Wind Erosion in Western Queensland Australia
Modelling Land Susceptibility to Wind Erosion in Western ... - Ninti One Modelling Land Susceptibility to Wind Erosion in Western ... - Ninti One
Chapter 3 – Modelling Land Erodibility ReviewInput variables for TEAM include wind speed, relative humidity, soil particle sizedistribution, clay content, residue and vegetative cover, soil aggregate cover, field length, andwindbreak height and porosity. The threshold friction velocity is calculated for the averageparticle size d (not including the clay fraction) and surface moisture conditions of the fieldundergoing simulation. This computation is based on wind tunnel research by Gregory andDarwish (1990), Darwish (1991), Gregory (1991) and Puri et al. (1925). The static thresholdis computed by:0.5 0.0045 1.2 0.1W/ W 0.11821.2d1+0.01W+ + e ( W W)2c Wu*t= (3.9) d dwhere d is the diameter of the average soil particle size not including clay, W is the watercontent of the soil in percentage weight, W W is the wilting point, and W C is the percentage ofwater on the surface needed to fill inter-particle spaces. The moisture content factor accountsfor the change that occurs in u *t once water content is above a threshold (described in Chapter2, Section 2.2.5). The water content is based on atmospheric humidity (%). W c is thethreshold water content at which an increase in u *t is initiated. If W is less than W c set Wequal to W c so the last term does not apply (Singh et al., 1999).The dynamic threshold friction velocity model accounts for the effects of soil surfacecondition, vegetation cover, and wind gustiness (Gregory et al., 2004). The dynamicthreshold is computed by first adjusting u *t to compensate for wind gustiness:u /* d= 0 .8u*tGf(3.10)where G f is a gust factor. The effects of vegetation cover (S) are applied to determine themaximum transport rate M, which is also a function of soil particle diameter at differentstages of the particle distribution (D 50 , D 75 , D g ), B d an empirical coefficient, and the dynamicthreshold and u * :2 1 D D75 0.08 502 2M = 0.004B1 125d( Su* u*d) u *u +(3.11)* dDRD R 78
Chapter 3 – Modelling Land Erodibility Reviewwhere S is a function of the fraction of residue or aggregate cover, biomass cover, and theheight of the plant canopy, residue, aggregates and other random soil roughness elements.TEAM uses a factor to adjust for field length effects on wind erosion. The field length factorwas developed by Gregory (1984) and built upon a relationship established by Chepil (1957)for field length effects on soil movement. The length factor accommodates abrasionprocesses in the calculation of the sediment transport rate from eroding fields, and issupplemented by an empirical abrasion factor that considers the field length, wind shearvelocity, and detachment rates of aggregated/crusted and loose soils. Two factors are used toaccount for the erodibility of soils in the solid (crusted) and loose conditions (Wilson, 1994).The erodibility of a crusted soil surface is computed by:bsE = fs( )(3.12)where E is the solid state erodibility (kgJ -1 ), ρ bs is the soil bulk density (kgm -3 ), τ s is the soilshear strength (Nm -2 ), and f(Θ) is a function of soil shear angle (dimensionless). For a loosesoil state the erodibility is computed by:El= N(3.13)bs2fu*twhere E l is the erodibility of a loose soil (kgJ -1 ), N is a calibration coefficient, ρ f is the airfluid density (1.23 kgm -3 ), and u *t is the threshold friction velocity (ms -1 ). The detachmentratio used to compute the field length factor is effectively a ratio of the solid and loose statesoil erodibilities.Testing TEAM wind erosion simulations against measurements of threshold friction velocityand sediment transport rates indicates that model performance is comparable with that of theWEPS and RWEQ models (Gregory and Darwish, 2001; Gregory et al., 2004). The modelwas found to perform well in comparison to measured erosion rates in bare and vegetatedsettings in both agricultural and industrial environments.79
- Page 52 and 53: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 54 and 55: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 56 and 57: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 58 and 59: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 60 and 61: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 62 and 63: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 64 and 65: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 66 and 67: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 68 and 69: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 70 and 71: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 72 and 73: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 74 and 75: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 76 and 77: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 78 and 79: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 80 and 81: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 82 and 83: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 84 and 85: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 86 and 87: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 88 and 89: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 90 and 91: Chapter 2 - Land Erodibility Contro
- Page 93 and 94: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 95 and 96: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 97 and 98: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 99 and 100: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 101: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 105 and 106: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 107 and 108: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 109 and 110: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 111 and 112: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 113 and 114: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 115 and 116: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 117 and 118: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 119 and 120: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 121: Chapter 3 - Modelling Land Erodibil
- Page 124 and 125: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 126 and 127: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 128 and 129: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 130 and 131: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 132 and 133: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 134 and 135: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 136 and 137: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 138 and 139: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 140 and 141: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 142 and 143: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 144 and 145: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 146 and 147: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 148 and 149: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
- Page 150 and 151: Chapter 4 -Modelling Soil Erodibili
Chapter 3 – Modell<strong>in</strong>g Land Erodibility ReviewInput variables for TEAM <strong>in</strong>clude w<strong>in</strong>d speed, relative humidity, soil particle sizedistribution, clay content, residue and vegetative cover, soil aggregate cover, field length, andw<strong>in</strong>dbreak height and porosity. The threshold friction velocity is calculated for the averageparticle size d (not <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g the clay fraction) and surface moisture conditions of the fieldundergo<strong>in</strong>g simulation. This computation is based on w<strong>in</strong>d tunnel research by Gregory andDarwish (1990), Darwish (1991), Gregory (1991) and Puri et al. (1925). The static thresholdis computed by:0.5 0.0045 1.2 0.1W/ W 0.11821.2d1+0.01W+ + e ( W W)2c Wu*t= (3.9) d dwhere d is the diameter of the average soil particle size not <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g clay, W is the watercontent of the soil <strong>in</strong> percentage weight, W W is the wilt<strong>in</strong>g po<strong>in</strong>t, and W C is the percentage ofwater on the surface needed to fill <strong>in</strong>ter-particle spaces. The moisture content factor accountsfor the change that occurs <strong>in</strong> u *t once water content is above a threshold (described <strong>in</strong> Chapter2, Section 2.2.5). The water content is based on atmospheric humidity (%). W c is thethreshold water content at which an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> u *t is <strong>in</strong>itiated. If W is less than W c set Wequal to W c so the last term does not apply (S<strong>in</strong>gh et al., 1999).The dynamic threshold friction velocity model accounts for the effects of soil surfacecondition, vegetation cover, and w<strong>in</strong>d gust<strong>in</strong>ess (Gregory et al., 2004). The dynamicthreshold is computed by first adjust<strong>in</strong>g u *t to compensate for w<strong>in</strong>d gust<strong>in</strong>ess:u /* d= 0 .8u*tGf(3.10)where G f is a gust factor. The effects of vegetation cover (S) are applied to determ<strong>in</strong>e themaximum transport rate M, which is also a function of soil particle diameter at differentstages of the particle distribution (D 50 , D 75 , D g ), B d an empirical coefficient, and the dynamicthreshold and u * :2 1 D D75 0.08 502 2M = 0.004B1 125d( Su* u*d) u *u +(3.11)* dDRD R 78