Evaluation of Water Levels and Flow Rates Measured in Irrigation Canal Using Limnigraph, Pressure and Ultrasonic Sensors

Cafer Gençoğlan; Mehmet Durak Tüysüz; Serpil Gençoğlan

Makale detayları

Evaluation of Water Levels and Flow Rates Measured in Irrigation Canal Using Limnigraph, Pressure and Ultrasonic Sensors

Yazarlar:

Cafer Gençoğlan | Mehmet Durak Tüysüz | Serpil Gençoğlan

Yayıncı:

Tekirdag Namik Kemal University

Ana Başlıklar:

Sulama Sistemleri

Dergi:

Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.20 Issue 3, pp.642-652

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

9/2023

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001298325

pISSN:

1302-7050

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 Anything that cannot be measured cannot be managed. Based on the thought, the aims of this study are to evaluate water levels and flow rates measured by Limnigraph OEL, pressure sensor PS and ultrasonic sensors US in the open irrigation canal. Limnigraph and pressure sensor sensed water levels and flow rates under un-fluctuating conditions in the Stilling Well and ultrasonic sensors directly measured them from water surface under fluctuating conditions at the Kartalkaya Dam in Kahramanmaraş. Assuming Limnigraph water level and flow rates readings correct and water levels and flow rates of Limnigraph were compared with that of pressure and ultrasonic sensor. Mean Absolute Percentage Error MAPE and ANOVA tests were done on 2454 observations. Average of water level and flow rates of limnigraph, pressure and ultrasonic sensor were 9284.9 mm and 4.610.038 m3s-1, 9274.9mm and 4.620.037 m3s-1, and 9224.9 mm and 4.580.037 m3s-1, respectively. Differences between the average water levels and flow rates were 1 mm 928-927 and 0.01 m3s-1 4.61-4.62 under un-fluctuating and 6 mm 928-922 and 0.03 m3s-1 4.61-4.58 under fluctuating conditions. The fluctuation increased the differences between the average water levels and flow rates. MAPE of water levels and flow rates for pressure and ultrasonic sensor were calculated as 0.741 and 1.466 under un-fluctuation, and 1.453 and 2.490 under fluctuation conditions, respectively and since they were below 10, the levels of agreement between the two data sets are considered as very good. However, fluctuation conditions increased MAPEs from 0.741 to 1.453, from 1.466 to 2.490. The water levels and flow rates of both sensors were not statistically different from those of optic encoder Limnigraph. Accordingly, both sensors can be used to measure water levels and flow rates in open irrigation canal but un-fluctuating conditions should be preferred. In addition, ultrasonic sensors can be used in environments that block, corrode the pressure sensors and make it difficult to use by floating objects.

 Anything that cannot be measured cannot be managed. Based on the thought, the aims of this study are to evaluate water levels and flow rates measured by Limnigraph OEL, pressure sensor PS and ultrasonic sensors US in the open irrigation canal. Limnigraph and pressure sensor sensed water levels and flow rates under un-fluctuating conditions in the Stilling Well and ultrasonic sensors directly measured them from water surface under fluctuating conditions at the Kartalkaya Dam in Kahramanmaraş. Assuming Limnigraph water level and flow rates readings correct and water levels and flow rates of Limnigraph were compared with that of pressure and ultrasonic sensor. Mean Absolute Percentage Error MAPE and ANOVA tests were done on 2454 observations. Average of water level and flow rates of limnigraph, pressure and ultrasonic sensor were 9284.9 mm and 4.610.038 m3s-1, 9274.9mm and 4.620.037 m3s-1, and 9224.9 mm and 4.580.037 m3s-1, respectively. Differences between the average water levels and flow rates were 1 mm 928-927 and 0.01 m3s-1 4.61-4.62 under un-fluctuating and 6 mm 928-922 and 0.03 m3s-1 4.61-4.58 under fluctuating conditions. The fluctuation increased the differences between the average water levels and flow rates. MAPE of water levels and flow rates for pressure and ultrasonic sensor were calculated as 0.741 and 1.466 under un-fluctuation, and 1.453 and 2.490 under fluctuation conditions, respectively and since they were below 10, the levels of agreement between the two data sets are considered as very good. However, fluctuation conditions increased MAPEs from 0.741 to 1.453, from 1.466 to 2.490. The water levels and flow rates of both sensors were not statistically different from those of optic encoder Limnigraph. Accordingly, both sensors can be used to measure water levels and flow rates in open irrigation canal but un-fluctuating conditions should be preferred. In addition, ultrasonic sensors can be used in environments that block, corrode the pressure sensors and make it difficult to use by floating objects.

 Anything that cannot be measured cannot be managed. Based on the thought, the aims of this study are to evaluate water levels and flow rates measured by Limnigraph OEL, pressure sensor PS and ultrasonic sensors US in the open irrigation canal. Limnigraph and pressure sensor sensed water levels and flow rates under un-fluctuating conditions in the Stilling Well and ultrasonic sensors directly measured them from water surface under fluctuating conditions at the Kartalkaya Dam in Kahramanmaraş. Assuming Limnigraph water level and flow rates readings correct and water levels and flow rates of Limnigraph were compared with that of pressure and ultrasonic sensor. Mean Absolute Percentage Error MAPE and ANOVA tests were done on 2454 observations. Average of water level and flow rates of limnigraph, pressure and ultrasonic sensor were 9284.9 mm and 4.610.038 m3s-1, 9274.9mm and 4.620.037 m3s-1, and 9224.9 mm and 4.580.037 m3s-1, respectively. Differences between the average water levels and flow rates were 1 mm 928-927 and 0.01 m3s-1 4.61-4.62 under un-fluctuating and 6 mm 928-922 and 0.03 m3s-1 4.61-4.58 under fluctuating conditions. The fluctuation increased the differences between the average water levels and flow rates. MAPE of water levels and flow rates for pressure and ultrasonic sensor were calculated as 0.741 and 1.466 under un-fluctuation, and 1.453 and 2.490 under fluctuation conditions, respectively and since they were below 10, the levels of agreement between the two data sets are considered as very good. However, fluctuation conditions increased MAPEs from 0.741 to 1.453, from 1.466 to 2.490. The water levels and flow rates of both sensors were not statistically different from those of optic encoder Limnigraph. Accordingly, both sensors can be used to measure water levels and flow rates in open irrigation canal but un-fluctuating conditions should be preferred. In addition, ultrasonic sensors can be used in environments that block, corrode the pressure sensors and make it difficult to use by floating objects.

 Ölçülemeyen hiçbir şey yönetilemez. Bu düşünceden hareketle, bu çalışmanın amacı, açık sulama kanalında Limnigraph OEL, basınç sensöru PS ve ultrasonik sensör US ile ölçülen su seviyelerini ve debilerini değerlendirmektir. Kartalkaya Barajında sol sahil sulama kanalında su seviyesi ve debiler, sulama mevsiminde akım gözlem istasyonunda AGİ ölçülmüştür. Akım gözlem istasyonunda limnigraf ve basınç sensörü, su seviyelerini dalgalanmayan koşullar altında ve ultrasonik sensörler ise dalgalı koşullar altında doğrudan su yüzeyinden ölçmüştür. Limnigraphın su seviyesi ve debi değerlerinin temel alınarak, basınç ve ultrasonik sensörün su seviyeleri ve debi değerleri ile karşılaştırılmıştır. Ortalama Mutlak Yüzde Hatası MAPE ve ANOVA testleri 2454 gözlem değeri üzerinde yapılmıştır. Limnigraf, basınç ve ultrasonik sensörün ortalama su seviyesi ve debisi sırasıyla 9284.9 mm ve 4.610.038 m3s-1, 9274.9 mm ve 4.620.037 m3s-1, 9224.9 mm ve 4.580.037 m3s-1dir. Ortalama su seviyeleri ve debiler arasındaki farklar, dalgasız ortamda 1 mm 928-927 ve 0.01 m3s-1 4.61-4.62, dalgalı koşullar altında 6 mm 928-922 ve 0.03 m3s-1 4.61-4.58dir. Basınç ve ultrasonik sensörün belirlediği su seviyeleri ve debilerinin MAPEsi dalgasız koşullarda sırasıyla 0.741 ve 1.466, dalgalı koşullarında ise 1.453 ve 2.490 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Bu değerler, 10un altında oldukları için iki veri seti uyumu çok iyi olarak kabul edilmektedir. Dalgalanma koşullar, MAPE değerleri 0.741den 1.453e, 1.466dan 2.490a yükseltmiştir. Dalgalı koşullar ortalama su seviyesi ve debi değerleri arasındaki farkı ve MEPA değerlerini artırmıştır. Her iki sensörün su seviyeleri ve debileri, limnigrafın değerlerinden istatistiksel olarak farklı değildi. Buna göre, açık sulama kanalında su seviyelerini ve debileri ölçmek için her iki sensör de kullanılabilir ancak dalgalı olmayan koşullar tercih edilmelidir. Ayrıca ultrasonik sensörler, basınç sensörlerini tıkayan, aşındıran ve yüzen nesneler tarafından kullanılmasını zorlaştıran ortamlarda kullanılabilir.

Makale detayları

Evaluation of Water Levels and Flow Rates Measured in Irrigation Canal Using Limnigraph, Pressure and Ultrasonic Sensors

Yazarlar:

Cafer Gençoğlan | Mehmet Durak Tüysüz | Serpil Gençoğlan

Yayıncı:

Tekirdag Namik Kemal University

Ana Başlıklar:

Sulama Sistemleri

Dergi:

Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.20 Issue 3, pp.642-652

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

9/2023

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001298325

pISSN:

1302-7050

PLC

Pressure and ultrasonic sensors

Stilling well

Water head

Rating curvePLC

Basınç ve ultrasonik sensör

AGİ

Su yükü

Anahtar eğrisi

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Cafer Gençoğlan | Mehmet Durak Tüysüz | Serpil Gençoğlan

Yayıncı: Tekirdag Namik Kemal University

Ana Başlıklar: Sulama Sistemleri

Dergi: Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.20 Issue 3, pp.642-652

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 9/2023

Belge Dili: İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.): 2001298325

pISSN: 1302-7050

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Cafer Gençoğlan | Mehmet Durak Tüysüz | Serpil Gençoğlan

Yayıncı:

Tekirdag Namik Kemal University

Ana Başlıklar:

Sulama Sistemleri

Dergi:

Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.20 Issue 3, pp.642-652

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

9/2023

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001298325

pISSN:

1302-7050