|
| 作者 | 王红兰 ; 唐翔宇
|
| 刊名 | 农业工程学报
 |
| 出版日期 | 2012
|
| 卷号 | 28期号:24页码:99-104 |
| 关键词 | 土壤
水分
测量
Guelph法
饱和导水率
单水头法
双水头法
降水头法
|
| 其他题名 | Comparison of determination methods for saturated soil hydraulic conductivity with Guelph infiltrometer
|
| 通讯作者 | 宋松柏
|
| 合作状况 | 国内
|
| 中文摘要 | 为探寻该区域Ks的最优测定方法,应用Guelph入渗仪测量了川中低山丘陵区的林地和坡耕地土壤的饱和导水率,对比分析单水头法(LA法、USH法)和双水头法(TH法、BH法)所测得饱和导水率(Ks)的差异,同时比较了田间原位Guelph法与室内降水头法测定结果的差异。对于同一土层深度,不同方法估算所得的Ks有较大的差异:1)双水头TH法测得的值最大(坡耕地土层>20～40cm除外),林地0～20cm,>20～40cm土层的Ks值分别为0.134,0.266mm/min,坡耕地0～20cm土层的Ks值为0.860mm/min。单水头USH法5cm水头所得值最小,林地0～20和>20～40cm土层的Ks值分别为0.015和0.022mm/min,坡耕地对应土层则分别为0.040和0.022mm/min;2)单水头USH法10cm水头(USH2)测得的Ks大于5cm水头(USH1)所得值,采用前者所测得林地0～20和>20～40cm土层、坡耕地0～20和>20～40cm土层的Ks值分别为0.031,0.056,0.211,0.031mm/min;3)田间原位BH法和USH2法(压力水头为10cm)测定的Ks均大于室内降水头法所测得的值,这可能与室内环刀法在采样中对土壤大孔隙通道的切断与破坏、所测定土壤样品的体积较小有关。综合上述结果,并考虑到单水头法操作简便,故而该研究推荐在川中低山丘陵紫色土地区使用单水头USH2法,压力水头为10cm。 |
| 英文摘要 | Soil hydraulic properties are key factors controlling water and solute movement in soil. Soil hydraulic properties estimated from a laboratory experiment use commonly on relatively small soil cores, and they are often not representative of field condition. Ideally, the estimation of soil hydraulic parameters for the simulation of flow dynamics should be based as far as possible on field measurements. Reliable determination of saturated hydraulic conductivity is critical for modeling and predicting soil moisture pattern in soil under various field conditions. In this study, soil saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) of a forest land and a sloping farmland, located at Yanting Agro-ecological Experimental Station of Purple Soil (105(27(E, 31(16(N), Sichuan, Southwest China, was determined with a Guelph infiltrometer using different methods, including single head methods (e.g., Laplace analysis, updated single head analysis) and two-head methods (e.g., two-head analysis, Bohne analysis). Differences in measured saturated hydraulic conductivity between in situ Guelph constant head methods and laboratory falling head method were also compared. We aimed to select a reliable method for determining Ks for the soils in this studied region. The Ks values obtained for the forest land at the 0-20 cm depth were lower than those obtained at the 20-40 cm depth; however, the results obtained from the sloping farmland were contrary to those measured in the forest land. For the same layer, the measured Ks value was related to the method adopted. Results showed that: 1) the Ks values using the two-head analysis were the greatest (except for the 20-40 cm layer of the sloping farmland). The Ks value in the forest land at the 0-20 cm and 20-40 cm depth was 0.134 and 0.266 mm/min, respectively. In the sloping farmland, the Ks value at the 0-20 cm depth was 0.86 mm/min. However, the updated single head analysis under a 5cm head was the smallest values. The Ks value at the 0-20 cm and 20-40 cm depth was 0.015 and 0.022 mm/min, respectively, in the forest land, 0.040 and 0.022 mm/min, respectively, in the sloping farmland; 2) Using the updated single head analysis, Ks measured at water head of 10 cm was higher than that obtained at 5 cm. The obtained Ks value was 0.031 and 0.056 mm/min at the 0-20 cm and 20-40 cm depth, respectively, in the forest land, 0.211 and 0.031 mm/min, respectively, in the sloping farmland; 3) The values of saturated hydraulic conductivity obtained by the Guelph infiltrometer using the Bohne analysis and Updated single head analysis at water head of 10 cm were greater than those obtained in the laboratory by falling head method on ring samples, probably due to the possible destruction of soil macropores and the smaller soil volume represented by the latter. Also since the updated single head analysis has the advantage of simple operation, the method at water head of 10 cm is therefore recommended in the purple soil region. |
| 分类号 | S152
|
| 收录类别 | EI
; CSCD
|
| 资助信息 | “十二五”国家科技支撑计划项目课题专题(2011BAC09B05);中国科学院“百人计划”择优支持项目(引进国外杰出人才);国家自然科学基金项目(41171372) |
| 语种 | 中文
|
| CSCD记录号 | CSCD:4706901
|
| 公开日期 | 2013-12-14
|
| 源URL | [http://ir.imde.ac.cn/handle/131551/6600]  |
| 专题 | 成都山地灾害与环境研究所_山地表生过程与生态调控重点实验室
|
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714 |
王红兰,唐翔宇. 基于Guelph法的土壤饱和导水率测定方法对比[J]. 农业工程学报,2012,28(24):99-104.
|
| APA |
王红兰,&唐翔宇.(2012).基于Guelph法的土壤饱和导水率测定方法对比.农业工程学报,28(24),99-104.
|
| MLA |
王红兰,et al."基于Guelph法的土壤饱和导水率测定方法对比".农业工程学报 28.24(2012):99-104.
|
