Polyethylene, compaction and chemical treatments to reduce the seepage losses from irrigation channels

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Lima, Luiz Antonio
Data de Publicação: 2014
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)
Texto Completo: https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/14683
Resumo: Efficiency and costs of polyethylene, compaction or chemical treatment to reduce the seepage loss from irrigation channels built in a Dark-Red Latosol of Cerrado soil were compared. Reductions in hydraulic conductivity of 102 soll samples treated with different concentrations of NaOH or Na2CO3 suggested respectively the application of 3 and 4 g/l to reduce seepage loss from irrigation channels. Application of 25 l/m2 of NaOH on the soil samples caused reductions greater than 95% in the hydraulic conductivity. In the channels the reduction was 73% when the channel was allowed to dry and 75% when the seepage tests were conducted just after the chemical treatment. Application of 25 l/m2 of Na2CO3 imparted a similar reduction (81%) when the seepage tests were conducted just after the chemical treatment. When the channel was allowed to dry, the reduction was only 48%. It is possible that this low reduction was due to the soil structure already being modified before the chemical treatment with Na2CO3. Due to the lack of expansive clays in this soil and the precipitation of aluminum by sodium containing compounds, it is believed that the reductions on seepage loss were caused by blockage of macropores with, particles displaced from aggregates disrupted by the removal of cementing agents. Among the alternatives compared, the polyethylene was the best, since it completely stopped the seepage loss from the irrigation channel. The compaction, which raised the bulk density from 1.03 to 1.52 g/cm3 reduced approximately 90% the seepage loss. Comparing the costs, the polyethylene was 15 times more expensive than chemical treatment and 5 times more expensive than soil compaction.
id EMBRAPA-4_40302f13b3eb4b79b7ed31410a63e818
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.seer.sct.embrapa.br:article/14683
network_acronym_str EMBRAPA-4
network_name_str Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Polyethylene, compaction and chemical treatments to reduce the seepage losses from irrigation channelsPolietileno, compactação e tratamento químico na redução das perdas de água por infiltração em canais de irrigaçãosoils; hydraulic conductivity; sodiumsolos; condutividade hidráulica; sódioEfficiency and costs of polyethylene, compaction or chemical treatment to reduce the seepage loss from irrigation channels built in a Dark-Red Latosol of Cerrado soil were compared. Reductions in hydraulic conductivity of 102 soll samples treated with different concentrations of NaOH or Na2CO3 suggested respectively the application of 3 and 4 g/l to reduce seepage loss from irrigation channels. Application of 25 l/m2 of NaOH on the soil samples caused reductions greater than 95% in the hydraulic conductivity. In the channels the reduction was 73% when the channel was allowed to dry and 75% when the seepage tests were conducted just after the chemical treatment. Application of 25 l/m2 of Na2CO3 imparted a similar reduction (81%) when the seepage tests were conducted just after the chemical treatment. When the channel was allowed to dry, the reduction was only 48%. It is possible that this low reduction was due to the soil structure already being modified before the chemical treatment with Na2CO3. Due to the lack of expansive clays in this soil and the precipitation of aluminum by sodium containing compounds, it is believed that the reductions on seepage loss were caused by blockage of macropores with, particles displaced from aggregates disrupted by the removal of cementing agents. Among the alternatives compared, the polyethylene was the best, since it completely stopped the seepage loss from the irrigation channel. The compaction, which raised the bulk density from 1.03 to 1.52 g/cm3 reduced approximately 90% the seepage loss. Comparing the costs, the polyethylene was 15 times more expensive than chemical treatment and 5 times more expensive than soil compaction.Foram comparados a eficiência e os custos do polietileno, da compactação e do tratamento químico para reduzir a perda de água por infiltração em canais de irrigação construídos em Latossolo Vermelho-Escuro de cerrado. As reduções ocorridas na condutividade hidráulica de 102 amostras de solo tratadas com diferentes soluções de NaOH e Na2CO3 sugeriram a aplicação de 3 e 4 g/l, respectivamente, para reduzir a perda de água por infiltração nos canais. Embora a aplicação de 25 l/m2 de NaOH tenha proporcionado redução de mais de 95% nas amostras em laboratório, nos canais esta redução foi de 73% quando foi permitido o secamento do leito, e 75% quando os testes foram conduzidos logo após a aspersão da solução no leito do canal. A aplicação de 25 l/m2 de Na2CO3 para tratamento dos canais proporcionou redução similar (81%) quando não foi permitido o secamento do leito do canal. Já com o leito do canal seco, a redução foi da ordem de 48% apenas. Acredita-se que esta menor redução seja devido à estrutura do solo já se encontrar modificada antes do tratamento com Na2CO3. Em face da ausência de argilas expansivas, bem como da precipitação de alumínio causada por compostos sódicos, acredita-se que as reduções ocorridas tenham sido causadas pelo entupimento de macroporos por partículas desagregadas pela remoção dos agentes cimentantes do solo. Das alternativas testadas, o polietileno foi o mais eficiente, pois reduziu completamente a perda de água por infiltração. Já a compactação, elevando de 1,03 para 1,52 g/cm3 a densidade do leito do canal, permitiu reduzir em aproximadamente 90% a perda de água por infiltração. Com relação aos custos, o polietileno revelou ser aproximadamente 15 vezes mais caro que o tratamento químico e 5 vezes mais caro que a compactação.Pesquisa Agropecuaria BrasileiraPesquisa Agropecuária BrasileiraLima, Luiz Antonio2014-04-17info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/14683Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira; v.22, n.11/12, nov./dez. 1987; 1201-1207Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira; v.22, n.11/12, nov./dez. 1987; 1201-12071678-39210100-104xreponame:Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)instname:Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)instacron:EMBRAPAporhttps://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/14683/8372info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2014-10-14T19:53:24Zoai:ojs.seer.sct.embrapa.br:article/14683Revistahttp://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pabPRIhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phppab@sct.embrapa.br || sct.pab@embrapa.br1678-39210100-204Xopendoar:2014-10-14T19:53:24Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online) - Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Polyethylene, compaction and chemical treatments to reduce the seepage losses from irrigation channels
Polietileno, compactação e tratamento químico na redução das perdas de água por infiltração em canais de irrigação
title Polyethylene, compaction and chemical treatments to reduce the seepage losses from irrigation channels
spellingShingle Polyethylene, compaction and chemical treatments to reduce the seepage losses from irrigation channels
Lima, Luiz Antonio
soils; hydraulic conductivity; sodium
solos; condutividade hidráulica; sódio
title_short Polyethylene, compaction and chemical treatments to reduce the seepage losses from irrigation channels
title_full Polyethylene, compaction and chemical treatments to reduce the seepage losses from irrigation channels
title_fullStr Polyethylene, compaction and chemical treatments to reduce the seepage losses from irrigation channels
title_full_unstemmed Polyethylene, compaction and chemical treatments to reduce the seepage losses from irrigation channels
title_sort Polyethylene, compaction and chemical treatments to reduce the seepage losses from irrigation channels
author Lima, Luiz Antonio
author_facet Lima, Luiz Antonio
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv

dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Lima, Luiz Antonio
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv soils; hydraulic conductivity; sodium
solos; condutividade hidráulica; sódio
topic soils; hydraulic conductivity; sodium
solos; condutividade hidráulica; sódio
description Efficiency and costs of polyethylene, compaction or chemical treatment to reduce the seepage loss from irrigation channels built in a Dark-Red Latosol of Cerrado soil were compared. Reductions in hydraulic conductivity of 102 soll samples treated with different concentrations of NaOH or Na2CO3 suggested respectively the application of 3 and 4 g/l to reduce seepage loss from irrigation channels. Application of 25 l/m2 of NaOH on the soil samples caused reductions greater than 95% in the hydraulic conductivity. In the channels the reduction was 73% when the channel was allowed to dry and 75% when the seepage tests were conducted just after the chemical treatment. Application of 25 l/m2 of Na2CO3 imparted a similar reduction (81%) when the seepage tests were conducted just after the chemical treatment. When the channel was allowed to dry, the reduction was only 48%. It is possible that this low reduction was due to the soil structure already being modified before the chemical treatment with Na2CO3. Due to the lack of expansive clays in this soil and the precipitation of aluminum by sodium containing compounds, it is believed that the reductions on seepage loss were caused by blockage of macropores with, particles displaced from aggregates disrupted by the removal of cementing agents. Among the alternatives compared, the polyethylene was the best, since it completely stopped the seepage loss from the irrigation channel. The compaction, which raised the bulk density from 1.03 to 1.52 g/cm3 reduced approximately 90% the seepage loss. Comparing the costs, the polyethylene was 15 times more expensive than chemical treatment and 5 times more expensive than soil compaction.
publishDate 2014
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2014-04-17
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/14683
url https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/14683
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/14683/8372
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira
Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira
Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira; v.22, n.11/12, nov./dez. 1987; 1201-1207
Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira; v.22, n.11/12, nov./dez. 1987; 1201-1207
1678-3921
0100-104x
reponame:Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)
instname:Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)
instacron:EMBRAPA
instname_str Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)
instacron_str EMBRAPA
institution EMBRAPA
reponame_str Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)
collection Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online) - Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv pab@sct.embrapa.br || sct.pab@embrapa.br
_version_ 1793416674497527808