Academic Bibliography

 Search 200 years of publications by Ghent University researchers.
Advanced search
1 file | 1.93 MB
  1. Search results
  2. Comparing methods to determine hydrau...

Comparing methods to determine hydraulic conductivities on stony soils

Koen Verbist (UGent) , Wim Cornelis (UGent) , Sabine Torfs and Donald Gabriëls (UGent)
(2013) SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL. 77(1). p.25-42
Author
Organization
Abstract
Determination of the field-saturated hydraulic conductivity (Kfs) can result in very high variability due to soil heterogeneity, the measurement method, the number of replications, and the Kfs calculation method used. Especially for dryland soils, stoniness can influence infiltration rates significantly. To identify this variability as well as its source, six widely used measurement methods were compared: single-ring (SR) and double-ring (DR) infiltrometers, the constant head well infiltrometer (CH), the inverse auger hole method (IA), the tension infiltrometer (TI), and the rainfall simulator (RFS). The six methods were applied at three locations in a semiarid part of Chile that showed moderate (15%) to high (55%) stoniness. Additionally, Kfs variations due to different calculation techniques for the same measurement method were thoroughly investigated. Results showed that different calculation techniques sometimes gave significantly different estimates of Kfs when using the same data set, and those relative differences were conserved among measurement locations. The borehole methods (IA and CH) showed high discard rates due to stoniness, making these methods less appropriate. The SR and DR methods gave considerably higher Kfs estimates, while the RFS and TI proved good candidates as reference methods for stony soils, with low failure rates and coefficients of variation.
Keywords
CONSTANT FLUX INFILTRATION, TENSION INFILTROMETER MEASUREMENTS, SINGLE-RING INFILTROMETERS, GLACIAL-TILL SOIL, GUELPH PERMEAMETER, DISC INFILTROMETER, WATER-RETENTION, GENERALIZED SOLUTION, WELL PERMEAMETER, POROUS-MEDIA

Downloads

  • Download
    (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.93 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
Verbist, Koen, Wim Cornelis, Sabine Torfs, and Donald Gabriëls. 2013. “Comparing Methods to Determine Hydraulic Conductivities on Stony Soils.” Soil Science Society of America Journal 77 (1): 25–42.
APA
Verbist, K., Cornelis, W., Torfs, S., & Gabriëls, D. (2013). Comparing methods to determine hydraulic conductivities on stony soils. SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 77(1), 25–42.
Vancouver
1.
Verbist K, Cornelis W, Torfs S, Gabriëls D. Comparing methods to determine hydraulic conductivities on stony soils. SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL. 2013;77(1):25–42.
MLA
Verbist, Koen, Wim Cornelis, Sabine Torfs, et al. “Comparing Methods to Determine Hydraulic Conductivities on Stony Soils.” SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL 77.1 (2013): 25–42. Print.
@article{3092250,
  abstract     = {Determination of the field-saturated hydraulic conductivity (Kfs) can result in very high variability due to soil heterogeneity, the measurement method, the number of replications, and the Kfs calculation method used. Especially for dryland soils, stoniness can influence infiltration rates significantly. To identify this variability as well as its source, six widely used measurement methods were compared: single-ring (SR) and double-ring (DR) infiltrometers, the constant head well infiltrometer (CH), the inverse auger hole method (IA), the tension infiltrometer (TI), and the rainfall simulator (RFS). The six methods were applied at three locations in a semiarid part of Chile that showed moderate (15\%) to high (55\%) stoniness. Additionally, Kfs variations due to different calculation techniques for the same measurement method were thoroughly investigated. Results showed that different calculation techniques sometimes gave significantly different estimates of Kfs when using the same data set, and those relative differences were conserved among measurement locations. The borehole methods (IA and CH) showed high discard rates due to stoniness, making these methods less appropriate. The SR and DR methods gave considerably higher Kfs estimates, while the RFS and TI proved good candidates as reference methods for stony soils, with low failure rates and coefficients of variation.},
  author       = {Verbist, Koen and Cornelis, Wim and Torfs, Sabine and Gabri{\"e}ls, Donald},
  issn         = {0361-5995},
  journal      = {SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL},
  keyword      = {CONSTANT FLUX INFILTRATION,TENSION INFILTROMETER MEASUREMENTS,SINGLE-RING INFILTROMETERS,GLACIAL-TILL SOIL,GUELPH PERMEAMETER,DISC INFILTROMETER,WATER-RETENTION,GENERALIZED SOLUTION,WELL PERMEAMETER,POROUS-MEDIA},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {1},
  pages        = {25--42},
  title        = {Comparing methods to determine hydraulic conductivities on stony soils},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2012.0025},
  volume       = {77},
  year         = {2013},
}
Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: