Abstract
Laboratory tests were conducted at the Irrigation Devices and Equipment’s Test Laboratory, Agricultural Engineering Research Institute, Agriculture Research Center, Giza, Egypt. The experimental design of laboratory experiments was split in randomized complete block design with three replicates. Laboratory tests carried out on three irrigation lateral lines of 40, 60, 80 m under the following three drip irrigation circuit (DIC) designs; 1) one manifold for lateral lines or closed circuits with one manifold of drip irrigation system (CM1DIS); 2) closed circuits with two manifolds for lateral lines (CM2DIS), and 3) traditional drip irrigation system (TDIS) as a control. The aims of the work were to study the effect of drip irrigation circuits (DIC) and lateral lines lengths (LLL; where): (LLL1 = 40 m, LLL2 = 60 m, and LLL3 = 80 m) on pressure head (PH) and friction loss (FL). Regarding to LLL and according to PH values, DIC designs could be ranked in the following ascending order: TDIS 1DIS 2DIS. The differences in PH among DIC designs were significant at the 1% level. The depressive effects of LLL on PH could be ranked in the following ascending order: LLL1 2 ≤ LLL3. Differences in PH among LLL treatments were significant at the 1% level except that between LLL2 and LLL3. The effects of interactions among: DIC × LLL on PH were significant at the 1% level with some exceptions. The highest value of PH (9.5 m) and the lowest one (6.05 m) were achieved in the interactions of CM2DIS × LLL1 and TDIS × LLL3, respectively. The shapes of the energy gradient lines were affected by DIC and LLL treatments used through their effect on ?H/H ratio. However, they followed similar trends. According to the FL values, DIC and LLL treatments could be ranked in the following descending orders TDIS > CM1DIS > CM2DIS and LLL1 > LLL2 > LLL3. The differences in FL among DIC and LLL were significant and the effects of interactions among DIC × LLL on FL were significant at the 1% level. The maximum and minimum values of FL were obtained in the interactions: TDIS × LLL3 and CM2DIS × LLL1, respectively. Therefore, the CM2DIS system is recommended for use where technically feasible.
Highlights
Differences in emitter geometry may be caused by variation in injection pressure and heat instability during their manufacture, as well as by a heterogeneous mixture of materials used for their production [1]
The maximum and minimum values of FL were obtained in the interactions: TDIS × LLL3 and CM2DIS × LLL1, respectively
2) The depressive effects of LLL on PH could be ranked in the following ascending order: LLL1 < LLL2 ≤ LLL3
Summary
Differences in emitter geometry may be caused by variation in injection pressure and heat instability during their manufacture, as well as by a heterogeneous mixture of materials used for their production [1]. If the inlet pressure head becomes greater than the required pressure head; it may cause water back-flow and if the inlet pressure head becomes lower than the total required pressure head, it may create negative pressure at the lateral which will affect distribution uniformity. To avoid both problems, the inlet pressure head must be determined precisely to balance the energy gain due to inlet flow and the total required pressure head within the lateral line [2]. Energy required for system operation depends on the required head and the system discharge. [5] used the relationship: qe kH x (1)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
