Comparative Study of smart irrigation control in ... · Shakib Shahidian; Ricardo Serralheiro;...
1
y = 0.6368x + 0.3586 R 2 = 0.9499 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 Daily solar radiation outside, mm day -1 Daily solar radiation inside greenhouse, mm day -1 y = 1.1269x - 0.0474 R 2 = 0.9434 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Daily Outside Hargreaves Samani ETo,mm day -1 Daily Greenhouse Hargreaves Samani ETo, mm day -1 Comparative Study of smart irrigation control in greenhouses Shakib Shahidian; Ricardo Serralheiro; João Serrano; Rui Machado Ref: C0172 With greenhouses it is possible to increase crop production and reduce significantly the water use. Additionally advancements in electronics and shortage of water have led to the development of “smart” or adaptive irrigation controllers that adjust the water application depth to plant needs, and thus increase water savings. The two most common types are soil moisture based and evapotranspiration based systems. In the first type, one or more sensors monitor the evolution of the soil water content, and trigger irrigation when a pre-defined soil moisture deficit is achieved, or a certain water tension is reached in the soil. The climate based systems usually measure one or more weather parameters and based on these establish the The objective of this work is to compare the performance of these two smart irrigation technologies for producing lettuce in greenhouses in southern Iberia. In the soil moisture methodology, Echo 5 sensors made by Decagon devices were used to monitor soil moisture content. The irrigation was set to start at three different soil moisture content, corresponding to a depletion of 10, 20 and 30% of soil moisture content at 10 cm depth. For the evapotranspiration based method, the Hargreaves Samani reduced-set evapotranspiration estimates were used to control irrigation. A purpose built microcontroller was developed that calculates daily ETo values based on maximum and minimum temperature, and then makes daily water applications to compensate the exact amount of water lost to the Atmosphere. For this research specific The results indicate that the Eto based methodology is easier to use, and can provide excellent water use efficiency as long as it is previously calibrated. Smart irrigation based on soil moisture proved greater overall water use efficiency, although greater care needs to be taken in managing the system and ensuring a uniform water application near the sensor. y = 0.746x 1.0086 R 2 = 0.8518 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Bare soil evaporation, mm day-1 Grass evapotranspiration, mm day-1 1:1 line 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 76 76 77 77 78 79 79 80 80 81 82 82 83 83 84 85 85 86 86 Day after plantation Soil moisture content, % volume 25% volume water 22% volume water 20% volume water 0.17% volume water Figure 1. Daily solar radiation inside and outside the greenhouse Figure 2. Daily ETo inside and outside the greenhouse Figure 3. Figure 3. Correlation Correlation between between Grass Grass ETo ETo and and bare bare soil soil evaporation evaporation Figure 4. Figure 4. Evolution Evolution of of soil soil moisture moisture content content when when irrigation irrigation was was managed managed based based on on four four different different soil soil moisture moisture contents contents
Transcript of Comparative Study of smart irrigation control in ... · Shakib Shahidian; Ricardo Serralheiro;...
y = 0.6368x + 0.3586R2 = 0.9499
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
Daily solar radiation outside, mm day -1
Dai
ly s
olar
rad
iatio
n in
side
gre
enho
use,
mm
day
-1
y = 1.1269x - 0.0474R2 = 0.9434
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
Daily Outside Hargreaves Samani ETo,mm day -1
Dai
ly G
reen
hous
e H
argr
eave
s S
aman
i ET
o, m
m
day-1
Comparative Study of smart irrigation control in greenhousesShakib Shahidian; Ricardo Serralheiro; João Serrano; Rui Machado
Ref: C0172
With greenhouses it is possible to increase crop production and reduce significantly the water use. Additionally advancements in electronics and shortage of water have led to the development of “smart” or adaptive irrigation controllers that adjust the water application depth to plant needs, and thus increase water savings. The two most common types are soil moisture based and evapotranspiration based systems. In the first type, one or more sensors monitor the evolution of the soil water content, and trigger irrigation when a pre-defined soil moisture deficit is achieved, or a certain water tension is reached in the soil. The climate based systems usually measure one or more weather parameters and based on these establish the The objective of this work is to compare the performance of these two smart irrigation technologies for producing lettuce in greenhouses in southern Iberia. In the soil moisture methodology, Echo 5 sensors made by Decagon devices were used to monitor soil moisture content. The irrigation was set to start at three different soil moisture content, corresponding to a depletion of 10, 20 and 30% of soil moisture content at 10 cm depth.
For the evapotranspiration based method, the Hargreaves Samani reduced-set evapotranspiration estimates were used to control irrigation. A purpose built microcontroller was developed that calculates daily ETo values based on maximum and minimum temperature, and then makes daily water applications to compensate the exact amount of water lost to the Atmosphere. For this research specific The results indicate that the Eto based methodology is easier to use, and can provide excellent water use efficiency as long as it is previously calibrated. Smart irrigation based on soil moisture proved greater overall water use efficiency, although greater care needs to be taken in managing the system and ensuring a uniform water application near the sensor.
y = 0.746x 1.0086
R2 = 0.8518
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Bare soil evaporation, mm day-1
Gra
ss e
vapo
tran
spira
tion,
mm
day
-1
1:1 line
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
76 76 77 77 78 79 79 80 80 81 82 82 83 83 84 85 85 86 86
Day after plantation
Soi
l moi
stur
e co
nten
t, %
vol
ume
25% volume water
22% volume water
20% volume water
0.17% volume water
Figure 1. Daily solar radiation inside and outside the greenhouse
Figure 2. Daily ETo inside and outside the greenhouse
Figure 3. Figure 3. CorrelationCorrelation betweenbetween GrassGrass EToETo andand barebare soilsoil evaporationevaporation
Figure 4. Figure 4. EvolutionEvolution ofof soilsoil moisturemoisture contentcontent whenwhen irrigationirrigation waswas
managedmanaged basedbased onon fourfour differentdifferent soilsoil moisturemoisture contentscontents
