Marco Pfeiffer, Julio Haberland, C. Kremer, O. Seguel
{"title":"比较两种测量油井饱和水力传导率(Ks)的替代方法","authors":"Marco Pfeiffer, Julio Haberland, C. Kremer, O. Seguel","doi":"10.4067/S0718-27912008000300005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The following study compared two field methods and one laboratory method to measure saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) in the saturated phase of soil, all evaluated in a clayey loam soil with three replicates. The two field methods under study were the auger hole method (PB) and the cylinder infiltrometer (CI), the laboratory method was the constant head permeameter (PCC). Ks values delivered by the PCC method showed differences in magnitude (1,03 m day-1) and a high variability (CV=249%), thus using these method is not recommended for soil with similar characteristics to the studied one. The PB and the CI methods showed a low variability (CV=39 and 13%) and similar Ks values (10,8 and 7,1 m day-1), being recommended the use of both methods in soils with similar characteristics to the studied one. These methods are complementary, because of the PB requires the presence of a water level, meanwhile the CI requires the absence of these one.","PeriodicalId":54472,"journal":{"name":"Revista De La Ciencia Del Suelo Y Nutricion Vegetal","volume":"5 1","pages":"49-56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COMPARACIÓN DE DOS MÉTODOS ALTERNATIVOS AL POZO BARRENO PARA LA MEDICIÓN DE LA CONDUCTIVIDAD HIDRÁULICA SATURADA (Ks) EN UN ALFISOL\",\"authors\":\"Marco Pfeiffer, Julio Haberland, C. Kremer, O. Seguel\",\"doi\":\"10.4067/S0718-27912008000300005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The following study compared two field methods and one laboratory method to measure saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) in the saturated phase of soil, all evaluated in a clayey loam soil with three replicates. The two field methods under study were the auger hole method (PB) and the cylinder infiltrometer (CI), the laboratory method was the constant head permeameter (PCC). Ks values delivered by the PCC method showed differences in magnitude (1,03 m day-1) and a high variability (CV=249%), thus using these method is not recommended for soil with similar characteristics to the studied one. The PB and the CI methods showed a low variability (CV=39 and 13%) and similar Ks values (10,8 and 7,1 m day-1), being recommended the use of both methods in soils with similar characteristics to the studied one. These methods are complementary, because of the PB requires the presence of a water level, meanwhile the CI requires the absence of these one.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54472,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista De La Ciencia Del Suelo Y Nutricion Vegetal\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"49-56\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista De La Ciencia Del Suelo Y Nutricion Vegetal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27912008000300005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista De La Ciencia Del Suelo Y Nutricion Vegetal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27912008000300005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
下面的研究比较了两种现场方法和一种实验室方法来测量土壤饱和阶段的饱和水力传导性(Ks),所有方法都在粘壤土中进行了三次重复。现场研究的两种方法分别是螺旋孔法(PB)和圆柱体渗透计(CI),室内研究的方法是恒水头渗透计(PCC)。PCC方法的Ks值存在量级差异(1.03 m day-1)和变异系数(CV=249%),因此不建议对与研究土壤特征相似的土壤使用PCC方法。PB和CI方法具有较低的变异率(CV分别为39和13%)和相似的k值(10、8和7、1 m day-1),推荐在与研究土壤特征相似的土壤中使用这两种方法。这些方法是互补的,因为PB需要有水位,而CI需要没有水位。
COMPARACIÓN DE DOS MÉTODOS ALTERNATIVOS AL POZO BARRENO PARA LA MEDICIÓN DE LA CONDUCTIVIDAD HIDRÁULICA SATURADA (Ks) EN UN ALFISOL
The following study compared two field methods and one laboratory method to measure saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) in the saturated phase of soil, all evaluated in a clayey loam soil with three replicates. The two field methods under study were the auger hole method (PB) and the cylinder infiltrometer (CI), the laboratory method was the constant head permeameter (PCC). Ks values delivered by the PCC method showed differences in magnitude (1,03 m day-1) and a high variability (CV=249%), thus using these method is not recommended for soil with similar characteristics to the studied one. The PB and the CI methods showed a low variability (CV=39 and 13%) and similar Ks values (10,8 and 7,1 m day-1), being recommended the use of both methods in soils with similar characteristics to the studied one. These methods are complementary, because of the PB requires the presence of a water level, meanwhile the CI requires the absence of these one.