IPART - AN IRRIGATION PERFORMANCE AUDIT AND REPORTING TOOL FOR PRESSURISED APPLICATION SYSTEMS

Transcription

1 IPART - AN IRRIGATION PERFORMANCE AUDIT AND REPORTING TOOL FOR PRESSURISED APPLICATION SYSTEMS Steven R Raine 1, Scott Wallace 2 and Nicholas Curran 1 1 National Centre for Engineering in Agriculture, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, 4350 Australia 2 Growcom Pty Ltd, 2/18 Mylne St, Toowoomba, 4350 Australia ABSTRACT The performance of infield application systems is a major determinant of water use efficiency in irrigated agriculture and measuring and improving the performance of infield application systems is a key focus of both government and industry water use efficiency programs. The Irrigation Performance Audit and Reporting Tool (IPART) has been developed to assist industry development officers undertake and report application system performance evaluations. IPART consists of a web-based interface linked to a database hosted on a centralised server. It provides a range of functions including standardisation of infield data record acquisition, calculation and presentation of infield irrigation performance evaluation indices, automated generation of grower recommendations, grower report generation and collation of industry and regional data for higher level reporting. This paper provides an overview of the features and operation of IPART as well as examples of individual performance reports and industry summary data. 1. INTRODUCTION The Queensland Government, through it s Department of Natural Resources and Water (DNRW), is currently funding both a Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative (RWUEI) and the South-East Queensland Irrigation Futures (SEQIF) program. Both programs involve working with industry partners (sugar, cotton, horticulture, dairy & fodder, turf, grains, cut flowers and nurseries) to provide development and extension activities to improve on-farm water use efficiency. Each of the industries involved in RWUEI and SEQIF are contractually required to undertake in-field performance evaluations of irrigation application systems. In each case, the industry development officer (IDO) collects a range of infield data (e.g. design and operating parameters, discharge rates, catch can measurements), undertakes calculations to characterise infield performance, compares these results with existing application system and industry benchmarks and, where appropriate, provides recommendations to growers on corrective measures. Procedures have previously been developed for the collection of the infield data and analysis of irrigation performance. Spreadsheets are commonly used by Queensland IDOs to assist with the data entry and performance calculations for the more commonly encountered pressurised application systems (e.g. fixed sprinklers, travelling guns, micro-systems). However, there is no process by which the data collected in these evaluations can be collated to provide either broader scale interpretation (e.g. industry or regional analysis) or trend analysis. Another problem is that the data collection and spreadsheet calculations are not consistent between IDOs with errors sometimes present in the calculations. In nearly all cases the original performance data is only held by individual IDOs. Hence, much of the infield irrigation performance evaluation data collected over the last eight years by the Queensland RWUEI programs is difficult or impossible to access due to staff turnover and clearly there is a need to improve irrigation performance evaluation reporting and collation. Both the Irrig8 (Page Bloomer Associates Ltd, 2005) and Irrigation Record Evaluation System (PIRSA, 2007) were evaluated but neither package provided the range of data collation, security and reporting features envisaged. Hence, the Queensland DNRW commissioned the National Centre for Engineering in Agriculture to develop a web-based system to improve the data entry and collation of infield irrigation performance evaluation data collected by the IDOs. The Irrigation Performance Audit and Reporting Tool (IPART) is implemented as a website with a database backend. As the user interface is accessible as a web page, IPART is usable from any computer with a web browser and requires no software to be installed on the user's computer. A copy of IPART (i.e. a new repository of irrigation data) can be installed on any server with the commonly available free, open source software packages PHP, Apache and PostgreSQL. Presented to Share the Water, Share the Benefits. Irrigation Australia 2008, nd May, Melbourne. 1

2 IPART provides a range of functions including standardisation of infield data record acquisition, calculation and presentation of infield irrigation performance evaluation indices, automated generation of grower recommendations and grower report generation. Irrigation performance evaluations are able to be conducted for travelling guns, travelling booms, side roll sprinklers, hand shift sprinklers, solid set sprinklers, lateral move machines, centre pivots, drip irrigation and microsprinklers. The tool also provides for the collation of industry and regional data for higher level reporting. 2. FEATURES OF IPART 2.1 ACCESS, PERMISSIONS AND SECURITY Access to IPART is controlled via a secure login page with individual users assigned unique permission to access specific information and functions. Users may be granted privileges to access (ie. view) existing records only, create new records, or edit existing records within specific user groups (i.e. industries). Users may belong to more than one user group. Grower and site specific identifying details are only able to be viewed by users with permission to create and edit records within that industry. However, all users are generally granted privileges to view all performance records (without any identifying details) for comparative purposes. Catchment groups and Government agency staff are granted privileges only to view existing records (without grower or site identifying details). 2.2 NAVIGATION After logging into the IPART system, the user is presented with a home page formatted to reflect their unique permissions and recent actions (Figure 1). The administrative function bar is dynamic (i.e. changes according to user permissions and page requirements) and located across the top of all IPART pages. From the home page, the administrative bar enables users to edit their own user details, change their password and manage their grower contact details. The home page also provides direct access to recent evaluations, database search and statistics capabilities and links to the data entry pages for new performance evaluations. User name Administration functions Links to data entry pages Links to access recent records Search and statistics functions Links to field record sheets Figure 1 Example user home page within IPART 2.3 ENTERING FIELD EVALUATION DATA Blank hardcopies of IPART field evaluation data record sheets are able to be downloaded directly from the IPART home page. Due to application system differences, the field data record sheets and the evaluation data entry pages are customised for each application system. The structure of Presented to Share the Water, Share the Benefits. Irrigation Australia 2008, nd May, Melbourne. 2

3 data required for each system is the same and includes sections for grower contact details, field identification details, generic pumping details, conditions under which the evaluation was conducted, irrigation system/machine details, water usage, field topography and catch can data. Speed measurements are also collected for moving systems. There is no need to enter values in sections where data has not been recorded and only non-null values are recorded in the database and shown on the evaluation reports. Previously entered grower and field details can be selected from drop down menus reducing data entry errors and time. The format of the irrigation system data entry section varies according to the application system being evaluated but generally includes data on the system/machine identity, characteristics of the water distribution system both to and within the field, characteristics of the application system (e.g. sprinkler type, nozzle size, elevation) and direction of movement (if applicable). Topographic data can be entered via either the interactive graphic tool or directly into a data table. Catch can data entry is customised in accordance with the various evaluation layouts and procedures for each application system. In general, the layout of the catch can data entry cells is representative of the way in which the cans would be laid out in the field. For example, the data entry cells are arranged in a grid (e.g. Figure 2) with a diagrammatic indication of the relative location of the lateral and sprinkler locations for systems where the cans are arranged in a grid pattern (e.g. solid set, side roll, handshift). In these cases, the size of the grid layout and number of cans is dynamic reflecting the sprinkler and lateral spacings and the catch can offsets and spacings used in the field evaluation. For moving systems, data from multiple catch can transects arranged either in the perpendicular or parallel to the direction of movement can be entered. In each case, the data entry cells are arranged relative to the machine location and the direction of movement is indicated. Catch can data can be entered as a volume or depth. Figure 2 Solid set example of data entry section to record catch can data 2.4 CALCULATION AND PRESENTATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES After saving the field evaluation data IPART returns the user to an evaluation summary page which shows the input data, calculated performance measures and graphical representations of the application data. The performance measures calculated from the evaluation data include minimum and maximum depth applied, average depth applied over the whole area, average depth applied in the lowest quarter, distribution uniformity and Christensen s (1942) Uniformity Coefficient. Presented to Share the Water, Share the Benefits. Irrigation Australia 2008, nd May, Melbourne. 3

4 Minimum and maximum depths applied are provided for both sides of centre feed lateral move machines and the Heerman and Hein (1968) Coefficient of Uniformity is calculated for centre pivot machines. The plots of each set of catch can data are provided either as a transect for the microsprinkler, drip and mobile application systems (Figure 3a) or as a two-dimensional surface for the fixed systems (Figure 3b). (a) (b) Figure 3 Example IPART plots of catch can data for (a) lateral move and (b) solid set application systems 2.5 SELECTING AND EDITING RECOMMENDATIONS It is possible to include recommendations into the evaluation report and summary database record of the evaluation. The recommendations editing window is separated into two main sections showing (a) the recommendations selected for this particular evaluation and (b) three lists of additional recommendations being the IPART Recommendations, Your Previous Recommendations and Optional Recommendations. IPART Recommendations are automatically provided based on trigger values for specific input variables relevant to the application system type being evaluated (Table 1). Your Previous Recommendations are any recommendations that have been created or edited by the user for the current application system type. The Optional Recommendations are a list of general recommendations appropriate for the selected application system. Any of these recommendations can be selected, included and edited for the current evaluation. New text recommendations can also be added and edited directly into a blank recommendation box. Table 1 Examples of automatic and optional recommendations within IPART for travelling guns Automatic Trigger If angle of gun rotation is < 240 or > 280 then If lane spacing > 75 m and DU < 75% then If pressure at gun < 483 kpa and DU < 75% then No trigger - Optional Recommendation Angle of gun rotation should be between 240 and 280. The lane spacing may be excessive for the nozzle and operating pressure of the gun. Depending on the gun and operating conditions the lane spacings would normally be less than 75 m. In high wind areas, consider using lanes with narrower spacings. Check the operating pressure at the gun. The recommended operating pressure for most guns lies between 483 kpa (70 psi) and 621 kpa (90 psi). Check the operating pressure specification for the gun and ensure that the system is operating within ± 5%. Lane spacings should be no more than 40% of the wetted diameter for travelling gun irrigation machines. No trigger - Optional Lane spacings should be 60-65% of wetted diameter for low wind (< 7 km/h) conditions, 50% of wetted diameter for moderate wind (7-14 km/h) conditions and 30-50% of wetted diameter for high (14 km/h) wind speeds Presented to Share the Water, Share the Benefits. Irrigation Australia 2008, nd May, Melbourne. 4

5 2.6 GENERATING GROWER EVALUATION REPORTS Grower reports summarising the evaluation data are automatically produced in pdf format. All of the major input evaluation data characteristics for which a value had been entered are included in the grower report (Figure 4). Similarly, where there is sufficient data to enable the calculation of summary statistics and the generation of relevant graphs these are also included along with any recommendations saved for the evaluation. Grower reports include grower and evaluation identifying information only where access to this information has been granted to the user. Figure 4 Example of a Grower Report generated by IPART 2.7 SEARCHING AND COLLATING PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RECORDS IPART provides two types of search functions both of which utilise a guided search principle and drop down menus. Searches can be constrained within multiple categories and within a single category. The Search Existing Records search returns a listing (with hyperlinks) of the relevant evaluations recorded in the database while the Calculate Summary Statistics search returns a list (Figure 5) of the key performance indicators for the relevant evaluations. Collation statistics can also be generated for the application or pumping system data. Summary performance data for individual evaluations can be exported to a csv file. Presented to Share the Water, Share the Benefits. Irrigation Australia 2008, nd May, Melbourne. 5

6 Figure 5 Example page returned from a Summary Statistics search in IPART 3. INDUSTRY USAGE OF IPART IPART was first released in September At the time of writing, there were 66 performance evaluations entered into the system across a variety of industries and all application system types (Table 1). The system has been accessed by 13 industry development and government officers. IPART provides IDOs with the ability to collect and collate data over time to provide answers relating to practice change and overall improvements. As industries begin to collate the regionalised data this information will enable irrigators to better identify and demonstrate best practice. For new IDOs with limited experience, the use of the field data collection sheets (which are aligned with the IPART data entry fields) is beneficial as this ensures the correct data is collected. The program itself is relatively easy to use and combined with the automatically triggered recommendations for system improvements, the grower reports provide clear outcomes that are consistent across the various irrigation systems and industries. In general, IDOs enter the field evaluation data into IPART, review the performance, edit the automatically generated recommendations and produce the grower report which is sent to the grower as either an attachment to an or appended to a hardcopy cover letter. To date, the horticultural (45%) and turf (20%) industries have been the most active in undertaking evaluations. The majority of the evaluations entered into IPART had been physically undertaken during 2007/08 except for the pasture and fodder measurements which were collected primarily between 2001 and Despite the relatively small data sample, differences are already apparent in performance levels between the application systems and the average depth of water applied by different industries using similar application systems (Table 2). Table 2 IPART usage and example system performance measures for application systems and industries with at least two evaluations (as at 26/02/08) Application Industry No. of Irrigation Performance System Evaluations CU (%) DU (%) Av. Depth Applied (mm) Travelling gun Turf ± ± ±8.9 Horticulture ± ± ±3.5 Pasture & Fodder ± ± ±10.6 Sugar ± ± ±7.8 Travelling boom Horticulture ± ± ±17.0 Solid set and Turf ± ± ±5.7 handshift Horticulture ± ± ±13.4 Pasture & Fodder ± ± ±15.4 Sideroll Pasture & Fodder ± ± ±1.1 Lateral moves Cotton & Grains ± ± ±0.1 Presented to Share the Water, Share the Benefits. Irrigation Australia 2008, nd May, Melbourne. 6

7 4. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IPART is currently being upgraded to improve functionality. A publicly accessible web-interface providing statistical summaries of application system performance at the industry and regional levels will also be provided. A performance and reporting tool for surface irrigation (ISID) and an irrigation pump evaluation and reporting tool (IPERT) are also currently being developed using a similar platform and may eventually be linked to the same database. The potential to provide linkages between the data collected within IPART and a range of irrigation simulation and optimisation packages is also being investigated. This would enable extrapolation of the field data to provide better targeted design and operational recommendations at the whole field level. For example, the NCEA has developed TRAVGUN (Smith et al 2006) which uses transect data from travelling gun machines and an inverse solution technique to calculate the radial leg data for the machine and simulate whole field performance under a range of wind conditions and lane spacing configurations. Similar opportunities also exist for using the field data to calibrate hydraulic models of centre pivot and lateral move machines. 5. REFERENCES Christiansen, J. E. (1942) Hydraulics of sprinkling systems for irrigation. Trans. Amer. Soc. Civ. Eng.107, Heermann, D. F. and Hein, P. R. (1968). Performance characteristics of self-propelled center pivot sprinkler irrigation systems. Transactions of the ASAE 11(1), PIRSA (2007). IRES - an irrigation recording and evaluation system. (viewed October 2007). Page Bloomer Associates Limited (2005) Irrig8: Irrigation Evaluation Software. Version Page Bloomer Associates Ltd, Napier, NZ. Smith, R. J. and Gillies, M. H. and Newell, G. and Foley, Joseph P. (2006) A Decision support model for travelling gun irrigation machines. In: CIGR World Congress 2006: Agricultural Engineering for a better world, 3-7 Sep 2006, Bonn, Germany. Presented to Share the Water, Share the Benefits. Irrigation Australia 2008, nd May, Melbourne. 7