The authors are appreciated for presenting a rapid prediction method of hydraulic performance evaluation for emitters with labyrinth channels. In that procedure, a variable pressure loss coefficient (PLC) was proposed as the evaluation index of an emitter’s hydraulic performance. As a matter of fact, the authors’ previous work (Zhang et al. 2011b) was focused on the same concern with testing the hydraulic performance of specific types of emitters with labyrinth channels. In that procedure (Zhang et al. 2011b), the combined pressure loss coefficient (PLC) was also proposed as an evaluation index which incorporates the effects of frictional and local losses in labyrinth channels. Regarding the same concern, Zhang et al. (2011a) proposed an alternative procedure for testing hydraulic performance of three of the most commonly available high-head in-line drip-tape emitters under different working-head conditions ranging from 0.2 to 10 m, especially for low-head conditions. This analysis (Zhang et al. 2011a) mainly deals with the calculation of the coefficient of manufacturing variation (CV ) and the emitter flow exponent (x), regarding different phases of water pressures. For the design problem of testing emitter hydraulic performance, these three successively published procedures (Zhang et al. 2011a, b, and the paper under discussion) may provide a useful decision support tool for achieving a good design solution among commercially available alternatives with high water application uniformity, and the resulting high irrigation efficiency. With respect to the current problem (testing the emitter hydraulic performance), Qingsong et al. (2010) presented an experimental procedure to simulate the change of emitter flow exponents with different ranges of water pressures examined. The analysis (Qingsong et al. 2010) mainly deals with, first, the calculation of the emitter flow exponent, the average flow velocity, and the Reynold numbers with regarding different phases of water pressures, and then the determination of the best choice among the pressure ranges examined for five types of drip emitters tested. For these purposes, the paper is essentially focused on three research topics: (1) the change of flow exponents with different pressure segments; (2) the relationship between average flow velocities and water pressures, and (3) the relationship between Reynolds numbers and flow exponents. As a useful reference, Yildirim (2010) proposed the backward stepwise procedure for computing three energy loss components; minor friction losses through the path of an integrated in-line emitter, the local pressure losses due to barbed emitter connections, and the pipe friction loss. In that procedure, the mathematical expressions were implemented in a simple Excel spreadsheet to evaluate the relative contribution of each energy loss component; then a combination calculation procedure is used to calculate total energy loss. Two sample designs were evaluated in order to show the relative magnitudes of total friction loss (due to pipe and emitters) emitter local losses, and pipe friction loss for two kinds of the integrated in-line emitters with varying spacing. In order to better understand the present method this discussion calls attention first to the following standpoints which need to be clarified, and then to minor editorial corrections on the paper’s algorithm, which will be presented through the discussion.
Read full abstract