Register free!
Search
 
     

Click for Weather
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 12-16-2013, 02:44 PM
Skipster Skipster is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
Yes and no. Generally speaking, infiltration rate is directly proportional to particle size.
No.

Infiltration rate is influenced by a lot of factors, but it is not directly proportional to particle size.

Learn what direct proportionality means and the factors that influence water movement in soils in the environment.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 12-16-2013, 05:12 PM
dKoester's Avatar
dKoester dKoester is offline
LawnSite Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: yummytown
Posts: 2,737
Don't forget Gravity. Its a constant downward pressure.
__________________
Wright stander
FS90R
Br600
89 Chevy Silverado 1500 4x4
5x10 Trailer
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-17-2013, 11:55 AM
Kiril Kiril is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: District 9 CA
Posts: 18,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
No.

Infiltration rate is influenced by a lot of factors, but it is not directly proportional to particle size.

Learn what direct proportionality means and the factors that influence water movement in soils in the environment.
Actually skip, for the sake of this "discussion" and generally speaking, it is. As particle size decreases, infiltration rate also decreases. This is generally speaking, and more importantly, conceptually speaking, directly proportional per linear trend, particularly when speaking of steady state infiltration rates.

Perhaps you need to learn what generally speaking means?

But then. since you feel it appropriate, why don't you demonstrate your understanding and grasp of soil water movement.
Please discuss soil hydraulic conductivity, unsaturated flow and saturated flow in soils (both vertically and laterally) and relate it mathematically using Darcy's law.

Also discuss Horton, Kostiakov and Philipís equations and demonstrate how they are used.

Please also include discussion on the how the following items (not all inclusive) impact hydraulic conductivity and soil infiltration rate.
  1. chemical characteristics of soil and irrigation water
  2. surface compaction, subsurface compaction, soil layering, bulk density and porosity
  3. particle & pore size, distribution, orientation and tortuosity
  4. slope, surface physical and chemical characteristics, surface vegetation (type and density), soil temperature
  5. hydraulic head and diffusivity, gravitational flow, capillary flow, matric potential, capillary fringe
  6. soil organic matter content and distribution through profile
If you are not prepared to discuss at least these items in detail, then you would be well advised to stick with the simple concepts you have a chance of understanding ..... like how, generally speaking soil infiltration rate is directly proportional to particle size (eg. generally speaking infiltration rate decreases with decreasing particle size).
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 12-17-2013, 12:09 PM
Skipster Skipster is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 677
If you understood Darcy's Law or any of the other equations you copied out of a book, you would know that 1) infiltration rate is dependent on pore size, NOT particle size (remember, you can have different pore sizes in two soils with the same particle sizes) and 2) infiltration rates at different pore sizes are always curved, NOT linear. Thus, generally speaking or not, infiltration does not necessarily vary directly with particle size.

If you're bent on holding everyone else to strict language standards, you must be held to the same.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 12-17-2013, 01:44 PM
Kiril Kiril is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: District 9 CA
Posts: 18,322
Hmmmmm, I see no discussion as usual skip, and a demonstration of your lack of knowledge .... thanks. Further as usual when you put your foot in your mouth, we find you putting words in my mouth.

I NEVER said anything about infiltration rate being "dependent" on anything .... now did I skip?

Using data from this site, plot of infiltration rates as a function of soil textures most likely to be seen in landscapes with linear fit .... since you obviously can't seem to understand what generally speaking and linear trend mean. Looks pretty close to 1:1 to me skip .... certain close enough for generally speaking.

Do I need to explain how soil texture is determined now skip? Wanna place any bets on if it is determined on particle size or pore size? Want me to post the definition for you?


How about you stick to the soft science of Agronomy .... heh skip?
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 12-17-2013, 01:51 PM
Kiril Kiril is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: District 9 CA
Posts: 18,322
Here you go skip, just for you, since you seem to be struggling here.

https://www.soils.org/publications/soils-glossary
soil texture The relative proportions of the various soil separates in a soil as described by the classes of soil texture shown in Fig. 1. The textural classes may be modified by the addition of suitable adjectives when rock fragments are present in substantial amounts; for example, "stony silt loam." (For other modifiers see also rock fragments.) The sand, loamy sand, and sandy loam are further subdivided on the basis of the proportions of the various sand separates present. The limits of the various classes and subclasses are as follows:

clay - Soil material that contains 40% or more clay, <45% sand, and <40% silt.
clay loam - Soil material that contains 27 to 40% clay and 20 to 45% sand.
loam - Soil material that contains 7 to 27% clay, 28 to 50% silt, and <52% sand.
loamy sand - Soil material that contains between 70 and 91% sand and the percentage of silt plus 1.5 times the percentage of clay is 15 or more; and the percentage of silt plus twice the percentage of clay is less than 30.
loamy coarse sand - Soil material that contains 25% or more very coarse and coarse sand, and <50% any other one grade of sand.
loamy sand - Soil material that contains 25% or more very coarse, coarse, and medium sand, <25% very coarse and coarse sand, and <50% fine or very fine sand.
loamy fine sand - Soil material that contains 50% or more fine sand (or) <25% very coarse, coarse, and medium sand and <50% very fine sand.
loamy very fine sand - Soil material that contains 50% or more very fine sand.
sand - Soil material that contains 85% or more of sand; percentage of silt, plus 1.5 times the percentage of clay, shall not exceed 15.
coarse sand - Soil material that contains 25% or more very coarse and coarse sand, and <50% any other one grade of sand.
sand - Soil material that contains 25% or more very coarse, coarse, and medium sand, <25% very coarse and coarse sand, and <50% fine or very fine sand.
fine sand - Soil material that contains 50% or more fine sand (or) <25% very coarse, coarse, and medium sand and <50% very fine sand.
very fine sand - Soil material that contains 50% or more very fine sand.
sandy clay - Soil material that contains 35% or more clay and 45% or more sand.
sandy clay loam - Soil material that contains 20 to 35% clay, <28% silt, and >45% sand.
sandy loam - Soil material that contains 7 to 20% clay, more than 52% sand, and the percentage of silt plus twice the percentage of clay is 30 or more; or less than 7% clay, less than 50% silt, and more than 43% sand.
coarse sandy 1oam - Soil material that contains 25% or more very coarse and coarse sand and <50% any other one grade of sand.
sandy loam - Soil material that contains 30% or more very coarse, coarse, and medium sand, but <25% very coarse and coarse sand, and <30% very fine or fine sand, or <15% very coarse, coarse, and medium sand and <30% either fine sand or very fine sand and 40% or less fine plus very fine sand.
fine sandy loam - Soil material that contains 30% or more fine sand and <30% very fine sand (or) between 15 and 30% very coarse, coarse, and medium sand, or >40% fine and very fine sand, at least half of which is fine sand, and <15% very coarse, coarse, and medium sand.
very fine sandy loam - Soil material that contains 30% or more very fine sand and <15% very coarse, coarse, and medium sand (or) >40% fine and very fine sand, more than half of which is very fine sand and <15% very coarse, coarse, and medium sand.
silt - Soil material that contains 80% or more silt and <12% clay.
silty clay - Soil material that contains 40% or more clay and 40% or more silt.
silty clay loam - Soil material that contains 27 to 40% clay and <20% sand.
silt loam - Soil material that contains 50% or more silt and 12 to 27% clay (or) 50 to 80% silt and <12% clay.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 12-17-2013, 02:16 PM
Skipster Skipster is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
I NEVER said anything about infiltration rate being "dependent" on anything .... now did I skip?

Yes, you did. When you wrote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
infiltration rate is directly proportional to particle size
you implicitly said that a change in infiltration rate is dependent on changes in particle size. Are you trying to tell us now that infiltration rate is not directly proportional to particle size?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
certain close enough for generally speaking.
I like how you use generally speaking to cover up for your lack of knowledge.

But, back to the task at hand:

Come now! You linked to a page and copy-and-pasted without reading it again, didn't you? Its OK. We all know.

If you actually read the article you linked, you would have known that those values were recommended infiltration rates on developed sites for the purpose of reducing as much stormwater runoff as possible. Be sure to read the cited reference documents. These values are recommendations for construction specs -- no more, no less.

If you're familiar with the USGA's Method for Putting Green Construction, you'll notice that it recommends infiltration rates of no less than 6 in/hr using the same soil composition that your link says should accept water at 1.63 in/hr. I've seen putting greens with the exact same particle size distribution accept infiltration at different rates. Infiltration across the same particle size distribution is not linear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
Do I need to explain how soil texture is determined now skip? Wanna place any bets on if it is determined on particle size or pore size? Want me to post the definition for you?

No thank you. You've made it very clear that this topic is beyond your understanding.

Do we need to place bets on your reading comprehension?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 12-17-2013, 02:18 PM
Skipster Skipster is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
Here you go skip, just for you, since you seem to be struggling here.

https://www.soils.org/publications/soils-glossary
And this all says what about infiltration?

You're struggling to understand the concept that water does not travel through solids in the soil.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 12-17-2013, 04:28 PM
Kiril Kiril is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: District 9 CA
Posts: 18,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
Yes, you did. When you wrote:


you implicitly said that a change in infiltration rate is dependent on changes in particle size. Are you trying to tell us now that infiltration rate is not directly proportional to particle size?
I didn't "imply" anything skip .... another example of you putting words in my mouth. I mean what I said, nothing more, nothing less.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
I like how you use generally speaking to cover up for your lack of knowledge.
I use "generally speaking" because most of the people who frequent this site do not have the background to understand this topic in detail .... including you.

I went on to list many factors that can influence soil water movement, all of which you have conveniently ignored. Funny how that is, heh skip? And who is struggling here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
Come now! You linked to a page and copy-and-pasted without reading it again, didn't you? Its OK. We all know.

If you actually read the article you linked, you would have known that those values were recommended infiltration rates on developed sites for the purpose of reducing as much stormwater runoff as possible. Be sure to read the cited reference documents. These values are recommendations for construction specs -- no more, no less.
Too funny. It's not an article, it is the Minnesota Stormwater Manual. Funny how you didn't know that, given your BS claim to have read it in less than 20 minutes.

Those infiltration rates are averages from the soil textures listed. Certainly you would know this if you had even a rudimentary understand of soil science.

Is that to say there won't be variation within those soil textures? Absolutely not! Never said there wouldn't be ..... hence again the use of generally speaking, and for the purpose of this forum and thread, my statement stands. Nothing you have said here shows otherwise.

So not only did you not read the manual, you don't understand the data. Clearly you have little to no understanding of this field of study otherwise you would know this. Here, let me help you pull your foot out of your mouth yet again.

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/...42p2_054224#88

Suppose you will now tell me the NRCS has got it wrong too .... heh skip?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
If you're familiar with the USGA's Method for Putting Green Construction, you'll notice that it recommends infiltration rates of no less than 6 in/hr using the same soil composition that your link says should accept water at 1.63 in/hr.
Interesting. Since when are USGA putting greens built using gravel? I think you mean USGA putting green sub-surface drainage requirements. Root zone mixtures are predominately sand per spec, not gravel. Interesting how you don't know this, and you dare speak of reading comprehension.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
I've seen putting greens with the exact same particle size distribution accept infiltration at different rates. Infiltration across the same particle size distribution is not linear.
Really, you have seen putting greens built with gravel? Further, who said anything about the same particle size distribution? I surely didn't .... I was speaking generally with respect to different soil textures and related particle sizes, not differences in infiltration rates of various putting greens. So we get more back peddling and attempts to redirect ..... as usual.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
Do we need to place bets on your reading comprehension?
Yup, I surely do skip, but you can be sure I won't be betting on yours ... you know, gravel based putting greens and all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
You're struggling to understand the concept that water does not travel through solids in the soil.
Amusing once again. Seems to me skip you are the one struggling here as you cannot see the relationship between particle size, pore size, and infiltration rate.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 12-17-2013, 06:08 PM
Skipster Skipster is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
I didn't "imply" anything skip .... another example of you putting words in my mouth. I mean what I said, nothing more, nothing less.
So now you're tryign to say that what you said wasn't what you said. You're trying hard to backpedal on this one, but you've been caught.

If you think that saying
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
infiltration rate is directly proportional to particle size
doesn't mean that infiltration rate depends on particle size, you don't understand what you wrote.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiril View Post
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/...42p2_054224#88

Suppose you will now tell me the NRCS has got it wrong too .... heh skip?
You don't read so good, do you? You're mistaking saturated hydraulic conductivity for infiltration. They are not the same. It's a rookie mistake -- all Intro Soils freshmen make the same mistake.

Understand, too, that they estimated Ksat for different bulk densities. NONE of those estimates show a direct linear relationship across different textural classes. They also differ within textural class across different bulk densities (which is what I was saying and you were telling my I was wrong).



On the putting greens, I just cited the wrong number, but that makes you look even worse! You're trying to tell me that sands can only accept water at 0.8 in/hr, but we know from research that sand putting greens (the SAME soil particles and sizes) accept greater than 6 in/hr for infiltration.

Your own link merely provides a construction minimum specification -- it even explains that it is not the only possible value.

**************************


Don't give up on your quest to learn soil physics. I know its not easy for everybody. Darcy's Law, Philip's Equation, Horton's equation -- none of them include soil texture or soil particle size in their formulae. (Don't forget that particle size distribution is the numerical way to express texture.)

I know you're struggling, but if you keep reading enough, you just might learn something about the wonderful world of soils.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:14 AM.

Page generated in 0.09401 seconds with 8 queries