Skip to main content
Log in

Modeling preferential water flow and solute transport in unsaturated soil using the active region model

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Environmental Earth Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Preferential flow and solute transport are common processes in the unsaturated soil, in which distributions of soil water content and solute concentrations are often characterized as fractal patterns. An active region model (ARM) was recently proposed to describe the preferential flow and transport patterns. In this study, ARM governing equations were derived to model the preferential soil water flow and solute transport processes. To evaluate the ARM equations, dye infiltration experiments were conducted, in which distributions of soil water content and Cl concentration were measured. Predicted results using the ARM and the mobile–immobile region model (MIM) were compared with the measured distributions of soil water content and Cl concentration. Although both the ARM and the MIM are two-region models, they are fundamentally different in terms of treatments of the flow region. The models were evaluated based on the modeling efficiency (ME). The MIM provided relatively poor prediction results of the preferential flow and transport with negative ME values or positive ME values less than 0.4. On the contrary, predicted distributions of soil water content and Cl concentration using the ARM agreed reasonably well with the experimental data, with ME values higher than 0.8. The results indicated that the ARM successfully captured the macroscopic behavior of preferential flow and solute transport in the unsaturated soil.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Basile A, Coppola A, De Mascellis R, Randazzo L (2006) Scaling approach to deduce field unsaturated hydraulic properties and behavior from laboratory measurements on small cores. Vadose Zone J 5:1005–1016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dane JH, Topp GC (eds) (2004) Methods of soil analysis, Part 4 Physical methods. Soil Sci Soc Am, Madison, WI

    Google Scholar 

  • de Vos JA, Raats PAC, Feddes RA (2002) Chloride transport in a recently reclaimed Dutch polder. J Hydrol 257:59–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flury M, Flühler H (1994) Brilliant Blue FCF as a dye tracer for solute transport studies: a toxicological overview. J Environ Qual 23:1108–1112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flury M, Flühler H (1995) Tracer characteristics of Brilliant Blue FCF. Soil Sci Soc Am J 59:22–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flury M, Wai NN (2003) Dyes as tracers for vadose zone hydrology. Rev Geophys 41(1):1002. doi:10.1029/2001RG000109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flury M, Flühler H, Jury WA, Leuenberger J (1994) Susceptibility of soils to preferential flow of water: a field study. Water Resour Res 30:1945–1954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forrer I, Parrita A, Kasteel R, Flühler H, Luca D (2000) Quantifying dye tracers in soil profiles by image processing. Eur J Soil Sci 51:313–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner WH (1986) Water content. In: Klute A (ed) Methods of soil analysis, Part 1, Physical and mineralogical methods. Am Soc Agron, Madison, WI, pp 493–544

    Google Scholar 

  • Gjettermann B, Nielsen KL, Petersen CT, Jensen HE, Hansen S (1997) Preferential flow in sandy loam soils as affected by irrigation intensity. Soil Technol 11:139–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glass RJ (1993) Modeling gravity-driven fingering using modified percolation theory. In: Proceedings of the fourth annual international conference on high level radioactive waste conference, Las Vegas, Nevada

  • Goulding KWT, Poulton PR, Webster CP, Howe MT (2000) Nitrate leaching from the Broadbalk Wheat Experiment, Rothamsted, UK, as influenced by fertiliser and manure inputs and the weather. Soil Use Manage 16:244–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heppell CM, Burt TP, Williams RJ, Johnson AC (2000) A laboratory investigation of the release of a conservative tracer and herbicide from topsoil aggregates under varying rainfall intensities. Soil Use Manage 16:175–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis SC (2000) Progress in studies of nitrate leaching from grassland soils. Soil Use Manage 16:152–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasteel R, Vogel HJ, Roth K (2002) Effect of non-linear adsorption on the transport behavior of Brilliant Blue in a field soil. Eur J Soil Sci 53:231–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ketelsen H, Meyer-Windel S (1999) Adsorption of brilliant blue FCF by soils. Geoderma 90:131–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klute A (1986) Water retention: laboratory methods. In: Klute A (ed) Methods of soil analysis, Part 1 physical and mineralogical methods. Am Soc Agron, Madison, WI, pp 635–662

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsson MH, Jarvis NJ, Torstensson G, Kasteel R (1999) Quantifying the impact of preferential flow on solute transport to tile drains in a sandy field soil. J Hydrol 215:116–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsius K, Mooney SJ (2006) Using image analysis of tracer staining to examine the infiltration patterns in a water repellent contaminated sandy soil. Geoderma 136:865–875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu H, Doughty C, Bodvarsson GS (1998) An active fracture model for unsaturated flow and transport in fractured rocks. Water Resour Res 34:2633–2646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu H, Zhang G, Bodvarsson GS (2003) The active fracture model: its relation to fractal flow patterns and an evaluation using field observations. Vadose Zone J 2:59–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu H, Zhang R, Bodvarsson GS (2005) An active region model for capturing fractal flow patterns in unsaturated soils: Model development. J Contam Hydrol 80:18–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loague K, Green RE (1991) Statistical and graphical methods for evaluating solute transport models: overview and application. J Contam Hydrol 7:51–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris C, Mooney SJ (2004) A high-resolution system for the quantification of preferential flow in undisturbed soil using observations of tracers. Geoderma 118:133–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nash JE, Sutcliffe JE (1970) River flow forecasting through conceptual models. Part 1-A discussion of principles. J Hydrol 10:282–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Öhrström P, Persson M, Albergel J, Zante P, Nasri S, Berndtsson R, Olsson J (2002) Field-scale variation of preferential flow as indicated from dye coverage. J Hydrol 257:164–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Öhrström P, Hamed Y, Persson M, Berndtsson R (2004) Characterizing unsaturated solute transport by simultaneous use of dye and bromide. J Hydrol 289:23–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson M, Yasuda H, Albergel H, Berndtsson R, Zante P, Nasri S, Öhrström P (2001) Modeling plot scale dye penetration by a diffusion limited aggregation (DLA) model. J Hydrol 250:98–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quisenberry VL, Phillips RE, Zeleznik JM (1994) Spatial distribution of water and chloride macropore flow in a well structured soil. Soil Sci Soc Am J 58:1294–1300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichenberger S, Amelung W, Laabs V, Pinto A, Totsche KU, Zech W (2002) Pesticide displacement along preferential flow pathways in a Brazilian Oxisol. Geoderma 110:63–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhoades JD (1982) Soluble salts. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR (eds) Methods of soil analysis, Part 2 Chemical and microbiological properties. Am Soc Agron, Madison, WI, pp 167–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheng F, Wang K, Zhang R, Liu H (2009) Characterizing soil preferential flow using iodine–starch staining experiments and the active region model. J Hydrol 367:115–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Šimůnek J, Vogel T, van Genuchten MT (1994) The SWMS_2D code for simulating water flow and solute transport in two-dimensional variably saturated media. Version 1.21, Research Report No. 132, US Salinity Laboratory, Riverside, CA

  • Šimůnek J, Jarvis NJ, van Genuchten MT, Gardenas A (2003) Review and comparison of models for describing non-equilibrium and preferential flow and transport in the vadose zone. J Hydrol 272:14–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith JE, Zhang ZF (2001) Determining effective interfacial tension and predicting finger spacing for DNAPL penetration into water-saturated porous media. J Contam Hydrol 48:167–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dam JC, Wosten JHM, Nemes A (1996) Unsaturated soil water movement in hysteretic and water repellent field soils. J Hydrol 184:153–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Genuchten MT (1980) A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 44:892–898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Genuchten MT, Wierenga PJ (1976) Mass transfer studies in sorbing porous media. I. Analytical solutions. Soil Sci Soc Am J 40:473–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang K, Zhang R, Yasuda H (2006) Characterizing heterogeneity of soil water flow by dye infiltration experiments. J Hydrol 328:559–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was financially supported in part by grants of the National Science Foundation of China (Nos. 50779080, 50528910 and 50579079) and the 973 Project, the National Basic Research Program of China (No. 2006CB403404).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Renduo Zhang.

Appendices

Appendix A: Derivation of the governing equation for water flow

Figure 1 schematically shows the vertical water flow occurring in a rectangular soil unit volume. Because the horizontally averaged soil water content is used in the ARM (Liu et al. 2005; Sheng et al. 2009), it is assumed that the soil water flows in the z-direction only. According to the mass conservation principle, we obtain the water conservation equation for the system during an arbitrary small time period Δt between t and t + Δt as

$$ V_{\text{in}} = V_{\text{out}} + V_{\text{inc}} + V_{\text{sk}} $$
(11)

Here V in is the water volume flowing into the soil volume during Δt; V out is the water volume flowing out from the soil volume during Δt; V inc is the increase of the water volume stored in the soil volume during Δt; V sk is the water volume extracted (e.g., plant root, positive) or supplied (e.g., irrigation, negative) from other processes during Δt.

For the one-dimensional vertical flow, the water volume flowing into the soil volume during Δt can be expressed as

$$ V_{\text{in}} = q_{\text{a}} \left( {x,z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)f\left( {x,z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)\Updelta x\Updelta t $$
(12)

where q a (flow per unit area per unit time) is the water flux within the active region in the z-direction (upward positive).

Similarly, the water volume flowing out from the soil volume during Δt is expressed as

$$ V_{\text{out}} = q_{\text{a}} \left( {x,z + \Updelta z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)f\left( {x,z + \Updelta z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)\Updelta x\Updelta t $$
(13)

The increase of the water volume stored in the soil volume during Δt is expressed by

$$ \begin{gathered} V_{\text{inc}} = \theta_{\text{a}} \left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t + \Updelta t} \right)f\left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t + \Updelta t} \right)\Updelta x\Updelta z \hfill \\ \begin{array}{*{20}c} {} & {} & {} & { - \theta_{\text{a}} } \\ \end{array} \left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t} \right)f\left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t} \right)\Updelta x\Updelta z \hfill \\ \begin{array}{*{20}c} {} & {} & {} & - \\ \end{array} \theta_{\text{i}} \left[ {f\left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t + \Updelta t} \right) - f\left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t} \right)} \right]\Updelta x\Updelta z \hfill \\ \end{gathered} $$
(14)

where θ i is the soil water content within the inactive region.

The ARM assumes that water flow occurs in the active region exclusively. Therefore, it is assumed that the sink and source terms also appear in the active region only and are expressed in the form of

$$ V_{\text{sk}} = r_{\text{aw}} \left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)f\left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)\Updelta x\Updelta z\Updelta t $$
(15)

where r aw is the rate of water consumed and supplied in the active region of the soil volume.

Substituting Eqs. (12) to (15) into Eq. (11), dividing both sides by ΔxΔzΔt, taking the limit and rearranging the terms, we obtain (upward positive)

$$ {\frac{{\partial \left( {fq_{\text{a}} } \right)}}{\partial z}} + {\frac{{\partial \left( {f\theta_{\text{a}} } \right)}}{\partial t}} - \theta_{\text{i}} {\frac{\partial f}{\partial t}} + fr_{\text{aw}} = 0 $$
(16)

Equation (16) is the governing equation for water flow. Including Darcy’s law in Eq. (16) yields

$$ - {\frac{\partial }{\partial z}}\left[ {fK_{\text{a}} \left( {{\frac{{\partial h_{\text{a}} }}{\partial z}} + 1} \right)} \right] + {\frac{{\partial \left( {f\theta_{\text{a}} } \right)}}{\partial t}} - \theta_{\text{i}} {\frac{\partial f}{\partial t}} + fr_{\text{aw}} = 0 $$
(17)

where K a and h a are the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity and the pressure head of the active region, respectively. The h a and K a can be expressed as the functions of θ a (Liu et al. 2005; van Genuchten 1980):

$$ h\left( {S_{\text{a}} } \right) = {\frac{1}{\alpha }}\left[ {\left( {S_{\text{a}} } \right)^{1/m} - 1} \right]^{1/n} = {\frac{1}{\alpha }}\left[ {\left( {S_{\text{e}}^{*} } \right)^{(\gamma-1)/m} - 1} \right]^{1/n} $$
(18)

and

$$ K_{\text{a}} = K_{\text{s}} S_{\text{a}}^{1/2} \left[ {1 - \left\{ {1 - S_{\text{a}}^{1/m} } \right\}^{m} } \right]^{2} = K_{\text{s}} \left( {S_{\text{e}}^{*} } \right)^{(1-\gamma)/2} \left[ {1 - \left\{ {1 - \left( {S_{\text{e}}^{*} } \right)^{(1-\gamma)/m}} \right\}^{m} } \right]^{2} $$
(19)

where α(1/cm), n and m = 1 − 1/1n are parameters; K s is the saturated hydraulic conductivity of the active region.

Appendix B: Derivation of the governing equation for solute transport

Governing equation for solute transport is also derived using the procedure similar to the soil water flow. According to the mass conservation principle of solute transport, we have

$$ M_{\text{in}} = M_{\text{out}} + M_{\text{inc}} + M_{\text{sk}} $$
(20)

where M in is the solute mass transporting into the soil volume during Δt; M out is the solute mass transporting out from the soil volume during Δt; M inc is the increase of the solute mass stored in the soil volume during Δt; M sk is mass of solute extracted (e.g., plant root, positive) or supplied (e.g., irrigation, negative) from other processes during Δt.

For the one-dimensional transport (upward positive), the solute mass transporting into the soil volume during Δt is expressed as

$$ M_{\text{in}} = J_{\text{a}} \left( {x,z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)f\left( {x,z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)\Updelta x\Updelta t $$
(21)

where J a (transport per unit area per unit time) is the solute flux within the active region in the z-direction, expressed as the sum of convection and dispersion/diffusion as follows

$$ J_{\text{a}} = q_{\text{a}} c_{\text{a}} - \theta_{\text{a}} D_{\text{a}} {\frac{{\partial c_{\text{a}} }}{\partial z}} $$
(22)

in which c a (mass of solute per volume of soil solution) is the dissolved solute concentration in the active region; D a is the dispersion–diffusion coefficient of the active region.

Similarly, the solute mass leaving from the soil volume during Δt is expressed as

$$ M_{\text{out}} = J_{\text{a}} \left( {x,z + \Updelta z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)f\left( {x,z + \Updelta z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)\Updelta x\Updelta t $$
(23)

The increase of the mass of solute stored in the soil volume during Δt can be expressed as

$$ \begin{gathered} M_{\text{inc}} = C_{\text{a}} \left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t + \Updelta t} \right)f\left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t + \Updelta t} \right)\Updelta x\Updelta z \hfill \\ \begin{array}{*{20}c} {} & {} & {} & { - C_{\text{a}} } \\ \end{array} \left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t} \right)f\left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t} \right)\Updelta x\Updelta z \hfill \\ \begin{array}{*{20}c} {} & {} & {} & - \\ \end{array} C_{\text{i}} \left[ {f\left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t + \Updelta t} \right) - f\left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t} \right)} \right]\Updelta x\Updelta z \hfill \\ \end{gathered} $$
(24)

where C a and C i are the total concentrations of solute in all forms (including the solute dissolved in soil solution and soil gas, and adsorbed by soil particles) in the active and the inactive regions, respectively. By assuming that the solute only exists in the solid (absorbed by soil particles) and liquid (dissolved in the soil solution) phases, the terms C a and C i can be expressed as

$$ C_{\text{a}} = \theta_{\text{a}} c_{\text{a}} + \rho_{\text{b}} s_{\text{a}} $$
(25)

and

$$ C_{\text{i}} = \theta_{\text{i}} c_{\text{i}} + \rho_{\text{b}} s_{\text{i}} $$
(26)

where c i (mass of solute per volume of soil solution) is the dissolved solute concentration in the inactive region; s a and s i (mass of sorbent per mass of dry soil) are the absorbed solute concentrations in the active and inactive regions, respectively; ρ b is the soil bulk density.

By assuming that the sink and source terms of solute occur in the active region exclusively, the solute mass extracted (sink, positive) and/or supplied (source, negative) from other processes is expressed as

$$ M_{\text{sk}} = c_{\text{as}} r_{\text{aw}} \left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)f\left( {x,z + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta z,t + \frac{1}{2}\Updelta t} \right)\Updelta x\Updelta z\Updelta t $$
(27)

where c as is the concentration of the sink term of soil water of the active region.

Substituting Eqs. (21) to (27) into Eq. (20), dividing both sides by ΔxΔzΔt, taking the limit and rearranging the terms, we have (upward positive) the following governing equation for solute transport

$$ - {\frac{\partial }{\partial z}}\left( {f\theta_{\text{a}} D_{\text{a}} {\frac{{\partial c_{\text{a}} }}{\partial z}}} \right) + {\frac{{\partial \left( {fq_{\text{a}} c_{\text{a}} } \right)}}{\partial z}} + {\frac{{\partial \left( {f\theta_{\text{a}} c_{\text{a}} } \right)}}{\partial t}} + {\frac{{\partial \left( {f\rho_{\text{b}} s_{\text{a}} } \right)}}{\partial t}} - \left( {\theta_{\text{i}} c_{\text{i}} + \rho_{\text{b}} s_{\text{i}} } \right){\frac{\partial f}{\partial t}} + fr_{\text{aw}} c_{\text{as}} = 0 $$
(28)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sheng, F., Wang, K., Zhang, R. et al. Modeling preferential water flow and solute transport in unsaturated soil using the active region model. Environ Earth Sci 62, 1491–1501 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-010-0633-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-010-0633-0

Keywords

Navigation