2020-08-08T02:59:32Z
http://digital.csic.es/dspace-oai/request
oai:digital.csic.es:10261/184791
2019-06-26T00:56:48Z
com_10261_75
com_10261_6
col_10261_328
00925njm 22002777a 4500
dc
Moret-Fernández, David
author
Latorre Garcés, Borja
author
Giner, M. L.
author
Ramos Escribano, Javier
author
Alados, Concepción L.
author
Castellano, C.
author
López Sánchez, María Victoria
author
Jiménez, J. J.
author
Pueyo, Yolanda
author
2019-07
Estimation of soil sorptivity (S) and hydraulic conductivity (K) is fundamental to model the water infiltration into the soil. This process can be affected by soil water repellency, which is defined as a reduction in soil wettability due to coating of soil particles by hydrophobic substances. Unlike to wettable soils, this phenomenon can generate infiltration curves with double-slope shape: a transient infiltration curve followed by a steady-state section. Because the topsoil final volumetric water content (θ1) of the transient phase of the double-slope curve is not a measurable data, in principle, the standard model based on the Haverkamp et al. (1994) model cannot be used to estimate S and K. This work presents two different approaches based on the Haverkamp et al. (1994) equation, which allow estimating S and K from the first phase of a double-slope infiltration curve, when θ1 data are not available. The methods, which are based on the analysis of both short-medium time transient infiltration curve (Tr) and the combination of both short-medium transient and steady-state infiltration steps (Mx), were applied on 20 soils affected by different degrees of water repellency. The Haverkamp et al. (1994) model was also valid for infiltration curves measured on hydrophobic soils, and the final volumetric water content was not an essential data to estimate K and S. Although the steady-state infiltration rate (q1) calculated with Mx was about 26% larger than that estimated with Tr, comparable K and S values were obtained with both methods. Overall, a large dispersion on the estimate of θ1 was observed with both methods. The gravimetric time, tgrav, estimated in the studied soils was low, <500 s. While the Mx method required simpler numerical calculus, Tr looked like to be more robust and less subjective.
Moret-Fernández D, Latorre B, Giner ML, Ramos J, Alados C, Castellano C, López MV, Jiménez JJ, Pueyo Y. Estimation of the soil hydraulic properties from the transient infiltration curve measured on soils affected by water. Catena 178: 298-306 (2019)
0341-8162
http://hdl.handle.net/10261/184791
10.1016/j.catena.2019.03.031
1872-6887
http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100010198
Hydraulic conductivity
Soprtivity
Disc infiltrometer
Hydrophobicity
Estimation of the soil hydraulic properties from the transient infiltration curve measured on soils affected by water repellency