Canal Automation

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 10

2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)

6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand


W.1.4.01

CANAL AUTOMATION FOR IRRIGATION SYSTEMS: AMERICAN


SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGIENERS MANUAL OF PRACTICE 131
Brian Wahlin1 and Darell Zimbelman2

ABSTRACT

Recently, the Task Committee on Recent Advances in Canal Automation, which is


part of the Irrigation Delivery and Drainage Systems Committee (IDDS) of the
Irrigation and Drainage Council (IDC) of the Environmental and Water Resources
Institute (EWRI) of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), prepared a
Manual of Practice (MOP) on canal automation for irrigation systems. Formally
referred to as MOP 131 Canal Automation for Irrigation Systems, this book focuses
on the technical aspects of modernizing irrigation systems through the use of
automated canal control systems. MOP 131 is an essential reference for
professionals in agricultural and irrigation engineering, as well as owners, managers,
and operators of irrigation water delivery systems.

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.

Keywords: Canal Automation, Automatic Control, Feedback Control, Feedforward


Control, SCADA Systems, Water Level Control, Flow Rate Control, Canal
Infrastructure

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.

2. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ON CANAL AUTOMATION

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

development of canal automation equipment and procedures. Subsequently, the


USBR published Water System Automation – A State of the Art Report (USBR,
1973). Concepts presented in this reference, such as optimum operation will result
only from proper control of the entire system, are still applicable today.

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.

While the above is certainly not an exhaustive presentation of canal automation


research and development, it does provide a broad summary and a snap shot of how
long water district managers have looked to technology to improve and enhance the
delivery of irrigation water to their customers. It also provides a flavor of the
approaches, technology, and agencies that have contributed to the field of automatic
canal operations. As pointed out earlier, the goal of MOP 131 is to bring all these past
accomplishments together in a single publication that is up to date and useful to both
system operations personnel, planners, and design engineers.

3
2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)
6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand
W.1.4.01

3. OVERVIEW OF MOP 131

MOP 131 consists of eight chapters and a glossary. A brief summary of each chapter
follows.

3.1 Chapter 1: Modernization Process, Constraints, and Concepts

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.

First, it is important to define the concept of modernization. Modernization is a


combination of technical, managerial and organizational upgrading (as opposed to
mere physical rehabilitation) of irrigation schemes with the objective of improving
resource utilization (e.g., water, labor, economics, and environment) and water
delivery service to farms (Wolter and Burt 1997). Such modernization investment
focuses on the details of the inner workings of an irrigation project. Planners and
engineers for irrigation projects frequently equate modernization with practices such
as canal lining, piping, and computerized automation; however, such investments are
often of low initial priority if one examines the steps needed to improve overall
performance. Computerized automation is typically implemented in later stages of
modernization, after basic needs such as flow measurement and accounting
procedures have already been completed. Modernization is a process that sets
specific objectives and selects specific actions and tools to achieve them over an
extended period of time.

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:

(i) Defining potential benefits of modernization and automation.


(ii) Defining incentives for modernization.
(iii) Defining realistic/evolving expectations and costs.
(iv) Assessing the existing system.
(v) Defining institutional and operational constraints as related to automation.
(vi) Selecting the appropriate canal operation strategy.
(vii) Developing a plan for emergency response/safeguards.
(viii) Defining where automation fits into a modernization plan.
(ix) Defining the typical sequence of actions in the modernization process.

4
2nd World Irrigation Forum (WIF2)
6-8 November 2016, Chiang Mai, Thailand
W.1.4.01

3.2 Chapter 2: Physical Infrastructure

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) Working with an existing irrigation system. Decisions need to be made


regarding whether to incorporate existing irrigation system infrastructure or
to replace the existing infrastructure with new infrastructure.
(ii) Conveyance system considerations. The type of canal automation that is
physically possible and practical is dependent upon the physical
characteristics of the existing canals and water allocation policies.
(iii) Gates for check structures. A summary of widely available check structure
configurations is provided, including PLC-based, electrically moved check
structures and non-PLC controlled “automatic” check structures.
(iv) Instrumentation and measurement. A discussion is provided regarding
instrument considerations that are common to canal automation including
water level, gate position, and flow rate measurements.
(v) Pumps. Pumps are an integral part of many automation schemes that must
supply or accept water at variable rates that can change from minute to
minute without advance notice.
(vi) Regulating (buffer) reservoirs within the irrigation system. Regulating
reservoirs have been used successfully in the western USA to reduce canal
spillage, simplify canal operation, and increase the flexibility of the water
delivery systems.

3.3 Chapter 3: SCADA Systems

Chapter 3 presents considerations regarding the design and implementation of a


Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system that will support the
advanced automation of irrigation canals. This chapter includes discussion of design
criteria, applicable technologies, installation, testing, and commissioning of the
system. This section of MOP 131 focuses on the SCADA infrastructure itself and not
on the control algorithms in the SCADA system processors, which is left for a later
chapter. 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.

3.4 Chapter 4: Control Operation and Control Concepts

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:

(i) Introduction to the control of irrigation canals. In general, control for


irrigation canals can be grouped into two categories: supply-oriented and
demand-oriented. It is important to note that most canal control strategies
include aspects of both supply-oriented and demand-oriented systems.
(ii) General strategies for control of irrigation canals. A common approach to
canal automation is to make gate adjustments at each site successively and
then return to each gate to make corrections depending on the observed
situation. These initial changes and the later corrections can be interpreted
as feedforward and feedback control actions, respectively. The initial
changes in settings to provide the new flows downstream are feedforward
actions, while the corrections based on the actual situation are feedback
actions. Remote control, where observations are communicated to a central
control room and, from there, gate adjustments can be remotely
implemented, simply allows the users to perform these actions more
quickly, more often, with better timing, and with the ability to see more of the
canal conditions at once. Automatic controls allow these adjustments to be
made automatically. Automation allows control actions to be made more
often and, in theory, more precisely. But fundamentally, these different
approaches (manual/local, manual/remote, automatic) use the same basic
strategies.

3.5 Chapter 5: Canal Hydraulic Properties

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.

3.6 Chapter 6: Control Methods

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:

(i) Introduction to control methods. Various control method concepts are


defined including control variables and control-action variables.
(ii) Implementation options. Automatic controls can be organized in a variety
of ways: local control, centralized control, hierarchical control, and
distributed coordination control.
(iii) Decoupling pools and structures. To simplify the design of controllers
(which are usually linear) and to simplify implementation, most canal
controllers determine the flow rate change needed for a check structure
and then the gate position change required to achieve the prescribed flow
rate in separate computations (algorithms).
(iv) Routing demand changes through a canal.Routing water through a canal,
also called feedforward control, can be done by using the time it takes a
flow rate change to travel from the head gate to turnouts (delay times).
Various methods for routing water through a canal, an essential control
function, are discussed.
(v) Feedback control. This section describes the mathematical procedures
needed to tune controllers for the control of water levels, flow rates and/or
volumes within a canal. These methods use measurements of water level
and/or flow rate to determine what control actions will bring the water level,
flow rate or canal pool volume to a set point value. Details on specific
feedback control algorithms such as Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR), H-

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.

3.7 Chapter 7: Verification of Controller Performance

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.

3.8 Chapter 8: Implementation of Control Systems

Chapter 6 addresses the practical implementation of canal automation as a project


within a wider modernization program. The automation of an entire lateral or whole
canal system is described, rather than just a single check structure, because the
challenges and benefits are much larger. This chapter describes the sequence of
required tasks, including the customization of control software, the installation and
commissioning of the field devices and central server software, the progressive
activation of control throughout the canal system, the measurement of overall
performance of the new system, and the training of operations staff. Ongoing
operational tasks and system maintenance are also discussed. Concepts discussed
in this chapter include:

(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

(iii) Commissioning. Commissioning is the process by which equipment, a


facility, or a plant is tested to verify if it functions according to its design
objectives or specifications.
(iv) Control rollout and tuning.Once the commissioning of the SCADA system
is complete, the next step is to roll out or activate the control system. In
this section, rollout of control refers to the control on a network scale as it
encompasses the processes involved in rolling out control at each
location. Sometimes the behavior of the actual system may differ from
what has been modelled initially. Hence, fine tuning of controller(s) may be
required at intermittent stages.
(v) Performance assessment and acceptance. As important as setting the
overall project objective is the measurement of the performance of the
canal system against those objectives.
(vi) Post-acceptance operation and maintenance. Post-acceptance operations
and maintenance is an important part of canal automation. It is the analog
of a routine maintenance program that irrigation districts generally
undertake anyway, but includes new equipment like the software and new
operating procedures.
(vii) Training. An automated canal system requires that operators learn a
number of new computer skills and adapt to a new style of operation that
involves reacting to operational problems rather than simply implementing
routines. This is not dissimilar to the role of a pilot when an airplane is
operating in auto-pilot. The pilot must vigilantly monitor instruments and
correct for unforeseen circumstances or deal with alarms.
(viii) Manuals. In addition to the training, the irrigation district must be supplied
with manuals for every component that makes up its system.

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.

As the technology provided by the development and enhanced performance of


computers made quantum leaps in performance, it was logical for the computing
power of these devices to be incorporated into the control of irrigation canals.
Beyond the power provided by computer technology, was the requirement for an
entire array of associate technology that needed to be developed and adapted for
canal control. The associated technologies included equipment to measure water
levels, flow rates, and gate movements digitally as well as radio and fiber optic
equipment to transmit and receive monitored data. As each of these technologies
matured, the engineers and researches responsible for the research and
development of canal control adapted these new technologies into their designs. As
such, canal control has matured and became more technically rigorous. In a parallel
way, the software needed to control canals also matured through the incorporation of
new theories or mathematical models into improved control algorithms.

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

consulting engineer community with a practical source of knowledge on the world-


wide status of automatic canal control. The professionals who were active participants
in the development and implementation of automatic canal control joined forces to
collaborate on MOP 131 in order to bring their collective expertise together in ways
that would be useful to water resources engineers and managers around the world.

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

American Society of Civil Engineers.1968.Automation of irrigation and drainage systems.


National Irrigation and Drainage Conference, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.
American Society of Civil Engineers. 1987. Planning, operation, rehabilitation, and automation
of irrigation water delivery systems. Irrigation and Drainage Division Conference,
Portland, Oregon, USA.
American Society of Civil Engineers. 1993. Unsteady-flow modeling of irrigation canals. ASCE
Task Committee on Irrigation Canal System Hydraulic Modeling, J. Irrig. Drain Eng.,
119:4(615).
Malaterre, P., Rogers, D., &Schuurmans, J. 1998. Classification of canal control
algorithms.ASCE Task Committee on Canal Automation Algorithms, J. Irrig. Drain Eng.,
124:1(3).
Plusquellec, H. 1988.Improving the operation of canal irrigation systems.The Economic
Development Institute of the World Bank.
United States Bureau of Reclamation.1973.Water systems automation – a state of the art
report. United States Department of the Interior.
United States Bureau of Reclamation. 1991. Canal systems automation manual. United States
Department of the Interior.
United States Committee on Irrigation and Drainage. 1999. Modernization of irrigation water
delivery systems, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.
Wahlin, B., & Zimbelman, D. 2014.Canal automation for irrigation systems.American Society of
Civil Engineers Manual of Practice 131.
Wolter, H., & Burt, C. 1997.Concepts for irrigation system modernization.FAO Water Report 12;
RAP Publication 1997/22.

10

You might also like