Journals / Eurasian Journal of Soil Science / 2012 / Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 2

Soil erodibility evaluation by splash cups under the simulated rainfalls

Pages
92–97
Publication Date
2012-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

However, since the USLE predicts soil losses from not only splash erosion but also sheet and rill erosions, the measured splash values should be mathematically related to the erodibility equations commonly employed in the model in order to meet the model requirement.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Soil erodibility is an important parameter to determine the sensibility of soil to the erosion and there are many methods to specify the erodibility.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For test soils, a total of 256 surface samples were taken from the fallow-crop system in the Asartepe Dam Basin and the splash erosion rate was found with the units compatible with the USLE.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, since the USLE predicts soil losses from not only splash erosion but also sheet and rill erosions, the measured splash values should be mathematically related to the erodibility equations commonly employed in the model in order to meet the model requirement.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Splash erosion · rainfall simulation · energy flow

Abstract

Soil erodibility is an important parameter to determine the sensibility of soil to the erosion and there are many methods to specify the erodibility. Until today, many methods were improved and the “Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE), which has the most common use in worldwide, is one of them. In this prediction technology, the soil susceptibility to the water erosion is represented by a multiplier factor together with those for climate, topography, vegetation and conservation practices. This study aimed to determine a soil erodibility factor by the laboratory simulated rainfall tests under the specified kinetic energy and rainfall intensity values using the splash cups. For test soils, a total of 256 surface samples were taken from the fallow-crop system in the Asartepe Dam Basin and the splash erosion rate was found with the units compatible with the USLE. However, since the USLE predicts soil losses from not only splash erosion but also sheet and rill erosions, the measured splash values should be mathematically related to the erodibility equations commonly employed in the model in order to meet the model requirement.

🔖

Cite This Article

PINAR, M. Ö., ERPUL, G. (2012). Soil erodibility evaluation by splash cups under the simulated rainfalls. Eurasian Journal of Soil Science, Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 2, 92–97. https://ajindex.com/articles/756983

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Bouyoucous, G.J. 1951. A recalibration of hydrometer method for making mechanical analysis of soils. Agronomy Journal 43, 434-438.
  2. Bubenzer, G.D., Jones Jr. B.A., 1971. Drop size and impact velocity effects on the detachment of soils under simulated rainfall. Transactions of the ASAE 14, 625-628
  3. Ellison, W.D. 1947. Soil erosion studies. Agricultural Engineering 28, 145-146.
  4. Erpul, G., Çanga, M.R., 2001 Toprak Erozyon Çalışmaları Için Bir Yapay Yağmurlama Aletinin Tasarım Prensipleri ve Yapay Yağış Karakteristikleri. Ankara Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi 7(1), 75-83.
  5. Ghadiri, H. 2004. Creater formation in soils by raindrop impact. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 29, 77-89.
  6. Ghadiri, H., Payne, D., 1981. Raindrop impact stress. Journal of Soil Science 32, 41-49.
  7. Ghadiri, H., Payne, D., 1986 The risk of leaving soil surface unprotected against falling rain. Journal of Soil and Tillage Research 8, 119 – 130. Ghadiri, H., Payne, D., 1988. The formation and characteristics of splash following raindrop impact on soil. Journal of Soil Science 39, 563-75.
  8. Gilley, J.E., Finkner, S.C., 1985. Estimating soil detachment caused by raindrop impact. Transactions of the ASAE 28, 140-146.
  9. Greweling, T., Peech, M., 1960. Chemical soil tests. Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. Sta. Bull.960. Cornell University, USA. Kemper, W.D., Rosenau, R. C. 1986. Aggregate stability and size distribution. In: A. Klute (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Agronomy Monographs, American Society of Agronomy, Madison, USA. Kinnell, P.I.A. 1973. The problem of assessing of erosive power of rainfall from meteorological observations. Soil Science Society America Proceedings 37, 617-621.
  10. Klute, A., Dirksen, C. 1986. Hydraulic conductivity and diffusivity laboratory methods. In: A. Klute (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Agronomy Monographs, American Society of Agronomy, Madison, USA. McIsaac, G.F. 1990. Apparent geographic and atmospheric influences on raindrop sizes and rainfall kinetic energy. Journal Soil and Water Conservation 45, 663-665.
  11. Meyer, L. D. 1981. How rainfall intensity affects inter-rill erosion. Transactions of the ASAE 24, 1472-1475.
  12. Morgan, R.P.C. 1978. Field studies of rainsplash erosion. Earth Surface Processesa3, 295– 299. Nelson, D.W., Sommers LE. 1982. Total Carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In: A. L. Page (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, USA. Park, S.W., Mitchell, J.K., Bubenzer, G.D., 1