THE RESEARCHER’S COMPLETE GUIDE TO MORE

INFORMATIVE SOIL MOISTURE RELEASE CURVES

INTRODUCTION

Soil moisture release curves (also called soil-water characteristic curves or soil
water retention curves) are like physical fingerprints, unique to each soil type.
Researchers use them to understand and predict the fate of water in a particular soil
at a specific moisture condition. Moisture release curves answer critical questions
such as: at what moisture content will the soil experience permanent wilt? How long
should I irrigate? Or will water drain through the soil quickly or be held in the root
zone? They are powerful tools used to predict plant water uptake, deep drainage,
runoff, and more.

WHAT IS A SOIL MOISTURE RELEASE CURVE?

There is a relationship between water potential and volumetric water content (VWC),
which can be illustrated using a graph. Together, these data create a curve shape
called a soil moisture release curve. The shape of a soil moisture release curve is
unique to each soil. It is affected by many variables such as soil texture, bulk density,
the amount of organic matter, and the actual makeup of the pore structure, and
these variables will differ from site to site and from soil to soil.

1
 Figure 1. Soil water retention curves for three different soils. Vertical lines indicate field capacity (left) and
permanent wilting point (right).

Figure 1 shows example curves for three different soils. On the X-axis is water
potential on a logarithmic scale, and on the Y-axis is volumetric water content. This
relationship between soil water content and water potential (or soil suction) enables
researchers to understand and predict water availability and water movement in a
particular soil type. For example, in Figure 1, you can see that the permanent wilting
point (right vertical line) will be at different water contents for each soil type. The
fine sandy loam will experience permanent wilt at 5% VWC, while the silt loam will
experience permanent wilt at almost 15% VWC.

EXTENSIVE VS. INTENSIVE VARIABLES

To understand soil moisture release curves, it’s necessary to explain extensive vs.
intensive properties. Most people look at soil moisture only in terms of one variable:
soil water content. But two types of variables are necessary to describe the state of
matter or energy in the environment. An extensive variable describes the extent (or
amount) of matter or energy. And the intensive variable describes the intensity (or
quality) of matter or energy.

2
 Extensive Variable Intensive Variable

Volume Density

Water content Water potential

Heat content Temperature

Table 1. Examples of extensive and intensive variables

Soil water content is an extensive variable. It describes how much water is in the
environment. Soil water potential is an intensive variable. It describes the intensity
or quality (and in most cases the availability) of water in the environment. To
understand how this works, think of extensive vs. intensive variables in terms of
heat. Heat content (an extensive variable) describes how much heat is stored in a
room. Temperature (an intensive variable) describes the quality (comfort level) or
how your body will perceive the heat in that room.

Figure 2. Heat moves from high to low energy

Figure 2 shows a large ship in the arctic vs. a hot rod that’s just been heated in a fire.
Which of these two items has a higher heat content? Interestingly, the ship in the
arctic has a higher heat content than the hot rod, but it’s the rod that has a higher
temperature.

3
If we put the hot rod in contact with the ship, which variable governs how the energy
will flow? The intensive variable, temperature, governs how energy will move. Heat
always moves from a high temperature to a low temperature.

Similar to heat, soil water content is just an amount. It won’t tell us how water is
going to move or the comfort level of a plant (plant-available water). But soil water
potential, the intensive variable, predicts water availability and movement. How?

Plant available water: Water potential measurements clearly indicate plant available
water, and unlike water content, there is an easy reference scale—plant optimal
runs from about -2-5 kPa which is on the very wet side, to approximately -100 kPa, at
the drier end of optimal. Below that, plants will be in deficit, and past -1000 kPa they
start to suffer. Depending on the plant, water potentials below -1000 to -2000 kPa
cause permanent wilting.

Water movement: Soil water always moves from a high water potential to a low water
potential. For example, if a soil’s water potential were -50 kPa, water would move
toward the soil layer with a more negative -100 kPa.

Figure 3. Water always moves from a higher energy state to a lower energy state

4
This also approximates what happens in the soil-plant atmosphere continuum.
In Figure 4, the soil is at -0.3 MPa and the roots are slightly more negative at -0.5
MPa. This means the roots will pull water up from the soil. Then the water will move
up through the xylem, out through the leaves across this potential gradient. The
atmosphere, at -100 MPa, is what drives this gradient. So the water potential defines
which direction water will move in the system.

Figure 4. Example water potential gradient in a system

5
WHERE DO MOISTURE RELEASE CURVE DATA COME FROM?

Soil moisture release curves can be made in situ or in the lab. In the field, soil water
content and soil water potential are monitored using soil sensors.

TEROS 12 soil moisture sensor TEROS 21 water potential sensor

METER’s easy, reliable dielectric sensors report near-real-time soil moisture data
directly through the ZL6 data logger to the cloud (ZENTRA Cloud). This saves an
enormous amount of work and expense. The TEROS 12 measures water content and
is simple to install with the TEROS borehole installation tool. The TEROS 21 is an
easy-to-install field water potential sensor, and the TEROS 32 is a low-maintenance
tensiometer that also measures water potential.

In the lab, you can combine METER’s HYPROP and WP4C to automatically generate
complete soil moisture release curves over the entire range of soil moisture.

6
HOW TO USE A SOIL MOISTURE RELEASE CURVE

A soil moisture release curve ties together the extensive variable of volumetric water
content with the intensive variable of water potential. Graphing the extensive and
intensive variables together allows researchers and irrigators to answer critical
questions, such as where soil water will move. For example, in Figure 5 below, if
the three soils below were different soil horizon layers at 15% water content, the
water in the loamy fine sand would begin to move toward the fine sandy loam layer
because it has a more negative water potential.
EXTENSIVE

( )
INTENSIVE
Figure 5. VWC is the extensive variable and water potential is the intensive variable

A soil moisture release curve can also be used to make irrigation decisions such as
when to turn the water on, and when to turn it off. To do this, researchers or irrigators
must understand both volumetric water content (VWC) and water potential. VWC tells
the grower how much irrigation to apply. And water potential shows how available
that water is to crops and when to stop watering. Here’s how it works.

7
 Figure 6. Typical soil moisture release curves for three different soils

Figure 6 shows typical moisture release curves for a loamy sand, a silt loam, and
a clay soil. At -100 kPa, the sandy soil water content is below 10%. But in the silt
loam, it’s approximately 25%, and in the clay soil, it’s close to 40%. Field capacity
is typically between -10 and -30 kPa. And the permanent wilting point is around
-1500 kPa. Soil that is drier than this permanent wilting point wouldn’t supply water
to a plant. And water in a soil wetter than field capacity would drain out of the soil.
A researcher/irrigator can look at these curves and see where the optimal water
content level would be for each type of soil.

Figure 7. Optimal water content levels in three different soils: optimal (light gray vertical lines left), lower
limit (medium gray vertical line), permanent wilting point (dark gray vertical line right)

8
Figure 7 is the same moisture release curve showing the field capacity range (light
gray vertical lines), the lower limit normally set for an irrigated crop (medium gray
vertical line), and the permanent wilting point (dark gray). Using these curves,
a researcher/irrigator can see the silt loam water potential should be kept
between -10 and -50 kPa. And the water content that corresponds to those water
potentials tells the irrigator that the silt loam water content levels must be kept at
approximately 32% (0.32 m³/m³). Soil moisture sensors can alert him when he gets
above or below this optimal limit.

LAB CURVES—NOW EASIER THAN EVER

Fifteen to twenty years ago, it took months to get a full, detailed soil moisture
release curve in the lab, but we’ve come a long way since then. Why?

Moisture release curves have always had two weak areas: a span of limited data
between 0 and -100 kPa and a gap from -100 kPa to -1000 kPa where no instrument
could make accurate measurements. Between 0 and -100 kPa, soil loses half or more
of its water content. Using pressure plates to create data points for this section of a
moisture release curve meant the curve was based on only five data points.

And then there’s the gap. The lowest tensiometer readings cut out at -0.085 MPa,
while historically the highest WP4 water potential meter range barely reached -1
MPa. That left a hole in the curve right in the middle of the plant-available range.

HYPROP WP4C dew point potentiameter

In 2008, METER Group AG in Germany released the HYPROP, an instrument capable

of producing over 100 data points in the 0 to -0.1 MPa range. This solved the
resolution issue with more than 20 times the data behind that section of the curve.

9
In 2010, METER Group released the redesigned the WP4C water potential meter.
Significant accuracy and range gains now allow the WP4C to make good readings
all the way up to the tensiometer range. Using HYPROP with the redesigned WP4C,
a skilled experimenter can now make complete, high-resolution moisture release
curves.

Figure 8. Combine the HYPROP and WP4C to auto-generate complete, high-resolution soil moisture release curves

MOISTURE RELEASE CURVES IN THE FIELD? YES, IT’S POSSIBLE.

Colocating water potential sensors and soil moisture sensors in situ add many
more moisture release curves to a researcher’s knowledge base. And, since it is
primarily the in-place performance of unsaturated soils that is the chief concern to
geotechnical engineers and irrigation scientists, adding in situ measurements to lab-
produced curves would be ideal.

HOW TO CREATE A FULL MOISTURE RELEASE

CURVE USING THE WP4C AND HYPROP

Creating a full moisture release curve is challenging. There is no single instrument

capable of measuring the range of soil water potentials needed for a full curve, and
historically, even those instruments capable of measuring part of the curve had
limitations that affected the final results.

10
Measuring water potential in the wet range with the HYPROP and into the dry range
with the WP4C requires care and skill. But with good measurement techniques, it is
finally possible to get a complete, high-resolution soil moisture release curve with
hundreds of points. And a full curve only takes a few days to generate (vs. a few
months with pressure plates). This application guide will illustrate the techniques
needed to perform these measurements.

FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED

OSMOTIC VS. MATRIC POTENTIAL

In soils, the total water potential is the sum of four different components (Ψt): matric
potential (Ψm), osmotic potential (Ψo), gravitational potential (Ψg), and pressure
potential (Ψp). In a soil moisture release curve, two main components are active:
matric and osmotic potential. The HYPROP measures matric potential only, and the
WP4C measures matric potential and osmotic potential.

In soils with a significant salt concentration, the water potential component must
be considered when combining HYPROP and WP4C data. The osmotic potential will
need to be determined and subtracted from the WP4C readings. Most soils have a
lower salt concentration, however, and won’t need this adjustment.

HYSTERESIS
It is possible for one water content to have multiple water potentials. The progress
of the retention curve depends on whether the measurement is based on a dry soil
which is saturating (wetting curve) or a saturated soil which is drying (drying curve).
At the same water content, the soil moisture tension on a drying curve will always be
higher than on a wetting curve.

One reason for this phenomenon is the heterogeneity, or irregular sequence, of

coarse pores and fine pores. Coarse pores drain faster than fine pores, but fine pores
refill faster than coarse pores. Another factor that affects the progress of a soil
moisture release curve is that air is trapped differently depending on the method
and speed of pore saturation (Hartge, Horn 1999, 148ss).

Because of hysteresis, the method used for determining a water retention curve
must be considered. When using the more time-consuming adsorption method,
oven-dry material is saturated to the desired water content. In contrast, the more
common desorption method (HYPROP) is based on the measurement of a drying soil.
In order to replicate and combine measurement values generated by two different
instruments, it is essential to choose the same method (Hartge, Horn, 1999, 148ss).

11
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR COMBINING
HYPROP AND WP4C MEASUREMENTS?

The HYPROP measurement is based on the evaporation method, where a saturated

soil sample is placed on a scale and exposed to natural evaporation, which is on the
drying portion of the curve (see HYPROP manual). The WP4C measurement can be
made by using either the wetting method or the drying method.

Because of hysteresis, combining wetting and drying curves results in curves that
do not match. This case is illustrated by the two curves in Figure 9. At certain water
contents, the retention data measured with HYPROP on the drying curve have higher
water potentials than the WP4C-measured data on the wetting curve. To prevent this
problem, use a drying method with the WP4C. This places the samples on the same
drying curve as the HYPROP, as illustrated in Figure 10.

Figure 9. Combining wetting and drying curves results in Figure 10. Using a drying method with the WP4C places
curves that do not match the samples on the same drying curve as the HYPROP

12
WP4C MEASUREMENT ON A DESORPTION CURVE

There are two options for making a WP4C measurement on a desorption (drying)
curve:

OPTION 1
The water content of the desired tension reading is defined, and the weight of the
sample at that water content must be calculated. A disturbed sample is saturated
beyond the defined water content, placed on a scale, and evaporated until reaching
the calculated weight.

Disadvantage: This method is extremely time consuming, and if the calculated

weight is missed, the sample must be resaturated.

OPTION 2 (RECOMMENDED)
At the end of the HYPROP measurement, WP4C samples are taken from the same soil
sample.

Advantage: The measurement is continued on the same drying curve as the HYPROP
measurement, allowing for better pairing of data.

Option 2 is described step by step in the following section.

COLLECTING WP4C SAMPLES

1. Perform the HYPROP measurement until the second tensiometer shows the air
entry, as indicated in Figure 11 (within the circled area). Waiting longer makes
the WP4C samples too dry. Stopping significantly earlier may have the opposite
effect. Thus, it is up to the user to determine at which suction (within the
acceptable circled area) to obtain the data.

13
 Figure 11. Perform the HYPROP measurement until the second tensiometer shows the air entry

2. After stopping the HYPROP measurement, remove the sampling ring (including the
soil core) from the HYPROP device (see Figure 12). Perform all operations in a large
drying pan to avoid losing any soil. In some cases, as with clay soils, it is not
possible to separate the sample from the tensiometer shafts without wetting it
before dismounting. If this happens, stop the HYPROP measurement after
cavitation of the top tensiometer. Or, a second option for clay samples is to
use drinking straw pieces around the tensiometer shafts that can slide off when
removing the sample.

14
 Figure 12. Removing the sampling ring

NOTE: For sandy soil samples, leave the sample on the HYPROP and collect the
WP4C samples while removing the soil sample in layers. Collect samples following
similar methods to step 4.

3. Prepare six WP4C sample cups to be filled with soil from the HYPROP core. Note
the tare weight of the sample cups (Figure 13). Label each cup, and make note of
which cup is used for each sample.

Figure 13. Note the tare weight of the sample cups

15
4. Take two WP4C samples from the top of the soil core. Use a spoon or other suitable
instrument to get enough soil material to fill the first two WP4C cups half
full (Figure 14). Seal the sample by placing the lid on the sample cup. If WP4C
measurements won’t be made soon after sampling, seal around the cup with tape
to avoid evaporation.

Figure 14. Get enough soil material to fill the WP4C cups half full

5. Turn the soil core around, and repeat step 4 for the next two cups.

6. Use a suitable cylinder, and press the soil column until half of the sample is out of
the sampling ring. Cut the sample in half with a long, sharp knife (Figure 15). Take
two more WP4C samples out of the middle following the procedure described in
step 4.

Figure 15. Cut the sample in half with a long, sharp knife

16
NOTE: When storing the samples, leave them at room temperature to avoid
condensation.

TAKING WP4C READINGS AND POST-PROCESSING

1. For option 1, it is necessary to leave the WP4C samples in closed cups for
approximately 24 hours equilibration time. For option 2, additional equilibration
time is not necessary.

2. Carefully clean the HYPROP measuring head, and place all remaining soil together
into one drying pan. Place the drying pan in the oven at 105 °C for 24 hours to
determine the dry soil weight.

3. Place the first of the six WP4C samples into the WP4C, and determine the water
potential as described in the WP4C manual.

4. Immediately(!) after finishing the WP4C measurement, remove the sample and
place it on a precision scale (accuracy of +/-0.001 g) to determine the gross
weight (WP4C + cup) of the “moist” sample.

5. Repeat step 3-4 for all remaining samples.

6. After measuring all six samples in the WP4C, dry them in the drying oven, at 105 °C
for 24 hours.

7. After drying, remove the samples from the oven, let them cool down in a
desiccator, and determine the gross weight (i.e., sample plus cups or drying pan)
and tare weights (if not noted before).

CUTOFF POINTS FOR PRECISE AND CONTINUOUS MODES

The WP4C’s precise mode repeats water potential measurements on a sample until
successive readings agree within 0.3 MPa (0.03 MPa for water potential greater
than -40 MPa). This should be the default measurement mode. For wet-end samples
(wetter than -2 MPa), use continuous mode with extremely careful measurement
techniques. For samples drier than -40 MPa, fast mode is recommended. In this
mode, the WP4C only takes one measurement to minimize errors due to water loss.

17
 Figure 16. Cutoff points for WP4C precise and continuous modes

GETTING STABLE WP4C MEASUREMENTS

INTO TENSIOMETER RANGE

Measuring in the wettest range possible for a vapor pressure method (wetter than -2
MPa) requires an extremely careful experimental method.

For details on helpful experimental techniques, see “Measuring water potential into
tensiometer range with the WP4C” later in this guide.

DATA EVALUATION WITH HYPROP FIT

1. The weights for the dry soil core plus the six WP4C samples need to be combined
and added to HYPROP FIT. Insert total dry soil mass into the respective box of the
HYPROP FIT software (tab Evaluation, see Figure 17).

18
 Figure 17. Insert total dry soil mass into the respective box of the HYPROP FIT software

2. To add the WP4C data into the HYPROP FIT software, insert the weights and MPa
values (or optional pF values) for each WP4C measurement into the “Add WP4
data points” menu (see Figure 18). This requires software version HYPROP FIT 3.0
and up. The weighting factor is ´1´ by default. The water contents will be calculated
automatically considering the bulk density of the respective HYPROP sample.

Figure 18. Insert the weights and MPa values

3. The resulting data will be illustrated in the retention data window of HYPROP FIT
and can be fitted with a suitable parametric model.

HOW TO MEASURE WATER POTENTIAL UP

INTO TENSIOMETER RANGE WITH THE WP4C

Water potentials at or near field capacity are past the edge of the WP4C range. In
order to get the best possible precision when measuring these moist samples, run
the WP4C in continuous mode, log the data using a terminal emulator, and continue
the measurement until a stable, fully equilibrated reading is seen. Here are some real
data to illustrate the point.

The data in Table 2 were collected on a -0.20 MPa KCl salt solution starting with an
air-dry (approx. -120 MPa) sensor block. If the WP4C had been configured in fast

19
mode, it would have reported the water potential of the first reading (-0.29 MPa),
yielding an error of -0.09 MPa. In precise mode, the WP4C waits for two consecutive
readings to be within 0.03 MPa of each other, so it would have reported -0.24
MPa, yielding a -0.04 MPa error. However, with patience and a lab that has decent
temperature stability (more on temperature stability below), it is possible to achieve
precision to the 0.01 MPa level.

MEASURED WATER
TIME (MINUTES)
POTENTIAL (MPa)
3.5 0.29
7.3 -0.25
11.0 -0.24
14.8 -0.23
18.6 -0.22
22.5 -0.22
26.3 -0.21
30.2 -0.21
34.1 -0.20
37.9 -0.20
41.8 -0.20
45.7 -0.20
49.5 -0.20

Table 2. Equilibration time when making vapor pressure

measurements with -0.20 MPa KCL salt solution

USING THE LINEAR OFFSET

Using this technique carefully and being precise is half the battle. It is possible
to have great precision but poor accuracy, so the next step is to make the precise
measurements accurate.

The WP4C has a built-in offset adjustment sequence that can be used in conjunction
with the 0.5 molal KCl standard provided to calibrate the instrument. This calibration
sequence uses precise mode to measure the water potential of the KCl standard
and then adjusts all subsequent readings by the difference between the known and
measured water potentials of the KCl solution. If calibrating the WP4C using the
built-in offset adjustment function, expect the wet-end accuracy to be about ±0.04
MPa due to the limitations of the precise-mode measurement of the KCl standard.

20
One strategy for achieving higher accuracy is to run the KCl standard in continuous
mode until an equilibrium value is reached. Then apply the offset between the
known and measured water potential to all subsequent data during post-processing
in Excel (or other data analysis program). With careful evaluation of the wet end
accuracy of the WP4C using precision KCl solutions, it is possible to achieve
accuracy to about ±0.02 MPa between -2.2 MPa and 0. Table 3 is an example data
set. Note that all data were adjusted with the offset on the -2.238 MPa standard.

KNOWN WATER OFFSET-CORRECTED ABSOLUTE

POTENTIAL (MPa) WATER POTENTIAL (MPa) ERROR (MPa)
-2.238 -2.238 0.000
-1.346 -1.363 -0.017
-0.223 -0.238 -0.015
-0.132 -0.138 -0.006
-0.040 -0.053 -0.013
0.000 0.012 0.012

Table 3. Wet end accuracy of WP4C using precision solutions

USING STAINLESS STEEL SAMPLE CUPS

An additional important consideration when measuring moist samples is the type of

sample cup to use. The disposable plastic cups are fine for dry samples but not for
wet samples. In the wet end, slight thermal gradients across the plastic sample cups
can yield errors up to 0.05 MPa. The stainless steel cups have high enough thermal
conductivity to become isothermal and prevent these errors. It is also important to
calibrate the instrument using the stainless steel cups if employing them for wet
end measurements.

PROTECT FROM TEMPERATURE GRADIENTS

If measuring dry samples, small fluctuations in the sample temperature won’t

be noticeable, but if measuring in the wet end, these fluctuations can affect
repeatability, precision, and accuracy. The WP4C has internal temperature control to
ensure thermal stability of the sample. This works quite well under most conditions.
However, if there are rapid swings in the ambient temperature, the temperature
stability can suffer.

21
Here’s an example of the type of rapid temperature fluctuation that can affect
a measurement. In an office, the most convenient place to set up the WP4C for
long-term measurements might be directly in line with an HVAC vent. When the air
conditioner turns on, there is enough cold air flow to cool the case of the WP4C about
1.5 ˚C in less than five minutes. This type of temperature disturbance is enough to
induce about 0.05 MPa error into the measurement. To help ensure temperature
stability, place the WP4C in a simple cardboard box with a large vent hole in the
box at the rear of the WP4C to allow the heat from the WP4C to be exhausted out
of the box as shown in Figure 19. Note that the vent hole in the box is essential for
good measurements. Without it, the box will heat up, and the WP4C won’t be able to
control its temperature, which is worse than having it in the air conditioner stream.

Figure 19. Place the WP4C in a cardboard box with a large vent hole at the rear of the WP4C

22
MEASURING MATRIC WATER POTENTIAL WITH THE WP4C

Moisture release curves created by the WP4C and HYPROP often match quite well,
but sometimes they come out like the graph in Figure 20.

The vertical axis is the degree of saturation or ratio of water content to water content
at saturation. The horizontal axis is water potential. It is clear that the two sets of
results are not going to match. What is wrong?

Figure 20. Moisture release curves generated by the HYPROP and WP4C of a silt loam with an EC of 1.4 dS/m

Vapor pressure methods, like the WP4C dew point potentiameter, measure the
sum of matric and osmotic potential, while tensiometers, like those in the HYPROP,
measure just matric potential. When the results of the two methods overlap, the
osmotic component of the water potential is near zero. The osmotic component
comes mainly from salts dissolved in the soil solution. In soils with significant salt
concentrations, the WP4C results will be like those in Figure 20.

23
If the osmotic potential is known, it is possible to subtract it from the WP4C
reading and obtain the matric potential. The result should match the HYPROP data.
Fortunately, it is relatively easy to determine the osmotic potential.

Figure 21 shows a more complete picture of the matric, osmotic, and total potential
of a silt loam soil. Assuming the soil has a saturation extract EC of around 1.4 dS/m,
the total potential is dominated by the osmotic potential in the wet range and by the
matric potential in the dry range. It is then justifiable to extend the HYPROP data in
Figure 21 with a smooth curve to meet the curve at around -3 MPa. To do something
more quantitative, though, it is possible to calculate the values of the osmotic
potential and subtract them from the total potentials. If the amount of salt in the soil
is kept constant (use distilled water to wet the soil and evaporation to dry it), it is
possible to approximate the osmotic potential (MPa) of the saturation extract from
(USDA Handbook 60).

ψos = -0.036σs
Equation 1

where σs is the electrical conductivity of the saturation extract in dS/m. At other

water contents the osmotic potential is

Equation 2

Here ω is the gravimetric water content of the soil and ψs is the water content at
saturation (or the water content at which we measured ψos. It is possible to get ψos
from electrical conductivity measurements, but it is easier to just measure it with
the WP4C. Saturate a sample, and measure its water potential and temperature.
Since the sample is saturated, its matric potential is zero, so the measurement
obtained is the osmotic potential. Use ψos and ψs from this experiment in Equation
3 to compute the osmotic potential at the other water contents of your samples,
and subtract those values from the total potential given by the WP4C to get matric
potential.

24
 Equation 3

Figure 21. A complete picture of the matric, osmotic, and total matric potential of a silt loam soil

EFFECTS OF SAMPLE DISTURBANCE ON SOIL WATER

POTENTIAL MEASUREMENTS WITH THE WP4C

Sample disturbance is often a concern when measuring water potential. Most

researchers try to minimize sample disturbance and thereby ensure a more
representative measurement. Sample disturbance, however, is inevitable. The
purpose of this section is to assess the magnitude of sample disturbance effects
and relate them to the range of water potential of the soil sample.

25
A soil is often modeled as a bundle of capillary tubes with a wide range of pore
sizes. As shown in Table 4, a unique relationship exists between the water potential
associated with a given pore size and the diameter of the pores. This relationship
comes from the Young-Laplace equation, which relates the water potential of water
beneath an air-water interface to the curvature of that interface.

PORE DIAMETER
kPa pF (μm)

-1 1.01 280.08
-10 2.01 29.01
FIELD CAPACITY -133 2.53 8.79
-100 3.01 2.90
-1000 4.01 0.29
PERM. WILT. PT. -1500 4.18 0.19
-10000 5.01 0.03
AIR DRY -100000 6.01
OVEN DRY -1000000 7.01

Table 4. Water potential units: MPa comparison to pore diameter and pF

The water in the largest pores is the most loosely held and is the first to be lost
as the soil dries. As the soil becomes drier, the residual water is held in smaller
pores. Eventually, the capillary analogy breaks down, and the water is held mainly
as adsorbed films on particle surfaces. The relationship between water potential
and water content for a soil is called a “moisture release curve”, or “moisture
characteristic.”

The soil moisture characteristic can be broken into three approximate ranges based
on the forces that hold water in the soil, shown in Figure 22:

- Tightly adsorbed: oven dry to –10,000 kPa

- Adsorbed films: -10,000 to -100 kPa

- Capillary water: -100 to 0 kPa

Soil disturbance and changes in bulk density mainly alter the sizes of the largest
pores. Disturbance can therefore strongly affect the water content-water potential
relationship of samples in the capillary range of potentials but has a negligible effect
on the water potential of samples in the tightly adsorbed and adsorbed film ranges.
This is shown in Figure 23, from Box and Taylor (1962). They investigated the effects

26
of bulk density on the moisture characteristic. Figure 23 shows that the change in
density dramatically affects the matric potential when the soil is wetter than about
-40 kPa but has little effect in drier soil. Campbell and Gardner (1971) obtained
similar results.

Figure 22. Idealized soil moisture characteristic from Lu and Likos (2004) showing the three soil moisture retention regimes

The WP4C is accurate to ±50 kPa in the wet range when used in precise mode,
meaning that a measurement of -50 kPa has an accuracy of ±100%. This
measurement uncertainty is far larger than uncertainty due to density differences,
so the effects of sample disturbance are likely negligible in this scenario.

Expert users of the WP4C can use continuous mode and extremely careful
experimental methods to increase accuracy to ±25 kPa and essentially extend the
functional measurement range of the WP4C further into the capillary water range.
If this type of careful research is being done, errors from sample disturbance could
become non-negligible, and it is recommended to use minimally disturbed samples
in the WP4C.

27
 Figure 23. Box and Taylor (1962) graph showing changes in matric
potential due to differences in bulk density

Note: the units of J/kg are equivalent to units of kPa

REFERENCES

Box, James E., and S.A. Taylor. “Influence of soil bulk density on matric potential.”
Soil Science Society of America Journal 26, no. 2 (1962): 119-122.

Campbell, Glen S., and Walter H. Gardner. “Psycho-rometric measurement of soil

water potential: temperature and bulk density effects.” Soil Science Society of
America Journal 35, no. 1 (1971): 8-12.

Ning, Lu, and William J. Likos. “Unsaturated soil mechanics.” John Wiley & Sons Inc,
New Jersey (2004).

28
Durner, W. (2015): Recommendation for an optimal combination of HYPROP and WP4
measurements to get a full range retention curve. Braunschweig.

Hartge, H.; Horn, R. (1999): Einführung in die Bodenphysik. Stuttgart.

METER Group Inc. (n.d.): Tools and Tips for measuring the full soil moisture release
curve. Pullman.

29