guest ::
| Home > Publications database > On the Accuracy of Factory-Calibrated Low-Cost Soil Water Content Sensors > print |
| Home > Publications database > On the Accuracy of Factory-Calibrated Low-Cost Soil Water Content Sensors > print |
| 001 | 863833 | ||
| 005 | 20210130002329.0 | ||
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a 10.3390/s19143101 |2 doi |
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a 2128/22505 |2 Handle |
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a altmetric:63509399 |2 altmetric |
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a pmid:31337053 |2 pmid |
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a WOS:000479160300068 |2 WOS |
| 037 | _ | _ | |a FZJ-2019-03813 |
| 082 | _ | _ | |a 620 |
| 100 | 1 | _ | |a Domínguez-Niño, Jesús María |0 0000-0002-9502-2100 |b 0 |e Corresponding author |
| 245 | _ | _ | |a On the Accuracy of Factory-Calibrated Low-Cost Soil Water Content Sensors |
| 260 | _ | _ | |a Basel |c 2019 |b MDPI |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a article |2 DRIVER |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a Output Types/Journal article |2 DataCite |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a Journal Article |b journal |m journal |0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16 |s 1563433942_18562 |2 PUB:(DE-HGF) |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a ARTICLE |2 BibTeX |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE |2 ORCID |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a Journal Article |0 0 |2 EndNote |
| 520 | _ | _ | |a Soil water content (SWC) monitoring is often used to optimize agricultural irrigation. Commonly, capacitance sensors are used for this task. However, the factory calibrations have been often criticized for their limited accuracy. The aim of this paper is to test the degree of improvement of various sensor- and soil-specific calibration options compared to factory calibrations by taking the 10HS sensor as an example. To this end, a two-step sensor calibration was carried out. In the first step, the sensor response was related to dielectric permittivity using calibration in media with well-defined permittivity. The second step involved the establishment of a site-specific relationship between permittivity and soil water content using undisturbed soil samples and time domain reflectometry (TDR) measurements. Our results showed that a model, which considered the mean porosity and a fitted dielectric permittivity of the solid phase for each soil and depth, provided the best fit between bulk permittivity and SWC. Most importantly, it was found that the two-step calibration approach (RMSE: 1.03 vol.%) provided more accurate SWC estimates compared to the factory calibration (RMSE: 5.33 vol.%). Finally, we used these calibrations on data from drip-irrigated almond and apple orchards and compared the factory calibration with our two-step calibration approach. |
| 536 | _ | _ | |a 255 - Terrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction (POF3-255) |0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255 |c POF3-255 |f POF III |x 0 |
| 588 | _ | _ | |a Dataset connected to CrossRef |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Bogena, Heye Reemt |0 P:(DE-Juel1)129440 |b 1 |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Huisman, Johan Alexander |0 P:(DE-Juel1)129472 |b 2 |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Schilling, Bernd |0 P:(DE-Juel1)140127 |b 3 |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Casadesús, Jaume |0 P:(DE-HGF)0 |b 4 |
| 773 | _ | _ | |a 10.3390/s19143101 |g Vol. 19, no. 14, p. 3101 - |0 PERI:(DE-600)2052857-7 |n 14 |p 3101 - |t Sensors |v 19 |y 2019 |x 1424-8220 |
| 856 | 4 | _ | |y OpenAccess |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/863833/files/sensors-19-03101.pdf |
| 856 | 4 | _ | |y OpenAccess |x pdfa |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/863833/files/sensors-19-03101.pdf?subformat=pdfa |
| 909 | C | O | |o oai:juser.fz-juelich.de:863833 |p openaire |p open_access |p driver |p VDB:Earth_Environment |p VDB |p dnbdelivery |
| 910 | 1 | _ | |a Forschungszentrum Jülich |0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8 |k FZJ |b 1 |6 P:(DE-Juel1)129440 |
| 910 | 1 | _ | |a Forschungszentrum Jülich |0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8 |k FZJ |b 2 |6 P:(DE-Juel1)129472 |
| 910 | 1 | _ | |a Forschungszentrum Jülich |0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8 |k FZJ |b 3 |6 P:(DE-Juel1)140127 |
| 913 | 1 | _ | |a DE-HGF |l Terrestrische Umwelt |1 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-250 |0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255 |2 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-200 |v Terrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction |x 0 |4 G:(DE-HGF)POF |3 G:(DE-HGF)POF3 |b Erde und Umwelt |
| 914 | 1 | _ | |y 2019 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200 |2 StatID |b SCOPUS |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0 |0 LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBY4 |2 HGFVOC |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0600 |2 StatID |b Ebsco Academic Search |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a JCR |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100 |2 StatID |b SENSORS-BASEL : 2017 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0501 |2 StatID |b DOAJ Seal |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0500 |2 StatID |b DOAJ |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a WoS |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0111 |2 StatID |b Science Citation Index Expanded |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150 |2 StatID |b Web of Science Core Collection |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a IF < 5 |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900 |2 StatID |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a OpenAccess |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0510 |2 StatID |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a Peer Review |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030 |2 StatID |b ASC |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0310 |2 StatID |b NCBI Molecular Biology Database |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300 |2 StatID |b Medline |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0320 |2 StatID |b PubMed Central |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199 |2 StatID |b Clarivate Analytics Master Journal List |
| 920 | 1 | _ | |0 I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118 |k IBG-3 |l Agrosphäre |x 0 |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a journal |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a VDB |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a UNRESTRICTED |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118 |
| 980 | 1 | _ | |a FullTexts |
| Library | Collection | CLSMajor | CLSMinor | Language | Author |
|---|