PDF Download

[1]ZHU Yu,ZHANG Zhuodong,LIU Chang,et al.Comparison of Laser Diffraction Method and Pipette Method on Soil Particle Size Distribution Determination—A Case Study of Variously Degraded Kastanozem[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2018,25(03):62-67,204.

Copy

Comparison of Laser Diffraction Method and Pipette Method on Soil Particle Size Distribution Determination—A Case Study of Variously Degraded Kastanozem

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 25 Number of periods: 2018 03 Page number: 62-67,204 Column: Public date: 2018-04-10

Title:: Comparison of Laser Diffraction Method and Pipette Method on Soil Particle Size Distribution Determination—A Case Study of Variously Degraded Kastanozem

Author(s):: ZHU Yu, ZHANG Zhuodong, LIU Chang, ZHANG Xin; Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China

Keywords:: particle size distribution; laser diffraction method; pipette method; scanning electron microscope; Kastanozem

CLC:: S152.3

DOI:: -

Abstract:: The laser diffraction method (LDM) has become a new method for particle size analysis. It is simple and convenient. However, its applicability and reliability have not been fully confirmed yet. In order to investigate the reliability and applicability of LDM, 21 Kastanozem soil samples with seven different degradation levels were collected and their particle size distributions were measured using both LDM and pipette method. The results showed that LDM underestimated the clay content and overestimated the sand and silt contents. The difference of the results measured by the two methods increased as particle sizes decreased. Regression analysis showed that there were high correlations between the sand and silt contents determined by these two methods, but there was no correlation for the clay content. Triangle coordinate diagram was applied to compare the textures determined by these two methods. The results agreed well after a transformation based on regression analysis compared to the original results. The morphology of soil particles was observed using a scanning electron microscope. The results showed that the shape and number of soil particles were different under different standard dispersive treatments which were involved in different methods, and would influence the results of particle size distribution. The applicability of LDM depends on the types of soil samples. If there are high precision requirements of clay content, LDM is not a good choice, in other cases, LDM is a feasible solution but the results should be carefully checked and transformed.

References:: [1] 刘广通,海春兴,李占宏.应用吸管法进行风沙土机械组成分析的试验研究[J].水土保持研究,2007,14(2):121-123,126.
[2] Beuselinck L, Govers G, Poesen J, et al. Grain-size analysis by laser diffractometry:comparison with the sieve-pipette method[J]. Catena, 1998,32:193-208.
[3] 冯腾,陈洪松,张伟,等.激光粒度仪与沉降吸管法测定喀斯特地区土壤机械组成的对比研究[J].农业现代化研究,2013,34(1):100-103.
[4] Di Stefano C, Ferro V, Mirabile S. Comparison between grain-size analyses using laser diffraction and sedimentation methods[J]. Biosystems Engineering, 2010,106(2):205-215.
[5] Syvitski J P M, LeBlanc K W G, Asprey K W. Interlaboratory, interinstrument calibration experiment[M]//Principles, Methods, and Application of Particle Size Analysis. Syvitski J P M. New York:Cambridge University Press, 1991:174-193.
[6] 王伟鹏,刘建立,张佳宝,等.基于激光衍射的土壤粒径测定法的评价与校正[J].农业工程学报,2014,30(22):163-169.
[7] Loizeau J, Arbouille D, Santlago S, et al. Evaluation of a wide range laser diffraction grain size analyser for use with sediments[J]. Sedimentology, 1994,41:353-361.
[8] 庞奖励,黄春长,贾耀峰.不同方法测定黄土和古土壤样品粒度的比较[J].陕西师范大学学报:自然科学版,2003,31(4):87-92.
[9] Pieri L, Bittelli M, Pisa P R. Laser diffraction, transmission electron microscopy and image analysis to evaluate a bimodal Gaussian model for particle size distribution in soils[J]. Geoderma, 2006,135:118-132.
[10] 王大安,刘刚,王翔鹰,等.用激光法和吸管法测定东北黑土区侵蚀泥沙颗粒组成的差异分析[J].中国水土保持科学,2016,14(1):114-122.
[11] 杨金玲,张甘霖,李德成,等.激光法与湿筛-吸管法测定土壤颗粒组成的转换及质地确定[J].土壤学报,2009,46(5):772-780.
[12] Eshel G, Levy G J, Mingelgrin U, et al. Critical evaluation of the use of laser diffraction for particle-size distribution analysis[J]. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 2004,68:736-743.
[13] 刘雪梅,黄元仿.应用激光粒度仪分析土壤机械组成的试验研究[J].土壤通报,2005,36(4):579-582.
[14] 刘涛,高晓飞.激光粒度仪与沉降-吸管法测定褐土颗粒组成的比较[J].水土保持研究,2012,19(1):16-18,22.
[15] 王君波,鞠建廷,朱立平.两种激光粒度仪测量湖泊沉积物粒度结果的对比[J].湖泊科学,2007,19(5):509-515.
[16] 邱倩倩,张卓栋,孙传龙,等.锡林郭勒草地景观系统土壤容重空间变异及其与风蚀的关系[J].水土保持通报,2016(6):58-62,66.
[17] 孙传龙,张卓栋,邱倩倩,等.基于层次分析法的锡林郭勒草地景观系统风蚀危险性分析[J].干旱区地理,2016(5):1036-1042.
[18] 中国科学院南京土壤研究所.土壤理化分析[M].上海:上海科学技术出版社,1978:481.
[19] 王彬,郑粉莉,安娟,等.激光衍射法与吸管法对东北黑土区土壤粒径分布测定的差异性研究[J].水土保持通报,2009,29(2):134-143.
[20] 吴焕焕,吕家珑,段英华,等.激光衍射法测定中国典型土壤颗粒分布的模型建立与验证[J].中国农业科学,2013,46(20):4293-4300.
[21] Vdovic N, Obhodas J, Pikelj K. Revisiting the particle-size distribution of soils:comparison of different methods and sample pre-treatments[J]. European Journal of Soil Science, 2010,61(6):854-864.
[22] Kowalenko C G, Babuin D. Inherent factors limiting the use of laser diffraction for determining particle size distributions of soil and related samples[J]. Geoderma, 2013,193:22-28.
[23] 程鹏,高抒,李徐生.激光粒度仪测试结果及其与沉降法、筛析法的比较[J].沉积学报,2001,19(3):449-455.
[24] 章明奎.预处理对高铁土壤颗粒分析结果的影响[J].浙江农业大学学报,1996,22(1):94-97.
[25] 汤庆峰,李光军,马黎春.盐湖沉积物粒度分析的超声波分散方法研究[J].矿床地质,2012(S1):481-482.
[26] 王英杰,韩春兰,齐向宇,等.超声波技术在火山碎屑物发育土壤粒度分析中的应用[J].土壤通报,2016,47(2):314-319.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 1900-01-01