VZJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Published online 8 March 2006
Published in Vadose Zone J 5:480-492 (2006)
DOI: 10.2136/vzj2004.0180
© 2006 Soil Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Flint, L. E.
Right arrow Articles by Flint, A. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Flint, L. E.
Right arrow Articles by Flint, A. L.
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Flint, L. E.
Right arrow Articles by Flint, A. L.
Related Collections
Right arrow Field-Scale Studies
Right arrow Inverse Procedures/Parameter Estimation
Right arrow Fractured Rock

Characterization of Unsaturated Zone Hydrogeologic Units using Matrix Properties and Depositional History in a Complex Volcanic Environment

Lorraine E. Flinta,*, David C. Bueschb and Alan L. Flinta

a U.S. Geological Survey, Placer Hall, 6000 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95819-6129
b U.S. Geological Survey, Las Vegas, NV

Figure 1
View larger version (112K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1. Map of study site with locations of boreholes used to develop matrix properties data set and hydrogeologic units.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (16K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2. The relation of fracture density to matrix properties. Data from video logs of the north ramp geologic boreholes (NRG).

 

Figure 3
View larger version (46K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3. Profiles of total porosity calculated from 105°C oven drying (105 porosity) and effective porosity calculated as total porosity minus porosity calculated from elevated relative humidity drying (relative humidity porosity) for core from two boreholes, (a) N31, and (b) SD7. A difference between 105 and relative humidity porosity of >5% is indicated by black bars (adapted from Flint, 2003).

 

Figure 4
View larger version (38K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4. Porosity, saturation, and particle density with depth for borehole SD7 (adapted from Flint, 2003).

 

Figure 5
View larger version (39K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 5. Relation of effective (relative humidity) porosity and saturated hydraulic conductivity for samples grouped by vitric/crystallized, altered and microfractured units (adapted from Flint, 2003).

 

Figure 6
View larger version (22K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 6. Moisture-retention curves for core samples from hydrogeologic units (a) CW and (b) CMW (adapted from Flint, 2003).

 




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education		 Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality		 The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2006 by the Soil Science Society of America.