Soil-specific calibration of capacitance sensors considering clay content and bulk density
Nargish Parvin A C and Aurore Degré B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Université de Liège, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, Department of Biosystem Engineering, TERRA Research Center, AIL, Passage des Déportés 2, 5030, Gembloux, Belgium.
B Université de Liège, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, Department of Biosystem Engineering, Passage des Déportés 2, 5030, Gembloux, Belgium.
C Corresponding author. Email: nargish.parvin@ulg.ac.be
Soil Research 54(1) 111-119 https://doi.org/10.1071/SR15036
Submitted: 2 February 2015 Accepted: 2 June 2015 Published: 20 January 2016
Abstract
Soil hydrology research requires the accurate measurement of soil water content. Recently, less expensive capacitance sensors (CS) have become popular for the measurement of soil moisture across soil profiles, but these sensors need to be calibrated for precise results. The purpose of the present study was to determine the effect of clay content and bulk density (ρb) on the calibration of CS. Two different CS (10HS and 5TM) were considered for the study. Clay content and ρb of the soils were determined from two different sites and from three different depths (0–5, 25–30 and 50–60 cm) of an experimental field in Gembloux, Belgium. Custom calibration (CC) equations were developed using packed soil columns following the same ρb at sequential volumetric water content (θ) levels. The factory-supplied calibration (FSC) showed an overestimation of θ (0.04–0.07 m3 m–3) with the 10HS sensor, and an underestimation of θ (0.06–0.077 m3 m–3) with the 5TM sensor for the entire calibration range. The variance in raw sensor outputs for different ρb and clay content of soil depths was not highly significant because the soil had limited range of variability in ρb and clay content. However, the CC is recommended in parallel with FSC for the precise measurement of soil moisture with CS.
Additional keywords: soil moisture, soil texture.
References
Bandaranayake WM, Parsons LR, Borhan MS, Holeton JD (2007) Performance of a capacitance-type soil water probe in a well-drained sandy soil. Soil Science Society of America Journal 71, 993–1002.| Performance of a capacitance-type soil water probe in a well-drained sandy soil.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXlvFGgur0%3D&md5=94678674b6e2255a4ce119909dd0ce38CAS |
Baumhardt RL, Lascano RJ, Evett SR (2000) Soil material, temperature, and salinity effects on calibration of multisensor capacitance probes. Soil Science Society of America Journal 64, 1940–1946.
| Soil material, temperature, and salinity effects on calibration of multisensor capacitance probes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXhsFSmtw%3D%3D&md5=14797549045dc8608ea1f73e22b8d8a3CAS |
Bell JP, Dean TJ, Hodnett MG (1987) Soil moisture measurement by an improved capacitance technique, Part II. Field techniques, evaluation and calibration. Journal of Hydrology 93, 79–90.
| Soil moisture measurement by an improved capacitance technique, Part II. Field techniques, evaluation and calibration.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaL1cXhsFCjtQ%3D%3D&md5=c1746bc93483f85b0eb3092b7c327a8dCAS |
Brahy V, Titeux H, Iserentant A, Delvaux B (2000) Surface podzolization in cambisols under deciduous forest in the Belgian loess belt. European Journal of Soil Science 51, 15–26.
| Surface podzolization in cambisols under deciduous forest in the Belgian loess belt.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3cXisVKmsLY%3D&md5=5c096ca3205df09d6aa2c1a9b3a17d3dCAS |
Brocca L, Melone F, Moramarco T, Morbidelli R (2010) Spatial–temporal variability of soil moisture and its estimation across scales. Water Resources Research 46, W02516
| Spatial–temporal variability of soil moisture and its estimation across scales.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Campbell CS (2002) Response of the ECH2O soil moisture probe to variation in water content, soil type, and solution electrical conductivity. Available at: www.loggershop.co.uk/PDF/Madgetech/Application%20Notes/ec-probe-analysis.pdf (accessed 24 November 2014).
Campbell CS, Campbell GS, Cobos DR, Bissey LL (2009) Calibration and evaluation of an improved low cost soil moisture sensor. Available at: www.decagondevices.eu/assets/Uploads/Calibration-and-Evaluation-of-an-Improved-Low-Cost-Soil-Moisture-Sensor.pdf (accessed 24 November 2014).
Cobos DR, Chambers C (2010) Calibrating ECH2O soil moisture sensors, application note. Available at: www.decagon.com/assets/Uploads/13393-04-CalibratingECH2OSoilMoistureProbes.pdf (accessed 29 November 2014).
Czarnomski NM, Moore GW, Pypker TG, Licata J, Bond BJ (2005) Precision and accuracy of three alternative instruments for measuring soil water content in two forest soils of the Pacific Northwest. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 35, 1867–1876.
| Precision and accuracy of three alternative instruments for measuring soil water content in two forest soils of the Pacific Northwest.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dean TJ, Bell JP, Baty AJB (1987) Soil moisture measurement by an improved capacitance technique, Part I. Sensor design and performance. Journal of Hydrology 93, 67–78.
| Soil moisture measurement by an improved capacitance technique, Part I. Sensor design and performance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaL1cXhsFehtQ%3D%3D&md5=b59c0166b3393d87afdbc1be68b017d9CAS |
Decagon Devices Inc. (2014a) 10HS user manual. Available at: http://manuals.decagon.com/Manuals/13508_10HS_Web.pdf (accessed 25 November 2014).
Decagon Devices Inc. (2014b) 5TM user manual. Available at: http://manuals.decagon.com/Manuals/13441_5TM_Web.pdf (accessed 25 November 2014).
Foley JL, Harris E (2007) Field calibration of ThetaProbe (ML2x) and ECHO Probe (EC-20) soil water sensors in a black vertosol. Australian Journal of Soil Research 45, 233–236.
| Field calibration of ThetaProbe (ML2x) and ECHO Probe (EC-20) soil water sensors in a black vertosol.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gabriel JL, Lizaso JI, Quemada M (2010) Laboratory versus field calibration of capacitance probes. Soil Science Society of America Journal 74, 593–601.
| Laboratory versus field calibration of capacitance probes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3cXjtFWrurk%3D&md5=a47fa3c997186ce649c427f7bafc6a3fCAS |
Gardner CMK, Dean TJ, Cooper JD (1998) Soil water content measurement with a high-frequency capacitance sensor. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 71, 395–403.
| Soil water content measurement with a high-frequency capacitance sensor.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hanson BR, Peters D (2000) Soil type affects accuracy of dielectric moisture sensors. California Agriculture 54, 43–47.
| Soil type affects accuracy of dielectric moisture sensors.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
IUSS Working Group WRB (2007) ‘World reference base for soil resources 2006, first update 2007.’ World Soil Resources Reports No. 103. (FAO: Rome) Available at: www.fao.org/ag/agl/agll/wrb/doc/wrb2007_corr.pdf.
Kelleners TJ, Soppe RWO, Ayars JE, Skaggs TH (2004) Calibration of capacitance probe sensors in a saline silty clay soil. Soil Science Society of America Journal 68, 770–778.
| Calibration of capacitance probe sensors in a saline silty clay soil.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2cXktV2gtLg%3D&md5=c5bca2c0bbb1b605a983f0bc3eef6600CAS |
Lane PNJ, Mackenzie DH (2001) Field and laboratory calibration and test of TDR and capacitance techniques for indirect measurement of soil water content. Australian Journal of Soil Research 39, 1371–1386.
| Field and laboratory calibration and test of TDR and capacitance techniques for indirect measurement of soil water content.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lukanu G, Savage MJ (2006) Calibration of a frequency-domain reflectometer for determining soil-water content in a clay loam soil. Water SA 32, 37
Mittelbach H, Lehner I, Seneviratne SI (2012) Comparison of four soil moisture sensor types under field conditions in Switzerland. Journal of Hydrology 430–431, 39–49.
| Comparison of four soil moisture sensor types under field conditions in Switzerland.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Morgan KT, Parsons LR, Wheaton TA (2001) Comparison of laboratory- and field-derived soil water retention curves for a fine sand soil using tensiometric, resistance and capacitance methods. Plant and Soil 234, 153–157.
| Comparison of laboratory- and field-derived soil water retention curves for a fine sand soil using tensiometric, resistance and capacitance methods.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXnsVemsLY%3D&md5=39baad936d1e2a0ddc66425ea32e9fdaCAS |
Olmstead LB, Alexander LT, Middleton HE (1930) ‘A pipette method of mechanical analysis of soils based on improved dispersion procedure.’ Technical Bulletin No. 170. (USDA: Washington, DC)
Paltineanu IC, Starr JL (1997) Real-time soil water dynamics using multisensor capacitance probes: laboratory calibration. Soil Science Society of America Journal 61, 1576
| Real-time soil water dynamics using multisensor capacitance probes: laboratory calibration.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaK2sXnvFWhsr0%3D&md5=e94eb7ae6c0d25fc0e234b03c84ea491CAS |
Parsons LR, Bandaranayake WM (2009) Performance of a new capacitance soil moisture probe in a sandy soil. Soil Science Society of America Journal 73, 1378–1385.
| Performance of a new capacitance soil moisture probe in a sandy soil.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXos1Ggsbc%3D&md5=c9d4cb3b05c37461d918d0e4074f1cb6CAS |
Perdok UD, Kroesbergen B, Hilhorst MA (1996) Influence of gravimetric water content and bulk density on the dielectric properties of soil. European Journal of Soil Science 47, 367–371.
| Influence of gravimetric water content and bulk density on the dielectric properties of soil.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Seyfried MS, Murdock MD (2001) Response of a new soil water sensor to variable soil, water content, and temperature. Soil Science Society of America Journal 65, 28
| Response of a new soil water sensor to variable soil, water content, and temperature.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXhvFSlt7g%3D&md5=38d7d7b2d0679623d7b304ec21fe79c5CAS |
Teuling AJ, Troch PA (2005) Improved understanding of soil moisture variability dynamics. Geophysical Research Letters 32, L05404
| Improved understanding of soil moisture variability dynamics.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Topp GC, Davis JL, Annan AP (1980) Electromagnetic determination of soil water content; measurements in coaxial transmission lines. Water Resources Research 16, 574–582.
| Electromagnetic determination of soil water content; measurements in coaxial transmission lines.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vaz CMP, Jones S, Meding M, Tuller M (2013) Evaluation of standard calibration functions for eight electromagnetic soil moisture sensors. Vadose Zone Journal 12, 2
| Evaluation of standard calibration functions for eight electromagnetic soil moisture sensors.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vereecken H, Kollet S, Simmer C (2010) Patterns in soil–vegetation–atmosphere systems; monitoring, modeling, and data assimilation. Vadose Zone Journal 9, 821–827.
| Patterns in soil–vegetation–atmosphere systems; monitoring, modeling, and data assimilation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wendroth O, Nambuthiri S, Walton RJ (2013) Accounting for soil spatial variability in soil water capacitance probe calibration. Vadose Zone Journal 12, 2
| Accounting for soil spatial variability in soil water capacitance probe calibration.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
