by Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, for sale by the National Technical Information Service in Ada, Okla, Springfield, Va .
Written in English
|Statement||by Wynn R. Walker .|
|Series||Environmental protection technology series ; EPA-600/2-76-219, Research reporting series -- EPA-600/2-76-219.|
|Contributions||United States. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Research and Development., Colorado State University. Dept. of Agricultural Engineering.|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||vii, 75 p. :|
|Number of Pages||75|
RETURN-FLOW ASSESSMENT USING SWAT MODEL sub-basin. The major advantage of the model is that, unlike other conventional conceptual simulation models, it does not require much calibration. The model can be used for the assessment of existing and anticipated water uses and water shortages. This report presents the various methodologies for correct assessment of irrigation return flow, which is one of the most significant components in the water balance of irrigation command areas. A part of the water applied to the irrigation fields percolates deep to recharge the groundwater and is known as irrigation return flow. A river salinity model has been developed on the 21 major canal areas in the lower Arkansas River Basin in Colorado to address the impact of irrigation return flow on the river. The quantity of the return flow is predicted by constructing response functions for tailwater, canal leakage, and in-field deep percolation so that the spatial and. In the present paper one such situation has been tackled using the SWAT (Soil and Water Assessment Tool) model. The target question was to assess the return flow on account of introducing canal irrigation in a basin (Palleru river basin in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh, India).Cited by:
Formulated as part of a need for evaluating irrigation return flows in a river system, the model is primarily oriented to this end. In addition to the mass balance of surface and groundwater in a river section, the model simulates reservoir operations, and a comparatively complex analysis of the soil salinity system. Moreover, HSU(3) estimated return flow based on irrigation plan water, practical irrigation a: water, and irrigation area. As a result, we got the usage ratio of return flow is over 10% of total irrigation water in Toyuan irrigation area, and the average return flow is 15% in Miaoli. This paper presents our research on the issue of water rights to return flow from irrigation of urban landscapes. Municipalities in Colorado's Front Range, with rights to transmountain water and other “use to extinction” water rights, have begun to examine lawn irrigation as a possible source to augment their supplies. This study allows for a quantitative and qualitative assessment of hydrological fronts at different levels. It furthers, thereby, our knowledge and understanding of the importance of each return flow pathway for the eco-hydrological cycle and provides invaluable data for models that address the impact of flood irrigation on the local environment.
An irrigation system assessment includes an evaluation of the irrigation system performance by conducting a simple audit of the irrigation system. An irrigation system audit should be done and all possible corrective actions identified taken prior to the peak flow and annual water use checks in this Guide are done. The proposed methodology allows relatively good estimates of the irrigation return flow coefficients at watershed and seasonal scale. The irrigation return flow coefficients are calculated as: 51 ± 8% in rainy season (Kharif) and 48 ± 4% in summer (Rabi) for rice; 26 ± 11% in rainy season and 24 ± 4% in summer for vegetables; 13 ± 8% in rainy season and 11 ± 3% . In addition, the irrigation return flow can be determined in various scenarios in terms of seasonal, annual, and regional variations in precipitation and irrigation amounts in paddy fields. However, the proposed model did not involve components that estimated the recaptured and reused return flow for by: The total irrigation return flow was 1, mm in , and 1, mm in , resulting in total return flow ratio of % and %, respectively.