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 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 Basinger, J. M. Articles by Kirkham, M. B. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Basinger, J. M. Articles by Kirkham, M. B. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Basinger, J. M. Articles by Kirkham, M. B. Related Collections Soil Methods/Instrumentation Water Content Soil Hydrology

Laboratory Evaluation of the Dual-Probe Heat-Pulse Method for Measuring Soil Water Content

^a Plant and Soil Science Department, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409
^b Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66505
^c Rocky Mountain Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, 240 W. Prospect Rd., Fort Collins, CO 80526
^d Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66505

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Volumetric water content () as a function of time from pressure-cell desorption measurements with (a) Chase and (b) Wymore soils. Lines represent measurements obtained with dual-probe heat-pulse sensors. Points represent measurements obtained using the pressure-cell method. Pressure steps ranged from 2 to 100 kPa at 24-h intervals. Results for other soils were similar.

View larger version (57K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Comparison of volumetric water content () as determined by dual-probe heat-pulse (DPHP) and pressure-cell methods for the (a) Olmitz, (b) Pawnee, (c) Wymore, and (d) Chase soils. Additional results for regression analysis (lines not shown) are given in Table 2. Comparison of volumetric water content () as determined by dual-probe heat-pulse (DPHP) and pressure-cell methods for the (e) Kahola, (f) Colbert Hills, and (g) Haynie soils. Additional results for regression analyses (lines not shown) are given in Table 2.

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Comparison of volumetric water content () as determined by dual-probe heat-pulse (DPHP) and pressure-cell methods for all seven soils combined. Additional results for regression analysis (line not shown) are given in Table 2.

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Comparison of change in volumetric water content () as determined by dual-probe heat-pulse (DPHP) and pressure-cell methods for all seven soils combined. Additional results for regression analysis (line not shown) are given in Table 3.

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Comparison of volumetric water content () as determined by the dual-probe heat-pulse (DPHP) method using estimated specific heats and the DPHP method using measured specific heats. See Table 1 for a comparison of measured and estimated specific heats.