See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/320189745

A State-of-art Review on Studies and Effectiveness of Micro-irrigation

Systems

Article in International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology · September 2017

CITATIONS READS

4 2,107

3 authors, including:

Giriraj Srivastava
Norwegian University of Science and Technology
2 PUBLICATIONS 4 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Giriraj Srivastava on 10 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)
Volume 8, Issue 9, September 2017, pp. 881–888, Article ID: IJCIET_08_09_098
Available online at http://http://www.iaeme.com/ijciet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=9
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

A STATE-OF-ART REVIEW ON STUDIES AND

EFFECTIVENESS OF MICRO-IRRIGATION
SYSTEMS
G. Delorme, G. Srivastava and M. Shanmugasundaram*
School of Mechanical and Building Sciences,
VIT University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

ABSTRACT
Choosing an irrigation system is not an obvious task and the number of available
techniques can induce legitimate doubt about which one would be the best. Still
largely dominated by traditional irrigation methods, the agricultural sector is slowly
living a turn in water management, to a more controlled and sustainable way of
irrigating fields. Microirrigation shows indeed the major benefit of saving water but
also of improving yields and crop quality. This paper reviews all the microirrigation
systems along with their suitable applications, their installation, their advantages and
limitations.
Key words: Microirrigation, Subsurface irrigation, Drip irrigation, Bubbler, Sprinkler,
Sprayer.
Cite this Article: G. Delorme, G. Srivastava and M. Shanmugasundaram, Some
Considerations of the Actual Problems Related to Good Corporate Governance, and
the Impetus for Law Enforcement. International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology, 8(9), 2017, pp. 881–888.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=9

1. INTRODUCTION
The world of agriculture is not the same than it was 50 years ago, because of the increasing
food requirements, the mechanisation and the development of chemical industries.
Unfortunately, these changes have not brought good news for our planet and especially not to
our water resources. To provide an alternative to the traditional ways of irrigating, that usually
require large quantities of water, the concept of microirrigation (MI) was firstly brought
through experiments conducted in Germany in the 1860’s, then in USA in 1910’s, before
being accepted as a viable method for commercial irrigation and spread worldwide since the
1960’s. The aim is simple: to distribute water as close as possible to the root zone of the plant,
in small quantity, slowly but frequently, so that the process stays under high control. It is in
the last 20 years that the improvement in MI technology has been the highest. We can now
find numbers of applications for the four types of MI: surface drip, subsurface drip, bubblers,
sprinklers (or sprayers). However, the fields irrigated with these techniques remain a minority
compared to the ones irrigated with conventional techniques. According to the report of

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 881 [email protected]

 A State-of-Art Review on Studies and Effectiveness of Micro-Irrigation Systems

International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage published 2014-2015 [1], the worldwide
total irrigated area is 225.63 Mha including a total micro irrigated area of 11.11 Mha i.e.
around 5% of total. According to Survey of Irrigation Methods in California in 2010 [2], the
proportion has been changing in favour of MI with an increase of 38%, mainly in the sector of
vegetable crops (onion, cucurbit, tomato and almond).

2. MICROIRRIGATION OVER TRADITIONAL IRRIGATION

SYSTEMS
Traditional irrigation systems comprise spate irrigation, flood-plain irrigation, border-strip
irrigation, level-basin-irrigation, and furrow irrigation. Generally in these methods, water
coming from nearby sources like river, pond, bore well etc., is directed to the fields through
ditches, bunds or electric pumps, and spread over the whole field till the water seeps through
the soil increasing soil moisture content. Moreover, the quantities of water are not
specifically calculated to fit plants requirement as they have to compensate the possible
losses: over 50% of the water applied can be lost as soil evaporation [3]. In other terms, litres
of water are wasted. A change in agricultural habits is becoming crucial for a more
sustainable future.
MI has been well accepted for permanent planting, small areas of high value crops like
orchard trees, berries and flowers. It is especially used in arid regions, or any region where the
water supply is limited or expensive, and in urban areas for ornamental planting. However, its
application could be much more extended or could even easily replace any traditional
irrigation installation. Scientists believe that MI can be adapted to any type of crops. For now,
the expensive costs that are implicated in this change are still one of the main reason for the
farmers to keep going with their old ways. The lack of knowledge about new technologies is
also preventing people from making the first step to a lot of benefits. Indeed, the advantages
of microirrigation over conventional irrigation are impressive. As the water is applied at the
closest to the root zone there is much less water loss through deep percolation and
evaporation, hence the water use efficiency (WUE) is much higher. It can be maximized with
a proper design and operation of the system, although the traditional practices can only go up
to 35% WUE. It is said that 40% to 80% of water can be saved using this method [4]. The
water quantities to be delivered are carefully set up. The irrigation is scheduled in time and
interval so that high uniformity in distribution is achieved while respecting the water-holding
capacity of soil [5]. High frequency irrigation keeps constantly the soil moisture at its optimal
level [6]. It enables each plant to grow at its best, thus improving the crop quality and
increasing the crops yields. On a long-term basis, a proper water and nutrient management
signifies a sustained economic benefit. Moreover, preventing the water to run all over the
field is also preventing the growth of weed. The direct consequence is a reduction in
agronomic cost and effort for weed control, fertilization and tillage [7]. Saving energy and
diminishing the use of chemicals are obviously a key to environmental sustainability.

3. SURFACE DRIP IRRIGATION

3.1. Description
Surface drip irrigation is a system that delivers the water in small quantity, drop by drop, to
each individual plant on the field by the means of tubes running on the open surface of the
soil. Basically, the tubes are pierced with small holes and fitted with an emitter that enables
the water to flow out with a reduced discharge rate. The emitted water is spread by hydraulic
properties of soil in an elliptical area, thus in certain case several emitters may be required for

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 882 [email protected]

 G. Delorme, G. Srivastava and M. Shanmugasundaram*

a single plant. This system has been studied and proved efficient in the case of vineyards,
almond tree [8] and red pepper.

3.2. Installations
Surface drip irrigation can be installed temporarily or permanently on the field based on crop
rotation pattern adopted by the farmer. However, it is advisable to use crops of similar root
depths in a particular field to avoid the 10% depreciation in the cost of irrigation materials per
each installation [9]. In order to improve the efficiency of the surface drip irrigation system
and reduce wastage of water, rain sensors can be attached to the field. The energy requirement
to pump the water can be fulfilled by solar-panel pump system which have proven to be very
efficient in a longer run. It is suggested that the minimum pond volume should be increased
by 20% to incorporate the evaporation losses and dead storage [10].

3.3. Advantages
This system has the main advantages of increasing irrigation water productivity [11] and
saving water under sustained deficit irrigation for regions with severe water scarcity. In the
case of vines, it has been found by Sanchez- Martin et al. (2008 & 2010) this MI type resulted
in lesser emissions of nitrous oxide N2O: 70% lower than furrow irrigation in a loamy soil
texture after incorporation of broadcast ammonium sulphate in the soil and 28% in a sandy
clay loam texture fertilized with digested pig slurry, Ca(H2PO4)2 and K2SO4 [12].

3.4. Disadvantages/Limitations
Its application is limited on field crops because the surface-installed drip tubing may interfere
with cultural operations.

4. SUBSURFACE DRIP IRRIGATION

4.1. Description
The subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) is the buried version of drip irrigation. Here, the tubes are
placed under the ground surface to discharge the water, at a rate of 2 to 5 litres per hour,
directly at the root zone of each plant. Under a proper maintenance, this kind of system can
have a life cycle lasting over 20 years. It is most suited for arid to semi-arid regions and hot or
windy regions where the evaporation is the highest, but it can be used in any area. It is the
microirrigation technique that has been the most studied in the past few years. Many different
types of crops have been tested, like cotton, tomato, sweet corn, melons (cantaloupe), onions
[13], wine grapes, sugarcane, wheat and peas.

4.2. Installations
SDI is usually preferred as a semi-permanent or permanent installation. This is understandable
as the tubes have to be buried at a particular depth it should rather not be removed and
changed every season. The irrigation depth has to be selected according to the type of crop,
the development of the roots, the evapotranspiration of the crop (ETc) and the interval
between irrigations [14]. It has been observed that the ideal range is between 0.2m (optimum
for sugarcane) to 0.6m [15]. Different methods of installation have been subjected to
experimentation: single row with spacing 1.5 metre and paired row with drip laterals spacing
2.1 metres. The choice is let up to the farmer according to its field’s shape and area, but it has
been concluded that a greater performance can be obtained with single row installation [16].
Subsurface irrigation using clay pipes was found to be particularly effective in improving
yields, crop quality and water use efficiency as well as being cheap, simple and easy to use
[3].

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 883 [email protected]

 A State-of-Art Review on Studies and Effectiveness of Micro-Irrigation Systems

4.3. Advantages
Compared with surface drip, SDI gathers many advantages. With the tubes buried there is no
interference with cultural operations and no need to remove/reinstall the tubes at
end/beginning of each season. The application of water in the soil and not on the soil reduces
the possible NO3 leaching.
Suddick et al. (2011) indicated lower N2O emission in case of SDI [12]. Fertigation
(injection of fertilizers and other chemicals in the irrigation system) is more efficient due to
the improved water application uniformity (Gil et al. 2008; Rodríguez-Sinobas et al. 2009)
[14]. Drip systems is most “low cost” MI system compared to flooding irrigation due to the
water saving and the increased yields [16].

4.4. Disadvantages & Limitations

The advantage of being buried is also a disadvantage for the tubing system. Indeed, root
intrusion in the tubes is the most common problem in SDI. The roots continue to develop
inside the emitter and starts clogging the hole, causing discharge issues. Tubing damages can
also be caused by equipment and burrowing animals. The distribution uniformity can become
a problem if the irrigation is not properly scheduled and the system properly managed. When
the pressure is too low the water is not equally distributed, and as the owner is not able to see
it the consequences might be notified after a long time. Hence, the need for intensive
management can also be considered as a disadvantage. The higher initial cost for the system
and for burying the tubes is one of the drawbacks that limit greatly its use.

4.5. Areas of improvement

Several studies of SDI have however aimed at finding solutions to these limitations. In 1991,
at the beginning of the rise of MI, scientists had found a chemical solution to prevent the
clogging of pipes: they provided injections of Treflan [17]. More recently, an innovative
design was published for the same problem [18]. Avoiding use of chemical the researchers
proposed an elastic silicon membrane and a vinyl polychloride PVC protection tube (system
on: opening by expansion of membrane).

5. LOW-HEAD BUBBLER
5.1. Description
Bubblers apply water to the ground surface in a small fountain with a discharge rate greater
than surface or subsurface drip emitters but generally less than 225 litres per hour. They are
well suited for orchards with wide root zones or for any situations where large amount of
water need to be provided in a short period of time.

5.2. Installations
The laterals are usually installed in single row. The emitters are disposed with different heads
along the lateral for a uniform water delivery [19].

5.3. Advantages
Operated at low-pressure like 1 meter, the system is based on gravity flow; hence there is no
need of mechanical pump. Moreover, it requires only a very simple filtration system. That
gives it a reduced initial cost and a minimal maintenance cost [20].

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 884 [email protected]

 G. Delorme, G. Srivastava and M. Shanmugasundaram*

5.4. Disadvantages & Limitations

Unfortunately there is a lack of well-defined design as well as facilitated installation. Farmers
are not aware about this technology as it is not enough promoted by the sellers.
However, researches on easy design & installation [19] are still pursued aiming to raise
awareness among the professionals.

6. SPRINKLER / SPRAYER IRRIGATION

6.1. Description
In this kind of irrigation the water is pressurized and diffused over the plants from an emitter
located slightly above the ground. It is so commonly used that we can even see some in
homes’ garden. Sprinkler heads are rotating with a flow rates ranging from 100 to 300 litres
per hour, whereas sprayers are non-rotating with flow rates ranging from 20 to 150 litres per
hour. Single units can irrigate about a 130-acre circular area. But another possibility is low-
pressure sprinkler system. Here, the water is not spread high in the air but gently sprayed
downward onto the plants. As less water is subjected to evaporation and strong wind blow,
this alternative has revealed to be more efficient.

6.2. Installations
The choice of emitter depends on the water throw pattern required. It exists different kinds of
external emitters available: mini-sprays, micro-sprays, jets or spinners. They are individually
connected with the lateral tube by a smaller tube of 0.3cm to 0.6cm diameter.

6.3. Advantages
Sprinkler is the type of MI that is able to deliver the more water quantity per hour. It can be
used to grow high water requirement plants. Treated wastewater (sewage) does not cause any
problem when utilized in this kind of system. The sprinklers and sprayers are the most viable
alternative in situations that require a high level of filtration or a crop protection cover
(because of high erosion level, for pest & disease control, against frost etc.).

6.4. Disadvantages & Limitations

The water losses associated with sprinklers can be very high in case of strong winds, physical
damage caused by animals, significant runoff or steep slope [21]. The concept of water saving
of this method is the weakest among the MI systems due to its high discharge rate.

7. CONCLUSIONS
Microirrigation is the key for a sustainable agriculture. The transition toward water saving
methods of irrigation should be encouraged worldwide. In the early years of MI development
the types of crops cultivated were restricted to privileged species, but nowadays the scientific
studies have proved that the different MI methods -surface drip irrigation, subsurface drip,
bubblers and sprinklers/ sprayers- offer large application possibilities. Microirrigation should
not be reserved to high value productions like berries or vineyards, it can be used for many
conventional types of crops like onions, tomatoes or corn. Each system shows its own
advantages in terms of installation and discharge rate. A properly adapted design followed by
a regular management and careful operation practices lead to high water saving, improvement
in crop quality, increase in yield, reduction in agronomical costs.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 885 [email protected]

 A State-of-Art Review on Studies and Effectiveness of Micro-Irrigation Systems

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The review paper was written as a part of PBL for Water Resources Engineering (CLE316)
course at VIT University, Chennai.

REFERENCES
[1] Sprinkler and Microirrigated area, ICID (International Commission on Irrigation and
Drainage) Report 2014-15
[2] Tindula G. N., Orang M. N., Snyder R. L., Survey of Irrigation Methods in California in
2010, Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering ASCE, 139(3) March pp.233-238
(2013)
[3] Batchelor C., Lovell C., Murata M., Simple microirrigation techniques for improving
irrigation efficiency on vegetable gardens, Agricultural Water Management, 32(1),
(November 1996)
[4] Priyanka P.A., Chandrasekaran M., An economic analysis of role of technology in
sustaining water resources for enhanced agricultural production, International Journal of
Commerce and Business Management, 8(1), pp.64-69 (April 2015)
[5] Barragan J., Cots L. l., Monserrat J., Lopez R., Wu I.P., Water distribution uniformity and
scheduling in micro-irrigation systems for water saving and environmental protection,
Biosystems Engineering (2010)
[6] Barragan, J., Wu I. P., Optimum scheduling of a microirrigation system under deficit
irrigation, Journal of Agricultural Engineering. Research, 80(2) pp.201-208 (2001)
[7] Ayars J.E., Fulton A., Taylor B., Subsurface drip irrigation in California – Here to stay?,
Agricultural Water Management (2015)
[8] Phogat V., Skewes M.A., Mahadevan M., Cox J.W., Evaluation of soil plant system
response to pulsed drip irrigation of an almond tree under sustained stress conditions,
Agricultural Water Management, 118 pp.1-11 (2013)
[9] Gyasi-Agyei Y., Cost-Effective Temporary Microirrigation System for Grass
Establishment on Environmentally Sensitive Steep Slopes, Journal of Irrigation and
Drainage Engineering (May/June 2004)
[10] Gyasi-Agyei Y., Pond water source for irrigation on steep slopes, J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.,
129(3), pp.184–193 (2003)
[11] Phogat V., Skewes M.A., McCarthy M.G., Cox J.W., Simunek J., Petrie P.R., Evaluation
of crop coefficients, water productivity, and water balance components for wine grapes
irrigated at different deficit levels by a subsurface drip, Agricultural Water Management,
180, pp.22-34 (2017)
[12] Fentabil M. M., Nichol C. F., Neilsen G. H., Hannam K. D., Neilsen D., Forge T. A.,
Jonesca M. D., Effect of micro-irrigation type, N-source and mulching on nitrous oxide
emissions in a semi-arid climate: An assessment across two years in a Merlot grape
vineyard, Agricultural Water Management (2016)
[13] Enciso J., Jifon J., Wiedenfeld B., Subsurface drip irrigation of onions: Effects of drip
tape emitter spacing on yield and quality, Agricultural Water Management, 92 pp.126-
130 (2007)
[14] de Matos Pires R. C., Agnellos Barbosa E. A., Bussmeyer Arruda F., Sakai E., da Silva T.
J. A., Effects of Subsurface Drip Irrigation and Different Planting Arrangements on the
Yields and Technological Quality of Sugarcane, Journal of Irrigation And Drainage
Engineering, (2014)

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 886 [email protected]

 G. Delorme, G. Srivastava and M. Shanmugasundaram*

[15] dos Santos L.N.S., Matsura E.E., Gonçalves I.Z., Barbosa E.A.A., Nazario A.A., Tuta
N.F., Elaiuy M.C.L., Feitosa D.R.C., de Sousa A.C.M., Water storage in the soil profile
under subsurface drip irrigation: Evaluating two installation depths of emitters and two
water qualities, Agricultural Water Management (2015)
[16] Surendran U., Jayakumar M., Marimuthu S., Low cost drip irrigation: Impact on
sugarcane yield, water and energy saving in semiarid tropical agro ecosystem in India,
Science of the Total Environment (2016)
[17] Oron G., DeMalach J., Hoffman Z., Cibotaru R., Subsurface Micro-irrigation with
Effluent, Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering ASCE, 117(1) pp.25-36 (January-
February 1991)
[18] de Jesus Souza W., Sinobas L. R., Sanchez R., Botrel .A., Coelho R.D., Prototype emitter
for use in subsurface drip irrigation: Manufacturing, hydraulic evaluation and
experimental analyses, Biosystems Engineering, 128 pp.41-51 (2014)
[19] Reynolds C., Yitayew M., Petersen M., Low-head bubbler irrigation systems Part 1:
Design, Agricultural Water Management, 29 pp.1-24 (1995)
[20] Hills D.J., Yitayew M., Bubbler Irrigation, Microirrigation for Crop Production (2007)
[21] Gyasi-Agyei Y., Sibley J., Truong P., and Nissen D., A catchment-based approach to the
mitigation of erosion problems in a railway cutting, Proc. Conf. on Railway Engineering
CORE2000, Railway Technical Soc. of Australasia, Kingston, Australia (2000)
[22] Ayars J.E., Phene C.J., Hutmacher R.B., Davis K.R., Schoneman R.A., Vail S.S., Mead
R.M., Subsurface drip irrigation of row crops: a Review of 15 years of research at the
Water Management Research Laboratory, Agricultural Water Management, 42 pp.1-27
(1999)
[23] Carrión F., Tarjuelo J.M., Carrión P., Moreno M.A., Low-cost microirrigation system
supplied by groundwater: An application to pepper and vineyard crops in Spain,
Agricultural Water Management, 127 (September 2013)
[24] Kang Y. & Nishiyama S., Analysis and Design of Microirrigation Laterals, Journal of
irrigation and drainage engineering, 122(2), pp. 75-82 (March-April 1996)
[25] Kuslu Y., Sahin U., Kiziloglu F.M., Memis S., Fruit Yield and Quality, and Irrigation
Water Use Efficiency of Summer Squash Drip-Irrigated with Different Irrigation
Quantities in a Semi-Arid Agricultural Area, Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 13(11):
2518-2526 (2014)
[26] Orang M. N., Matyac S., Snyder R. L., Survey of Irrigation Methods in California in
2001, Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering ASCE, 134 pp.96-100 (January-
February 2008)
[27] Sezen S.M., Yazar A., Dasgan Y., Yucel S., Akyildiz A., Tekin S., Akhoundnejad Y.,
Evaluation of crop water stress index (CWSI) for red pepper with drip and furrow
irrigation under varying irrigation regimes, Agricultural Water Management, 143 pp.59-
70 (2014)
[28] Thompson T.L., Pang H., Li Y., The Potential Contribution of Subsurface Drip Irrigation
to Water-Saving Agriculture in the Western USA, Agricultural Sciences in China, 8(7):
850-854 (2009)
[29] Zeng C.Z., Bie Z.L., Yuan B.Z., Determination of optimum irrigation water amount for
drip-irrigated muskmelon (Cucumis melo L.) in plastic greenhouse, Agricultural Water
Management, 96 pp.595-602 (2009)
[30] Zhang Q., Wang S., Li L., Inoue M., Xiang J., Qiu G., Jin W., Effects of mulching and
subsurface irrigation on vine growth, berry sugar content and water use of grapevines,
Agricultural Water Management, 143 pp.1-8 (2014)

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 887 [email protected]

 A State-of-Art Review on Studies and Effectiveness of Micro-Irrigation Systems

[31] D. Deepthi, E. Vasavi, K. Pravallika, P. Swathi and K. Rajasekhara Reddy, A Study on

Development of Low Cost Environmental Friendly and Sustainable Irrigation Techniques.
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(4), 2017, pp. 823-829.
[32] Hanan H. Eltobgy, Basma H. Mohamed and Eehab A. Khalil, Analysis of Irrigation Steel
Vertical Gates with Different Systems. International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology, 8(1), 2017, pp. 1021–1030.
[33] Arifin Matoka, Nadjamuddin Harun, Salama Manjang and M. Arsyad Thaha, Settling
Basin Modeling To Reduce Fluctuation of Sediment Concentration On MHP Irrigation
Channels. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(8), 2017, pp.
937–946.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 888 [email protected]

View publication stats