Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Flow measuring devices in surface irrigation for enhancing agricultural water productivity


Affiliations
1 ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
2 ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
 

Judicious use of water plays a vital role in enhancing its productivity in agriculture. In India, surface irrigation covers about 88% of the irrigated area with application efficiency ranging from 30% to 40%. Therefore, it becomes imperative to improve water application efficiency of canal commands and other areas under surface irrigation. Water application efficiency can be improved by minimizing conveyance losses and by judicious irrigation scheduling pertaining to different crops, which can be accomplished by accurate measurement of irrigation water. Measurement of irrigation water supplied to farmlands not only assists in the saving of water but also enhances water productivity in agriculture. The most popular device for measuring irrigation water in field channels is the Parshall flume, which has undergone a series of modifications to simplify its construction, improve the accuracy of measurements and reduce its cost leading to its wider acceptance by the stakeholders. Thus, it becomes imperative to deve­lop an accurate, low-cost and portable flow-measuring device for enhancing agricultural water productivity. Moreover, a review of the literature reveals limited availability of portable and digital flow-measuring devices for real-time measurement of surface irrigation through field channels. Nonetheless, it is established that the use of flow-measuring devices in surface irrigation will not only save water but also expand the area under irrigation, ensure its sustainability and improve agricultural water productivity.

Keywords

Agriculture, field channels, flow-measuring devices, surface irrigation, water productivity.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • GoI, Three-year national agenda, NITI Aayog, Government of India, 2017.

  • Klaus, P., The devil is in the details – only what get measured gets managed. In Measuring Customer Experience, Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK, 2015, pp. 81–101.

  • Ahmed, S. R. M. and Das, S., A smart flow measurement system adaptive to different variation using ultrasonic flowmeter. Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., 2014, 3(2), 1340–1345.

  • Santhosh, K. V. and Roy, B. K., An intelligent flow measurement technique using ultrasonic flow meter with optimized neural network. Int. J. Control Autom., 2012, 5, 185–196.

  • Skogerboe, G. V., Hyatt, M. L., England, J. D. and Johnson, J. R., Measuring water with Parshall flumes, Utah State University, USA, Reports, Paper 83, 1966.

  • United States Bureau of Reclamation, Water Measurement Manual, US Department of Interior, Denver, Colorado, USA, 2001.

  • Parshall, R. L., Improved venturi flume. Agricultural Experiment Station, Colorado Agricultural College, Bulletin No. 336, Fort Collins, Colorado, 1928.

  • Cone, V. M., The Venturi Flume, US Government Printing Office, 1917.

  • IS: 14371, Measurement of liquid flow in open channels – Parshall and SANIIRI flumes, 1996.

  • Parshall, R. L., Parshall flumes of large size. Colorado Agricultural and Mechanical College, Extension Service, Fort Collins, Colorado, Bulletin No. 426A, 1932.

  • Robinson, A. R., Parshall measuring flumes of small sizes. Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 61, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, 1957.

  • Skogerboe, G. V., Cut-throat flow measuring flume for flat gradient channels. In Seventh Congress on Irrigation and Drainage, Mexico City, 1969.

  • Hyatt, M. L., Design, calibration, and evaluation of a trapezoidal measuring flume by model study, Utah State University, USA, Reports, Paper 386, 1965.

  • Bos, M. G., Replogle, J. A. and Clemmens, A. J., Flow Measuring Flumes for Open Channel Systems, John Wiley, New York, USA, 1984.

  • Samani, Z. and Magallanez, H., Simple flume for flow measurement in open channel. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 2000, 126(2), 127–129.

  • Singh, J., Mittal, S. K. and Tiwari, H. L., Parshall flume discharge relation under free flow condition. Int. J. Adv. Res., 2014, 2(7), 906–915.

  • Das, R., Nayek, M., Das, S., Dutta, P. and Mazumdar, A., Design and analysis of 0.127 m (5″) Cutthroat flume. Ain Shams Eng. J., 2017, 8(3), 295–303.

  • Carollo, F. G., DiStefano, C., Ferro, V. and Pampalone, V., New stage-discharge equation for the SMBF flume. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 2016, 142(5), 1–7.

  • Krupavati, K., Satyanarayana, T. V. and Hema Kumar, H. V., Performance testing of semicircular contraction critical flow flumes for field channels. IOSR J. Mech. Civil Eng., 2012, 1(5), 1–7.

  • Kolavani, F. L., Bijankhan, M., Di-Stefano, C., Ferro, V. and Mazdeh, A. M., Flow measurement using circular portable flume. Flow Measu. Instrum., 2018, 62, 76–83.

  • Goel, A., Verma, D. V. S. and Sangwan, S., Open channel flow measurement of water by using width contraction. Int. Scholar. Sci. Res. Innov., 2019, 9(2), 1557–1562.

  • Bos, M. G., Discharge measurement structures (no. 20). International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement, 1989.

  • Robinson, A. R., Simplified flow corrections for Parshall flumes under submerged conditions. Civ. Eng., ASCE, 1965, 25(9), 75.

  • Hyatt, M. L., Skogerboe, G. V. and Egglestron, K. O., Laboratory investigations of submerged flow in selected Parshall flumes. Utah State University, USA, Reports, Paper 380, 1966.

  • Skogerboe, G. V., Hyatt, M. L. and Eggleston, K. O., Design and calibration of submerged open channel flow measurement structures: Part 1 – Submerged flow, Utah State University, USA, Reports, Paper 93, 1967.

  • Skogerboe, G. V., Hyatt, M. L., England, J. D. and Johnson, J. L., Design and calibration of submerged open channel flow measurement structures. Part 2 – Parshall flume, Utah State University, USA, Reports, Paper 81, 1967.

  • Skogerboe, G. V., Bennet, R. S. and Walker, W. R., Generalized discharge relations for cutthroat flumes. J. Irrig. Drain. Div., ASCE, 1972, 98(4), 569–583.

  • Ahmad, S., Yasin, M. and Ahmad, M. M., Flow measurements with portable cutthroat flume and broad crested weir in flat gradient channels. Irrig. Drain. Syst., 1991, 5(2), 141–150.

  • Abt, S. R., Thompson, K. and Staker, K. J., Discharge correction for longitudinal settlement of Parshall flumes. Trans. ASAE, 1989, 32(5), 1541–1544.

  • Abt, S. R. and Staker, K. J., Rating correction for lateral settlement of Parshall Flumes. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 1990, 116(6), 797–803.

  • Singh, A., Effect of design parameter variations on head discharge relationship of Parshall flume. Master’s thesis, ICAR-IARI, New Delhi, 1990.

  • Prasad, S., Performance evaluation of a Parshall flume under different simulated settlements. Master’s thesis, ICAR-IARI, New Delhi, 1991.

  • Abt, S. R., Cook, C., Staker, K. J. and Johns, D. D., Small Parshall flume rating correction. J. Hydraul. Eng., 1992, 118(5), 798–803.

  • Genovez, A., Abt, S., Florentin, B. and Garton, A., Correction for settlement of Parshall flume. J. Irrig. Drain Eng., 1993, 119(6), 1081–1091.

  • Abt, S. R., Genovez, A. and Florentin, B., Correction for settlement in submerged Parshall flumes. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 1994, 120(3), 676–682.

  • Heiner, B. J., Parshall flume staff gauge location and entrance wingwall discharge calibration corrections. Ph.D. thesis, Utah State University, USA, 2009.

  • Parshall, R. L., The Parshall measuring flume, Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station, Colorado Agricultural College, Fort Collins, Colorado, Bulletin No. 423, 1936.

  • Le-Coz, J., Camenen, B., Peyrar, X. and Dramais, G., Uncertainty in open-channel discharges measured with the velocity–area method. Flow Meas. Instrum., 2012, 26, 18–29.

  • Almeida, A. S. and de Souza, V. C. B., An alternative method for measuring velocities in open-channel flows: performance evaluation of a pitot tube compared to an acoustic meter. Braz. J. Water Resour., 2017, 22, 1–14.

  • Weaver, M., Performance evaluation of uncalibrated packaged continuous Doppler flow meter systems in a variety of water diversion scenarios. Technical Memo, Department of Water Resources, State of Idaho, USA, 2009.

  • Vermeyen, T. B. P., A laboratory evaluation of Unidata’s Starflow Doppler flow meter and MGD Technologies’ acoustic Doppler flow meter. In Building Partnerships, Joint Conference on Water Resource Engineering and Water Resources Planning and Management, ASCE, Minnesota, USA, 2000.

  • Sood, R., Kaur, M. and Lenka, M., Design and development of automatic water flow meter. IJCSEA, 2013, 3(3), 49–59.

  • Samani, Z., Jorat, S. and Yousaf, M., Hydraulic characteristics of circular flume. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 1991, 117(4), 558–566.

  • Replogle, J. A., Critical flow flumes with complex cross section. In Proceedings of the Irrigation Drainage Division Special Conference, ASCE, Reston, Virginia, USA, 1975.

  • Hager, W. H., Mobile flume for circular channel. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 1988, 114(3), 520–534.

  • Samani, Z. and Magallanez, H., Measuring water in trapezoidal canals. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 1993, 119(1), 181–186.

  • Robinson, A. R. and Chamberlain, A. R., Trapezoidal flumes for open-channel flow measurement. ASABE, 1960, 3(2), 120–124.

  • Samani, Z., Three simple flumes for flow measurement in open channels. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 2017, 143(6), 04017010 (1–4).

  • Goel, A., Verma, D. V. S. and Sangwan, S., Open channel flow measurement of water by using width contraction. Int. Scholar. Sci. Res. Innov., 2015, 9, 1557–1562.

  • Skogerboe, G. V. and Hyatt, M. L., Rectangular cutthroat flow measuring flumes, Utah State University, USA, Reports, Paper 87, 1967.

  • Kruse, E. G., Discussion of rating correction for lateral settlement of Parshall flumes. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 1992, 118(2), 337–339.

  • Abt, S. R., Florentin, C. B., Genovez, A. and Ruth, B. C., Settlement and submergence adjustments for parshall flume. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 1995, 121(5), 317–321.

  • Abt, S. R., Ruth, B. C. and Skowron, E. M., Rating adjustment for settlement of cutthroat flumes. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 1998, 124(6), 311–315.


Abstract Views: 380

PDF Views: 144




  • Flow measuring devices in surface irrigation for enhancing agricultural water productivity

Abstract Views: 380  |  PDF Views: 144

Authors

A. Kumar
ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
A. Sarangi
ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India

Abstract


Judicious use of water plays a vital role in enhancing its productivity in agriculture. In India, surface irrigation covers about 88% of the irrigated area with application efficiency ranging from 30% to 40%. Therefore, it becomes imperative to improve water application efficiency of canal commands and other areas under surface irrigation. Water application efficiency can be improved by minimizing conveyance losses and by judicious irrigation scheduling pertaining to different crops, which can be accomplished by accurate measurement of irrigation water. Measurement of irrigation water supplied to farmlands not only assists in the saving of water but also enhances water productivity in agriculture. The most popular device for measuring irrigation water in field channels is the Parshall flume, which has undergone a series of modifications to simplify its construction, improve the accuracy of measurements and reduce its cost leading to its wider acceptance by the stakeholders. Thus, it becomes imperative to deve­lop an accurate, low-cost and portable flow-measuring device for enhancing agricultural water productivity. Moreover, a review of the literature reveals limited availability of portable and digital flow-measuring devices for real-time measurement of surface irrigation through field channels. Nonetheless, it is established that the use of flow-measuring devices in surface irrigation will not only save water but also expand the area under irrigation, ensure its sustainability and improve agricultural water productivity.

Keywords


Agriculture, field channels, flow-measuring devices, surface irrigation, water productivity.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv122%2Fi10%2F1135-1144