HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ochsner, T. E. Articles by Horton, R. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Ochsner, T. E. Articles by Horton, R. Agricola Articles by Ochsner, T. E. Articles by Horton, R. Related Collections Agroclimatology Heat Transport

Special Submissions

Soil Heat Storage Measurements in Energy Balance Studies

^a Soil and Water Management Research Unit, USDA-ARS, St. Paul, MN 55108
^b National Soil Tilth Lab., USDA-ARS, Ames, IA 50011
^c Dep. of Agronomy, Iowa State Univ., Ames, IA 50011

^* Corresponding author (ochsner{at}umn.edu)

Received for publication April 8, 2005. Energy balance studies require knowledge of the heat flux at the soil surface. This flux is determined by summing the heat flux at a reference depth (z_r) some centimeters below the surface and the rate of change of heat storage in the soil above z_r. The rate of change of heat storage, or heat storage for short (S), is calculated from soil volumetric heat capacity (C) and temperature. The objectives of this study were to determine how choices regarding z_r, C measurements, and S calculations all affect the accuracy of S data. Heat transfer theory and data from three field sites were used toward these ends. In some studies, shallow reference depths have been used and S neglected. Our results indicate that when z_r is sufficiently deep to permit accurate heat flux measurements, S is too large to neglect. Three methods for determining C were evaluated: soil sampling, the ThetaProbe soil moisture sensor, and heat pulse sensors. When C was determined using all three methods simultaneously, the estimates agreed to within 6% on average; however, the temporal variability of C was best recorded with the automated heat pulse sensors. Three approaches for calculating S were also tested. The common approach of letting C vary in time but neglecting its time derivative caused errors when soil water content was changing. These errors exceeded 200 W m^–2 in some cases. The simple approach of assuming a constant C performed similarly. We introduce a third approach that accounts for the time derivative of C and yields the most accurate S data.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. Liu, B. Li, T. Ren, R. Horton, and B. C. Si Analytical Solution of Heat Pulse Method in a Parallelepiped Sample Space with Inclined Needles Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., September 1, 2008; 72(5): 1208 - 1216. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Zvomuya, F. J. Larney, S. M. McGinn, A. F. Olson, and W. D. Willms Surface Albedo and Soil Heat Flux Changes Following Drilling Mud Application to a Semiarid, Mixed-Grass Prairie Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., September 1, 2008; 72(5): 1217 - 1225. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. L. Steiner and J. L. Hatfield Winds of Change: A Century of Agroclimate Research Agron. J., May 7, 2008; 100(Supplement_3): S-132 - S-152. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]