Canal Automation
Canal Automation
Canal Automation
ABSTRACT
The Task Committee was formed because although there has been continual
research in the field of canal automation, there has not been a formal publication on
the topic for some time. From the beginning, the Task Committee wanted the final
product to be a truly international effort that would be useable in all countries. Indeed,
the Task Committee itself was composed of researchers and engineers in multiple
countries including the United States, the Netherlands, Australia, France, Spain,
Portugal, China, and Mexico. In all, more than 40 different professionals from 8
different countries participated in the development of MOP 131.
This paper provides a brief summary of MOP 131 within the context of the history and
future of canal automation.
1. BACKGROUND
Canal automation always has had the potential to save water and improve efficiency
of irrigation water supply projects or of irrigation district operations. Recently, there
have been a number of technological and engineering advances in the field of canal
automation. While these advances have been documented via conference
proceedings and peer-reviewed journal articles, a comprehensive document outlining
the state-of-the-art in canal automation was lacking.
The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) decided to fill this void by
commissioning the development of the Manual of Practice (MOP) 131: Canal
Automation for Irrigation Systems (Wahlin and Zimbelman, 2014). MOP 131 was
developed by the Task Committee on Recent Advances in Canal Automation
(TCRACA) which was formed under the Irrigation Delivery and Drainage Systems
(IDDS) Committee under the Environmental and Water Resources Institute (EWRI) of
1
Vice President, WEST Consultants, Inc.8950 S. 52 nd Street, Suite 210, Tempe, AZ 85284, United States
of America. E-mail: bwahlin@westconsultants.com
2
President, Water Systems Operations and Management, LLC. 8258 Spinnaker Bay Drive, Windsor, CO
80528, United States of America. E-mail: ddz.wtr.engr@mac.com
1
2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)
6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand
W.1.4.01
ASCE. EWRI is an entity within ASCE that focuses on water resources instead of civil
engineering in general. The TCRACA members gathered information on canal
automation research and practice from around the world in their efforts to document
the application of new technologyto the progress of designing and implementing
irrigation canal automation. The TCRACA was a truly international effort with
researchers and practitioners from the USA, the Netherlands, Australia, France,
Spain, Portugal, China, and Mexico all participating in the development of MOP 131.
MOP 131 is designed to provide guidance on how and when to implement canal
automation within the context of canal modernization but not covering the full range of
canal modernization issues. The manual also provides practical guidance on some of
the more routine aspects of canal automation.Note that while MOP 131 was
developed by the cooperative efforts of eight different countries, it has not been
formally adopted by the administrations of those countries.
In order to plan for a successful canal modernization program, with measurable goals
and objectives, that provides water users (irrigators) with improved flexibility, it is not
only interesting but also very helpful to review how the science of irrigation canal
automation arrived at today’s technology. For purposes of this paper, a historic review
will principally be from the perspective of the USA. A broader perspective would
require more time and space than allowed herein.
Then, as now, members of ASCE, working through committees of what was then the
Irrigation and Drainage Division, which later merged into EWRI, paved the way for
presenting and discussing improved operations of irrigation water supply systems.
Their deliberations were published in 1968 as Automation of Irrigation and Drainage
Systems which contained papers from a conference held in Phoenix, Arizona (ASCE,
1968). A paper by the Salt River Project (SRP), a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
(USBR) project, discussed efforts to develop a supervisory control system for
distribution canal operations that relied on new technology to measure gate openings,
compute gate flows, monitor water levels, transmit data to a centralized operations
center, and remotely move gates.
During the same general time period, the California Department of Water Resources
(DWR) was in the process of designing the USA’s largest state-built water and power
project to move water from northern California to cities and irrigators in water short
southern California. This project became known as the State Water Project (SWP).
Power usage and power generation were to be key elements of the SWP along with
the multi-basin transfer of water. Optimizingpower generation and movement of
water, while minimizing power usage, required the development of an innovative
canal operation strategy. The research developed from this project was presented in
several publications from 1964 to 1976 and included topics such as hydraulic
transients, check structure hydraulics, and computerized control. The research also
resulted in the formulation of a computerized model of the aqueduct that simulated
unsteady flow in the SWP.
The USBR has the primary responsibility for the design and construction of water
resource infrastructure for the purpose of providing irrigation water to irrigable lands in
the western USA. As such, the USBR took the early lead in investigating ways of
enhancing the operational efficiency of irrigation water supply districts (projects).
While weirs, flumes, sluice gates, and radial gates were in common usage, the
integration of electro-mechanical devices to make the task of water masters and ditch
riders easier, more precise, and timelier, came about as a result of the USBR
directing its researchers and design engineers to take a leadership role in the early
2
2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)
6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand
W.1.4.01
ASCE’s Irrigation and Drainage Division moved the technology forward in 1987 by
organizing a conference in Portland, Oregon calledPlanning, Operation, Rehabilitation
and Automation of Irrigation Water Delivery Systems (ASCE, 1987). This included
presentations by French engineers discussing their implementation of Dynamic
Regulation in the system of Canal De Provence, NEYRTEC Automatic Equipment,
and BIVAL for downstream control. Dr. John Merriam introduced a definition for
flexibility as being when the irrigator has control of the frequency, rate and duration of
irrigation. Only through maximizing flexibility can the irrigator maximize their
productivity and economic return.
Through the programs and projects of his employer, The World Bank, Herve
Plusquellec was able to make presentations to many canal operators and water
supply agencies throughout the world using a comprehensive state-of-the-art 35-mm
slide presentation (Plusquellec, 1988). He was instrumental in bringing the concepts
of improved canal operations and modernization to many who had previously not
been aware of such concepts and ideas.
This was followed by USBR’s publication titled Canal Systems Automation Manual
(USBR, 1991). This was an update of previous USBR publications with discussions
on the practical aspects of canal operation, control, and automation. The manual
began with fundamentals and basic concepts, continued with more specific details,
and finished with the more complex aspects of control theory analysis. The manual
was divided into three parts that address three levels of readership: Volume 1 - water
users and operators, Volume 2 - planning and design engineers, and Volume 3 -
research and development specialists.
Understanding that to move the field of canal automation forward required that
researchers and designers be able to model unsteady flow in a canal system, ASCE’s
Irrigation and Drainage Division undertook the task of providing a definitive treatise on
unsteady flow modeling of canals (ASCE, 1993). Later, an EWRI task committee
created a comprehensive and detailed review of canal control algorithms (Malaterre,
Rogers, and Schuurmans, 1998). Both of these task committee efforts provided for a
meaningful advance in the formulation and verification of canal control theory and
practice. Many of the ASCE/EWRI task committee members joined with EWRI in
1999 to organize and conduct a United States Commission on Irrigation and Drainage
(USCID) workshop on the Modernization of Irrigation Water Delivery (USCID, 1999),
with much of the focus being on current canal automation endeavors.
3
2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)
6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand
W.1.4.01
MOP 131 consists of eight chapters and a glossary. A brief summary of each chapter
follows.
This first chapter in MOP 131 is probably the most important one. It provides a
general overview of the potential benefits of irrigation canal modernization and
discusses considerations for assessing whether or not an irrigation or water district
should implement automation as it modernizes. If automation appears to be a viable
component of modernization, then Chapter 1 describeshow to proceed. This chapter
also provides a general overview of the potential benefits of canal automation.
There are no "single answers" as to how and when to implement automation as part
of modernization because of the complexity and variety of combinations of the water
supplies (surface versus conjunctive use), water allocation policies, water quality,
timing of flows, adequacy of the water supplies, topography, aquatic weed problems,
soil types as related to seepage and bank stability, usage of return flows, types of
existing structures, and so on. There are, however, some basic principles that should
be followed to achieve a high level of success in designing, constructing, and
implementing a canal automation project. Concepts discussed in this chapter include:
4
2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)
6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand
W.1.4.01
Chapter 2 provides an overview of the types of structures and devices used for flow
or water level control in canal systems. For each structure or device included, there is
a photograph along with a discussion on the advantages/disadvantages, the power
requirements, and the serviceability of the structure. In addition, the presentation
includes a discussion on what measurements need to be made while using the
structure. Only structures or devices useful from an automation perspective are
discussed. Concepts discussed in this chapter include:
(i) Basic introduction to SCADA systems. SCADA refers to a broad and ever-
changing spectrum of electronic hardware, computer software, and
communications infrastructure that provides a platform for remote
monitoring and control in a variety of industrial applications. In canal
applications (or irrigation systems),SCADA system complexity ranges from
simple systems that allow operators to monitor a few water levels or flow
rates over a radio network, to large-scale, multi-server systems capable of
automatically controlling large canal networks over fibre optic and
microwave communication networks. Whether small or large, SCADA
systems can provide real-time monitoring; remote supervisory or automatic
control; alert or emergency notifications; troubleshooting; and automatic
data reporting and archiving capabilities.
5
2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)
6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand
W.1.4.01
(ii) Basic SCADA system components and function. In simple terms, a SCADA
system consists of a central base unit, which provides facilities for data
storage, manipulation, and visualization. The base unit communicates with
one or more remote units (e.g., at a canal check structure) through some
communications infrastructure. The remote unit communicates with sensors
and implements control instructions issued from the base unit.
(iii) Control options in SCADA systems. Automatic control options for SCADA
systems can be categorized into three basic groups: local control, central
control, and distributed control.
(iv) SCADA project considerations. A discussion is provided detailing
considerations for SCADA projects such as system evaluation, building an
integration team, system maintenance, and cost.
Chapter 4 presents basic canal control methods and their intended operational goals.
A brief discussion of concepts required for implementation is also provided. The
limitations for each method are described in terms of the overall control strategy. It is
important to note that the concepts discussed in this chapter are not necessarily
mutually exclusive, because different concepts can often be used on different parts of
the same canal network. Each concept has advantages and drawbacks and each fits
better with certain overall strategies. Concepts discussed in this chapter include:
Chapter 5 discusses the hydraulic properties of canal pools and structures, as they
relate to needs for canal automation. Since this publication is geared toward
modernization of existing canal networks or systems, detailed design considerations
are not included. However, changes may be needed to the infrastructure to
implement new technologies during modernization, so that the system will allow
greater flexibility and thus potentially improve performance. This chapter also
presents methods for describing the hydraulic response of canal pools, particularly
6
2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)
6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand
W.1.4.01
how water levels respond to changes in flow rate. Concepts discussed in this chapter
include:
(i) Design issues. Various design issues such as freeboard, canal lining,
intermediate structures, and flow capacity are discussed.
(ii) Canal structure hydraulics. Summary information regarding the hydraulics
of typical weirs and gates used in irrigation canals is provided.
(iii) Canal pool hydraulics. Each pool is unique in its response to changes in
flows through control structures. Physical parameters that influence this
behavior are longitudinal bed slope, cross section size and shape, length,
and bed material. Concepts regarding flow conditions, changes in canal
conveyance, pool volumes, and travel time of waves are also discussed.
(iv) Resonance Waves. Resonance waves and their influence on automatic
control can be minimized using the filtering procedures discussed.
(v) Identification. Methods for determining important hydraulic properties of
the canal pool are discussed. These parameters are crucial for controller
design.
Chapter 6 presents control system fundamentals and control techniques that are used
to develop controllers for water level or flow rate in irrigation canals. This chapter
presents methods by which the control strategies discussed earlier in MOP 131 can
be implemented via electronic devices such as PLCs, RTUs, computers, etc. The
intent of canal automation is to improve the operation of the water distribution system,
which typically means better service to farmers; canal automation is intended to
improve some aspect of operations by performing controls that would be difficult to do
manually and to enhance system monitoring and emergency responses. Concepts
discussed in this chapter include:
7
2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)
6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand
W.1.4.01
Infinity, Model Predictive Control (MPC), and Proportional Integral (PI) flow
control are discussed. There is also a discussion on combining
feedforward and feedback control.
The users of canal automation want to be sure that the automatic control system will
function in a way that is useful for their operations. Two essential questions must be
answered. First, are the right processes being controlled? Second, is the automatic
control functioning in an acceptable manner? This chapter discusses the process that
control system designers and integrators should go through so that they can
document a successful automation implementation. Concepts discussed in this
chapter include:
(i) Performance testing issues. This section deals with performance testing of
automated canal structure logic.
(ii) Performance testing with unsteady-flow simulation models. Simulation
models are a useful tool for determining the potential performance of canal
automation. Many canal automation developers routinely test control
algorithm performance for even a single gate with unsteady-flow
simulation. This allows the gate to be tested under a variety of flow and
operating conditions.
(iii) Performance measures. This section outlines concrete performance
measures that can be used to evaluate how effectively a canal automation
scheme is controlling the irrigation delivery system. Performance
measures for both water level control and flow rate control are presented.
(i) Project initiation. The first step in any automation project is to determine
the project objectives. These might include the improvement of irrigator
service levels, water savings, and better control of water levels,
operational cost savings, or rate of return on investment. Clear, quantified
objectives help ensure success by aligning the irrigation district and
implementation team and allowing for objective measurement of
performance.
(ii) Configuration and customization of software. Discussions are provided
regarding RTU/PLC software, communications software, SCADA software,
water ordering and demand management software, and network
representation software.
8
2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)
6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand
W.1.4.01
4. CONCLUSIONS
Irrigation district managers as well as state and federal water resource management
agencies have for more than 50 year looked to technology to increase their
effectiveness, improve their operations, enhance water transmission and delivery,
and make their canal systems safer and more responsive.
What started out as remote monitoring and control with much of the decision-making
left in the hands of humans, has now been refined to the point that automatic control
of irrigations canals is a reality. What was lacking was an up to date, comprehensive
publication that would not only assist irrigation district personnel but also the
9
2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)
6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand
W.1.4.01
The professionals that contributed to the preparation, review, editing and finalization
of MOP 131 are hopeful that MOP 131 is adopted by the water resources community
as the definitive publication on the state of the art of automatic canal control, and that
automatic canal control will make a substantial contribution to the production of food
and fiber for a world that is facing unrelenting increases in the demand for food
production with limited water supplies, while at the same time meeting demands to
preserve our environment.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors of this paper would like to acknowledge the authors of the individual
chapters within MOP 131: Charles Burt (Irrigation and Training Research Center,
USA), Robert Strand (LemnaTec Corporation, Germany), Peter-Jules van Overloop
(Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands), Bert Clemmens (WEST
Consultants, USA), and Sumith Choy (Rubicon Water, Australia). These individuals’
dedication and commitment to the MOP 131 made the vision of this document a
reality.
REFERENCES
10