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

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free 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 Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Castiglione, P. Articles by Santini, A. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Castiglione, P. Articles by Santini, A. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Castiglione, P. Articles by Santini, A. Related Collections Laboratory Column Studies Dual Porosity/Permeability Models

Lateral Water Diffusion in an Artificial Macroporous System

Modeling and Experimental Evidence

P. Castiglione^*,a, B. P. Mohanty^,a, P. J. Shouse^a, J. Simunek^a, M. Th. van Genuchten^a and A. Santini^b

^a George E. Brown, Jr. Salinity Laboratory, 450 W. Big Springs Road, USDA, ARS, Riverside, CA
^b Department of Agricultural Engineering, University of Naples "Federico II", Italy

View larger version (13K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Scheme of the soil column with a vertical cylindrical macropore.

View larger version (98K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Experimental setup.

View larger version (102K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Partitioning of the bottom of the column in six pie sectors. The metal dividers are 15 cm high. The stainless-steel nets support the soil when the ceramics are removed.

View larger version (69K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Two dimensional simulations of pressure head distribution during infiltration processes for a 2.7-cm soil mantle. All figures show snapshots at 0.05 h.

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Summary of the cumulative water transfer for nine two-dimensional simulations.

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Cumulative water exchange predicted by the one-dimensional dual-permeability model (DPM) compared with the transfer calculated by HYDRUS 2-D.

View larger version (13K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Scaling factor dependency on the macropore saturated conductivity.

View larger version (24K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Measured and fitted inflow and outflow curves during infiltration in the homogeneous soil column (without macropore). Simulated results are obtained using Richards' equation.

View larger version (29K): [in a new window]   Fig. 9. Pressure head profiles during the infiltration experiments without the macropore. Simulated results are obtained using Richards' equation.

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 10. Cumulative infiltration rates measured with and without the macropore.

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Fig. 11. Cumulative infiltration curves measured in the soil column with a macropore, and calculated using the dual permeability model, for w optimized and w = 1.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 12. Observed vs. predicted cumulative water transfer between the macropore and matrix. In the dual permeability model, both w optimized and w = 1 were used.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 13. Observed vs. predicted cumulative outflow. In the dual permeability model, both w optimized and w = 1 were used.