HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Kosugi, K. PubMed Articles by Kosugi, K. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Kosugi, K. Related Collections Flow Water Retention/Capillary Pressure Numerical Solutions

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Comparison of Three Methods for Discretizing the Storage Term of the Richards Equation

Laboratory of Erosion Control, Dep. of Forest Science, Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto Univ., Kyoto 606-8502, Japan
^* Corresponding author (kos{at}kais.kyoto-u.ac.jp).

Received 27 November 2007.

We compared three methods for discretizing the storage term of the Richards equation: the traditional chain rule expansion approach (Method A), a mass conservative approach based on a mixed form of the Richards equation (Method B), and another mass conservative approach using a chord-slope approximation for the specific moisture capacity (Method C). The results of three test problems indicated that Method A could not achieve a perfect global mass balance even if the iteration number in the Picard iteration scheme was large enough to bring a perfect solution convergence. Both Methods B and C successfully produced perfect mass balances. Method C produced step-by-step decreases in the global mass balance error as the Picard iteration level increased, which corresponded well with step-by-step decreases in the solution convergence error. Method B produced more accurate mass balances than Methods A and C for every Picard iteration level; when this method was used, the global mass balance error became negligible before the solution converged. Analytical evaluation of Method B revealed the mechanisms for removing the mass balance error. As the difference between the matric pressure head, , lessens between the previous and current Picard iteration levels, the water retention curve becomes more linear in the region bounded by the two values. As a result, the difference in the water content between two consecutive Picard iteration levels is accurately approximated by using the difference in the two values, which results in a remarkable reduction in the mass balance error, allowing Method B to produce better results than Method C.