Abo-Habaga, M., Elsamra, E., EL-Sheshny, A. (2016). Effect of Different Leveling Methodes on Roughness Condition of Soil Surface. Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering, 7(12), 955-959. doi: 10.21608/jssae.2016.40555
M. Abo-Habaga; E. Elsamra; A. EL-Sheshny. "Effect of Different Leveling Methodes on Roughness Condition of Soil Surface". Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering, 7, 12, 2016, 955-959. doi: 10.21608/jssae.2016.40555
Abo-Habaga, M., Elsamra, E., EL-Sheshny, A. (2016). 'Effect of Different Leveling Methodes on Roughness Condition of Soil Surface', Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering, 7(12), pp. 955-959. doi: 10.21608/jssae.2016.40555
Abo-Habaga, M., Elsamra, E., EL-Sheshny, A. Effect of Different Leveling Methodes on Roughness Condition of Soil Surface. Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering, 2016; 7(12): 955-959. doi: 10.21608/jssae.2016.40555
Effect of Different Leveling Methodes on Roughness Condition of Soil Surface
1Agric. Eng. Dept, Fac. of Agric. Mansoura Univ., Egypt.
2Agric. Eng. Ins., El-Dokki, Giza., Egypt.
Abstract
The main objective of this research is to determine the most appropriate ways of land leveling methods, which is working to reduce the resistance to water flow and the impact on irrigation efficiencies. Three different treatment methods and two experiments were carried out in Gemiza, El-Gharbia government,(clayley soil) during two successive agricultural seasons of winter (wheat) 2014/2015, and summer (corn) 2015. The study showed the decrease of coefficient of water resistance, and water applied with laser land leveling comparing hydraulic scraper, and rotary tiller. The percentage of decrease of coefficient of water resistance were ( 54%, and 79%), (79%, and 92%) and (56%, 86%) at Manning’s roughness coefficient(n), chezy’s roughness coefficient(C), and Darcy-Weisbach roughness coefficient,(√ʄ ) respectively at hydraulic scraper, and rotary tiller at first season. The percentage of decrease at water applied was (20%, and 22%) with laser land leveling comparing hydraulic scraper, and rotary tiller at first season. The percentage of decrease of coefficient of water resistance at second season were (51.75%, and 67.61%), (51.76%, and 93.4%) and (51.75%, and47.15%) at Manning’s roughness coefficient(n), chezy’s roughness coefficient(C), and Darcy-Weisbach roughness coefficient,(√ʄ ) respectively at hydraulic scraper, and rotary tiller. The percentage of decrease at water applied was (17.97%, and 19.99%) with laser land leveling comparing hydraulic scraper, and rotary tiller at second season. The study showed the increase of irrigation efficiencies with laser land leveling comparing hydraulic scraper, and rotary tiller. The percentage of increase of irrigation efficiencies were (15.44%, and 20.61%), (4.83%, and 7.81%), (1.4%, and 3.36%) and (36.95%, and 62.99%) at application efficiency, distribution efficiency, low-quarter efficiency, and water productivity at hydraulic scraper, and rotary tiller at first season. The percentage of increase of irrigation efficiencies were (23.24%, and 22.23%), (1.23%, and 4.68%), (11.17%, and 3.06%) and (43.75%, and 45.26%) at application efficiency, distribution efficiency, low-quarter efficiency, and water productivity at hydraulic scraper, and rotary tiller at second season.
View on SCiNiTO
Top