History
Conventional techniques for measuring in-situ infiltration include the use of a single or double ring infiltrometer. Single and double ring infiltrometer only measures flow under ponded (saturated) conditions, and when used in soil with distinct macropores, preferential flow will dominate the flow. (See: Poiseuille's law) This does not reflect infiltration under rainfall or sprinkler irrigation. Therefore many authors attempted to create a negative potential (tension) on the water flow. This is to exclude macropores in the flow process, hence only measuring the soil matrix flow.
Willard Gardner and Walter Gardner developed a negative head permeameter as early as 1939. Dixon (1975) developed a closed-top ring infiltrometer to quantify macropores. Water is applied to a closed-top system, which permits the imposition of negative head or pressure on the ponded water surface. Negative tension can be considered as simulating a positive soil air pressure, created by a negative air pressure above ponded surface water. A simplification was made by Topp and Zebchuk (1985). The limitation of this device is the infiltration has to be started by ponding the closed-top infiltrometer (applying a positive head), then adjusted to a negative pressure. Little research effort was continued in this area, instead attention has been given mainly to the sorptivity apparatus of Dirksen (1975) which used a ceramic plate as a base. Based on this design, Brent Clothier and Ian White (1981) developed the sorptivity tube which can provide a constant negative potential (tension) on the soil surface. However, the sorptivity tube had many shortcomings, hence modifications to the design led to the development of the disc permeameter by Perroux and White (1988) from CSIRO. In the US it is known as the tension infiltrometer.
For more on the development of the first permeameter as told by Walter Gardner, visit (http://www.decagon.com/ag_research/hydro/history.php)
Read more about this topic: Disc Permeameter
Famous quotes containing the word history:
“Philosophy of science without history of science is empty; history of science without philosophy of science is blind.”
—Imre Lakatos (1922–1974)
“Literary works cannot be taken over like factories, or literary forms of expression like industrial methods. Realist writing, of which history offers many widely varying examples, is likewise conditioned by the question of how, when and for what class it is made use of.”
—Bertolt Brecht (1898–1956)