مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Persian Verion

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

video

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

sound

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Persian Version

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

View:

1,250
مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Download:

0
مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Cites:

1

Information Journal Paper

Title

EFFECT OF DIFFERENT SHAPE FACTOR CALCULATION METHODS ON GUELPH PERMEAMETER’S TWO HEAD ANALYSIS RESULTS

Pages

  232-241

Abstract

SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY (Kfs) is one of the important physical features of soil that have wide usage in soil and water science. It is one of the important parameter in the irrigation and drainage, ground water flow, some of the road and structure project, river engineering etc. Kfs is the important parameter on cost of the projects so it is very important to achieve with most accuracy. The determination of Kfs has divided in two ways: laboratory and outdoor way. Outdoor way done in above or under the ground water, depend on the ground water depth. GUELPH PERMEAMETER (GP) method has done on above the ground water. The GP method has a good accuracy in determination of Kfs. However, C is an important parameter in the two head GP. C is calculated with five methods (Pourshe, Pressure, Glour, Half-source and Numerical). Only problem of GP are the negative results that may have seen in some results. In this research the GP experiments were down with different ratio of H2/H1 in 18 holes (Max and Min H are 5 and 20 cm, respectively). Then Kfs and fm (matric flux potential) are determined by two head analysis of GP with different solution methods for WELL SHAPE FACTOR (C). Result showed if the Pourshe method was used for C FACTOR calculation, negative results have been minimized and other methods for the C calculation (Pressure, Glover, Numerical and Half-source) have been produced low to high negative result of Kfs respectively. Pourshe and Pressure methods for C calculation cause the maximum negative result of fm respectively. So, three other methods of C calculation are suitable for determination of the fm. However, number of negative result for Kfs and fm are decreased when the  increase.

Cites

References

Cite

APA: Copy

SOHRABI, H., MASHAL, M., ZAREI, GH., & SHAGHAGHI, M.. (2010). EFFECT OF DIFFERENT SHAPE FACTOR CALCULATION METHODS ON GUELPH PERMEAMETER’S TWO HEAD ANALYSIS RESULTS. IRANIAN JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE, 4(2), 232-241. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/131557/en

Vancouver: Copy

SOHRABI H., MASHAL M., ZAREI GH., SHAGHAGHI M.. EFFECT OF DIFFERENT SHAPE FACTOR CALCULATION METHODS ON GUELPH PERMEAMETER’S TWO HEAD ANALYSIS RESULTS. IRANIAN JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE[Internet]. 2010;4(2):232-241. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/131557/en

IEEE: Copy

H. SOHRABI, M. MASHAL, GH. ZAREI, and M. SHAGHAGHI, “EFFECT OF DIFFERENT SHAPE FACTOR CALCULATION METHODS ON GUELPH PERMEAMETER’S TWO HEAD ANALYSIS RESULTS,” IRANIAN JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 232–241, 2010, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/131557/en

Related Journal Papers

Related Seminar Papers

  • No record.
  • Related Plans

  • No record.
  • Recommended Workshops






    Move to top
    telegram sharing button
    whatsapp sharing button
    linkedin sharing button
    twitter sharing button
    email sharing button
    email sharing button
    email sharing button
    sharethis sharing button