ESTIMATION OF EVAPOTRANSPIRATION IN SARDAR SAROVAR COMMAND AREA USING WEAP

Similar documents
Crop Water Requirement using Single and Dual Crop Coefficient Approach

Crop Water Requirement. Presented by: Felix Jaria:

Crop Water Requirement Estimation by using CROPWAT Model: A Case Study of Halali Dam Command Area, Vidisha District, Madhya Pradesh, India

ABSTRACT. KEYWORDS: Reference Evapo transpiration (ETo), Blaney-Criddle Method, Penman-Monteith Method, Irrigation NOMENCLATURE

Crop water requirement and availability in the Lower Chenab Canal System in Pakistan

M= Rank No. N= no. of years

How to irrigate. How much to irrigate. When to irrigate

Revised FAO Procedures for Calculating Evapotranspiration Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 56 with Testing in Idaho 1

REFERENCE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION ESTIMATION USING CROPWAT MODEL AT LUDHIANA DISTRICT (PUNJAB) A. Patel 1, R. Sharda 2, S. Patel 3 and P.

The Ways of Increasing Efficiency of Crop Irrigation Management with the Help of Automatic Weather Stations and ET Gages

CFT Water Assessment Description

ANNEX C: CROP WATER REQUIREMENT AND IRRIGATION SCHEDULE AGRICULTURE & IRRIGATION. December Paradis Someth Timo Räsänen

Figure 1: Schematic of water fluxes and various hydrologic components in the vadose zone (Šimůnek and van Genuchten, 2006).

DETERMINATION OF CROP CO-EFFICIENT AND CROP WATER REQUIREMENT OF MUNGBEAN ( VIGNA RADITA L. ) IN DL1B AGRO ECOLOGICAL REGION OF SRI LANKA

Water limited yield. Authors. Scope: questions/ challenges the tool addresses. Target group. Requirements for tool application

Determination of the Optimal Date for Sowing of Wheat in Canal Irrigated Areas using FAO CROPWAT Model

Comparative study of water requirement with seasonal rainfall for Cereals, pulses and oil seed of Khurda district of Odisha

Water balance in soil

Influence of evapotranspiration estimates on the water balance of sugarcane cropping system in the Hawaiian island of Maui

CHAPTER 6: Irrigation scheduling

12/12/ General. Crop period and base period Duty and delta of a crop Duty and delta of a crop

Crop Water Requirements. Lecture note for Soil and Water Management Course Prepared by Dr ND Nang

Texture Definition: relative proportions of various sizes of individual soil particles USDA classifications Sand: mm Silt:

Development of the Mississippi Irrigation Scheduling Tool-MIST

Water Footprint Evaluation of Oryza sativa L.Tha Wang Pha District, Nan Province

Chapter 1 Introduction

IRRIGATION SCHEDULING OF ALFALFA USING EVAPOTRANSPIRATION. Richard L. Snyder and Khaled M. Bali 1 ABSTRACT

ET-BASED IRRIGATION SCHEDULING

Draft manual. Prepared by Paula Paredes Supervised by Luis Santos Pereira

Temperature extremes, moisture deficiency and their impacts on dryland agriculture in Gujarat, India

FORECASTING CROP WATER REQUIREMENT BY ET-HS MODEL FOR ARID AND SEMI ARID REGION OF IRAN

Comparison of Several Reference Evapotranspiration Methods for Itoshima Peninsula Area, Fukuoka, Japan

Agronomy 406 World Climates

Cristian Paltineanu 1, Emil Chitu 2 and Emilia Mateescu 3

A NEW TECHNIQUE FOR EVALUATION OF CROP COEFFICIENTS:A CASE STUDY

Smart Irrigation Controllers: Operation of Evapotranspiration-Based Controllers 1

Ex: If porosity of a soil sample is 50% by volume, the moisture in each meter of a saturated soil is equivalent to 50 cm on the field surface.

Fecha 17/octubre/2018

Crop Water Requirements and Irrigation Scheduling

APPLICATIONS OF AN OPERATIONAL COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR IRRIGATION PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT IN ROMANIA

Water Requirements and Irrigation Scheduling of Maize Crop using CROPWAT Model

Sensitivity of Crop Water Requirements to Elevated Temperatures in Arid Rajasthan

AquaCrop theoretical and practical training

Climate Variability, Urbanization and Water in India

08. WATER BUDGETING AND ITS IMPORTANCE - IRRIGATION SCHEDULING - APPROACHES

Impact of Urbanization on the Natural Groundwater Recharge of Karuvannur Watershed

Lysimeter based crop coefficients for estimation of crop evapotranspiration of black gram (Vigna Mungo L.) in sub-humid region

Hydrologic Cycle. Water Availabilty. Surface Water. Groundwater

DSS-IWM: A FARM LEVEL DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR IRRIGATION WATER MANAGEMENT

Water Resources Engineering. Prof. R. Srivastava. Department of Water Resources Engineering. Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur.

Comparison of field level and regional actual ETc values developed from remote sensing and dual crop coefficient procedure

Study project. Galina Shevyrina

Tools and Methodologies in Agrometeorology

Estimation of Evapotranspiration using CROPWAT 8.0 Model for Shipra River Basin in Madhya Pradesh, India

Hands-on Session. Adrian L. Vogl Stanford University

On-Farm Water Management. More Crop Production

Effects of the decoupling of the subsidies on agricultural water productivity

Methods of Irrigation Scheduling and Determination of Irrigation threshold triggers

A Novel Method for Water irrigation System for paddy fields using ANN

N. AMENZOU(1,*), H. MARAH(1), F. RAIBI(1), J. EZZAHAR(1), S. KHABBA(2), S. ERRAKI, J. Lionel (3)

Evaluation of the Efficiency of CROPWAT Model for Determining Plant Water Requirement in Arid Regions

Measurement of Evapotranspiration Across Different Land Cover Types in the Greater Toronto Area

Alpha College of Engineering. Fifth Semester B.E. Question Bank. Hydrology and irrigation engineering

Procedure to easily Fine-Tune Crop Coefficients for Irrigation Scheduling

Determination of water requirement and irrigation timing for Amaranthus hybridus in Maiduguri metropolis, north-eastern Nigeria

Chapter 3 THEORY OF INFILTRATION. 3.1 General

Water balance at the field and watershed scale.

CHAPTER ONE : INTRODUCTION

AGRICULTURAL METEOROLOGY IN TURKEY

DRAFT - DO NOT DISSEMINATE

Integrate GIS and Cropwat Model in Study Crop Water Requirement and Irrigation Scheduling

Integrating wetlands and riparian zones in regional hydrological modelling

ANALYSIS OF RAINFALL DATA TO ESTIMATE RAIN CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS CROP WATER REQUIREMENT USING CROPWAT MODEL

Simulation of Peanut ( Arachis hypogaea L.) with Cropwat Model in Irrigation Condition and Rainfed

Development of a decision support tool: Preliminary analysis to improve field data collection in Kathiraveli Village, Sri Lanka

Effects of land use change on the water resources of the Basoda basin using the SWAT model

Agricultural Production Forecasting Using Planning Distribution Model (PDM):A Case Study of the Nam Oon Project

Series: Irrigation of potatoes IV. Scheduling tools - Atmospheric methods

MODELING IRRIGATION DEMAND IN RESPONSE

M.L. Kavvas, Z. Q. Chen, M. Anderson, L. Liang, N. Ohara Hydrologic Research Laboratory, Civil and Environmental Engineering, UC Davis

Agricultural drought index and monitoring on national scale. LU Houquan National Meteorological Center, CMA

Water4Crops EU USE EFFICIENCY TO SUPPORT THE GREEN ECONOMY IN EU AND INDIA

Evaluation of the versatility of WEAP as a planning tool in rice production in the Philippines in view of water-saving techniques. M.Sc.

Indian Journal of Hill Farming

Sensor Strategies in Cotton. Stacia L. Davis, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Irrigation Engineering LSU AgCenter

The application of climatic data for planning and management of sustainable rainfed and irrigated crop production

Hydrologic cycle, runoff process

MANAGEMENT OF CROPS. Thomas Marek Texas A&M University Agricultural Research and Extension Center, 6500 Amarillo Blvd. West, Amarillo, Texas 79106

Soil salinity and cotton yield estimation on regional scale in Tarim River Basin using EPIC Model and SOTER approach

Estimation irrigation water requirements with derived crop coefficients for upland and paddy crops in ChiaNan Irrigation Association, Taiwan

ENGINEERING HYDROLOGY

Improvement of Water Use Efficiency and Remote Sensing Applications for Surface Soil Moisture Monitoring

Evaluation of Indices for an Agricultural Drought Monitoring System in Arid and Semi-Arid Regions

ESTIMATION OF EVAPOTRANSPIRATION AND CROP WATER REQUIREMENTS OF SOME SELECTED CROPS AT TONO IRRIGATION SCHEME IN THE UPPER EAST REGION OF GHANA

Strategies to Maximize Income with Limited Water

Water and Nitrogen balance studies of Rice crop grown under drainage lysimeters

Modification of the Palmer Drought Severity Index for Mediterranean environments: Model and application

Irrigation Management for Trees and Vines

EVALUATION OF CROP COEFFICIENTS FROM WATER CONSUMPTION IN PADDY FIELDS

Development of Decision Support System for On-Farm Irrigation Water Management

Transcription:

ESTIMATION OF EVAPOTRANSPIRATION IN SARDAR SAROVAR COMMAND AREA USING WEAP BY : RINA. CHOKSI, GOPAL H. BHATTI AND PROF. H. M. PATEL CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY AND ENGINEERING, THE M.S. UNIVERSITY OF BARODA, VADODARA

India s Population and Per-capita Water Availability 8000 7000 6000 5000 7743 7771 7001 6129 5409 4446 Per capita availability of fresh water estimated in 2001 in Gujarat was 1137 m 3 per annum. As against national renewable fresh water standing of 2000m 3. In view of this Gujarat can be identified as Water Scarce State. 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 3563 2858 2308 1902 252 251 279 319 361 439 548 683 846 1027 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 Population (Million) Per capita water availability (Cubic meters) Source : Tata Energy Research Institute, (TERI), 1998 and Census India, 2001.

Available Water Resources in Gujarat State Total geographical area of state is 19.6 M ha. Cultivable area is 12.5 M ha. Population of about 60.38 million (as per 2011 census). States decade growth rate 19.17 %. The state s water resources are just 2.28% of India s total water resources. Indicating the low availability per-capita water. Source : Gujarat State Water Policy, 2004 & GWSSB, 2005 River basins in Gujarat State Total 185 river basins in the state of Gujarat 17 basins are in the North and South Gujarat; 71 and 97 basins are in Saurashtra and Kutch region. 97 17 71 North & South Gujarat Saurashtra Kutch Availability of quantum of water resources in Gujarat State 15.80% 2.20% 82% The availability of quantum of water resources in the north and south Gujarat is 82%. Total water available in Saurashtra and Kutch region is 15.80% and 2.20% respectively.

Sardar Sarovar Project Command Area The Sardar Sarovar Project is one of the largest irrigation projects of India. The GCA is 3.43 M ha, while CCA is 2.12 M ha. Around 8215 villages and 135 towns/cities of Gujarat shall be covered under Narmada Project. Soil distribution ranges from loamy to clayey. Crops grown in the area are maize, cotton, pulses, paddy, bajra, castor, tobacco and pulses in Kharif and wheat, maize, gram, jowar, pulses, vegetables in Rabi season

Objectives To estimate the actual crop evapotranspiration of maize and wheat crops in the study area. To carry out daily soil moisture balance in root zone. To evaluate two different irrigation scheduling strategies, conventional and model based.

Methodology Data collection related to irrigation and crop water requirements from various agencies. Estimation of Reference evapotranspiration by using daily meteorological data of the year 2008-09. Computing crop evapotranspiration for selected major crops. Estimating irrigation requirements. Working out strategies for irrigation. Software usage Using MABIA Method in WEAP It includes modules for estimating reference evapotranspiration and soil water capacity. For a daily simulation of transpiration, evaporation, irrigation requirements and scheduling The method uses dual crop coefficient where crop coefficient value is divided into a basal crop coefficient, k cb and a separate, K e, representing evaporation from the soil surface. The method is an improvement over CROPWAT, which uses single crop coefficient and hence, does not separate evaporation and transpiration.

CROP WATER REQUIREMENT Crop water requirement = Evaporation +Transpiration +Seepage below the Ground + Drainage. Major component is evaporation and transpiration combined to gather named Evapotranspiration.

Reference ETo The rate of evapotranspiration from a reference surface is called reference evapotranspiration. ETo can be computed from meteorological data and crop data. It depends on: Weather parameters such as radiation, maximum and minimum temperature, humidity and wind speed; Crop factors such as crop type, development stage, crop height, type of irrigation and Management and environmental conditions Different climatological methods are used for estimating reference crop evapotranspiration (ETo). The FAO Penman-Monteith method is recommended as the sole standard method for the definition and computation of the ETo.

Potential Evapotranspiration under Standard conditions (ETc) Amount of water that would be consumed by evapotranspiration if no water restrictions exists. The soil has extensive moisture and it is covered by fully developed vegetation. Crop evapotranspiration (ETc) can be calculated by multiplying the reference ETo by crop coefficient Kc (Allen et al., 1998).

Crop Coefficient Crop coefficient (Kc) can be calculated by two approaches. Single crop coefficient and dual crop coefficient. In single crop coefficient, difference in Evaporation and transpiration between field crops and reference grass surface can be integrated in a single crop coefficient (Kc). Dual crop coefficient is separated into two coefficients : A basal crop coefficient (Kcb). Actual evapotranspiration conditions when the soil surface is dry but sufficient root zone moisture is present to support full transpiration. A soil evaporation coefficient (Ke). Soil evaporation coefficient (Ke) calculated when the topsoil dries out, and evaporation is less and evaporation reduces in proportion to the amount of water available in surface soil layer. Source : (Allen et al., 1998; Allen R. G. 2002; Allen et al., 2005

Actual Evapotranspiration under non standard conditions (ETc act) It is the amount of water that would be consumed by evapotranspiration in the catchment, including water supplied by irrigation also. It is also known as ET adj. The crop is under stress in the dry soil when the potential energy of soil water drops below the threshold value. The effect of soil water stress can be estimated by water stress coefficient (Ks) multiplied with basal crop coefficient (Kcb).

Computing crop evapotranspiration Daily water balance For Estimating irrigation requirements. Estimating crop water requirements by calculating the soil water balance of the root zone on daily basis. Planning the depth and timing of irrigation A daily water balance, expressed in terms of depletion at the end of the day, is: Where = root zone depletion at the end of day i [mm] = depletion in the root zone at the end of the previous day, i-1 [mm] = precipitation on day i [mm], limited by maximum daily infiltration rate [mm] = surface runoff from the soil surface on day i [mm] = net irrigation depth on day i that infiltrates the soil [mm] = capillary rise from the groundwater table on day i [mm] = actual crop evapotranspiration on day i [mm] = water flux out of the root zone by deep percolation on day i [mm]

Reduced evaporation or transpiration due to limited moisture availability resulting from increasing soil moisture deficits: When soil is wet, stress coefficient (Ks) value is maximum and evapotranspiration occurs at potential rate. If there is precipitation or irrigation, Ks = 1. As the soil surface dries, Ks<1 and when no water is available for evapotranspiration in the top soil, Ks=0. To avoid crop water stress, irrigation needs to be applied. Ks can be calculated as follows (Allen et al., 1998; Allen R. G. 2002). Source:- Rushton et al., 2005. Where, TAW= Total Available Water (mm) RAW= Readily Available water (mm) D r, i = root zone depletion at end of day i (mm) p = depletion factor

Working out strategies for irrigation SE NO. I aditional ractices II Model pecified CROP Maize Wheat Maize PLANTING DATE 5 th July 1 st November 5 th July HARVESTI NG DATE 22 nd Septembe r 28 th February 22 nd Septembe r IRRIGATION STRATEGY IRRIGATIO N SCHEDULI NG 18 th,47 th, 60 th day 1 st, 6 th, 11 th, 34 th, 46 th, 58 th, 60 th, 72 nd, 84 th day 100% RAW IRRIGATIO N AMOUNT 25 mm 60 mm 100% Depletion Irrigation to be applied before or at the moment when readily available water (RAW) is equal or greater than soil moisture depletion (SMD) to avoid crop water stress. i.e. (SMD <= RAW). Irrigation applied at fixed interval and fixed amount as per practices followed by localities. Irrigation to be applied when crop reaches at a fixed % of soil moisture depletion. The irrigation amount can also be determined according to fixed depth, % of deletion, % of RAW and % of TAW. Wheat 1 st November 28 th February 100% RAW 100% Depletion

Reference PET Scenario : All Days (366) Millimeter 12.5 12.0 11.5 11.0 10.5 10.0 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.0 7.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 2008-03-01 2008-03-07 2008-03-13 2008-03-19 2008-03-25 2008-03-31 2008-04-07 2008-04-13 2008-04-19 2008-04-25 2008-05-01 2008-05-07 2008-05-13 2008-05-20 2008-05-26 2008-06-01 2008-06-07 2008-06-13 2008-06-19 2008-06-25 Reference PET Scenario: Reference, All Days (366) 2008-07-02 2008-07-08 2008-07-14 2008-07-20 2008-07-26 2008-08-01 2008-08-07 2008-08-14 2008-08-20 2008-08-26 2008-09-01 2008-09-07 2008-09-13 2008-09-19 2008-09-26 2008-10-02 2008-10-08 2008-10-14 2008-10-20 2008-10-26 2008-11-01 2008-11-08 2008-11-14 2008-11-20 2008-11-26 2008-12-02 2008-12-08 2008-12-14 2008-12-21 2008-12-27 2009-01-02 2009-01-08 2009-01-14 2009-01-20 2009-01-26 2009-02-02 2009-02-08 2009-02-14 2009-02-20 2009-02-26

Comparison of potential and actual Case 1 Traditional practices Kc Potential. crop coefficient for case 1 1.35 1.30 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 Kc Potential Scenario: Reference, All Days (366) 3/1/2008 3/7/2008 3/13/2008 3/19/2008 3/25/2008 3/31/2008 4/6/2008 4/12/2008 4/18/2008 4/24/2008 4/30/2008 5/6/2008 5/12/2008 5/18/2008 5/24/2008 5/30/2008 6/5/2008 6/11/2008 6/17/2008 6/23/2008 6/29/2008 7/5/2008 7/11/2008 7/17/2008 7/23/2008 7/29/2008 8/4/2008 8/10/2008 8/16/2008 8/22/2008 8/28/2008 9/3/2008 9/9/2008 9/15/2008 9/21/2008 9/27/2008 10/3/2008 10/9/2008 10/15/2008 10/21/2008 10/27/2008 11/2/2008 11/8/2008 11/14/2008 11/20/2008 11/26/2008 12/2/2008 12/8/2008 12/14/2008 12/20/2008 12/26/2008 1/1/2009 1/7/2009 1/13/2009 1/19/2009 1/25/2009 1/31/2009 2/6/2009 2/12/2009 2/18/2009 2/24/2009 agriculture catchment Case 1 Traditional practices Kc Actual. It is marginally lesser in initial period of wheat 1.35 1.30 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 Kc Actual Scenario: Reference, All Days (366) 3/1/2008 3/7/2008 3/13/2008 3/19/2008 3/25/2008 3/31/2008 4/6/2008 4/12/2008 4/18/2008 4/24/2008 4/30/2008 5/6/2008 5/12/2008 5/18/2008 5/24/2008 5/30/2008 6/5/2008 6/11/2008 6/17/2008 6/23/2008 6/29/2008 7/5/2008 7/11/2008 7/17/2008 7/23/2008 7/29/2008 8/4/2008 8/10/2008 8/16/2008 8/22/2008 8/28/2008 9/3/2008 9/9/2008 9/15/2008 9/21/2008 9/27/2008 10/3/2008 10/9/2008 10/15/2008 10/21/2008 10/27/2008 11/2/2008 11/8/2008 11/14/2008 11/20/2008 11/26/2008 12/2/2008 12/8/2008 12/14/2008 12/20/2008 12/26/2008 1/1/2009 1/7/2009 1/13/2009 1/19/2009 1/25/2009 1/31/2009 2/6/2009 2/12/2009 2/18/2009 2/24/2009 agriculture catchment

Comparison of actual Crop Coefficient of both cases Case 1 Traditional practices Kc actual 1.35 1.30 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 Kc Actual Scenario: Reference, All Days (366) 3/1/2008 3/7/2008 3/13/2008 3/19/2008 3/25/2008 3/31/2008 4/6/2008 4/12/2008 4/18/2008 4/24/2008 4/30/2008 5/6/2008 5/12/2008 5/18/2008 5/24/2008 5/30/2008 6/5/2008 6/11/2008 6/17/2008 6/23/2008 6/29/2008 7/5/2008 7/11/2008 7/17/2008 7/23/2008 7/29/2008 8/4/2008 8/10/2008 8/16/2008 8/22/2008 8/28/2008 9/3/2008 9/9/2008 9/15/2008 9/21/2008 9/27/2008 10/3/2008 10/9/2008 10/15/2008 10/21/2008 10/27/2008 11/2/2008 11/8/2008 11/14/2008 11/20/2008 11/26/2008 12/2/2008 12/8/2008 12/14/2008 12/20/2008 12/26/2008 1/1/2009 1/7/2009 1/13/2009 1/19/2009 1/25/2009 1/31/2009 2/6/2009 2/12/2009 2/18/2009 2/24/2009 agriculture catchment Case 2 Model specified Kc actual are marginally higher in initial period 1.35 1.30 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 Kc Actual Scenario: Reference, All Days (366) 3/1/2008 3/7/2008 3/13/2008 3/19/2008 3/25/2008 3/31/2008 4/6/2008 4/12/2008 4/18/2008 4/24/2008 4/30/2008 5/6/2008 5/12/2008 5/18/2008 5/24/2008 5/30/2008 6/5/2008 6/11/2008 6/17/2008 6/23/2008 6/29/2008 7/5/2008 7/11/2008 7/17/2008 7/23/2008 7/29/2008 8/4/2008 8/10/2008 8/16/2008 8/22/2008 8/28/2008 9/3/2008 9/9/2008 9/15/2008 9/21/2008 9/27/2008 10/3/2008 10/9/2008 10/15/2008 10/21/2008 10/27/2008 11/2/2008 11/8/2008 11/14/2008 11/20/2008 11/26/2008 12/2/2008 12/8/2008 12/14/2008 12/20/2008 12/26/2008 1/1/2009 1/7/2009 1/13/2009 1/19/2009 1/25/2009 1/31/2009 2/6/2009 2/12/2009 2/18/2009 2/24/2009 agriculture catchment

Comparison of ET actual and ET potential of both cases CASE NO. CROP TOTAL ET actual (mm) TOTAL ET pot 7.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 Case 1: Traditional practices ET Actual and Potential Scenario: Reference, All Days (366) ET Actual ET Potential 1 Maize 251.12 251.12 5.5 5.0 4.5 Wheat 478.13 479.82 2 Maize 251.39 251.39 Millimeter 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 Wheat 506.01 506.13 0.0 2008-03-01 2008-03-07 2008-03-13 2008-03-19 2008-03-25 2008-03-31 2008-04-06 2008-04-12 2008-04-18 2008-04-24 2008-04-30 2008-05-06 2008-05-12 2008-05-18 2008-05-24 2008-05-30 2008-06-05 2008-06-11 2008-06-17 2008-06-23 2008-06-29 2008-07-05 2008-07-11 2008-07-17 2008-07-23 2008-07-29 2008-08-04 2008-08-10 2008-08-16 2008-08-22 2008-08-28 2008-09-03 2008-09-09 2008-09-15 2008-09-21 2008-09-27 2008-10-03 2008-10-09 2008-10-15 2008-10-21 2008-10-27 2008-11-02 2008-11-08 2008-11-14 2008-11-20 2008-11-26 2008-12-02 2008-12-08 2008-12-14 2008-12-20 2008-12-26 2009-01-01 2009-01-07 2009-01-13 2009-01-19 2009-01-25 2009-01-31 2009-02-06 2009-02-12 2009-02-18 2009-02-24 Case 2: Model specified In maize crop, actual evapotranspiration is found same in Case-I and Case-II as this crop is not under water stress in both the cases. Meter 0.0080 0.0075 0.0070 0.0065 0.0060 0.0055 0.0050 0.0045 0.0040 ET Actual and Potential Scenario: Reference, All Days (366) ET Actual ET Potential 0.0035 0.0030 0.0025 But, in case of wheat crop; the water stress condition has resulted lower value of actual evapotranspiration in Case-I 0.0020 0.0015 0.0010 0.0005 0.0000 3/1/2008 3/7/2008 3/13/2008 3/19/2008 3/25/2008 3/31/2008 4/6/2008 4/12/2008 4/18/2008 4/24/2008 4/30/2008 5/6/2008 5/12/2008 5/18/2008 5/24/2008 5/30/2008 6/5/2008 6/11/2008 6/17/2008 6/23/2008 6/29/2008 7/5/2008 7/11/2008 7/17/2008 7/23/2008 7/29/2008 8/4/2008 8/10/2008 8/16/2008 8/22/2008 8/28/2008 9/3/2008 9/9/2008 9/15/2008 9/21/2008 9/27/2008 10/3/2008 10/9/2008 10/15/2008 10/21/2008 10/27/2008 11/2/2008 11/8/2008 11/14/2008 11/20/2008 11/26/2008 12/2/2008 12/8/2008 12/14/2008 12/20/2008 12/26/2008 1/1/2009 1/7/2009 1/13/2009 1/19/2009 1/25/2009 1/31/2009 2/6/2009 2/12/2009 2/18/2009 2/24/2009

Soil Moisture Balance CASE NO. CROP DECRE ASE IN SOIL MOIST URE (mm) TOTAL PRECIP ITATIO N (mm) TOTAL IRRIGA TION* (mm) TOTAL RUNOF F (mm) TOTAL FLOW TO GROU ND WATER (mm) INCRE ASE IN SOIL MOIST URE (mm) Case 1: Traditional practices Land Class Inflow s and Outflow s Scenario: Reference, All Days (366) 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 Surface Runoff Precipitation Irrigation Increase in Soil Moisture Flow to Groundwater Decrease in Soil Moisture Cubic Meter 1.0 0.0-1.0-2.0-3.0-4.0 1 Maize 109.74 883 75 211.78 508.42 96.404-5.0-6.0-7.0-8.0-9.0 3/1/2008 3/7/2008 3/14/2008 3/21/2008 3/28/2008 4/4/2008 4/11/2008 4/17/2008 4/24/2008 5/1/2008 5/8/2008 5/15/2008 5/22/2008 5/29/2008 6/4/2008 6/11/2008 6/18/2008 6/25/2008 7/2/2008 7/9/2008 7/15/2008 7/22/2008 7/29/2008 8/5/2008 8/12/2008 8/19/2008 8/25/2008 9/1/2008 9/8/2008 9/15/2008 9/22/2008 9/29/2008 10/5/2008 10/12/2008 10/19/2008 10/26/2008 11/2/2008 11/9/2008 11/15/2008 11/22/2008 11/29/2008 12/6/2008 12/13/2008 12/20/2008 12/26/2008 1/2/2009 1/9/2009 1/16/2009 1/23/2009 1/30/2009 2/5/2009 2/12/2009 2/19/2009 2/26/2009 Wheat 446.27 0 540 101.05 108.31 452.91 Case 2: Model specified Land Class Inflow s and Outflow s Scenario: Reference Decrease in Soil Moisture 160 Flow to Groundwater Increase in Soil Moisture 140 Irrigation Precipitation 2 Maize 113.78 883 21.69 178.17 484.23 104.68 120 100 80 Surface Runoff 60 Millimeter 40 20 0-20 Wheat 470.85 0 349.13 0 0 313.97 3/1/2008 3/7/2008 3/13/2008 3/20/2008 3/27/2008 4/2/2008 4/9/2008 4/16/2008 4/23/2008 4/29/2008 5/6/2008 5/13/2008 5/20/2008 5/26/2008 6/2/2008 6/9/2008 6/15/2008 6/22/2008 6/29/2008 7/6/2008 7/12/2008 7/19/2008 7/26/2008 8/2/2008 8/8/2008 8/15/2008 8/22/2008 8/29/2008 9/4/2008 9/11/2008 9/18/2008 9/25/2008 10/1/2008 10/8/2008 10/15/2008 10/22/2008 10/28/2008 11/4/2008 11/11/2008 11/18/2008 11/24/2008 12/1/2008 12/8/2008 12/14/2008 12/21/2008 12/28/2008 1/4/2009 1/10/2009 1/17/2009 1/24/2009 1/31/2009 2/6/2009 2/13/2009 2/20/2009 2/27/2009-40 -60-80 -100 The model specified irrigation strategy prevents runoff and deep percolation

Soil Moisture Depletion, RAW And TAW Case-I Traditional Practices 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Depletion and Available Water Scenario: Reference, All Days (366) Readily Available Water Soil Moisture Depletion Total Available Water 80 Millimeter 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 2008-03-01 2008-03-07 2008-03-13 2008-03-19 2008-03-25 2008-03-31 2008-04-07 2008-04-13 2008-04-19 2008-04-25 2008-05-01 2008-05-07 2008-05-13 2008-05-20 2008-05-26 2008-06-01 2008-06-07 2008-06-13 2008-06-19 2008-06-25 2008-07-02 2008-07-08 2008-07-14 2008-07-20 2008-07-26 2008-08-01 2008-08-07 2008-08-14 2008-08-20 2008-08-26 2008-09-01 2008-09-07 2008-09-13 2008-09-19 2008-09-26 2008-10-02 2008-10-08 2008-10-14 2008-10-20 2008-10-26 2008-11-01 2008-11-08 2008-11-14 2008-11-20 2008-11-26 2008-12-02 2008-12-08 2008-12-14 2008-12-21 2008-12-27 2009-01-02 2009-01-08 2009-01-14 2009-01-20 2009-01-26 2009-02-02 2009-02-08 2009-02-14 2009-02-20 2009-02-26 Case-II Triggering Irrigation 0 10 20 30 40 Depletion and Available Water Scenario: Reference, All Days (366) Readily Available Water Soil Moisture Depletion Total Available Water when 50 60 70 Soil Moisture Depletion reaches 100% of RAW 2008-03-01 2008-03-07 2008-03-13 2008-03-19 2008-03-25 2008-03-31 2008-04-07 2008-04-13 2008-04-19 2008-04-25 2008-05-01 2008-05-07 2008-05-13 2008-05-20 2008-05-26 2008-06-01 2008-06-07 2008-06-13 2008-06-19 2008-06-25 2008-07-02 2008-07-08 2008-07-14 2008-07-20 2008-07-26 2008-08-01 2008-08-07 2008-08-14 2008-08-20 2008-08-26 2008-09-01 2008-09-07 2008-09-13 2008-09-19 2008-09-26 2008-10-02 2008-10-08 2008-10-14 2008-10-20 2008-10-26 2008-11-01 2008-11-08 2008-11-14 2008-11-20 2008-11-26 2008-12-02 2008-12-08 2008-12-14 2008-12-21 2008-12-27 2009-01-02 2009-01-08 2009-01-14 2009-01-20 2009-01-26 2009-02-02 2009-02-08 2009-02-14 2009-02-20 2009-02-26 Millimeter 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180

Concluding Remarks In maize crop, actual evapotranspiration is found same in Case-I and Case-II as this crop is not under water stress in both the cases. But, in case of wheat crop; the water stress condition has resulted lower value of actual evapotranspiration in Case-I. Thus saving of water can be achieved by application of WEAP in determining irrigation requirements in real time condition. The prevention of water stress condition by model application also improves yield of crop The model specified irrigation strategy also prevents runoff and deep percolation.

References Allen R. G., Pereira L.S., Raes D. and Smith M. 1998. Crop evapotranspiration - Guidelines for computing crop water requirements United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, Irrigation and drainage paper 56 Produced by: Natural Resources Management and Environment Department Allen R. G. 2002. Evapotranspiration : The FAO-56 Dual Crop Coefficient Method and Accuracy of predictions for Project-wide Evapotranspiration, International meeting on Advances in Drip/Micro Irrigation Allen R. G. 2005. FAO-56 Dual crop coefficient Method for estimating Evaporation from soil and application Extensions. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering ASCE/January/February 2005. Kumar R., Vijay Shankar and Mahesh Kumar. Modeling of Crop Reference Evapotranspiration : A Review. Universal journal of Environment Research and Technology, 1(3):239-246 Rossa R. D., Paredesa P., Rdriguesa G. C., Alvesa I., Fernandoa R. M., Pereirra L. S. 2012. Implementing the Dual Crop Coefficient approach in interactive software. Agricultural Water Management, 103 : 8-24 Rushton K. R., Eilers V.H.M., Carter R. C. 2005. Improved soil moisture balance methodology for recharge estimation, Journal of Hydrology 318 (2006): 379-399. WEAP 2011. Tutorial modules & and user guide, Sieber J., Purkey D., Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI)

Thank you

Irrigation Strategy for Maize and Wheat Crop IRRIGATION STRATEGY CASE NO. CROP PLANTING DATE HARVESTING DATE IRRIGATION SCHEDULING IRRIGATION AMOUNT I Maize 5 th July 22 nd September 18 th,47 th, 60 th day 25 mm Wheat 1 st November 28 th February 1 st, 6 th, 11 th, 34 th, 46 th, 58 th, 60 th, 72 nd, 84 th day 60 mm II Maize 5 th July 22 nd September 100% RAW 100% Depletion Wheat 1 st November 28 th February 100% RAW 100% Depletion

Motivation of the study Complexities involved in estimation of Crop water requirement with different parameters. (Weather, Crop, Soil) The intricacy involved in measurement of rainfall and/or irrigation losses by surface run off, percolation beyond root zone and soil moisture use of crops. Uncertainties arise in estimating the moisture availability. Development in recording meteorological data using automated instruments on daily as well as hourly basis. Using this data it is also possible to precisely estimate reference evapotranspiration. Using advance model such as Penman Monteith it is possible to integrate all this technology related to data and model to precisely monitor the irrigation process (soil moisture balance). The applying the water to the crops when it is not essential; while not applying when it is desirable.

Basal Crop and Soil Evaporation Kcb represents actual evapotranspiration conditions when the soil surface is dry but sufficient root zone moisture is present to support full transpiration. Soil evaporation coefficient (Ke) calculated when the topsoil dries out, and evaporation is less and evaporation reduces in proportion to the amount of water available in surface soil layer (Allen et al., 1998; Allen R. G. 2002; Allen et al., 2005). Coefficients

Runoff and Flow to Groundwater during Irrigation of Maize and Wheat CASE NO. CROP TOTAL ETactual (mm) Crop TOTAL PRECIPITATI ON (mm) TOTAL IRRIGATION * (mm) TOTAL RUNOFF (mm) TOTAL FLOW TO GROUND WATER (mm) 1 Maize 251.12 883 75 211.78 508.42 Wheat 478.13 0 540 101.05 108.31 2 Maize 251.39 883 21.69 178.17 484.23 Wheat 506.01 0 349.13 0 0

Land Class Inflows and Outflows Case 1 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 Land Class Inflow s and Outflow s Scenario: Reference, All Days (366) Surface Runoff Precipitation Irrigation Increase in Soil Moisture Flow to Groundwater Decrease in Soil Moisture 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 Cubic Meter 1.0 0.0-1.0-2.0-3.0-4.0-5.0 3/1/2008 3/7/2008 3/14/2008 3/21/2008 3/28/2008 4/4/2008 4/11/2008 4/17/2008 4/24/2008 5/1/2008 5/8/2008 5/15/2008 5/22/2008 5/29/2008 6/4/2008 6/11/2008 6/18/2008 6/25/2008 7/2/2008 7/9/2008 7/15/2008 7/22/2008 7/29/2008 8/5/2008 8/12/2008 8/19/2008 8/25/2008 9/1/2008 9/8/2008 9/15/2008 9/22/2008 9/29/2008 10/5/2008 10/12/2008 10/19/2008 10/26/2008 11/2/2008 11/9/2008 11/15/2008 11/22/2008 11/29/2008 12/6/2008 12/13/2008 12/20/2008 12/26/2008 1/2/2009 1/9/2009 1/16/2009 1/23/2009 1/30/2009 2/5/2009 2/12/2009 2/19/2009 2/26/2009-6.0-7.0-8.0-9.0 Case 2 160 140 120 Land Class Inflow s and Outflow s Scenario: Reference Decrease in Soil Moisture Flow to Groundwater Increase in Soil Moisture Irrigation Precipitation Surface Runoff 100 80 60 3/1/2008 3/7/2008 3/13/2008 3/20/2008 3/27/2008 4/2/2008 4/9/2008 4/16/2008 4/23/2008 4/29/2008 5/6/2008 5/13/2008 5/20/2008 5/26/2008 6/2/2008 6/9/2008 6/15/2008 6/22/2008 6/29/2008 7/6/2008 7/12/2008 7/19/2008 7/26/2008 8/2/2008 8/8/2008 8/15/2008 8/22/2008 8/29/2008 9/4/2008 9/11/2008 9/18/2008 9/25/2008 10/1/2008 10/8/2008 10/15/2008 10/22/2008 10/28/2008 11/4/2008 11/11/2008 11/18/2008 11/24/2008 12/1/2008 12/8/2008 12/14/2008 12/21/2008 12/28/2008 1/4/2009 1/10/2009 1/17/2009 1/24/2009 1/31/2009 2/6/2009 2/13/2009 2/20/2009 2/27/2009 Millimeter 40 20 0-20 -40-60 -80-100

Penman- Monteith Equation: (1) Where, ETo =reference evapotranspiration [mm day- 1 ], Rn =net radiation at the crop surface [MJ m -2 day -1 ], G=soil heat flux density [MJ m -2 day -1 ], T= mean daily air temperature at 2 m height [ C], u 2 =wind speed at 2 m height [m s -1 ], e s =saturation vapour pressure [kpa], e a =actual vapour pressure [kpa], e s -e a =saturation vapour pressure deficit [kpa], =slope vapour pressure curve [kpa C -1 ], γ=psychrometric constant [kpa C -1 ].

Working out strategies for irrigation Irrigation to be applied before or at the moment when readily available water (RAW) is equal or greater than soil moisture depletion (SMD) to avoid crop water stress. i.e. (SMD <= RAW). Irrigation applied at fixed interval and fixed amount as per practices followed by localities. Irrigation to be applied when crop reaches at a fixed % of soil moisture depletion. The irrigation amount can also be determined according to fixed depth, % of deletion, % of RAW and % of TAW.

2024 © businessdocbox.com Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Feedback