See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/257938294

Soil Water Relations

Chapter · October 2013

CITATION READS
1 464

1 author:

Markus Tuller
The University of Arizona
311 PUBLICATIONS 7,500 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Markus Tuller on 28 November 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 1

Soil Water Relations

Markus Tuller
Department of Soil, Water & Environmental Science
The University of Arizona
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 2

Introduction
The amount and energy state of soil water govern most hydrological, biological, and
biogeochemical processes in the vadose zone. Gas exchange with the atmosphere,
movement of heat and dissolved chemicals in the subsurface, and diffusion of nutrients
to plant roots are intimately related to soil water content. In addition, changes in water
content and energy state affect many mechanical and engineering properties of soils
such as strength, compactibility, penetrability, or trafficability.
The combined effects of all forces acting on soil water result in a deviation in potential
energy relative to a reference state, called the ‘total soil water potential’ (H). This total
potential is commonly expressed as the algebraic sum of the matric (hm), the
gravitational (hz), the pressure (hp), and the osmotic potentials (ho).
The matric potential (hm) is attributed to capillary and adsorptive forces acting between
liquid, gaseous, and solid phases and manifests the tenacity with which soil water is
held within the soil matrix. The gravitational potential (hz), which is determined solely by
the elevation of a point relative to some arbitrary reference point, is equal to the work
needed to raise a body against the earth’s gravitational pull from a reference level to its
present position. The pressure potential (hp) is defined as the hydrostatic pressure
exerted by unsupported water that saturates the soil and overlays a point of interest.
The solute or osmotic potential (ho) is determined by the presence of solutes in soil
water, which lower its potential energy and its vapor pressure. The effects of h o are
important when there are appreciable amounts of solutes in the soil or in presence of a
selectively permeable membrane or a diffusion barrier, which transmits water more
readily than salts.
Soil water content and matric potential are functionally related through the Soil Water
Characteristic (SWC), which describes the amount of water retained in a soil (expressed
as mass or volume water content) under equilibrium at a given matric potential. The
SWC is an important hydraulic property, related to size and connectedness of pore
spaces. Modeling water distribution and flow in partially saturated soils requires
knowledge of the SWC; therefore, it plays a critical role for water management and
prediction of solute and contaminant transport in the environment.
The problems in Chapter 2 are intended to facilitate better understanding of basic
interrelations between solid, liquid and gaseous phases and potential energy
distributions within soils.
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 3

References
Jones, S.B., J.M. Wraith, and D. Or, 2002. Time domain reflectometry measurement
principles and applications, Hydrol. Process. 2002 16:141-153.
Brutsaert, W., 1982. Evaporation into the Atmosphere. D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Dordrecht. Holland.
Derjaguin, B.V., Churaev, N.V., Muller, V.M. 1987. Surface Forces. Consult. Bur., New
York.
Roth, K., R. Schulin, H. Fluhler, and W. Attinger. 1990. Calibration of time domain
reflectometry for water content measurement using composite dielectric
approach. Water Resour. Res., 26(10):2267-2273.
Topp, G.C., J.L. Davis, and A.P. Annan. 1980. Electromagnetic determination of soil
water content: Measurements in coaxial transmission lines. Water Resour. Res.
16:574-582.
Tuller, M., D. Or, and L.M. Dudley. 1999. Adsorption and capillarity condensation in
porous media. Water Resour. Res. 35:1949-1964.
van Genuchten, M.Th. 1980. A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic
conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44:892-898

Symbols and notation

am Soil specific surface area L2 M-1
A Cross-sectional Area L2
Asvl Hamaker constant for solid-vapor interactions M L2 T-2
D Thickness of adsorbed liquid film L
DW Depth of water L
De Equivalent depth of water L
DPAW Plant available soil water L
e Water vapor pressure M L-1 T-2
e0 Saturated water vapor pressure M L-1 T-2
E Energy per unit mass (disjoining pressure) M L2 T2 M-1
ECs Electrical conductivity of soil solution Current2 M-1 L-3 T-3
g Acceleration due to gravity L T-2
hc Height of capillary rise L
h Pressure head L
hm Matric potential L
hp Pressure potential L
ho Osmotic potential L
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 4

hz Gravitational potential L
H Total soil water potential L
L Depth L
M Shape parameter (van Genuchten, 1980) -
Mf Mass of field- wet soil M
Ms Mass of dry soil M
Mw Molecular weight M
n Shape parameter (van Genuchten, 1980) -
r Radius L
R Gas constant of Kelvin equation ML2 T-2 C-1 Amount Substance-1
RH Relative humidity -
S Degree of saturation -
T Absolute temperature T
V Volume L3
Vp Volume of total pore space L3
Vt Volume of soil L3
Vw Volume of pore space occupied by water L3
z Elevation L
VG Shape parameter (van Genuchten, 1980) L-1
 Shape parameter (Roth et al., 1990) -
 Water-air interface contact angle -
a Air dielectric constant -
b Bulk dielectric constant -
s Soil dielectric constant -
w Water dielectric constant -
a Volumetric air content L3 L-3
FC Volumetric water content at field capacity L3 L-3
m Gravimetric water content M M-1
r Residual volumetric water content L3 L-3
s Saturated volumetric water content L3 L-3
WP Volumetric water content at the wilting point L3 L-3
 Volumetric water content L3 L-3
b Bulk density M L-3
s Particle density M L-3
w Density of water M L-3
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 5

 Surface tension M L T-2 L-2

 Porosity -
a Air-filled porosity -

Problem 2-1

A moist sample of a sandy soil has a field-wet mass (Mf) of 1170 g and a volume (Vt) of
640 cm3. After oven-drying at 105 C the dry mass (Ms) is determined as 928 g. Assume
a typical particle density (s) for mineral soils and calculate:

a. The bulk density (b)

Answer:
M s 928
b    1.45 g cm3
Vt 640

b. The porosity (), assuming a typical particle density for a mineral soil of 2.65 g cm -3
Answer:

b 1.45
  1  1  0.45
s 2.65

c. The gravimetric water content (m)

Answer:

M f  Ms 1170  928
m    0.26 g g -1
Ms 928

d. The volumetric water content ()

Answer:

Vw M f  M s 1170  928
    0.38 cm3 cm-3
Vt  wVt 1 640 
Alternatively, the volumetric water content () can be found using the soil bulk density
and density of water, as well as the gravimetric water content (m):
b 1.45
  m  0.26  0.38 cm3 cm-3
w 1

e. The degree of saturation (S).

2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 6

Answer:

 0.38
S   0.84
 0.45
f. The air-filled porosity (a).

Answer:

a      0.45  0.38  0.07

Problem 2-2
A sandy soil with gravimetric water content (m) of 0.1 kg kg-1 was collected for a
laboratory study.
a. Determine the mass of soil required to pack a cylindrical soil column with a radius (r)
of 0.2 m and a height (h) of 0.4 m to a bulk density (b) of 1600 kg m-3.
Answer:
First, determine the volume (Vt) of the cylindrical soil column:

Vt   r 2 h   0.22  0.4  0.05 m3

Next, calculate the mass of oven dry soil (Ms):

M s  bVt  1600  0.05  80 kg

From the dry soil mass and gravimetric water content we can determine the mass of
field-wet soil (Mf):

M f  Ms
m   M f  M s 1  m   80(1  0.1)  88 kg
Ms

b. Calculate the porosity ( ) of the column, assuming a soil particle density ( s) of 2650
kg m-3.
Answer:
The porosity may be calculated from bulk density (ρb) and particle density (ρs):
b 1600
  1  1  0.4
s 2650

c. Determine the volume of water required to fully saturate the column.

Answer:
To determine the volume of water required to saturate the sample we first calculate the
volume of the total pore space (Vp):
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 7

Vp  Vt  0.05  0.4  0.02 m3

The portion of the total pore space already occupied by water is simply the mass of
water already contained in the soil (Mw) divided by the density of water ( w) (we
assume w = 1000 kg m-3):

M f  Ms 88  80
Vw    0.008 m3
w 1000

Finally, we calculate the volume of water (Vs) required to completely saturate the
sample:

Vs  Vp  Vw  0.02  0.008  0.012 m3

Problem 2-3

The side length (a) of a weighing lysimeter with a square cross-section is 3 m. The
lysimeter was initially filled to a depth (L) of 1 m with 11520 kg oven-dry loam soil
having a particle density (s) of 2600 kg m-3. After a heavy thunderstorm, the total
mass of wet soil (Mf) in the lysimeter is 13830 kg. After the thunderstorm, an additional
5 cm depth of water is added by sprinkler irrigation.
a. What is the bulk density of the soil?
Answer:
M s M s 11520
b   2   1280 kg m-3
Vt a L 9

b. Calculate average gravimetric (m) and volumetric () water contents of the soil after
the end of the thunderstorm (before the sprinkler irrigation).
Answer:
The gravimetric water content is:

M f  Ms 13830  11520
m    0.2 kg kg -3
Ms 11520

The volumetric water content is:

Vw M f  M s 13830  11520
    0.26 m3 m3
Vt  wVt 1000  9 

c. What is the mass of the soil in the lysimeter and the corresponding volumetric water
content after the sprinkler irrigation?
Answer:
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 8

Final Mass = M f  (depth added) a 2 w  13830   0.05 32 1000  14280 kg

The final volumetric water content () is calculated as:

Final Mass  M s 14280  11520
   0.31 m3 m-3
 w Vt 1000(9)

Problem 2-4

A ponded depth (D) of 270 mm of water is added to a soil with a volumetric air content
of a = 0.2 m3 m-3 and a bulk density of b = 1450 kg m-3. Calculate the depth of wetting
(L) assuming complete saturation.

Answer:
We know that the difference between the initial water content and the water content at
saturation equals the volumetric air content:
a  s  i  0.2 m3 m-3
The depth of wetting after addition of 270 mm water is calculated as:
D 0.27
L   1.35 m
 0.2
Problem 2-5

A 2-m deep soil profile is comprised of two layers. The upper layer has a thickness of
0.5 m. The average volumetric water contents of the upper and lower layers were
determined as 1  0.21 and 2  0.29 m3 m-3. Determine the volume of water (V) that is
stored in the profile within a 1-hectare field.

Answer:
First determine the equivalent depth De of water
stored in the profile:
De  1L1  2 L2   0.21 0.5   0.29 1.5  0.54 m

To obtain the volume, multiply the area (1 ha =

104 m2) with the equivalent depth of water:
V  ADe  10000  0.54  5400 m3

Figure 2-1 a layered soil profile

2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 9

Problem 2-6

A core sample was taken from a 1-m deep soil profile and split into 20-cm increments.
After oven drying at 105 C, gravimetric water content (m) and bulk density (b) were
determined for each increment. Then the cores were saturated and the volumetric water
contents at field capacity (FC) and at the permanent wilting point (WP) were determined
by means of Tempe cells and the Richards' pressure plate apparatus, respectively.

Depth Interval m b FC WP

-1 -3 3 -3
[cm] [kg kg ] [kg m ] [m m ] [m3 m-3]
0-20 0.09 1340 0.39 0.21
20-40 0.11 1425 0.36 0.23
40-60 0.16 1460 0.31 0.24
60-80 0.19 1500 0.34 0.22
80-100 0.22 1510 0.33 0.24

a. Calculate the average volumetric water content and the saturated water content for
each depth increment.
Answer:
First we convert the measured gravimetric water contents to volumetric water contents

using    m b with w representing the density of water (998.21 kg m-3 at 20 C). We
w
assume that the volumetric saturated water content is equal to porosity with s as the
particle density (2650 kg m-3):
b
  s  1 
s

The results are listed in the second and third columns of the table:

Depth Interval  s De DPAW

3 -3 3 -3
[cm] [cm cm ] [cm cm ] [cm] [cm]
0-20 0.12 0.49 7.4 3.6
20-40 0.16 0.46 6.0 2.6
40-60 0.23 0.45 4.4 1.4
60-80 0.29 0.43 2.8 2.4
80-100 0.33 0.43 2.0 1.8
Sum 22.6 11.8
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 10

b. Estimate the equivalent depth of water needed to completely saturate the profile.
Answer:
For each increment calculate the equivalent depth:

De  L  s   

as shown in the fourth column of the table above. The results are summed up to yield
22.6 cm for the 100-cm deep soil profile.
c. Estimate to what depth 15-cm precipitation would saturate the profile.
Answer:
By examining the tabulated results, we observe that 15 cm of precipitation will saturate
the first two depth increments (7.4 + 6.0 = 13.4 cm) and that the remaining 15 - 13.4 =
1.6 cm will saturate an additional 1.6/4.4 of the next 20 cm increment. Thus, a
reasonable estimate for the wetting depth is 40 + (1.6/4.4) 20 = 47.3 cm.
d. Calculate the plant available soil water in length units within the profile from the
volumetric field capacity FC and the wilting point WP listed in the first table.
Answer:
The plant available soil water content for each increment is:

DPAW  L FC   WP 

with L = 20 cm with the results as shown in the table above. Adding the values yields a
total of 11.8 cm for the total plant available soil water in the profile.

Problem 2-7

A soil has an initial water content of θ = 0.1 m3 m-3 and a bulk density of b = 1400 kg m-
3
. What would the final depth of wetting be after internal drainage to field capacity
following a rainfall event of 37 mm?

Answer:
First we calculate the volumetric water content at saturation that is equivalent to
porosity:

b 1400
  s  1   1  0.47 m3 m3 .
s 2650
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 11

From the saturated water content we can estimate the water content at field capacity
s
using the “rule of thumb”  FC   0.235 m3 m-3.
2

Once we know the water content at field capacity we can calculate the final depth of
wetting as:

D 0.037
L   0.27 m
 0.235  0.1

Problem 2-8

A neutron probe calibration for a field plot with loamy soil yielded the volumetric water
content () - counts per minute (CPM) data pairs listed in the table below. The standard
reading (Cs) during calibration was 19226 counts per minute. The calibration equation is
based on the count ratio (CR), which is defined as the measured counts per minute
CPM
divided by the standard count reading: CR  .
Cs

Calibration Data

 CPM CR
3 -3
[m m ]
0.07 8652 0.45
0.18 15381 0.80
0.31 24033 1.25
0.36 25955 1.35
0.37 26916 1.40
0.45 30762 1.60

a. Determine the linear calibration equation that relates volumetric water content in cm 3
cm-3 (y-axis) to the dimensionless count ratio (x-axis).
Answer:

Use the  - CR data pairs and perform linear regression analyses with  as the
dependent variable. We can use spreadsheet software to determine the slope and
intercept of the regression line, or perform the calculations manually. The resulting
calibration curve is   0.0801  0.3241CR , as shown in the graph.
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 12

0.5

Water content (cm cm )

-3
0.4

3
0.3

0.2

 = 0.3241CR - 0.0801
0.1

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
CR -

Figure 2-2 Neutron probe calibration curve

b. Compute the water content profile measured two weeks later for which the following
CPM values were found and for which the standard reading during the measurement
was 18720 counts per minute.
Answer:
First we convert the neutron probe counts (CPM) to count rate (CR) by dividing by the
standard reading (Cs). Then we apply the calibration equation determined above for
each depth, yielding the tabulated and the graphical results below.

Water Content Profile

Depth CPM CR 
[m] [m m-3]
3

0.3 13206 0.71 0.149

0.5 13451 0.72 0.153
0.7 13680 0.73 0.157
0.9 19455 1.04 0.257
1.1 19700 1.05 0.261
1.3 20047 1.07 0.267
1.5 21110 1.13 0.285
1.7 21848 1.17 0.298
1.9 21756 1.16 0.297
2.1 22386 1.20 0.308
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 13

Figure 2-3 Water content profile

Problem 2-9

The volumetric water content distribution within a soil profile of a cropped field was
determined with a neutron probe on two different dates with the following results.

Depth  [cm3 cm-3]

[cm] Date 1 Date 2
5 0.144 0.155
10 0.183 0.165
20 0.231 0.175
35 0.271 0.180
50 0.270 0.183
75 0.333 0.204
100 0.321 0.251
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 14

a. Assume zero water content on the surface and plot the water content distributions for
both days on the same graph.
Answer:

Figure 2-4 Water content profiles

b. Determine the equivalent depth of water stored in each layer and over the entire
profile on both dates.
Answer:
Take the average of the water contents between soil layers and multiply values with the
layer thickness to find the equivalent depth of water (De).
For the 0 to 5 cm layer for date 1 we calculate:
0  0.144
De   5  0.36 m
2
The equivalent depth of water stored over the entire profile is the sum of the equivalent
depths of water of all individual layers.
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 15

Depth  [cm3 cm-3] Equivalent Depth De [cm]

[cm] Date 1 Date 2 Date 1 Date 2
5 0.144 0.155 0.36 0.39
10 0.183 0.165 0.82 0.80
20 0.231 0.175 2.07 1.70
35 0.271 0.18 3.77 2.66
50 0.27 0.183 4.06 2.72
75 0.333 0.204 7.54 4.84
100 0.321 0.251 8.18 5.69
Sum 26.80 18.80

c. What is the net change in equivalent depth of water from date 1 to date 2?
Answer:

De  De1  De 2  26.8  18.8  8 cm

d. What might explain the change in the water content over the profile?
Answer:
The measurements show an increase in the water content from Date 1 to Date 2 at the
5-cm depth, which is indicative of surface water application (irrigation or precipitation)
between the measurement dates. The overall decrease in the water content deeper in
the profile is likely due to drainage and evapotranspiration.

Problem 2-10

A waveguide of length L = 10 cm connected to a Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR)

cable tester was successively inserted into a sand, loam, and clay soil. During the
measurements, the relative propagation velocity Vp was set at 0.99. The reflected
electromagnetic waves were captured from the TDR output screen. The reflection points
that mark the entry of the electromagnetic signal into the probe (x1) and the reflection at
the end of the probe (x2) are listed together with measured bulk (b) and particle
densities (s) in the table below.

Sand Loam Clay

x1 [cm] 23.639 22.989 23.076
x2 [cm] 59.948 66.763 73.340
b [kg m-3] 1500 1400 1200
s [kg m-3] 2650 2650 2650
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 16

Figure 2-5 TDR system

Calculate the bulk dielectric constant εb according to the expression:
2
x x 
b   2 1 
 V L 
 p 

Answer:

The results are b = 13.45, 19.55, and 25.78 for sand, loam and clay, respectively.

b. Find the corresponding water contents using Topp’s empirical relationship (Topp et
al., 1980):

  5.3 10  2.92 10  b  5.5 10   b 2  4.3 10   b3

2 2 4 6

Answer:

The results are  = 0.25, 0.34, and 0.41 for sand, loam and clay, respectively.
c. Find the resulting θ a second time using the three-phase mixing model as formulated
by Roth et al. (1990):
1

 b    w   (1   ) s   (   ) a   

where  is the soil's porosity and w = 81, s = 4, and a = 1 are the dielectric constants
for water, soil and air, respectively. Take  = 0.5 which is related to the geometry of the
medium in relation to the axial direction of the wave guide.
Answer:
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 17

b
First find the respective porosities (   1 ) to be 0.43, 0.47, and 0.55 for sand, loam
s
and clay, respectively. Then, use the mixing model to obtain volumetric water contents 
of 0.26, 0.36, and 0.45.

Problem 2-11

The average TDR-measured soil bulk dielectric constant for silt loam top soil (0 to
0.6 m) having a bulk density (b) of 1325 kg m-3 was b = 12. A measurement made
with a neutron probe (NP) in a close by access tube resulted in a count ratio (CR) of
0.8 (NP calibration curve:  = 0.02 + 0.45CR). Calculate the soil water content with
both methods, and explain any discrepancies between the methods - state your
assumptions!

Answer:

First we calculate porosity ( ) by assuming a reasonable value of the particle density

(ρs = 2650 kg m-3):
 1325
  1 b  1  0.5
s 2650
We apply a simplified form of the mixing model used in the previous problem to obtain
the volumetric water content from the TDR measurement:
  2   12   2  0.5
 b   0.25 m3 m-3
8 8
The water content measured with the neutron probe is simply calculated using the
calibration relationship:
  0.02  0.45  CR   0.02  0.45  0.8  0.38 m3 m-3
The differences might be attributed to differences in soil volumes measured with TDR
and the neutron probe, different measurement depths, heterogeneous conditions
throughout the profile, bad neutron probe calibration, and/or spatial variability.

Problem 2-12

The volumetric air content of a soil is 0.15 m3 m-3 and the bulk density is 1280 kg m-3.
Calculate the volumetric and gravimetric water contents, and determine the soil’s bulk
dielectric constant.

Answer:

First we calculate the porosity. We assume a particle density of s = 2650 kg m-3.

2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 18

b 1280
  1  1  0.52
s 2650
From porosity and known volumetric air content we can calculate the volumetric water
content:
    a  0.52  0.15  0.37 m3 m-3
Then we can convert volumetric to gravimetric water content using the relationship:
  1000
   m b   m   w  0.37  0.29 kg kg -1
w b 1280
From known volumetric water content and porosity we can estimate the dielectric
constant based on the dielectric mixing model used in the previous 2 problems (Roth et
al., 1990):
  2  
 b   b   8  2      2.16  2  0.52   19.7
2

Problem 2-13

A clean glass capillary with a radius of 0.01 cm is dipped into a container of water.
Determine the water pressure pw at points A (water-air interface in the capillary), B,
and C in Pa, and draw a sketch of the pressure head distribution. Assume that the
contact angle between water and clean glass is zero, and the water temperature is 20
C. The water level (D) in the container is 5 cm above the bottom.

Answer:
First we calculate the height of capillary rise (hc):

hc 
2 cos 

 2  0.07281  0.1487 m
 w gr  998.2  9.81 20 
4

where  is surface tension of the water-air interface (0.0728 N m-1 at 20 C),  is the
water-glass contact angle, w is the density of water (998.2 kg m-3 at 20 C), g is the
acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m s-2), and r is the capillary radius.

The pressure in Pa at the water-air interface in point A equals:

pw A   w ghc =-  998.21 9.81 0.1487  =-1456 Pa

The pressure in point B is zero (relative to atmospheric pressure). At point C we have

positive hydrostatic pressure equivalent to the vertical distance between point C and
the free water level in the container if expressed in length units. The pressure in Pa is
given as:

pwC  w gD=  998.2 9.81 0.05 =490 Pa

2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 19

Figure 2-6 Capillary rise

Problem 2-14

A small sample of Ca+2 montmorillonite is placed in a closed chamber and equilibrated

over several days in the chamber environment. The water vapor pressure of the
chamber atmosphere after sample equilibration is 514 Pa, the temperature is 20 C, and
the gravimetric water content m of the sample is 0.15 kg kg-1. Assume that the solute
(osmotic) potential is negligible and that water is retained solely on account of van der
Waals interactions in the form of adsorbed films.

a. Calculate the soil water matric potential (expressed first as energy per unit weight
and then as energy per unit mass)
Answer:
The Kelvin equation gives the sum of the matric and osmotic potentials. Expressed in
units of length, or energy per unit weight:

RT e
hm  h0  ln  
M w g  e0 
where hm is the matric potential expressed as a length, h0 is the osmotic potential
expressed as a length, e is the water vapor pressure (Pa), e0 is the saturated water
vapor pressure at the same temperature, g is the acceleration of gravity (9.81 m s-2),
Mw is the molecular mass of water (0.018 kg mol-1), R is the ideal gas constant (8.31
m3 Pa mol-1 K-1), and T is absolute temperature in Kelvin.
The saturation vapor pressure at 20 C (293.15 K) can be approximated as (Richards,
1971):

e0  101325e
13.3185t R 1.976 t R
2
0.6445tR3 0.1299tR 4 
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 20

with tR  1  373.15/ T .

Assuming that ho is negligible, Kelvin’s equation yields:

8.31 239.15 ln  514   1.703 10 4 m energy per unit weight

hm     
 0.018 9.81  2334.07 
To express as energy per unit mass, multiply with g:

E  ghm   9.81 1.70310   1.67 10  J kg -1 (energy per unit mass)

4 5

b. Calculate the thickness of the adsorbed water film.

Answer:
The thickness of the film (d) is given in Tuller et al. (1999):

6 10 
20
Asvl
 2.67 10  m
10
d  3
6  998.2  167000 
3
6 w E

where Asvl = -6(10)-20-J is the Hamaker constant for solid-vapor interactions through the
intervening liquid, and E is the disjoining pressure (Derjaguin et al., 1987) expressed in
units of energy per unit mass (J kg-1).
c. Calculate the specific surface area (am) based on the film thickness

Answer:

The mass of water per unit mass of dry soil (m) is equal to the specific surface area
(am) multiplied with film thickness (d) multiplied with the density of water (w):

m  am d w

The specific surface is:

m 0.15
am    5629805 m2 kg -1  563 m2 g -1
d  w 2.67 10   998.2 
10

Problem 2-15

A soil sample is in equilibrium with the ambient atmosphere with a relative humidity
(RH) of 99% and a temperature of 30 C. The electrical conductivity of the soil solution
(ECs) is 25 dS m-1.
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 21

a. What is the sum of the osmotic and matric potential, expressed as energy per unit
weight?
Answer:
The sum of the osmotic and matric potentials is given by the Kelvin equation from the
previous problem:
RT
hm  h0  ln  RH 
Mwg

here R is the ideal gas constant (8.31 Pa m3 mol-1 K-1), T is absolute temperature in
degrees Kelvin, Mw is the molecular weight of water (0.018 kg mol-1), g is the
acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m s-2), and RH represents the ratio of the water vapor
pressure of the system to the saturated water vapor pressure (relative humidity).

8.31 303.15 ln 0.99  143 m

hm  ho   
 0.018 9.81
b. Determine the osmotic potential in kPa based on its approximate relationship to the
electrical conductivity (An approximation because it also depends upon specific ionic
composition).
Answer:
Between ECs = 3 to 30 dS m-1 the relation of ECs and osmotic potential is:
E  kPa    0.36  ECs  dS m1  10    0.36  2510   900 kPa
2 2

Converting to Pa and dividing by the product of w (995.6 kg m-3 at 30 C), and g gives
the osmotic potential in units of length (ho):

900 10 
3

ho    92.1 m
 995.6  9.81

c. What is the matric potential?

Answer:
The matric potential is the difference of the last 2 results:
hm  143  (92)  51 m
(where we have rounded off ho to the nearest integer)
Problem 2-16

Two tensiometers with a length of 60 cm (measured from the center of the ceramic cup
to the vacuum gauge) were installed at a depth of 50 cm. Tensiometer 1 was installed
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 22

vertically from the soil surface and Tensiometer 2 was installed horizontally from a
trench. The matric potential (hm) in vicinity of both tensiometer cups is -1.3 m. What do
the vacuum gauges (hgauge) of the tensiometers read? Express your results in units of
energy per weight (head) as well as in units of energy per volume (soil water pressure).

Figure 2-7 Tensiometer setup

Answer:
The pressure head in a tensiometer is reduced by the change in elevation from the cup
level to the gauge. The vertical gauge is 60 cm above the level of the cup resulting in

hgauge1  1.3  0.6  1.9 m

The horizontal gauge is at the same elevation as the ceramic cup, resulting in

hgauge 2  1.3  0  1.3 m

To express as energy per unit volume or equivalent pressure, multiply with wg which
gives

Energy/Volume1  1000 9.81 (1.9)   1.86 10  Pa  18.6 kPa

4

and

Energy/Volume2  1000 9.81 (1.3)   1.2810  Pa  12.8 kPa

4

Problem 2-17

A matric potential of hm = -0.3 m was measured with a tensiometer 0.5 m deep in a

uniform soil. Assuming that hydrostatic conditions exist and that the osmotic potential
is negligible, determine the distribution of the total hydraulic head (H) and pressure
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 23

head (h = hm + hp) down to a depth of 2 m. Draw a potential diagram with the gravity,
elevation, and total potentials in meters of water on the x-axis, and elevation in meters
on the y-axis. If there is a free water table within the profile under consideration,
calculate its depth. Designate the soil surface as reference level.

Answer:
The hydraulic head at the 50-cm depth is the pressure head (matric potential here)
added to the elevation (-0.5 m relative to the reference level).
Under hydrostatic conditions, H must be constant and the pressure head, expressed in
meters, is given at any depth d by

H  h  hz  0.3  0.5  0.8 m

The water table depth dWT will be the depth for which h is zero
dWT  0.8 m
The plot of the hydraulic head is constant with depth, while the pressure head
increases linearly with depth from -0.8 at the surface to zero at the water table. Above
the water table it can be called a matric potential and below the water table it has
positive values.

Figure 2-8 Potential diagram for soil profile

Problem 2-18

Two tensiometers are installed adjacent to each other at 80 cm and 40 cm depths as

shown in the sketch below. Which direction does water flow between the two
installation depths when the vacuum gauge of Tensiometer 1 reads -19620 Pa and the
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 24

gauge of Tensiometer 2 reads -20610 Pa? Assume that the osmotic potential is
negligible.

Figure 2-9 Tensiometer setup

Answer:
To determine the direction of flow we first need to calculate the matric potentials at the
depths of the tensiometer cups. We first convert the tensiometer readings given in
units of energy per volume to pressure head by dividing by wg:
19620
hgauge1   2.0 m
1000  9.81
20610
hgauge 2   2.1 m
1000  9.81
The matric head at each cup is essentially the pressure head, and must be equal to the
gauge pressure head added to the decrease in elevation from the gauge to the cup:

hm1  2.0  0.9  1.1m

hm2  2.1  0.5  1.6m

For convenience we choose the soil surface as reference for gravitational and
calculate the hydraulic heads H1 and H2 by adding the elevation to the respective
pressure head values:.

H1  1.1  (0.8)  1.9m

2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 25

H 2  1.6  (0.4)  2.0m

We assume that the osmotic potential is negligible. Since water flow occurs from
locations of higher potential energy to locations of lower potential energy in pursuit of
equilibrium, the flow direction is upwards (the potential at 40 cm depth is lower than at
80 cm depth).

Problem 2-19

A static water table exists at the 65 cm depth. Assuming hydrostatic conditions and
neglecting osmotic effects, sketch the hydraulic head, the component pressure heads,
and the elevation from the 0- to the 100-cm depth. Use the bottom of the profile as the
reference level.

Answer:
First, we chose a convenient location to calculate the hydraulic head H. At the water
table, the pressure head (h) is zero, giving H = 35 cm (the elevation (z) is defined
relative to the reference level). Since, under hydrostatic conditions the hydraulic head
along the profile is defined as H = h + z, the pressure head is given by h = 35 - z.
Note that pressure head (h) is used for both positive and negative values relative to
atmospheric pressure. A negative h is considered the matric potential, and is
represented by hm. A positive h is also referred to as the hydrostatic potential, and is
represented by hp.

Figure 2-10 Hydrostatic soil profile

2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 26

Problem 2-20

Sketch a typical Soil Water Characteristic (SWC) curve for a sandy and a loam soil.
Include both curves in the same graph and plot the volumetric water content on the x-
axis and the matric potential on the y-axis. Mark the air entry points and explain the
differences in the shapes of the two curves (make sure to correctly label the axes).

Figure 2-11 Soil water characteristic

Answer:
There are distinct differences between the shapes of the Soil Water Characteristic
(SWC) for coarse (sand) and fine textured (loam) soils.
The saturated water content of sand is significantly lower than the saturated water
content of loam. While sand has a more homogenous pore-size distribution, where the
average pore size is likely larger than loam soil pores, water retention is lower for sand
particles. In fact, the graph shows us that more water is retained at saturation by the
smaller-diameter loamy soil pores, giving loam larger saturated water content
compared to sand.
The air entry value marks the matric potential where the largest pores drain (air enters
the soil). Because less energy is required to drain larger pores, the air entry potential of
the sand is higher (less negative) when compared to the loam.
Finally, there is a distinct difference in the slopes of the two graphs. In general, the
finer the soil texture, the greater water retention for a given matric potential, and the
more gradual the slope of the curve will be. In sand, most of the adsorbed water drains
close to the air entry potential, as can be seen in the sudden drop in the water content
after this point.
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 27

Problem 2-21

Calculate and plot the relative saturation (Se) distribution with depth within a bundle of
cylindrical quartz capillaries that is vertically dipped into a water reservoir (see sketch).
The water temperature is 20 C and the capillary bundle is comprised of the following
capillaries:

Figure 2-12 Bundle of capillaries

No. of
100 300 250 100 18 10 7 4 2
Capillaries
Radius [m] 1.E-05 2.E-05 5.E-05 1.E-04 2.E-04 6.E-04 8.E-04 1.E-03 2.E-03

Answer:
First we calculate the height of capillary rise of water (20 C) for various radii:

2 cos 
hc 
 w gr

where σ is surface tension of the water-air interface (0.0728 N m-1), γ is the water-
glass contact angle, w is the density of water (998.2 kg m-3), g is the acceleration of
gravity (9.81 m s-2), and r is the capillary radius.

For each elevation, we then calculate the cross-sectional area of all filled capillaries:

A   r 2n

with n as the number of capillaries in each size fraction. We start at the highest
elevation where only capillaries with the smallest diameter are filled and then gradually
move down to the lowest elevation where all capillaries are filled. At each elevation
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 28

increment, we add the water filled cross-sectional areas of capillaries with smaller
diameters. Finally we calculate the relative saturation at each elevation as the ratio of
the water-filled cross-sectional area at a certain elevation and the total cross-sectional
area of the capillary bundle.

Radius Filled
No. of Capillary Relative
Crossection
Capillaries [m] Rise [m] Saturation
[m2]
100 1.E-05 1.487 3.14E-08 4.43E-04
300 2.E-05 0.743 4.08E-07 5.76E-03
250 5.E-05 0.297 2.37E-06 3.35E-02
100 1.E-04 0.149 5.51E-06 7.78E-02
18 2.E-04 0.074 7.78E-06 1.10E-01
10 6.E-04 0.025 1.91E-05 2.69E-01
7 8.E-04 0.019 3.32E-05 4.68E-01
4 1.E-03 0.015 4.57E-05 6.45E-01
2 2.E-03 0.007 7.09E-05 1.00E+00

Figure 2-13 Relative saturation for bundle of capillaries

Problem 2-22

A hanging water column was used to measure desorption on a Soil Water Characteristic
curve. After equilibration, the vertical distance between the free water level in burette
and the bottom of the 5-cm high soil sample is 25 cm (see sketch). Use the top of the
soil sample as the reference level and determine the hydraulic, matric, pressure, and
gravitational potentials for points A to D.
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 29

Figure 2-14 Hanging water column

Draw a potential diagram for the system with the potential components on the x-axis
and elevation on the y-axis.
Answer:
Expressing potentials as energy per unit of weight and with the sample top as
reference, the gravitational potential components are simply the negative vertical
distances from the reference level to the points of interest.
The matric potentials in points A and B are -30 and -25 cm (distance between points
and the water level in the burette. The pressure potentials are zero (i.e., there are no
positive pressures).
In point C (water level) the matric and pressure potentials are zero. In point D the matric
potential is zero and the pressure potential is 35 cm. The total hydraulic potential (sum
of individual components) is constant at -30 cm throughout the system (equilibrium).
We can combine results in tabulated form and draw the potential diagram.

Point H hz hm hp
[cm] [cm] [cm] [cm]
A -30 0 -30 0
B -30 -5 -25 0
C -30 -30 0 0
D -30 -65 0 35
2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 30

Figure 2-15 Potential diagram for hanging water column

Problem 2-23

The van Genuchten (VG) model parameters (van Genuchten, 1980) and saturated and
residual water contents were determined for a Millville silt loam soil ( VG = 0.394 m-1, n
= 1.420, m = 0.296, s = 0.5 m3 m-3, r = 0.021 m3 m-3).
Calculate the equivalent depth of plant available soil water (DPAW) stored in the top 1 m
of the soil. Use the “Field Capacity - Wilting Point” concept for your calculations. List
practical applications that require knowledge of the equivalent depth plant available soil
water.
Answer:

The volumetric water content FC at field capacity (h = -3 m):

m
 
 FC   r   s   r  
1  , m  n 1
 1  VG h  
n
n
 
0.296
 1 
 FC  0.021   0.5  0.021    0.4 m3 m-3
 1   0.394  3 1.42 
   

Volumetric water content WP at the wilting point (h = -150 m):

0.296
 1 
WP  0.021   0.5  0.021    0.11 m3 m-3
 1   0.394 150  1.42 
   

Plant available soil water PAW:

2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 31

 PAW   FC  WP  0.4  0.11  0.29 m3 m-3

Equivalent depth (DPAW) of plant available soil water stored in the top 1 m:

DPAW  L  FC  WP   1 0.29   0.29 m  290 mm

Practical applications that require knowledge of the equivalent plant available soil
water:

 For irrigation scheduling to avoid over-irrigation beyond field capacity (leaching

losses) or under-irrigation resulting in drought stress.
 To select crops suitable for a certain location, in accordance with available soil and
water resources.
 In geotechnical applications, to determine the optimum water content where
maximum compaction occurs in order to minimize future soil settlement.

Problem 2-24

Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR) was used to measure the volumetric water contents
in points A and B, 20 and 50 cm below the surface of a highly heterogeneous soil
profile. Point A lies within a region of silt loam and the soil in point B is located in a
sandy loam. The TDR measurements showed identical volumetric water contents of
0.25 cm3 cm-3 in both depths. Use the Soil Water Characteristic (SWC) information
(van Genuchten parameters) provided below for both soil regions to determine the
direction of water flow between the two locations. Assume that the osmotic potential is
negligible and use the soil surface as reference level.

Figure 2-16 Heterogeneous soil profile and Soil Water Characteristic information
 2. SOIL WATER RELATIONS 32

Answer:
We use the van Genuchten (VG) parametric model for the Soil Water Characteristic
(SWC) to relate the measured volumetric water content to matric potential. First we
rearrange the VG equation to obtain an explicit expression for matric potential hm = h:
1

 
m  
1
n
1 
1    r  m

   r   s   r     h    1
 1  VG h  n  
VG   s   r 
   

where s is the saturated water content, r the residual water content and , n, and m
are the VG model shape parameters. Note that the parameter m is related function of n
according to the following expression:

n 1
m
n
For point A we obtain:
1
 
1
 1.390
1  0.250  0.061  0.281 
hA    1  430.94 cm
0.012  0.430  0.061  
 

For point B we obtain:

1
 
1
 1.610
1  0.250  0.067  0.379 
hB    1  89.92 cm
0.021  0.370  0.067  
 

With the matric potentials determined, we can now calculate the hydraulic potentials
(H) at both points. Please note that the van Genuchten equation uses the absolute
value of the matric potential, but that potential values are actually negative, as the van
Genuchten equation is only relevant for unsaturated soil conditions.

For point A we obtain: H A  hA  hz  430.94  (20)  450.94 cm

For point B we obtain: H B  hB  hz  89.92  (50)  139.92 cm

Since water flow occurs from locations of higher potential energy to locations of lower
potential energy in pursuit of equilibrium, the flow direction is from point B to point A
(upwards).

View publication stats