METHODS OF INFILTRATION ESTIMATION FOR FURROW IRRIGATION<sup>†</sup>

Moravejalahkami, Bita

doi:10.1002/ird.2392

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Often, due to poor management and inappropriate design, surface irrigation systems have low efficiency (Ghobadi et al ., 2020). Among the most important parameters affecting the design of surface irrigation systems are soil properties and permeability (Moravejalahkami, 2020). Many researchers have presented various physical, empirical, and semi‐empirical models to determine infiltration of water into the soil.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the midpoint of a two‐point method for predicting advance and infiltration in surface irrigation^*

Panahi

Seyedzadeh

Maroufpoor

2021

Irrigation and Drainage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study used the location of the average advance time (method 1) and the mean infiltration opportunity time (method 2) as the midpoint of the twopoint method for determining "power advance" and Kostiakov-Lewis infiltration parameters. Experiments were carried out in three border-irrigated fields. The results showed that calibration of the power advance equation obtained by the Elliot and Walker method had high accuracy, with an average relative error of 11.3% in the time to complete the advance phase. The root mean square deviation (d RMS ) index used by Elliot and Walker showed that method 1, with an average d RMS value of 15.7 min, has the lowest d RMS , which estimates the advance time with mean d RMS values of 5.1 and 1.8 min less than the proposed method 2 and the method of Elliot and Walker, respectively. Furthermore, using all methods, the Kostiakov-Lewis infiltration equation parameters were determined. In estimating infiltration depth, method 1 had the highest accuracy with a minimum relative error of 0%, a maximum relative error of 8.7%, and an average relative error of 3.8%. Based on both the d RMS index and the accuracy of the infiltration equation, method 1 had a higher accuracy. K E Y W O R D S average advance time, design, evaluation, infiltration opportunity, volume balance Résumé Cette étude a utilisé l'emplacement du temps moyen d'avance (méthode 1) et le temps moyen d'occasion d'infiltration (méthode 2) comme point médian de la méthode à deux points pour déterminer les paramètres d'infiltration "avance de puissance" et Kostiakov-Lewis. Des expériences ont été menées dans trois champs irrigués selon la méthode border irrigation. Les résultats ont montré que l'étalonnage de l'équation d'avance de puissance obtenue par la méthode Elliot et Walker avait une grande précision, avec une erreur relative moyenne de 11,3% dans le temps pour terminer la phase d'avance. L'indice d'écart quadratique moyen ine (d RMS ) utilisé par Elliot et Walker a montré que la * Etude du point médian d'une méthode en deux points pour prédire l'avance et l'infiltration dans l'irrigation de surface

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the midpoint of a two‐point method for predicting advance and infiltration in surface irrigation^*

Panahi

Seyedzadeh

Maroufpoor

2021

Irrigation and Drainage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To date, various infiltration equations have been presented. Nevertheless, few of these equations can provide a clear analysis [3]. The calculation of the infiltration coefficient is the principal criterion to prefer one equation over others [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Different Irrigation Managements on Infiltration Equations and Their Coefficients

Javadi,

Ostad-Ali-Askari

2023

CivilEng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main aim of this paper was to analyze the sensitivity of the five infiltration equations (Kostiakov, Kostiakov–Lewis, Philip, Horton and SCS) and their coefficients to various ponding depths and initial soil moisture under different irrigation managements. The treatments included three qualities of water (electrical conductivity = 6, 3 and 0.6 dS/m), two managements of irrigation (intermittent irrigation and daily irrigation) and three irrigation periods (100, 45 and 8 days). The HYDRUS-1D model was calibrated to simulate infiltration in various initial soil moistures and ponding depths. Evaluating the performance of infiltration equations showed that the Horton and Kostiakov–Lewis had better accuracy and Kostiakov and SCS had less accuracy than the other equations. The empirical coefficients of SCS and Kostiakov had the most and least sensitivities, respectively. Furthermore, Horton was the most sensitive equation, while SCS was the least sensitive one. The output parameters under daily management were the most sensitive to variations in infiltration coefficients, especially when the salinity and sodium contents of water and soil were higher. The results also showed that the effect of the initial soil moisture on the infiltration coefficient in high permeable soil (arising from daily management) was greater; but in low permeable soil (arising from intermittent management), the ponding depth was more effective. It is concluded that the infiltration equations (specifically the SCS equation) and their coefficients (specifically coefficient c) should be calibrated relative to the initial soil moisture, ponding depth, soil solution and water irrigation quality. Particularly in areas with high permeable soil (in the daily management), the calibration of the infiltration equation should be conducted with the initial soil moisture. In these areas, the irrigation period should be controlled. In areas with low permeable soil (in intermittent management), calibration should be carried out relative to the ponding depth. In these areas, the inflow rate should be controlled.

show abstract

“…However, it might be possible to enhance water application efficiency by improving on‐farm management (Kebede et al, 2014). Accurate estimation of the amount of water infiltrated into the soil is one of the most critical factors in furrow irrigation design and management (Ebrahimian et al, 2010; Lazarovitch et al, 2009; Moravejalahkami, 2020; Moravejalahkami et al, 2012; Nasseri et al, 2008). Improved management schemes often require the analysis of complex soil–water interactions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field evaluation of an explicit infiltration function for conventional and alternate furrow irrigation

Dialameh

Ebrahimian

Parsinejad

2022

Irrigation and Drainage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surface irrigation models should take two‐dimensional infiltration of water in furrows into account for better representation and more accuracy. The Warrick–Lazarovitch infiltration model (W–L model) has been proposed to estimate the two‐dimensional infiltration of water in furrow irrigation. This model consists of several parameters, including γ as an empirical parameter, which is often obtained through calibration of the model. This study aimed to evaluate the W–L model performance in determining the cumulative and lateral infiltrations under conventional furrow irrigation (CFI) and alternate furrow irrigation (AFI) schemes and two different initial and boundary conditions. The results indicate that the W–L model adequately estimated the cumulative and lateral infiltration, and the two‐dimensional infiltration was estimated with less error than the lateral infiltration. In both irrigation schemes, for an increased surface boundary head from 5 to 10 cm and for a reduced initial water content from 0.21 to 0.16 cm3/cm3, the value of γ would increase. Generally, γ values in AFI were greater than those in CFI. The W–L model estimated the two‐dimensional infiltration with more accuracy than the relative lateral infiltration for both CFI and AFI. Proper representation of infiltration is important in both irrigation management and in tracing footprints of chemicals used in agriculture.

show abstract

METHODS OF INFILTRATION ESTIMATION FOR FURROW IRRIGATION^†

Cited by 6 publications

References 26 publications

Investigating the midpoint of a two‐point method for predicting advance and infiltration in surface irrigation^*

Investigating the midpoint of a two‐point method for predicting advance and infiltration in surface irrigation^*

Effect of Different Irrigation Managements on Infiltration Equations and Their Coefficients

Field evaluation of an explicit infiltration function for conventional and alternate furrow irrigation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

METHODS OF INFILTRATION ESTIMATION FOR FURROW IRRIGATION†

Cited by 6 publications

References 26 publications

Investigating the midpoint of a two‐point method for predicting advance and infiltration in surface irrigation*

Investigating the midpoint of a two‐point method for predicting advance and infiltration in surface irrigation*

Effect of Different Irrigation Managements on Infiltration Equations and Their Coefficients

Field evaluation of an explicit infiltration function for conventional and alternate furrow irrigation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

METHODS OF INFILTRATION ESTIMATION FOR FURROW IRRIGATION^†

Investigating the midpoint of a two‐point method for predicting advance and infiltration in surface irrigation^*

Investigating the midpoint of a two‐point method for predicting advance and infiltration in surface irrigation^*