Testing of a Water Loss Distribution Model for Moving Sprinkler Systems

Thompson, Allen L.; Martin, Derrel L.; Norman, John M.; Tolk, Judy A.; Howell, Terry A.; Gilley, James R.; Schneider, A. D.

doi:10.13031/2013.21251

Cited by 51 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A similar set of cases was presented by Thompson (1997), and provided a daily integration of ET and the partitioning of E and T as simulated with Cupid-DPEVAP (Cupid with a droplet evapo ration component). This paper evaluated ET for linear-move irri gated corn on Pullman clay loam soil in Bushland, Tex.…”

Section: Evaporation Based On Methods Of Water Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recall that Fig. 14 by Thompson et al (1997) demonstrated that even with the short irrigation water contact time with a crop that is associated with a linear-move irrigation system, daily T is suppressed relative to T where an irrigation event does not occur. Tolk et al (1995) measured similar suppression with stem flow measurements and attributed the reduction to evaporation of canopy-intercepted water and microclimatic modification.…”

Section: Evaporation Based On Methods Of Water Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using the one-dimensional (1D) mass and heat transfer Cupid DPEVAP model, Thompson (1993bThompson ( , 1997 demonstrated that droplet evaporation for an irrigation event with solid-set impact sprinklers is a very small component of applied water loss. In a Nebraska study, the measured loss was slightly negative ( -0.12 mm or -0.3% of the application depth).…”

Section: Measured and Simulated Spray Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaporation Research: Review and Interpretation

Burt

Mutziger

Allen

et al. 2005

J. Irrig. Drain Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Literature regarding evaporation from soil, wet plant surfaces, and sprinkler droplets was examined, normalized, and inter preted. Much of the evaporation literature is difficult to compare and interpret; this paper offers comparisons and discussions of various findings by others as well as by the writers. Techniques of measuring and estimating evaporation from irrigation and rainfall are discussed. The partitioning between increased evaporation and decreased transpiration from a variety of research is quantified. Factors that impact the various forms of evaporation are listed and quantified. This review and summary will provide practitioners and researchers with theoretical and practical guidance on measurement techniques and estimates of evaporation under a wide range of conditions.

show abstract

Section: Evaporation Based On Methods Of Water Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evaporation Based On Methods Of Water Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measured and Simulated Spray Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaporation Research: Review and Interpretation

Burt

Mutziger

Allen

et al. 2005

J. Irrig. Drain Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1). We speculate that the overhead system yields may have been lower in the first year because of the very high number of overhead irrigations applied (30, compared with 18 in the second year), which likely resulted in a higher proportion of applied water being lost as evaporation and less water stored in the soil compared with the second year Thompson et al 1997); also ET o was higher in the first year (table 2).…”

Section: Irrigation Systems Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Precision overhead irrigation is suitable for several Central Valley crops

Mitchell

Shrestha²,

Hollingsworth

et al. 2016

Cal Ag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Overhead systems are the dominant irrigation technology in many parts of the world, but they are not widely used in California even though they have higher water application efficiency than furrow irrigation systems and lower labor requirements than drip systems. With water and labor perennial concerns in California, the suitability of overhead systems merits consideration. From 2008 through 2013, in studies near Five Points, California, we evaluated overhead irrigation for wheat, corn, cotton, tomato, onion and broccoli as an alternative to furrow and drip irrigation. With the exception of tomato, equal or increased yields were achieved with overhead irrigation. Many variables are involved in the choice of an irrigation system, but our results suggest that, with more research to support best management practices, overhead irrigation may be useful to a wider set of California farmers than currently use it.A 1976 Scientific American article called center-pivot irrigation "perhaps the most significant mechanical innovation in agriculture since the replacement of draft animals by the tractor" (Splinter 1976). Patented in 1952 by Frank Zybach, a farmer in eastern Colorado, center-pivot systems are automated, precision irrigation water application machines typically made up of seven or eight connected pipes with drop hoses and sprinkler nozzles that rotate in a line around a pivot point. Linear move systems are similar but apply irrigation water in a straight line across a field. Together, center-pivot and linear move systems are known as overhead, or mechanized, irrigation systems and are the most prevalent form of irrigation system in the United States (NASS 2013). They account for the irrigation of 50.4% of total U.S. irrigated acreage.In Nebraska, the state with the highest crop acreage under irrigation, 70,000 overhead systems are used on more than 7.2 million acres -87% of the state's total irrigated land -and the remaining gravity irrigation systems are being rapidly replaced by overhead systems because of overhead systems' superior application precision and yield benefits (Pfeifer and Line 2009). In California, by contrast, roughly 350 overhead systems irrigate about 150,000 acres, just 2% of the state's total irrigated acreage. Technology adoptionSeveral factors may have contributed to the slow rate of adoption of overhead irrigation in California.First, difficulties encountered by early adopters of the technology led to overhead systems gaining an undeserved reputation for being unable to keep up with California's high crop evapotranspiration demands, losing unacceptably large amounts of water to evaporation, and being prone to getting stuck in muddy fields. While successful installations of center-pivot systems in recent years show that the technology can in fact work well in California, these negative perceptions persist.Incomplete coverage by center-pivot systems is another issue. With a standard center-pivot system, roughly 20%, or 33 acres, of a typical 160-acre (quarter section) field is unirrigated. ...

show abstract

“…It is the dominant component of ET between irrigations, (Lawrence et al, 2007), whereas during sprinkler irrigation, canopy evaporation is assumed to be the dominant component followed by transpiration, soil evaporation and droplet evaporation (Thomson et al, 1997). It has been suggested that transpiration can be decreased by 50-70% during sprinkler irrigation (Cavero et al, 2009;Martinez-Cob et al, 2008) while canopy evaporation can be increased more than 50% (Thompson et al, 1997) largely due to the wet canopy evaporation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Sap Flow Sensors to Measure the Transpiration Rate of Plants during Canopy Wetting and Drying

Uddin

Smith

Hancock

et al. 2014

JAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate measurement of transpiration is required to estimate the various components of evaporation losses during sprinkler irrigation. Among the methods, sap flow measurements have widely used for direct measurements of transpiration rate in plant. To evaluate the applicability of this method to field experiments involving canopy wetting (by sprinkler irrigation), stem flow measurements were compared with transpiration values estimated from successive mass measurements of small potted plants using pre-calibrated mini-lysimeters in a glasshouse at the University of Southern Queensland, during the period August-October 2010. From this study it was found that when the canopy was dry, the sap flow measurements mirrored the transpiration rate of plants with reasonable accuracy, overestimating the transpiration rate by about 11%. The measurements showed no evidence of time lag between sap flow and transpiration. Following wetting of the plant canopy the sap flow declined rapidly reflecting a decline in the transpiration rate transpiration and sap flow. Location of the sap flow gage on the stem was seen to be a factor with gages at different heights giving different sap flow rates again due to the buffering capacity of the stem.

show abstract

Testing of a Water Loss Distribution Model for Moving Sprinkler Systems

Cited by 51 publications

References 9 publications

Evaporation Research: Review and Interpretation

Evaporation Research: Review and Interpretation

Precision overhead irrigation is suitable for several Central Valley crops

Evaluation of Sap Flow Sensors to Measure the Transpiration Rate of Plants during Canopy Wetting and Drying

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About