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 Similar articles in ISI Web of Science 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 Morari, F. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Morari, F. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Morari, F. Related Collections Water Flow Models Recharge Soil Methods/Instrumentation

Drainage Flux Measurement and Errors Associated with Automatic Tension-controlled Suction Plates

Dipartimento di Agronomia Ambientale e Produzioni Vegetali, Agripolis, Universitá Di Padova, Viale dell'Università, 16 35020, Legnaro (Pd)–Italy

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Diagram of a portion of the automatic equilibrium tension lysimeter (AETL) system, including electronic tensiometers (E-tensiometers), lysimeters, central collection unit, and automatic vacuum controller.

View larger version (63K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Sketch of the domain simulated by HYDRUS-2D.

View larger version (28K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. (a) Daily ET and cumulative rainfall + irrigation and drainage; (b) variation of soil water matric potential head above the lysimeters (AL) and in the adjacent bulk soil (BS), with daily precipitation and irrigation. Bars indicate the simulated 2-d periods.

View larger version (27K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. (a) Average 10-min variation of the soil water matric potential above the lysimeters (AL) and in the adjacent bulk soil (BS), with (b) their absolute differences (h) observed over a 2-d period of high drainage flux; (c) cumulative drainage volumes simulated by HYDRUS-2D. The arrows represent the moments the electronic valves opened to control suction; SE = standard error.

View larger version (28K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. (a) Average 10-min variation of the soil water matric potential above the lysimeters (AL) and in the adjacent bulk soil (BS), with (b) their absolute differences (h) observed over a 2-d period of low drainage flux; (c) cumulative drainage volumes simulated by HYDRUS-2D. The arrows represent the moments the electronic valves opened to control suction; SE = standard error.

View larger version (14K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. (a) Relationship between sample mean () and variance (s2) of the daily drainage collected during the survey period; (b) relationship between sample size (number of lysimeters) and relative standard error (RSE) of measured drainage for given values of mean daily drainage.

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Comparison between simulated and measured daily drainage in the 2-d periods in the three growth boxes (GB).

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Cumulative drainage simulated with HYDRUS-2D considering different variable LS (lysimeter) lower boundary conditions.