基于多入渗模型的荒漠砂质土壤积水入渗模拟对比

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2022.01.13

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

包气带土壤水分入渗在水文循环中起着至关重要的作用,深入了解降雨-积水-入渗过程的相互关系对评估荒漠环境下土壤水分补给和降水再分配具有重要意义。本研究以自然沙丘的丘间低地为研究对象,通过土壤剖面入渗原位观测试验。采用Kostiakov、Green-Ampt、Philip入渗模型和Hydrus-1D、Hydrus-2D/3D水文模型模拟了土壤水分垂直入渗过程,旨在寻求土壤积水入渗可接受的方法。模拟与实测结果比较表明：综合考虑平方和误差、均方根误差等验证指标,Philip模型能够预测砂土入渗率、累积入渗量和湿润锋推进过程,并且整个湿润区,Hydrus-3D模拟土壤含水量的效果明显优于Hydrus-2D,RMSE均值和R²系数分别达到了0.018 cm³·cm^-3和0.93。综上所示,Philip与Hydrus-3D模型结合可有效地估算砂土积水入渗参数和模拟水分传输过程,进而提高土壤水分入渗研究效率。

关键词: 包气带, 积水入渗, 数值模拟, 砂质土壤

Abstract:

Water infiltration of the vadose zone plays a key role in the water cycle. A better understanding of the relationships among rainfall, ponded water, and soil infiltration processes is critical to estimate groundwater replenishment and redistribution in desert environments. However, research on the moisture distribution in the vadose zone of sandy soil is still limited. In particular, few studies have examined the water transport processes in the desert vadose zone. Therefore, we aimed to determine the soil moisture distribution and variation in homogenous sandy soil under ponded infiltration and to validate models using data from these observations. This study was conducted in a nature dune slack through dynamic in situ observations using profile infiltration experiment and continuous soil moisture measurements at 1 min intervals. A single-ring infiltrometer (diameter, 20 cm; insertion depth, 5 cm) was used to keep a constant water head. Kostiakov-Lewis, Green-Ampt, Philip, Hydrus-1D/2D/3D numerical software based on Richard’s equation were used to describe the vertical infiltration and soil water movement processes and to identify suitable models for ponded infiltration processes in sandy soil. The validation indices included the sum of squared error and root mean squ are error. A comparison between the simulated and measured results indicated that the Philip model could predict the infiltration rate, cumulative infiltration, and wetting front advancement correctly, with an RMSE value of 0.0003, 0.04, and 0.24 cm·min^-1 and R ² of 0.95, 0.99, and 0.94, respectively. These values were clearly less than those of the Kostiakov-Lewis, Green-Ampt, and Hydrus-1D models, although the other models also showed good overall agreement with the field measured cumulative infiltration. The Hydrus-3D model yielded a better fit to the simulated soil moisture than the Hydrus-2D in the wetted zone based on the coefficient of determination, average RMSE (0.018 cm³·cm^-3) and R ² (0.93). Altogether, it appears that the combination of the Philip and Hydrus-3D models is a highly effective approach to estimate ponded infiltration parameters and simulate the water transport process in variably saturated sandy soil. The three-dimensional soil water diffusivity must be considered to predict water infiltration in sandy soils. Our results also demonstrate that the integration of numerical simulation and field measurements can improve the research efficiency of soil water infiltration in dry environments. In practice, the accurate prediction of soil water infiltration can be done by the selection of the proper models based on the soil properties of the particular sites.

Key words: vadose zone, ponded infiltration, numerical simulation, sandy soil

周宏. 基于多入渗模型的荒漠砂质土壤积水入渗模拟对比[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(1): 123-134.

ZHOU Hong. A comparative study of ponded infiltration in a desert sandy soil based on multi-hydrological models[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2022, 39(1): 123-134.

图/表 14

图1

图2

表1

表2

图3

图4

图5

图6

表3

图7

图8

图9

表4

图10

参考文献 34

[1]	Reynolds W D. An assessment of borehole infiltration analyses for measuring field-saturated hydraulic conductivity in the vadose zone[J]. Engineering Geology, 2013, 159: 119-130. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.02.006
[2]	Bagarello V, Sferlazza S, Sgroi A. Comparing two methods of analysis of single-ring infiltrometer data for a sandy-loam soil[J]. Geoderma, 2009, 149(3-4): 415-420. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.12.022
[3]	Xiao B, Sun F H, Hu K L. Biocrusts reduce surface soil infiltrability and impede soil water infiltration under tension and ponding conditions in dryland ecosystem[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2019, 568: 792-802. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.11.051
[4]	Verbist K, Torfs S, Cornelis W M, et al. Comparison of single-and double-ring infiltrometer methods on stony soils[J]. Vadose Zone Journal, 2010, 9(2): 462. doi: 10.2136/vzj2009.0058
[5]	Alagna V, Bagarello V, Di Prima S, et al. Determining hydraulic properties of a loam soil by alternative infiltrometer techniques[J]. Hydrological Processes, 2016, 30(2): 263-275. doi: 10.1002/hyp.v30.2
[6]	Wang X J, Li H L, Yang J Z, et al. Measuring in situ vertical hydraulic conductivity in tidal environments[J]. Advances in Water Resources, 2014, 70: 118-130. doi: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2014.05.004
[7]	Daly E, Porporato A. A review of soil moisture dynamics: From rainfall infiltration to ecosystem response[J]. Environmental Engineering Science, 2005, 22(1): 9-24. doi: 10.1089/ees.2005.22.9
[8]	任杰, 沈振中, 杨杰, 等. 基于HYDRUS模型低温水入渗下土壤水热运移模拟[J]. 干旱区研究, 2016, 33(2): 246-252.
	[Ren Jie, Shen Zhengzhong, Yang Jie, et al. Simulation of water and heat transfer in soil under low-temperature water infiltration based on the HYDRUS model[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2016, 33(2): 246-252. ]
[9]	Regalado C M, Ritter A, Álvarez B, et al. Simplified method to estimate the Green-Ampt wetting front suction and soil sorptivity with the Philip-Dunne falling-head permeameter[J]. Vadose Zone Journal, 2005, 4(2): 291. doi: 10.2136/vzj2004.0103
[10]	Putte A V, Govers G, Leys A, et al. Estimating the parameters of the Green-Ampt infiltration equation from rainfall simulation data: Why simpler is better[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2013, 476: 332-344. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.10.051
[11]	Huo W, Li Z, Zhang K, et al. GA-PIC: An improved Green-Ampt rainfall-runoff model with a physically based infiltration distribution curve for semi-arid basins[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2020, 586: 124900. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.124900
[12]	Zhang J, Lei T G, Chen T Q. Impact of preferential and lateral flows of water on single-ring measured infiltration process and its analysis[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2016, 80(4): 859. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2015.12.0445
[13]	Wang C Y, Mao X M, Hatano R. Modeling ponded infiltration in fine textured soils with coarse interlayer[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2014, 78(3): 745-753. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2013.12.0535
[14]	Sansoulet J L, Cabidoche Y M, Cattan P, et al. Spatially distributed water fluxes in an andisol under banana plants: Experiments and three-dimensional modeling[J]. Vadose Zone Journal, 2008, 7(2): 819-829. doi: 10.2136/vzj2007.0073
[15]	Mashayekhi P, Ghorbanidashtaki S, Mosaddeghi M R, et al. Different scenarios for inverse estimation of soil hydraulic parameters from double-ring infiltrometer data using HYDRUS-2D/3D[J]. International Agrophysics, 2016, 30(2): 203-210. doi: 10.1515/intag-2015-0087
[16]	Kandelous M M, Šimůnek J. Numerical simulations of water movement in a subsurface drip irrigation system under field and laboratory conditions using HYDRUS-2D[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2010, 97(7): 1070-1076. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2010.02.012
[17]	Yi J, Zhao Y, Shao M A, et al. Hydrological processes and eco-hydrological effects of farmland-forest-desert transition zone in the middle reaches of Heihe River Basin, Gansu, China[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2015, 529: 1690-1700. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.08.017
[18]	Stratford C J, Robins N S, Clarke D, et al. An ecohydrological review of dune slacks on the west coast of England and Wales[J]. Ecohydrology, 2013, 6(1): 162-171. doi: 10.1002/eco.v6.1
[19]	Zhang C C, Li X Y, Wang Y, et al. Responses of two desert shrubs to simulated rainfall pulses in an arid environment, northwestern China[J]. Plant and Soil, 2019, 435(1): 239-255. doi: 10.1007/s11104-018-3892-2
[20]	Diego Rivera, Mario Lillo, Stalin Granda. Representative locations from time series of soil water content using time stability and wavelet analysis[J]. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2014, 186(12): 9075-9087. doi: 10.1007/s10661-014-4067-0 pmid: 25249045
[21]	Wang S, Fu B J, Gao G Y, et al. Responses of soil moisture in different land cover types to rainfall events in a re-vegetation catchment area of the Loess Plateau, China[J]. Catena, 2013, 101: 122-128. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2012.10.006
[22]	Dohnal M, Vogel T, Dusek J, et al. Interpretation of ponded infiltration data using numerical experiments[J]. Journal of Hydrology and Hydromechanics, 2016, 64(3): 289-299. doi: 10.1515/johh-2016-0020
[23]	Chamizo S, Cantón Y, Domingo F, et al. Evaporative losses from soils covered by physical and different types of biological soil crusts[J]. Hydrological Processes, 2013, 27(3): 324-332. doi: 10.1002/hyp.v27.3
[24]	Cheng Q B, Chen X, Chen X H, et al. Water infiltration underneath single-ring permeameters and hydraulic conductivity determination[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2011, 398(1-2): 135-143. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.12.017
[25]	石兰君, 乔晓英, 曾磊, 等. 甘肃黑方台黄土水分运移规律模拟[J]. 干旱区研究, 2018, 35(4): 813-820.
	[Shi Lanjun, Qiao Xiaoying, Zeng Lei, et al. Loess moisture migration in Heifangtai of Gansu Province[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2018, 35(4): 813-820. ]
[26]	Smith R E. The infiltration envelope: Results from a theoretical infiltrometer[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 1972, 17: 1-21. doi: 10.1016/0022-1694(72)90063-7
[27]	Uloma A R, Samuel A C, Kingsley I K. Estimation of Kostiakov’s infiltration model parameters of some sandy loam soils of Ikwuano-Umuahia, Nigeria[J]. Open Transactions on Geosciences, 2014, 1(1): 34-38.
[28]	Duan R B, Fedler C, Borrelli J. Field evaluation of infiltration models in lawn soils[J]. Irrigation Science, 2011, 29(5): 379-389. doi: 10.1007/s00271-010-0248-y
[29]	Lewis J D. Assessment of a Single-ring Sprinkle Infiltrometer Method for Evaluating Soil-based Stormwater Management Practices[D]. North Carolina, Raleigh: Graduate Faculty of North Carolina State University, 2016.
[30]	Sihag P, Tiwari N K, Ranjan S. Modelling of infiltration of sandy soil using gaussian process regression[J]. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, 2017, 3(3): 1091-1100. doi: 10.1007/s40808-017-0357-1
[31]	Zolfaghari A A, Mirzaee S, Gorji M. Comparison of different models for estimating cumulative infiltration[J]. International Journal of Soil Science, 2012, 7(3): 108-115. doi: 10.3923/ijss.2012.108.115
[32]	Ogbe V B, Jayeoba O J, Ode S O. Comparison of four soil infiltration models on a sandy soil in Lafia, Southern Guinea Savanna Zone of Nigeria[J]. Production Agriculture and Technology, 2011, 7(2): 116-126.
[33]	孙程鹏, 赵文智, 杨淇越. 绿洲边缘夹黏沙丘持水特性[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(11): 3879-3888.
	[Sun Chengpeng, Zhao Wenzhi, Yang Qiyue. Water retention of the clay interlayer of dunes at the edge of an oasis[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(11): 3879-3888. ]
[34]	崔浩浩, 张冰, 冯欣, 等. 不同土体构型土壤的持水性能[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2016, 34(4): 1-5.
	[Cui Haohao, Zhang Bing, Feng Xin, et al. Soil water-holding properties of different soil body configuration[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2016, 34(4): 1-5. ]

土壤深度/cm	容重/(g·cm^-3)	初始含水量/(cm³·cm^-3)	土壤粒径分布/%			土壤孔隙度/%	土壤质地
土壤深度/cm	容重/(g·cm^-3)	初始含水量/(cm³·cm^-3)	黏土(<0.002 mm)	粉土(0.002~0.05 mm)	砂土(>0.05 mm)	土壤孔隙度/%	土壤质地
10	1.45	0.04	1.73	10.01	88.26	45.28	砂土
20	1.40	0.01	1.28	7.1	91.63	46.42	砂土
40	1.42	0.02	1.28	6.14	92.42	46.42	砂土
60	1.41	0.02	0.59	4.53	94.88	46.79	砂土
80	1.43	0.03	0.79	5.66	93.55	46.04	砂土

土壤深度/cm	饱和含水量/(cm³·cm^-3)	残余含水量/(cm³·cm^-3)	进气值/cm	孔径分布指数	饱和导水率/(cm·d^-1)
10	0.373	0.062	0.012	2.292	26.85
20	0.376	0.071	0.014	2.600	38.41
40	0.363	0.059	0.013	2.301	40.28
60	0.358	0.061	0.01	2.475	40.54
80	0.375	0.082	0.016	2.145	16.76

试验测定项目	Kostiakov		Green-Ampt		Philip		Hydrus-1D
试验测定项目	RMSE/(cm³·cm^-3)	R²	RMSE/(cm³·cm^-3)	R²	RMSE/(cm³·cm^-3)	R²	RMSE/(cm³·cm^-3)	R²
入渗速率/(cm·min^-1)	0.003	0.85	0.002	0.84	0.0003	0.95	0.004	075
累积入渗量/cm	0.08	0.98	0.35	0.97	0.04	0.99	1.38	0.98
湿润锋距离/cm	-	-	1.85	0.81	0.24	0.94	-	0.27

土壤深度/cm	Hydrus-2D		Hydrus-3D
土壤深度/cm	RMSE /(cm³·cm^-3)	R²	RMSE /(cm³·cm^-3)	R²
10	0.02	0.65	0.013	0.94
20	0.024	0.83	0.021	0.84
40	0.017	0.91	0.026	0.96
60	0.032	0.85	0.021	0.93
80	0.015	0.94	0.009	0.98