Laserfiche WebLink
<br />("-J <br />0), <br />M <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />(.::) <br />.:....; <br /> <br />,...... <br />-' <br /> <br />weir created problems in some of the upstream ported gates. Also, the <br />overal I field had 4 different crops and only a portion of the field <br />was mon i tored in the past. <br /> <br />Sites 19 and 24 were monitored from 1985 to 1987 but were dropped in <br />1988 because it was felt that additional information could not be <br />gained by monitoring these sites. The producers received weekly ET <br />updates for the fields but were unwi I I ing to change their irrigation <br />practices based on SCS recommendations. <br /> <br />1989 Monitorinq Sites: <br /> <br />In 1989, 20 sites were established, however only 19 sites were fully <br />operational. All 1988 sites were monitored in 1989. Two previously <br />mon i tored sites, 13 and 31 were added in 1989. As menti oned above, <br />site 31 was partially monitored in 1987 and then reactivated again in <br />1989. Site 13 was mon i tored in 1985 and 1986 and dropped in 1987 and <br />1988 due to problems with the irrigation system. It was again <br />reactivated in 1989, but was however not fully operational due to <br />equipment malfunction during the first three irrigations. Therefore, <br />a full season of irrigation data could not be collected from this <br />site. The site continued to be monitored throughout the season and <br />the equipment appeared to be working good later in the season. The <br />data from this site is not included in this report. <br /> <br />EQUIPMENT CHANGES AND PROBLEMS <br /> <br />There were no major problems with the irrigation monitoring equipment <br />in 1989 except with the magnetic flow sensor installed at site 13. <br />The float sensors using potentiometers were installed at several sites <br />with outflow weirs to measure the volume of water leaving the fields. <br />These float sensors were connected to Easy Logger field units for data <br />record i ng and storage. The st ill i ng we II s (pot chambers) for some <br />float sensors experienced siltation. This problem was controlled by <br />regular removal of si It from the sti II ing wells during routine site <br />check. In the past, transducers and or Drexelbrook I inear gauges were <br />used for measuring runoff. The transducers developed problems because <br />of flooding when weirs were overtopped. The transducers had an <br />additional problem of plugging by debris and insects. In 1988, 2 <br />outflow sites had Drexelbrook I inear gauges connected to Datapods. No <br />problems developed with this set up. <br /> <br />Most of the inflow sites under surface irrigation had Drexelbrook <br />I inear gauges for measurement of inflow volume to the fields. These <br />gauges were connected to Datapods for data recording and storage. One <br />inflow site, #18 with inline-closed pipe system is permanently <br />connected to a magnetic flow sensor. This equipment measures the <br />amount of water be i ng app lied to the fie I d and the Datapod records and <br />stores the measured data. Site 13 has a similar set-up. <br /> <br />Da i I y Evapotransp i rat i on (En data obta i ned from the 2 SCS weather <br /> <br />8 <br />