Dimensionless advance curves for infiltration families

A.A. Alazba
*
Department of Agriculture Engineering, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
Accepted 11 November 1998
Abstract
Dimensionless advance curves of border irrigation have been developed for Soil Conservation
Service (SCS) infiltration families. The volume balance equation was nondimensionally formulated
and then used to plot a dimensionless advance curve for each infiltration family that is a function of
the exponent a in the infiltration power function and the dimensionless time t
*
. Initially, the SCS
infiltration formula was fitted into a power function. The equivalent parameters for each SCS
infiltration family were obtained through a nonlinear regression analysis. The dimensionless curves
for a given inflow rate, slope, and roughness coefficient can be used to determine either advance
distance at a particular time or time of advance for a certain distance through a few simple steps.
The curves also allow reviewing the advance trend of each infiltration family for a sufficiently wide
range of dimensionless time covering any condition of dimensioned input parameters. It is
anticipated that the curves will help in designing, evaluating, and managing irrigation borders. The
more complex zero inertia model has also been used to enhance results of obtained dimensionless
advance curves and of fitted SCS infiltration parameters. # 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights
reserved.
Keywords: Border irrigation; Volume balance model; Surface irrigation; SCS Inltration families; Dimension-
less advance curves
1. Introduction
During an irrigation event, a complete irrigation process consists of four different
phases. These phases depicted in Fig. 1 are: (1) advance, (2) wetting or ponding, (3)
depletion, and (4) recession. Advance and recession curves are essential to determine the
ultimate distribution of infiltrated water in the subsurface profile for known soil
Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131
* Fax: +96614673429; e-mail: alazba@ksu.edu.sa
0378-3774/99/$ see front matter # 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S0 3 7 8 - 3 7 7 4 ( 9 8 ) 0 0 1 1 3 - 9
infiltration characteristics. This yields information necessary to evaluate the irrigation
performance. While the advance curve depicts arrival of water front across the field, the
recession curve displays the disappearance of the water. Fig. 2 depicts the idealized post-
irrigation subsurface distribution of infiltrated depth along the field at the end of the
irrigation phases. Different mathematical models have been used to predict water advance
during an irrigation event, as well as other phases, runoff and deep percolation. Of which,
the volume balance model is the simplest to solve and the least complicated to
understand. The behavioral trends of the advance curves, however, can only be realized
through repeated solutions using many different combinations of the irrigation parameters
or variables which include constant inflow rate Q
o
, time of cutoff or application time
T
appl
, soil surface roughness n, field geometry such as length L and slope S
o
, and the soil
infiltration characteristics.
Fortunately, the solution of volume balance for predicting advance trajectory can be
simplified by the use of dimensionless analysis, which allows a reduction in the number
of variables governing or controlling the trend of the advance curve. Consequently, one
can view the behavioral trends on a single or a couple of sketches. This, however, requires
certain forms expressing the input parameters. For instance, infiltration characteristic
Fig. 1. Definition sketch of the four irrigation phases.
116 A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131
parameters need to be expressed in a form of a power function such as Kostiakov
equation. The U.S. Soil Conservation Services (National Engineering Handbook, 1974)
expressed the infiltrated depth as a function of time in a form which differs from
Kostiakov equation for a series of infiltration families (IF), however. The main objective
of the present study is to use the dimensionless analysis for developing the advance
curves of border irrigation for the various infiltration families on a single xt graph.
Before proceeding to this, each infiltration family has to be fitted in a form of the
Kostiakov equation utilizing a nonlinear regression analysis.
2. Advance volume balance derivation
The volume balance model (VBM) is recognized to be the least accurate
method to describe the motion of water during its progress down the irrigated
field. However, it may give good results compared to those obtained from more
sophisticated models such as zero inertia and full hydrodynamic in certain cases,
for example with a steep slope and smooth soil surface. Moreover, the VBM is the
basis for the early design and evaluation of the surface irrigation systems. The VBM is
also the basis for the development of and understanding of other surface irrigation
models, and it has been used to determine the wetting front of the stream during
the advance process. During the advance phase, the general form of VBM stems from
the fact that volume delivered to the field should equal those of surface and subsurface
Fig. 2. Idealized sketch of post-irrigation distribution curves at the end of the irrigation phases.
A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131 117
volumes. That is
\
in
(t) = \
sur
(t) \
sub
(t) (1)
in which, \
in
, \
sur
, and \
sub
are volumes of inflow, surface, and subsurface flow,
respectively. The quantity of each volume can be obtained mathematically as follows:
\(t)
in
=
Z
t
0
Q(t)dt (2)
\(t)
sur
=
Z
x
0
A(s; t)ds (3)
and
\(t)
sub
=
Z
x
0
Z(s; t)ds (4)
where Q is rate of flow, A is area of flow, Z is subsurface volume per unit length, t is time,
x is distance, and s is the integrand of x.
Combining Eqs. (2)(5) can be obtained in an integral form
Z
t
0
Q(t)dt =
Z
x
0
A(s; t)ds
Z
x
0
Z(s; t)ds (5)
For constant inflow rate Q
o
, i.e., @Q/@t = 0, constant average area

A, and assuming that Z
is independent of the water depth and only function of the intake opportunity time, t t
s
,
where t
s
is the time at which advance reaches the s distance, the following is obtained:
Q
o
t =

Ax
Z
x
0
Z(t t
s
)ds (6)
If the variable of integration in Eq. (6) has been replaced by
ds =
ds
dt
s
dt
s
=
dx
dt

t=t
s
dt
s
(7)
in which
dx
dt

t=t
s
is the time derivative that constitutes the speed of advance at the time the stream reached
point s, the Lewis and Milne (1938) integral equation for advance assuming a unit width
of border is obtained
q
o
t = yx
Z
t
0
z(t t
s
)
dx
dt

t=t
s
dt
s
(8)
The above equation had been solved for a few simple infiltration formulas, but the
complexity of the convolution integral precluded its use with general empirical
relationships between infiltration and infiltration time. In Eq. (8), for any consistent
118 A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131
system of units, q
0
= (constant) inflow rate per unit width of border; y = distance-
averaged depth of the irrigation stream; z = cumulative infiltration, volume per unit area
of border, a function of x and t, and in particular, in a border, a function solely of
infiltration time (t t
s
). Eq. (8), furthermore, can be written in terms of shape factors for
both surface and subsurface profiles
q
o
t =
y
y
o
x
z
z
0
x (9)
in which y
o
is the inlet depth and assumed equal to normal depth y
n
, z
0
is the infiltrated
depth at distance zero, and
y
and
z
are surface and subsurface shape factors respectively

y
=
y
y
o
(10)

z
=
R
x
0
z(t t
s
)ds
z
o
x
(11)

y
is usually considered to be 0.8 which is an average value of its range, 0.70.9, as
shown by a dimensionless study done by Hart et al. (1968). On the other hand,
z
is
simplified, particularly for tip cells, to be a function of the exponent term in the
Kostiakov infiltration equation assuming uniform advance rate (Katopodes and Strelkoff,
1977)

z
=
1
1 a
(12)
Values of
z
range from 1.0 to 0.5 for magnitudes of a equal to zero and one, respectively.
These values are associated with constant infiltrated depth and constant infiltration rate,
respectively.
Hall (1956) proposed a recursive method to solve the border advance in which the
solution at any time depends upon the solution at the end of the preceding time step. This
numerical scheme for advance computed at a sequence of time steps, in effect, is a
numerical solution of (8). Though the method was the precursor to all current physically
based numerical simulations of surface irrigation and is referenced in papers and text
books to the present day [Hagan et al. (1967); Jensen, 1983); Walker and Skogerboe
(1987)], it has an error in computing advance. Alazba and Strelkoff (1994) proposed an
alternative formula free of error for computing advance of border irrigation. Their
equation considers the total volume at each time step rather than computing incremental
changes
x
i
=
q
o
t
i

y
y
o
x
i1

P
i1
k=1
((z
0;ik1
z
0;ik
)=2)x
k

y
y
o

z
z
0;1
; i = 2; 3; 4; . . . (13)
x
i
=
q
0
t
i

y
y
0

z
z
0;1
; i = 1 (14)
If the Manning formula
y
n
=
q
o
n
c
u

S
o
_

3=5
(15)
A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131 119
in which c
u
is a units coefficient equal to 1.0 m
1/3
/s in the metric systemand ~1.486 ft
1/3
/s in
the English system is used to compute the inlet depth of water, y
o
, assumed constant and
at normal, x
i
becomes a function of many parameters more or less depending on the
formula used to compute the infiltration depth, z, for known intake opportunity time,
= t t
s
. If, for example, the Kostiakov (1932) equation
z() = k
a
(16)
is utilized, the variables inflow rate per unit width q
o
, time t, slope S
o
, roughness
coefficient n, and infiltration coefficient k and exponent a all affect x
i
. On the other
hand, if the SCS formula
z() = k
/

a
/
c (17)
is used in lieu of Eq. (16), x
i
is affected by one more parameter which is the constant c,
in addition to q
o
, t, S
o
, and n, and coefficient k
/
and exponent a
/
, parameters of each
infiltration family. Dimensionally, a large number of variables makes a comprehensive
study of the behavioral trend of advance almost impossible regardless of type of equation
describing the infiltration. In other words, a study conducted by systematically varying
q
0
, t, S
0
, and k and a or k
/
, a
/
, and c each varying over its practical range would be either
overwhelming or incomplete. In dimensionless terms along with the use of Eq. (16), it
proves possible to display the advance trajectory through a set of curves where the
parameter distinguishing one curve from another is exponent a.
3. Fitting approach for SCS-infiltration parameters
Practically, the SCS formula is often preferred over the Kostiakov equation.
Unfortunately, the dimensionless formulation requires the infiltration formulation to be
in a form of Kostiakov equation. This suggests fitting the SCS equation, Eq. (17), for
each IF in a form of Eq. (16). That is to find k and a such that the deviation between the
two representations are minimal. Sritharan (1992) achieved that by minimizing the
functional
S =
Z
T
0
(k
/
t
a
/
c kt
a
)
2
dt (18)
with respect to k and a. The selected time, T, was the time at which the terminal intake
rate appropriate for the SCS infiltration family begins to occur. However, it was found
that values of k and a obtained by Sritharan's approach underestimate the infiltration
depth for large time, particularly for time >1000 min. Ultimately, this leads to an
overestimate of advance distance. A use of a nonlinear regression was possible to obtain
values of k and a that give less deviation for each IF. Figs. 35 illustrate the infiltration
depth as a function of time for three infiltration families 0.4, 0.5, and 0.6 respectively. It
can be seen from these figures that the regression-SCS denoted by Reg-SCS curve is
comparable with SCS, direct use of Eq. (17), curve while Sritharan-SCS abbreviated by
Srith-SCS curve indicates lower infiltration depth, particularly for time greater than
120 A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131
Fig. 3. Cumulative infiltration depth vs. time for IF = 0.4.
Fig. 4. Cumulative infiltration depth vs. time for IF = 0.5.
A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131 121
1000 min. The values of k and a obtained from different approaches, in addition to SCS
parameters, are shown in Table 1. In order to see how this affects the advance distance, an
illustration is presented for IF equal to 0.6. As an example, advance is computed with
Eqs. (13) and (14) for the following border strip
Manning roughness n = 0.15
bottom slope S
o
= 0.005
inflow rate q
o
= 0.2138 l/s m (0.0023 cfs/ft)
surface-depth shape factor
y
= 0.8
computational time step t = 1 min
Infiltration constants for IF equal to 0.6 are: in SCS formulation
SCS-infiltration coefficient k
/
= 29 mm/h
a
/
(1.15 in./h
a
/
)
SCS-infiltration exponent a
/
= 0.76
SCS-infiltration constant c = 7.0 mm (0.28 in.)
in Kostiakov formulation resulted from Sritharan (Srith) method;
Srith-infiltration coefficient k = 37 mm/h
a
(1.46 in./h
a
)
Srith-infiltration exponent a = 0.64
Fig. 5. Cumulative infiltration depth vs. time for IF = 0.6.
122 A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131
Table 1
SCS and fitted infiltration families parameters
Fitted SCS infiltration parameters
SCS infiltration parameters Reg-SCS Srith-SCS
IF Exponent
a
/ Coefficient
k
/
(mm/h
a
/
)
Coefficient
k
/
(in/h
a
/
)
Constant
c (mm)
Exponent
a
Coefficient
k (mm/h
a
)
Coefficient
k (in/h
a
)
Exponent
a
Coefficient
k (mm/h
a
)
Coefficient
k (in/h
a
)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
0.1 0.66 9 0.37 7 0.58 13 0.52 0.50 16 0.62
0.2 0.70 14 0.53 7 0.65 17 0.67 0.54 21 0.82
0.3 0.72 18 0.70 7 0.68 21 0.82 0.57 25 0.99
0.4 0.74 22 0.85 7 0.70 25 0.97 0.60 29 1.15
0.5 0.75 26 1.01 7 0.72 29 1.12 0.62 33 1.31
0.6 0.76 29 1.15 7 0.73 32 1.27 0.64 37 1.46
0.7 0.77 33 1.31 7 0.75 36 1.42 0.66 41 1.61
0.8 0.77 37 1.45 7 0.76 40 1.56 0.67 45 1.76
0.9 0.78 41 1.60 7 0.76 43 1.71 0.69 48 1.90
1.0 0.79 44 1.75 7 0.77 47 1.86 0.70 52 2.05
1.5 0.80 60 2.37 7 0.79 63 2.47 0.72 68 2.69
2.0 0.81 75 2.96 7 0.80 78 3.06 0.73 83 3.29
3.0 0.82 103 4.06 7 0.81 106 4.16 0.74 111 4.37
4.0 0.82 129 5.09 7 0.82 132 5.18 0.74 136 5.35
A
.
A
.
A
l
a
z
b
a
/
A
g
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
4
1
(
1
9
9
9
)
1
1
5

1
3
1
1
2
3
in Kostiakov formulation resulted from Regression (Reg) method;
Reg-infiltration coefficient k = 32 mm/h
a
(1.27 in./h
a
)
Reg-infiltration exponent a = 0.73
The advance trajectories for IF equal to 0.6 are depicted in Fig. 6. It is obvious that Srith-
SCS advance curve deviates largely from SCS curve compared to Reg-SCS curve. The
error in computing advance using values of k and a obtained from Srith method ranges
from 0% at small time to near 20% at large time. On the other hand, the advance curve
obtained with values of k and a resulted from nonlinear regression analysis deviates by
less than 4% at most. The negative sign means that Reg-method overestimates
infiltration and so it underestimates advance distance. To enhance the comparison, the
zero inertia model (ZIM) of Strelkoff and Katopodes (1977) was used. The advance
curves for SCS, Srith-SCS, and Reg-SCS are illustrated in Fig. 7 and same interpretations
can be made. It should be noted that the advance curves obtained via VBM and ZIM may
not be identical to each other since VBM is only valid for certain conditions, whenever y
o
reaches y
n
instantly, e.g. steep channel bottom slope.
It might be argued that the time of application does not practically reach the value at
which the Srith method produces high error. Studies done by Alazba (1994) and Alazba
and Fangmeier (1995) on the inflow hydrograph shapes of borders showed a time of
application in the vicinity of 1800 min, however. An example was drawn from Alazba and
Fangmeier (1995) paper to compare between the nonlinear regression analysis used in the
Fig. 6. Advance curves for IF = 0.6, q
o
= 0.2138 l/s m, S
o
= 0.005 and n = 0.15 obtained via VBM.
124 A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131
present study and Srith method used for fitting the SCS formula in a form of Kostiakov.
The input parameters of the selected case are: Infiltration family, IF = 0.25, Manning
roughness, n = 0.15, bottom slope, S
0
= 0.005, and field length, L = 198 m (650 ft). The
inflow rate, q
o
and time of application, T
appl
, vary depending on the required depth D
req
.
For depth of 50 mm, q
o
= 0.93 l/s m (0.01 cfs/ft) and T
appl
= 225 min, for depth of
100 mm, q
o
= 0.483 l/s m (0.0052 cfs/ft) and T
appl
= 865.38 min, and for depth of
150 mm, q
o
= 0.344 l/s m (0.0037 cfs/ft) and T
appl
= 1824.32 min. The infiltration
parameters for SCS, Srith-SCS, and Reg-SCS, respectively, are:
SCS-infiltration coefficient k
/
= 16 mm/h
a
/
(0.6274 in./h
a
/
)
SCS-infiltration exponent a
/
= 0.71
SCS-infiltration constant c = 7.0 mm (0.28 in.)
Srith-infiltration coefficient k = 23 mm/h
a
(0.90 in./h
a
)
Srith-infiltration exponent a = 0.56
Reg-infiltration coefficient k = 22.11 mm/h
a
(0.8706 in./h
a
)
Reg-infiltration exponent a = 0.66
The irrigation output parameters which included application efficiency, E
a
; storage
efficiency, E
s
; distribution uniformity, DU; average low quarter depth,

D
lq
; and average
depth infiltrated,

D
inf
were used for comparison. The ZIM was utilized to obtain the
output parameters considering the concept of low-quarter proposed by the On-Farm
Irrigation Committee of the Irrigation and Drainage Division (1978). It is evident from
Table 2 that the irrigation performance parameters for SCS and Reg-SCS are almost the
Fig. 7. Advance curves for IF = 0.6, q
o
= 0.2138 l/s m, S
o
= 0.005 and n = 0.15 obtained via ZIM.
A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131 125
same while for Srith-SCS the parameters have different values especially for parameters
other than E
s
. The differences in parameters magnitude between SCS and Reg-SCS and
Srith-SCS are large for high depth and small for low depth. When comparing Srith-SCS
to SCS, for depth of 150 mm, there is an error of about 8% in E
a
, DU, and

D
lq
, and 14%
in

D
inf
, respectively. The error in computing performance parameters is in the vicinity of
3% when Reg-SCS is compared to SCS. The preceding discussion implies that the
fitted SCS infiltration parameters obtained from a nonlinear regression analysis are likely
to give better advance computations compared to those obtained from Sritharan method.
And hence the nonlinear regression analysis is used to compute the infiltration
parameters, k and a, in order to fit the SCS infiltration equation into Kostiakov equation
and so as to minimize errors.
4. Dimensionless formulation
It is now possible to plot the advance curves for the SCS infiltration families in a
dimensionless form. Indeed, if the following dimensionless variables are defined in terms
of the corresponding dimensional variables and arbitrary, nonzero reference variables as
follows:
y
+
=
y
Y
R
(19)
q
+
=
q
Q
R
(20)
x
+
=
x
X
R
(21)
Table 2
Irrigation output parameters for comparison of Sritharan (1992) method and a nonlinear regression analysis used
to fit SCS-IF
Output parameters
E
a
(%) E
s
(%) DU (%)

D
lq
(mm)

D
inf
(mm)
Required depth of irrigation = 150 mm
SCS 74 99.1 83 142 171
Srith-SCS 69 99.6 90 131 147
Reg-SCS 73 99.2 84 140 166
Required depth of irrigation = 100 mm
SCS 73 99.4 87 93 107
Srith-SCS 70 99.6 90 89 99
Reg-SCS 73 99.3 86 93 109
Required depth of irrigation = 50 mm
SCS 73 99.6 90 46 52
Srith-SCS 75 99.6 90 48 53
Reg-SCS 75 99.4 88 48 54
126 A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131
t
+
=
t
T
R
(22)
The reference variables are now set by the conditions
Q
R
= q
o
(23)
Y
R
=
y
y
o
(24)
T
R
=
Y
R
k

1=a
(25)
and
X
R
Y
R
= Q
R
T
R
(26)
Eqs. (13) and (14) in dimensionless forms are rewritten as follows:
x
+
i
=
t
+
i
x
+
i1

P
i1
k=1
1
2
(t
+
a
ik1
t
+
a
ik
)x
+
k
1 (t
+
a
=1 a)
; i = 2; 3; 4; . . . (27)
x
+
i
=
t
+
i
1 (t
+
a
=1 a)
; i = 1 (28)
For known t that is sufficiently small, it is evident from these equations that
dimensionless advance is a function solely of a and t
*
. The dimensionless advances for
odd and even infiltration families are plotted on Figs. 8 and 9, respectively. Although the
parameter distinguishing one curve from another is being the exponent a, the IF is used
rather for simplicity. The dimensionless formulation implies that advance curves are
plotted for all IF for a sufficiently wide range of t
*
covering any condition of dimensioned
parameters, q
o
, t, n, and S
o
. To demonstrate the use of these curves, an illustrated example
is presented. The dimensionless representation of the first foregoing sample irrigation is
found from the characteristic variables Eqs. (23) and (24) for this case: Q
R
= 0.2138
l/s m (0.0023 cfs/ft); Y
R
= 7.89 mm (0.0259 ft); T
R
= 6.79 min; and X
R
= 11.04 m
(36.22 ft).
The distance x of water arrival, after 600 min is computed in three steps. First; t
*
is
computed via Eq. (22). Second; x
*
is found from Fig. 9 for IF = 0.6. Third; x is computed
using Eq. (21). The distance which is found to be 52 m is comparable to that obtained
from ZIM (x 52.4 m).
5. Suitability and limitations of dimensionless curves
The absence of the computer makes the computation of either advance time or distance
for any combination of the irrigation parameters lengthy and tedious. Therefore, the
developed dimensionless advance curves will facilitate the determination of either
advance distance at a particular time or time of advance for a certain distance through a
few simple steps. The curves might also be considered as a helpful tool in designing,
evaluating, and managing irrigation borders. Despite of the merits of the proposed
method, cautions should be noticed. The VBM was used to construct the dimensionless
A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131 127
advance curves through the utilization of nondimensional notation. The VBM is known to
lack momentum considerations precluding its use to certain cases such as steep bottom
slope and smooth soil surface. Therefore, the validation of the proposed method relies on
the VBM capabilities and limitations. Unfortunately, the developed dimensionless curves
cannot be used for level borders, i.e. borders with zero slopes in the direction of flow,
since VBM assumes that the inlet flow depth should instantly reach normal depth. This
might be noticed from Eq. (15) which indicates that with zero bottom slope flow depth
will never reach normal depth.
The field verification of the proposed method is of practical importance. The
complexity and difficulty of field data measurements, however, precluded the verification
to the use of more complex zero inertia model. In addition, the field nonhomogeneity
adds another limit to the field verification.
6. Summary and conclusions
The VBM has been used to develop a dimensionless advance curve for each SCS-
infiltration family. The curves facilitate the determination of either advance time or
Fig. 8. Dimensionless advance curves for Odd-IF.
128 A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131
distance for any combination of the input parameters specifically for borders. In addition,
they allow reviewing the behavioral trend of advance trajectory of each SCS-IF and how
each differs from one another. The curves could be utilized to design, evaluate, and
manage irrigation borders.
The first step towards the curves development was to fit the SCS for-
mulation describing the infiltrated depth into a power function. This means that
the infiltration parameters of the fitted formula for each IF should initially be
obtained. The method utilized to accomplish the fitting was a nonlinear regression
which was compared to a method devised by Sritharan (1992). With the
nonlinear regression analysis, a better fitting to the SCS formulation was achieved,
especially for long infiltration opportunity periods. The Srith method underestimated
the infiltrated depth which led to an overestimate of advance distance along the field.
The error in the estimated advance distance using infiltration parameters obtained via
Srith's method was near 20% relative to SCS, but decreases as time of irrigation
decreases.
Fig. 9. Dimensionless advance curves for Even-IF.
A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131 129
7. Nomenclature
a exponent in the Kostiakov cumulative-infiltration equation
a
/
exponent in the SCS cumulative-infiltration equation
c
u
units coefficient in Manning formula: c
u
= 1.0 (metric system) = 1.486
(English system)

D
inf
average infiltrated depth

D
lq
average depth infiltrated in the field low quarter
D
req
required irrigation depth
DU distribution uniformity
E
a
application efficiency
E
s
storage efficiency
IF infiltration family
i time-step index; distance index
k coefficient in the Kostiakov infiltration equation; distance or time index
k
/
coefficient in the SCS cumulative-infiltration equation
L field length
n Manning roughness
Q
R
characteristic, reference discharge
q
o
inflow rate per unit width of border
q
*
q
o
/Q
R
s point stream of advance reached at t
s
S
o
bottom slope
t time from the start of inflow
T time over which deviation between two functions is expected to be minimum
T
appl
time of application
T
coff
time of cutoff
T
R
characteristic, reference time
t
s
time for stream to reach point s
t
*
t/T
R
\
in
total volume, per unit width, introduced at the upper end of the border
\
sur
volume of water on the surface, per unit width
\
sub
volume of infiltrated water, per unit width
x distance coordinate
X
R
characteristic, reference distance
x
*
x/X
R
y depth at any point in the surface stream
y
o
upstream water depth; = average depth of the surface stream
Y
R
characteristic, reference depth
y
*
y/Y
R
Z volume of infiltrated water per unit length
z depth of infiltrated water
z
0
depth of infiltrated water at zero distance form inlet
t time step
x advance increment; distance increment
130 A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131

y
surface shape factor

z
subsurface shape factor
infiltration opportunity time (t t
s
).
References
Alazba, A.A., 1994. Efficiency of irrigation borders as affected by inflow hydrograph shape. Ph.D. Dissertation,
University of Ariz.
Alazba, A.A., Fangmeier, D.D., 1995. Hydrograph shape and border irrigation efficiency. J. of Irrig. and Drain.
Div. ASCE 121(6), 325342.
Alazba, A.A., Strelkoff, T., 1994. Correct form of Hall technique for border irrigation advance. J. of Irrig. and
Drain. Div. ASCE 120(2), 292307.
Hagan, R.M., Haise, H.R., Edminster, T.W., 1967. Irrigation of agricultural lands. American Society of
Agronomy, Madison, Wis.
Hall, W.A., 1956. Estimating irrigation border flow. Agricultural Engineering 37(1), 263265.
Hart, W.E., Bassett, D.L., Strelkoff, T., 1968. Surface irrigation hydraulics-kinematics. Proc. of ASCE. Journal
of irrigation and Drainage Division 94(IR4), 419440.
Jensen, M.E. (Ed.), 1983. Design and operation of farm irrigation system. American Society of Agricultural
Engineers. Srt. Joseph, Mich.
Katopodes, N., Strelkoff, T., 1977. Hydrodynamics of border irrigation- A Complete Model. Journal of the
Irrigation and Drainage Division. ASCE 103(IR3), 309323.
Kostiakov, A.N., 1932. On the dynamics of the coefficient of water percolation in soils and the necessity for
studying it from a dynamic point of view for purposes of amelioration. Trans. Sixth Congr. Int. Soc. of Soil
Sci., Vienna, Russian part A: 17-2.
Lewis, M.R., Milne, W.E., 1938. Analysis of border irrigation. Agricultural Engineering 19, 267272.
National engineering handbook, 1974. Chapter 4, Sec. 15: Border irrigation. U.S. Soil Conservation Service.
(SCS), Washington, DC.
On-Farm Irrigation Committee of the Irrigation and Drainage Division, 1978. Describing Irrigation Efficiency
and Uniformity. Journal of the Irrigation and Drainage Division, ASCE 104(IR1), 35-41.
Sritharan, S.I., 1992. Equivalent Kostiakov parameters for SCS infiltration families. J. of Irrig. and Drain. Div.,
ASCE 118(1), 192197.
Strelkoff, T., Katopodes, N.D., 1977. Border-irrigation hydraulics with zero-inertia. Journal of the Irrigation and
Drainage Division. ASCE 103(IR3), 325342.
Walker, W.R., Skogerboe, G.V., 1987. Surface irrigation: Theory and practice. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood
Cliffs, NJ.
A.A. Alazba / Agricultural Water Management 41 (1999) 115131 131