United States
 Environmental Protection
 Agency
 Robert S. Kerr Environmental
 Research Laboratory
 Ada OK 74820
 Research and Development
 EPA-600/S2-82-078  Oct. 1982
 Project Summary
Evaluating  Furrow  Irrigation
Systems for  Regional  Water
Quality Planning
 Wynn R. Walker and Gaylord V. Skogerboe
  Field evaluations of furrow irriga-
 tion practices at three Colorado loca-
 tions were conducted during the 1979
 irrigation season.  The data  were
 utilized to assess four alternative field
 evaluation procedures and develop
 cost effectiveness relationships for
 each  method.  A simulation formu-
 lated  from volume balance concepts
 was also developed and calibrated
 using the field  data. The model was
 used  to evaluate the relationships
 among furrow  hydraulic and perfor-
 mance parameters so that proper
 alternatives for improving irrigation
 efficiency could be determined.
  Analysis of spatial and temporal
 variabilities in the field indicates that
 large errors are likely in field assess-
 ments unless the study is comprehen-
 sive. Testing  should include the first
 seasonal irrigation and at least three
 later irrigation  events.  At least  six
 individual furrows should be studied
 on each field.
  Relationships among soil proper-
 ties, furrow hydraulics, and irrigation
 efficiency were  not predictable unless
 specific intake  (infiltration) relations
 were utilized as input data. However,
 with this information  it was possible
 to identify the  effects  of changing
 various  irrigation  practices upon
 irrigation efficiencies.
  This Project Summary was devel-
 oped by EPA's Roberts. Kerr Environ-
mental Research Laboratory. Ada,
 OK, to announce key findings of the
research project that is fully docu-
mented in a separate report of the
same title (see Project Report ordering
information at back).

Introduction
  Improved irrigation practices have
become increasingly important to
pollution control, water and  energy
conservation,  and increased food and
fiber production. Sixty-eight percent of
the total irrigated acreage in the United
States  is surface  irrigated. Furrow
irrigation, comprising a major portion of
this acreage, is characterized by running
water down small channels called fur-
rows located between crop rows. Pro-
perly designed and managed  furrow
irrigation systems can result in high crop
production levels while conserving water
and energy resources. However, in-
herent system limitations coupled with
poor management practices can and
often do result in large deep percolation
and tailwater  run-off volumes, which
frequently impact  downstream water
quality.
  Studies of the irrigation  return flow
system  have been concerned with the
severe problem of collecting data on a
scale large enough to ensure adequate
system characterization. Existing man-
power within planning agencies and the
funding  committed to  water quality
planning are likely to be insufficient to
facilitate studies of the same detail as
most research field studies. Conse-
quently, the investigative tools appli-
cable at the planning level  must be
much simpler in order to accommodate

-------
the kinds of data that can be realistically
collected. The objective of this project
was to provide such a simplified, usable
computational aid and  to  concisely
describe the procedures and limitations
of the suggested approaches.
   Furrow evaluation data were collect-
ed at six locations in Colorado on fields
with lengths ranging from 175 m to 625
m, slopes of 0.23% to 1.0%, and soils
ranging from loamy sand to  clay loam.
These  data  provided the  basis  for
comparing four evaluation procedures
and calibrating a furrow  irrigation
performance simulation  model called
FURSIM.

Field  Data Collection
Procedure
  Farmers cooperating in the research
efforts  were  notified  several months
prior to the  irrigation season of the
nature and objectives of the field work.
An interview with  each farmer estab-
lished the history of irrigation and tillage
practices for each field. Following these
initial interviews, groups of three or four
furrows were selected at each site to be
representative of  general field condi-
tions.
  Furrow lengths were measured and
staked  at 25  meter intervals. The field
was surveyed to establish average field
slopes. Soil moisture sampling, furrow
cross-section sampling (with a profil-
ometer), blocked  furrow infiltrometer
testing, and the setting of inflow and out-
flow measuring flumes were all accom-
plished on the day just prior to the first
and subsequent irrigations. During the
irrigation event, data collected included
advance times to  each 25 m  station,
inflow  and outflow discharge readings,
and flow depth and top width measure-
ments  for selected stations along each
furrow. In addition, recession times
were recorded at each station following
the termination of inflow (time of cutoff).
Two to three days following the  irri-
gations, soil moisture and furrow cross-
section sampling was  repeated.

Simulation Model
Development
   The  traditional volume approach for
predicting the distribution of water
under  surface irrigation systems was
programmed. The model simulated
furrow irrigation  performance as  a
function of furrow discharge, time of
cutoff, soil moisture deficit, and number
of  previous  irrigations.  The relations
between hydraulic  variables  were
described by  a series of functions
determined  by  a regression analysis.
These "state variable" functions in-
clude relations  for the advance coeffi-
cient  and the  basic  intake rates. The
primary mathematical elements of the
model included  (a) the  furrow cross-
sectional  flow area and  the  furrow
wetted perimeter; (b) Manning's rough-
ness factor; (c) a power function used to
characterize the rate of advance; (d) the
modified Kostiakov equation describing
infiltration with extension  to incor-
porate wetted  perimeter and seasonal
variation effects; and (e)the subsurface
water distribution profile.
  In nearly every case where a  reason-
able estimate of the infiltration  charac-
teristics of the furrow was used as input
to the model, the predictive results were
satisfactory.  Following the verifications
and calibration tests, the  model  was
used to indicate alternatives for  improv-
ing irrigation performance at the local
site. For example, the effects of chang-
ing furrow discharge, time of applica-
tion,  and irrigation frequency  were
calculated.

Evaluation of Field
Procedures
  All field data were reduced, coded in a
computer library,  and organized for
each individual field. Then four levels of
field evaluation were devised in which
Procedure 1 is the simplest and  Pro-
cedure 4  uses  all  of the "measured"
field data. The  data  required for each
procedure were extracted from the files
and used along with appropriate as-
sumptions to  predict the  actual  field
performance of the irrigation, as com-
pared with the  complete  data set
(Procedure 4).  In addition,  data from a
single furrow  and a  single group of
furrows were used to predict the
average field performance. From these
analyses, relationships were developed
which indicated the accuracy of the
various procedures
  The  projected costs associated with
the use of each procedure were esti-
mated in terms of hours of labor and
equipment needs required for each field
evaluation  procedure. Rather than
apportion hourly costs between those of
supervisor and  one or two assistants,
the hourly  wage  was  estimated as
seven dollars per hour. Equipment costs
were  obtained  from catalogs for equip-
ment available  in the spring of 1980.
Costs for major items were apportioned
over  an estimated useful  life on an
annual  basis without using a capital
recovery factor.  The costs were then
related to the accuracy to yield a cost-
effectiveness  function  for each  pro-
cedure.  Examples of the results  are
shown in Figures 1 and  2 for tailwater
(surface) runoff  and  deep percolation,
respectively. Similar  plots were made
for  cost-effectiveness related  to  irri-
gation application  efficiencies.  An
aggregate comparison of the results
indicated  that the most  detailed  ap-
proach was less cost-effective than one
in which a  larger number of  furrows
were tested.

Conclusions

  The  accuracy of a field evaluation
procedure is directly proportional to the
cost of conducting  the evaluation.
However,  a procedure  involving  a
moderate level of field  tests will yield
accurate results if the number of furrow
evaluations is increased. Consequently,
it was concluded that a  moderate level
of detail in the field testing procedure,
but a large number  of furrows tested,
was the  most cost-effective  program
(Procedure 3).
  A volume balance computer simula-
tion of furrow irrigation  performance
was shown to  predict  the effects of
various irrigation practices so long as
the  infiltration  rates of  the  soil  are
accurately known Efforts to correlate
furrow  and soil  parameters with hy-
draulic  and management parameters
were only partially successful. Never-
theless, it is concluded that the simula-
tion model can be used  effectively on a
site-by-site  basis following local calia-
tion

Recommendations

  Measurements for evaluating an
existing furrow irrigation system should
include inflow and  runoff  (tailwater)
discharge,  the rate  of  field coverage
(time of advance), soil moisture prior to
the  irrigation, and  a typical furrow
cross-sectional shape.  At least three
furrows spaced across the field should
be tested during four irrigation events,
including the first irrigation event of the
season.
  The  basic volume  balance  analysis
should be used to evaluate the field data
and predict the effects  of alternative
irrigation practices. Relating the cost of
improved  practices to the  level of
improved hydraulic  performance will
allow an assessment of Best Manage-
ment Practices to be incorporated into a
water quality implementation program.

-------
   720 r-
                  i Procedure 4 (Measured)    o Procedure 1,   & Procedure 2,   o Procedure 3
                                                                                o   &
                                                                               o

                                                                                2   fi
                                                        ao
                                                         o

                                                        fip
            0.7
0.2    0.3
0.4
                  fa,/ Benson Farm



Figure 1.   Cost comparison for tailwater ratios at three farms.
0.5    0.6 0      0.5      1.0      1.5     2.0   0


        Average Absolute Fractional Deviation


                       (b) Printz Farm
                      • Procedure 4 (Measured),
o Procedure 1,   d Procedure 2,
     120r
     100 -
-§


Uj
 o
Cj
0
                                               0
 0.1
                                          0.2
                                   0.3    0.4     0.5


             Average Absolute Fractional Deviation

                           fbj Printz Farm
              (a) Benson Farm



Figure 2.  Cost comparisons for deep percolation ratios at three farms.
                                             0.1     0.2    0.3   0.4




                                              (c) Matchett Farm
                                                                     D Procedure 3.
                                                                                                   0.5
                                                                    1.0
                                                                  1.5
                                              (c) Matchett Farm
                                                                                         0 US.GOVERNMENTPRWTINQOFFICE. 1962 -559-017/0843

-------
       Wynn Ft. Walker and Gay lord V. Skogerboe are with Colorado State University,
        Ft. Col/ins, CO 80523.
       Alvin L.  Wood is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
       The complete report, entitled "Evaluating Furrow Irrigation Systems for Regional
        Water Quality Planning," (Order No. PB 82-255 324; Cost: $13.50, subject to
        change) will be available only from:
                National Technical Information Service
                5285 Port Royal Road
                Springfield,  VA 22161
                Telephone: 703-487-4650
       The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
                Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
                U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency
                Ada, OK 74820
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Postage and
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA 335
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
                0000329
                                           ASENC'

-------