Table 5 - uploaded by Guy Fipps
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
A smart controller testing facility was established by the Irrigation Technology Center at Texas A&M University in College Station in 2008. A two-year testing program was initiated in order to evaluate smart controller testing methodology needed to determine their performance and reliability under Texas conditions from an “end-user” point of view....
Context in source publication
Context 1
... to the lack of scientifically derived crop coefficients for most landscape plants, we suggest that users classify plants into one of three categories based on their need for or ability to survive with frequent watering, occasional watering and natural rainfall. Suggested crop coefficients for each are shown in Table 5. ...
Citations
... These concepts have led to the technological development of irrigation systems run by smart irrigation controllers based on evapotranspiration (ET) or soil moisture sensors, which in principle suggest the potential for significant water savings compared to the traditional time-based controllers and calendar-based irrigation schedules (Davis and Dukes 2012). The use of ET-based controllers has been shown, however, to result in over/under irrigation applications under both deficit irrigation and well-watered conditions (Devitt et al. 2008, Mayer et al. 2009, Swanson and Fipps 2012. Results from a detailed 3-year evaluation study of ET-based controllers in Texas indicate that most of the available units still have issues with programming using an adequate number of parameters specific to each zone (Burns 2011, Swanson andFipps 2012). ...
... The use of ET-based controllers has been shown, however, to result in over/under irrigation applications under both deficit irrigation and well-watered conditions (Devitt et al. 2008, Mayer et al. 2009, Swanson and Fipps 2012. Results from a detailed 3-year evaluation study of ET-based controllers in Texas indicate that most of the available units still have issues with programming using an adequate number of parameters specific to each zone (Burns 2011, Swanson andFipps 2012). Improper calculation of ET and insufficient accounting for rainfall are among the main factors that cause for these controllers to over/under irrigate with respect to ETo, and these issues seem to be exacerbated by variable and erratic weather patterns. ...
... Improper calculation of ET and insufficient accounting for rainfall are among the main factors that cause for these controllers to over/under irrigate with respect to ETo, and these issues seem to be exacerbated by variable and erratic weather patterns. Based on results for 2011, the researchers found that controllers with on-site sensors generally performed better and more often irrigated closer to the recommendations of the TexasET Network than those that had ETo information sent to the controller (Swanson and Fipps 2012). Similar evaluations of ET-based controllers under wetter Florida conditions has found that several of them can match irrigation application with seasonal demand and in particular reduce irrigation in the winter when plant demands are dramatically reduced (Davis and Dukes 2012). ...
Irrigated agriculture is the largest user of water in Texas, followed by urban-municipal uses, which has landscape irrigation as its largest component. Data from various sources were used to estimate the extent of the state’s urban landscaped area and its associated water use. The statewide area in golf courses is estimated at 115,000 acres, while 1,608,399 acres are ascribed to managed landscapes and lawns. While the total annual water use by golf courses is estimated at 0.364 million acre-feet, the volume projected for the landscape sector ranges from a low of 1.898 million acre-feet to a high of 4.021 million acre-feet. The sum of water use by golf courses with the low-end estimate for landscapes would represent 46.6% of the total use within the urban/municipal water sector and 12.6% of the total annual demand by all activities in Texas during 2010. This effectively positions urban irrigation as the state’s third largest water user, after agricultural irrigation and other urban uses. Strategies and practices that can significantly conserve (reduce) water use for urban landscape irrigation include water-conserving native and adaptive plant materials, weather- and sensor-guided irrigation, deficit irrigation practices, and use of alternative (saline/brackish, reclaimed, and graywater) water sources.
Citation: Cabrera RI, Wagner KL, Wherley B. 2013. An evaluation of urban landscape water use in Texas. Texas Water Journal. 4(2):14-27. Available from: https://doi.org/10.21423/twj.v4i2.6992.
