MACRO (v5.2): Model Use, Calibration, and Validation

Jarvis, Nicholas; Larsbo, Mats

doi:10.13031/2013.42251

Cited by 72 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The 1D dual permeability model presented in this study has a similar structure to the MACRO model (Jarvis and Larsbo, 2012), but simplified some of its aspects. This was done to decrease the number of required parameters, and to allow a model inversion with as few input data as possible with the idea of larger scale application in mind.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this study we presented a simplified 1D dual permeability model whose structure is similar to the MACRO model (Jarvis and Larsbo, 2012). The model parameters were estimated from soil water content time series data in a novel inversion scheme.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The abstraction flux further increases with the matric saturation deficit (θ s − θ) and the effective saturation of the macropore domain, S ma , to account for an incompletely wetted boundary layer (Larsbo et al, 2005). With this reasoning the MACRO model uses the following term to calculate the abstraction flux (Jarvis and Larsbo, 2012):…”

Section: Domain Exchange Termmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The model development resulted in a dual permeability model similar to the MACRO model (Jarvis and Larsbo, 2012). We explore the usage of three alternative simple, i.e.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The presented model structure is similar to the MACRO model (Jarvis and Larsbo, 2012) in using the Richards equation for the matrix domain and a kinematic wave equation for the macropore domain. The largest differences are the use of a simplified domain exchange term, the application of different simple retention functions and an indirect simulation of water repellancy in the infiltration and domain exchange terms.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Modeling macropore seepage fluxes from soil water content time series by inversion of a dual permeability model

Valle

Potthast

Meyer

et al. 2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Dual permeability models are widely used to simulate water fluxes and solute transport in structured soils. However, so far obtaining necessary data for model calibration is a problem due to the large set of unconstrained parameters. Therefore, this study presents a simplified 1D dual permeability model whose structure is similar to the MACRO model together with a calibration scheme that allows constraining the parameters using time series of soil water content. The inversion scheme consists of four consecutive steps: First, the parameters of three different water retention functions were assessed using vertical 5 soil water content profiles assuming hydraulic equilibrium. Second, the soil sorptivity and diffusivity functions were estimated from Boltzmann-transformed soil water content data of a drying period. Third, the parameters governing macropore flow were determined using the most dynamic part of the soil water content time series during the first 12 h after a precipitation event.The model was calibrated using data of artificial, homogeneous and shallow soils from mesocosms. The resulting retention functions predicted similar values as pedotransfer functions apart from for very dry conditions. The predicted soil water content 10 time series were in good agreement with measurements at 5 and 12 cm soil depth. Predicted macropore seepage fluxes exhibited high uncertainty and differed between water retention functions, but average predictions were close to measurements for two of the three water retention functions.The study demonstrates the feasibility of calibrating a 1D dual permeability model with soil water content time series.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Domain Exchange Termmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The model development resulted in a dual permeability model similar to the MACRO model (Jarvis and Larsbo, 2012). We explore the usage of three alternative simple, i.e.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Modeling macropore seepage fluxes from soil water content time series by inversion of a dual permeability model

Valle

Potthast

Meyer

et al. 2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Preferential percolation quantified by large water content sensors with artifactual macroporous envelopes

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For many scientific and practical tasks, it is important to estimate the soil–water percolation fluxes. This paper builds on measurements with large horizontal time‐domain reflectometry water content sensors in a loamy Mollisol. The sensors were installed into pre‐drilled holes and the gaps between them, and the soil was filled with a slurry of local soil with water. This gave rise to envelopes around them that contained artificial macropores. The sensors reacted to intensive rains by a rapid increase of their readings, often above the native soil's porosity, followed by an almost equally rapid decrease. The paper explores the feasibility of quantifying the rapid percolation, based on these anomalous water content peaks, and demonstrates that this is possible in principle, if the processes are simulated by a suitable model. A two‐dimensional dual porosity non‐equilibrium (mobile‐immobile) model was tried. The envelope around the sensor was modelled as an annulus with higher porosity and hydraulic conductivity, which attracts preferential flow and amplifies the percolation signal. With the model at hand, the flux hydrographs can be derived from model simulations and measured precipitation. For contrast, the Durner equilibrium dual porosity model was tried but was found little suitable. However, even the mobile‐immobile model did not perform perfectly. Simulated water contents were similar to the measured ones at some depths but not in the others, and the percolation fluxes were overestimated, compared to cumulative soil–water balance. Efforts to improve model performance were not successful. Hence, the model structure needs to be improved. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

The relevance of preferential flow in catchment scale simulations: Calibrating a 3D dual‐permeability model using DREAM

Hopp

Glaser

Klaus

et al. 2020

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The occurrence of preferential flow in the subsurface has often been shown in field experiments. However, preferential flow is rarely included in models simulating the hydrological response at the catchment scale. If it is considered, preferential flow parameters are typically determined at the plot scale and then transferred to largerscale simulations. Here, we successfully used the optimization algorithm DiffeRential Evolution Adaptive Metropolis (DREAM) to calibrate a 3D physics-based dualpermeability model directly at the catchment scale. In order to keep computational costs of the optimization routine at a reasonable level, we limited the number of parameters to be calibrated to the ones that had been shown before to be most influential for the simulation of discharge. We also calibrated parameters of the matrix domain and the macropore domain with a fixed parameter ratio between soil layers instead of calibrating every layer separately. These ratios reflected observed depth profiles of soil hydraulic properties at our study site. The dual-permeability parameter sets identified during calibration were able to simulate observed discharge time series satisfactorily but did not outperform a calibrated single-domain reference model scenario.Saturated hydraulic conductivities of the macropore domain were calibrated such that they became very similar to matrix saturated hydraulic conductivities, thereby effectively removing the effect of macropores. This suggests that the incorporation of vertical preferential flow as represented by the dual-permeability approach was not relevant for reproducing the hydrometric response reasonably well in the studied catchment. We also tested the scale-invariance of the calibrated dual-permeability parameter sets by using the parameter sets performing best at catchment scale to simulate plot-scale bromide depth profiles obtained from tracer irrigation experiments.This parameter transfer proved to be not successful, indicating that soil hydraulic parameters are scale-variant, independent of the direction of parameter transfer. K E Y W O R D S catchment scale, discharge simulation, dual-permeability model, HydroGeoSphere, model calibration, optimization algorithm, preferential flow

show abstract

MACRO (v5.2): Model Use, Calibration, and Validation

Cited by 72 publications

References 0 publications

Modeling macropore seepage fluxes from soil water content time series by inversion of a dual permeability model

Modeling macropore seepage fluxes from soil water content time series by inversion of a dual permeability model

Preferential percolation quantified by large water content sensors with artifactual macroporous envelopes

The relevance of preferential flow in catchment scale simulations: Calibrating a 3D dual‐permeability model using DREAM

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About