2011
DOI: 10.1007/s00271-011-0294-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing whole-field sprinkler irrigation application uniformity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
38
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 57 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
1
38
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Concerning the two smaller nozzle diameters, 4.0 x 4.6 mm and 5.0 x 4.6 mm, stepping up working pressure from 294 to 343 kPa led to a reduction of the radius of throw (Table 1) due to a greater spraying of the jet into small drops. Decrease in radius of throw by virtue of increasing working pressure was also observed by Zhang et al (2013).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 75%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Concerning the two smaller nozzle diameters, 4.0 x 4.6 mm and 5.0 x 4.6 mm, stepping up working pressure from 294 to 343 kPa led to a reduction of the radius of throw (Table 1) due to a greater spraying of the jet into small drops. Decrease in radius of throw by virtue of increasing working pressure was also observed by Zhang et al (2013).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…For the geometric shape I of the NY30 sprinkler, this spacing is 45% of WD and 50% of WD for geometric shapes II and III; however, in the sprinkler uniformity response surfaces of these last two typical profiles, around the spacings pointed out, there are uniformity zones that could lead to high CU values, as well as to small ones. Zhang et al (2013) found that sprinkler spacing variations have larger influence on water distribution uniformity than the working pressure variations in the lateral lines. This outcome has been evidenced in this work, regarding to the same nozzle diameter combination, the geometric shape of the dimensionless radial profiles of the NY30 sprinkler had negligible differences, which could result in small variation in the CU values; however, varying spacings between sprinklers culminate in large variation (Figure 5 and 6).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These values can be justified by the different sprinkler pressures, which according to Zhang, Merkley and Pinthong (2013) can result in different water distribution profiles and different overlapping patterns. It should be noted that the mean pressures obtained in each sprinkler were 184 kPa, which ranged from 167 to 203 kPa.…”
Section: Descriptive Statistics Of the Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prior to using sprinkler irrigation equipment, it is prudent to assess its uniformity of application and eliminate any problems before the start of an irrigation season. Just as in the case of non-VRI sprinkler systems, application uniformity of VRI systems can be impacted by climatic conditions, type of sprinkler hardware, sprinkler spacing, the condition of the irrigation system components, system operating pressure (Clark et al, 2003;Zhang et al, 2011), and sprinkler height above the ground (Ortiz et al, 2009). Mean depth and uniformity can also be affected by the equipment used to make the assessment, such as the type of collector (Kohl, 1972;Marek et al, 1985) and the height of the collector above the ground (Dogan et al, 2008).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%