Prediction of absolute unsaturated hydraulic conductivity – comparison of four different capillary bundle models

IF 5.7 1区 地球科学 Q1 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Andre Peters, S. Iden, W. Durner
{"title":"Prediction of absolute unsaturated hydraulic conductivity – comparison of four different capillary bundle models","authors":"Andre Peters, S. Iden, W. Durner","doi":"10.5194/hess-27-4579-2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. To model water, solute, and energy transport in porous media, it is essential to have accurate information about the soil hydraulic properties (SHPs), i.e., the water retention curve (WRC) and the soil hydraulic conductivity curve (HCC). It is important to have reliable data to parameterize these models, but equally critical is the selection of appropriate SHP models. While various expressions for the WRC are frequently compared, the capillary conductivity model proposed by Mualem (1976a) is widely used but rarely compared to alternatives. The objective of this study was to compare four different capillary bundle models in terms of their ability to accurately predict the HCC without scaling the conductivity function by a measured conductivity value. The four capillary bundle models include two simple models proposed by Burdine (1953) and Alexander and Skaggs (1986), which assume a bundle of parallel capillaries with tortuous flow paths, and two more sophisticated models based on statistical cut-and-random-rejoin approaches, namely those proposed by Childs and Collis-George (1950) and the aforementioned model of Mualem (1976a). To examine how the choice of the WRC parameterization affects the adequacy of different capillary bundle models, we utilized four different capillary saturation models in combination with each of the conductivity prediction models, resulting in 16 SHP model schemes. All schemes were calibrated using 12 carefully selected data sets that provided water retention and hydraulic conductivity data over a wide saturation range. Subsequently, the calibrated models were tested and rated by their ability to predict the hydraulic conductivity of 23 independent data sets of soils with varying textures. The statistical cut-and-random-rejoin models, particularly the Mualem (1976a) model, outperformed the simpler capillary bundle models in terms of predictive accuracy. This was independent of the specific WRC model used. Our findings suggest that the widespread use of the Mualem model is justified.","PeriodicalId":13143,"journal":{"name":"Hydrology and Earth System Sciences","volume":"303 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hydrology and Earth System Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-4579-2023","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract. To model water, solute, and energy transport in porous media, it is essential to have accurate information about the soil hydraulic properties (SHPs), i.e., the water retention curve (WRC) and the soil hydraulic conductivity curve (HCC). It is important to have reliable data to parameterize these models, but equally critical is the selection of appropriate SHP models. While various expressions for the WRC are frequently compared, the capillary conductivity model proposed by Mualem (1976a) is widely used but rarely compared to alternatives. The objective of this study was to compare four different capillary bundle models in terms of their ability to accurately predict the HCC without scaling the conductivity function by a measured conductivity value. The four capillary bundle models include two simple models proposed by Burdine (1953) and Alexander and Skaggs (1986), which assume a bundle of parallel capillaries with tortuous flow paths, and two more sophisticated models based on statistical cut-and-random-rejoin approaches, namely those proposed by Childs and Collis-George (1950) and the aforementioned model of Mualem (1976a). To examine how the choice of the WRC parameterization affects the adequacy of different capillary bundle models, we utilized four different capillary saturation models in combination with each of the conductivity prediction models, resulting in 16 SHP model schemes. All schemes were calibrated using 12 carefully selected data sets that provided water retention and hydraulic conductivity data over a wide saturation range. Subsequently, the calibrated models were tested and rated by their ability to predict the hydraulic conductivity of 23 independent data sets of soils with varying textures. The statistical cut-and-random-rejoin models, particularly the Mualem (1976a) model, outperformed the simpler capillary bundle models in terms of predictive accuracy. This was independent of the specific WRC model used. Our findings suggest that the widespread use of the Mualem model is justified.
非饱和绝对导水性预测--四种不同毛细管束模型的比较
摘要要建立多孔介质中水、溶质和能量传输模型,必须掌握有关土壤水力特性(SHPs)的准确信息,即保水曲线(WRC)和土壤导水曲线(HCC)。掌握可靠的数据以确定这些模型的参数固然重要,但选择合适的 SHP 模型也同样重要。虽然人们经常对 WRC 的各种表达式进行比较,但 Mualem(1976a)提出的毛细管导流模型却被广泛使用,但却很少与其他模型进行比较。本研究的目的是比较四种不同的毛细管束模型,看它们在不按测量电导率值缩放电导率函数的情况下准确预测 HCC 的能力。这四种毛细管束模型包括 Burdine(1953 年)和 Alexander 与 Skaggs(1986 年)提出的两种简单模型(假定毛细管束为平行毛细管束,具有曲折的流动路径),以及两种基于统计切割和随机重合方法的更复杂模型,即 Childs 与 Collis-George(1950 年)提出的模型和上述 Mualem(1976a)提出的模型。为了研究 WRC 参数化的选择如何影响不同毛细管束模型的适当性,我们采用了四种不同的毛细管饱和度模型与每种电导率预测模型相结合的方法,得出了 16 种 SHP 模型方案。所有方案都使用 12 个精心挑选的数据集进行了校准,这些数据集提供了较大饱和度范围内的保水性和水导率数据。随后,对经过校准的模型进行了测试,并根据其预测不同质地土壤的 23 个独立数据集的水力传导性的能力进行了评级。统计切割和随机接合模型,尤其是 Mualem(1976a)模型,在预测准确性方面优于较简单的毛细管束模型。这与所使用的具体 WRC 模型无关。我们的研究结果表明,Mualem 模型的广泛使用是合理的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 地学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
10.10
自引率
7.90%
发文量
273
审稿时长
15 months
期刊介绍: Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS) is a not-for-profit international two-stage open-access journal for the publication of original research in hydrology. HESS encourages and supports fundamental and applied research that advances the understanding of hydrological systems, their role in providing water for ecosystems and society, and the role of the water cycle in the functioning of the Earth system. A multi-disciplinary approach is encouraged that broadens the hydrological perspective and the advancement of hydrological science through integration with other cognate sciences and cross-fertilization across disciplinary boundaries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信