A CORRE’LAHON STUDY :3; :Nmmmou,
PERMEABKUTY, AND was 5:25
msmaunon

Thai: for m Degree of M. S.
mcmcm 57m cause:
Howard Albert Voiibrachf
1954

fir-1:53.73}
L.

WW 1

“Wiles 00796 3592

,V _‘.__ __.—.—. g

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

v'- *9 ur-
l :r‘ : S.

A Correlation Study of Infiltration,- Penlo-‘agiugz.’ and

.v '0'
‘-

P9re Size mamfifitw 2:121: ._

,d ‘d‘ "IJ

presented by

Howard A. Vollbrecht

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Master of Science degree inmnco

green—E

Major professor

Date ML

0-169

 

 

— ' CWfCWpflI'J-DJ

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

I DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

raw: “

“ D;

.:| I:
|l____]|
f

MSU Is An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution
enema-annea-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

,4 7 777 i "7 ~7-<..--.—_______—4-

 

A CORRELATION STUDY OF INFILTRATIJN, PERMHABILITY,

AND FORE SIZE DISTRIBUTION

by
Howard Albert Vollbrecht

A THESIS

submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan
State College of Agriculture and Applied Science
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Soil Science

l95h

a. .3.

".1

n a '
“A
9v
:1.—
m

 

THESIS

AC KNONLEDG EMENT

The investigator expresses his sincere thanks to Dr. Earl Erickson,

under whose supervision and guidance this study was undertaken.

331297

I INTRODUCT ION .

II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

III EXPERIMEITAL PROCEDURE.

Field Procedures

Laboratory Procedures

Statistical Procedures

IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .

Variability Analysis

Surface Soil Correlations

subsoil Correlations

Regression Line Predictions.

V CONCLUSst . .
BIBLICBRAPHY .
APPENDIX . .

Tables . .

Figures . .

TABLE CF CONT L‘INTS

Basic Field and Laboratory Data.

Page

10
10
12
15
17
17

'18

26
33
3h
35
38
39

76

INTRODUCTION

The disposition of rainfall and irrigation water has posed a
problem to many workers in certain fields of science and engineering.

The question is asked, ”How fast and at what sustained rate will a soil
infiltrate water before surface run-off occurs?"

Estimations of infiltration rates have been made by hydrologic
engineers from the analysis of rainfall intensity curves and surface
run-off data. The information gained in this manner is satisfactory
for certain controlled watershed areas where rainfall intensities and
surface runpoff measurements can be made. However, a solution to the
problem of surface run-off is quite extensive in scope and cannot be
easily solved by the soil conservationist or the highway engineer.far
removed from.an area wheretiata is collected and assembled in a hydrograph.

A large volume of data have been obtained from soil core permeability
studies. However, the predictions of infiltration rates for a given soil
from these data have been subject to question. Therefore, data concerning
correlations between infiltration and permeability rates, and pore size
distributions would be valuable in planning for irrigation, flood control,
drainage, erosion control, and in the construction of highways.

The purpose of this paper is to show what correlation existed between
observed infiltration rates, core permeability, and pore size distribution.
80113 at twentyasix different sites, including seventeen different soil
types found in the lower peninsula of Michigan, were included in this

study.

REVIE'J CF LITERATURE

The investigation of the processes involved in the infiltration
of water into the soil is not new. The investigation of infiltration
started as early as 1911 when Green and Ampt (12) made a study on the
effect of capillary pull on the downward advance of a moisture front in
a column of soil. Investigations of soil-water relationships goes back
even farther to the work of King (16) who in 1898 made comprehensive
studies on the flow of air and water through a column of soil.

It has been stated that rainfall can enter the soil only as fast
as the escape or displacement of an equal volume of soil air (16). If
this is the case, the relationship between infiltration and the dispos-
ition of soil air becomes quite important. Many investigations have been
made of the effect of trapped air on the rate of infiltration. Free and
Palmer (11) were interested in determining the importance of air movement
in the soil during the infiltration process. They attempted to correlate
the interrelationships between air movement, pore size, and infiltration
so the results could be applied to field soil under natural rainfall.
When they maintained a constant head of water on sands of different I
texture, they found that in open columns infiltration decreased with
depth and time. Infiltration proceeded slowly in the closed columns at
first and only increased when entrapped air had sufficient pressure to
lift a layer of saturated sand and escape through the top of the column.
This was observed to be true only for the columns which contained the

finer sand sizes. Free and Palmer felt that retarded infiltration was due

3.
to the small capillaries which were blocked by compressed air and a
saturated layer at the top of the soil column'which resisted nonnal air
passage. No definite conclusions were drawn but tendencies were noted.
Further conclusions were drawn by Free and Palmervwhen they stated that
in undisturbed soils, infiltration was dependent upon the independent
interaction of cracks, worm and root holes, degree of aggregation, degree
of shrinkage, swelling, number of pores, size and distribution of pores
and other factors found in a normal soil.

Musgrave (23), in making infiltration capacity determinations of
soils in the field, employed single unbuffered steel rings long enough
to reach the ”B” or impervious horizon as an infiltrometer, and one
thousand cubic centimeter'burettes for the.maintenance of water heads.
'With similar apparatus Zwerman (33) found that on.Duffield silt loam in
four’stages of erosion (slight, moderate, severe, and a virgin soil) in-
filtration rates were unexpectedly high for the moderately eroded soil
'with lower infiltration rates for’the virgin soil next in order. Zwerman
reasoned that this unexpected order was due to the impedence of water
flow by entrapped air. The aieras said to be trapped between particles
2mm and less. An aggregate analysis of the moderately eroded and virgin
soils showed that particles greater than 2mm in size were about the same
for both. However, at a depth of sixteen inches the moderately eroded
soil showed a 38% non-capillary porosity value while the virgin soil
showed only 26%. Since the infiltration cylinders‘were Jacked down to the
. "B" horizon and the moderately eroded soil had more favorable conditions
for air permeability as well as water permeability, it showed a much higher

infiltration capacity over a seven and one-half hour run. Zwerman felt

 

 

th 2 2154.“:

179 form 1:

3n: ‘
non-ca:-l.
‘. ‘. .
“DIES, an;
Wire an

l‘ .
bm'lgn 8:

“mus k:
soil, 58

b.
that Musgrave's method gave much higher infiltration values than would
be found in natural and artificial rainmaker type infiltrometers.

Lewis and Powers (20) mentioned porosity, chiefly non—capillary, as
a factor to be considered in soil infiltration capacity. In addition to
non-capillary porosity, the porosity factor is increased by cracks, worm
holes, animal burrows, shrinkage, and root channels. In addition,
texture and structure were mentioned. They stated that infiltration
through soils of a given texture and structure is influenced by colloid
content, character of the colloid as to exchangeable bases, pH, SiOZ/A1203
ratio, character of moisture, wetting and drying effects, swelling of col-
loids, duration of wetting, and other related effects on organic colloidal
material.

Lewis and Powers also discussed the moisture pressure gradients of
various kinds that were found to affect the infiltration capacity of a
soil. is a unit volume of water entered the soil, conditioned by its
physical properties, it became subject to the forces of capillary pull or
particle field forces. They stated that to a large extent the pull of
capillarity would be determined by the moisture content of the soil hori—
zons at the time of water entry. Among the effects to be considered would
be the state of hydration of the soil colloids, the depth of the soil, the
permeability of the subsoil or of the soil horizon which is the least
permeable. In addition, these investigators mentioned the factors of soil
temperature, water temperature and its viscosity, and their influence upon
infiltration capacity.

In 'his study of the surface factors affecting the rate of intake of
water by soils, Duley (6) found cultivated and bare soils had a high rate

of water run-off and soil erosion. This was especially true when soils

S.

were left smooth by cultivating implements. Making tests on soils rang-
ing from sandy loams to clay loams, Duley used photomicrographic studies
of treated soil cross-sections and found that in all cases increased run-
off was due to the beating effect of rain drops which formed a thin com-
pact layer of soil. This compact layer was formed by the assortment of
small particle sizes from structural disturbances which fitted around
larger particles forming a relatively impervious seal.

Workers in the field of soil conservation have contributed to the
study of infiltration by indirect methods. By making studies of soil
structure and its corresponding permeability characteristics, Uhland and
O'Neal (32) have attempted to relate infiltration to soil structure.
Although, while not actually performing infiltration tests, these workers
have described drainage and irrigation problems mainly in the light of
the permeability of the horizons and their interaction for any given soil
of known texture, structure, degree of aggregate overlap, and other ob-
servable soil characteristics of subsurface horizons. They admitted that
the occurrence of natural water passageways were important factors in
soil permeability and also agreed that infiltration of water into the
surface of the soil was important. However, due to the affect of manage-
ment and cropping practices, variability in infiltration and permeability
of the surface seven inches prohibited significant permeability deter-
minations.

Musgrave (23) used a single unbuffered ring type infiltrometer to
conduct a study for determining the infiltration capacity of soils in the
field. He attempted to relate infiltration capacity to soil structure
insofar as its capacity is related to the structure of the horizon which

permits its lowest normal infiltration. While lusgrave’s results compared

 

 

favorably wi‘
lysiretrez-s, .
the variatil
Nelson .
on liscansi:
m lusgra're
into soil (:3
“31'. The}
Stones and ,-
decided that
apparatus .15
by Rem-9v ‘I
shall" deem
hrt’lt‘x
tmmiSSia
Sing b‘i ta:
rate:- ‘as n
true beta;

6.

favorably with other methods of infiltration measurement, i.e. erosion
lysimeters, and Horton's (lb) rainfall-runoff curves, it was noted that
the variability of the infiltration curve was quite large.

Nelson and Muckenhirn (25) in determining field percolation rates
on Wisconsin soils obtained data which agreed with those cited by Zwerman
and Iusgrave. They found large variations in the amount of water taken
into soil columns enclosed by the long steel cylinder type of infiltrom-
eter. They felt this was due to the disturbance of the soil caused by
stones and roots being driven down into the soil by the cylinder. They
decided that this method was unsatisfactory and settled on the type of
apparatus used by Katchinsky (15) and Kohnke (17) as initially designed
by Nestrov which consisted of two concentric steel squares, driven to a
shallow depth in the surface soil.

Horton (11;) stated that infiltration capacity was usually less than
transmission capacity because of the related effects of packing and plug-
ging by rainfall on the surface of a soil mass. Transmission of soil
water was much more rapid within the soil mass. He believed this to be
true because in the process of infiltration soil air must escape from the
soil surface as fast as water enters, while percolation is only dependent
upon saturated soil. Horton cites the work of King (16) who made calcula-
tions of air flow through different grades of sand. King found that air
flow was 26.5 times greater than water flow through the same material.
Horton did not feel, however, that air would flow as fast when water was
flowing into a soil in the opposite direction. He also felt that the de—
termination of infiltration capacities in some instances was actually
estimation of transmission capacities. Relative to transmission capaci-

ties Horton cited the work of Green and Ampt (12) who were attempting to

 

 

 

reasrre he
thick. was s
nation H

531mm an:

'1! the at”
Y
eater (;

distrihu.

7.

measure the downward advance of a moisture front in a column of soil
which was saturated above a moisture front. Horton felt that this deter-
mination was a transmission and not an infiltration capacity study.
Bodman and Colman (2) with air dry soils maintained a head of water on a
soil column for a twenty hour period and found by moisture potential
studies that only the surface one to two centimeters of the soil column
ever reached the state of pore space saturation.

Probably the most important physical characteristic of the soil
profile yet to be considered in a study of infiltration on various soils
is the effect of permeability and pore size distribution. Lutz and
Learner (21) studied the relationship between permeability and pore size
distribution in three North Carolina subsoils (Iredell, Cecil, and
Davidson) each having about the same texture. They found that permea-
bility increased exponentially with particle size and pore size. In
addition, they found that permeability increased greatly with the per-
cent increase of pores larger than 0.1mm and suggested a direct relation-
ship might exist between percent increase of pores greater than .05mm but
less than 0.1mm. The clay content of these soils was also thought to
have some effect upon the decrease in permeability. In order of greatest
to least clay content the soils were in order Davidson, Cecil, and
Iredell, while in permeability rate their order was reversed. They found
that an inverse relationship existed between clay swelling and permea-
bility. The greater the swelling, the lower the permeability. They
attributed this to the clogging of smaller pores with swelling water.
They also found that in the coarser fractions permeability was found to

increase exponentially with an inerease in particle size.

 

 

N915):
. - 0 “fly-
"Alp 0A rat
9 . 3:16“.-
oe 17..--..(1

' . a
given 531*

ficult to 3
istic pert:
arates, it
the can-es;
3 decmase
Cohtion TE
size of p,,

EaVer
Boil pef'flea
”it'd an t;
ImiI‘QCt. 3;.
8Pace,

M181 1

imgatign
'5‘" 34931 x
3011 has
3:141 Pregip
I“ 'K-
‘ af’rq‘r‘a
FA
slur
4“ a mi.

8.

Nelson and Baver (26) showed similar data in regard to the relation-
ship of pore systems and permeability. They found that the disposition
of infiltrated water is governed by the nature of the pore space in a
given soil profile. These investigators also made a study of percolation
rates through cores and found that constant percolation rates were dif-
ficult to obtain. They did, however, find a tendency toward character-
istic percolation rates and particle size. ‘When'working'with sand sep-
arates, it was noted that as the average size of the particle decreased,
the corresponding percolation rate decreased. This is coincident with
a decrease in percent non-capillary porosity. It was found that the pare
colation rate varied directly with volume of pores and inversely with the
size of pores.

Baver (1) has stated that the best known direct methods of evaluating
soil permeability involve the determination of the infiltration rate in
situ and the measuring of percolation rates of cores in the laboratory.
Indirect methods must be used to determine the character of soil pore
space.

Much work has been done in determining the infiltration capacity of
soils primarily from the standpoint of the soil conservationist and the
irrigation engineer. Their interest lies in the answer to the question,
"How'much rain or sprinkler irrigation can be applied to a given area or
soil type and for how long a period before the soil becomes saturated
and precipitation or irrigation rates exceed infiltration capacities?"
The apparatus generally-used by these investigators has?been the F or
IFA infiltrometer, of the rainmaker type. This equipment is expensive,

has a high operating cost, and is cumbersome.

 

 

Reviewi:
cusses pessi‘:
deaided to u.
posed by See
that allele“:
did mt all:
“19!! they a
“Want or
infiltratio:
mospheric
'33 for t}; '1‘

Steel 51“ r

9.

Reviewing other methods of infiltration study, Kohnke (l7) dis-~
cusses possible sources of error. In conducting his own study, Kohnke
decided to use the concentric square buffer type infiltrometer as pro-
posed by Nestrov, and used later by Katchinsky. He wanted an apparatus
that allowed vertical.flow, unimpeded lateral flow, and at the same time
did not allow air pressures in the soil column to build up to a point
‘where they exceeded natural conditions. Kohnke further explained his
viewpoint on trapped soil air during infiltration.and pointed out that
infiltration rates were much reduced when air pressures greater than
atmospheric conditions caused impeded flow of water.into the soil. It
'was for-this reason, in addition to others, that he used the concentric
steel square principle of Nestrov. The concentric ring infiltrometer
used in this study is essentially of the same type used by Lewis (19),
Musgrave (23), Katohinsky (IS), and Kohnke (l7) and has the advantage
over the rainmaker type because it is inexpensive, easily set up, and

is easily transported.

10.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCED [IRES

Field Procedures
Infiltration characteristics in situ. The field laboratory for
the measurement of infiltration rates was enclosed in a large tent.
(Figure 2 and 3.) The concentric rings were temporarily placed in
zoosition in a block I'H" (Figure h) pattern to assure adequate and con-
ssistent spacing. After the design and spacing patterns were determined
‘tihe vegetation was removed with a minimum of soil disturbance. If the
soil was thought to have a subsurface horizon impervious enough to im-
pede water flow, a trench as shown in Figure 1; was dug to the surface
of the impervious horizon. Rings were placed on these prepared sur-
:ffaaces and driven into the soil to a depth of one to two inches depend—
ing upon the micro-topography of the site . This was accomplished by
unesans of a heavy sliding weight on a.rod welded perpendicular to a
Erizeel plate so designed to hold the rings in place while being driven.
A total of fifteen sets of concentric rings was set up at each
£3c>il site. Ten ring sets were used for surface determinations and five
ring sets were located on the subsurface for infiltration determina-
tions.

After the rings were in place, a small buffer plate was placed in
‘the>inner ring and burettes essentially of the same type used by
Stauffer (31) were placed directly over the inner ring. The set up of
the burettes, infiltrometer rings, and water cans is shown in

Figures 2 and h.

 

 

 

 

Prior 1:
tmttes wen
the desirei 1
and car. are;
311;; flairtai
the Stcpcge,
on the 331:;

Peadi;
fifteen min

mainir

“Ch Site,
in the 3.3::

we take}

Plic ed L”.

11.

Prior to zero time, the two and one-half gallon cans and the
burettes were filled with water. The head of water was maintained at
the desired depth (two inches) by adjusting the height of the burette
and can above the soil surface. Air displacement of water automatic-
ally maintained the head of water at the two inch depth. At zero time
the stopcock on each burette was opened and the water cans were inverted
on the outer, larger rings.

Readings were taken every ten minutes for the first hour, every
fifteen minutes for the next three hours, and every half hour for the
remaining three hours in the seven hour run. Two runs were made on
each site. The initial or dry run was made the first day with the soil
in the moisture condition that it was found. Ck: the second day a wet
man was made. A minimum of twelve hours was allowed to elapse between
runs.

Just prior to the time the initial run was started, moisture samples
were taken of each of the horizons in the profile. The samples were
Placed in standard type moisture cans. Lids were taped on with masking
tape.

In addition, air and soil tanperatures, temperature of the water,
and evaporation readings were recorded at the beginning and at the end
01‘ each seven hour run.

At each site the profile was studied carefully. The texture,
structure, and color of each horizon was observed and recorded. Core
Samples of each horizon were taken, using the methods of Uhland and
0'Neal (32) and care was taken to have the soil at approximately field

capacity before sampling. The numbered cores were placed in pint con-

tainers and transferred to the laboratory.

 

12.
Definition 32 terms. Various investigators (1h), (33) have re-

ported that some confusion exists in the use and definition of the term

infiltration capacity. In order to meet on common ground in this matter,

this thesis will follow the concepts of Horton (In) and his definition
of this term.

Horton states that infiltration capacity is the maximum rate at
which a given soil in a given condition can absorb rain as it falls.
Horton further states that infiltration capacity varies with time and
as a soil continues to absorb moisture, each soil reaches a minimum

infiltration capacity.

The term, initial c_l_r_y infiltration, will apply to the maximum in-
filtration capacity of a soil at the start of the dry run.

The term, initial wet infiltration, will apply to the maximum in-
filtration capacity of a soil at the start of the wet run.

Measurements for these two values were taken as the average rate
01‘ flow, in inches of water, during the first hour of a seven hour run.

The term, minimum infiltration capacity, is used to describe the
rate of flow of water through the soil profile after a dry seven hour
run was made on the soil, followed twelve to eighteen hours later by a
Wet run. The measurement was taken as the flow of water in inches per
hour based upon the average rate of flow from the fifth to the seventh
hour of 'the wet run. At that time a constant rate of flow had been
eBtablished.

Laboratory Procedures
Upon arrival in the laboratory the core samples were trimmed and

fitted with a filter paper and cheesecloth base to prevent soil loss

 

 

or mil 5

lass seas:
tension ta
ables '9;
mm ten

cabinet 1r'

I

tens “he
h.
fez“

13.

during laboratory manipulations. Approximate field moisture determina-

tions were made by weighing the prepared cores. The cores were then
placed in deep pans of distilled water for a period of one to two days,
or until saturated. They were then weighed.

Pore size distribution determinations were obtained from weight
loss measurements which were made after equilibrium was established on
tension tables similar to those used by Learner and Shaw (18). The

tables were set at 0.01, 0.02, 0.03, 0.01;, and 0.06 atmospheres of

water tension. The tension tables were contained in an upright steel

cabinet which reduced evaporation losses from the cores.

The cores were taken from the 0.06 atmosphere tension table and
placed on porous ceramic plates in pressure cookers of thetype des-
cribed by Richards (28). In the apparatus the cores were subjected to
tensions of one-third, one-half, and one atmosphere, respectively.

Permeability determinations were made by the method described by
Uhland and O'Neal (32). A one inch aluminum ring was taped to the core
cynnder with masking tape. The surface of the soil core was protected
fIron: excessive turbulence by means of a small filter paper. The cores
were then resaturated and water was added in 100 milliliter increments.
Permeability was determined from the amount of water percolating through
the core in a two hour period and was reported as inches of water per

hour.

When permeability determinations were completed, the cores of soil

were oven dried at 110 degrees Centigrade for thirty-six hours and

weighed. Volume weight and moisture content at the various tensions on

an oven dry weight basis were calculated.

 

 

W" ..‘ ‘
139 ad ,,

in

far: in the Art!

Laboratary 3a: 5

 

 

 

11;.
The data obtained from these procedures are contained in tabular
form in the Appendix under the section headed, "Basic Field and

Laboratory Data."

15 .
Statistical Procedures

The procedures followed for all statistical determinations in
this thesis were described by Dixon and Massey (5). Data contained
in Tables III and IV are the correlation coefficients between the
factors thought to influence infiltration and permeability in soils.
Dixon and Massey (5) stated that in a sampling of any population
believed to be normal and involving two variables, a test of the inde-
pendence of corresponding values may be ascertained. This is to say,
if these variables as points in a plane have little or no relation to
each other, the correlation coefficients will approach or be equal to
zero. If the variables are in some manner related, certain minimal
values, based on N—2 degrees of freedom and percentiles of significance,
will show the probability percentiles for the minimum chance of inde-
pendence in this population. Correlation coefficients which exceed the
minimal values in any particular case show a probability of signifi-
cance toward dependence, or correlation. However, in a sampling of
some populations involving two variables which are independent, it is
Possible to find a series of points, if the data'are plotted in two di-
men sions, which show a significance of correlation at various percentage
leVels. The test of the validity of the correlation, or an indication
01‘ significance, is to show that the correlation coefficient is greater
that: three standard deviations of the correlation coefficient obtained.
Calculations were made to determine the validity of extreme values
i'Cnmd in raw permeability and infiltration data for each soil site. An
Opinion on the statistical significance of these extreme values was ob-

tained and it was decided that values which exceeded three times the

16 .

standard deviation from the mean value, positively, or negatively,
would be discarded.

It was noted that only the extremely high values could be discarded
on this basis. This was not true for the very low values since three
Standard deviations from the mean in almost every case allowed zero
rates of flow. In addition, it was felt that the range of values ob-
tained in this manner was not too wide when the variability of soil is

considered in the light of past investigation and when wide coefficients

of variation found in this study are noted.

 

17.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Variability Analysis

It has been noted by some investigators (10), (26) that constant

rates of flow in core permeability studies are difficult to obtain.
Replicate infiltrometers have also been found to give a range of
rates which are mainly due to soil variability in addition to other
variables. Lewis and Powers (20) mention several factors which may
limit constant infiltration measurements. They are (l) the pressure
effect of different hydraulic heads, (2) depth of moisture penetra-
tion, and (3) textural differences in a soil column. As infiltration
of water proceeds, differential swelling of the colloids probably due
Partially to the initial soil variability tends to increase the var-
ia‘bility between replicates .

A statistical analysis of individual variability was made of core
Permeabilities and infiltration rates on a sampling group taken from
the twanty-six sites. The sampling group contains three soil types,
Fox sandy loam, Hillsdale sandy loam, and Miami silt loam. The Fox
sandy loam was replicated to see if there were trends toward constant

relationships between the same soil type located in different areas of
the state.

The data reported in Tables I and II show that wide variations

were commonplace. However, certain trends were found to exist for the

Sampling group. For instance, as shown in Table I, the average readings

:P
1: its!

D, i’nNrdlh.
m ruli‘: \EQEIPQ‘:
.. .. New... n“
J.
_ . HuihH

 

18.
of minimum infiltration showed the highest range of variability. It

was felt that whatever the cause for wide variability in minimum infil-

tration flow rates, the same processes affected the permeability of
saturated cores.

The initial wet infiltration variations were usually less variable
than were the measurenents for the initial dry infiltration rates. This
is not strange since certain variable factors present in a dry soil ap-

proach equilibrium in a saturated soil.

The permeability data show wide variation also which, from past

investigations (26), was not surprising. However, variations in the

measurements for minimum infiltration capacity were also wide and of the
same order.

&rrf ace Soil Correlations

Certain of the physical properties of soils seem to be related to
the moisture characteristics which a soil may exhibit. The factors of
Pore size, pore size distribution, continuity of pores, and moisture

content of the soil, may have some effect upon the rate of infiltration
and permeability. Several of those factors which might be related to
each other were selected and tested for a correlation study. Their cor-
I‘elations will be considered individually in the discussion to follow.

 

Minimum infiltration capacity 3.112 permeability. There is a very
high significance of correlation for minimum infiltration capacity and

permeability. The correlation coefficient is 0.88 .t. 0.01:7. The reason

for this high correlation may be explained by stating that both methods
of water flow measurement are of the same type, that is, measuring rates

of water flow through soils in a saturated or very wet state. It is be-

l9.

lieved that the saturation of cores prior to permeability determinations
was approximated by long periods of water flow through a soil profile
undergoing an infiltration study. Under these conditions of inf iltra-
tion, most of the variable properties in a soil body would have reached
a state of equilibrium and would give readings related to core perm-
eability.

Figure 5 gives the regression line which appears as a solid line,

where Y =- 0.82 X +0.90. Examination of this line for the two variables,

shows three soils far out of line. The data related to these points

were discarded for pertinent reasons.

Sites 7 and 8, Nappanee and Paulding soil series respectively, were
very fine textured soils. Due to the dryness of’the soils, core sampling
was difficult. This probably altered the structure in the soil cores to
allow an excessively high permeability rate. Values for Site 3, a
Sprinks sandy loam, were disregarded for the reason that infiltration
rates were obtained on the Spinks soil While the core samples were in-
advertently taken from a Hillsdale sandy loam.

An important point to be made at this time is that even though the
regression line for the total twenty-six sites is distorted by the poor
.results from the three previously mentioned soils, the correlation is
3t I‘ong enough to hold the regression line well within significance at
the one percent level (r - 0.59 1 0.133). In addition, if the high cor-
relation of these two variables is considered in the light of the wide
Variability in the rates of flow for both methods, it must be assumed

that the magnitude and direction of the variations are of the same order.

The correlation between these two variables has proven to be strong and

Very highly significant. The correlation is also very close to a straight

20.

line relationship. On the 13271:: of these results it is concluded that
if cores of the surface horizon of a given soil are carefully taken at
approximately field capacity, the approximate minimum infiltration

capacity of a soil can be estimated in the laboratory by saturated

permeability determinations

 

Minimum infiltration capacity and lowest permeable horizon in
p rofile. The correlation coefficient is 0.20 3 0.196 and is not sig-

nii'icant.
horizon which is less permeable than the horizon above it, with flow
This also shows a

This is probably due to lateral flow taking place over a

mOVZ’Lng laterally through the more permeable horizon.

8hortcoming in the concentric ring infiltrometer for the measurement of

infiltration characteristics of the total soil profile. In defense of

the infiltrometer, the buffer compartment prevents lateral flow of
Water from the inner ring down to the horizon which is impervious.

H Owever at this point lateral flow is unimpeded and correlated data

for this point are not obtainable.
Minimum infiltration capacity and. volume weight.
coefficient is a negative 0.53 3 0.11:7 (see Figure 6 for the regression

The correlation

line) and is significant. This is to be expected since as volume weight

i“creases, porosity should decrease, with a corresponding decrease in

De meability .
Minimum infiltration and percent pores drained at various tensions.

 

The significant correlations in this group are shown in Table III. Their
COrresponding regression lines are presented in Figure 7, 8, 9, and 10.
The correlations at the 0.01 atmosphere and 0.03 atmosphere tensions

were not significant but at higher tensions the correlations improved.

21.

This apparently was where pores were becoming continuous. There was an

additional improvement in the correlation when pore sizes 100 and 18

microns in diameter at 0.60 and one-third atmosphere of tension were

added to the total volume of pores drained. The addition of pores

drained at one atmosphere of tension did not seem to further improve

the correlation. The increase and steady correlation, starting at the

0.h0 atmosphere tension and continuing through the one atmosphere tension

level seems to indicate that the smaller pores influenced the minimum

infiltration capacity runs. Scth (29) working with large pond type

inf-'1 ltrometers, has stated that infiltration rates are directly pro-

Portional to the combined depth of the surface water head and the hydro-

static head existing in the soil. The depth of the hydrostatic head is

dependait upon the nature of the soil and will not always be constant
for a given depth of surface head. Edlefsen and Anderson ( 8 ) have
ataimed that hydrostatic pressures in soils are nearly proportional to
the depth of water in the soil column. Considering the added depth of
the hydrostatic heads that might exist in a soil and the corresponding
1":v’<irostatic pressures that could exist, an explanation of the signifi-
ca‘nt values for pore sizes drained at 0.014 atmosphere to one atmosphere
or tension might be suggested. Because of the increased pressures it is
possible that certain of the smaller soil pores may be forced into

fulnationing as transmitting channels whereas under relatively lower

SIlrface heads this would not be “the case.
Minimum infiltration capacity and percent total pore space. The
“Correlation coefficient 0.60: 0.131 (see Figure 11 for the regression

 

line) is significant at the one percent level. The relatively low cor-

22.

relation is an indication of the dependence of infiltration upon a wide

distribution of medium to small sized continuous pores rather than on

a few large pores.

Permeability and percent total pore space. The correlation coef-

 

ficient is 0.72 1 0.098 (see Figure 12 for the regression line) and is
significant. The correlation for these two variables for most soils
should be consistently high. If there is a relationship between an in-
crease in total porosity with a corresponding increase in the total per-
- cent of non-capillary pores, the rates of flow should be proportional
to the percent of non-capillary pores. Usually permeability determina-
tions are conducted under relatively low hydrostatic pressures and the
rate of flow would be governed to some extent by the larger, continuous,

n0n~capillary pores .

germeability _e_m_<_i_ volume 3;: pores drained at various tension_s. For

 

the significant correlations see Table III. Their corresponding re-
gression lines are shown in Figures 13, 1h, 15, and 16. It will be
noted that. the correlation between permeability and the volume of pores
drained seems to lie only in the larger range of pores. The correlation
was most significant When the volume of pores drained was considered for
the 0.03 atmosphere tension level. This may be an indication of the
1‘ act that permeability under low hydraulic heads of water can only take
Place through the larger continuous pore systems. The improvement of
the correlation at 0.03 atmsopheres of tension shows that this pore
Size (200 microns in diameter) is connected in some way with the forma-
tion of continuous channels for water flow. The lower correlation for
Pore sizes involved in the 0.01 atmosphere (600 microns in diameter)

tension, seem to indicate some loss of pore continuity. Correlation may

23.

also be lost due to the fact that when pores approach the smaller sizes,
even though they may be continuous, they do not contribute greatly

toward permeability .

Permeability y; volume weight.
negative 0.75 I 0.089 (see Figure 17 for the regression line) and is

The correlation coefficient is

highly significant. The high correlation was to be expected for the

same reasons as were previously mentioned for a comparison of minimum

infiltration capacity and volume weight.

Initial dry infiltration capacity and permeabiliiy. The correla-

tion coefficient is 0.63 I 0.023 (see Figure 18 for regression line) and
is significant. This correlation was somewhat dependent upon the initial
Inorieture content of the soil at the start of the infiltration run.
when a soil is relatively dry, the initial volume of water carried
down through the large pores and cracks is large. However, with time,
the larger pores and cracks diminish in size and the rate of water flow
diminishes. Therefore when comparisons are made between a soil which

is saturated, and a soil which is becoming saturated, the correlation

may not necessarily be high.

Initial 95y infiltration capacity and initial air space. The
<2Omelation coefficient is 0.72 I 0.105 (see Figure 19 for regression
line) and is highly significant. This relationship was expected to be
high. Dependent on the moisture content of soil pores, infiltration

Can be expected to be proportionate to the many factors influencing

1‘ low rates as mentioned by Lawis and Powers (20). Among those mentioned

are moisture content of pores, degree of colloid swelling, size of pores

and their distribution, number of soil cracks and their distribution, and

other factors .

24.

Initial wet infiltration capacity Eli permeability. The correla-

tion coefficient is 0.113 f; 0.166, is not significant, and is a con-

siderably lower value than was expected. It was assumed that when a

3011 had been subjected to conditions of saturation for a period of
nineteen hours or more the change in pore sizes and pore size distri-

bution, brought about by colloid swelling, should have reached an

approximate equilibrium. It is apparent that equilibrium was not est-

ablished in the surface soil horizons to the extent that they existed
later during the infiltration run. Lack of established equilibria
PPObably can be attributed to the differential rates of colloid swelling,
Sand lenses, and other associated factors which occurred in the differ-
ent soil sites and types tested in this study.

There is also the possibility that since the soil column was sub-
Jected to conditions of saturated water flow, sufficient time was not
allowed for complete gravitational drainage of the non-capillaries to
f ield capacity levels. Therefore, continuous soil pore systems might

8"Cf—111 have contained sufficient water to cause the existence of water

Columns under tension. These columns may have existed as varying

boundaries with variable tensions as suggested by Edlefsen and Ander-
BOn ( 8 ). When the infiltrating water met those boundaries, the rate
01‘ intake of water was increased or decreased according to the varia-

bility of the region in which infiltration was taking place.

Summary of Surface Soil Correlations

It has been shown that for surface soils, definite relationships
existed between certain types of field infiltration determinations and

the permeability of soil cores. In this connection it was demonstrated

25.

that infiltration after the fifth hour on a given soil, closely approx-

imated the permeability of the soil profile. While individual values

varied rather widely, the end result seemed to indicate a straight line
relationship that results in values which are highly significant at the

one percent level. In addition, the correlation is sufficiently high

to compensate for values which are out of line by as much as three

standard deviations from the mean correlation value. In addition,

initial dry infiltration rates were highly correlated with initial air

8Pace. Another significant correlation existed between initial dry

infiltration rates and permeability which in turn may be interrelated

to the initial pore space. These significant correlations were to be

exDected since infiltration of any type is dependent upon the state of

h~3't1ration of the soil body.
Still other interrelationships were found through significant cor-

I"Blations between infiltration, permeability, corresponding volume
weight, and continuity of the surface soil pore systems.

The importance of soil pore continuity is discussed by Nelson and
Baver (26). They conducted tests on prepared soil columns to try out
tale concepts of Haines (13) on the cellular configuration of soil pore
8‘pace. In agreement with the concepts of Haines, Nelson and Baver

found that soil pores may be non-functional due to a lack of continuity.

They demonstrated this fact by showing that large pores may be con-

nected to each other by small pores which effectively blocked the large

pore column by forming constrictions or "necks". They further showed

that a constriction so located, renders the large pore colmm only as
effective, for functioning in permeability and infiltration, as the

diameter of the pore size causing the constriction.

26.
Evidence is presented in data from Table III to show that minimum
infiltration rates were not solely dependent upon the larger pores of
a soil in situ, as is the case for permeability in soil cores, but were
related to a distribution of pores ranging from large to very small
with special emphasis being placed on the continuity of the pore within
the individual size groups. An additional factor, hydrostatic pressures,
acting upon the smaller continuous pore systems, was also suggested to
Explain the distribution of correlations between minimum infiltration

and the variety of pore size groups found in surface soils.

Subsoil Correlations

The study of the behavior of the distribution, size, continuity,
and moisture content of subsoil pore systems was thought to be related
to the relatively consistent patterns established by surface infiltra-
tion curves for various soils under various conditions. An indication
(‘31‘ similarity or dissimilarity in these patterns would be of great
assistance in explaining and predicting the soil-moisture relationships
01‘ soils as they pertain to the disposition of natural or artifically
a~pplied surface moisture. A series of quantities identical to those
chosen for study of the surface soils were selected and tested for a
31milar correlation study of the subsoils.

Minimum infiltration capacity and permeability. The correlation

 

 

coefficient is 0.81 I 0.095, which is highly significant as indicated
by the regression line in Figure 20. A similar type of comparison

was made in the previous correlation between minimum infiltration cap-
acity and permeability of the surface soils. It should be noted that

the correlation might have been higher. In most cases the subsoils were

27.

moist at the start of infiltration determinations, consequently pore
size and pore distribution should have reached an equilibrium at an
earlier time in the infiltration run. In addition, because of less
plant and animal activity and soil disturbances caused by man, the size
of pores in the subsoil are smaller and tend to be more uniform. Also,
the degree of colloid swelling should be less and not affect pore size
and the distribution of pores as much as was the case for the surface
soils where a greater variety of pore size was found.

Minimum infiltration capacity and lowest permeable horizon i_r_1_
m. The correlation coefficient is 0.32 _+_ 0.2h9. There is no
significance of correlation between these variables. The reasons for
this lack of correlation are essentially the same as those previously

(11 Scussed for the surface soil.

Minimum infiltration capacity 33d volume weight. The correlation
c<-7'e.f‘ficiart is -0.17 I. 0.269. The correlation is negative, which is to

be expected, but it is non-significant. The lack of correlation is
p 1"(Diroably due to the fact that volume weights increased and the rates of
flow decreased out of proportion to the apparent decrease in pore volume.
It may be noted that the total pore space of the subsoil decreased
81Tightly (see Table V, Basic Field and Laboratory Data). In addition,
the large pores (600 to 200 microns in diameter) 0.01 to 0.03 atmos-
pheras tensions contribute approximately nine percent to the total pore
8pace of the subsoil, thus aiding in the maintenance of a relatively
high total pore space.
The fact that these large pores are non-functional, as is shown

by lack of correlation with minimum infiltration, indicates that they

28.
may be partially responsible for very low cor-relation betwe en minimum
infiltration capacity and volume weight . Other reasons for lack of
correlation may be found in the limited capacity of the small soil pores
for infiltration when time is a factor and the unmeasurable flow of
water through checks and cracks associated with soil structure.

Minimum infiltration and percent pores drained _a_t_ various tensions.
The correlation coefficients for these two variables are given in
Table IV. Their corresponding regression lines are presented in
Figures 21, 22, 23, and 2h. The significance of correlations for the
range of pores drained at 0.014 atmospheres of tension and greater was

very high. The fact that correlations were not significant for the
larger sized pore (600 to 200 microns in diameter) at 0.01 and 0.03
atmospheres of tension indicates that they were probably discontinuous.
0n the other hand the smaller pores sizes did, according to the corre-
lation coefficients, contribute to infiltration and showed a degree of
continuity. Here again as in the surface soils, the effect of hydro-
Static heads of water may have had some part in causing the smaller
sized pores to function.

Minimum infiltration gppacity and pgrcept total pore space. The
correlation coefficient is 0.29 i 0.251;, which is not significant. The
f act that the total pore space does not correlatewith infiltration

Supports the statements concerning the presence of large pore systems
in the soil body which do not function as non-capillaries. This is
evidenced by the fact that the average decrease in percent total pore
Space is approximately seven percent, while the average decrease in

Water flow in inches per hour amounts to bl inches per hour. For ap-

29.
proximate purposes of comparison, minimum infiltration rates of flow
may be expressed in terms of the percent of pores required per inch of
water flow per hour. For the surface soil, it took Seven percent of
the total pore space to percolate one inch of water per hour. For the
subsoil, it took twenty-five percent of the total pore space to percolate
one inch of water per hour. Apparently the eighteen percent difference
in pore space lost to percolation is found in the large pores or cracks
Which are not continuous and do not contribute to infiltration to a
great extent.

Permeability and percent petal pore space. The correlation coef-

ficient is 0.66 _+_ 0.156. (See Figure 25 for the regression line.)

K This correlation is significant; however the relative significance is
moderate. The moderate significance of correlation in this case can
be explained by stating that permeability must be more directly re-
lated to the percentage volume of continuous pores and the function of
cracks and checks associated with soil structure than to total pore
Space. In this instance water flow through cores appeared to be mainly
dependent upon the continuous pore system of the core. However, the

1' act that the correlation is not higher indicates some additional flow
was taking place through other channels.

Permeability and p_e_rcent ppgeg drained 93; various tensions. The
correlation coefficients for these two variables are presented in
Table IV. Regression lines for the corresponding significant correl-
ations can be seen in Figures 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30. The relation-
ship here is essentially the same as discussed for minimum infiltration

capacity rates and percent of pores drained at different tensions for

30.
the subsoils. It is to be noted again that the percent of pores
drained at higher tensions and reduced permeabilities have very high
correlation coefficients. Such close relationships show that contin—
uity as well as size, plays an important role in permeability. Lack
of correlation was noted in only one case, pores drained at 0.01 atmos—
pheres of tension, indicating again that the pore size was not contin-
uous and therefore did not contribute to permeability.

Permeability 3251 volume wegpt. The correlation coefficient is

 

 

—O .23 :- 0.263. There is no significance of correlation, and the corre-
lation is negative. These relationships would be expected based upon
the data presented thus far. Consistent with this lack of correlation,
it should be noted that the correlation between minimum infiltration
capacity and volume weight was not significant.

Initial 9.11 infiltration capacity and initial air space. The

 

 

correlation coefficient is -0.08 _+. 0.271. There is no significance of

Correlation. The lack of correlation can be related to the fact that

when initial infiltration rates are low, the lack of correlation is

net to be found in a consideration of the initial volume of air space

130 be filled with water. The error probably lies in the fact that the

vblume of the larger pores (approximately nine percent) of the subsoil
c<>ntribute to an estimate of the initial moisture content of the soil
Pore systen. However, such pores do not contribute to infiltration
because of their discontinuity. Therefore, flow rates would be dis-
Proportionate again due to non-functioning large pores.

Initial 15y infiltration capacity and permeability. The correla-

 

tion coefficient is 0.81 _+_- 0.095. (See Figure 31 for the regression

1”?! 1!
i. . .. E i: “i
with. 3‘"! Vi
.
.tr

«I.

 

31.

line.) There is a high significance of correlation. Permeability

in this case again is probably dependent upon the ability of the smaller
continuous pores in the soil to act as transmission channels through a
relatively impervious soil. This is consistent with previous discussions.

Initial 1'23: infiltration papacipy and permeability. The correlation

coefficient is 0.85 i 0.077. (See Figure 32 for the regression line.)
There is a very high significance of correlation. The situation for
this correlation is the same as previously discussed for initial wet in-
filtration capacity and permeability in surface soils. The degree and
extent to which factors influencing infiltration and permeability have
acted upon the soil body with its pores and cracks, determines its re-
sponse to further tests of relative rates of water flow. In the case of
subsurface soils, if the pore’ volume of the smaller pores is reduced by
swelling then as is indicated by the high correlation, the infiltration

and permeability rates are proportionately reduced.

Summary of Subsoil Correlations
It should be noted that while the number of significant correla-
tions for the surface soil were many, significant correlations for the
Shbsoil were not so frequent. It was noted that this loss of correla-
tion was primarily due to the relatively moderate loss of total pore
8pace with a corresponding increase in'volume weight, while permeability
and infiltration rates did not decrease proportionately. Most of these
cases can be explained by noting that in infiltration and permeability,
the continuity of small pore sizes did not always. produce a significant
correlation. Therefore, some of the distortion of the correlation was

due to the flow of water through channels other than the pores. This

32.

flow may have been through cracks and checks associated with soil

structure. The lack of correlation between permeability and volume

weight illustrates this point.

It was noted that a high correlation existed between minimum in-

filtration and subsoil permeability. The high correlation between

these two variables as opposed to the lack of correlation between
permeability, minimum infiltration, and their corresponding volume
Weights, was thought to arise from the fact that approximately the
same type of disturbance of soil structural cracks and pores occurs
Widen preparing cores for permeability determinations and the prepara-
tion of subsoil trenches in infiltration studies.

Initial dry and initial wet infiltration, as compared with perm-
eability, had a very high significance of correlation. This close
association was probably due to the fact that as in minimum infiltra-
tion and permeability correlations, the soils are not too far from a
8aturated state. Thus flow rates in the subsoil for initial dry,

initial wet and minimum infiltration, approximate each other with re-

sI>ect to permeability rates of flow. Evidence is shown of the fact

that when comparisons were made between infiltration, permeability and
their corresponding pore size distribution, the relatively high corre-
lations involved a wider range of pore sizes which included the very
8mall sizes. Such a close relationship indicates that while the total
Dore space in the subsoil was less, the continuity of the pores was

much increased over the pore systems in the surface soils.

33.
Regression Line Predictions

It was felt that since certain of the correlations in this study
were very high, regression lines with the necessary conversion factors
could be employed to predict such quantities as the minimum inf iltra-
tion capacity of a soil from given information on core permeability
determinations, or other data which might result in the valuable saving
of time.

The regression lines and associated data were submitted to a
statistical test to determine the coefficients of the regression lines
With regard to predicting the above mentioned quantities. In many
cases, the distribution of points about the regression line is wide,
thus leading to a high standard error of estimate or a wide margin for
predicting purposes. However, certain correlations were found that
Showed a narrow distribution of points about the regression line. The
best of these correlations was selected to test its value in prediction
d eterminations .

The coefficient of the regression line for the best correlation
Was calculated in order to find the band of normality for predicting
Purposes. The best correlation coefficient in this study existed
between the two variables, minimum infiltration and permeability of
the Ap horizon where r - 0.88 i 0.01:7. In a comparison of these two

Variables, Figure 5 shows the limits of the band of normality into
Which sixty-eight percent of all estimates will fall. The equation for
the expression of this association is Y - 0.82]! + 0.902532 .1, showing
that for any given permeability the corresponding unknown minimum in-

filtration capacity can be estimated to within 2.1 inches per hour of
its actual flow rate.

311.

C OK- CLUS I ONS

The relation between infiltration, permeability, and pore size

distribution has been presented in this thesis by means of correlation

studies. An attempt was made to make the correlation study complete

Within the limits of time allowed for a study of only those essential

and related variables thought to pertain to soil infiltration rates

and permeability determinations. The results of this study seem to

point toward certain relationships, listed below, which may be of value

as an aid to further research in projects similar to this study.
1. There is a significant relationship between minimum infiltra-

tion capacity and permeability rates for a given soil horizon.

2. If cores are taken at the proper moisture content and care-
fully treated, it is possible to predict, within certain limits, the

Tuinimum infiltration capacity of a soil.
3. Permeability and infiltration are directly affected by the

e3Ct.ent of continuity and total percent of pores in the soil body.

’4. Pores in the size range, 600 to 200 microns in diameter, are

More often than not, discontinuous.

5. The infiltrometer, as used in this study, will not supply

infiltration data beyond the least permeable horizon in the profile.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(h)

(S)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9) '

(10)

§ (11)

35.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baver, L. D. 1938 Soil permeability in relation to non-
capillary porosity. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc.
3: 52-56

Bodman, G. B. and Colman E. A. 19h3 Downward entry of
water into soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc.
8:116-122

Bradfield, R. and Jamison, V. C. 1938 Soil structure -
attempts at its quantitative characterization. Soil
Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 3:70-76

Browning, G. M. 1939 Volume change of soils in relation
to their infiltration rates. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer.
Proc. hz23-27 ,

Dixon, W. J. and Massey, F. J. 1951 Introduction to
statistical analysis. McGraw Hill Book Company
pp. let-165

Duley, F. L. 1939 Surface factors affecting the rate
of intake of water by soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer.
Proc. h:60-6h

and Domingo, C. E. 19h3 The effect of water
temperature on rate of infiltration. Soil Sci. Soc.
Amer. Proc. 8:129-131

Edlefsen, N. E. and Bodman, G. B. 19hl Field measure-
ments of'water’movement through a silt loam soil.
Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 33:713-731

and Anderson, A. B. C. 19143 Thermodynamics
of soil moisture. Hilgardia, 15:20h-210

Edminister, T. W., Turner Jr., W. L., Lillard, J. H., and
Steele, F. ‘1951 Test of small core samplers for
permeability determinations. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer.
Proc. 15: h17-h20

Free, G. R. and Palmer, V. J. 19h0 The interrelation-
ship of infiltratiOn, air movement, and pore size in
graded silica sand. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc.
5:390-398

(12)

(13)

(1h)

(15)

(l6)

(17)

(18)

(19)

(20)

(21)

(22)

(23)

(2h)

36.

Green, W. H. and Ampt, G. A. 1911 Studies in soil
physics. Journ. Agron. Sci. hzl—Zh

Haines, W. B. 1927 Studies on the physical properties
of soils. IV A further contribution to the theory
of capillary phenomena in soil. Jounn. Agr. Sci.
17:26h-29O

Horton, Robert E. 19h0 An approach toward a physical
interpretation of infiltration capacity. Soil Sci.
Soc. Amer. Proc. 5:399-h17

Katchinsky, N. A. 193k Methodes Pour Determiner la
Permeabilite du sol a'leau envue d'une Irrigation.
Trans. of the Internet. Soc. of Soil Sci. A 2:79-99

King, F. H. 1898 Principles and conditions of movements
of ground water. 19th Annual Report, Part II, U. 3.
Geological Survey, pp lS-29h

Kohnke, H. 1938 A method for studying infiltration.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 3:296-303

Leamer; RW‘W. and Shaw, R. l9h1 A simple apparatus for
measuring non-capillary porosity on an extensive
scale. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 33:1003-1008

Lewis, M. R. 1937 The rate of infiltration of water in
irrigation practice. Trans. Amer. Geophysical Union.
Part II:361—368

and Powers, W. L. 1938 A study of factors
affecting infiltration. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc.
:60—6

Lutz, J. F. and Leamer, R. W. 1939 Pore size distri-
bution as related to the permeability of soils.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. h:28-3l

Moore, R. E. 19h0 The relation of soil temperature to
soil moisture: pressure potential, retention, and
infiltration rate. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc.
5:61-61:

Musgrave, G. W. 1935 The infiltration capacity of
soils in relation to the control of surface runoff
and erosion. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 27:336-3h5

and Free, G. R. 1936 Some factors which
madify the amount of infiltration of field soils.
Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 28:727-739

(26)

(27)

(28)

(29)

(30)

(31)

(32)

(33)

37.

Nelson, L. R. and Muckenhirn, R. J. 19bl Field
percolation rates of four Wisconsin soils having
different drainage characteristics. Jour. Amer.
Soc. Agron. 33:713-731

and Baver, L. D. l9h0 Movement of water
through soils in relation to the nature of the pores.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 5:69-76

Peels, T. C. l9h9 Relation of percolation rates through
saturated soil cores to volume of cores drained in
fifteen and thirty minutes under sixty cm of tension.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. lb:359-361

Richards, L. A. l9h8 Porous plate apparatus for measuring
moisture retention and transmission in soils. Soil Sci.
Soc. Amer. Proc. 66:105-110

Schiff, L. 1953 The effect of surface head on infiltrap
tion rates based on the performance of ring infiltromp
eters and ponds. Trans. of Amer. Geophysical Union
3hz257-266 '

and Dreibelbis, F. R. 19h9 Preliminary studies
on soil permeability and its application. Trans. of
Amer. Geophysical Union 30:759-766

Stauffer, R. S. 1938 Infiltration capacity of some
Illinois soils. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 30:h93—500

U'hland, R. E. and O'Neal, A. M. 1951 Soil permeability
determinations for use in soil and water conservation
Mimeograph material U.S.D.A. SCS-TP 101:1-36

Zwerman, Paul J. 1938 The relation of sheet erosion to
the structure of Duffield silt loam. Soil Sci. Soc.
Amer . Proc . 66 :105-110

rail-lax. ill; 4.“. . . \

APPENDIX

39.
TAB LE I

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF INFILTRATION DATA

 

 

 

as
Site Soil Type Infiltration Av. Stazdard Coefficient
b!c>. In. hr. . . 0
__g / Dev1atlon Variation
5? Fox Sandy Loam
Surface Initial Dry 6.3 .78 12.3h
Initial Wet 3.9 .33 8.38
Minimum 2.? 2.56 93.81
subsurface Initia1.Dry 6.6 2.25 3h.09
Initial Net 3.6 .56 15 .246
Minimum 1.8 .96 53.21
JUO Fox Sandy Loam
Surface Initial Dry 9.0 2.8h 31.55
Initial Wet 6.0 1.88 31.33
Minimum 3.7 1.89 51.08
Subsurface Initial Dry 9.0 3.55 39.hh
Initial Net 5.0 .52 10 .hh
Minimum 1.9 .96 50.h7
3L5 Fox Sandy Loam
Surface Initial Dry 111.2 3.68 25.91
Initial Wet 71; 2 .32 31.35
Mfinimwm 8.8 3.65 bl.h7
Subsurface Initial Dry 7.3 1.83 25.06
Initial Wet 3.7 .50‘ 13.37
Minimum 2.0 .58 28.90
17 Miami Silt. Loam
Surface Initial Dry lh.1 6.1M h3.5h
Initial Wet h.7 1.60 311.01;
Minimum , 3.6 1.27 35.27
Subsurface Initial Dry 3.0 .29 9.6
Initial Wet 1.11 .29 20.57
Minimtml 03 015 so .66
23 Hillsdale Sandy Loam
Surface Initial Dry' 8.6 1.92 22.32
Initial Net 6 .h 1 .77 27 .65
Minimum 8.1 h.l6 51.32
Subsurface Initial Dry 3.5 .37 10.h8
Initial Wet 2.3 .21 9.21
Minimum .h .lh 35.25
\ y‘ A

 

* in inches per hour

** in percent

L0.
TABLE II

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF PEifl-JIMABILITY DATA

 

 

A M. a «m A #

I— -‘ -‘ A w W ‘-‘-r-HW

 

 

 

 

ESjsbe Soil Type Average Average Stahdard Coefficient
P‘<’- ml/mln- In-/hr° Deviation of Variation
5? Fox Sandy Loam
Ap 3 .50 l .79 1 .55 1111 .15
Bl*** 2.00 1u02 1.19 59.50
B2 b.60 2.30 1.77 38.h7
B3 15.60 7.90 8.b7 5h.22
10 Fox Sandy Loam
Ap 2.60 1.33 .87 33.57
Bl 1 055 079 057 1‘9 e20
82*":31’ 1‘ 039 2 023 1 093 1‘3 096
B3 30.00 15.30 8.22 27.39
15 Fox Sandy Loam
AP 7 .79 3 .97 2 .110 30 .80
12 1.00 2.01 0.71 18.50
A3 2.52 1.28 1.18 h5.23
3L7 Miami Silt Loam
Ap 3.8h 1.95 1.28 33.68
1.2 1 .30 .66 .57 M .88
A3 .ho .20 .28 71.89
B21” 077 039 037 ’89 .79
B22 .28 01h .10 36 036
B3 .29 .15 .07 217.82
2 3 Hillsdale Sandy Loam
AP 5.50 2.80 1.52 27.62
Ap 1.60 .81 .82 51.31
12 .32 .16 .11 3h .37
B21“ 026 013 013 he 0&6
822 .17 .86 .05 28.23
B3 .25 .151 .101 39 .60
B3 036 0181 0131 36 091‘
c .20 .101 .07 32.75

\ A 44—.

* in milliliters per minute
11* in percent
m subsoil infiltration capacities were made on this horizon

I"'F '- mfljhchwj-

 

TABLE III

SURF. CE CORRELATION DATA

 

:- 1
‘-—‘—-._ :—__

 

'Ffiigure Variables r arr
5 Minimum Infiltration and Permeability .88* I: .0h7
Minimum Infiltration and Lowest Permeable
Horizon in Profile .20 I .196
6 Minimum Infiltration and Volume Weight 53* 1 .1117
Minimum Infiltration and Percent Pores
Drained at
0.01 Atms. Tension .25 I .191
0.03 Atms. Tension .117 I .159
7 0.0L Atms. Tension .50* f; .153
8 0.06 Atms. Tension .5819 i .1118
9 0.33 Atms. Tension .58* I .135
10 1.00 Atms. Tension .55* I .1112
11 Minimum Infiltration and Percent Total
Pore Space .60Kb I .131
12 Permeability and Percent Total Pore
Space .72* i .098
Permeability and Percent Pores
Drained at
13 0.01 Atms. Tension .53* I .1117
111 0.03 Atms. Tension .67* i .112
15 0.0h Atms. Tension .62* 31 .125
16 0.06 Atms. Tension .57* I: .138
0.33 Atms. Tension .38 j: .175
01.00 Atms. Tension .33 .C .182
17 Permeability and Volume Weight .7531 j; .089
18 Initial Dry Infiltration and
Permeability .63* I; .123
Initial'Wet Infiltration and
Permeability .1.3 3: .166
19 Initial Dry Infiltration and Initial
Air Space .72* I .105

 

«- Significant of the 1% level

bl.

 

TABLE IV

SUBSURFACE CORRELATION DATA

 

 

W “m
Figure Variables r r r
20 Minimum Infiltration and Permeability .811!- 1’. .093
Minimum Infiltration and Lowest Permeable
Horizon in Profile .32 I; .2h9
Minimum Infiltration and Volume Weight -.17 I .269
Minimum Infiltration and Percent Pores
Drained at
0.01 Atms. Tension .09 L: .275
0.03 Atms. Tension .h3 5: .226
21 0.014 Atms. Tension .81* i .095
22 0.06 Atms. Tension .86* j; .072
23 0.33 Atms. Tension .77*' Q: .113
2b 1.00 Atms. Tension .78*- j: .108
Minimum Infiltration and Percent Total
Pore Space .29 I .2511
25 Permeability and Percent Total Pore
Space .66* J: .156
Permeability and Percent Pores
Drained at
0.01 Atms. Tension .22 .1 .26h
26 0.03 0.03 Atms. Tension .67* 1'. .1119
27 0.011 Atms. Tension .8h* I .082
28 0.06 Atms. Tension .81* ;t .095
29 0.33 Atms. Tension .76* Li .117
30 1.00 Atms. Tension .79* I .1011
Permeability and Volume'Weight -.23 .1 .263
Initial Dry Infiltration and Initial
Air Space -.08 i .271
.31 Initia1.Dry Infiltration and
Permeability .81* 2‘. .095
.32 Initial Wet Infiltration and
Permeability .85* I. .077
\

M2.

 

* Significant at the 1% level

 

m .g ant...“ ‘-
w

TAB LE V

AVERAGE VALUES FOR BASIC FIELD AND LI‘ABOIDATOR‘Ir DATA

Surface

Initial Air Space (%)

Initial Dry Infiltration (in./hr.)
Initial Wet Infiltration (in./hr.)
Minimum Wet Infiltration (in./hr.)
Permeability

Volume Weight (gms/cc)

Total Pore Space (1)

Percent Pores Drained at
0.01 Atms.
0.03 Atms.)
0.0h Atms.
0.06 Atms.
0.33 Atms.
1.00 Atms.

subsoil

Initial Air space (5)

Initial Dry Infiltration (in./hr.)
Initial Wet Infiltration (in./hr.)
Minimum Wet Infiltration (in./hr.)
Permeability

Volume Weight (gms/cc)

Total Pore Space (1)

Percent Pores Drained at
0.01 Atms.
0.03 Atms.
0.0h Atms.
0.06 Atms.
0.33 Atms.
1.00 Atms.

Minimum Permeability of Profile (in./hr.)

Peg???
888888

NH

 

h3.

.k Hen-Ia“ ‘ 3““?
.

to: .-'“ - .-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     
     
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.1““
.1—____—-———-I 47.
mm
at.“
#1
IHfi-‘a——
an MD oscaoA Aicom
mscou. OGEMAIV Iosco
"‘ escrow an: rum!” MENAC
u.
in)?“
MY
Figure 1 , wmrco MfcasrA mum mouwo
- ruscou 3.4mm
Numbers Indicate Location of
3011 Sites . non/tram suitor «own
new .
r1 sense: ““5“
am in mm cumow 3mm. "cum
19 mum fut——
mu um: ”mm! mmcsr‘u
16 17 1 2 3 23

 

115

mum. cums JAtKJOIl msumuw mm
11 10

suosmv Mam pursuit-unite: manor 3!!

15

9 78
r—A_

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I" ~. 0
‘7 C" o .
u 0‘ 0’.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l.._—-—- a
’_ .—

2.

 

Photograph showing infiltrometer apparatus set up and in
operation on a soil site in Southern Michigan.

 

 

 

.. ‘ \ ‘Q
I a a" " )1 '
Q I}. t{- ' ".;. 'yl‘K‘h ' . ‘s s . _ ~ ‘ - "‘. ‘ ‘ . .
" a... ‘ L. “’ r "8 ' - :" . .' ' I 4
. ‘1 p ‘ . u- ‘ ._ 4 . , - - I '
'a . ‘v' "‘73:“ .o .‘ .' - . . ' ' ' ' - ’ t
. , _- ' 7.. . . ,, '- - 7- .' ,5 -- W , . ‘ ‘ . '
g .' s y o'
‘ o . .‘ '

O

 

Figure 3. Typical set up of apparatus and tut. ‘_

b7.

1 W e W. WW

/ /’\ ,‘ .
K\“// \£;;;Z) :\\W”Ej

SURFACE GROUP

3 T.
l

 

*-_--———————-_~

SUBSOIL GROUP IN TRENCH

a. Arrangement of individual infiltrometers, using
5 and 9 inch rings.

 

 

 

 

j l 1 Trench

F F
Impervious horizon

 

 

b. Cross section of the subsoil group.

Figure A. The arrangement used for the infiltrometers,
(a.) showing general set up, (b.) a cross
section showing the infiltrometer on an
impervious horizon.

 

ll. _1I(.Iai.|'4|1| .l

filiall‘i, ,IE 1...? nhfl? In» . ... ~
fl . . \L
h.

48.

.oawa nofiuuonwou spas
nouduon ad no aofipoupaauua asefinua .u> hpaafinooauom

uson\nonvna n hafiaupaoauom
em om ca «a

 

cm: poop no nofipaa
unease a“ cousaono condo»

huaauanon Mo coon

0.9 + ”mate «M.
00.0 uh

1m w No 8.0 + fimd a»
8.0 PH

madcadam
a 0 Dawn 0

. a fi _ l

ouncnguz

 

.m chewah

deanm
i n Oflmfl 0

We.

 

«d

0H

1 on

 

«non/ceqoux - noun-nun: Imam

F. . llihlyul..- 0 Vi . 'Pwlle‘Ll lth

.3: noauuohmoh 5a.
gonzo: 94 no paw“: 2550p 5» «392333 Susana: .c 0.33%

 

 

 

 

mm noon\uonouH .. nogaupdfiua .533:

mm .vm om ea 3 m e o

i.-!-n-i-.f :lzq _ _ _ . . J

nmé 388.: u» 1
no: u." «.0
///- 4 m6

.-///.J- O o
///!I .-.l/. .// o o

// O O l

/ «4
Q llOIIzi o
//J- 00 O
rial...

O O. O/Ojv/

o 1
0.4
.. o.m
. e.»

 

oo/emuo - gusto“; oumtoA

Vi!!!

.onaa nonmaonwon new: noaunop mead «0.0 no ooaau

 

anon unconoa .u» damage: 94 no nagaouaaauna ausdnaa .5 ouemwm
w. Sofiufiofl .. E: 23385 553:
cu we «a m w o
e — .1 A 1.1
1m fwow. ..
on. ¢.o
O O
O O O
00
O
\3 .
m o
o o .. ., \
0 O O
x -- o o
.\
.x \ o o .1
xx... “.4”
. \\\
.\\-
.\.....\ .
\.\.-\\ \\\ . l O
\\\. o H
\\ O
\\
\\
O O
\ \ ll
.\\ o.m
\. O

 

vow

not-neg easy 50-0 3' coeds oxoa :uoozeg

_
Flu .r?...;‘...’.luvlvtsnu. {Ht ..‘

.ouda aoaouonmou nu“: cognac» need oo.o pa conga
anon uncouon .u> aoaanon g4 «o nowanuua«uq« Isaanfia. .m ousmau

 

 

 

L usoflnofiau .. nononpdufl .535:
5 mm «m on 3 3 m o
d . l q F T _ 4 n

13 $8. «a ..
mm. nu v
o L m

0
O
\ 3
\...
\.\
o.\\. o
\...\\ O

\. 1

. on
O
.
\\x\
\\
\.\
.\.
\.x.\ *N

notoue; emxy go‘o as needs 010; annexed

52.

.3: codename." n3- aoamao» 254 3.0 an conga
goo £30th .3 confined n4 no noaponaduaa .5353. .o PSQE

usofleonog .. negoupduqa 5352

para .u a
85..

#N
_

ON
7

ca
.

ma
_

~10
‘d‘

Nd

0H

mu

 

NM.

nouns; new 2930 n ooedg no.1 annexe;

53.

 

o.ma+Nm . u w
00." .H

 

an: nonananwan a»? nonona» as: 00.4 «a aoana
anon 33.39 .a». «83.3: A4 no acnaanpannnn gang: .3 93m;

.Qofloononn .. 338335 555:
mm «m 8 3 «a m

. _ d .

 

0A

«A

on

 

on

noteue; emu 00°! 4e eoeds nod queue;

an: nonauanwen a»: .
nounnon 94 no nonaanpaflqn aaannna .3 3an anon Haven. :3. 0.3m:

 

mm aoann anom Haven.
on no an. ev 3. 09 mm.
_ A n q q _ o
\\ O 0
e ...e e O
\\ e e e
e x
o e
0.3” 1&3.“ .n. a J
om . H n a.
O
O
\ O O O 0

0H

 

.moq/eeqoux - uoneaanmx mutiny:

 

.anna acnmmanwan nun:
nounnon n4 no npnannmaanan .m> aounn anon aapon. .ma anzmnn

 

aw aoann anon gen.
.0 on on Hm bi n¢ on on An
II + q n . . . C
e e
C O O C
e e \
e
ham .. n3...» . . \\. . .
N§o " h 0 \ fl
\.\\
\\.x 0

0a

 

¢N

non/Ion“: - ‘SIU‘I‘W‘J

56.

 

m.m + NNN. In.
00......“

. "‘"1
iJ
5».

li, i

.m.. ;
.l..'lu 1.13:0. .2!

 

1!

U .

an: nanaaanman n3: nonmaao

 

«and no.0 pa aaana anon anaonan .2, nounnon n4 .. nannnaannan .3 ensmnn
nsoa\maaonn .. nagnnaaanan
Mm on on «A m e o
a 1 . _ — 1
ea e e
e e
O\\\'\
O O O \0 00‘ 1
. .\ e
\ O C
e e 94
.\\\\.\\.\\\\. O a
. .\.\u\l.. ”
-\\u\. u
1....-- . i ..
\x m a
o
\ u
o S
.m
0
w
.3 n.
m.
0
T.
m
- 3 m
e
m
a...
0
an
L. on

 

.enna nonnoanman nuns nonooa»

 

 

eae< no.0 no eoane anon paeonan .o> nounnon n4 u nunannaeananq .«a en:Mnn
Wu nsofloanona u mundane—anon
mm on om on «a m o 0
1fi 4 . A _ . . 4 W
O

m.m+M0¢.uM e eee 1

no. u n v
0 O
a e \
O O

O O O 1

m
0 O
O
O

\ I:

\\ NH
O \1\

\ . i

. . i

O I...
\ m 3

\\ n

i

_
.4 on

 

vN

noteuea. emv go°o 1e eeeds e105 sneezed

‘.

, A,
_ .

 

III- ‘1. c.3fiFl’..." 1, IF.

.ouaa floanaoQMon up“: qoauao»
as: 3.0 an 32:. upon 23qu 3» 35.3: 3 .. huddnoofinom .2 0.33%

 

mum ndofluonoqm .. Apadnnoanom
mm 3 ON 0A «Ht 1 m z u- # o
a a A _ q _ J1
im + N¢¢.BM
muffin" I v
o o
. u.
o o u
C
O
. . w
o o o u
o \x.\ o 0 .Mb
.-\\ U
.. a
O
x \ o 1 NH “9
O
. C
. . w
m
o \ ‘ l
\K 3 u
x. u
o I
9.!
O
x \ u
\ . o
\ O
\X. I on
\ o

 

 

 

.oaaa acanuonmon up“: scanno»
.54 no.0 an ocean anon «noon-n 3» ~33qu A4 n 5333055 .3 0.33m

 

mm nsoflaonoun; ... 5330239”
mm {N ON 04.. NH. m
_ IA 14 iil‘ Anlfl A a
0.0H IT Nafl. "M
an. H
C
o \X\.\
o \ xxx ‘
\\\.. o
\\
\\\
\.. \ O 0
~ \\ o
\\\\\.x .
\ .
.\\
..\\
\\\
x.\
‘\\V\\
\s,
.

 

 

*N

0d

 

wanna; my go°o :3 cents nod wound

‘-

1i|' L.

.on: aoaomopwon a» «I

 

 

“Ewan: 0830.? .up .3532. 94 mo hpadpuonnom .3. 0.33m
0. nson\mono§ .. mflfinoosnom
6 mm «m on 3 3 m w o
_ _ J 1 . _ _ _ 0.0
C
84:30.- .1.» x
9... an ,. 4 0.."
z o o
O .I "OH
O O O
on: o o L #3...

0.4

1 m2"

 

oo/cmo - smog canton

 

i 1‘

 

 

i...“
d .
G

.0 ‘ . 5 .

.onaa acammopmoh nu“:
833a 3 .8 833335 he :23 .3 333353 .3 magma

nson\mononH u huaaanoaanom

mm «a m
4 J. lbfl L om ma .1

61.

o.a +39 u»
no."

0.

nonfiction - tout-unfit! Ha tuna!

 

fit... .9 .-.firfi4q!7§.n.d‘

.“l‘: .1

 

 

62.

. ' vib'l. I'll-'1'] ‘ 44‘ J \1‘\

 

 

.onua noHononwou nag: confine: n4

 

$04.. I ”no. a»
N5. an

«o qoflpoppaflunfi hug Amanda” .u» coon» ago aufipnna .aa unamdm
83m .34 4333
8 8 mm 3 3 mm
_ a fi w '1 u
0
O
O
O O
o .r.‘ .
.\‘\\.\ O O
\\

CA

«N

«n

 

.mv

 

m 11n- an"

maul-nun"? .. "111':an 7‘! m1

63.

m.o + Knoénh
Am. «a

 

~ .

.onua aoaunouwon mags

.3033 Mo 53.13252" .: 8032333 5533 .ON chum;

.Sofioonofl . nozufidufl 553:

o." m 0 ¢ m
¢ 4 q

d
“H

 

«a

ca

om

vN

moq/«qoux - Antquuoa

: .Il. I'll J‘l'llallilllllll El. it;

‘ Lliidiia Cally .. ,1]. Ifi
.. M
.

 

N
i.'

64.

non +iod "M
Hm. “H

S

 

kifl‘n’uul‘n. Pin

.33.. acammonmon A3- :333 £54 3.0 an 323
anon 9:8qu .up 3033 .3 «838335 553: .3 Paw;

uaoiuoflfl . n2 £8385 553:

NH OH m 0 # N O
. _ m 4 . fl

 

 

not-no; my 90-0 an ooudg 0105 moon;

 

.09: nodunopwou :0? noise» 254 co.o an 32:.
upon £30qu .n» 3025. no 33:33”: 3.55: .mm 35mg

 

a Sofiaofifl .. 33823.: 53a;
5 3 «a 3 m m .v a o
s- A .b F g; E- Eliifizyi.» :. «ELK. : q A _
m.e +HoooduH 01 ¢
8. up
.0.
O . .II. 0
.
.n
1 3
\X I ca
\\ u on
\\
\\§\
0 .\
\

 

noun”, cum mm 1: ends magnum“;

 

: .lul lit-HI: .lfllvlll‘la‘ {iii-I. \‘lll .I... i , ‘VIIIT. »

66.

 

«.a+No¢.m
bk.

¢H

.1?!..:f&11-:1 . . .4 :t

M

II II
II

 

 

.onaa aofiauothQ

n33 noduno» 234 99.0 no 3on-

 

ohon «coupon .2. 3033 Ho dogmuaduna 553: .nm Paw;
kaoQuonouH .. dogged“: .535:
m« on m o e 0
fi‘ .-4r, . 1] _

f

o

O

O
. m

C

\n

O O
x \ 1 «A

\ .
\

I O

\x u on
I..\\\

O I.

8
O
\\..
w J

 

Cm

 

nouns; my cc'o at ”oocds‘oma mowed

 

’. ... ll, 1., Qri . .. , .I\ .

II\

.3: nouuuoamou a»? noamaop 254 004 an 33..
anon 33qu .u» «do-nan no noganuadna .353: .fiw 93mg

 

 

 

 

 

M nsoflaonoun I 3393.323 .553:
«A ma oa m o a. m o
-...!-IIIII-----.._... . u . _ q . 4
C
«nod. .38?» n» .-
3. u . . I a.
o \\u\
. \ u
. a
\ o
\ u
\ 3
.\ . .- m m.
\ u
\\\\ “U
\ O a
\ O
\\ O I .
NH 3
\ w.
\\ o m
\ v.
\ m
\ a
...\\x 0H M
\x

. m

.. om

\
\\
.\\
«m
\ .

 

69.

 

rnul'.lilllll If!" I 44114- .or ‘4 I

.SSH acaouonmon A»: noaooop
354 no.0 no 3on anon 33.39 .3. done; no handgun—pom .3 933%

noon\oonooH I Eadpooaom
vH NH 0H m o a.

— a 4 1 d

a

045%. u.»
8. an

«N

 

 

«A

on

ow

fin

not-no; may co°o an acids 010; among

'70.

 

. O-

.on: noaooouwon a»: flange» «and 3.0
no coonn anon uncouon .3 3253 no hazanooauon .nm 8sz

usofioonona I manage canon
0:... 0;. 01.0 mun on“ 04 m. 0

L

n.n +H3...A "N
3. "an

 

O\I|Ilu\! . 1 OH
\¢I\v-

ma

not-n.1, can you) n oondg 9105 31100195

 

 

.
4
n
n. 1.2.]: I

VLF»

.onna nanooonmon nan. cannon» aged 00.0

 

 

 

no coono anon anaonon .m> Anoansu no npnannoosnon .mm onownn
In nnOA\oononH I nonannooanom
7 9m 0;. 0.... m.» «.m Item I m. o
4 n .1 n .._ a H
O
0 0
13x34 In \I. I
am. “k . \III.\\|\.II\|I . O O m
.\I\\.v.\‘l.
.II\\I... O
IIIRIIXII a
a \.s., - I- a
I\K. Ion
\
I 3
Ian
I 0...
I 0*

 

 

corona; aux! 90-0 3a acads axed guoaied

 

 

 

'72.

n.0+¢®.d

I n?
I I-Il‘t

.anna nonaaonman nun: nonooap
«894 nn.0 pa aoanu anon anaonan .a> anoansa no hunanoaaanan

anon\aanunn I nanannaaanan
«.m

‘I’a. .P

. am 8&3

 

 

0H

m»

0*

we.

notaun; amwy cg°o an aands aaoa zuaazad

All .u'lll- .II'IIIIIII‘! ‘llilalllbk1.

 

’1.

Fl

14’ ’1. a V.

.3: qofimmohmou :3:
.3233 no 53332509 .3. dogged?“ b5 Hogan...” 23 23mg

.Sonxmonofl .. qofififiafl ES 4325

IV.‘ ‘ l C,

'74.

«in I Nomi
am.

¢m

ow
_

0d
a

Na
4

 

(Q
,4

0."

ON

 

.moq/eoqouI - Kunqa mod

 

 

'75.

 

li’.’ ' tll .Iun‘ ¢l .

H. I Man.
8..

w

 

.33 nofimuohmon 4::
.3033 .3 3335.053 .a> nagging new 13»qu

Sofluofifl - 833333 no.5 3323..
«m om .. 3 «a

 

.llrt‘ -;l;v i;‘!-01‘|av.l ll.‘ I"? 1 $ ’0 alr‘lvvl.’ ‘jilc‘l;i‘ib:éJ‘.}IQ-‘lia’tu.uiu

.mn oasmvm

m

 

 

._I l I‘l.r‘d."l'lf‘0|$. 00-le

        

-9\.-J a... b' ”- ms‘om-l1.‘_w --

 

0....

NH

.moq/coqaux - Annqa mod

76.

BASIC FIELD AND MBOFJ‘xTOitY DATA

 

_-—-—-— ‘W ——~—- ——

_§oil Type
Berrien Granby Hillsdale Miami
Loamy Loamy Sandy Sandy

 

 

 

___ Sand ‘_ Sand Loamy Loam
Site Number 1 2 3 h
Sample Number 1 6 ll 18
Horizon Ap Ap Ap Ap
Initial Air Space, :5 .. .. .. -
Infiltration
Initial Dry 2h.1 11.3 18.6 u.s
Initial Wet 13.2 6.6 23.5 3.3
Minimum Wet 13.2 5.0 13.2, 1.1
Permeability 13.h 6.9 3.h 2.8
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.3 1.1 1.3 l.b
Total Pore Space, % Sh S2 h8 h2
Percent Pores Drained at
0.01 Atms. h l h 6
0.03 Atms. 11 6 8 10
0.01; Atms. 13 9 10 11
0.06 Atms. 20 1h 13 1h
0.33 Atms. 27 20 17 19
1.00 Atms. 30 22 21 22
Sample Number 2 8 13 21
Initial Air Space, 5% - - .. ..
Infiltration
Initial Dry - _ - -
Initial Wet - - - -
Minimum wet - - - _
Permeability - - - -
Volume Weight (gms/cc) - - .. -
Total Pore Space, 1 - - - -
Per Cent Pores Drained at
0.01 Atms. - - III «-
0.03 Atms. - _ - _
0.0h Atms. — - - _
0.06 Atms. - - _ -
0.33 Atms. — - - _
10m Amso -' ‘- - .-
Lowest Permeability of Profile .92 2.10 .13 .1h

 

Rota: Infiltration and permeability values are given in inches
per hour.

 

'77.

BASIC FIEID AND LABORATORY DATA

 

 

 

 

L. Wang

‘nr‘b 1.5.;-

Soil Type
—§rookston Sims Nappanee Hoytville
Sandy Clay‘ Silt Clay

A ‘Qoam Loam Loam Loam
Site Number 5 6 7 8
Sample Number 2h 30 35 LO
Horizon Ap Ap Ap Ap
Initial Air Space, 1 - 55 117 1111
Infiltration

Initial Dry 17.1 h5.8 1h.9 26.?

Initial Wet 17.9 27.0 5.5 20.1
Permeability h.0 15.1 20.1 27.6
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.h .9 1.1 .9
Total Pore Space, % 113 611 55 58
Per Cent Pores Drained at

0.01 Atms. 3 10 11 7

0.03 Atms. 6 17 15 13

0.0h Atms. 8 19 16 1h

0.06 Atms. 10 21 17 16

0.33 Atms. 15 23 17 17

1.00 Ath. 17 25 18 18
Horizon Bgl Blg Beg 62b
Sample Number 25 31 37 h2
Initial Air Space, % -- 2h 20 32
Infiltration

Initial Dry 10.6 7.5 2.7 6.h

Initial Wet 2.5 5.3 1.5 2.1

Minimum Net 2.1 1.2 .1 0.14
Permeability 2.2 2.0 3.1 1.7
Volume Weight, (gms/cc) 1.6 1.1; 1.5 1.14
Total Pore Space, % ‘ 36 h? hl ’45
Per Cent Pores Drained at

0.01 Ath. 2 6 h 3

0.03 Atms. 7 10 6 5

0.0h Atms. 8 ll 6 5

0.06 Atms. 11 13 6 6

0.33 Atms. 17 13 10 9

1.00 Atms. 18 1h 11' 10
Lowest Permeability of Profile .10 2.00 3.10 1.70

 

Note: Infiltration and permeability values are given in inches per
hour.

78.
BASIC FlELD.AND LABORATORY DATA

 

 

Soil Type

 

Fox Fox Warsaw Spinks
Sandy Sandy Silt Sandy
Loam Loam Loam Loam

 

Site number 9 10 ll 12
Sample Number h3 h8 5h 60
Horizon Ap Ap Ap Ap
Initial Air Space, % 15 20 22 25
Infiltration
Initial Dry 11.11 6.1 8.1 20.0
Initial Wet 3.9 hit 6.5 19.8
Minimum Wet 1.h 1.7 2.8 11.3
Permeability 1.5 l.h 2.9 7.5
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.6 1.5 1.2 1.5
Total Pore Space, % 33 37 149 39
Per Cent Pores Drained at
0.01 Atms. 1 h 5 2
0.03 Atms. h 7 9 6
0.0h Atms. 7 7 11 9
0.06 Atms. 10 9 13 20
0.33 Atms. 15 10 11 29
1.00 Atms. 17 10 11 29
Horizon . B3 82 B]. B].
Sample Number h6 50 - -
Initial Air Space, % 27 22 - -
Infiltration
Initial Dry h.6 6.3 - ‘
Initial wet 2.1 3.1 - -
Minimum‘Wet 1.0 1.3 - -
Permeability h.0 2.0 - -
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.5 1.6 - -
Total Pore Space, % 35 37 - -
Per Cent Pores Drained at
0.01 Atms. 3 h - -
0.03 Ath. ll 7 .. _
0.0h Atms. 12 8 - -
0.06 Atms. 1h 9 - -
0.33 Atms. 23 9 - -
1.00 Atms. 2h 10 - -
Lowest Permeability of Profile .78 .67 .hh 5.00

 

 

Note: Infiltration and permeability values are given in inches per
hour.

 

 

“
n
, Fixbiil .

rt! PF- .

 

BASIC FIELD AND LABORATORI DATA '79-

 

 

 

 

Soil Type
Berrien 'Warsaw Fox Conover
Sandy Silt Sandy Silt
Loam Loam Loam Loam

Site Number 13 1h 15 16
Sample Number 6h 68 73 82
Horizon Ap Ap Ap Ap
Initial Air Space, % 3h lb 18 18
Infiltration

Initial Dry 11.8 11.14 15.14 11.5

Initial Net 7.6 3.9 12.3 7.5

Minimum Wet 6.1 1.7 5.3 1.7
Permeability 9.7 1.0 3.8 h.3
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.h 1.5 l.h 1.3
Total Pore Space, % hO 39 h0 h7
Per Cent Pores Drained at

0.01 Atms. h 3 6 6

0.03 Ath. 8 h 11 8

0.0h Atms. 10 5 12 9

0.06 Atms. 12 6 1h 10

0.33 Atms. 17 9 16 1h

1.00 Ath. 19 11 17 16
Horizon —— 822 B2 32g
Sample Number -- 7O 76 85
Initial Air Space, % - 17 11 23
Infiltration

Initial Dry .— 10.6 7.2 3.3

Initial Wet -- S .5 3.6 2.3

Minimum Wet - 1.9 1.0 0.2
Permeability' - .9 1.2 0.8
Volume Weight (gms/cc) - 1.6 1.7 1.5
Total Pore Space, % - 32 37 hl
Per Cent Pores Drained at

0.01 Atms. - 00 3 h

0.03 Atms. - 2 6 6

0.011 Atms. -- 6 6 7

0.06 Atms. - 8 7 9

0.33 Atms. - 10 ll 15

1.00 Atms. -— 11 12 17
ILowest Permeability of Profile h.00 .76 1.00 .12

 

 

Note: Infiltration and permeability values are given in inches per
hour.

BASIC FIELD AND LABORATORY DATA 80-

W

 

 

___ Soil Type
Miami Newton Saugatuck Conover
Silt Loamy Loamy Silt
Loam Sand Sand Loam
Site Number 17 18 19 20
Sample Number 87 9h 99 10h
Horizon Ap Ap Ap Ap
Initial Air Space, % 20 27 38 18
Infiltration
Initial Dry 111.1 8.1: 28.2 1h.5
Initial Net 5.8 h.6 23.1 14.9
Minimum Net 2.1 2.h 10.h 2.2
Permeability 1 .7 h .2 8 .1; 1 .6
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.5 l.h 1.3 l.h
Total Pore Space, % 10 hh L? h}
Per Cent Pores Drained at
0.01 Atms. h 1 2 h
0.03 Atms. h h 7 5
0.0b Atms. 5 l2 l7 6
0.06 Atms. 6 15 20 7
0.33 Atms. 8 22 33 12
1.00 Atms. 10 26 36 15
Sample Number 90 - 100 106
Initial Air Space, % 22 - - 11
Infiltration
Initial Wet 2.0 - 19.2 2.5
Minimum Wet 0.2 - 8.2 0.3
Permeability 0.3 - 10.8 0.5
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.6 - 1.2 1.6
Total Pore Space, % 38 - N9 39
Per Cent Pores Drained at
0033 Ame. 6 " 28 11
1400 Atms. 9 - 31 1h
Lowest Permeability of Profile 12 66 7.50 .18

 

INote: Infiltration and permeability values are given in inches per
hour. ‘

81.

BASIC FIEID AND LABORATOHR DATA

 

Soil Type

 

Granby Berrien Hillsdale Ubly
Sandy Loamy' Sandy Silt

 

Loam Sand Loam Loam
Site Number 21 22 23 2h
Sample Number 109 11h 121 127
Horizon Ap Ap Ap Ap
Initial Air Space, % 39 27 27 32
Infiltration
Initial Dry 20.1 15.2 10 3 h.l
Initial Net 13 .3 13 .6 8 h 14.8
Minimum Wet 9.9 6.0 h 0 1.6
Permeability 10.7 h.l 1 8 1.0
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.5
Total Pore Space, % 52 39 39 DD
Per Cent Pores Drained at :
0.01 Atms. 8 l 5 h
0.03 Atms. 16 3 9 5
0.01. Atms. 19 6 10 6
0.06 Atms. 18 8 11 8
0.33 Ath. 27 22 16 11
1.00 Atms. 30 25 18 13
Horizon ' BE B2 B21 82
Sample Number 11 - 121 128
. Initial Air Space, % 20 - 13 19
Infiltration
Initial Dry 5.9 - 3.5 11.2
Initial wet 5.2 - 2.3 2.5
Minimum Wet 3.6 - 0.2 0.3
Permeability 0.5 - 0.1 0.3
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.7 - 1.8 1.7
Total Pere Space, % 30 - 31 35
Per Cent Pores Drained at
0.01 Atms. h - 1 l
0.03 Atms. 6 - 2 h
0.01. Atms. 10 - 3 6
0.33 Atms. 20 - 5 7
1.00 Atms. 20 g - 7 9
.Lowest Permeability of Profile .51 2.80 .06 .31

'1

O '7 i-J n—ei‘J'n-v‘zsn‘
.

 

Note: Infiltration and permeability values are given in inches per
hour.

BASIC FIELD AND LABOEG‘iTOh’Y DATA

WJ'32‘33'2—‘33—3‘3-‘3‘S‘33‘r m

Soil Type

 

A!

Kalkaska Mancelona
Loamy Loamy

 

_ _- . -_,_____§aad_i Sand w
Site Number 25 27
Sample Number 130 1&1
Horizon Ap AP
Initial Air Space, % 28 28
Infiltration

Initial Dry 11 .1. 19.5
Initial Wet 8.1; 5.8
Minimum Wet 5.9 3 .5
Permeability 6.7 8.9
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.5 1.5
Total Pore Space, % D2 bl
Per Cent Pores Drained at
0.01 Atms. l h
0.03 Atms. 6 15
0.0h Atms. 1h 21
0.06 Atms. 22 2h
0.33 Atms. 29 29
1.03 Atms. 7 31 30
Horizon ‘ - -
Sample Number - 9
Initial Pore Space, 2 - -
Infiltration
Initial.Dry' - -
Initial Wet - -
Minimumeet _ -
Permeability - ..
Volume Weight (gms/cc) - _ -
Total Pore Space, % - ’
Per Cent Pores Drained at ‘
0.01 Atms. - -
0.03 Atho '- -
0.0h Atms. _ -
0.06 Atms. — -
0.33 Atms. - -
1.00 Atms. — -
Lowest Permeability of Profile 8.00 8.90

1‘“th ~‘ns ..-J—n_4. '
I.
a "
.
. .
,I r
.

 

Note: Infiltration and penmeability values are
given in inches per hour.

 

   

flit» .litx XXL-PVJ‘W. l 13.71

   

"I71811111111111ITS