| تعداد نشریات | 284 |
| تعداد نشریات سازمان | 82 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 3,036 |
| تعداد مقالات | 33,971 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 45,654,374 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 76,207,082 |
ارزیابی مدل های نفوذپذیری در خاک سطحی سازندهای زمین شناسی در آبخیز الشتر، استان لرستان | ||
| پژوهش های آبخیزداری | ||
| مقاله 11، دوره 34، شماره 4 - شماره پیاپی 133، دی 1400، صفحه 150-164 اصل مقاله (1.46 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/wmrj.2021.354035.1398 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| شکوفه حسنوند1؛ علیرضا سپه وند* 2؛ فرج اله ترنیان3؛ پروین سیهاک4 | ||
| 1گروه علوم و مهندسی مرتع و آبخیزداری، دانشکده کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه لرستان | ||
| 2استادیار گروه مهندسی مرتع و آبخیزداری، دانشکده کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه لرستان، خرم آباد، لرستان، ایران | ||
| 3استادیار گروه علوم و مهندسی مرتع و آبخیزداری، دانشکده کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه لرستان | ||
| 4استادیار گروه مهندسی عمران، دانشگاه شولینی، سولان، هیماچال پرادش، هند. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| شیوه‌ی نفوذ آب به خاک و تغییر و چگونگی آن یکی از ویژگی های کلیدی در طراحی سامانه های آبیاری، مدیریت منبع آب و حفاظت خاک و مهار فرسایش خاک در آبخیزها است. به‌دلیل اهمیت موضوع، در این پژوهش به بررسی تغییر نفوذپذیری در خاک سطحی سازندهای زمین شناسی و ارزیابی مدل های نفوذپذیری در آنها پرداخته شده‌است. از استوانه های دوتایی برای اندازه گیری نفوذ در خاک سطحی برخی سازندهای زمین شناسی آبخیز الشتر به‌دلیل سیل خیز بودن، بهره برده‌شد. بعد از سنجیدن اندازه‌ی نفوذ، عمل‌کرد مدل های گرین-آمپت اصلاح شده، فیلیپ، کوستیاکوف، حفاظت خاک آمریکا و هورتون در برآوردکردن نفوذپذیری با معیارهای ریشه‌ی میانگین مربع‌های خطا، ضریب کارآیی مدل، و ضریب همبستگی ارزیابی شد. نتیجه نشان داد که نفوذ تجمعی، متوسط سرعت نفوذ و سرعت نفوذ نهایی در خاک سطحی سازند زمین شناسی آسماری (Oml) از دیگر سازندها بیش‌تر است، و بعد از آن سازندهای دوران چهارم Q و Qt بود. نتیجه‌ی مقایسه‌ی مدل ها نشان داد که دقت و صحت مدل گرین-آمپت اصلاح شده به ترتیب در سازندهای آغاجاری (Mpaj و Muplaj) گچساران (M)، گروه خامی (Jk,Mz)، پابده (El)، و بختیاری (Plb)، با ضریب کارآیی 93/9، 94/4، 95/9، 97/6، 87/7 و 92/7 % نسبت به دیگر مدل ها پذیرفتنی بود، و مدل برتر شناخته شد. در خاک سطحی سازندهای Q و Oml مدل کوستیاکوف به ترتیب با ضریب کارآیی 0/776 و 0/705 و در Qt مدل هورتون با ضریب کارآیی 0/925 مناسب تر از دیگر مدل ها بود. از این مدل ها می‌توان برای کمّی سازی مقدار نفوذ و تخمین‌زدن اندازه‌ی روان‌آب در سازندهای گوناگون زمین شناسی بهره برد. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| استان لرستان؛ استوانه های دوتایی؛ اَلشتَر؛ مدل کوستیاکوف؛ مدل گرین-آمپت؛ نفوذپذیری | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| An Assessment of Infiltration Models in the Surface Soil of Geological Formations in Aleshtar Watershed, the Province of Lorestan | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Shokofeh Hasanvand1؛ Alireza Sepahvand2؛ Farajollah Tarnian3؛ Parveen Sihag4 | ||
| 1Department of Range and Watershed Management, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Lorestan Province, Iran | ||
| 2Assistant professor, Department of Range and Watershed Management Engineering, faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Lorestan University | ||
| 3Assistant professor, Department of Range and Watershed Management, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Lorestan Province, Iran | ||
| 4Assistant professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Shoolini University, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Soil infiltration is one of the key processes in the design of irrigation systems, water resources management, soil conservation, and erosion control in watershed management. As to the importance of the mentioned subject, infiltration changes and modeling were investigated on the surface soil of geological formations in this study. The double-ring infiltrometer was used to measure the infiltration rate in the surface soil of some geological formations on the Alashtar Watershed due to the flooding potential of the area. The performance of the modified Green-Ampt, Philip, Kostiakov, the US Soil Conservation Service (SCS), and the Horton models were evaluated in estimating the infiltration rate in the surface soils formed or deposited on those formations. The results indicated that the Asmari Formation (Oml) had a higher cumulative infiltration, average infiltration rate, terminal infiltration rate than other formations. This was followed by the Quaternary Formations (Q and Qt). The results indicated that the modified Green-Ampt model had an acceptable accuracy as compared to other models in estimating infiltration in the Pabdeh (EL), the Khami Group (Jk, Mz), the Gachsaran (M), the Aghajari (Muplaj, Mpaj), and the Bakhtyari (Plb) Formations with efficiency coefficients of 93.9, 94.4, 95.9, 97.6, 87.7, and 92.7%, respectively. The Kostiakov model was more suitable for the Q and Oml Formations, and the Horton model was the best for the Qt Formation (C.C= 0.925), which may be used to quantify the amount of infiltrated water and to estimate the runoff volume for the soils formed or deposited on those formations different on the mentioned geological formations. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Aleshtar, double Ring, Green-Ampt model, infiltration, Kostiakov model, Lorestan Province | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Ahmadi H. 2007. Applied geomorphology. Volume 1 (Water Erosion). Tehran, University Press, 688 p. (In Persian). Alizadeh A. 2019. Applied hydrology. Imam Reza International University. Forty-third edition, 941 p. (In Persian). Angelaki A, Sakellariou-Makrantonaki M, Tzimopoulos C. 2013. Theoretical and experimental research of cumulative infiltration. Transp. Porous Media, 100(2): 247–257. Azamirad M, Ghahreman B, Esmaili K. 2015. Investigation of flooding intensity watersheds by permeability of geological. The 4st National Congress on Irrigation and Drainage of Iran, pp. 1–11. (In Persian). Behzad A, Hamzeh F. 2009. Investigation the effect of geological formations on water quality. Journal of Geography, 3 (11): 93–112. (In Persian). Chahinian N, Moussa R, Andrieux P, Voltz M. 2005. Comparison of infiltration models to simulate flood events at the field scale. Journal of Hydrology, 306(1–4):191–214. Chari M, Poozan M, Afrasiab P. 2020. Modelling soil water infiltration variability using scaling. Biosystems Engineering, 196: 56–66. Delleur JW. 2007. The handbook of groundwater engineering. 2nd Edition, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis, 1342 p. Feiznia S. 2001. Sediment potential in geological formation (lithology). Publications of the Faculty of Natural Resources. University of Tehran. Journal of Geography, 13 p. (In Persian). Fox DM, Bryan RB, Price AG. 1997. The influence of slope angle on final infiltration rate for interrill conditions. Geoderma, 80(1–2): 181–194. Gerke HH, Van Genuchten MTh. 1993. A dualporosity model for simulating the preferential movement of water and solutes in structured porous media. Water Resource, 29 (2): 305–319. Ghaiumi Mohamadi AM, Ghorbani Dashtaki Sh, Raiesi F, Tahmasbi P. 2013. Effect of land abandonment on variation of soil water infiltration parameters. Journal of Soil and Water Resources Conservation, 2 (4): 41–51. (In Persian). Ghorbani Dashtaki Sh, Homaee M, Mahdian MH. 2010. Effect of land use change on spatial variability of infiltration parameters. Iranian Journal of Irrigation and Drainage. 2 (4): 206–221. (In Persian). Green WH. Ampt GA. 1911. Studies in soil physics: I. The flow of air and water through soils. Journal of Agricultral Science, 4(1): 1–24. Hillel D. 1998. Environmental soil physics. Academic Press. New York, 771p. Horton RE. 1940. Approach toward a physical interpretation of infiltration capacity. Soil Science. Society America Journal, 5(C): 339–417. Horton Robert E. 1993. The role of infiltration in the hydrologic cycle. Trans. AGU, 14th Ann. Mtg), pp. 446–460. Hwang S, Lee KP, Lee DS, Powers S.E. 2002. Models for estimating soil particle-size distributions. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 66(4): 1143–1150. Jarvis NJ. 1998. Modeling the impact of preferential flow on nonpoint source pollution. In H. M. Selim & L. Ma (Eds.), Physical none quilibrium in soils: modeling and application. Chelsea, MI: Ann Arbor, pp. 195–221. Kavian A, ahmadi R, habibnejad M, jafarian Z. 2017. Evaluation of Spatial changes in Soil infiltration Using Experimental and Geostatistical Methods in coastal plain of Behshahr-Galugah. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research, 48(1): 177–186. (In Persian). Kostiakov AN. 1932. On the dynamic of coefficient of water percolation in soil and on the necessity for studying it from a dynamic point of view for purpose of amelioration. Tran’s 6th cong International. Soil Science, Russia Juornal, pp. 17–21. Kutilek M, Nielsen DR. 1994. Soil hydrology: textbook for students of soil science, agriculture, forestry, geoecology, hydrology, geomorphology and other related disciplines. Catena verlag, Cremlingen, Germany, 370 p. Lashani Zand M, Sepavand A, Taei Smiromi M. 2011. Comparison of infiltration models and determination of the infiltration in order to apply optimal management in rangeland and forest lands. Iranian Journal of Natural Ecosystems, 2(2): 11–-23. (In Persian). Ma Y, Feng S, Su D, Gao G, Huo Z. 2009. Modeling water infiltration in a large layered soil column with a modified Green- Ampt Model and HYDRUS-1 D. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 71(1): S40–S47. Machiwa D, Mandan K, Mal BC. 2006. Modeling infiltration and quantifying spatial soil variability in a watershed of kharagpur, India, Biosystems Engineering, 95(4): 569–582. Maleki A, Behzad M, Boroumand nasab M. 2005. Determination of infiltration by soil physical properties. Iranian Agricultural Sciences, 6(36): 27–46. (In Persian). Mamoodabadi M, Charkhabi A, Rafahi H. 2007. The effect of soil physical and chemical properties on runoff generation and sediment yield using rainfall simulator. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 8(2): 1–16. (In Persian). Mamoodabadi M, Mazaheri M. 2012. Effect of some soil physical and chemical properties on permeability in field conditions. Iranian of Irrigation & Water Engineering, 2(8): 14–25. (In Persian). Mezencev VJ. 1948. Theory of formation of the surface runoff. Meteorologiae Hidrologia, 3: 33–40. Mohammadi MH, Refahi H. 2005. Estimation of infiltration through soil physical characteristic. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 36(6): 1391–1398. Nadersafat MH, Saeediyan F. 2011. Study of flooding trend in watersheds through permeability study and runoff potential in geological formations. Journal of Geography. 4 (11): 163–198. (In Persian). Philip JR. 1957 a. The theory of infiltration: 1. the infiltration equation and its solution. Soil Science, 83: 345–357. Ribolzi O, Patin J, Bresson LM, Latsachack KO, Mouche E, Sengtaheuanghoung O, Silvera N, Thiébaux JP, Valentin C. 2011. Impact of slope gradient on soil surface features and infiltration on steep slopes in northern Laos. Geomorphology, 127(1–2): 53–63. Romkens MJ, Luk MSH, Poesen JWA, Mermut AR. 1995. Rainfall infiltration into loess soils from different geographic regions. Catena, 25(1–4): 21–32. Roshani H, Heydari M, Sotoodehnia A. 2019. Estimation of Hydrodynamic Infiltration Coefficients Using Optimization of SCS & Horton Equations. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water research, 50(1): 201–213. Sadeghi HR. 2010. Study and measurement of soil erosion. Tarbiat Modares University Publication. First Edition, 171p. (In Persian). Saeediyan H, Moradi HR. 2020. Determining of the Most Important Factors in Infiltration Rates of the Soils formed on Gachsaran and Aghajari formations in Various Land Uses. Watershed Research. 23 (2): 97–109. (In Persian). Safavi HR. 2006. Engineering hydrology. Arkan Danesh Press, 603 p. (In Persian). Sepahvand A, Sihag P, Singh B, Zand M. 2018. Comparative Evaluation of Infiltration Models. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 22(10):4173–4184. Sepavand A, Taie Semiromi M, Mirnia SK, Moradi HR. 2011. Assessing the sensitivity of infiltration models to variability of soil moisture. Journal of Water and Soil, 25 (2): 1–11. (In Persian). Sihag P, Singh VP, Angelaki A, Kumar V, Sepahvand A, Golia E. 2019. Modelling of infiltration using artificial intelligence techniques in semi-arid Iran. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 64(13):1647–1658. Sihag P, Singh B, Sepahvand A, Mehdipour V. 2020: Modeling the infiltration process with soft computing techniques, ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 26(2): 138–152. Smith ER. 1976. Approximation for vertical infiltration rate patterns. ASAE. Annual international meeting, 75 p. Tashayo B, Honarbakhsh A, Akbari M, Ostovari Y. 2020: Digital mapping of Philip model parameters for prediction of water infiltration at the watershed scale in a semi-arid region of Iran. Geoderma Regional, 22(e0030): 1–9. Turner ER. 2006. Comparison of infiltration equations and their field validation with rainfall simulation. MSc. thesis. University of Maryland. USA, 202 p. Vaezi A, Salehi Y. 2020. The Efficiency of Water Infiltration Models in Different Land Uses of the Tahamchai Catchment. Department of Soil Sciences Engineering, 51 (5): 1281–1291. (In Persian). Van Es HM, Cassel DKD, aniels RB. 1991. Infiltration variability and correlations with surface soil properties for an eroded hapludult. Soil Science Society America Journal, 55(2): 486–492. Ward AD, Trimble SW. 2004. Environmental Hydrology. Second Edition, CRC Press LLC, 475 p. Zhou X, Lin HS, White EA. 2008. Surface soil hydraulic properties in four soil series under different land use and their temporal changes. Catena, 73(2): 180–188. Zolfaghari AA, Mirzaee S, Gorji M. 2012. Comparison of different models for estimating cumulative infiltration. International Journal of Soil Science, 7)3(:108–115. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,109 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 545 |
||