Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
2 Hydrology
Homework Problem Set #2
Due Tues March 6
Problems in "Applied Hydrology"
3.5.1 Evaporation from a lake
3.6.3 Evapotranspiration computation
4.1.3 Soil water flux
3.5.1.
The computations are summarized In Table 3.5.1. For example, 1n winter
(tirst
row ot the table),
trom Eq. (2.7.6) ot the textbook,
the latent
heat
2.36 x 5 21189 kJ/kg as shown 1n
ot vaporization
ot water is 1v 2500
- Er
es
611 exp[17.21T~(231.3...m
vapor pressure
1.7 mm/d
ot the textbook,
ot the saturated
-.!...::. ~098es/(231.3+T)2
5)]
...
curve
is,
the
873 Pa
trom Eq.
60.9 PaloC
- 1,
.l.-
given
~-
by Eq. (3.5.27)
of' the
a6/(6+Y)Er - 1.3 x
evaporation
textbook,
1.1 mm/d
(1)
Winter
Summer
30
Table 3.5~1.
(2)
Net
Rad.
R
(W/ga)
"
50
250
(3)
Latent
Heat"
Lv
(kJ/kg)
21189
21130
Evaporation
(11)
Water
Dens.
p
(kg'mJ)
1000
996
canputations
3-28
(5)
Energy
Evap.
E
(mm~d)
1.7
8.9
(6)"
(7)
6
(Pa/oC)
Y
(Pa/oC)
60.9
243.14
65.8
67.11
by the Priestley-Taylor
may be
(8).
PriestleyTaylor
E
(mm/d)
1.1
9.1
method.
of
the textbook.
3.6.3.
From
17oC,
21160
~Rn/(1vpw)
169/(2~60
x 998.6)
101
mm/d
Aerodynamic
method.
From Eq. (3.2.9)
vapor pressure for May is
611 exp[17.27T/(237.3+T)]
of
the
textbook,
the
17)J
1938 Pa
(1 + u/100)
0.0027
(1 + 167/100)
coefficient
B is
167 km/d,
.f-'
BCeas
- ea)
6.0 mm/d
of Table 3.6.3.
1,
textbook,
2...:- CpKhP/(0.6221vKw).
66.5 pa/oC
The psychrometric
wi th Cp
1005 J/kg/OK,
of the saturated
1100)
of the
3.6.3.
textbook
3-32
Then,
to
vapor
122.8 Pa/oC
constant
P
Y is given
101.3
kPa and
x 21133 x 10.)
give
the
evapotranspiration
- ~. - -.
_.
. - -- -
AU. . __
_ u
.-.
-----
f"
,r
f
(
122.8/(122.8+66.5)
5.9 +
66.5/(122.8+66.5)
3.6.3.
(d) Priestley-Taylor
method.
The evapotranspiration
by Eq. 0.5.27)
of the textbook,
wi th a
1.3,
for
3.6.3.
Values
66.5)
5.9
May is
gi ven
5.0 mm/d
of evapotranspiration
for
June
computed.
',Ii
(1)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Temperature T
Latent heat, lv
Water density
Net radiation,
Rn
"(5)
(6)
(1)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
Wind run, u
Sat. vapor presure,
b
Air pressure,
p
Vapor pressure,
ea
B
Y
(oC)
(kJ/kg)
'(kg/m')
(W/m2)
(kmld)
(pa)
eas
( Pa/oC)
(kPa)
(Pa)
.
(10-3 mmld/Pa)
(Pa/oC)
---
Method
(12) Enery balanoe, Er
(13) Aerodynamio method, Ea
(14) Combination method
(15) Priestley Taylor method
Table 3.6.3.
PO
July
(3)
May
( 2)
Unl ts
17
2li60
998.6
169
23
2li46
991. II
189
167
1938
122.8
101.3
1100
7.21
66.5
121
2810
110.0
101.3
1400
5.97
66.9
"Evapotranspiration
(mm/d)
(mm/d)
(mm/d)
(mm/d)
Evapotranspiration
5.9
6.0
6.0
5.0
6.7
8.4
7.2
6.2
(5)
Sept.
20'
21153
998
1111
133
2339
144.8
101.3
1200
6.29
66.7
rate
4.0
7.2
5.0
3.6
at Davis, California.
3.6.11.
The computations are identioal
are summarized in Table 3.6.11.
to, those in
3-33
Problem 3.6.3.
The results
--.-..-
soil moisture
flux in week
q -K Sf -0.0~1
1 is
0.75 -0.030
cmld
as shown
in Col. (9) of Table
11.1.1. The
moisture is flowing downwards in the soil.
flux
is
negative
because
~.1.2.
The moisture flux between 1.0 and 1.2 m depth may be computed following
the method outlined in Problem lI.1.1. For example, for week 1 and depth ZI
lI.1.2.
1I1z
1111
-190 -(-120).
of the
, values
at
cm as shown in Col.
q -K Sf -0.037
1.5
-0..056
cmld
as shown
in Col. (9) of Table. Jf.1.2. The
mois~~e
is flowing downwards
In the soil.
fluxq
is
negative
because
4.f.3.
The moisture fiuxes may be computed between different depths following
the method outlined in Problems 1i.1.1 and 11.1.2. Table 11.1.3-1 shows
the
hydraulic
heads measured
from Fig. Q.1.5(b) of the texbook
at different
depths.
The resulting flu~es are summarized
in Table !I.1.3-2. The values
of the flu~ at 3m depth are very high because the soil is saturated most of
the time and the relationship
between
hydraulic
oonducti vi ty and suction
head is no longer applicable; the flow Is driven by gravity alone.
Fig. 4.1.3 shows curves of moisture flux versus time between
different
depths In the soU.
It is clear from the figure that rainfall
dri ves the
inf 11 tratlon
process.
The response
of the soil to precipl taUon
is very
rapid In the upper layers of the soil.
For example,
between
O.lIand 0.8m,
infiltration increases abruptly after storms followed by a decay later.
As
we move deeper into the soil, the response is more damped and a single storm
is no longer
influential
to the same degree;
longer
rainy periods
are
required to increase the moisture flux, as shown by the 1.5 to 1.8m profile.
During the summer months, suction heads are very high throughout the
soU' profile. The effect of precipitation in moisture flux is negligible,
except in the upper sections of the so11.
Between O.lI and a.8m, the
direction of flow is eventually reversed as moisture moves upwa~ds to leave
the soil as evapotranspiration. The calculations shown here are approximate
as
the
they
do
not
account
same relationship
for
the
between
variation
of
4-2
soil
properties
with
depth
in the solI.
i.e.
:!'t;'".:
:"';''>
"
Station
depth
Week
[-,
-110
-80
-100
-120
-150
-180
-2110
-PIS
-PIS
-160
-265
-165
-230
-200
-180
-190
11
-110
-120
-130
-1110
-150
-170
-190
-200
-220
-220
-2110
-2110
-265
-265
-310
-310
5
6
7
8
-80
-60
-135
-1115
-125
-105
-135
-150
-160
-130
-150
-170
-190
-160
-165
-190
-215
-200
-190
-210
-2110
-230
-215
-230
-265
-265
-255
-255
-310
-310
-310
-310
9
10
11
12
13
-155
-2110
-2110
-285
-165
-190
-220
-230
-190
-210
-230
-250
-205
-220
-235
-250
-225
-235
-250
-260
-2110
-2115
-255
-265
-260
-265
-270
-275
-315
-315
-315
-320
-265
-265
-285
-330
-275
-270
-285
-275
-285
-285
-295
.i
J"
)
1
2
t"
p,
-255
-280
-205
-300
-235 -265
Table 11.1.3-1. Total so11 water head h (em) in a loam soU at Deep
Dean, Sussex, England.
Soil moisture
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
111
110-80
0.000
0.008
-0.022
-0.015
-0. 103
-0.394
0.000
-0.002
-0.003
0.007
0.002
0.005
Table 11.1.3-2.
England.
80-100
100-120
-0.030
-0.056
.120-150
-0.016
-0.028
-0.065
-0. 056
-0. 102
-0.286
-0.088
-0.031
-0 .0111 -0.018
-0.056
-0.028
-0.207
-0.108
-0.01111
-0.031
-0.0211
-0.012
-0.0511
-0.076
-0.031
-0.0211
-0.016
-0.008
-0.003
-0.006
-0.002
-0.000
-0.0111
-0.006
-0.002
0.000
0.000
0.002
150-180
180-2110
-0.069
-0.0211
-0.0211
-0.033
-0.065
.
-0.099
-0.035
-0.017
-0.009
-0.052
-0.038
-0.038
-0.038
-0.069
-0. 187
-0.067
-0.0311
-0.027
-0.01L1
-0.006
-0.003
-0.001
-0.003
-0.002
-0.002
-0.007
-0.005
-0.002
0.000
-0.0011
240-300
-0.111'6
-0.1146
-0.11116
-0.11116
-1.110
-1 . 110
-0.5L16
-0 .3711
-0.262
-0. 172
-0.089
4-4
a.,
o
,
'--------
.'<
.\.
0.4
0.8 m
0.8
loOm
..
i
(
."
-0.,
-0.2
1.0
1.2 111
1.2
1.5m
o
.
...
~----
'
\
,-.
'\
,--'
'\
\
,
\
'
\
,'\ ,
\ ,
-o.t
---------
1.5
1.8 m
1.8
2.4 m
'1
F1S. 4.1.3. Soil moisture flux between different depths in a loam soil in
Deep Dean. Sussex. England. Negative sign indicates flow into the ground.
4-5