Development of Surface Irrigation Systems Design and Evaluation

Software (SIDES)
Sirisha Adamala, N.S. Raghuwanshi

, Ashok Mishra
Agricultural and Food Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, West Bengal 721 302, India
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 4 January 2013
Received in revised form 5 November 2013
Accepted 11 November 2013
Keywords:
Surface irrigation systems
Basin
Border
Furrow
Open channel
Pipeline
a b s t r a c t
A software for the design and evaluation of surface irrigation systems (furrow, border and basin) along
with the design of water conveyance systems (open channel and pipe line) is developed to assist users
in educational and research organizations. The software named as SIDES is developed using Visual Basic
6 programming language. The developed software for the design of surface irrigation systems is based on
the volume balance approach and is tested using the available published datasets. Results obtained using
the SIDES matched well with the published datasets for all the designs. Besides the design parameters at
maximum application efciency, SIDES also provides detailed tabular and step wise design results. A
comprehensive Help menu is incorporated in the SIDES to facilitate a thorough understanding of the the-
ory and methodology adopted for the design.
2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Over the years, irrigated lands have become crucial for meeting
the worlds foodrequirement. According to the FAO, about 80%of to-
tal cultivated lands in the world (1.527 billion hectares) under rain-
fed agriculture, supply 60% of the worlds food; while the remaining
20% of the worlds cultivated lands under irrigation, contribute the
other 40% of the food supplies (Dowgert, 2010). The majority of this
land is irrigated using surface methods, namely, basin, border and
furrows. Surface irrigationis the widely usedmethodof water appli-
cation to agricultural lands in which water is distributed over the
eld by overland ow. In spite of its wide use, the method is charac-
terized by low irrigation efciencies and uniformities that may
result in reduced crop yields. Merriam(1977) and Kay (1990) stated
that low efciencies in surface irrigation are not inherent to the
method but are due to poor design and management. Poor designs
and management are generally responsible for inefcient irrigation,
leading to wastage of water, water logging, salinization and pollu-
tion of surface and ground water resources. However, surface irriga-
tion systems, when properly designed and managed, can attain
application efciencies similar to that of pressurized irrigation
systems (James, 1988). Thus, in order to improve performance of
surface irrigation systems, there is a need for proper design and
management. Mathematical models of surface irrigation can help
in better design and management of these systems.
In the past three decades considerable research has been con-
ducted to develop mathematical models for simulating surface irri-
gation performance. These models depend on several interacting
factors such as eld dimensions, eld slope, ow rate, cutoff time,
soil inltration characteristics and ow resistance. The presence of
a large number of variables makes the design of surface irrigation
quite complex. The main task in the design of surface irrigation
systems is the selection of inow ow rate (Q
0
) at which applica-
tion efciency (E
a
) is maximum. In addition, a surface irrigation
systemneeds to be monitored or evaluated on a regular basis. Eval-
uation helps to identify problems and the measures required to
correct them.
A number of surface irrigation based computer software to mi-
mic the complexity in designing have been developed in the past.
Some of the early developed software in the eld of surface irriga-
tion include: BASCAD (Boonstra and Jurriens, 1988), BICADM
(Maheshwari and McMahon, 1991), FISDEV (Zerihun and Feyen,
1992), BASIN (Clemmens et al., 1995), BORDER (Strelkoff et al.,
1998) and SURDEV (Jurriens, 2001). All the above software have
been developed only to design any one of the three surface
irrigation systems (furrow or border or basin). However, SIRMOD
(Walker, 2003) and SRFR/WinSRFR (Bautista et al., 2009) are the
most comprehensive software developed so far to design three
types of surface irrigation systems (furrow, border and basin).
These software are good for research and design but are still
0168-1699/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2013.11.004

Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 3222 283146.

E-mail address: nsr@agfe.iitkgp.ernet.in (N.S. Raghuwanshi).
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 100 (2014) 100109
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ compag
lacking in the step wise design process which are very essential for
student learning. Also, the above software do not have a module for
design of water conveyance systems, which is a priori design as-
pect before planning any surface irrigation system. Therefore, the
present study was undertaken with the following objectives:
1. To develop a computer software for the design and evalua-
tion of surface irrigation systems along with the design of
water conveyance systems with an interface that is conve-
nient for both developer and average user.
2. To verify the developed software with the available pub-
lished data.
2. Theoretical background
2.1. Design of water conveyance systems
The water supply and rate of irrigation delivery for the area
served by the conveyance system shall be sufcient to make irriga-
tion practical and feasible, for the crops to be grown and the irriga-
tion water application methods to be used. The water conveyance
system consists of either open channel or pipeline. Different open
channel (rectangular, triangular, trapezoidal and parabolic) cross
sections and pipeline are designed to convey the water from source
to irrigation elds. Table 1 shows different methods considered for
design of pipeline, in the present study.
2.2. Design of surface irrigation systems
The volume balance approach is selected for designing and eval-
uating surface irrigation systems. The generic form of the volume
balance model for the advance phase is based on the Lewis-Milne
integral, which computes the inltration integral as a function of
time and can be expressed as:
Q
0
t r
y
A
0
x
Z
x
0
Zt t
s
ds 1
For sloping elds, the upstream ow area (A
0
) can be accomplished
with the Mannings equation:
A
0

Q
2
0
n
2
3600p
1
S
0
!1
p
2
2
In a level-slope condition, such as basin, it is assumed that the
friction slope is equal to the inlet depth, y
0
, divided by the distance
covered by water, x. This leads to the following expression for y
0
(Walker and Skogerboe, 1987):
y
0

Q
2
0
n
2
x
3600
!
0:23
3
CumulativeinltrationZ canbe estimatedusingthe KostiakovLewis
equation as follows:
Z kT
a
f
0
T 4
Assuming the power advance, x pt
r
s
(i.e. t
s
x=p
1=r
) and
simplifying (Eq. (1)) after substituting t
s
and Z, results:
Q
0
t r
y
A
0
x r
z
kT
a
x
f
0
Tx
1 r
5
where r
z
= subsurface prole shape factor, which is a function of
the exponent of the inltration function (Walker and Skogerboe,
1987):
Nomenclature
a, k, f
0
empirical parameters; (a = dimensionless),
(k = m
2
/min/m), (f
0
= m
2
/min/m)
A, P area of cross-section (m
2
) and wetted perimeter
(m) of the channel
A
0
wetted area at the upstream (m
2
)
b, T, y bottom width, top width and depth of a channel
(m)
C Chezys constant
C
h
HazenWilliams constant
D diameter of pipeline (m)
DPR deep percolation ratio (%)
DU distribution uniformity
e roughness coefcient (m)
E
a
application efciency (%)
g acceleration due to gravity (m/s
2
)
H
f
head loss due to friction (m)
i loss of head per unit length (dimensionless)
I inltration rate as f (x, t) (m/s)
L, W eld length and width (m)
L
p
length of pipe (m)
n Mannings roughness coefcient
N
f
, N
s
, N
b
number of furrows, number of sets, number of
borders/basins
p, r empirical parameters of advance equation
p
1
, p
2
shape coefcients
Q discharge capacity of open channel/pipeline/sup-
ply system (m
3
/s)
Q
0
, Q
max
, Q
min
inow, maximum, minimum ow rates (m
3
/min)
S slope of the open channel/pipeline (%)
S
0
longitudinal slope (m/m)
S
f
slope of energy grade line (m/m)
S
y
relative water surface slope (%)
t time from the start of inow (min)
T = t t
s
opportunity time (min)
t
0.5L
advance time to one-half of the eld length (min)
t
co
, t
r
, t
d
cutoff time, recession time, depletion time (min)
t
L
advance time to end of the eld (min)
T
req
intake opportunity time (min)
t
s
time required (min) for the water front to reach a
distance of s (m) from the head of the eld
TWR tail water ratio (%)
TWV volume of tail water (m
3
)
v kinematic viscosity of water (m
2
/s)
v velocity of ow as f (x, t) (m/s)
V
0.5L
inltrated volume to one-half of the eld length
(m
3
)
V
L
inltrated volume to end of the eld (m
3
)
V
max
maximum non erosive ow velocity (m/s)
W
b
width of border/basin (m)
x water front advance (m)
x
a
length of adequate area (m)
x
d
length of inadequate area (m)
y
0
inlet depth (m)
z side slope of a channel (zH:1V)
Z cumulative inltration per unit length (m
3
/m)
Z
req
required depth of water (m)
Greek symbols
r
y
surface prole shape factor (varies from 0.77 to
0.80)
r
z
subsurface prole shape factor
S. Adamala et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 100 (2014) 100109 101
r
z

a r1 a 1
1 a1 r
6
The above volume balance equation (Eq. (5)) can be solved for any
two waterfront advance points, say (x
1
, t
1
) and (x
2
, t
2
), to obtain
either advance time at two locations with known inltration func-
tion or inltration parameters with known advance time. Typically,
these two advance points are considered as the water front advance
at the middle and tail end of the eld or irrigation system (furrow,
border and basin). Eq. (5) can be written for two points (half of the
eld length, L/2, and eld length, L) to represent the advance trajec-
tory as follows:
At the end of the eld:
Q
0
t
L
r
y
A
0
L r
z
kt
a
L
L
f
0
t
L
L
1 r
7
At the mid-length of the eld:
Q
0
t
0:5L

r
y
A
0
L
2

r
z
kt
a
0:5L
L
2

f
0
t
0:5L
L
21 r
8
2.2.1. Estimation of inltration parameters
For determining parameters k and a of the inltration func-
tion, Eqs. (7) and (8) can be solved knowing the advance times cor-
responding to two locations as follows (Walker and Skogerboe,
1987):
a
lnV
L
V
0:5L

lnt
L
t
0:5L

9
k
V
L
r
z
t
a
L
10
where
V
L

Q
0
t
L
L
r
y
A
0

f
0
t
L
1 r
11
V
0:5L

2Q
0
t
0:5L
L
r
y
A
0

f
0
t
0:5L
1 r
12
However, steady state inltration rate (f
0
) must be known before
hand. The technique used for determining f
0
is the inow-outow
method, in which the entire furrow is used essentially as an inl-
trometer and can be found using the following equation (Walker
and Skogerboe, 1987):
f
0

Q
in
Q
out
L
13
2.3. Performance evaluation of surface irrigation systems
In this study, surface irrigation systems performance evalua-
tion is based on the procedure outlined by Walker and Skogerboe
(1987). The primary indicators that are used in evaluation of sur-
face irrigation systems are distribution uniformity, application ef-
ciency, deep percolation ratio, tail water ratio, and tail water
volume described below:
(1) Distribution uniformity (DU): It measures how uniformly
water is applied to the eld, and is expressed as a percent-
age. The most common measure of DU is the Low Quarter
DU (DU
lq
), which is a measure of average inltrated depth
in the low quarter of the eld, divided by the average inl-
trated depth over the whole eld.
DU
lq

Average low-quarter depthd

lq

Average depth of water accumulated in all elements

100
14
(2) Application efciency (E
a
): It indicates how well a system is
being used. It is dened as:
E
a

Z
req
L
t
co
Q
0
100 for complete and overirrigation 15
E
a

Z
req
x
d
V
zi
t
co
Q
0
100 for underirrigation 16
(3) Deep percolation ratio (DPR): It indicates the loss of water
through drainage beyond the root zone. High deep percola-
tion losses aggravate waterlogging and salinity problems,
and leach valuable crop nutrients from the root zone.
DPR
V
z
Z
req
L
t
co
Q
0
100 for complete and overirrigation 17
DPR
V
za
Z
req
x
d
t
co
Q
0
100 for underirrigation 18
(4) Tail water ratio (TWR): It is the ratio of average depth of eld
runoff to the average depth applied.
TWR 100 E
a
DPR 19
(5) Tail water volume (TWV): It indicates the surface water runoff
at the end of a eld.
TWV Q
0
t
co
TWR 20
3. Development of software
The Visual Basic 6.0 programming language is used to develop
the software, called SIDES. SIDES consists of three modules: (1) de-
sign of water conveyance systems (open channel and pipeline), (2)
design of surface irrigation systems (furrow, border and basin), and
(3) evaluation of surface irrigation systems.
3.1. Design of water conveyance systems
3.1.1. Design of open channels
The input and output data required for design of open channels
are shown in Table 2. Depending on input data, the output can be
obtained for different channel sections. Design of open channels is
based on the Mannings equation. Therefore, for a given cross sec-
tion, velocity and discharge (capacity) are calculated and compared
with the required capacity. The design is carried out using a trial
Table 1
Commonly used equations for the pipeline design.
Source Equation
DarcyWeisbach and
ColebrookWhite
Q 0:9641D
2:5

gH
f
Lp

r
ln
e
3:7D

1:78m
D
1:5

gH
f
Lp
q

HazenWilliams
Q 0:2786 C
h
S
0:54
D
2:63
Mannings
Q 0:3115
1
n

S
0:5
D
2:667
Chezys
Q 0:3725 C i
0:5
D
2:5
where Q = discharge capacity of pipeline/open channel/ supply system (m
3
/s);
D = diameter of pipeline (m); g = acceleration due to gravity (9.806 m/s
2
); H
f
= head
loss due to friction (m); L
p
= length of pipe (m); e = roughness coefcient (m);
v = kinematic viscosity of water (m
2
/s); C
h
= HazenWilliams constant; S = bed
slope (%); n = Mannings roughness coefcient; C = Chezys constant; i = loss of head
per unit length (H
f
/L
p
).
102 S. Adamala et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 100 (2014) 100109
and error process, which continued until calculated capacity be-
come equal to required capacity. Fig. 1 shows the open channel de-
sign window of SIDES. The input data required for open channel
design depends on the chosen cross section. A drop down box is
provided for selecting Mannings roughness coefcient values for
different channel linings. For validating the open channel design,
input datasets were taken from (Michael, 1999) and (Murty, 1985).
3.1.2. Design of pipeline
Four empirical approaches have been adopted for the design of
pipeline systems (Table 1). Depending on input data different cases
have been considered for these four empirical approaches (Table
3). The design procedure involves in DarcyWeisbach or Cole-
brook-White equation for the following three cases is explained as:
Case (1) Given: L
p
, e, Q and H
f
; Find: D. This case is a typical of
rst step in designing a pipeline and solution is based on trial
and error method.
Case (2) Given: L
p
, e, D and H
f
; Find: Q. The solution for this case
is simple because it has a direct solution.
Case (3) Given: L
p
, e, D and Q; Find: H
f
. The solution for this case
also based on trial and error method.
A similar procedure was also been adopted for the design of
pipelines by using other three empirical approaches (Table 3).
Fig. 2 shows the pipeline system design window of SIDES. The in-
put data required for pipeline design depends on the chosen meth-
od. The chosen methods can be used to determine pipe diameter
(D), total head loss (H
f
) or discharge (Q). These cases are summa-
rized in Table 3. An option of Select from table is provided for
selecting the values of loss coefcients for various ttings, avail-
able pipe diameters, pipe roughness coefcients, HazenWilliams
coefcients, and Mannings roughness coefcient values, if they
are not known to user. For the design of pipeline the datasets were
taken from (Gilberto, 2005) and (Bansal, 2005).
3.1.3. Design of surface irrigation systems
Fig. 3 shows the procedure adopted for design of surface irriga-
tion systems. For designing of surface irrigation systems, the com-
putation of required intake time (T
req
) by NewtonRaphson
procedure, advance time (t
L
) using two-point method and deple-
tion time (t
d
) are necessary which involves an iterative or trial
and error procedure as suggested by Walker and Skogerboe
(1987). Fig. 4 shows the furrow irrigation system design window
in SIDES. The input data includes data of eld topography/geome-
try (eld length, eld width, furrow spacing, type of soil and eld
slope), inltration characteristics (KostiakovLewis inltration
model parameters), supply system capacity, irrigation require-
ment, Mannings roughness coefcient and shape coefcients. A
command Select from table is provided for selecting Mannings
roughness coefcient and inltration parameters for both the rst
irrigation and subsequent irrigations. These two different irriga-
tions are chosen to consider the change in inltration characteris-
tics during the cropping season. In SIDES an option is provided for
the selection of inltration parameters as reported by Walker
(2003) as a function of soil texture if information on inltration
is not known to user for furrow, border and basin irrigation sys-
tems. These inltration characteristics should be used primarily
for obtaining the rst estimate of design. Users are advised to
Table 2
Input and output data for the open channels design.
Cross section Input Output
Rectangular Q, n and S b, y
Triangular Q, n, S and z y
Trapezoidal Q, n, S and z b, y
Parabolic Q, n and S T, y
where b, T, y = bottom width, top width and depth of a channel, respectively (m).
Fig. 1. Design of open channels.
Table 3
Different cases considered for the three empirical approaches.
Empirical approach Cases
Input Output
HazenWilliams (1) L
p
, C
h
, Q and H
f
D
(2) L
p
, C
h
, D and H
f
Q
(3) L
p
, C
h
, D and Q H
f
Mannings (1) L
p
, n, Q and H
f
D
(2) L
p
, n, D and H
f
Q
(3) L
p
, n, D and Q H
f
Chezys (1) L
p
, C, Q and H
f
D
(2) L
p
, C, D and H
f
Q
(3) L
p
, C, D and Q H
f
S. Adamala et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 100 (2014) 100109 103
Fig. 2. Design of pipeline system.
Input data
Enter: L, W, Q, S
0,
V
max
, Z
req Select: p
1
, p
2
, a, k, f
0
, n
Calculate: minimum, maximum flow rates (Q
min
, Q
max
)
0.5
0
min
0.000157*L*S
Q =
n
2
2
p
max max
1 0
n
Q = V *
3600*p *S



Select inflow rate (Q
0
), so that Q
max
< Q
0
< Q
min
Advance time (t
L
) Intake time (T
req
) Calculate:
Furrow Basin
Border
Enter: Furrow spacing (F
s
)
Time of cutoff (t
co
) = T
req
+ t
L
N
s
= N
f
*Q
0
/Q
N
f
= W/F
s
Integer
Calculate: No. of furrows, sets (N
f
, N
s
)
Yes No
Q
0
= Q
0
+0.001
No. of borders or basins (N
b
) = W/W
b
Width (W
b
) = Q/Q
0
Integer
0.6
0
0 0.5
0
Q n
Inflow depth (y )=
60S



Yes No
Q
0
= Q
0
+0.001
y
0
< dike
height
Basin Border
Recession time: t
r
= T
req +
t
L
Calculate: Depletion time (t
d
)
0
co d
0
y L
t = t -
2Q
Application efficiency,
req 0
L o c
0
Z L - 0.77y L
t = + t
Q
d req t T
Yes
Irrigation is complete Under irrigation
0
co req
0
y L
t = T -
2Q
No
req
a
co 0
Z L
E =
t Q
Assumptions: (i) The water i.e.
remaining on the border at the
instant the water is shut off is
triangular in shape. (ii) The water
infiltrates at an equal rate
everywhere in the field.
Fig. 3. Flowchart for the design of surface irrigation systems (Walker and Skogerboe, 1987).
104 S. Adamala et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 100 (2014) 100109
use actual eld data to obtain eld representative designs. Furrow
shape coefcients can be calculated from the measured elevation
and depth data using the Calculate command. The data set shown
in Fig. 4 for the design of furrow irrigation system was taken from
Walker and Skogerboe (1987).
Fig. 5 shows the detailed design results of the furrow irrigation
system which includes the eld length and width utilized to cover
the total available water, ow per furrow, number of furrows,
number of sets, intake time, advance time, cutoff time and applica-
tion efciency for rst irrigation. The results are displayed in a tab-
ular form to compare designs related to different inow rates.
Here, a command Results at best efciency is provided for dis-
playing results pertaining to the maximum application efciency
for the rst irrigation. Due to the similarity in the design of all sur-
face irrigation systems, the developed windows for border and ba-
sin are not shown here. For the design of border and basin
irrigation systems, the datasets were also taken from (Walker
and Skogerboe, 1987).
3.2. Evaluation of surface irrigation systems
3.2.1. Evaluation of inltration parameters
SIDES uses two point method (Elliott and Walker, 1982) for
evaluation of KostiakovLewis inltration parameters (k and a).
In SIDES, windows for the evaluation of the KostiakovLewis inl-
tration model parameters for furrow, border and basin irrigation
systems were developed. The input data for the evaluation of in-
take parameters was taken from Walker (1989).
3.2.2. Performance of surface irrigation systems
Performance of surface irrigation event is measured using a
number of performance measures such as DU, E
a
, DPR, TWR, and
TWV. In SIDES, windows for the evaluation of furrow, border and
basin irrigation systems performance in terms of above mentioned
measures were developed. The input data was taken from Walker
and Skogerboe (1987).
4. Verication of the software
The developed software was veried using several published
datasets (standard design procedures only) for testing purposes.
For example, conveyance systemdesigns for open channel was ver-
ied using different examples from Michael (1999) and Murty
(1985) whereas the pipeline design was veried using various
examples from Gilberto (2005) and Bansal (2005). The design re-
sults obtained by the software exactly matched with the various
published source values for both open channel and pipeline
systems.
Table 4 shows comparison of published and developed software
obtained surface irrigation systems design results. The values con-
sidered for comparison are inow (Q
0
) (although input but de-
pends on number of furrows/border/basin in a given set),
required intake time (T
req
), advance time (t
L
), cutoff time (t
co
),
number of sets (N
s
), number of furrows/border/basin per set (N
f
/
N
b
) and application efciency (E
a
). From Table 4, it is clear that
the results obtained by SIDES for the design of all surface irrigation
systems matched well with the published data, with a negligible
difference in case of advance time (t
L
), cut off time (t
co
) and appli-
cation efciency (E
a
) except for advance time computation in basin
design. The small discrepancy in these values may be due to the
truncation or round off error. In case of basin advance time, this
difference is mainly caused by different value of exponent in ad-
vance formula used in source and SIDES.
Table 5 shows comparison of furrow irrigation performance
measures obtained with developed software, for a sample problem
given in Walker and Skogerboe (1987). For all performance mea-
sures (DU, E
a
, DPR, TWR and TWV), the results obtained by SIDES
matched exactly with respective published values. The software
obtained performance measures also matched with their respec-
tive values for basin and border irrigation systems. The comparison
results in Tables 4 and 5 gave same values with the published val-
ues as they both are based on the same set of equations. Hence
these tables serve as a check against errors in the code. The results
Fig. 4. Required inputs for the design of furrow irrigation system.
S. Adamala et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 100 (2014) 100109 105
obtained using the SIDES for above mentioned verication exam-
ples clearly demonstrate that the software results in accurate de-
sign of conveyance and surface irrigation systems, and also
accurate evaluation of performance measures.
5. Key features of the SIDES over existing other software
In SIDES for all designs, an option is provided for saving detailed
step wise design results. For example these step wise design results
for furrow irrigation include calculation of inow rates, no. of sets,
intake, advance, and cutoff times and application efciencies with
no. of iterations. The developed software allows users to save all
Fig. 5. Design results of furrow irrigation system.
Table 4
Comparison of output for the design of surface irrigation systems (initial irrigations).
Parameters Furrow Border Basin
SIDES Walker and
Skogerboe (1987)
Difference
(%)
SIDES Walker and
Skogerboe (1987)
Difference
(%)
SIDES Walker and
Skogerboe (1987)
Difference
(%)
Inow, Q
0
(m
3
/min/m) 0.075 0.075 0 0.14 0.14 0 0.14 0.14 0
Required intake time, T
req
(min) 378.73 378.73 0 146.39 146.4 0.068 382.97 383.00 0.008
Advance time, t
L
(min) 198.68 198.60 0.04 158.46 158.00 0.29 71.99 77.00 6.95
Cutoff time, t
co
(min) 577.41 577.33 0.014 205.58 205.00 0.282 158.96 158.00 0.604
No. of sets, N
s
(No.) 6 6 0 2 2 0 8 8 0
Furrows/Borders/Basins per set (No.) 80 80 0 185 185 0 90 90 0
Application efciency, E
a
(%) 69.28 69.30 0.028 65.67 66.00 0.502 80.88 81.20 0.395
Table 5
Comparison of output for the performance evaluation of furrow irrigation system.
Parameters SIDES Walker and Skogerboe
(1987)
Distribution uniformity, DU (%) 77.17 77.17
Application efciency, E
a
(%) 80 80
Deep percolation losses, DPR (%) 20 20
Tail water ratio, TWR (%) 14.2 14.2
Tail water volume, TWV (m
3
per
furrow)
3.2 3.2
Fig. 6. Help window.
106 S. Adamala et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 100 (2014) 100109
the design steps such that they can be easily understood in the
future. This key feature of SIDES makes users to get better
understanding and possibly greater trust in the used approach by
repeating the same calculations by hand. The designs are saved with
default extension

.txt. The sample detail design procedures for the
open channels and pipelines are provided in Appendix A and B,
respectively. The sample output for furrow irrigation design exam-
ple (Figs. 4 and 5) as described in Fig. 3 is shown in Appendix C. The
resulting design procedure for furrowirrigation consists of 12 steps.
In addition to the above, a detailed and systematic Help at var-
ious steps of design procedures is also provided in SIDES. Fig. 6
shows the developed Help window in SIDES. This Help module
provides the complete description about the theory involved,
methodology, sample datasets, and example validation results for
the effective and wise use of the developed software package.
Besides this extensive Help Menu, several pop-up menus are also
provided in each module of the SIDES to facilitate quick decision-
making by the users.
6. Conclusions
A computer based software package using Visual Basic 6 pro-
gramming language was developed for the design and evaluation
of different surface irrigation systems including design of water
conveyance systems. The developed software package is called
SIDES, which is based on the volume balance approach and
consists of three modules. The three modules of the software
were rigorously tested at developers level using the several
available published datasets. The software was found to be ef-
cient and reliable for the design and evaluation of surface irriga-
tion systems and for the design of water conveyance systems
also. Besides the design parameters at maximum application ef-
ciency, the SIDES provides detailed outputs in tabular form for
different design alternatives at different levels of application ef-
ciency. SIDES also has a provision to save the detailed design re-
sults for later use and post-processing. Here it is worth to
mention that the problems solved by the traditional method
are very cumbersome and time consuming. However, this prob-
lem can be overcome using SIDES. In SIDES a Help module is
provided to facilitate a thorough understanding of the theory
and methodology adopted for the design. Besides this extensive
Help Menu, several pop-up menus are also provided in each
module of the software to facilitate alert messages and quick
decision-making by the users. It is concluded that SIDES can be
used as a teaching and design tool. It may be also useful for prac-
ticing irrigation engineers.
Appendix A
Sample software output for the design of open channel:
Here selected channel is: Trapezoidal cross section
Input data:
Bottom width, b = 0.4 m
Side slope, z = 1.5H:1V
Mannings roughness coefcient, n = 0.025
Flow discharge, Q = 0.182 m
3
/s
Bed slope, S = 0.1%
Detailed design results:
Step 1: Assume initial value for ow depth, y = 10 m
Step 2: Substitute this value in following equations:
Area of cross section, A = (b + z

y)

y = (0.4 + 0.4

10)

10 = 154 m
2
Wetted perimeter, P = (b + (2

y

sqrt(1 + z
2
))) = = (0.4 + (2

10

(1 + 1.5
2
)
0.5
)) = 36.46 m
Hydraulic radius, R = A/P = 154/36.46 = 4.22 m
Calculated ow discharge, Q1 = (1/n)

A

R
(2/3)
sqrt(S) = (1/0.025)

154

36.46
(2/3)
0.001
0.5
= 509.0406 m
3
/s
Step 3: Compare the values of actual and calculated discharge, i.e. = (Q1 Q) = = 509.0406-0.182 = = 508.8586
Since the computed value >0.0001, decrease the value of ow depth and repeat the steps 1 to 3 until they are equal to each other or <0.0001. After several iterations the
nal estimated value of ow depth y = 0.4 m
Detailed design results at nal ow depth:
Area of cross section, A = (b + z

y)

y = (0.4 + 1.5

0.4)

0.4 = 0.4 m
2
Wetted perimeter, P = (b + (2

y

sqrt(1 + z
2
))) = (0.4 + (2

0.4

(1 + 1.5
2
)
0.5
)) = 1.84 m
Top width, T = (b + (2

z

y)) = (0.4 + (2

1.5

0.4)) = 1.6 m
Hydraulic radius, R = A/P = 0.4 /1.84 = 0.22 m
Hydraulic depth, HD = (A/T1) = (0.4/1.6) = 0.25 m
Appendix B
Sample software output for design of pipeline system.
Computation of pipe diameter using DarcyWeisbach equation:
Input data:
Length of the pipe, L
p
= 2000 m
Pipe roughness coefcient, e = 0.0001 m
Flow discharge, Q = 2.2 m
3
/s
Head loss due to friction, H
f
= 1 m
Viscosity, v = 0.000001 m
2
/s
Acceleration due to gravity, g = 9.81 m/s
2
Detailed design results:
Step 1: Assume initial value for diameter, D = 10 m
Step 2: Substitute this value in DarcyWeisbach model
Q1= 0.9641

D^(2.5)

sqrt(g

H
f
/ L
p
)

ln((e/3.7

D) + ((1.78

v)/(D^(1.5)

sqrt(g

H
f
/ L
p
)))) = 273.13 m
3
/s
Step 3: Compare the values of actual and estimated discharge, i.e. = (Q1 Q) = 273.13-2.2 = 270.93
Since the computed value >0.0001, decrease the value of diameter and repeat the steps 1 to 3 until they are equal to each other or <0.0001. After several iterations the
nal estimated value of diameter D = 1.64 m
S. Adamala et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 100 (2014) 100109 107
Appendix C
Design of a furrow irrigation system
Input data:
Parameters of Modied KostiakovLewis inltration equation, for rst irrigation:
Inltration exponent, a = 0.534
Inltration parameter, k = 0.0028 m
3
/min/m
Basic inltration rate, f
0
= 0.00022 m
3
/min/m
Mannings roughness coefcient, n = 0.04
Field slope, S
0
= 0.008 fraction
Shape coefcients: p1 = 0.325 and p2 = 2.734
Stream size, Q = 6 m
3
/min
Length, L = 200 m and Width, W = 720 m
Furrow spacing, F
s
= 1.5 m
Required depth of water, Z
req
= 0.1 m
Soil type = Clay
Step 1: Compute T
req
to satisfy irrigation requirement:
(a) Z
req
= irrigation requirement

F
s
= 0.1

1.5 = 0.15 m
3
/m length
(b) Calculate T
req
using Newton Raphson procedure: The basic mathematical model used is modied KostiakovLewis equation i.e.
Zreq k

T
a
req
f

0
T
req
(i) Assume rst estimate of (T
req
)
i
= 15.00 min
(ii) Compute a revised estimate of T
req

i1
based on following
formula,T
req

i1
T
req

i

ZreqkTreq
a
i
f
0
Treq
i

ak=Treq
1a
i
f
0

15
0:10:002815
0:534
0:0002215
0:5340:0028=15
10:534
0:00022
224:56min
(iii) Compare the values of rst and revised estimates = T
req

i1
T
req

i
224:56 15 209:56min
Since the computed value > 1 s, replace the rst value of T
req
with revised value, i.e. (T
req
)
i
= (T
req
)
i+1
Repeat the steps (ii) and (iii), until
they are equal or <1 s. After several iterations the nal estimated value of T
req
= 378.73 min.
Step 2: Compute maximum Q
max
(m
3
/min/m) ow discharge:
The selected value for maximum non-erosive velocity for clay soil, V
max
= 13 m/min
Q
max
V
^p2
max
n
2
3600p
1
S
0

^
1=p
2
2 13
2:734 0:04
2
36000:3250:008

^
1=2:734 2 0:104m
3
= min=m
Step 3: Select the furrow inow (Q
0
) near to Q
max
which results in integer no. sets and integer number of furrows per set.
(a) No. of furrows, N
f
= W/ F
s
= 720/1.5 = 480
(b) No. of furrows per set, N
fs
N

f
Q
max
=Q 480 0:104=6 8:32
(c) No. of sets, N
s
= N
f
/N
fs
= 480/8.32 = 58
The no. of furrows per set is not an integer. Therefore, a new value of Q
0
needs to be selected iteratively such that both the no. of
furrows and no. of sets are integer. Select Q
0
= 0.1 m
3
/min/m.
(a) No. of furrows per set,N
fs
N

f
Q
max
=Q 480 0:1=6 8
(b) No. of sets, N
s
= N
f
/N
fs
= 480/8 = 60
Step 4: Calculate the cross-sectional ow area at the eld inlet, A
0
(m
2
):
A
0

Q

0
n
2
3600p

1
S
0

^
1=p
2

0:10:04
2
36000:3250:008

^
1=2:734 0:00777m
2
Step 5: Assume an initial value of advance rate exponent, r = 0.5
Step 6: Compute sub surface shape factor, r
z

ar1a1
1a1r

0:5340:510:5341
10:53410:5
0:76793
Step 7: Computation of advance time up to end of the eld:
(a) Let T
1
be the initial estimate of t
L
: T
1

5A

0
L
Q
0

50:00777200
0:1
77:73min
(b) Compute a revised estimate of t
L
as T
2
T
2
T
1

Q

0
T
1
0:77A

0
Lr

z
kT
a
1
Lf

0
L

T
1
=1r
Q
0
rzakL=T
^
1
1af

0
L=1r
80:21min
(c) Compare the values of rst and revised estimates i.e. = (T
2
-T
1
) = 80.21-77.73 = 2.48 min
Since the computed value > 1 s, replace the rst value of advance with revised value, i.e. T
2
= T
1
. Repeat the steps 7(a) and 7(b), until
they are equal or <1 s. After several iterations the nal estimated value of advance time t
L
= 81.66 min
Step 8: Computation of advance time required to reach one-half the eld length t
0.5L
:
(a) Let T
1
be the initial estimate of t
0.5L
T
1

2:5A

0
L
Q
0

2:50:00777200
0:1
38:86min
(b) Compute a revised estimate of t
0.5L
as T
2
T
2
T
1

Q

0
T
1
0:77A
0
L=2r

z
kT
^
1
aL=2f

0
L=2T
1
=1r
Q
0
rzakL=2=T
^
1
1af

0
L=2=1r
20:43min
(c) Compare the values of rst and revised estimates i.e. = (T
1
T
2
) = 38.86-20.43 = 18.43 min
Since the computed value > 1 s, replace the rst value of advance with revised value, i.e. T
2
= T
1
. Repeat the steps 8(a) and 8(b), until
they are equal or <1 s. After several iterations the nal estimated value of t
0.5
L = 19.42 min
Step 9: Compute the revised estimate of advance rate exponent, r
1
:
r1
log2
logt
L
=t
0:5L

log2
log81:66=19:42
0:48
Step 10: Compare the values of rst and revised estimates i.e. = (r-r
1
) = 0.5-0.48 = 0.02
108 S. Adamala et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 100 (2014) 100109
References
Bansal, R.K., 2005. Fluid Mechanics and Hydraulic Machines. Laxmi Publications,
New Delhi, p. 1093.
Bautista, E., Clemmens, A.J., Strelkoff, T.S., Schlegel, J., 2009. Modern analysis of
surface irrigation systems with WinSRFR. Agricultural Water Management 96,
11461154.
Boonstra, J., Jurriens, M., 1988. BASCAD: A mathematical model for level basin
irrigation. ILRI pub. 43, ALTERRA, Wageningen, The Netherlands, p. 30.
Clemmens, A.J., Dedrick, A.R., Strand, R.J., 1995. BASIN: A computer program for the
design of level-basin irrigation systems (version 2.0). USDA/ARS, US Water
Conservation Laboratory, Phoenix, Arizona, p. 58.
Dowgert, M.F., 2010. The impact of irrigated agriculture on a stable food supply. In:
Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Central Plains Irrigation Conference, Kearney,
NE.
Elliott, R.L., Walker, W.R., 1982. Field evaluation of furrow inltration and advance
functions. Transactions of the ASAE 25 (2), 396400.
Gilberto, E.U., 2005. Pipe ow with friction losses-solutions using HP and TI
calculators <http://www.docstoc.com/docs/27374878/Pipe>.
James, L.G., 1988. Principles of Farm Irrigation System Design. John Wiley and Sons,
New York, p. 543.
Jurriens, M., 2001. SURDEV: Surface irrigation software: design, operation, and
evaluation of basin, border, and furrow irrigation. International Institute for
Land Reclamation and Improvement/ILRI, Wageningen, p. 194.
Kay, M., 1990. Recent developments for improving water management in surface
irrigation and overhead irrigation. Agricultural Water Management 17, 723.
Maheshwari, B.L., McMahon, T.A., 1991. BICADM: A Software Package for Border
Irrigation Computer Aided Design and Management. Dept. of Civil and
Agricultural Engineering, University of Melbourne, Australia, p. 32.
Merriam, J.L., 1977. Efcient Irrigation. California Polytechnic and State University,
San Luis Obisgo, California.
Michael, A.M., 1999. Irrigation: Theory and practice. Vikas Publishing House, New
Delhi, p. 801.
Murty, V.V.N., 1985. Land and Water Management Engineering. Kalyani Publishers,
New Delhi, p. 590.
Strelkoff, T.S., Clemmens, A.J., Schmidt, B.V., 1998. Computer program for simulating
ow in surface irrigation: Furrows-Basins-Borders. US Water Conservation Lab.,
USDA-ARS, 4331E. Broadway.
Walker, W.R., 1989. Guidelines for designing and evaluating surface irrigation
system. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 45, Rome, p. 137.
Walker, W.R., 2003. SIRMOD III - Surface irrigation simulation, evaluation, and
design. Guide and technical documentation, Dept. of Biological and Irrigation
Engineering, Utah State University, Logan, Utah.
Walker, W.R., Skogerboe, G.V., 1987. Surface Irrigation: Theory and Practice.
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, p. 386.
Zerihun, D., Feyen, J., 1992. FISDEV: A Software Package for Design and Evaluation of
Furrow Irrigation Systems. Centre for Irrigation Engineering,Katholieke
Universiteit, Lueven, Belgium, p. 54.
Appendix C (continued)
Since the computed value not <0.0000001, replace the rst value r with revised value of r
1
, i.e. r
1
= r. And repeat the steps 5 to 9, until
they are equal to each other or difference is <0.0000001
Step 11: Compute the time of cut-off, t
co
:
t
co
= T
req
+ t
L
= 378.73 + 81.66 = 460.39 min
Step 12: Compute the application efciency, E
a
: Ea
ZreqL
Q
0
tco

0:15200
0:1460:39
65:16%
Appendix D. Results
Intake opportunity time, T
req
= 378.73 min
Length (m) No. of
sets(No.)
Furrows/set (No.) Flow/unit
furrow (m
3
/min/m)
Advance
time (min)
Cutoff time (min) Application
efciency (%)
200 6 80 0.075 198.68 577.41 69.28
200 8 60 0.1 8166 460.39 65.16
S. Adamala et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 100 (2014) 100109 109