Given the cumbersome determination method of the Soil Water Characteristic Curve (SWCC), the collapsible loess (silty clay loam) in Lanzhou was taken as the research object to explore a symmetrical prediction method for SWCC in a low suction section on the inflection point, and to determine the optimal suction section and the inflection point. The results showed that in the range of 0–7,000 cm suction, the spatial variation coefficient (CV) of soil saturation of each bulk density increased with the increase of suction. Soil saturation showed weak spatial variability when suction <800 cm, and moderate spatial variability when suction ≥800 cm. Using a bulk density of 1.58 g/cm3 as an example, the SWCC determined by the symmetry of the bending point was compared with the measured data of 0–300, 0–500, 0–800 and 0–1,000 cm suction sections. It was found that the measured soil saturation of SWCC determined by the data for the 0–800 cm suction section was the most consistent with the predicted value. The measured and predicted saturation points of the SWCC were most consistent with suction segments of 0–800 cm. SWCC data of different textures and bulk density were used to verify the prediction method at low suction section and an inflection point of 0–800 cm. It was found that the average absolute error and root mean square error of statistical indicators were close to 0, and the correlation coefficient was greater than 0.9915. The actual and predicted values of each soil parameter were linearly correlated. This method of predicting SWCCs with low suction and inflection points ensures both a high degree of curve fitting and the accuracy of characteristic soil parameters, providing a simple method for the prediction of SWCCs and guidance for managing soil water in loessial areas.

  • In the low suction range, soil saturation increases with suction and CV increases.

  • The low suction inflection point was used to predict the soil moisture characteristic curve, which effectively reduced the deviation of CV.

  • SWCC prediction provides guidance for soil moisture management in loess area.

The soil water characteristic curve (SWCC) characterizes the relationship between soil suction and soil water content (saturation, mass water content, volume water content) (Chen et al. 2015; Pham et al. 2019; Zhao et al. 2020a), which is the basis of studying soil water movement and solute transport (Fu et al. 2011; Xing et al. 2016). Therefore, researchers have developed many methods for the determination of SWCC (Ishimwe et al. 2014; Haghverdi et al. 2018), among which the centrifugal method is the most widely used. Although the operation is simple, the density change and centrifugal time in the centrifugal process have certain effects on measurement results, so measured parameters often have low accuracy (Sun et al. 2019; Wang et al. 2019a). Wang et al. (2020) compared and evaluated the van Genuchten model, Brooks-Corey model, lognormal distribution model and the residual film SWCC estimation model based on improved pore size distribution. Therefore, a method of minimizing the centrifugal speed and suction without losing important information has important research value.

The direct determination of a SWCC has the disadvantages of high cost and complex steps and is time-consuming. In addition, the spatial variation of soil also limits the application of SWCCs in practice (Qin & Fan 2020). Indirect methods are based on the basic properties of soil, and use some empirical or semi-empirical relationship to establish an SWCC prediction method, the main three being: pedotransfer function (Wang et al. 2019b); physical empirical method (Zeiliguer et al. 2000); and the fractal method (Perfect 1999). Wang et al. (2017, 2019a) explored the effects of ammoniated straw and inorganic changes on SWCCs and soil water holding capacity. Stoof et al. (2010) evaluated the effect of the addition of ash on soil water retention. Various methods have been used to combine empirical models for SWCCs in low-suction sections with Campbell and Shiozawa models to describe the full range of SWCCs. (Khlosi et al. 2006; An et al. 2019). Peng et al. (2012) combined the Hyprop system with rapid centrifugation to determine SWCCs in the full range of suction. The inflection point is an important characteristic for determining SWCCs. Chen et al. (2014) proposed a method to estimate SWCCs for high-suction sections by assuming that the sections were the tangents of the low-suction sections at a water potential of −15,000 cm. Niu et al. (2020) reported that pores corresponding to the peak point were the dominant pores, corresponding to the inflection points of SWCCs. Pan et al. (2020) found that determining the inflection point played an important role in obtaining the tangent equation of the transition zone. Few reports have predicted SWCCs using low-suction sections and inflection points.

Residual saturation and residual suction are basic parameters of SWCCs. The accurate determination of these parameters is the basis for the study of unsaturated soil strength, permeability, and constitutive relationships (Gao et al. 2017). Brooks & Corey (1964) believed that the soil-water content when the matric suction reached infinity was the residual water content. Fredlund & Xing (1994) used traditional mapping to obtain the air-entry value of SWCCs. These traditional methods, however, are prone to large errors due to subjective uncertainties (Soltani et al. 2019). Chai & Gao (2021) predicted that there was no test data available for SWCCs in the study area by using the saturated permeability (ks), plasticity index (PI) and grain size distribution (GSD) curves of soil. Throughout the current research, there are few reports on the prediction of SWCCs by using low suction section and inflection point.

Therefore, to reduce the influence of centrifugal force and subjective factors on the determination results of SWCCs, taking Lanzhou collapsible loess as an example, the SWCC with the best low suction section symmetrical about the inflection point was determined, and the calculation formula for the intake suction value of soil characteristic parameters was deduced. This is expected to provide a simple method for the prediction of SWCCs in this region and give guidance for soil moisture management in the loess area.

Area description

Soil samples were collected from the Pengjiaping Campus of Lanzhou University of Technology, Gansu Province, China (Figure 1) at an altitude of 1,628 m, latitude 36 °03′58″N, and longitude 103 °41′44″E. It is a transitional area from the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau to the Loess Plateau. This area has typical loessial landforms and the thickest loessial deposits in China. Annual average sunshine hours are 2,446 hours, with an average frost-free period of 180 days. The annual average temperature is between 6.4 and 11.2 °C, and the annual precipitation is between 276 and 494 mm. The precipitation is mainly concentrated from June to September. The main soil types are calcareous, chestnut, and cinnamon soils.

Figure 1

Study area and sampling location.

Figure 1

Study area and sampling location.

Close modal

Experimental design

The study area was 80 × 80 m, and soil samples were collected mechanically. The tilled soil layer of 0–30 cm was excavated at the central point and every 20 m. (Figure 2). The soil particles in the study area were measured by a Mastersizer 2000 laser particle size analyzer. The test results were classified according to the soil texture classification standard of the United States Department of Agriculture (Table 1), and the tested soil was silty clay loam. Bulk density was measured using the ring knife method due to the wide distribution of soil samples and the convenience of centralized management. Bulk density ranged from 1.38 to 1.58 g/cm3. Accordingly, artificial loading was carried out with three different bulk densities of 1.38, 1.48 and 1.58 g/cm3. All samples were air-dried, sieved through a 2-mm mesh, and layered in a 100-cm3 ring knife. SWCCs were determined using a Nissan CR21G II high-speed refrigerated centrifuge maintained at 4 °C. The samples were centrifuged at a suction range of 0–7,000 cm.

Table 1

Statistical table of soil physical properties

Soil layer depth (cm)Cosmid (%)Powder particle (%)Grit (%)
< 0.002 mm0.002 ∼ 0.05 mm0.05 ∼ 1 mm
0 ∼ 10 20.54 66.58 12.88 
10 ∼ 20 21.65 67.32 11.03 
20 ∼ 30 23.27 67.14 9.59 
Soil layer depth (cm)Cosmid (%)Powder particle (%)Grit (%)
< 0.002 mm0.002 ∼ 0.05 mm0.05 ∼ 1 mm
0 ∼ 10 20.54 66.58 12.88 
10 ∼ 20 21.65 67.32 11.03 
20 ∼ 30 23.27 67.14 9.59 
Figure 2

Horizontal and vertical distribution of sampling points (b is grid size, n is sampling point).

Figure 2

Horizontal and vertical distribution of sampling points (b is grid size, n is sampling point).

Close modal

Data analysis

The saturation form of the van Genuchten (VG) model is:
(1)
where is matrix suction (kpa). S is saturation. a, m, n are the fitting parameters, where m is not related to n, and m is taken as m = 1 − 1/n. The VG model is then evolved into the Mualem model, commonly used in geotechnical engineering (Pan et al. 2020). The size of n determines the slope of the SWCC. When n is large, the curve is steep. When n is small, the curve is shallow (Li et al. 2018).
Classical statistical spatial variation analysis theory is given by:
(2)
where s is the standard deviation, is the mean and CV is the coefficient of variation. CV <10% indicates low variability, 10% ≤ CV ≤ 100% indicates moderate variability, and CV >100% indicates high variability (Zhao et al. 2020a, 2020b).
Error analysis: The prediction method was evaluated using mean absolute error (MAE) and root mean square error (RMSE). The method was highly accurate when MAE and RMSE were near 0. The equations are (Zhang et al. 2012; Zhao et al. 2017):
(3)
(4)
where Oi and Ci are the measured and predicted soil saturation under suction i and N is the total number of data points.

A number of assumptions are made in the inverse inflection point symmetry method:

Deriving from Equation (1):
(5)
Equation (1) continues to derive lg:
(6)
Equation (5) is equal to 0, and the coordinates of the inflection point B are:
(7)
The tangent slope, K2, of point B is obtained by substituting = in Equation (4):
(8)
From Equations (6) and (7), the transition zone line is:
(9)
Take S = 1 into equation (9) to get the intake value :
(10)

Statistical analysis of soil saturation at all pressure levels

Soil saturation under various pressures is presented in Table 2. The spatial CV of soil saturation increased with the suction in each pressure section. The variation of saturation with bulk density was associated with the volumetric water content. As the suction increased, more soil pores were drained, soil-water content decreased and the CV of saturation increased. Bulk density was weakly and moderately spatially variable when suction was <800 and ≥800 cm, respectively.

Table 2

Characteristic values of soil saturation under various pressures

Soil sample/g/cm3NameSuction/cm
1003005008001,0003,0005,0007,000
1.38 Maximum value 0.9299 0.6964 0.3618 0.2601 0.1385 0.0421 0.0130 0.0069 
Minimum value 0.8967 0.6526 0.2875 0.1820 0.1011 0.0249 0.0090 0.0031 
Mean value 0.9124 0.6777 0.3106 0.2144 0.1189 0.0343 0.0106 0.0044 
Skewness 0.1737 −0.9071 1.7181 0.5241 0.0119 −0.4862 0.6051 0.8948 
Peak −1.5421 0.9350 4.4109 0.1689 −1.4628 0.2102 −1.2021 1.1043 
CV1.28 1.78 5.59 10.21 10.30 12.72 13.25 23.06 
1.48 Maximum value 0.9634 0.7436 0.3882 0.2760 0.1447 0.0649 0.0360 0.0159 
Minimum value 0.9056 0.6940 0.3082 0.2009 0.0941 0.0367 0.0177 0.0013 
Mean value 0.9362 0.7158 0.3492 0.2286 0.1147 0.0450 0.0277 0.0082 
Skewness −0.3546 0.7814 0.1881 0.8500 0.3817 1.2511 −0.4147 0.4399 
Peak 0.1373 −0.0325 −1.1426 −0.4031 −0.8573 1.6768 −0.7879 1.2327 
CV1.56 2.09 7.25 10.34 13.06 16.94 18.95 41.46 
1.58 Maximum value 0.9714 0.8575 0.4712 0.3124 0.2116 0.1074 0.0709 0.0668 
Minimum value 0.9192 0.7516 0.3390 0.1926 0.0926 0.0484 0.0270 0.0068 
Mean value 0.9515 0.8109 0.3890 0.2443 0.1486 0.0691 0.0498 0.0263 
Skewness −0.5984 −0.7362 0.8079 0.5285 0.3008 1.2221 0.1307 1.5462 
Peak −0.1111 3.0585 0.8868 0.1340 0.2248 1.2834 −1.1049 3.9630 
CV1.63 2.79 9.16 14.00 21.80 24.73 27.16 53.34 
Soil sample/g/cm3NameSuction/cm
1003005008001,0003,0005,0007,000
1.38 Maximum value 0.9299 0.6964 0.3618 0.2601 0.1385 0.0421 0.0130 0.0069 
Minimum value 0.8967 0.6526 0.2875 0.1820 0.1011 0.0249 0.0090 0.0031 
Mean value 0.9124 0.6777 0.3106 0.2144 0.1189 0.0343 0.0106 0.0044 
Skewness 0.1737 −0.9071 1.7181 0.5241 0.0119 −0.4862 0.6051 0.8948 
Peak −1.5421 0.9350 4.4109 0.1689 −1.4628 0.2102 −1.2021 1.1043 
CV1.28 1.78 5.59 10.21 10.30 12.72 13.25 23.06 
1.48 Maximum value 0.9634 0.7436 0.3882 0.2760 0.1447 0.0649 0.0360 0.0159 
Minimum value 0.9056 0.6940 0.3082 0.2009 0.0941 0.0367 0.0177 0.0013 
Mean value 0.9362 0.7158 0.3492 0.2286 0.1147 0.0450 0.0277 0.0082 
Skewness −0.3546 0.7814 0.1881 0.8500 0.3817 1.2511 −0.4147 0.4399 
Peak 0.1373 −0.0325 −1.1426 −0.4031 −0.8573 1.6768 −0.7879 1.2327 
CV1.56 2.09 7.25 10.34 13.06 16.94 18.95 41.46 
1.58 Maximum value 0.9714 0.8575 0.4712 0.3124 0.2116 0.1074 0.0709 0.0668 
Minimum value 0.9192 0.7516 0.3390 0.1926 0.0926 0.0484 0.0270 0.0068 
Mean value 0.9515 0.8109 0.3890 0.2443 0.1486 0.0691 0.0498 0.0263 
Skewness −0.5984 −0.7362 0.8079 0.5285 0.3008 1.2221 0.1307 1.5462 
Peak −0.1111 3.0585 0.8868 0.1340 0.2248 1.2834 −1.1049 3.9630 
CV1.63 2.79 9.16 14.00 21.80 24.73 27.16 53.34 

The curve of soil saturation CV versus pressure for each bulk density is shown in Figure 3. At the same suction, the spatial variabilities of saturation and volumetric water content increased with bulk density. When the suction increased, the CV of each bulk density decreased as saturation decreased, indicating high spatial variability. This relationship was important for the determination of the SWCCs: when the suction is low, the spatial variability is low, and the number of samples can be reduced, and when the suction is high, the number of samples should be increased.

Figure 3

Coefficient of variation of soil saturation for different soil samples.

Figure 3

Coefficient of variation of soil saturation for different soil samples.

Close modal

In order to further determine the relationship between different bulk densities and soil saturation, this paper analyzed the correlation between different bulk densities at 1.38 g/cm3, 1.48 g/cm3 and 1.58 g/cm3, respectively. The results are shown in Table 3. Each bulk density was significantly positively correlated with saturation, with coefficients for adjacent soil layers >0.9932. This result indicated that the SWCC for soil with a specific bulk density could be estimated using other bulk densities, which could substantially reduce manpower and material resources in future studies.

Table 3

Correlation between soil depth and saturation

Soil sample1.38 g/cm31.48 g/cm31.58 g/cm3
1.38 g/cm3 0.9959** 0.9982** 
1.48 g/cm3  0.9932** 
1.58 g/cm3   
Soil sample1.38 g/cm31.48 g/cm31.58 g/cm3
1.38 g/cm3 0.9959** 0.9982** 
1.48 g/cm3  0.9932** 
1.58 g/cm3   

Note: ** is significantly correlated at 0.01 level.

Prediction of soil characteristic curve

Assumptions of the inverse inflection point symmetry method

SWCCs of continuously graded or single graded soils show an S-shaped unimodal shape and have symmetrical geometric characteristics. The curve is sigmoidal (Figure 4). Two inflection points, A and C, divided the curve into three parts. Points A and C are usually determined using the tangent method (Zhou et al. 2010). Inflection point B is an important point in SWCCs. Assuming that the curve is symmetrical around point B, the curve can use part of the suction value to determine the complete SWCC by using the partial suction value and triangle equivalence theorem.

Figure 4

Definitions of basic parameters of soil-water characteristic curves.

Figure 4

Definitions of basic parameters of soil-water characteristic curves.

Close modal

This paper refers to the inflection point, using Equation (1) to find a point where the second derivative equals 0, and using the measured data of different suction sections to predict SWCC symmetrically. The study showed that when the suction of each soil layer was less than 800 cm, the soil saturation showed weak variability, and the correlation of SWCC determined by the data of 0–800 cm suction was high. It can be seen that this method can not only reduce the time-consuming and laborious problem but also reduce the experimental error of spatial variability caused by the increase of suction.

Determine the optimal suction section

For 48 groups of measured saturation data, Origin software fitting was used to determine the SWCC parameters a and n, and Equation (7) combined with a statistical method was then used to obtain the average bulk-density inflection point at 1.58 g/cm3 as (2.6626, 0.5066). The SWCCs for the 0–300, 0–500, 0–800 and 0–1,000 cm measured data were symmetrically determined, and the prediction-fitting equation of each data point was obtained using Equation (1). The relative values for suctions of 100, 300, 500, 800, 1,000, 3,000, 5,000 and 7,000 cm were entered into the above prediction-fitting equation, and the saturation predicted by this method was calculated. The measured and predicted values were statistically analyzed using least squares (Table 4). The maximum correlation coefficient between the measured value and the measured data for 0–800 cm suctions was 0.9941, indicating that the assumption of the symmetry method of the reverse bending point is feasible. Future determinations of SWCC will thus only need centrifugation to suction of 800 cm, which will reduce the problem of increasing spatial variability due to the increase in suction, greatly shortening the centrifugal time and reducing the workload.

Table 4

Correlation analysis between measured and predicted saturation in different suction sections

Suction section/cm0–3000–5000–8000–1,000
Correlation coefficient 0.8132 0.9023 0.9941 0.9938 
Suction section/cm0–3000–5000–8000–1,000
Correlation coefficient 0.8132 0.9023 0.9941 0.9938 

The measured data from published SWCCs (Aubertin et al. 1998; Miao et al. 2006; Pan et al. 2020) were used to verify the proposed method. The published basic soil properties are presented in Table 5. The predicted and measured values were statistically analyzed using Equations (3) and (4). MAE and RMSE were close to 0, indicating that the predicted and measured values agreed well and that the proposed method for determining SWCCs using measured data for suctions of 0–800 cm on the inflection point was accurate.

Table 5

Comparison of measured and predicted values of soil saturation in different soil samples

Soil sampleSoil textureInflection e pointCorrelation coefficientMean absolute errorRoot mean square error
TSB[25] (Tailings Sigma) Bentonite (3.5099,0.5109) 0.9962 0.0196 0.0189 
Till cover[25] Silty soil (4.4973,0.5162) 0.9973 0.0215 0.0167 
Hefei[26] Bentonite (3.3228,0.5184) 0.9994 0.0167 0.0205 
Luochuan[15] Silt loam (3.1808,0.5227) 0.9915 0.0473 0.0287 
Lanzhou 1.38 g/cm3 Silt clay loam (2.6626,0.5066) 0.9916 0.0244 0.0238 
Lanzhou 1.48 g/cm3 Silt clay loam (2.6626,0.5066) 0.9934 0.0232 0.0323 
Soil sampleSoil textureInflection e pointCorrelation coefficientMean absolute errorRoot mean square error
TSB[25] (Tailings Sigma) Bentonite (3.5099,0.5109) 0.9962 0.0196 0.0189 
Till cover[25] Silty soil (4.4973,0.5162) 0.9973 0.0215 0.0167 
Hefei[26] Bentonite (3.3228,0.5184) 0.9994 0.0167 0.0205 
Luochuan[15] Silt loam (3.1808,0.5227) 0.9915 0.0473 0.0287 
Lanzhou 1.38 g/cm3 Silt clay loam (2.6626,0.5066) 0.9916 0.0244 0.0238 
Lanzhou 1.48 g/cm3 Silt clay loam (2.6626,0.5066) 0.9934 0.0232 0.0323 

Equation (1) was symmetrically determined using the inflection point (2.6626, 0.5066) of 0–800 cm suction measured data for bulk densities of 1.38 and 1.48 g/cm3, and the predicted saturation under different suctions was then calculated using it. The relationship between the predicted and measured values at different bulk densities was determined. The saturation dispersion points for each bulk density were distributed on both sides of the 1:1 line, with the small deviations and strong correlations (Figure 5). The correlations between the bulk densities for the same texture were strong, and the SWCCs could be symmetrically determined using the same inflection point.

Figure 5

Comparison of measured and predicted values of soil saturation for different bulk densities.

Figure 5

Comparison of measured and predicted values of soil saturation for different bulk densities.

Close modal

Soil characteristic parameters

Basic SWCC parameters include residual saturation and residual suction. The accurate determination of the basic parameters is the basis for the study of the strength and permeability of unsaturated soil. Zhou et al. (2010) used a graphical method to determine the actual measured values of the basic parameters of the traditional SWCC fitting method. The prediction value of residual saturation was determined by SWCC combined with the tangent method in this paper, and the prediction value of suction at intake point was determined by Equation (10). The statistical analysis of the characteristic soil parameters (Table 6) indicated that the absolute value of the relative error between the measured and the predicted values of the parameters was <0.0469, and the CV for each parameter tended to decrease as the bulk density increased.

Table 6

Statistics of measured and predicted characteristic soil parameters

ParameterSoil sample g/cm3NameAverage valueCVRelative errorCorrelation coefficient
Residual saturation 1.38 Measured value 0.1427 16.44% 0.0056 0.9255 
Predictive value 0.1419 11.60% 
1.48 Measured value 0.1147 13.06% − 0.0113 0.7857 
Predictive value 0.1160 12.74% 
1.58 Measured value 0.1189 10.30% −0.0469 0.6724 
Predictive value 0.1245 7.03%   
Inlet point suction value 1.38 Measured value 2.3383 1.40% − 0.0063 0.9367 
Predictive value 2.3531 1.63% 
1.48 Measured value 2.2659 0.95% − 0.0152 0.7441 
Predictive value 2.3004 1.05% 
1.58 Measured value 2.2191 0.55% − 0.0274 0.8428 
Predictive value 2.2799 0.65% 
ParameterSoil sample g/cm3NameAverage valueCVRelative errorCorrelation coefficient
Residual saturation 1.38 Measured value 0.1427 16.44% 0.0056 0.9255 
Predictive value 0.1419 11.60% 
1.48 Measured value 0.1147 13.06% − 0.0113 0.7857 
Predictive value 0.1160 12.74% 
1.58 Measured value 0.1189 10.30% −0.0469 0.6724 
Predictive value 0.1245 7.03%   
Inlet point suction value 1.38 Measured value 2.3383 1.40% − 0.0063 0.9367 
Predictive value 2.3531 1.63% 
1.48 Measured value 2.2659 0.95% − 0.0152 0.7441 
Predictive value 2.3004 1.05% 
1.58 Measured value 2.2191 0.55% − 0.0274 0.8428 
Predictive value 2.2799 0.65% 

In order to explore the spatial distribution characteristics of the basic parameters of SWCCs more intuitively, a spatial distribution map of soil characteristic parameters was drawn using Surfer's statistical Kriging interpolation method and taking 1.58 g/cm3 bulk density as an example (Figure 6). Each parameter had a ‘bump and uneven’ distribution. Each parameter diffused and migrated in the same direction, from high to low, under the action of the matrix potential gradient. The method for predicting SWCC with low suction and inflection points guaranteed accurate curve fitting and characteristic soil parameters, and the predicted values could effectively predict the spatial distribution of the characteristic soil parameters throughout the study area. This provides a new idea to guide other regions to use this method for determining SWCCs, which is important for current and future research.

Figure 6

Spatial distribution of soil water curve characteristic parameters.

Figure 6

Spatial distribution of soil water curve characteristic parameters.

Close modal

The centrifuge method has the advantages of simple measurement and wide range of application for determining SWCCs. Increasing the speed of centrifugation, however, increases soil suction, the gradual discharge of water and air from the soil and bulk density, and decreases soil volume, leading to high variability. Studying the prediction of SWCCs using data from the low-suction section and inflection points therefore has practical importance. Shao et al. (1985) reported that the bulk density of Wugong heavy loam could be increased from 1.3 to 2.0 g/cm3 under suction of 0–204 m, and Lu et al. (2004) found that the bulk density of clayey loam increased by 0.6 g/cm3 during the determination of SWCCs, which had a great influence on soil water conductivity. Xing et al. (2015) reported that changes in bulk density could not be ignored when determining SWCCs by centrifugation, consistent with the conclusion that increasing suction and bulk density increases variability.

The characteristic parameters of soil water are very important in strength and seepage theories of unsaturated soil. Many studies have directly used water content corresponding to 1,500 or 3,000 kPa as the residual water content. This method is currently popular but is purely empirical (Genuchten & Th 1980; Sillers & Fredlund 2011; Tao et al. 2018). Niu et al. (2020) found that the corresponding air-entry value of pores between compact samples was about 73 kPa, and the corresponding residual value of pores between compact samples was about 600 kPa. The accuracy of SWCCs due to the accurate determination of the basic parameters of SWCC, however, has rarely been studied, so accuracy is difficult to guarantee. The predicted residual saturation was therefore determined using SWCCs combined with the tangent method, and the predicted suction at the intake point was determined using Equation (9). SWCC data for different textures and bulk densities were used to verify the method for predicting SWCCs at low-suction sections of 0–800 cm and inflection points. Both statistical indicators MAE and RMSE were close to 0, and the correlation coefficient was >0.9915. This method thus had high prediction accuracy, which is convenient for the determination of SWCCs and reduces the experimental error of spatial variability caused by an increase in suction.

In this paper, the low suction inflection point is used to predict SWCCs, which effectively reduces the problem of deviation caused by the increase of variability caused by high centrifugal force, and makes predicted value estimates close to the measured values, improves prediction accuracy and saves a lot of manpower and material resources. It is expected to provide a simple method for the prediction of SWCCs in this region and guidance for soil moisture management in the loess area.

SWCC is a very important parameter in the strength theory and seepage theory of unsaturated soil. To obtain these parameters conveniently and accurately, taking Lanzhou collapsible loess (silty clay loam) as the research object, SWCCs were predicted by using a low suction section and inflection point.

The spatial CV for bulk-density saturation increased with suction within the range of 0–7,000 cm. Soil saturation was weakly and moderately spatially variable at suctions <800 and ≥800 cm, respectively. Saturation CVs increased with bulk density under the same suction.

The optimal coordinates of the inflection point were determined by statistical method (2.6626, 0.5066). Taking the bulk density of 1.58 g/cm3 as an example, VG saturation prediction equations determined symmetrically by the measured data of different suction sections at 0–300, 0–500, 0–800 and 0–1,000 cm with respect to the inflection point were compared. The logarithm values of different suctions were brought into the above prediction equations to calculate the soil saturation. It was found that the predicted soil saturation determined by the symmetry of the suction section of 0–800 cm with respect to the inflection point was in the highest agreement with the measured value.

The predicted value of residual soil saturation was determined using graphical and mathematical methods. The results indicated that the correlation coefficients between the measured and predicted values were >0.6724. The method for predicting SWCCs with low suction and inflection points had high fitting accuracy and accurately predicted SWCC parameters. The method can be used for the determination of SWCCs and provides guidance for managing soil water and restoring vegetation in loessial areas.

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51869010), the Guidance Program for Industrial Support of Colleges and Universities in Gansu Province (2019C-13) and the Lanzhou University of Technology Hongliu first-class discipline funding.

All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.

An
L. S.
,
Zhao
K.
&
Li
M.
2019
Evaluation of soil water retention curve model from saturation to oven-dryness and development of pedotransfer functions for predicting model parameters
.
Journal of Natural Resources
34
(
12
),
2732
2742
.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ejss.12401
.
Aubertin
M.
,
Chapuis
R. P.
&
Ricard
J. F.
1998
A predictive model for the water retention curve: application to tailings from hard-rock mines
.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal
35
(
1
),
55
69
.
https://doi.org/10.1139/t97-080
.
Brooks
R. H.
&
Corey
A. T.
1964
Hydraulic Properties of Porous Media
.
Colorado State University
,
Fort Collins
.
Chai
J.
&
Gao
Z.
2021
Method for predicting drying-wetting and scanning soil-water characteristic curves
.
Transportation Geotechnics
31
,
100666
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2021.100666
.
Chen
C.
,
Hu
K.
,
Li
W.
,
Wang
G.
&
Liu
G.
2014
Estimating the wet-end section of soil water retention curve by using the dry-end section
.
Soil Science Society of America Journal
78
(
6
),
1878
1883
.
https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2014.04.0167
.
Chen
R.
,
Liu
J.
,
Li
J. H.
&
Ng
C. W. W.
2015
An integrated highcapacity tensiometer for measuring water retention curves continuously
.
Soil Science Society of America Journal
79
(
3
),
943
947
.
https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2014.11.0438n
.
Fredlund
D. G.
&
Xing
A.
1994
Equations for the soil-water characteristic curve
.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal
31
(
4
),
521
532
.
https://doi.org/10.1139/t94-061
.
Fu
X.
,
Shao
M.
,
Lu
D.
&
Wang
H.
2011
Soil water characteristic curve measurement without bulk density changes and its implications in the estimation of soil hydraulic properties
.
Geoderma
167
,
1
8
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j. geoderma.2011.08.012
.
Gao
Y.
&
Sun
D.
2017
Determination of basic parameters of unimodal and bimodal soil water characteristic curves
.
Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
39
(
10
),
1884
1891
.
doi:10.11779/CJGE201710017
.
Genuchten
V.
&
Th
M.
1980
A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils
.
Soil Science Society of America Journal
44
(
5
),
892
898
.
https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1980.03615995004400050002x
.
Haghverdi
A.
,
Öztürk
H. S.
&
Durner
W.
2018
Measurement and estimation of the soil water retention curve using the evaporation method and the pseudo continuous pedotransfer function
.
Journal of Hydrology
563
,
251
259
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.06.007
.
Ishimwe
E.
,
Blanchard
J.
&
Coffman
R. A.
2014
Field-obtained soil water characteristic curves and hydraulic conductivity functions
.
Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering
144
(
1
),
04017056
.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0001272
.
Khlosi
M.
,
Cornells
W. M.
,
Gabriels
D.
&
Sin
G.
2006
Simple modification to describe the soil water retention curve between saturation and oven dryness
.
Water Resources Research
42
(
11
),
248
255
.
https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004699
.
Li
P.
,
Li
T. L.
&
Vanapalli
S. K.
2018
Prediction of soil-water characteristic curve for Malan loess in Loess Plateau of China
.
Journal of Central South University
25
(
2
),
432
447
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-018-3748-1
.
Lu
D. Q.
,
Shao
M. A.
&
Hortan
R.
2004
Effect of changing bulk density during water desorption measurement on soil hydraulic properties
.
Soil Science
169
(
5
),
319
329
.
doi:10.1097/01.ss.0000128017.00021.74
.
Miao
L. C.
,
Fei
J.
&
Houston
S. L.
2006
Soil-Water characteristic curve of remolded expansive soils
.
International Conference on Unsaturated Soils.ASCE
997
1004
.
https://doi.org/10.1061/40802(189)80
.
Niu
G.
,
Shao
L. T.
,
Sun
D.
,
Wei
C. F.
,
Guo
X. X.
&
Xu
H.
2020
Evolution law of pore-size distribution in soil-water retention test
.
Rock and Soil Mechanics
41
(
4
),
1195
1202
.
doi:10.16285/j.rsm.2019.0785
.
Pan
D. L.
,
Ni
W. K.
,
Yuan
K. Z.
,
Zhang
Z. F.
&
Wang
J. X.
2020
Determination of soil-water characteristic curve variables based on VG model
.
Journal of Engineering Geology
28
(
1
),
69
76
.
doi:10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2019-156
.
Peng
Z. Y.
,
Huang
S.
,
Yang
J. Z.
&
Wang
X. L.
2012
Using HYPROP system and centrifugal method to measure soil water characteristic curve
.
Journal of Irrigation and Drainage
31
(
5
),
7
11
.
doi:10.13522/j.cnki.ggps.2012.05.010
.
Perfect
E.
1999
Estimating soil mass fractal dimensions from water retention curves
.
Geoderma
88
(
3–4
),
221
231
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7061(98)00128-1
.
Pham
K.
,
Kim
D.
,
Yoon
Y.
&
Choi
H.
2019
Analysis of neural network based pedotransfer function for predicting soil water characteristic curve
.
Geoderma
351
,
92
102
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.05.013
.
Qin
W.
&
Fan
G.
2020
Estimating soil water characteristic curve from soil physical-chemical properties in alluvial plain
.
Journal of Coastal Research
115
,
421
424
.
https://doi.org/10.2112/JCR-SI115-119.1
.
Shao
M. G.
1985
Preliminary study on the difference and accuracy of soil matric potential determination by different methods
.
Chinese Journal of Soil Science
16
(
5
),
222
225
.
doi:10.19336/j.cnki.trtb.1985.05.009
.
Sillers
W. S.
&
Fredlund
D. G.
2011
Statistical assessment of soil-water characteristic curve models for geotechnical engineering
.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal
38
(
6
),
1297
1313
.
https://doi.org/10.1139/t01-066
.
Soltani
A.
,
Azim
M.
,
Deng
A.
&
Taheri
A.
2019
A simplified method for determination of the soil-water characteristic curve variables
.
International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
13
(
3–4
),
316
325
.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19386362.2017. 1344450
.
Stoof
C. R.
,
Wesseling
J. G.
&
Ritsema
C. J.
2010
Effects of fire and ash on soil water retention
.
Geoderma
159
(
3–4
),
276
285
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2010.08.002
.
Sun
X. Q.
,
Fang
K.
,
Fei
Y. H.
&
She
D. L.
2019
Structure and hydraulic characteristics of saline soil improved by applying biochar based on micro-CT scanning
.
Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery
50
(
2
),
242
249
.
doi:10.6041/j.issn.1000-1298.2019.02.027
.
Tao
G. L.
,
Li
J.
,
Zhuang
X. S.
,
Xiao
H. L.
&
Cui
X. L.
2018
Determination of the residual water content of SWCC based on the soil moisture evaporation properties and micro pore characteristics
.
Rock and Soil Mechanics
39
(
4
),
1256
1262
.
doi:10.16285/j.rsm.2017.0705
.
Wang
J. P.
,
Hu
N.
,
François
B.
&
Lambert
P.
2017
Estimating water retention curves and strength properties of unsaturated sandy soils from basic soil gradation parameters
.
Water Resources Research
53
(
7
),
6069
6088
.
https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR020411
.
Wang
X.
,
Yang
K.
&
Zheng
J.
2019a
Effect of straw addition on soil infiltration characteristics and model-fitting analysis
.
Arabian Journal of Geosciences
12
(
13
),
1
12
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-019-4539-1
.
Wang
Z. L.
,
Chang
G. Y.
,
Jiang
Q. X.
,
Fu
Q.
&
Chen
W. J.
2019b
Constructing pedo-transfer functions based on grey relational and nonlinear programming to estimate hydraulic parameters in black soil
.
Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering (Transactions of the CSAE)
35
(
10
),
60
68
.
doi:10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2019.10.008
.
Wang
Z.
,
Li
X.
,
Shi
H.
,
Li
W. P.
&
Yang
W. H.
2020
Estimating the water characteristic curve for soil containing residual plastic film based on an improved pore-size distribution
.
Geoderma
370
,
114341
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2020.114341
.
Xing
X. G.
,
Zhao
W. G.
,
Ma
X. Y.
&
Zhang
Y. L.
2015
Study on soil shrinkage characteristics during soil water characteristic curve measurement
.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
46
(
10
),
1181
1188
.
doi:10.13243/j.cnki.slxb.20150632
.
Xing
X.
,
Ma
X. Y.
&
Kang
D. G.
2016
Impacts of type and concentration of salt cations on soil water retention and desiccation cracking
.
Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering (Transactions of the CSAE)
32
(
9
),
115
122
.
doi:10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2016.09.016
.
Zeiliguer
A. M.
,
Pachepsky
Y. A.
&
Rawls
W. J.
2000
Estimating Water Retention of Sandy Soils Using the Additivity Hypothesis
.
Soil Science
165
(
5
),
373
383
.
Zhang
S. W.
,
Huang
Y. F.
,
Shen
C. Y.
,
Ye
H. C.
&
Du
Y. C.
2012
Spatial prediction of soil organic matter using terrain indices and categorical variables as auxiliary information
.
Geoderma
171
(
2
),
35
43
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.07.012
.
Zhao
W. J.
,
Cui
Z.
,
Zhang
J. Y.
&
Jin
J.
2017
Temporal stability and variability of soil-water content in a gravel-mulched field in northwestern China
.
Journal of Hydrology
552
,
249
257
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.06.031
.
Zhao
W. J.
,
Cui
Z.
&
Zhou
C. Q.
2020a
Spatiotemporal variability of soil-water content at different depths infields mulched with gravel for different planting years
.
Journal of Hydrology
590
,
1
11
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125253
.
Zhao
W. J.
,
Cao
T. H.
,
Li
Z. L.
,
Su
Y.
&
Bao
Z. W.
2020b
Spatial variability of the parameters of soil-water characteristic curves in gravel-mulched fields
.
Water Science and Technology-Water Supply
20
(
1
),
231
239
.
https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2019.153
.
Zhou
B. C.
,
Kong
L. W.
,
Chen
W.
,
Bai
H.
&
Li
X. W.
2010
Analysis of characteristic parameters of soil-water characteristic curve (SWCC) and unsaturated shear strength prediction of Jingmen Expansive soil
.
Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering
29
(
5
),
1052
1059
.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY 4.0), which permits copying, adaptation and redistribution, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).