Model for Estimating Soil Water Flow, Water Content, Evapotranspiration and Root Extraction

A mathematical model was developed to predict water content profiles, evapotranspiration, water flow from or to the water table, root extraction and root water potential at the surface as functions of time under unsteady state conditions. The model was tested in the field at The Hullinger Farm near...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Nimah, Musa N.
Format: Others
Published: DigitalCommons@USU 1972
Subjects:
Online Access:https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/4324
https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5252&context=etd
id ndltd-UTAHS-oai-digitalcommons.usu.edu-etd-5252
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-UTAHS-oai-digitalcommons.usu.edu-etd-52522019-10-13T06:12:51Z Model for Estimating Soil Water Flow, Water Content, Evapotranspiration and Root Extraction Nimah, Musa N. A mathematical model was developed to predict water content profiles, evapotranspiration, water flow from or to the water table, root extraction and root water potential at the surface as functions of time under unsteady state conditions. The model was tested in the field at The Hullinger Farm near Vernal, Utah, in 1970 and 1971. Comparison of water content-depth profiles show excellent agreement at the end of a 9- day run in 1970 on oats seeded to alfalfa. In 1971 with alfalfa as the crop, the data show best agreement, between predicted and computed water content-depth profiles, 48 hours after any water addition. The poorest agreement for both crops was right after irrigation. The computed cumulative ET was 4.9 em which was 0.4 em less than actual (measured) ET, during the 9- day period in 1970. In 1971, the actual and measured ET were the same for the whole season. This agreement may be partially due to the "forcing" of the water removal by ET to be the same as measured. In 1970, the computed cumulative upward flow from the water table was 2.20 em which was 0.1 em greater than the actual for the 9-day period. In 1971, the cumulative upward water flow from the water table was 4.80 em which was 3.20 em greater than the calculated for the whole season of 116 days. 1972-05-01T07:00:00Z text application/pdf https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/4324 https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5252&context=etd Copyright for this work is held by the author. Transmission or reproduction of materials protected by copyright beyond that allowed by fair use requires the written permission of the copyright owners. Works not in the public domain cannot be commercially exploited without permission of the copyright owner. Responsibility for any use rests exclusively with the user. For more information contact Andrew Wesolek (andrew.wesolek@usu.edu). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations DigitalCommons@USU Biophysics Meteorology Soil Science
collection NDLTD
format Others
sources NDLTD
topic Biophysics
Meteorology
Soil Science
spellingShingle Biophysics
Meteorology
Soil Science
Nimah, Musa N.
Model for Estimating Soil Water Flow, Water Content, Evapotranspiration and Root Extraction
description A mathematical model was developed to predict water content profiles, evapotranspiration, water flow from or to the water table, root extraction and root water potential at the surface as functions of time under unsteady state conditions. The model was tested in the field at The Hullinger Farm near Vernal, Utah, in 1970 and 1971. Comparison of water content-depth profiles show excellent agreement at the end of a 9- day run in 1970 on oats seeded to alfalfa. In 1971 with alfalfa as the crop, the data show best agreement, between predicted and computed water content-depth profiles, 48 hours after any water addition. The poorest agreement for both crops was right after irrigation. The computed cumulative ET was 4.9 em which was 0.4 em less than actual (measured) ET, during the 9- day period in 1970. In 1971, the actual and measured ET were the same for the whole season. This agreement may be partially due to the "forcing" of the water removal by ET to be the same as measured. In 1970, the computed cumulative upward flow from the water table was 2.20 em which was 0.1 em greater than the actual for the 9-day period. In 1971, the cumulative upward water flow from the water table was 4.80 em which was 3.20 em greater than the calculated for the whole season of 116 days.
author Nimah, Musa N.
author_facet Nimah, Musa N.
author_sort Nimah, Musa N.
title Model for Estimating Soil Water Flow, Water Content, Evapotranspiration and Root Extraction
title_short Model for Estimating Soil Water Flow, Water Content, Evapotranspiration and Root Extraction
title_full Model for Estimating Soil Water Flow, Water Content, Evapotranspiration and Root Extraction
title_fullStr Model for Estimating Soil Water Flow, Water Content, Evapotranspiration and Root Extraction
title_full_unstemmed Model for Estimating Soil Water Flow, Water Content, Evapotranspiration and Root Extraction
title_sort model for estimating soil water flow, water content, evapotranspiration and root extraction
publisher DigitalCommons@USU
publishDate 1972
url https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/4324
https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5252&context=etd
work_keys_str_mv AT nimahmusan modelforestimatingsoilwaterflowwatercontentevapotranspirationandrootextraction
_version_ 1719268094959943680