Comparison of pedotransfer functions for the determination of saturated hydraulic conductivity coefficient

Q4 Environmental Science
M. Ryczek, E. Kruk, M. Malec, S. Klatka
{"title":"Comparison of pedotransfer functions for the determination of saturated hydraulic conductivity coefficient","authors":"M. Ryczek, E. Kruk, M. Malec, S. Klatka","doi":"10.1515/oszn-2017-0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract On one hand, direct methods of measurement of saturated hydraulic conductivity coefficient are time consuming, and on the other hand, laboratory methods are cost consuming. That is why the popularity of empirical methods has increased. Their main advantages are speed of calculations and low costs. Comparison of various empirical methods (pedotransfer functions) for the determination of saturated hydraulic conductivity coefficient was the purpose of this work. The methods used were Shepard’s, Hazen’s, USBR (United States Bureau of Reclamation), Saxton et al.’s, Kozeny–Carman’s, Krüger’s, Terzaghi’s, Chapuis’s, Sheelheim’s, Chapuis’, and NAVFAC (Naval Facilities Engineering Command) methods. Calculations were carried out for the soil samples of differential texture. The obtained results shows the methods used for the determination of permeability coefficient differ considerably. Mean values obtained by analysed methods fluctuated between 0.0006 and 12.0 m·day−1. The results of calculations by the chosen methods were compared with the results of the laboratory method. The best compatibility with laboratory method was obtained by using the Terzaghi method.","PeriodicalId":37767,"journal":{"name":"Ochrona Srodowiska i Zasobow Naturalnych","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/oszn-2017-0005","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ochrona Srodowiska i Zasobow Naturalnych","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/oszn-2017-0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract On one hand, direct methods of measurement of saturated hydraulic conductivity coefficient are time consuming, and on the other hand, laboratory methods are cost consuming. That is why the popularity of empirical methods has increased. Their main advantages are speed of calculations and low costs. Comparison of various empirical methods (pedotransfer functions) for the determination of saturated hydraulic conductivity coefficient was the purpose of this work. The methods used were Shepard’s, Hazen’s, USBR (United States Bureau of Reclamation), Saxton et al.’s, Kozeny–Carman’s, Krüger’s, Terzaghi’s, Chapuis’s, Sheelheim’s, Chapuis’, and NAVFAC (Naval Facilities Engineering Command) methods. Calculations were carried out for the soil samples of differential texture. The obtained results shows the methods used for the determination of permeability coefficient differ considerably. Mean values obtained by analysed methods fluctuated between 0.0006 and 12.0 m·day−1. The results of calculations by the chosen methods were compared with the results of the laboratory method. The best compatibility with laboratory method was obtained by using the Terzaghi method.
确定饱和水力传导系数的土传递函数的比较
饱和水力传导系数的直接测量方法一方面耗时长,另一方面实验室方法成本高。这就是实证方法越来越受欢迎的原因。它们的主要优点是计算速度快,成本低。比较各种经验方法(土壤传递函数)来确定饱和水力传导系数是这项工作的目的。使用的方法是Shepard’s, Hazen’s, USBR(美国垦务局),Saxton等人,Kozeny-Carman’s, kr ger’s, Terzaghi’s, Chapuis’s, Sheelheim’s, Chapuis’s和NAVFAC(海军设施工程司令部)方法。对不同质地的土样进行了计算。所得结果表明,测定渗透系数的方法差异较大。通过分析方法获得的平均值在0.0006和12.0 m·day - 1之间波动。将所选方法的计算结果与实验室方法的计算结果进行了比较。采用Terzaghi法与实验室方法配伍效果最佳。
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
Ochrona Srodowiska i Zasobow Naturalnych
Ochrona Srodowiska i Zasobow Naturalnych Environmental Science-Environmental Science (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND NATURAL RESOURCES is a publication which addresses the issues of broadly understood environmental protection and publishes research and review papers. All these articles and papers are peer-reviewed. Interdisciplinary studies published by specialists in various fields present reciprocal relationships between the reactions taking place in the environment which are connected with natural element cycle and at the same time reflect both natural processes and human impacts. Themes of the works also concern socio-economic and technical issues at the UE, national, regional and local levels in the context of sustainable development. The main aim of the journal is to promote high level research in all aspects of environment and natural resources protection.
×
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