4.7 Article

A comparative modeling study of a dual tracer experiment in a large lysimeter under atmospheric conditions

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY
卷 375, 期 3-4, 页码 566-577

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.07.010

关键词

Tracers; Lysimeter; Unsaturated zone; Transport modeling; Model applicability; Parameter identification

资金

  1. EU [226536, FP7-ENV-2008-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, five model approaches with different physical and mathematical concepts varying in their model complexity and requirements were applied to identify the transport processes in the unsaturated zone. The applicability of these model approaches were compared and evaluated investigating two tracer breakthrough curves (bromide, deuterium) in a cropped, free-draining lysimeter experiment under natural atmospheric boundary conditions. The data set consisted of time series of water balance, depth resolved water contents, pressure heads and resident concentrations measured during 800 days. The tracer transport parameters were determined using a simple stochastic (stream tube model), three lumped parameter (constant water content model, multi-flow dispersion model, variable flow dispersion model) and a transient model approach. All of them were able to fit the tracer breakthrough curves. The identified transport parameters of each model approach were compared. Despite the differing physical and mathematical concepts the resulting parameters (mean water contents, mean water flux, dispersivities) of the five model approaches were all in the same range. The results indicate that the flow processes are also describable assuming steady state conditions. Homogeneous matrix flow is dominant and a small pore volume with enhanced flow velocities near saturation was identified with variable saturation flow and transport approach. The multi-flow dispersion model also identified preferential flow and additionally suggested a third less mobile flow component. Due to high fitting accuracy and parameter similarity all model approaches indicated reliable results. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据