention curve estimated for a wetting (αw) and a draining process (αd) from the TDR-pressure cell (PC) and the inverse analysis (CR-E), respectively, measured on sand and 2-mm sieved loam and clay-loam soils. The α values in italics were calculated according to the Gebrenegus and Ghezzehei (Citation2011) model. W & D: wetting and drying.

Figure 5. (a) Contours of the objective function Φ(K,α,n) for the cumulative upward infiltration plus the cumulative evaporation curves: one parameter is fixed and the other two are optimized in the α–n plane for a 2-mm sieved loam soil. See caption for details. (b) Experimental (circles) and optimized simulated (line) cumulative upward infiltration plus evaporation curves measured on a 2-mm sieved loam. (WCR: water capillary rise.)

Figure 5. (a) Contours of the objective function Φ(K,α,n) for the cumulative upward infiltration plus the cumulative evaporation curves: one parameter is fixed and the other two are optimized in the α–n plane for a 2-mm sieved loam soil. See Figure 2 caption for details. (b) Experimental (circles) and optimized simulated (line) cumulative upward infiltration plus evaporation curves measured on a 2-mm sieved loam. (WCR: water capillary rise.)

Figure 6. Comparison between effective saturation (Se) curves measured in (a) fine sand, (b) sieved loam and (c) sieved clay-loam soil with TDR pressure cells (circles) during a draining process and the corresponding curve obtained by inverse analysis (line) of the cumulative upward infiltration–evaporation curve in the draining branch of the water retention curve.

Figure 6. Comparison between effective saturation (Se) curves measured in (a) fine sand, (b) sieved loam and (c) sieved clay-loam soil with TDR pressure cells (circles) during a draining process and the corresponding curve obtained by inverse analysis (line) of the cumulative upward infiltration–evaporation curve in the draining branch of the water retention curve.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.