2010
DOI: 10.1002/hyp.7647
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Antecedent soil moisture conditions of different soil types in South‐western Ontario, Canada

Abstract: Abstract:Soil moisture conditions prior to input design storms need to be known in the planning and design of urban stormwater control facilities using the design storm approach. Limited information is available on these soil moisture conditions which are commonly referred to as the antecedent soil moisture conditions. In this study, a deterministic continuous simulation model was used to simulate antecedent soil moisture conditions under south-western Ontario, Canada, climate conditions. A wide range of diffe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
(53 reference statements)
0
15
1
Order By: Relevance
“…As reported by others (Lee et al, ; Pitt, Chen, Clark, Swenson, & Ong, ), the soil texture may not characterize well the actual infiltration in swales because of variations in individual textural classes and spatial variability of soil characteristics within the studied facilities. In our study, K s estimated from the soil texture were about twice as large as those estimated from swale hydrographs in Swale 1, but smaller (by a factor of 0.6) in Swale 2, when compared with averages of the corresponding soil texture class (Nishat et al, ). Such discrepancies can be explained by the presence of thawing–freezing cycles (contributing to enhanced infiltration), macropores resulting from biological activity, or maintenance, as also suggested by other authors (Ahmed et al, ; García‐Serrana, Gulliver, & Nieber, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 56%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As reported by others (Lee et al, ; Pitt, Chen, Clark, Swenson, & Ong, ), the soil texture may not characterize well the actual infiltration in swales because of variations in individual textural classes and spatial variability of soil characteristics within the studied facilities. In our study, K s estimated from the soil texture were about twice as large as those estimated from swale hydrographs in Swale 1, but smaller (by a factor of 0.6) in Swale 2, when compared with averages of the corresponding soil texture class (Nishat et al, ). Such discrepancies can be explained by the presence of thawing–freezing cycles (contributing to enhanced infiltration), macropores resulting from biological activity, or maintenance, as also suggested by other authors (Ahmed et al, ; García‐Serrana, Gulliver, & Nieber, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…Depending on the relative magnitude of the total inflow and hydrologic abstractions, there may be no outflow from the swale (i.e., the inflow fully infiltrates), or there is an outflow in the form of saturation excess flow (Dunne & Leopold, ). Besides rainfall characteristics, the swale hydrology is affected by the channel geometry, vegetation, and depressions (or check dams; Davis et al, ); by the saturated hydraulic conductivity K s of swale soils (Ahmed, Gulliver, & Nieber, ); and by the antecedent wetness (Nishat, Guo, & Baetz, ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These results indicate that each study area has a spatial heterogeneity of land surface characteristics. The amount of soil moisture is influenced by differences in the infiltration capacity according to the surface soil properties and land cover [43,44]. Chaney et al [45] noted that the topography, land cover, and soil properties are the main drivers of spatial heterogeneity of soil moisture, and soil moisture variability is attributed to the complex interactions between the drivers of heterogeneity.…”
Section: Validation Of Remotely Sensed Soil Moisturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The optimal T value was determined for a T 1 to 150 days, and optimal T value for sites YP, HS, AD, CJ, and IS was estimated as 45, 64, 59, 100, and 59 days, respectively; the optimal T value for site CW was estimated as three days. According to previous studies [10,44,47], the optimal T value ranges from 30 to 90 days. In Figure 3, T was set to range from 1 to 60 days because it is difficult to explain that remotely sensed soil moisture before two months (60 days) can affect to the infiltration of the next rainfall events.…”
Section: Proxy Variables Of Iwcmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…() performed some simplified numerical and theoretical experiments to clarify the relationship between the Q p return periods obtained by the two methods, while Nishat et al . () investigated the role of the antecedent soil moisture condition in the event‐based approach. To evaluate the performance of five design hyetographs, Alfieri et al .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%