FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE

UNITED NATIONS

WATER RESOURCES, DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT

SERVICES

Effective Rainfall
by N.G. Dastane
FAO Consultant
project coordinator Indian agricultural research institute New Delhi

Publication Series: FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 25

FAO - Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Rome, 1978

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of
any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning
the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its
frontiers or boundaries.

M-56
ISBN 92-5-100272-X
The copyright in this book is vested in the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The book
may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, by any method or process, without written permission from the
copyright holder. Applications for such permission, with a statement of the purpose and extent of the
reproduction desired, should be addressed to the Director, Publications Division, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations, Via delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy.

FAO 1978
This electronic document has been scanned using optical character recognition (OCR) software and careful
manual recorrection. Even if the quality of digitalisation is high, the FAO declines all responsibility for any
discrepancies that may exist between the present document and its original printed version.

Rome - Italy, 1978

2
Table of Contents

Foreward............................................................................................................................................................... 1
Chapter I. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 2
1. Effective rainfall and its significance ........................................................................................................... 2
2. The pathway of rain water ............................................................................................................................ 3
3. Concepts of effective rainfall ....................................................................................................................... 5
4. Definition of effective rainfall...................................................................................................................... 6
5. Effectiveness of rainfall................................................................................................................................ 7
6. Factors influencing effective rainfall............................................................................................................ 9
Chapter II. Measurement of effective rainfall .................................................................................................... 12
1. Components of effective rainfall and their measurement ........................................................................... 12
2. Empirical methods of determining effective rainfall .................................................................................. 16
3. Determining effective rainfall from formulae ............................................................................................ 22
4. Evaluation of methods................................................................................................................................ 28
Chapter III. Application of effective rainfall data is irrigation and drainage projects ........................................ 30
1. Irrigation project design ............................................................................................................................. 30
2. Irrigation project operation......................................................................................................................... 34
3. Drainage projects........................................................................................................................................ 36
4. Rice cultivation........................................................................................................................................... 45
5. The effect of groundwater .......................................................................................................................... 46
6. Effective rainfall in unirrigated and low rainfall, areas .............................................................................. 48
Chapter IV. Increasing the proportion of effective rainfall its effectiveness and further lines of work ............. 53
1. Increasing effective rainfall ........................................................................................................................ 53
2. Increasing the effectiveness of rainfall ....................................................................................................... 54
3. Further lines of work needed in the field of effective rainfall in agriculture .............................................. 55
Bibliography....................................................................................................................................................... 57

i
Foreward
TIn view of the vital importance of water in man's life, precise knowledge of not only total rainfall but also of the
utilisable or effective part of rainfall is essential for the economic and efficient planning of water resources. There
is abundant literature on the subject of total rainfall. The topic of effective rainfall has remained somewhat
neglected, because of the several disciplines involved. Literature on effective rainfall in general and on its role in
agriculture in particular is limited.

This paper on concepts, assessment and the application of effective rainfall in irrigated agriculture has been
prepared at the recommendation of the Ad Hoc Consultation Meetings on Crop Water Requirements held under
the auspices of the Land and Water Development Division, FAO, Rome. Dr. N.G. Dastane, Project Co-ordinator,
Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India, very willingly accepted the task of preparing this paper
as FAO Consultant. Helpful suggestions Mere received from Panel Members: Messrs. A. Aboukhaled, Lebanon;
G. van den Berg and P.E. Ritjema of the Netherlands; J. Damagnez, Prance; O.N. Ashford, WMO, Geneva; W.O.
Pruitt, U.S.A.; and C.E. Houston and J. Doorenbos, FAO, Rome.

This publication presents a number of concepts of effective rainfall currently in use. A distinction is made
between effective rainfall and the effectiveness of rainfall being two different entities. The definition of effective
rainfall has been examined and a . modified concept of effective rainfall is proposed for use in irrigated
agriculture. A brief history as well as the criteria for the assessment and factors influencing effective rainfall are
presented. In addition, methods of measuring effective rainfall and its different components, as well as merits and
limitations of each of these methods are discussed. Also the application of derived data on effective rainfall,
together with several calculations and reference are given for guidance in developing and using the information in
planning as wall as in practice of water management. Finally, a number of practices to increase effective rainfall
are listed.

I am pleased to have this opportunity of expressing to Dr. Dastane and the members of the FAO Consultative
Group on Crop Water Requirements my sincere appreciation for the time and effort they have devoted to the
preparation of this valuable publication.
Edouard Saouma Director
Land and Water Development Division
Chapter I. Introduction
1. Effective rainfall and its significance
2. The pathway of rain water
3. Concepts of effective rainfall
4. Definition of effective rainfall
5. Effectiveness of rainfall
6. Factors influencing effective rainfall

1. Effective rainfall and its significance

The primary source of water for agricultural production for most of the world is rainfall. Three main
characteristics of rainfall are its amount, frequency and intensity, the values of which vary from place to place,
day to day, month to month and also year to year. Precise knowledge of these three main characteristics is
essential for planning its full utilization.

Information of the amount, intensity and distribution of monthly or annual rainfall for the most important places
in the world is generally available. Long-term records of daily rainfall have been compiled for years; norms and
standard deviations have been worked out; floods and droughts have been defined and climatic zones of potential
evapotranspiration less precipitation have been mapped from rainfall patterns and crop studies. Investigations
using electronic computers are continuously in progress and efforts are being made to predict future trends in
order to refine planning.

In spite of voluminous data on weather, all is not yet known that should be known about rainfall. Certain simple
entities have baffled planners right up to the present. One of these is "effective rainfall".

In its simplest sense, effective rainfall means useful or utilizable rainfall. Rainfall is not necessarily useful or
desirable at the time, rate or amount in which it is received. Some of it may be unavoidably wasted while some
may even be destructive. Just as total rainfall varies, so does the amount of effective rainfall. The importance of
precise knowledge on the subject of effective rainfall needs little elaboration. The useful portion of rainfall is
stored and supplied to the user; the unwanted part needs to be conveyed or removed speedily.

Most rain water is used in agriculture for crop production. Therefore, the first point which arises is whether the
available rainfall is adequate and well distributed for crop-raining. If it is inadequate, can it be supplemented with
timely irrigation? If not, what type of agriculture should be practised? If irrigation can be supplied, bow should it
be designed, operated and maintained? What are the water requirements of crops during the growing season as
well as during different periods of growth and development and how far are these needs met by rainfall? How can
excess rain water be disposed of and how can waste be reduced by changing management practices? Finally,
what would all this cost? Without the necessary information on these basic points, no irrigation project can be
planned and productively and economically executed. The greater the precision of long-term data on rainfall
patterns and the greater the care taken in interpreting them, the higher will be the efficiency of water management
projects.

Pharande and Dastane (1964) listed salient points in the practical application in the field of agriculture of data on
effective rainfall as follows:
- designing irrigation projects on a sound economic basis;
- fixing cropping patterns and working out the irrigation requirements of crops;
- operating irrigation projects efficiently from year to year;
- preparing schedules of other farm operations in irrigated agriculture;
- planning cropping patterns in unirrigated or rainfed areas;
- designing drainage and land reclamation projects;

2
 - planning soil and water conservation programmes;
- interpreting field experiments accurately;
- classifying regions climatologically for agriculture.
Meteorologists can neither solve nor evaluate the problem of effective rainfall merely from tables of frequency,
amount and intensity of rainfall or from physical phenomena in the atmosphere. It is a task in which several
disciplines and sub-disciplines overlap. For example, in the field of agriculture, soil types, cropping patterns and
social, economic and management factors all have a direct impact on the extent of effective and ineffective
rainfall.

Because of such complexities, there is confusion in concepts, definitions and measurements and their
interpretation. The nomenclature and methods of measurement need to be standardised as well as interpreted for a
better understanding of effective rainfall and to convert total rainfall into effective rainfall to the maximum
possible extent.

In this paper on effective rainfall, present concepts are reviewed and defined, present methods of its assessment
are examined, estimating procedures for evaluation in applied fields, especially that of irrigated agriculture, are
suggested and future lines of work on this subject are pinpointed.

2. The pathway of rain water

The pathway of rain water is shown in Fig 1 which also indicates the different factors which need to be
considered.

Before rain strikes the earth's surface, there is some evaporation in the atmosphere (A in Fig 1). This amount is
never measured, but it increases air humidity, lowers the temperature and so reduces evapotranspiration from
field crops. Vapour may also be blown away by winds to the surrounding area. This A fraction is thus partially
useful bat is not taken into consideration in any calculation.

Rain may be intercepted by vegetation (B in Fig 1). Some of it Bay be absorbed and retained by leaves; this is
lost as evaporation (B1), Some may drip from the leaves onto the soil surface (B2), The rate of vegetal
interception is high in the beginning and declines with time. B1 and B2, which are measured in the total rainfall
received, are useful for crop growth since they reduce transpiration and depletion of soil moisture. When showers
are light the entire rainfall may be intercepted by vegetation. In sway studies light showers have been treated
incorrectly as ineffective rainfall.

On striking the soil surface (C), some water infiltrates the soil (C2), some may stagnate on the surface (C3), while
some may flow over the surface as run-off (C1). Factors influencing infiltration and surface run-off are many and
are interrelated.

Rain water lost by run-off may be pumped back and re-used at the site where it was received (C1.1), or it may be
used elsewhere downstream (C1.2.1). In overall water development planning this latter amount of surface run-off
still remains part of effective rainfall.

Some rain water stagnates on the soil surface (C3). This amount is lost by evaporation in due course or by
infiltration. It can be useful for meeting the water needs of crops but may be harmful and create drainage
problems.

Of the water which infiltrates into the soil (C2) some may be retained around the soil particles as a thin film and
is thus stored in the root zone (C2.1) while the rest may move beyond the root zone (C2.2). Of the stored soil
water (C2.1), part may be ineffective when received during the non-growing season. Also during the growing
season rainfall can cause harm such as flower and fruit drop, delay in harvesting and lowering of the quality of
the produce. This useless or harmful water (C2.1.1) is ineffective rainfall. A part of the water stored in the root
zone may be actually utilized in raising a crop. It may be useful for evapotranspiration or in any other form
(C2.1.2). A part of the stored water may remain unused due to the harvest of the crop (C2.1.3) as moisture
balance for the next season.

3
Water may be lost beyond the root zone by deep percolation to groundwater storage or streams (C2.2). A certain
fraction of loss by deep percolation is useful, even essential, in arid and semi-arid regions for washing down the
salts (C2.2.1). This portion is therefor also useful. If there is no salinity problem, all water lost by deep
percolation beyond the root zone may be useful only through recharge of the underground aquifer.

Fig 1: PATHWAY OF RAIN WATER

4
3. Concepts of effective rainfall
The term effective rainfall has been interpreted differently not only by specialists in different fields but also by
different workers in the same field.

The city civil engineer is interested in providing a drinking water supply from his storage tank or lake. According
to him, that amount of the total rainfall which enters his reservoir is the effective part (C1.2.2 in Fig 1).
To an irrigation engineer the rain which reaches his storage reservoir directly and by surface run-off from the
surrounding area indirectly is the effective portion (also C1.2.2 in Fig 1); but even though the concept is the same
in both this and the former case, the values of effective rainfall are different for the same total rainfall.

According to a hydro-electrical engineer, the rainfall which is useful for running the turbines that generate
electricity is the effective portion of the total received. This comes under C1.2.1 in Fig. 1.

Geohydrologists would define as effective that portion of rainfall which contributes to groundwater storage. The
extent of the rise in the water table or well levels would be the effective rainfall. This quantity comes under
C1.2.2 and C2.2 in Fig 1.

To drainage engineers rainfall lost either by surface run-off or by deep percolation is of great significance.

According to some planners, the surface run-off from a field nay be used at a higher or lower level (the former by
pumping) before the water leaves the catchment area. Such water may be useful for agriculture or industry,
navigation or recreation. All of it is effective in an integrated plan for utilization of water resources. It is
equivalent to B, C1.1, G1.2.1, C2.1.2, G2.2.1, C3.

In forests, dry leaves and twigs often form a thick layer on the soil surface, called the Ao horizon. This litter
intercepts a considerable amount of rain and enhances the water storage capacity of the soil. It is a contributing
factor in evapotranspiration and is therefore effective rainfall from the forestry point of view.

In the field of irrigated agriculture, interests differ at the irrigation project level, at the farm level and at the field
level. Some canal operating engineers feel that rain which saves an irrigation application is effective, although the
rain may not necessarily be effective: light showers of, say, less than 10 mm often make no difference in
irrigation schedules and hence are treated as ineffective by canal engineers.

Agriculturists may consider as effective that portion of the total rainfall which directly satisfies crop water needs
and also the surface run-off which can be used for crop production on their farms by being pumped from ponds or
wells. This fraction is equivalent to B, C1.1, C2.1.2 and C3.

In the field of dry-land agriculture, when the land is left fallow, effective rainfall is that which can be conserved
for the following crop.

An individual farmer considers that effective rainfall is that quantity which is useful in raising crops planted on
his soil, under his management. Water which moves out of the field by run-off or by deep percolation beyond the
root zone of his crop is ineffective. But on the other hand, if he receives run-off from outside high level
surroundings then it may add to the moisture stock and it nay be useful for crop production. Consequently,
farmers with different crops will arrive at different values in assessing effective rainfall. This is a dynamic rather
than a static notion. B, C2.1.2 and C3 come into this category.

Since there are such varied interpretations of what may be regarded as effective rainfall, it is difficult to create a
definition to suit all the interested disciplines. Rainfall which is ineffective according to one discipline is effective
according to another. In his calculations a planner interprets the term broadly as that which is utilizable by any
sector while the individual user interprets it narrowly to mean only that fraction which satisfies his particular
need. Even in the single field of the water requirements of crops different workers may mean different entities.

5
Hayes and Buell (1955) stated that effective precipitation is that quantity which is available for plant growth and
amounts to total precipitation minus run-off and evaporation. This definition is not completely satisfactory since
aspects prior to sowing are neglected and the term 'evaporation' is ambiguous and confusing here.

Ogrosky and Mockus (1964) defined effective rainfall as the total rainfall during the growing season minus that
occurring after soil saturation or irrigation, when the additional water is lost by deep percolation or by run-off.
Water is needed even before sowing and for land preparation; this definition overlooks this aspect. Also, rainfall
prior to harvesting can be ineffective even if the soil is unsaturated. The definition cannot be applied for rice
either where rainfall, after the soil is saturated, can also be effective.

Hershfield (1964) defined effective rainfall as that part of the total rainfall during the growing season which is
available to meet the consumptive water requirements of a crop. This is a narrow definition in that water is
required to meet not only consumptive but also non-consumptive needs such as land preparation, puddling and
leaching of salts.

According to the Soil Conservation Service of U.S.D.A. (1967), effective rainfall is that which is received during
the growing period of a crop and is available to meet consumptive water requirements. It does not include surface
run-off or deep percolation losses. This definition is similar to that of Hershfield above and suffers from the same
limitations.

Miller and Thompson (1970) defined effective precipitation as the ratio of precipitation to evaporation at a given
place. This definition is confusing as actually it refers to effectiveness of precipitation and not to effective
precipitation. The two terms 'effective rainfall' and 'effectiveness of rainfall' are not synonyms but signify two
distinct things. The term effectiveness denotes degree of utility or efficiency of the rainfall with respect to the
aridity of the place. Effective rainfall refers to the useful fraction of the total rainfall received. Thornthwaite
(193l) has discussed the concept of precipitation effectiveness at length, giving formulae for classifying world
climates. A given amount of rainfall will have varying degrees of effectiveness under different conditions of
aridity or even when it is received at different stages of crop growth.

While working out agronomic practices for seasonal field crops, De and Ray (1973) used a moisture index based
on two factors, namely, annual rainfall and potential evapotranspiration. This is an erroneous approach since
instead of annual rainfall, effective seasonal or effective growing season rainfall should have been considered.
It is evident that the above concepts are not identical in interpretation and have serious limitations from the point
of view of crop production.

The points in concepts of effective rainfall needing critical attention can be listed as follows:
what period should be taken into consideration? Should it be restricted to the growing season or include
the pre-sowing period, when tillage operations or moisture conservation practices commence?
which needs should be met by effective rainfall; consumptive needs only or also those of leaching, land
preparation and puddling?
assuming the soil is unsaturated and the rains which fall cause flower shedding and damage to a crop,
should they be considered as effective?
should the amount be usable in general by any type of vegetation or by a specific crop species?
when several crops of different growth habits are being cultivated simultaneously, how should rainfall
received under rainfed and irrigated conditions be accounted for? can the concept be applied to rice
which requires ample water supply? should values be the same for different purposes such as project
design and project operation?
how should annual variation in the amount of rainfall be accounted for?

4. Definition of effective rainfall

It would be useful to clarify the term water requirements of a crop before effective rainfall is fully defined. By the
tern water requirement of a crop is meant the amount of water needed to raise it and this includes water to meet
both consumptive and special needs, such as land preparation, land submergence, leaching and so on. In view of
this current concept, it follows that from the production point of view, the annual or seasonal effective rainfall as
far as the water requirement of crops is concerned, should be interpreted as that portion of total annual or

6
seasonal rainfall which is useful directly and/or indirectly for crop production at the site where it falls but without
pumping. It therefore includes water intercepted by living or dry vegetation (B), that lost by evaporation from the
soil surface (C3), the precipitation lost by evapotranspiration during growth (C2.1.2), that fraction which
contributes to leaching, percolation (C2.2.1) or facilitates other cultural operations either before or after sowing
without any harm to yield and quality of the principal crops.

Effective Rainfall, (ER) = B + C2.1.2 + C2.2.1 + C3. Consequently ineffective rainfall is that portion which is
lost by surface run-off (C1), unnecessary deep percolation losses (C2.2.2), the moisture remaining in the soil after
the harvest of the crop (C2.1.3) and which is not useful for next season's crop.

The effect of rainfall in lowering temperature and increasing humidity and its effect by advection on dry areas is
not included.

The period here is not just the growing season but the period from the start of the first tillage operation until the
harvest. It avoids the term soil saturation and therefore may also be applied to rice cultivation. As long as the rain
water is useful in some aspect of crop production, it is a part of the effective rainfall.

It is not possible to consider each individual crop. Those crops which occupy the largest proportion of land
during the season may be taken as reference to express the effective rainfall. The smaller the unit of land area, the
greater the accuracy in the value of effective rainfall.

The destructive aspect of rainfall has also been accounted for in the definition by the clause 'without any harmful
effect on yield and quality'. If rain causes lodging or any other type of damage, it must not be regarded as
effective even if the soil is dry. The rainfall has to be 'useful' in some way or another and should not cause the
slightest damage to crop production.

This concept of effective rainfall is suggested for use in planning and operation of irrigation projects. It can also
be used by economists in estimating agricultural production from meteorological data.

The irrigation water supply in a given year should be planned to complement rainfall. Since annual rainfall varies
from year to year, an irrigation project cannot be planned on one year's data; records are needed over a long
period to calculate effective rainfall on the basis of probability of occurrence.

It is emphasized that the values of effective rainfall will vary for different purposes, such as project planning and
project operations, dry fanning, drainage designs, and for special conditions such as a shallow water-table and
salinity. The concept that effective rainfall is that which is useful or usable in any phase of crop production
should be borne clearly in mind.

5. Effectiveness of rainfall
The effectiveness of precipitation or rainfall efficiency has been defined as the extent of its utility in a given
region. How good is a given amount of rainfall in terms of production? A rainfall of 100 mm in a temperate zone
is much more useful and productive for agriculture than in a tropical arid region. The effectiveness of rainfall can
be evaluated in three ways:
in relation to other meteorological variables;
as an input, in terms of meeting crop water needs
as an output in terms of production per unit of water and/or financial returns.
In assessing the effectiveness of rainfall, relationships between the climate and vegetation have been worked out
in terms of moisture indices.

Transeau (1905) used a quotient of annual rainfall divided by computed free water evaporation to give the
moisture index.

Lang (1920) introduced a factor in which rainfall was divided by temperature.

7
De Martonne (1926) introduced the term aridity index (A) which was equal to precipitation (P in cm) divided by
temperature (t) in degrees centigrade, or A - P/10 (t + 10),

Meyer (1926) put forth that the effective soil moisture was proportional to the precipitation (mm) divided by
saturation deficit (mm of mercury) of the air.

Thornthwaite (1931) introduced the concept of the precipitation effectiveness index (PE) which is computed from
the monthly values of precipitation and evaporation. The evaporation is expressed in terms of temperature.

where, P = monthly precipitation in inches;

T = temperature in F;
and n = months = 12

On these values climatic regions were classified as follows:

PE Index Climate
More than 128 Wet
64 - 127 Humid
32 - 63 Sub-humid
16 - 31 Semi-arid
Less than 16 Arid

In 1948, Thornthwaite modified the concept by changing the evaporation parameter to potential
evapotranspiration which was derived from temperature. The potential evapotranspiration (PET) was defined as
the amount of water lost by a field, completely covered with green vegetation in an active stage of growth under
non-limiting moisture supply.
PET -= 1.6 (10 t/I)a
PET = monthly potential evapotranspiration in cm;
t = mean monthly temperature in C;

I = annual heat index, which is

i = monthly heat index, which is (t/5)1.514

a = co-efficient which varies with the heat index and is given by
a = 0,000000675 I - 0.0000771 I + 0.01792 I + 0.49239
The values are then corrected for day length and number of days in a month. The use of tables and charts
simplifies complicated calculations. This concept was used in a water budget method for working out daily soil
moisture balance for planning irrigation practices.

It can be seen that the approach does not meet the requirements from an agricultural production point of view.
Rainfall should satisfy not only the consumptive needs of crops but also leaching, land preparation needs,
percolation needs (as in rice) etc. It is therefore more appropriate and precise to use the total water needs of the
crop in computing effectiveness of rainfall, instead of evaporation or potential evapotranspiration values. In
simple words, effectiveness of precipitation (needs satisfied expressed in %) = [(available rain water) / (needed
water for potential production)] X 100

For example, if the values of monthly rainfall, stored rainfall, PET and total water needs are 100, 60, 120 and 180
mm respectively, the effectiveness of precipitation will be (60/180 x 100) = 33% and not (60/120 x 100) = 50%
Different amounts of effective rainfall influence their effectiveness when expressed from meteorological and
agronomic points of view as is shown below.

8
Parameters Cases
Parameters 1 2 3 4 5 6
Monthly rainfall (A) 0 10 10 10 10 10
Stored/effective
rainfall (B) 0 1 3 6 8 10
Potential ET (C) 6 6 6 6 6 6
Water need (D) 8 8 8 8 8 8
Effective rainfall % (B/A) 0 10 30 60 80 100
Effectiveness of rainfall
(B/C) meteorologically % 0 16 50 100 Excess Excess
(B/D) agronomically % 0 12 37 75 100 Excess

Effectiveness of rainfall can also be assessed in terns of monetary returns. This is a rather complicated analysis.
The returns depend upon the type of production, use of other inputs such as fertilizers, plant protection measures,
soil fertility, weather parameters other than rainfall, infra-structure developed in the area, farm management
efficiency and market prices. Ml these factors are again variable with time and technology applied and therefore
assessing effectiveness of rainfall in terms of financial returns in a given situation requires careful analysis of all
factors involved.

Values of effectiveness of rainfall vary from plus to minus according to its timing with respect to crop growth
stage. Untimely rains can directly damage field crops in several ways:
by delaying sowing, interculturing, threshing or drying operations in the field;
by causing flower drop and fruit drop in certain cultivated species;
by causing lodging of plants;
by lowering the quality of the produce.
An example is given in Table 1.

Table 1: INFLUENCE OF RAINFALL ON WHEAT IN INDIA AT DIFFERENT STAGES OF

GROWTH
Time of shower from sowing Crop stage Yield (Quintals/ha)
Absolute Relative
No rain - 8 100
3 weeks Crown root formation 14 175
6 weeks Tillering 12 150
11 weeks Flowering 10 125
15 weeks Grain formation 9 112

The effectiveness of rainfall varies with different species, and therefore for comparison among different crops, it
may be convenient here to express production in terms of financial returns per unit depth of rainfall.

Crop species is thus a factor of paramount importance in assessing the effectiveness of rainfall. This evaluation
needs to be done cautiously. Since the cropping patterns and varieties vary with time, the effectiveness of rainfall
will also vary from time to time.

6. Factors influencing effective rainfall

Several factors influence the proportion of effective rainfall in the total received and these may act singly or
collectively and interact with each other. Any factor which affects infiltration, run-off or evapotranspiration
affects the value of effective rainfall (Table 2).

Rainfall Characteristics

A soil has a definite and limited water intake rate and moisture holding capacity. Hence greater quantities as well
as Intensities of rainfall normally reduce the effective fraction, increasing run-off and lessening infiltration.
Similarly, uneven distribution decreases the extent of effective rainfall while an even spread enhances it. A well

9
distributed rainfall in frequent light showers is more conducive to crop growth than heavy downpours. For
example, annual rainfall is lower than 100 mm in the Middle Eastern desert countries, so it may all become
effective. In countries like India and Pakistan, intensity, frequency and amount are high daring July and August
and hence the effective fraction is very low. From November to April, however, most of the rainfall is effective in
these countries due to its low intensity, frequency and amount.

Table 2: FACTORS INFLUENCING EFFECTIVE RAINFALL THROUGH INFILTRATION,

SURFACE RUN-OFF AND EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
Factor Relevant characteristics
Rainfall Amount, intensity, frequency, distribution over area as well as time;
Other meteorological Temperature, radiation, relative humidity, wind velocity;
parameters
Land Topography, slope, type of use;
Soil Depth, texture, structure, bulk density, salt and organic matter content;
Soil water Head, suspended matter, turbidity due to clay or colloids, viscosity, temperature, nature
of dissolved salts (Na+, N03-);
Groundwater Depth from surface, quality;
Management Type of tillage, degree of levelling, type of layout (bunding, terracing, ridging), use of
soil conditioners;
Channel Size, slope, shape, roughness and back water effect;
Crops Nature of crops, depth of root system, degree of ground cover, stage of growth, crop
rotations,

Other Meteorological Parameters

Potential evapotranspiration is primarily governed by evaporative demand under conditions of abundant water
supply. An approximation of evaporative demand can be obtained front the integrated effect of four parameters:
temperature, radiation, wind velocity and humidity. Increase in the first three and decrease in the fourth
parameter enhance evaporation. Such conditions encourage greater deficits of moisture in the soil and therefore
the proportion of effective rainfall in the total increases. The mean monthly values of temperature, radiation,
wind velocity and humidity fluctuate less from year to year than total rainfall. Today in some countries, weekly
or fortnightly maps of potential evapotranspiration are available which can be used in assessing effective rainfall.

Land Characteristics

The time interval between receipt of rain water and its recessation by soakage is known as 'opportunity time'.
Water stays longer on flat and levelled land and thus has a longer opportunity time than on sloping land where
there is a rapid run-off. Sloping, rolling and undulating lands thus influence opportunity time of rain water for
uniform infiltration and consequently the effective rainfall fraction. The use to which land is put in the
surrounding area - agriculture, road and building construction, play-grounds - also affects the amount of effective
rainfall.

Soil Characteristics

Soil is an important medium between water and plants, acting as a reservoir for the moisture supply to crops.
Hence its properties of absorption, retention, release and movement of water influence the degree of effective
rainfall.

Intake and water movement in soil are expressed in terms of infiltration rate and permeability. For maximum
absorption of rain and reduction of surface run-off, the values of these properties should be as high as possible.
Permeability depends upon the texture, structure and compactness or bulk density of the soil. The higher the bulk
density, the lower the permeability.

The fraction of effective rainfall increases with increased water holding capacity in a soil. The amount of water
held and retained by a soil depends upon its depth, texture, structure and organic matter content; the finer the
texture, the greater the storage capacity. The amount of water available to plants varies considerably in different

10
soils. It may be about 10 mm per metre depth in sandy soils to about 100 mm in clayey soils. The greater the soil
depth, the higher the proportion of effective rainfall in the total.

Initial moisture status in a soil governs the extent of effective rainfall considerably. When a shower falls just after
irrigation, it becomes surplus water and is lost through deep percolation or run-off, but if the soil is dry it is
recharged with moisture, resulting in a saving in irrigation water. The proportion of effective rainfall is lower in
irrigated than in unirrigated areas where there is often a greater deficit of moisture in the soil.

Soil Water Characteristics

On striking the soil surface, the rain water often becomes run-off water and changes its physical and chemical
properties during its flow. Hater characteristics influencing effective rainfall are the head or depth of water
received directly or indirectly, turbidity, viscosity, temperature, and nature of the salts, such as sodium, nitrates,
etcetera, dissolved in it. These properties influence infiltration and through this the effective rainfall quantum.

Groundwater Characteristics

The amount of effective rainfall is greater when the water table is deep than when it is shallow. Water moves
upwards in the soil by capillarity, thus reducing the deficit of moisture and hence the amount of effective rainfall.
The levels of water tables normally fluctuate. Before the onset of rain, the water table may be quite deep; during
the rainy season, it may rise to the surface. There are horizontal flows in the sub-soil to or from adjoining regions.
Because of these variations, the contribution of groundwater to the needs of the crop is variable and the
proportion of effective rainfall varies inversely with this contribution.

If the groundwater is saline, it can be harmful to crop plants especially when it is near the soil surface. The
proportion of effective rainfall may then increase since salts are diluted.

Management Practices

Any management practice which influences run-off, infiltration, permeability or evapotranspiration also
influences the degree of effective rainfall. Bunding, terracing, ploughing, ridging and mulching reduce run-off
and increase effective rainfall; so do well-planned irrigation schedules, while arbitrary or random practices may
reduce it.

Drainage Channel Characteristics

Size, shape, slope and roughness of a channel influence the speed of surface run-off to streams and consequently
the time allowed for infiltration and also for direct evaporation at the site of rainfall. Hence these factors are also
important in influencing effective rainfall.

Crop Characteristics

Crops with high water consumption create greater deficits of moisture in the soil; therefore effective rainfall is
directly proportional to the rate of water uptake by the plant. Crop characteristics influencing the rate of water
uptake are the degree of ground cover, rooting depth and stage of growth. Evapotranspiration is generally high
during vegetative growth and the flowering period and then may decline toward maturity. Soil moisture stored in
deeper layers can be tapped only when roots penetrate to these depths. Deep-rooted crops therefore increase the
proportion of effective rainfall in a given area; hence the nature of the crop is an important factor in determining
its extent. Rainfall just before harvesting is for most crops a waste or a nuisance and may need to be considered
as ineffective. Rainfall which reduces the yield (such as downpours which often cause lodging in cereals when
the latter are at the grain formation stage) must be regarded as ineffective, and similarly, rains which result in
deterioration or actual destruction of a crop. The crop is an important factor in interpreting the basic data. Hence
the seasonal needs of major crops in a given area should be taken into account when the extent of effective
rainfall is assessed.

11
Chapter II. Measurement of effective rainfall

1. Components of effective rainfall and their measurement

2. Empirical methods of determining effective rainfall
3. Determining effective rainfall from formula
4. Evaluation of methods

1. Components of effective rainfall and their measurement

The evaluation of effective rainfall involves measuring rainfall and/or irrigation, losses toy surface run-off,
percolation losses beyond the root zone and the soil moisture uptake by the crop for evapotranspiration.
Information is needed on rooting depth of crop plants. Components are measured directly or indirectly and either
individually or in an integrated way.

1.1 Rainfall and Irrigation

Total rainfall can be measured directly with rain gauges. Several types of recording and non-recording gauges are
available. The instruments and their use have been described by WMO (1970). Irrigation applications can be
measured with various types of notches, weirs, Parshall flumes, out-throat flumes and with direct recording water
meters. The methods have been compiled and described by Dastane (1972),

1.2 Surface Run-off

With efficient farm water management, surface run-off should be kept to a minimum. Only excess water should
be removed by deep percolation and sub-surface drainage or by surface drainage. For a given field, run-off can be
assessed with measuring flumes and water stage recorders or can be computed with formulae established for
different conditions, as given in the Handbook on Hydrology by Chow (1964), and USDA Field Manual for
Research in Agricultural Hydrology (1968).

1.3 Rooting Depth

For determining the water losses due to deep percolation and water uptake by a crop, the depth of rooting must
first be known. The depth of root system varies from crop to crop and also from time to time during growth. The
root system is influenced by several factors; too much wetness results in development of a shallow root system
while drier soil water regimes encourage a deep one; soil texture and structure influence the depth of the root
system to a great extent. Studies on rooting depths should, therefore, be made under existing and recommended
cultural and irrigation practices on representative soils. The two most common methods of measuring the rooting
depth are by excavation method and by studying soil moisture extraction patterns.

With the excavation method the roots are carefully dug from the soil, then cleaned, dried and weighed. The
length and distribution in different layers is noted. The process is simple but laborious and careful handling is
needed. But what is the effective root depth; is it the longest root or the mean root length? As a first
approximation, the soil depth in which 90 percent (by weight) of the roots lie, can be taken as the effective root
zone for irrigation purposes. However, several investigators have pointed out that the mass of roots and their
activity do not have a simple linear relationship. There are generally more roots in the surface layer. Also,
sometimes water extraction can be greater from the sub-soil than the surface soil. Water is extracted from a layer
where it is readily available, provided there is a certain minimum root permeation in that layer. Soil moisture
depletion can be determined by periodical soil sampling or by means of devices such as gypsum blocks or
neutron probes. For irrigation purposes, the soil depth over which 80 percent of the total water intake takes place
can toe regarded as the effective root zone of a crop. Since the root system is dynamic and continues to extend up
to the flowering time, such studies are necessary at monthly or fortnightly intervals.

12
1.4 Deep Percolation Losses
Deep percolation losses can toe determined directly by using lysimeters or indirectly by computation of soil
characteristics including soil water content, soil moisture tension and soil permeability. With the direct method, a
representative and undisturbed soil column is enclosed in a large container or a tank fitted with an outlet at the
bottom from which excess water can be drained into a measuring cylinder; this is the so-called drainage
lysimeter. The lysimeter needs to be surrounded by a large cropped area. The method has been widely used since
all the components of water gains and water losses can be measured from which a water balance can be obtained.
For details, reference is made to comprehensive studies by Anonymous (1967), Harrold (1968), Hillel et al
(1969), Rose et al (1966), and McGuinness and Bordne (1972).

For the indirect method, the moisture holding capacity of the soil is calculated layer by layer from the field
capacity, wilting point, bulk density, soil depth and rooting depth. Any excess over the water holding capacity of
the soil will normally be a deep percolation loss. The values of the first four parameters can be determined using
established methodologies (Dastane, 1972).

With a dry subsoil deep percolation losses take place under saturated soil conditions but will continue even after
field capacity has been reached. In the Great Plains of the U.S.A., the soil water storage efficiency is sometimes
lower than 20 percent on fallow lands left for water harvesting. Accurate measurement of the deep percolation
component under both saturated and unsaturated soil conditions is rather laborious. Rooting depth and root
concentration must be known. A method has been described by Hillel et al (1972).

1.5 Evapotranspiration
The level of evapotranspiration is controlled mainly by three factors, namely, plant characteristics, extent of
ground cover and stage of growth; water availability in the soil; and meteorological parameters or the evaporative
demand. Maximum or potential evapotranspiration (ETp) occurs when the soil water is non-limiting and the crop
is in an active stage of growth with full ground cover; the level of ETp for a given plant species is then mainly
governed by the meteorological conditions.

Actual evapotranspiration (ETa), which is also sometimes called consumptive water use, is the actual quantity of
water lost during crop growth by evaporation from land surface and by transpiration by plants.
The ETa may reach ETp level if conditions permit. It is more difficult to estimate ETa than ETp since several
factors play interacting roles. The ETa can be determined directly by periodic soil sampling and oven-drying;
changes in soil water by the growing crop are followed and layerwise depletions are studied in the effective root
zone of the crop. It is a very laborious method and is subject to sampling errors.

The ETp can be computed from the meteorological parameters such as temperature, radiation, wind velocity,
humidity. Several different formulae to compute ETp are available. Some formulae in computing ETp and also
ETa are listed in Table 3 along with the parameters considered. None of the formulae suits all situations perfectly.
Some improved methods need elaborate sets of meteorological data which are not always available. Prohibitive
costs of installation and operation of equipment, time involved in processing the data and the variety of crops
grown make it impossible to use and apply these formulae in day to day agricultural operations.

A simple method such as measurement of open pan evaporation has been proposed since it represents the effect
of all meteorological elements in an integrated way. Since only one parameter is to be measured, it is relatively
easy to use this technique in the field. The relationship between open pan evaporation and ETp however, is
intricate. Local coefficients relating pan evaporation to ETp should preferably be established locally. The value
of potential evapotranspiration where there is a non-limiting water supply varies from 0.4 to 0.8 times the U.S,
Class A Open Pan Evaporimeter under different conditions of pan specifications and its method of installation. It
offers a good approximation for practical purposes. For details, refer to FAO Irrigation and Drainage paper no. 24
(1974).

13
Table 3: FORMULAE TO PREDICT CROP EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
Variables considered (+)
Formula by Tem Air Dry- Dryli Sunshine Ra Wind Eva Cro Cro Soil Correc Preci Bar Entity
pera hum wet ght hours/clou diat veloc pori p p fact tion pitati ogr measured
ture idity bulb hours d cover ion ity mete dat fact or factor on aph
temp r a or
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Rohwer, + + + + + ET crop
1931, USA
Blaney- + + + + ET crop
Morin,
1942, USA
Lowry- + + ET of valley,
Johnson, entire
1942, USA growing
season
Thornthwait + + + ET crop,
e, 1943, adequate
USA
Penman, + + + + + + + Eo or ET
1948, UK crop
Blaney- + + + Cu crop
Criddle,
1950, USA
Halstead, + + + + ET crop
1951, USA
Haude, + + + + ET crop
1952,
Germany
Turo, 1954, + + + + + + ET crop
France
Turo- + + Eo or ET
Langbein, crop,
1954,
France annual river
basin
Halkais. + + CU crop
1955, USA
Thornthwait + + + + + ET crop and
e-Mather, soil
1955
USA water balance
van Bavel, + + + + + ET crop
1956, USA
Hargreaves, + + + + Eo or ET
1956, USA crop
Ivanov, + + ET crop
1957, USSR under
adequate
moisture
Makkink, + + ET grass
1957,
Holland
Rijtoma, + + + + + + + ET crop
1957.

14
Holland
McIlroy, + + + + + + + + ET crop
1961,
Australia
Olivier, + + + + + + + Basic water
1961. UK needs for
crop/land unit
Jensen- + + + + + + ET crop
Haise, 1963,
USA
Christianson + + + + + + Eo
, 1966, USA
Dastane, + ET crop
1967, India
Linacro, + + + + + + + ET crop
1967,
Australia
ET = Evapotranspiration
CU = Consumptive use of water
Eo = Evaporation from U.S. Class A avaporimeter placed in a grass field.
In deriving relationship between ETa and soil water content, four main approaches can be distinguished, as
shown in Fig 2:

Fig 2: RELATION BETWEEN ACTUAL TO POTENTIAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION AND SOIL

MOISTURE CONTENT

15
 1 a constant ET and sudden reduction at wilting point (WP);
2 a decreasing linear rate of ET with decrease in soil water content;
3 a linear cum exponential decreasing rate of ET with decrease in soil water content;
4 an exponential decreasing rate of ET with decrease in soil water content.
Each of the four curves given in Fig 2 is possible under a given situation. Considerable literature has accumulated
on the subject during the last two decades. Reference is made to Slatyer and McIlroy (1961), Linacre (1963),
Konstantinov (1963), Hagan et al (1967) and Gangopadhyaya et al (1968),

2. Empirical methods of determining effective rainfall

2.1 Soil Moisture Changes

2.2 Daily Soil Moisture Balance Method
2.3 Integrating Gauge
2.4 The Ramdas Method
2.5 Lysimeters
2.6 Drum Technique for Rice

There are several methods of assessing effective rainfall. Each method has certain merits and limitations.

2.1 Soil Moisture Changes

Water in the root zone may be measured by sampling and oven-drying the soil before and after every shower of
rain. The increase in soil moisture, plus evapotranspiration loss (ETa) from the time the rain starts until the soil is
sampled, is the amount of effective rainfall. After heavy rainfall evapotranspiration can be assumed to be at the
potential rate during the short period from cessation of rainfall until the sampling time. This can be taken as 0.4 to
0.8 times the evaporation value of the Class A Pan as is given in FAO Irrigation and Drainage paper No. 24
(1974), or
ER = M2 - M1 + kp Eo

ER = effective rainfall

Eo = U.S. Class A Open Pan evaporation value M1 and

M2 = moisture status in the effective root zone before and after rain, respectively

kp = pan coefficient
The method takes into account the soil and the crop characteristics. The determination is simple and accurate but
it may involve errors due to soil variation; the sampling errors may range from 5 to 40 percent. The method is
also laborious and time consuming. The use of neutron probes reduces the drudgery of periodic soil sampling, but
these are costly methods for routine purposes and also subject to sampling errors.

2.2 Daily Soil Moisture Balance Method

A daily soil water balance is rather like a bank account. Rainfall and irrigation are on the credit side, while soil
moisture depletion is on the debit side. Precise data on the maximum water holding capacity (field capacity) is
necessary for this method. Any amount in excess of this capacity is a surplus and will be a deep percolation loss
or run-off. When the balance reaches nil, no more withdrawal is possible and hence further depletion is treated as
water deficiency. Rainfall and irrigation are directly measured while the evapotranspiration is computed from any
of several available formulae.

In irrigated agriculture, the soil water content is never allowed to fall below a certain value where water becomes
a limiting factor in crop production. When water is depleted to the lower limit of readily available moisture,
irrigation is applied. Hence, computations may be based on potential evapotranspiration (ETp).

16
In rainfed or partially irrigated areas, where the soil moisture is depleted below the lower limit of readily
available moisture, the computations are to be based on actual evapotranspiration. ETa can be estimated by using
the Thornthwaite and Mather method (l955), that of Baier and Robertson (1966), or the relationships between
ETa and ETp under decreasing soil water content as given by Tanner (1967).

A sample calculation is given below. The water storage capacity of the soil has been assumed to be 100 mm;
irrigation is applied at 50 percent of total depletion. All values are in mm. Of total rainfall of 625 mm, only 279
mm is effective in this case, which amounts to about 45 percent.

Date Rainfall ET Storage change in soil Storage balance in soil Irrigation Water surplus
p (Drainage)
1 100 6 94 94 - 0
2 25 8 17 100 - 11
3 0 9 -9 91 - 0
4 0 9 -9 82 - 0
5 0 8 -8 74 - 0
6 0 9 -9 65 - 0
7 100 5 95 100 60
8 100 4 96 100 - 96
9 50 8 42 100 - 42
10 0 10 -10 90 - 0
11 0 11 -11 79 - 0
12 0 11 -11 68 0
13 0 12 -12 56 - 0
14 0 12 -12 44 50 0
15 0 11 -11 63 0
16 0 11 -11 72 - 0
17 0 10 -10 62 0
18 0 11 -11 51 - 0
19 0 10 -10 41 50 0
20 0 10 -10 81 - 0
... Sample calculation continued
Date Rainfall ET Storage change in soil Storage balance in soil Irrigation Water surplus
p (Drainage)
21 0 11 -11 70 - 0
22 0 12 -12 58 - 0
23 0 12 -12 46 - 0
24 50 8 42 - 88 0
25 100 6 94 100 - 82
26 100 5 59 100 95
27 0 10 -10 90 - 0
28 0 10 -10 80 - 0
29 0 10 -10 70 - 0
30 0 10 -10 60 - 0
Total 625 279 188 386

2.3 Integrating Gauge

The method is shown in Fig 3. It consists of a rainfall receiver (R) which is connected to a water reservoir (WR),
and which in turn is connected to an evaporating surface (E) representing a crop. The reservoir is provided with
an overflow outlet at the top of the side wall (D). The capacity of the reservoir is adjusted to the maximum water
holding capacity of the soil in question. The rain water above this maximum capacity flows out and is measured
as ineffective rainfall. The evaporating surface loses moisture continuously, creating a fall in the water level in
the reservoir, which is graduated so that the moisture balance can be read directly at any time.

17
The device is simple, practical and useful and can easily be set up in the field. The evaporating surface represents
the crop and therefore its size and the porosity of the material are important. The method is described by Stanhill
(1958).

Fig 3: INTEGRATING GAUGE FOR MEASURING EFFECTIVE RAINFALL

2.4 The Ramdas Method

Ramdas (1960) suggested a direct field method using a small portable device containing soil of the field, so
eliminating the necessity of sampling.

Fig 4: RAMDAS APPARATUS FOR MEASURING EFFECTIVE RAINFALL

The apparatus, as shown in Fig 4, consists of a cylinder (CD) of about 30 cm in diameter, with a perforated base
(BO) and a funnel (F) leading into a receiver bottle (H). All these parts are enclosed in an outer cylinder (MN).
The cylinder (CD) is filled with a representative soil with the same density as that of the field. The height is equal

18
to the depth of the effective root zone of the crop. The apparatus is installed in the field crop where the effective
rainfall is to be measured. The crop in the container is irrigated along with the field crop. Excess rain or irrigation
water drains in the receiver bottle H and is measured from time to time. The total rainfall minus the ineffective
rainfall gives the value of effective rainfall. It is assumed that there is no surface run-off. Cylinders of different
lengths are used consistent with the rooting depth of the different crops. With a suitable number of replications,
the method is very useful. It is simple and practical, and furnishes direct readings.

2.5 Lysimeters
Lysimetry is a method which provides complete information on all the components of water balance. Lysimeters
can be used not only for measuring evapotranspiration but also for checking empirical formulae for computing
ET. The method is similar to the Ramdas method, but is more elaborate, refined and gives a higher accuracy.

A lysimeter is a large container with soil in which crops are grown; water losses and gains can be measured. The
container is fitted with suitable inlets for irrigation and outlets for drainage. The lysimeters are buried in the field
and are surrounded by the same crop as is grown inside. The size of lysimeter varies from small oil drums
(Gilbert and van Bavel, 1954) to large size and deep lysimeters (Harrold and Dreilbelbis, 1958, l967 Pruitt and
Angus, 1960, McIlroy and Angus, 1963). They can be either the non-weighing or weighing type.

In non-weighing lysimeters, changes in water balance are measured volumetrically weekly or biweekly. No
accurate daily estimates can be obtained. A simple design is shown in Pig 5. Irrigation water is applied to the
lysimeter, A layer of pebbles is placed at the bottom to facilitate easy drainage. Excess water is collected from
below at a suitable distance. A number of crops can be grown in a concentric pattern around a central drainage
chamber. A simple lysimeter can be built at low cost from a petrol drum. A tube with a small diameter is placed
through the soil to the layer of pebbles. Excess water is removed at frequent intervals by using a thin metal tube
open at the bottom which is connected to a receiver bottle in which suction can be applied using a reversed
handpump. This is shown in Pig 6.

Weighing lysimeters can provide precise information on soil moisture changes for daily or even hourly periods.
The lysimeter is placed inside another tank which is in contact with the surrounding soil. The inside container is
free for weighing by scales. Also, the lysimeter tank can be floated in water; a suitable heavy liquid (ZnCl2) is
used whereby the change in liquid displacement is a measure for the water gain or loss to or from the lysimeter
tank. Apart from the high cost, the major problems with lysimeters are the restricted root growth, the disturbed
soil structure in the lysimeter causing changes in water movement and possibly the tank temperature regime,
resulting in condensation of water on the walls of the container. Harrold and Dreilbelbis (1967) estimated that
errors due to dew formation were in the order of 250 mm per annum. Other limitations include the 'bouquet
effect' whereby the canopy of the plants grown in the lysimeter is above and extends over the surrounding crop,
resulting in a higher evapotranspiration rate. In spite of these limitations, it is the best technique for precise
studies on evapotranspiration.

Fig 5: DRAINAGE LYSIMETER

19
Fig 6: SUCTION TYPE DRAINAGE LYSIMETER

2.6 Drum Technique for Rice

Dastane et al (1966) used a container or drum technique for assessing evapotranspiration, percolation, water
requirements and also ineffective rainfall of a rice crop, (Fig 7). Three containers (drums) A, B, and C, of about
40 gallons capacity, 50 cm in diameter and 125 cm high) are embedded in a rice field leaving about a quarter of
their height above ground level. The bottoms of containers B and C have been removed. To container C, outlet
pipes are fitted at 0,5 cm intervals or a sliding strip is fitted for precise water control.

Fig 7: CONTAINER TECHNIQUE FOR DETERMINATION OF EFFECTIVE RAINFALL IN RICE

20
The outlet pipes can he connected to a water receiver. The containers are filled with soil and rice is grown inside,
along with the adjoining field crop. Water levels in the drums are maintained at the same level as outside. The
difference in the values on two successive days caused by the daily loss of water in container A, represents
evapotranspiration, while in container B, it indicates daily total needs of water. The daily difference between
water levels in containers A and B is percolation loss.

Container C is intended to assess ineffective rainfall. The maximum depth of submergence is governed by the
height of the rice crop and height of the field bunds, whichever is less. Any rainfall which submerges the crop
beyond a certain critical height or which exceeds the height of the bunds is ineffective. As the height of the crop
increases, the outlets are plugged or the sliding strip is pushed progressively upwards till the bund height
becomes the limiting factor.

The water level is set at a selected height in container C. This height can be adjusted with increase in growth of
plants. Evapotranspiration and percolation continue and create a deficit every day. When rain falls, it first makes
up this deficit. When it becomes excessive, the surplus flows out through the outlet pipes. This is the ineffective
rainfall. The difference between water levels in containers B and C is ineffective rainfall. If there are no rains, the
water level in container C will gradually reach the soil surface and the crop will be irrigated according to routine
practice. The technique is simple, inexpensive, easy and practicable. A typical example is given below using a
daily balance sheet.

Date Irrigation Daily rain Drum Evapotranspiration ETA plus Percolation Ineffective
fall A B C ETA percolation rainfall
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Previous 0 0 75 75 75 0 0 0 0
day
1 0 20 90 80 75 5 15 10 5
2 0 40 107 97 75 8 18 10 22
3 0 100 170 160 75 5 15 10 85
4 0 15 85 75 75 5 15 10 0
5 0 0 67 75 57 8 18 10 0
6 0 0 48 38 38 9 19 10 0
7 0 20 51 41 41 7 17 10 0
8 0 60 95 85 75 6 16 10
9 0 70 140 130 75 5 15 10 55
10 0 0 67 57 57 8 18 10 0
11 0 0 49 39 39 8 18 10 0
12 0 0 32 22 22 7 17 10 0
13 0 0 17 7 7 5 15 10 0
14 75 0 75 65 65 7 17 10 0
15 0 30 90 80 75 5 15 10 5
Total 75 355 - - - 98 248 150 182
Permissible water depth = 75 mm
Column 2: from water meter reading
Column 3: from rain gauge records
Columns 4 to be adjusted daily to column 6 reading and 5: and to be observed next day
Column 6: reading from daily observations
Column 7: previous day's column 6 plus column 3 minus column 4
Column 8: previous day's column 6 plus column 3 minus column 5
Column 9: column 8 minus column 7
Column 10: column 5 minus column 6

21
3. Determining effective rainfall from formulae

3.1 Renfro Equation

3.2 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Method
3.3 Potential Evapotranspiration/Precipitation Ratio Method (India)
3.4 USDA, SCS Method
3.5 Empirical Relationships

A number of empirically determined formulae can be used. They have been developed under a given set of
conditions which may be very different from those under which they are to be applied. Their use elsewhere
therefore remains doubtful.

3.1 Renfro Equation

Renfro, as quoted by Chow (1964), suggested the following equation for estimating effective rainfall:
ER = E Rg + A
ER = effective rainfall
Rg = growing season rainfall
A = average irrigation application
E = ratio of consumptive use of water (CU) to rainfall during the growing season (Table 4)
The E value implies degree of rain likely to be utilized in meeting consumptive water needs. The greater the E
value, the higher the value of effective rainfall. For example, if rainfall during the four month growing season is
400 mm, consumptive use of water is 700 mm, and average irrigation application is 100 mm, then the effective
rainfall is equal to 0.60 x 400 + 100 - 340 mm. The method is empirical and may not suit many situations.

Table 4: RATIO E FOR USE IN ESTIMATING EFFECTIVE RAINFALL IN RENFRO EQUATION

(Chow, 1964)
CU/Rg E CU/Rg E
0 0 2.4 0.72
0.2 0.10 2.6 0.75
0.4 0.19 2.8 0.77
0.6 0.27 3.0 0.80
0.8 0.35 3.5 0.84
1.0 0.41 4.0 0.88
1.2 0.47 4.5 0.91
1.4 0.52 5.0 0.93
1.6 0.57 6.0 0.96
1.8 0.61 7.0 0.98
2.0 0.65 9.0 0.99
2.2 0.69 / I

3.2 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Method

A method described by Stamm (1967), is recommended for arid and semi-arid regions and uses mean seasonal
precipitation of the five driest consecutive years. Percentage marks are given to increments of monthly rainfall
ranging from greater than 90 percent for the first 25 mm (1 in) or fraction thereof, to 0 percent for precipitation
increments above some 150 mm (6 in), as is shown in Table 5.

22
Table 5: EFFECTIVE PRECIPITATION BASED ON INCREMENTS OF MONTHLY RAINFALL (U.S.
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION METHOD)
Precipitation increment range Percent Effective precipitation accumulated - range
mm in mm in
0.0 - 25.4 0-1 90-100 22.9 - 25.4 0.90 - 1.00
25.4 - 50.8 1-2 85 - 95 44.4 - 49.5 1.75 - 1.95
50.8 - 76.2 2-3 75 - 90 63.5 - 72.4 2.50 - 2.85
76.2 - 101.6 3-4 50-80 76.2 - 92.7 3.00 - 3.65
101.6 - 127.0 4-5 30-60 83.8 - 107.9 3.30 - 4.25
127.0 - 152.4 5-6 10 - 40 86.4 - 118.1 3.40 - 4.65
Over 152.4 Over 6 0-10 86.4 - 120.6 3.40 - 4.75

For example, if monthly rainfall during the past five years in the month of July is 100; 125; 250; 225 and 175 cm,
the mean is 175 cm. From the table, the effective rainfall value for the month of July will be 120.6 mm. The
method does not take into account the type of soil, nature of the crop and frequency and distribution of rain. Nor
does it consider degree of aridity. The method is not considered satisfactory.

3.3 Potential Evapotranspiration/Precipitation Ratio Method (India)

This simple semi-empirical method is used in some projects in India. A ratio of potential evapotranspiration,
taken as 0.8 of the U.S. Class A pan data, to the total rainfall for a certain group of days during the growing
season is computed. The number of days in a group is based broadly on a soil type or soil moisture properties as
well as general weather conditions or evapotranspiration rates* The maximum number of days in a group is 15
during warm weather and 30 during cool weather for crops other than rice. The lower the water holding capacity
of the soil and/or the higher the evapotranspiration rate, the shorter the period in the group. This is shown in
Table 6.

Table 6: NUMBER OF DAYS IN A GROUP FOR DIFFERENT SOIL TYPES AND CLIMATIC
CONDITIONS
Crop Mean monthly ETp Soil texture and water storage capacity (mm/m).
(mm/day) Light (below 40) Medium (40 to Heavy (80 to 120) Very heavy (over
80) 120)
Rice 3 to 12 2 3 4 7
Other Over 6 4 7 10 15
crops Below 6 7 10 15 30

Rainless periods are deleted from the calculations. The ratios are expressed in a percentage for each period. So
the maximum value of the ratio cannot exceed 100. The monthly means are then computed and from these the
grand mean ratio is obtained for the entire growing season. Precise knowledge on soil properties or aridity is not
essential. There can be some under or over estimation depending upon the distribution of rainfall, but the error is
small. This method is good for broad planning purposes. It is rapid and inexpensive.

A sample calculation for the case of a heavy soil in a warm season is shown below. Of the total rainfall of 670
mm during the growing season, 80 percent is effective according to this method,

Period Potential evapotranspiration (mm) Rainfall (mm) Percentage ratio Mean ratio for the
month(%)
July 1-10 60 80 75
11-20 80 0 0 87
21 - 31 65 60 100
Aug. 1 - 10 60 150 40
11-20 65 100 65 60
21 - 31 60 80 75
Sept. 1 - 10 60 60 100
11 - 20 70 40 100 100
21 - 30 80 20 100

23
Oct. 1 - 10 80 0 0
11 - 20 85 0 0 75
21 - 31 60 80 75
Total 825 670 - 322
Mean ... ... ... 80%

In the case of rice, instead of the evapotranspiration value, total water loss, which is evapotranspiration plus
percolation losses, is used for computation.

Taking crop characteristics into account, necessary correction can be further applied for undesirable or
destructive kinds of rainfall such as those causing lodging, or flower or fruit drop.

3.4 USDA, SCS Method

The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Soil Conservation Service has developed a procedure for estimating
effective rainfall by processing long term climatic and soil moisture data. A comprehensive analysis was made by
perusing 50 years of precipitation records at 22 experimental stations representing different climatic and soil
conditions. The soil moisture balance was worked out for each day try adding effective rainfall or irrigation to the
previous day's balance and subtracting consumptive use. To avoid a high degree of complexity, neither the soil
intake rate nor rainfall intensities are considered in this method.

From total rainfall and monthly consumptive use, effective rainfall values were computed (Table 6). The values
were based on a 3 in or 75 mm net irrigation application, which is equal to the available storage capacity in the
root zone at the time of irrigation application. To convert this data to other net depths, factors were worked out
which are shown in Table 7. For example, a crop of wheat grown on sandy loam has a net depth of irrigation
application of 50 ram. With a mean consumptive use for the month of December of 100 mm and a mean rainfall
of 75 mm, the effective rainfall will be 52.7 x 0.93 = 49 mm.

The monthly effective rainfall cannot exceed the rate of consumptive use. If it does, the lower value of the two is
taken.

24
Table 7: MULTIPLICATION FACTORS TO RELATE MONTHLY EFFECTIVE RAINFALL VALUE
OBTAINED FROM TABLE 8 TO NET DEPTH OF IRRIGATION APPLICATION (d), IN mm
d mm factor d mm factor d mm factor
10.00 0.620 31.25 0.818 70.00 0.990
12.50 0.650 32.50 0.826 75.00 1.000
15.00 0.676 35.00 0.842 80.00 1.004
17.50 0.703 37.50 0.360 85.00 1.008
18.75 0.720 40.00 0.876 90.00 1.012
20.00 0.728 45.00 0.905 95.00 1.016
22.50 0.749 50.00 0.930 100.00 1.020
25.00 0.770 55.00 0.947 125.00 1.040
27.50 0.790 60.00 0.963 150.00 1.060
30.00 0.808 65.00 0.977 175.00 1.070
Table 8: AVERAGE MONTHLY EFFECTIVE RAINFALL AS RELATED TO MEAN MONTHLY
RAINFALL AND MEAN MONTHLY CONSUMPTIVE USE (USDA, SCS)
Monthly mean Mean monthly consumptive use mm
rainfall mm 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350
Mean monthly effective rainfall mm
12.5 7.5 8.0 8.7 9.0 9.2 10.0 10.5 11.2 11.7 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5
25.0 15.0 16.2 17.5 18.0 18.5 19.7 20.5 22.0 24.5 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
37.5 22.5 24.0 26.2 27.5 28.2 29.2 30.5 33.0 36.2 37.5 37.5 37.5 37.5 37.5
50.0 25 32.2 34.5 35.7 36.7 39.0 40.5 43.7 47.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0
62.5 at 41.7 39.7 42.5 44.5 46.0 48.5 50.5 53.7 57.5 62.5 62.5 62.5 62.5 62.5
75.0 46.2 49.7 52.7 55.0 57.5 60.2 63.7 67.5 73.7 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0
87.5 50.0 56.7 60.2 63.7 66.0 69.7 73.7 77.7 84.5 87.5 87.5 87.5 87.5
100.0 at 80.7 63.7 67.7 72.0 74.2 78.7 83.0 87.7 95.0 100 100 100 100
112.5 70.5 75.0 80.2 82.5 87.2 92.7 98.0 105 111 112 112 112
125.0 75.0 81.5 87.7 90.5 95.7 102 108 115 121 125 125 125
137.5 at 122 88.7 95.2 98.7 104 111 118 126 132 137 137 137
150.0 95.2 102 106 112 120 127 136 143 150 150 150
162.5 100 109 113 120 128 135 145 153 160 162 162
175.0 at 160 115 120 127 135 143 154 164 170 175 175
187.5 121 126 134 142 151 161 170 179 185 187
200.0 125 133 140 148 158 168 178 188 196 200
225 at 197 144 151 160 171 182
250 150 161 170 183 194
275 at 171 181 194 205
240
300 175 190 203 215
325 at 198 213 224
287
350 200 220 232
375 at 225 240
331
400 at 372 247
425 250
at
412
450 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250

25
3.5 Empirical Relationships

3.5.1 Crops other than rice

3.5.2 Rice Measurement in rice

Several methods of estimating effective rainfall for irrigation schedules are in vogue in different countries. They
are based on long experience and have been found to work quite satisfactorily in the specific conditions under
which they were developed.
3.5.1 Crops other than rice

India

For a given area, effective rainfall is taken to be equal to 70 percent of the average seasonal rainfall.
In another method, effective rainfall is taken as the mean value of rain, with the excess ever 3 in. in one day and 5
in. in 10 days omitted.

Effective rainfall has also been taken to be equal to the lowest monsoon rainfall occurring in three out of four
years.

The Damodar Valley Corporation divided the 'Kharip season' (June to November) into ten-day periods. During
these periods, rainfall which exceeded the water needs of the predominant crop was considered as ineffective and
the rest as effective.

Khushlani (1956) suggested that rainfall during the life cycle of the crop in a bad year (one with low rainfall)
should be considered as the effective rainfall.

In determining the water requirement of sugar cane under Bombay Deccan conditions, Rege et al (1943)
considered that rainfall received only after five days from the irrigation date was effective. The rainfall received
within five day after irrigation was treated as ineffective.

Sastry (1956) suggested the following equation for estimating rainfall usable by crops under Andhra Pradesh

(central part of South India) conditions,

Y = usable rainfall, per days for a given period

= mean dally rainfall
C = a constant, which determines the confidence limit of the minimum statistical average
d = standard deviation of the dally rainfall
Estimates of usable rainfall in various periods of the monsoon season can be arrived at by selecting suitable
confidence limits and statistical methods for calculating the standard deviation.

Burma

During the wet season, rainfall of less than 0.5 in. is considered as ineffective. Above this figure, 63 percent of
the amount greater than 0,5 in. is considered affective rainfall. Baring the dry season, rainfall of less than 1 in. is
considered as ineffective. Above this figure, 65 percent of the amount greater than 1 in. is considered as. usable
by the crop (Kung, 1971). This approach would appear to be rather arbitrary.

26
Thailand

Of the November rainfall 80 percent and of the December to March rainfall 90 percent is considered an effective
(Kung, 1971)

3.5.2 Rice Measurement in rice

Rice thrives under conditions of abundant water supply, hence the practice of land submergence. Depth of
flooding is governed by the variety grown and its height, the height of field bunds and availability of water. The
water requirements of rice include evapotranspiration and percolation. Measuring effective rainfall is thus more
complicated. Different empirical methods used in different countries are outlined below (Kung, 1971).

India

In one method, a percentage of total rainfall varying from 50 to 80 percent is assumed effective.
In a second method, rainfall less than 0.25 in (6.25 mm) on any day is considered as ineffective* Similarly any
amount over 3 in (75 mm) per day, and rainfall in excess of 5 in (125 mm) in 10 days is treated as ineffective.

Japan

For submerged rice the year having the lowest rainfall over the past 10 to 15 years is selected. Depending upon
local conditions, an amount of 50 to 80 mm is considered as ineffective. The rest is all effective. A daily record is
kept of soil water in the field.

For non-submerged rice a method using daily readings is also used. The daily rainfall efficiency is assumed to be
80 percent. Daily rainfall of less than 0.5 x ET is not effective. Also, if the sum of effective rainfall and the
residual moisture from the previous day exceeds a predetermined value, the surplus is disregarded. A sample
calculation of computation for a 12 day period is shown below for non-submerged rice. In this example ET = 3.7
mm/day, available soil Water = 30 mm.

Da Rainfall Effective Potential Soil water Irrigation Stored soil Remarks

te (A) rainfall evapotranspiratiostorage change applied water balance
(A x 0.8) n (+ or -)
1 0 0 3.7 -3.7 30.0 26.3
2 1.7 0 3.7 -3.7 0 22.6 (1.7 x 0.8) less than
1.85
3 5.4 4.3 3.7 +0.6 0 23.2
4 0 0 3.7 -3.7 0 19.5
5 1.5 0 3.7 -3.7 0 15.8 (1.5 x 0.8) less than
1.85
6 5.8 4.6 3.7 +0.9 0 16.7
7 0 0 3.7 -3.7 0 13.0
8 0 0 3.7 -3.7 0 9.3
9 53.2 20.7 3.7 +17.0 0 26.3 (53.2 x 0.8) + 9.3
greater than 30.0
10 2.5 2.0 3.7 -1.7 0 24.6
11 20.3 5.4 3.7 +1.7 0 26.3 (30.0 - 24.6)- 5.4
12 35.0 3.7 3.7 0.0 0 26.3 (30.0 - 26.3)- 3.7

The method must be modified in respect of rainfall efficiency, the moisture storage capacity of the soil, and
evapotranspiration, before it can be used for other situations.

27
Vietnam

The water holding capacity of rice soils is assumed to be 50 mm. Daily rainfall below 5 mm and above 50 mm is
disregarded. If daily evapotranspiration is 10 mm, a two-days' successive rainfall of up to 60 mm is taken as
effective and excess over this limit is disregarded. Similarly, three days' successive rainfall of up to 70 mm is
taken as effective and the excess is disregarded. The same procedure is followed for more rainy days.

In different months different percentages are considered to be effective out of the total rainfall received.

Period % taken as effective Remarks

April - September 75 Wet season
October 65 High rainfall intensity
November 80 Dry season
December - March 90 Dry and cool season
Burma
Rainfall below 0.5 in is considered as ineffective. Above 0.5 in, 80 percent of the amount in excess is considered
as effective.

4. Evaluation of methods
A method must account satisfactorily for surface run-off, water storage changes in the soil, evapotranspiration
and crop characteristics. For field use, the method should be simple, inexpensive, rapid and accurate. It should be
useful for broad regional planning or precise irrigation scheduling under a given set of conditions. For each
method measurement of total rainfall using & rain gauge or rain recorder is essential. Relative merits and
limitations of the different methods discussed are shown in Table 9. Of the field methods, the first method
(No.2.1) involving periodic measurement of soil water changed is accurate only when a sufficient number of
replications are made; it is very laborious and cumbersome for field application. The method can be used to
verify the applicability of empirical methods developed elsewhere. The soil water balance sheet method (No.2.2)
involving the use of meteorological data and estimation of ETa will provide data on estimating effective rainfall
if relevant input data are available. The estimation of ETa, however, is more complicated and less accurate than
the estimation of ETp. In the integrating gauge method (No.2.3), ceramic plates are used; the relation between
evaporation from the plate and the evapotranspiration from the crop must be known but is difficult to establish.
Errors are due to dust and salt accumulation on the evaporating surface, The Ramdas method (No.2.4) is simple
bat may not be accurate unless a large number of replications are made. This may make the method cumbersome
for field use. The use of lysimeters of large diameters (No.2.5) is the best and the most reliable method in
assessment of effective rainfall. It is, however, expensive for field use. It should be installed in research stations.
The method can be used to check the accuracy of the other methods. The drum technique for rice (No.2.6) has
given promising results. The method requires replications to give accurate data.

Of the empirical formulae the Renfro equation method (No. 3.1) is too empirical. The U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation method (NO. 3.2) neglects many essential parameters. The method based on the ratio of potential
evapotranspiration to precipitation (No.3.3) will provide the best results. It can be used for broad estimation of
effective rainfall in irrigation planning. The USDA, SCS method (NO. 3.4) has been based on data representing a
wide range of conditions. The method is satisfactory and can be applied for field use after verification in a given
situation. The empirical methods for crops other than rice (No.3.5.1) and for rice (No.3.5.2), are based on long
experience. They may be satisfactory under local conditions but need verification when applied in conditions
very different from those under which they were developed.

Methods described under 2.2, 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5.1 when used in planning should first be checked for accuracy
using methods 2.1 or 2.5. The choice of method to be used depends upon the funds, facilities and basic data that
are locally available.

28
Table 9: RELATIVE MERITS OF DIFFERENT METHODS FOR DETERMINING EFFECTIVE
RAINFALL
Methods Factors taken Special Accura Relative Remarks
into account equipment cy costs
Ru Soi Ari Cr
n- l dity op
off
2.1 Field studies of soil + + + + + Very Medium Good for verifying other met hods;
moisture high cumbersome practicability low
2.2 Daily soil water - + + + Very Medium Practicability medium
budget with Eta high
2.3 Integrating gauge - + + + + Mediu Medium Needs careful standardization
m
2.4 Ramdas apparatus - + + + + High Medium Practicability good
2.3 Lysimeters - + + + + Very Very Practicability medium, good as a check
high high on other methods
2.6 Drum technique + + + + + Very Low Practicability high
(rice) high
3.1 Renfro equation - B + - + Low Negligibl Too empirical
e
3.2 U.S. Bureau of + - - - - Low Negligibl Not suitable for wide use
Reclamation method e
3.3 Ratio of ETp to B B + - - Mediu Low Satisfactory for very preliminary
precipitation m planning purposes
3.4 USDA, SCS method - B + B - Mediu Low Good for areas with low intensity of
m rainfall and high soil infiltration rate
3.5.1 Empirical methods B B B B - Low to Negligibl Practicability very high
(other than rice) high e
3.5.2 Empirical methods B B B B - Mediu Negligibl Needs verification; practicability high
(rice) m e
+ = positive; - = negative; B = first approximation

29
Chapter III. Application of effective rainfall data is
irrigation and drainage projects

1. Irrigation project design

2. Irrigation project operation
3. Drainage projects
4. Rice cultivation
5. The effect of groundwater
6. Effective rainfall in unirrigated and low rainfall, areas

Knowledge of effective rainfall is vital for efficient utilization of water in irrigated agriculture. Application of
information on effective rainfall is shown in the subsequent pages with sample calculations and illustrations for
design of irrigation projects, operation of irrigation projects, design and operation of drainage systems, leaching
of salts, rice cultivation, planning of irrigation systems using groundwater, and for rainfed agriculture.

1. Irrigation project design

Monthly, seasonal and annual rainfall varies from year to year, so does the effective rainfall, and consequently
irrigation requirements. The Water supply cannot be planned on the minimum value of effective rainfall since
this would result for most years in a highly uneconomic and wasteful project. Nor can it be based on the average
amount of effective rainfall since this would provide an adequate and assured water supply for approximately
only half the time. Therefore, the value of effective rainfall is computed on a probability basis. The percent
chance of its occurrence is selected on a number of considerations, including yield predictions, cost of the system
and financial returns; for instance, for a high value crop like vegetables, a water supply may be based on effective
rainfall occurring nine years out of ten but for a low value crop, five out of ten years may be adequate.

The water supply to be developed is to be based on the percent chance of occurrence chosen which exceeds the
gross irrigation requirement of the crop during the chosen period. If this is 10 percent, for example, the water
supply for that period would be adequate in 9 years out of 10. The 90 percent chance effective rainfall will need
to be determined.

Data items needed are rainfall data for several years, weekly; consumptive use data, mean monthly; available
water storage capacity of soils in the scheme area, mean data for different soil types or classification units;
irrigation efficiency, percentage or fraction; type of crops and acreages, their sowing and harvesting times,
critical stages in crop growth, and special water needs if any; economic factors from which chance of occurrence
of rainfall can be selected,

A procedure to develop gross irrigation requirements is given below.

Rainfall data can normally be obtained from available records. The rainfall values are arranged in order of
magnitude and their cumulative frequency is worked out. In drawing cumulative frequency distribution of rainfall
on a log-normal probability paper the following steps are required:

Step 1s obtain rainfall data for as many years as possible (columns 1 and 2);
Step 2: arrange them in order of magnitude, with the largest number first (columns 3 and 4);
Step 3: calculate the plotting position (Fa) by using the Hazen equation (USDA, SCS, 1967):

Fa = [100 (2n - 1)] / 2 y

30
 Fa = the plotting position in percent
n = the rank number
y = the number of years of record keeping
Step 4: prepare the vertical scale of the log-normal probability paper and plot the rainfall on the vertical
logarithmic scale against the Fa positions on the percent chance scale (Fig 8).

Step 5: drew the best fitting line through the plotted points as shown in Fig 8. For instance, at the 80 percent
chance level, the rainfall is about 350 mm.
Years Annual rainfall (Ra) mm n Ra Fa
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
1934 380 2 960 3.8
1935 720 3 900 6.3
1936 1000 4 880 8.8
1937 900 5 860 11.3
1938 800 6 840 13-8
1939 520 7 800. 16.3
1940 380 8 780 18.8
1941 260 9 760 21.3
1942 300 10 720 23.8
1943 620 11 700 26.3
1944 840 12 700 28.8
1945 300 13 560 31.3
1946 340 14 620 33.8
1947 660 15 600 36.3
1948 960 16 600 38.8
1949 240 17 580 41.3
1950 280 18 560 43.8
1951 400 19 540 46.2
1952 600 20 520 48.8
1953 880 21 500 51.2
1954 860 22 500 53.8
1955 780 23 480 56.2
1956 760 24 480 58.7
1957 360 25 460 61.2
1958 420 26 440 63.7
1959 540 27 420 66.2
I960 700 28 400 68.7
1961 360 29 400 71.2
196?. 400 30 380 73.7
1963 440 31 380 76,2
1964 460 32 360 78.7
1965 480 33 360 81.2
1966 480 34 340 83.7
1967 500 35 320 86.2
1968 700 36 300 88.7
1969 500 37 300 91.2
1970 560 38 280 93.7
1971 580 39 260 96.2
1972 600 40 240 98.7

31
Fig 8: FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION 0F RAINFALL

A sample calculation of irrigation water requirements is given in Table 10. In Table 10, from the above data, the
50 and 75 percent (or any other) chance rainfall can be determined, which is here 500 and 374 mm respectively.
The ratio 374/500 = 0.75 is used here to determine the rainfall at 75 percent chance of occurrence for each month,
assuming that the frequency distribution of yearly or seasonal rainfall is the same as the frequency distribution of
each month. From data on mean monthly water needs and 50 or 75 percent chance monthly rainfall, the 50 and 75
percent chance effective rainfall is obtained from Table 8. Gross irrigation requirements can be calculated from
crop water need and carryover soil moisture data and selected irrigation application efficiency for 50 and 75
percent chance effective rainfall or, in the example in Table 10, 404 and 513 respectively.

Rainfall patterns will differ from month to month. Rather than using a constant ratio derived from seasonal or
yearly data, the 75 percent chance or any other percent chance monthly rainfall should preferably be determined
from a rainfall frequency distribution analysis prepared for each month using the step method described above.
This would also allow a selection of percent chance of rainfall occurrence for each month, with possibly a higher
percentage when water is needed most, such as during the flowering stage of most crops. The calculations will be
similar to those given in Table 10, except for column 9.

32
Table 10: SAMPLE CALCULATION OF IRRIGATION WATER REQUIREMENTS AT 50% AND 75%
CHANCE OF OCCURRENCE OF RAINFALL (mm)
MMea Monthl Monthly Car Total Net Gross Monthly Monthl Car Total Net Gross
o n y effective ry avail irrigation irrigatio rainfall y ry avail irrigation irriga
nt mon rainfall rainfall over able requirement n at 75% effective over able requirement tion
h thly at 50%at 50% soil soil (Column 2 requirem chance of rainfall soil soil (Column 2 requi
wat chance chance mois moist minus 6 plus ent at occurren at 75% mois moist minus 12 reme
er of of ture ure 5 of the next 75% ce chance ture ure plus 11 of the nt at
nee occurr occurren (Colu month) at irrigatio (Column (Table (Colu next month) 75%
d ence ce mn 4 50% chance n 3 x R*) 8) mn at 75% irriga
(Table 8) plus efficienc 10 chance tion
5) y plus efficie
11) ncy
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
M 25 50 25 50 75 0 0 37 22 50 72 0 0
a
y
Ju 75 100' 64 50 114 0 0 75 50 47 97 3 4
n
e
Ju 200 150 120 39 159 66 88 112 93 25 118 107 142
ly
A 200 125 102 25 127 98 130 94 78 25 103 122 162
u
g.
S 175 75 60 25 85 115 153 56 45 25 80 129 172
e
pt
.
O 50 0 0 25 25 25 33 0 0 0 0 25 33
ct
.
T 725 500 371 304 404 374 288 386 513
ot
al
*R = [75% chance of total rainfall (374 mm)] / [50% chance of total rainfall (500 mm)] = 0.75
An alternative method for determining first estimates on effective rainfall that will exceed a given percent chance
of occurrence is suggested by USDA, SCS (1967). Data needed are average annual rainfall and average effective
rainfall; factors with which the average effective rainfall needs to be multiplied to obtain its value for any given
percent chance of occurrence are given in Table 11. This method should be used only when no high degree of
accuracy is required.

For example, if average annual rainfall is 1 250 mm, and mean effective rainfall is 1 000 mm, the 80 percent
chance factor is 0.85 and effective rainfall at 80 percent chance of occurrence is 1 000 x 0.85 = 850 mm.

In a given irrigation project, certain crops may be provided with a water supply at 90 percent level of certainty
while the others may be provided with one at 50 percent depending upon their economic value and availability of
water. Normally, fruits and vegetables, oilseeds and industrial crops, spices and condiments require an assured
supply to obtain high production levels while this may, for a given condition, be a less stringent requirement for
cereals, pulses, pastures, and some millets. Irrigation projects should not be based on economic considerations
alone; many other aspects, including humanitarian, are also involved in deciding on the level of water to be
supplied.

33
Table 11: FACTORS APPLICABLE TO EFFECTIVE RAINFALL
Mean annual rainfall nun Percent chance of occurrence
50 60 70 50 90
75 0.80 0.68 0.56 0.45 0.33
100 .84 .72 .61 .50 .38
125 .87 .76 .65 .54 .42
150 .88 .78 .68 .57 .45
175 .89 .79 .69 .60 .48
200 .90 .81 .71 .62 .51
225 .91 .82 .73 .63 .53
250 .92 .83 .75 .65 .55
300 .93 .85 .78 .69 .58
350 .94 .86 .79 .71 .61
400 .95 .88 .81 .73 .63
450 .95 .89 .82 .74 .65
500 .96 .90 .83 .75 .67
550 .96 .90 .84 .77 .69
600 .97 .91 .84 .78 .70
650 .97 .92 .85 .79 .71
700 .97 .92 .86 .80 .72
750 .97 .93 .87 .81 .73
875 .98 .93 .88 .82 .75
1000 .98 .94 .89 .83 .77
1125 .98 .94 .90 .84 .78
1250 .98 .95 .91 .85 .79
1375 .99 .95 .91 .86 .80
1500 .99 .915 .91 .87 .81
1750 .99 .95 .92 .88 .83
2000 .99 .95 .92 .89 .85
2250 .99 .96 .93 .90 .86
2500 .99 .96 .93 .91 .87

2. Irrigation project operation

Rainfall will affect the day to day operation of an irrigation project. Timing and the amount of water applied to
the field will affect irrigation efficiency. Irrigation intervals may vary from 4 to 15 days depending mainly on the
soil type and crop grown. Scheduling of irrigation should account for the rainfall received and hence precise
knowledge about effective rainfall within 24 to 48 hours of its receipt is required for planning the next irrigation
application. The operation schedules of the canal system can be subsequently adjusted This will result in a better
utilization of available water resources and improved crop production.

The following data are needed: daily rainfall (duration, intensity and amount); mean value of soil water storage
capacity in the root zone in the area commanded by an irrigation outlet} ETa data of crops at different stages of
growth; thorough knowledge of local agricultural and irrigation practices, including special water needs if any.
A sample of a working sheet for irrigation programming follows. The example applies to conditions where the
soil water storage capacity is 120 mm and irrigation is applied when 50% of the total available water has been
used. All data are given in mm.

34
D Initial soil Irrig Total Et Net change Soil Ineffec Decision Date of next Actual
at moisture ation rainfa a in soil moisture tive irrigation irrigation
e contents ll moisture balance rain date
(surplu
s)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1 60 60 0 8 -52 112 0 Next irrigation not 8 0
before 7 days
2 112 0 0 8 -8 104 0 8 0
3 104 0 20 7 13 117 0 Irri. postponed by 2 10 0
days
4 117 0 30 7 23 120 20 Storage capacity 11 0
limited to 60 mm.
Irrigation postponed
by 1 day
5 120 0 0 9 -9 111 0 11 0
6 111 0 0 10 -10 101 0 11 0
7 101 0 0 10 -10 91 0 11 0
8 91 0 0 10 -10 81 0 11 0
9 81 0 0 10 -10 71 0 Keep ready for 11 0
irrigation on 11th
10 71 0 10 9 +1 72 0 Irrigation postponed 12 0
by 1 day
11 72 0 0 9 -9 63 0 Irrigate on 12th 12 0
12 63 57 50 4 57 120 46 Rains received in the 20 12
evening Hence
became ineffective
13 120 0 0 8 -8 112 0 20 0
14 112 0 0 8 -8 104 0 20 0
15 104 0 0 8 -8 96 0 20 0
16 96 0 0 8 -8 88 0 20
17 88 0 0 8 -8 80 0 20
18 80 0 0 9 -9 71 0 Keep ready for 20
irrigation on 20th
19 71 0 0 8 -8 63 0 Irrigate on 20th 20 -
20 63 57 0 8 +49 112 0 Next irrigation not 27 20
before 27th
21 112 0 8 -8 104 0 27
22 104 0 0 8 -8 96 0 27
23 96 0 0 7 -7 89 0 27
24 89 0 0 7 -7 82 0 27
25 82 0 0 8 -8 74 0 27
26 74 0 80 3 46 120 31 Irrigation postponed 4
by 8 days. Not
before 4th of next
month
27 120 0 0 7 -7 113 0 4
28 113 0 0 8 -8 105 0 4
29 105 0 0 8 -8 97 0 4
30 97 0 0 8 -8 89 0 4
1 89 0 0 9 -9 80 0 Transfer to the next 4
monthly sheet

35
Monthly Summary

Total irrigations applied during June = 3 times = 174 mm ETa = 238 mm

Total rainfall = 190 mm Mean ETa per day = 8.0 mm
Ineffective rainfall = 97 mm
Effective rainfall = (ETa - irrigations) + (Final balance - Initial balance) = (238 - 174) + (89 - 60) = 93 mm

To increase the amount of effective rainfall and water economy personal judgment is often needed in scheduling
water deliveries. As in the example given, on the 12th day irrigation water was applied in the morning and rain
fell in the evening; however, if the sky was cloudy and there was a likelihood of rain, it would have been worth
while to take the risk of postponing irrigation by a day.

Based on effective rainfall, swift changes in the scheduling programme can be made from time to time,
depending on practicability and flexibility allowed in the operation of the water distribution network.

3. Drainage projects

3.1 Drainage of Excess Water

3.2 Drainage for Leaching of Salts

Land drainage is essential for crop production in areas experiencing heavy rainfall. It is an inseparable part of
irrigation systems to control salinity in arid and semi-arid regions for permanent and sustained agriculture. The
drains may not necessarily flow throughout the year; the need may exist for just one or two months of the year, as
is the case in many parts of the monsoon areas of Asia. Nevertheless, to save the crops from water-logging
drainage becomes inevitable.

3.1 Drainage of Excess Water

Depth and frequency of rain and the peak drainage discharge are closely related. The rate at which excess water
must be removed from the soil is termed 'drainage co-efficient', which is expressed in mm per day or in m
/sec/ha. This value is based on rainfall characteristics and on the excess water tolerance of the crop.

For a given situation consideration may need to be given to surface run-off, deep percolation losses from rainfall,
seepage of irrigation canals and underground flows from adjacent areas. The absolute as well as relative
contributions from the different sources vary in time as well as in quantity. Often they are also interdependent.
Only the rainfall component in drainage flows is considered in the following section.

In simple terms, the sum of the daily rainfall minus consumptive use rate plus or minus the soil storage change, is
the drainage need. In humid regions, the amount of precipitation will have a direct relationship to the quantity of
water to be drained. In arid and semi-arid regions, the annual surface run-off from rain may range from about 0 to
200 mm while the seepage, percolation and leaching in irrigation schemes may range from 200 to 2 000 mm.
Losses from irrigation systems may be of great significance. Precipitation is of little consequence and can most
often be ignored in computing drainage discharges.

The ineffective rainfall for crop production, less the soil moisture left at harvest, amounts to effective rainfall in
drainage, except in cases such as rice, leaching of salts, and. periods outside the growing season. Hence the
methodology employed for assessing effective rainfall in crop production can also be used to assess it from the
drainage point of view. Daily values of surplus rain water can be worked out for the whole year by the soil
moisture balance sheet method. Deep percolation losses can be measured with lysimeters. In case of high
groundwater the fluctuation in groundwater tables should be measured. Drainage practices then, can be based on
crop tolerance to high groundwater tables taking into account soil and topography and the natural drainage
characteristics of the area.

36
Several semi-empirical methods for estimating run-off for drainage design have been developed; they are given
in most standard handbooks on hydrology. A simple method is described below; the method is rather empirical
and only provides first estimates on surface run-off for general planning purposes.

The USDA, SCS (1969) has developed a procedure using charts and tables for estimating volume and peak rates
of run-off. Apart from rainfall characteristics, important factors influencing rainfall run-off are the run-off
potentiality of the area; the antecedent moisture condition; the degree of vegetal cover; conservation practices
followed. The peak flow rates are also strongly dependent on slope of the land and area of the watershed. The
method includes the following steps:

Processing of rainfall data: by processing records of the daily values of total rainfall, probability values at any
frequency, for any given period, are obtained for the project concerned;
Run-off potentiality: the soils are to be grouped into one of the four hydrological classes on the basis of their run-
off potentiality which is closely scheduled to their infiltration rates.
Class A (low run-off potential): deep sandy soils;
B: shallow sandy soils and medium texture soils with above average infiltration rates;
C: shallow soils of medium to heavy texture with below average infiltration rates;
D: (high run-off potential) clay and shallow soils with hardpan, high groundwater table, etc.
Antecedent moisture condition: the moisture condition is selected from precipitation during the 5 days (or more)
preceding the day in question; there are 3 classes, as follows:

Precipitation during 5 days before the day in question (mm) Condition

Growing season Dormant season
Less than 35 Less than 12.5 Dry - I
35.0 to 52.5 12.5 to 27.5 Average - II
Greater than 52.5 Greater than 27.5 Wet -III

Run - off equation:

the equation used for surface run-off is:

Q = run-off over the drainage area (mm)

P = precipitation over the drainage area (mm)

S = potential water retention by the soil over the drainage area at time of start of rainfall (mm)
S values are expressed in the relation CN = 1 000/(10 + S).

CN values for the different hydrological classes, A, B, C and D, the vegetal covers and the conservation treatment
are shown in Table 12 for antecedent moisture condition II. Corrected values for moisture conditions I (dry) and
III (wet) are shown in Table 13. Run-off values (Q) for different values of CN and rainfall rates can be obtained
from Table 14.

For example, if a row crop of maize is grown on 40 ha of loamy soil belonging to hydrological class D, without
any conservation treatment and having a moderate slope ranging from 3 to 8 percent, the antecedent moisture
condition is dry, and the rainfall is 150 nun during 24 hours, evenly distributed, it follows that CN will amount to
91 for medium moisture condition as per Table 12 and 80 for dry condition as per Table 13. The depth of surface
run-off flow will be 94.50 mm as per Table 14.

37
Table 12: CN VALUES FOR WATERSHED CONDITION II FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF LAND USE
Land use or cover Treatment or practice State Hydrological soil class
A B C D
Fallow Straight row Poor 77 86 91 94
Row crops Straight row Poor 72 81 88 91
Straight row Good 67 78 85 89
Contoured Poor 70 79 84 88
Contoured Good 65 75 82 86
Contoured and terraced Poor 66 74 80 82
Contoured and terraced Good 62 71 78 81
Small grain Straight row Poor 65 76 84 88
Straight row Good 63 75 83 87
Contoured Poor 63 74 82 85
Contoured Good 61 73 81 84
Contoured and terraced Poor 61 72 79 82
Contoured and terraced Good 59 70 78 81
Closed-seeded legumes or rotation meadow Straight row Poor 66 77 85 89
Straight row Good 58 72 81 85
Contoured Poor 64 75 83 85
Contoured Good 55 69 78 83
Contoured and terraced Poor 63 73 80 83
Contoured and terraced Good 51 67 76 80
Pasture or Poor 68 79 86 89
range Pair 49 69 79 84
Good 39 61 74 80
Contoured Poor 47 67 81 88
Contoured Pair 25 59 75 83
Contoured Good 6 35 70 79
Meadow Good 30 58 71 78
(permanent) Poor 45 66 77 83
Woodlands Pair 36 60 73 79
(farm woodlots) Good 25 55 70 77
Table 13: CN NUMBERS FOR DIFFERENT MOISTURE CONDITIONS AND S VALUES
CN for condition II CN S-values mm CN for CN S-values mm
I III condition II I III
100 100 100 0.0 58 38 76 181.0
98 94 99 5.1 56 36 75 196.5
96 89 99 10.4 54 34 73 213.0
94 85 98 15.9 52 32 71 230.7
92 81 97 21.7 50 31 70 250,0
90 78 96 27.7 48 29 68 270.0
88 75 95 34.0 46 27 66 292.5
86 72 94 40.7 44 25 64 317.5
84 68 93 47.5 42 24 62 345.0
82 66 92 55.0 40 22 60 375.0
80 63 . 91 62.5 38 21 58 407.5
78 60 90 70.5 36 19 56 445.0
76 58 89 79.0 34 18 54 485.0
74 55 88 87.7 32 16 52 530.0
72 53 86 97.2 30 15 50 582.5

38
Table 13 continued
CN for condition II cm S-values mm CN for condition II CN S-values mm
I III I III
70 51 85 107.0 25 12 43 750.0
68 48 84 117.5 20 9 37 1000.0
66 46 82 128.7 15 6 30 1417.5
64 44 81 140.5 10 4 22 2250.0
62 42 79 153.2 5 2 13 4750.0
60 40 78 166.7 0 0 0 Infinity

Table 14: RUN-OFF UNDER DIFFERENT CN VALUES AND RATES OF RAINFALL IN mm

Rainfall mm CN values
70 65 70 75 80 85 90
25.0 0 0 0 0.75 2.0 4.25 8.0
30.0 0 0 0.75 1.75 3.75 7.0 11.5
35.0 0 0.50 1.50 3.25 6.0 9.75 15.2
40.0 0.25 1.25 2.75 5.0 8.50 13.0 19.0
45.0 0.75 2.25 4.25 7.25 11.0 16.2 23.2
50.0 1.50 3.50 6.0 9.50 14.0 20.0 27.2
62.5 4.25 7.50 11.5 16.2 22.2 29.5 38.2
75.0 8.25 12.7 18.0 24.0 31.2 39.7 49.5
100.0 19.0 25.7 33.2 41.7 51.0 61.5 73.0
125.0 32.5 41.2 51.0 61.2 72.2 84.2 97.0
150.0 48.0 58.7 70.0 82.0 94.5 107.7 121.2
175.0 65.0 77.5 90.5 103.7 117.2 131.5 145.5
200.0 83.2 97.5 111.7 126.0 140.5 155.5 170.2
225.0 102.5 118.0 133.5 148.7 164.2 179.7 194.7
250.0 122.5 139.2 155.7 172.0 188.0 204.0 219.5
275.0 143.0 161.0 178.2 195.5 212.0 228.5 244.2
300.0 164.0 183.0 201.2 219.0 236.2 253.0 269.0

Application of data

Data collected over several years on quantity and peak rate of surface run-off are needed on which to base the
value of the drainage co-efficient for the design of a drainage project. The value is determined taking into account
level of probability and degree of protection to crops. Higher values will be needed for crops sensitive to water
logging such as truck and most fruit crops, and generally lower values for field crops, pastures, meadows, native
ranges and forests.

The mean rate of run-off for more than 24 hours for a two to five year frequency is generally a good guide in
selecting a value of drainage co-efficient. Values may range from 8 to 25 and from 12 to 40 nun per day for
general field crow and special high value crops respectively. The values will be about 1.5 times higher for
organic or peat soils.

Peak flow rates

Peak flow rates can be determined by using the unit hydrograph method, Cook's method, or the rational formula.
The last is very simple and hence popular, but also very empirical and should be used for first estimates only.
The relationship is
Q = C I A/360
Q = peak rate of flow in m/sec for a given frequency of rainfall
C = a constant ranging from 0 to 1, according to watershed conditions
I = maximum rainfall intensity in mm/hr
A = drainage area in ha

39
The values of C under different conditions are as follows.
Soil type Cultivated lands Pastures
Sand 0.20 0.15
Loam 0.40 0.35
Clay 0.50 0.45

The maximum rainfall intensity, i, relates to a rainfall duration equal to the concentration time, Tc, of the basin.
To determine the maximum intensity, empirical formulas have been developed expressing precipitation for
various durations as a function of frequency and which are of the form i = aTb/tc where T is the return period, t
the duration in minutes and a, b, and c are regional constants. Values for the US show for rainfall of less than 60
mins a = 7 to 11, b = 0.17 to 0.23 and C = 0.38 to 0.47. Tc can be obtained from the empirical formula Tc =
0.00195 (L/ )0.77 where Tc is in mins, L is the length of the mainstream and S = H/L where H is the difference
in height between the highest and the lowest point in the field or basin. For example, if H is 9.5 m, L = 3070 m
then Tc = 1 hr 27 mins. With precipitation intensity for various durations known, the value of i can then be
determined. Such data can normally be obtained from the national meteorological service.

To short cut the necessary calculations graphs are given to determine peak discharge in cusecs for given water
shed conditions and typical types of storm rainfall distribution (USDA, SCS, 1969). An example is given in Fig
9. The selection of the . correct graph for a given situation is somewhat problematic.

3.2 Drainage for Leaching of Salts

Soils may contain large amounts of salts when they weather and decompose. Irrigation water may also carry salts
in appreciable amounts; even the best quality is never as pure as rainfall. The electrical conductivity of rain water
is some 30 to 50 micromhos/cm while the best quality irrigation water is never lees than 100 micromhos/cm, but
frequently much higher. Irrigation water evaporates, leaving the salts behind. With the lapse of time, these salts
accumulate in the root zone. The salt content is usually expressed in electrical conductivity (EC) in millimho/cm
or in parts per million on a weight basis (ppm). . EC in millimhos/cm is roughly 1/640 x ppm. The presence of
salts in the root zone beyond a certain concentration hampers crop growth. Therefore, it is necessary to provide
additional water (Dd) to leach them. Part of the rain received during the non-growing season is also useful in
removing salts from the root zone. The extent of effective rainfall may thus be lower in salt affected areas than in
non-saline areas.

On an annual basis, the net quantity of irrigation water (Di) needed to meet the consumptive use by the crop (Do)
amounts to total water need (CD) less the annual effective rainfall (Dr).
Di = Do = CU - Dr (1)
When there is a salt problem, additional water is required (Dd) for leaching the salts and hence the relation
becomes:
Di = Dc + Dd (2)

40
Fig 9: PEAK RATES OF DISCHARGE FOR SMALL WATERSHEDS TYPE II STORM
DISTRIBUTION SLOPE-MODERATE / CURVE NUMBER 75 (USDA, SCS, 1969)

The leaching requirement (LR) is the fraction of the total amount of irrigation water that must be passed through
the soil in excess of crop water needs, to control salinity at a specified level. Different crops differ in salt
tolerance. The salt content of drainage water should normally not exceed the tolerance level of a crop. Leaching
requirement (LR) can be expressed in terms of ratio of the depth of drainage water (Dd) to that of irrigation water
(Di) or in terms of a ratio of the salt content of the irrigation water (ECi) to that of drainage water (ECd), or

(3)
In case of rainfall, it is necessary to take into account its amount and the electrical conductivity also and to work
out its weighted average.
(Di) adjusted = Di + Dr (4)

and (ECi) adjusted = (5)

When electrical conductivity of rain water is assumed to be zero for ill practical purposes, the equation 5 resolves
to:

(ECi) adjusted = (6)

In case of rainfall, therefore, the equation 3 of leaching requirements resolves to:

(7)

41
From equations 2 and 7 above, the quantity of irrigation water (Di) can be expressed in terms of EC values,
annual leaching requirement (Dd) and consumptive water requirement as under.

Di=(CU/(1-LR))-Dr

Dd=(CU/(1-LR))-(Dc+Dr)

and (8)
Also from equation 3:

It follows that: (9)

The amount of rain water entering the soil from the annual rainfall (Ra) is obtained by deducting from the latter
the annual run-off (Sa) and evaporation from the soil surface in the non-growing season (En). Sa and En are not
useful in the leaching process and hence their values must be subtracted from the total, or
Dr = Ra - (Sa + En) (10)
The values of evaporation from land surfaces can be determined locally. If these are not available, however, the
broad monthly values can be read from a chart prepared by the USDA, SCS (1967), shown in Pig 10. The chart
has been prepared from relationships between rates of rainfall, mean monthly temperature and evaporation.
In applying the above method to determine annual gross leaching needs the following data should be available:
- monthly and annual rainfall values (Rm and Ra);

- rainfall during growing season (Rg);

- growing season effective rainfall (Re);

- concumptive use of water by crop (CU);

- salt content or electrical conductivity of irrigation water (ECi);

- salt content (parts per million) or electrical conductivity of drainage water (ECd) or salt tolerance limit
of crop;

- annual surface run - off (Sa);

- irrigation efficiency (Ef);

- evaporation in non-growing season (En).

42
Fig 10: EVAPORATION FROM LAND AREAS FOR VARIOUS TEMPERATURES AND RAINFALL
(ASCE PRACTICE HYDROLOGY HANDBOOK)

A sample calculation for determining the effective rainfall and annual leaching needs of a crop of berseem is
given below; in this example annual consumptive use (CU) is 750 mm, annual rainfall (Ra) is 400 mm, annual
run-off (Sa) is 40 mm, evaporation in non-growing season (E) is 160 mm, effective rainfall during growing
season (ER) is 150 mm, irrigation efficiency (Ef) is 70%, salt content of irrigation water (ECi) is 1 920 ppm, and

salt tolerance limit of the crop (ECd) is 9.0 mmhos/cm.

Using equation (1), DC = CU - ER = 750 - 150 = 600 mm; and mmhos/cm, by equation (10), Dr = Ra - (Sa + En)
= 400 - (40 + 160) = 200 mm.
Assume first that no irrigation water is to be added.
By using equations 7 and 8:

and

If this quantity of 200 mm is substituted in the above equations, then

43
The higher value of 221.75 mm is obtained meaning thereby that more than 200 mm of water will be required for
leaching purposes. Next assume that 250 - of water are to be added. In this case:

Since 227.4 is lower than 250, the quantity of irrigation water to be added for leaching is lees than 227.4 mm.
The required value lies between 221.75 mm and 227.4 mm.
By interpolation:

Dd = 224.60
After substituting this value of 224.6 mm in the above equations:

Since the irrigation efficiency is 70%, the annual gross leaching need will be 224.60/0.70 - 320.8 mm.
Another approach to estimating annual leaching needs was developed by Van der Molen and Boumans (1963).
The relationship between different parameters was derived as follows:

= year total of indicated quantities in dm

P = deep percolation below the root zone required to maintain soil salinity at the selected average level

ET = Evapotranspiration in din/month

N = Precipitation less interception and surface run-off in din/month

k = leaching co-efficient

ECe = electrical conductivity of saturation extract in mmhos/cm or tolerated average salt level

ECi = electrical conductivity of the irrigation water in mmhos/cm

A calculation example of the average annual drainage needs according to the equation given above is presented
below.

44
Soil Type Sand Loam Clay
Leaching Co-efficient (k) 0.8 0.6 0.3
Evapotranspiration (ET) dm 9 9 9
Precipitation (N) dm 3 3 3
Tolerated average salt level (ECe) 4 4 4
Conductivity irrigation water (ECi) 2 2 2
Required leaching (P) 2.5 3.3 6.6
Required irrigation G[i3?) 8.5 9.3 12.6
Natural drainage (+) or seepage supply (-) 0 +2 -3
Total drainage dm 2.5 3.3 6.6
Artificial drainage dm 2.5 1.3 9.6

The average annual requirement is, however, inadequate as a design criterion. Information on peak drainage
needs can be obtained by studying irrigation - Bait - drainage relationships for each monthly period. To derive the
necessary monthly data, reference is made to Chapter 11 edited by Tan den Berg in FAO/UNESCO International
Sourcebook on Irrigation Drainage and Salinity (1973).

4. Rice cultivation
To assess the effective rainfall in rice culture, the water balance should preferably be calculated from daily data.
The use of the drum culture technique described earlier permits the measurement of actual evapotranspiration
(ETa), deep percolation (Dp) and effective rainfall (ER).

If this degree of accuracy is not needed, however, the effective rainfall can be measured using values of estimated
ETp, deep percolation and permissible water depth for land submergence to obtain a daily account value, X
X = (Water stock on hand - Water losses) - (Permissible water depth) (for land submergence)
If the value of X is positive, it indicates the amount of water surplus or rainfall is ineffective.
If the value of X is 0, it means that all the rainfall received on that day has been effective and the field has
attained its maximum allowable flooding capacity. There is no room to store any more water. Also, there is no
water surplus on that day.

If the value of X is negative, it means that all the rainfall received on that day is effective and some more
(equivalent to X value) can be accommodated in the field without it being ineffective. ',"'

As already stated, stock on hand includes the previous day's balance plus any addition due to rain or irrigation.
Losses are those due to evapotranspiration and deep percolation, The permissible water depth for land
submergence depends on the stage of crop growth and field bund height, whichever is lower of the two. The
illustration of three cases is given below, and daily water balance can thus be maintained to derive the monthly
values.

Parameters Case A Case B Case C

Previous 'balance (ram depth) 30 30 30
Rainfall received (mm) 40 45 50
Irrigation (mm) 0 0 0
Evapotranspiration (mm) 8 8 8
Deep percolation (mm) 7 7 7
Crop stage allowance (mm) 60 60 60
Field, bund height allowance (mm) 125 125 125
X value (mm) -5 0 5
Balance to be carried forward 55 60 60
Conclusion , All rain effective Space for All effective No space for 5 mm ineffective
additional 5 mm storing more rain 45 mm effective

45
Data requirements for this method are: total rainfall from rain gauge (daily value); evapotranspiration from open
pan (daily value); percolation, mean value for the field (daily value); crop stage allowance (weekly value); field
bund allowance from direct measurement of bund height (seasonal value).

A summary table can be used as given for the following example, where at a given period the crop stage
allowance is 75 mm and the field bund allowance is 150 mm. All data are in mm.

Data Rainfall Irrigation Percolation plus ET Change in water Depth of stored water Ineffective
stored rain
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
- 0 0 0 0 75 0
1 20 0 15 5 75 5
2 40 0 18 22 75 22
3 100 0 15 85 75 85
4 15 0 15 0 75 0
5 0 0 18 -18 57 0
6 0 0 19 -19 38 0
7 20 0 17 3 41 0
8 60 0 16 44 75 10
9 70 0 15 -55 75 55
10 0 0 18 -18 57 0
11 0 0 18 -18 39 0
12 0 0 17 -17 22 0
13 0 0 15 -15 7 0
14 0 75 17 58 65 0
15 30 0 15 15 75 5
Total 355 - - - - 182

5. The effect of groundwater

High groundwater tables may be due to ample rain at the site or in the surrounding area or due to seepage and
percolation losses from irrigation canals. They may also be due to underground water flow from other areas. The
contributions from different sources may vary from year to year.

With groundwater tables within 1-1.5m from the root zone, there is on most soil types some contribution by
capillary movement of water towards the water needs of crops. When the water depth is beyond this limit, the
contribution by capillary flow for most soils is negligible.

A distinct feature of irrigation systems based on pumped groundwater is that the command areas are frequently
nearer the source of water, as compared to the canal systems where long distances may be involved. The area
supplied by one well is small in size, easy to manage and has a high flexibility. The cultivation and irrigation
practices can be adapted quickly to the available water supply.

Kith deep water table conditions, water is pumped and used for irrigation in a similar method to that used for
canal irrigation systems. Effective rainfall can be calculated by the same method as that used in surface irrigation
project designs or project operations. From the frequency distribution of effective rainfall and by selecting the
proper percent chance of occurrence of total rainfall, and of effective rainfall, the net irrigation requirements can
be calculated.

With shallow water table conditions, there can be a significant moisture recharge by capillary action to the root
zone. Effective rainfall can decrease by an amount equal to the contribution from groundwater storage. There
have been few studies on the relationship between depth of groundwater and effective rainfall. Hater will rise by
capillary action above the water table, its height and rate depending on the type of soil and its hydraulic
properties, the soil moisture content and consequently the type of crop and level of evaporative demand. Both
distance and rate of water movement are important; for heavy textured soil the distance is great but the rate slow,
whilst for sandy soils the distance is small but the rate is high. In the absence of impervious layers, the

46
contribution of water to the root zone of less than 1 mm/day may be approximately taken when the upper soil
layer is moist at 50 to 90 cm for coarse and heavy textured soils and some 120 to 200 cm for most medium
textured soils.

The contribution from the groundwater table can be assessed with the methods reported by Doering (1963),
Dastane (1972) and White and Troxell, quoted by Chow (1964). In the White and Troxell method, it is assumed
that evapotranspiration is negligible between midnight and 4 a.m. and that the level of the water table during this
interval approximates the daily mean using Fig 11.

Fig 11: DIURNAL FLUCTUATION OF A WATER TABLE AS A RESULT OF TRANSPIRATION

(AFTER TROXELL)

If h is the hourly rise from midnight to 4 a.m. and S = net fall or rise of water table in one day, then the daily
volume discharge = VET = Sy A (24 h S) , where Sy is specific yield and A is the area of vegetation. The specific
yield is defined as the ratio of volume of water which, after the soil is saturated, will drain out by gravity to the
total volume of the soil. It is non-capillary porosity of the soil. If the groundwater reservoir has a surface area of
10 km n and an average specific yield is 7.5 percent, each 1 metre rise or fall in the water level over the area
represents 75 hm of water. This method assumes that there is no but or in flow of water in the area under
consideration and a change in the water table is a result of ET only.

Recently, Allison (1964) derived a formula for estimating capillary rise of water as follows:

Where:

Dgw = depth of ground water evaporated or removed

ECe = electrical conductivity of saturation extract in mmhos per dm at 25C.
ds = soil density (gm/cc)
Ds = depth of soil, where salt accumulation takes place
Sp = saturation percentage of soil
dw == density of water (gm/cc)
ECgw = electrical conductivity of groundwater in mmhos/cm

47
The daily soil water budget method can also be used for determining the value of effective rainfall under shallow
water table conditions; an additional column on ground-water contribution on the income side, similar to that of
irrigation is needed.

If no information is available on the extent of groundwater contribution, the value of effective rainfall can be
estimated by obtaining first the values of uncorrected effective rainfall under deep groundwater conditions from
Table 8 and then correcting them by applying the multiplication factors as shown in Table 15. For example, if the
total rainfall is 100 mm, the depth of water application is 50 mm and consumptive use is 150 mm, then the
effective rainfall under the deep water table conditions is 2.97 x 0.93 x 25 69 mm. Under the conditions of a
shallow water table, say at 140 cm, the effective rainfall will be 69.05 x 0.6 = 41.5 mm

Table 15: MULTIPLICATION FACTORS TO BE APPLIED TO THE VALUES OF UNCORRECTED

EFFECTIVE RAINFALL FROM TABLE 8 TO OBTAIN EFFECTIVE RAINFALL UNDER SHALLOW
WATER TABLE CONDITIONS
Depth to water table from soil surface (cm) Soil Type
Sand Loam Clay
50 0 0 0
60 0.25 0 0
70 0.50 0.30 0
80 0.75 0.50 0.22
90 0.95 0.66 0.40
100 1.00 0.80 0.57
110 0.90 0.75
120 0.95 0.86
130 1.00 0.95
140 0.97
150 1.00
Over 150 1.00 1.00 1.00

6. Effective rainfall in unirrigated and low rainfall, areas

In low rainfall, unirrigated areas, knowledge of the effective rainfall is most essential in planning crop production
with the correct selection of crop species and agronomic practices.

Two situations can be distinguished; rainfall may be received, predominantly in the crop growing season, and
rainfall may be received during the non-growing season. In the first situation, it is necessary to know the extent of
rain which is or can be actually used and that which is utilizable but lost through surface run-off and deep
percolation, and whether suitable measures can be adopted to reduce these losses. In the second case it is
necessary to know the extent of rainwater which can be conserved economically and carried over to the next
season for crop use. In other words, is it possible to conserve moisture and, if so, to what extent. These two
situations are dealt with below and illustrations are given for the best utilization of the often limited water.
The essential data needed include:
layer-by-layer values of field capacity, wilting point, bulk density and depth of the soil in order to
compute the moisture storage capacity and the moisture balance;
daily rainfall records for several years from available records;
data on the consumptive use of crops,
class A pan records or other ET data;
equipment needed includes soil augar, soil moisture boxes, weighing balance, drying oven, rain gauge.
The following steps are required:
- determine the moisture storage capacity of the soil;

- maintain daily records of gains due to rains and losses due to evapotranspiration; if records are
available, they must be tabulated;

48
 - prepare a daily soil moisture balance sheet, as shown for the Thornthwaite's method, using rainfall and
consumptive use values. If data on actual consumptive use values are not available, these may be
computed by using any of the formulae, their selection depending on the climatological data available.
To obtain the first approximate value of evaporation from the soil surface, Fig 9, showing broadly the
relationship between temperature, rainfall and evaporation, may be used;

- check the balance sheet value against that determined by periodic soil moisture sampling and oven
drying. Samples should be taken immediately after rains, as early as possible. Moisture lost during the
period from the cessation of rainfall until the soil is sampled should be estimated by multiplying the
class A pan evaporation value for the corresponding period by 0.4 to 0.8, depending on the siting of the
pan. (see FAO Irrigation and Drainage paper No. 24);

- determine the total and effective rainfall for each week, month and season, and the year;

- plot a frequency distribution diagram of effective rainfall during the growing season using available
records;

- select the value of the effective rainfall at the desired percent chance of occurence for planning
purposes;

- interpret the data from the economic and crop production points of view.
A sample calculation is given below which uses data from moisture studies after a rain shower to find the
moisture storage capacity, effective rainfall and soil moisture balance when total rainfall is 200 mm; class A pan
evaporation value for the three days after cessation of rains until the soil is sampled is 8, 10 and 12 mm. The soil
moisture data on oven - dry weight basis are as follows:

Soil Layer Field Capacity % Wilting point % Moisture % Bulk Density (gm/co)
(cm) Before rains After rains
0-30 24.0 12.0 14.0 22.0 1.40
30-60 26.0 13.0 15.0 24.0 1.45
60-00 28.0 14.0 16.0 25.0 1.50
90-120 30.0 15.0 22.0 22.0 1.50

Available moisture storage capacity of soil on a volume basis:

Total = 23.7 cm
Similarly, the initial available soil moisture on a volume basis:

49
 or

Total =5.8 cm
The final available soil moisture balance on a volume basis

Total =17.1 cm
The evapotranspiration during the interval between the cessation of rains and soil moisture sampling is:

The effective rainfall is equal to the increase in soil moisture plus that evapotranspired during the interval
between the cessation of the rain and the soil moisture sampling, or (17.1 - 5.8) + 2.4 = 13.7 cm.

Thus of 200 mm of rainfall only 137 mm was effective. The rest, or 63 mm, was lost by surface run-off. The
moisture did not reach the fourth layer because it had too little time for infiltration. Suitable measures should
therefore be taken to avoid this run-off and to store the moisture for use by the crop, such as ploughing, mulching
or terracing.

50
A sample calculation is also given on moisture studies during the crop growing season. Weekly data on rainfall
and consumptive use are given in columns 2 and 3 in the water balance sheet. The available soil water storage
capacity is assumed to be 75 mm.

Period Rainfall Actual Water storage change in Water storage balance in Water
week mm evapotranspiration ETa soil soil surplus
1 150 10 140 75 65
2 40 15 25 75 25
3 50 20 30 75 30
4 130 25 105 75 105
5 0 30 -30 45 0
6 0 30 -30 15 0
7 0 15 -15 0 0
8 10 10 0 0 0
9 5 5 0 0 0
10 10 10 0 0 0
11 100 35 65 65 0
12 60 35 25 75 15
13 70 30 40 75 40
14 0 20 -20 55 0
15 20 10 10 65 0
16 0 5 -5 60 0
Total 645 305 - 60 280

In the latter example, during the first six weeks, the rainfall exceeds the consumptive use and moisture storage
capacity of the soil, and so there will be substantial losses amounting to 225 mm by surface run-off and deep
percolation. After six weeks, the crop will suffer through lack of moisture until the end of the tenth week. From
the eleventh week onwards, there will again be adequate moisture until the crop matures. The water surplus is 55
mm, whilst considerable moisture (60 mm) is left at the end of the growing period.

A rainfall frequency distribution on a weekly basis should be prepared from available rainfall records. If this
shows a trend like that shown above, measures for more efficient use of the soil moisture through judicious crop
planning should be taken. The possibility of conserving surplus water during the first four weeks by the
construction of ponds should be investigated, and whether the water stored can be used to irrigate the crop during
the seventh to the tenth week. Also, a crop with a longer growing period may be selected since considerable
moisture is left unused at the end of the crop season. In rainfed agriculture it is advisable to choose different types
of crop, with the length of growing seasons varying. Mixed cropping is a frequently applied method of using the
available soil moisture efficiently and reducing the risk of total crop failure.

Studies on the efficiency of fallowing should be made where applicable. Moisture conservation through fallowing
the land has been an ancient practice in many parts of the world. Quantitative and comprehensive studies on soil
moisture have been conducted and have been reported by Kanitkar (1944), Jenkins (1951), Evans and Lemon
(1957), Duley and Coyle (1955). Literature shows that the efficiency of fallowing depends upon the water
holding properties of the soil, the rainfall pattern during the fallowing period, the evaporative demand during the
fallowing period, the length of the fallowing period and the management practices. The efficiency of summer
fallowing may range from 15 to 30 percent and that of winter fallowing from 25 to 60 percent.

The value of effective rainfall cannot exceed the moisture storage capacity of the soil and hence moisture storage
or fallowing efficiency should be regarded as 100% if the soil water is wetted to its maximum capacity. Dastane
and Joshi (1961) suggested the following formula for the evaluation of moisture conservation efficiency during
the fallowing period. Soil moisture available at sowing time for use by the crop amounts to the effective rainfall
in the proceeding seasons.

51
 E = efficiency of moisture conservation in percentage
M1 = available moisture at the beginning of the fallowing period
M2 = available moisture at the end of the period
R = rainfall received
Sc = available moisture storage capacity of the soil
If the available moisture in the root zone before and after fallowing is 50 and 150 mm respectively, the rainfall
during the fallowing period is 250 mm and the available water storage capacity of the soil is 200 mm, then the
efficiency of fallowing will be 75 percent. The effective rainfall is 150 mm only out of the total received.

Due to the enormous variations in soil conditions, it is emphasised that, in determining the soil moisture
properties, it is necessary to provide an adequate number of replications of soil samples in time and space. With
all care taken, errors may still be in the order to 5 to 20 percent, or larger. Reference is made to the monograph by
Black et al (1965) for a detailed discussion on the errors involved in the determination of soil moisture properties.

52
Chapter IV. Increasing the proportion of effective rainfall
its effectiveness and further lines of work

1. Increasing effective rainfall

2. Increasing the effectiveness of rainfall
3. Further lines of work needed in the field of effective rainfall in agriculture

Rainfall is a free source of water and its proper utilization will lead to increased crop production. Farmers and
researchers, planners and administrators, have been engaged from early times in the task of increasing the
effective proportion of the total rainfall and also its effectiveness for increased crop production. he main practices
in this respect can be listed as follows:

1. Increasing effective rainfall

1.1 Reducing Surface Run-off

1.2 Increasing Infiltration (except in rice culture)
1.3 Building Water Storage Structures
1.4 Minimizing Peep Percolation Losses

The approach to increasing effective rainfall in agriculture includes:

1.1 Reducing Surface Run-off

This is achieved by altering the topography of land, erecting barriers to the flow of water and by increasing the
opportunity for infiltration. The practices followed include:
- land grading and levelling;
- bunding, terracing, basin listing, criss-cross ridging;
- retaining crop residues after harvest;
- reducing depth as well as frequency of irrigation.

1.2 Increasing Infiltration (except in rice culture)

Increased infiltration is achieved by improving the soil structure or condition at the surface, as well as in the
subsurface. The practices include:
- deep ploughing, sub-soiling or breaking hard pans;

- adding organic matter and soil conditioners to improve the texture of the growing pasture or grass
legume mixtures;

- using mulches to prevent breaking of aggregates which seal the soil surface;

1.3 Building Water Storage Structures

Farm ponds at suitable places are very useful to collect run-off water for use during periods of low rainfall at
critical stages of crop growth.

1.4 Minimizing Peep Percolation Losses

Deep percolation losses can be minimized by practices such as;

53
 - increasing the water holding capacity of light textured soils by the addition of clays or organic matter,
if this is economically feasible;

- indirectly by extending the root zone though selecting deep roted crops;

- reducing permeability beyond the root zone, especially in rice, using soil conditioners (krylium) and
placing plastic sheets and bituminous layers at some depth in the soil.
The losses due to deep percolation can be very high in rice fields and may amount to 50 to 75 percent of the
water applied. It is here that a great impact can be made in economising on irrigation water or in increasing the
efficiency of rainwater by adopting the various measured listed (Dastane et al (1970)).
- select for the rice growing heavy soils or those with hard pans and shallow depths;

- grow crops in large blocks instead of isolated fields, since the seepage can be inversely proportional to
the perimeter of the area;

- scrupulously level the land to avoid excess water applications;

- puddle and destroy structures in the surface soil;

- compact soil, embed polythene sheets and apply chemicals such as bitumen and asphalt, or a cement-
concrete layer;

- construct sub-soil dams to arrest horizontal flows of water;

- apply light instead of heavy irrigation in irrigated areas to accommodate rainfall; carefully follow a
water budgeting procedure.

2. Increasing the effectiveness of rainfall

The object of measuring the effectiveness of rainfall is -so increase production per unit of water, per unit of land
and per unit of time. This can be achieved by planning suitable crops and carrying out farm operations consistent
with the amount, intensity and frequency of rainfall. These include;
- planning cropping patterns consistent with rainfall patterns;

- selecting high value crops for maximizing the income;

- adjusting sowing times according to the probable rainfall so that drought sensitive stages of growth do
not synchronize with periods of inadequate rainfall;

- timing other farm operations such as tillage, fertilizer application, applying insecticides, fungicides and
herbicides etcetera, in relation to rainfall probability periods;

- following mixed cropping of shallow and deep rooted crops for full exploitation of stored soil
moisture;

- adopting 'multi-storied' cropping practices, water needed for a single crop and for several crops
together is more or less the same, but total production can be much. higher in the latter system than in
the former;

- improving weather forecasting techniques and using the predictions in planning farm operations.

54
3. Further lines of work needed in the field of effective rainfall in
agriculture

3.1 Collecting Data by Setting Up Crop Lysimeters

3.2 Verification of Empirical Methods
3.3 Development of Empirical Methods in Different Areas
3.4 Utilizing Information of Effective Rainfall in Agricultural Practices
3.5 Increasing Effective Rainfall Under Field Conditions
3.6 Increasing the Effectiveness of Rainfall

3.1 Collecting Data by Setting Up Crop Lysimeters

Very little experimental information is available for planning purposes on the region-by-region values of
effective rainfall in agriculture. This data should, therefore, he collected. The setting up of crop lysimeters at
suitable places would go a long way towards achieving this. Agricultural research stations, agro-meteorological
stations and irrigation scheme headquarters may be selected for such studies. The staff can work out the
corrections which should be applied to the value of total rainfall for the different conditions, such as for leaching
requirements, for shallow water tables, and different crops. Effective rainfall is an entity governed by site and
situation, hence systematic collection of data and judicious interpretation should be done on a small region-wide
basis. Additional field studies should be made to verify the collected information under field conditions. In this
respect, several techniques are available to study water balance parameters. One of them, lysimetry is rather
costly and requires competent personnel. However, it is the most reliable technique. Alternatively, water balance
studies can also be conducted in small watersheds in representative irrigated areas.

3.2 Verification of Empirical Methods

Empirical methods for estimating effective rainfall are simple and practical, and have a high extension value.
However, these methods should be verified in individual areas against the standard methods and improved, if
necessary, by applying suitable corrections*

3.3 Development of Empirical Methods in Different Areas

Rapid methods must be developed for estimating effective rainfall in all irrigated areas. Empirical methods with
suitable assumptions would be the best initial approach because of their inexpensiveness and reliability when
corrected for local conditions.

3.4 Utilizing Information of Effective Rainfall in Agricultural Practices

Studies on effective rainfall in rainfed farming areas will reveal to what extent water is used at the site and to
what extent it is wasted. These will facilitate the drawing up of plans for more efficient utilization of water
resources.

Information can be used productively and profitably in all irrigation projects. In new schemes, water deliveries,
both in time and depth, should be planned on the basis of short period values of effective rainfall. Often either no
values or generalized values are taken for the entire season. Planning, management and operation of irrigation
schemes on the basis of carefully computed effective rainfall data would increase agricultural productivity and
economize on irrigation water usage.

3.5 Increasing Effective Rainfall Under Field Conditions

Effective rainfall can be increased by reducing surface run-off, increasing infiltration and reducing deep
percolation losses. Several practices are listed, but they are often not followed because their usefulness is under-
estimated or their cost is too high.

55
It is therefore necessary to popularize them through extension agencies. What can be done at the individual,
community and district levels needs to be defined and demonstrated.

Rice culture offers an enormous scope for increasing effective rainfall by reducing percolation losses ranging
between 50 and 75 percent. Studies using techniques of puddling, compacting, adding chemicals, lining the sub-
soil with impervious materials and constructing sub-soil dams, would go a long way towards reducing the crops'
water needs.

3.6 Increasing the Effectiveness of Rainfall

For lack of studies on the subject, very little progress has been made in developing practices for increasing the
effectiveness of rainfall. Economic studies on the value of rainfall in terms of the production and benefits should
be made for its proper appraisal and further augmentation.

56
Bibliography

Allison, L.E. 1964 Soil salinity in relation to irrigation. Adv. Agron. 16, 139-180.
Anonymous. 1967 Evaluation of agricultural hydrology by monolith lysimeters. Technical Bulletin 1367, USDA
1967a in cooperation with Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center.
Anonymous. 1970 Guide to hydrometeorological practices. WMO 168 T.P. 82, 2nd Edition.
Anonymous. 1971 Annual workshop report on coordinated project for wheat improvement., ICAR
Anonymous. 1973 FAO International source book on irrigation, drainage and salinity. London, Hutchinson and
Co. 510p.
Baier, W. & Robertson, G.W. 1966 A new versatile soil moisture budget. Canada, J. Plant Sci. 46: 299-315.
Black, C.A. et al. 1965 Methods of soil analysis. Agron 9, Part I. Amer. Soc. Agron.
Blaney, H. P. & Criddle, W.D. 1950 Determining water requirements in irrigated areas from climatological and
irrigation data. USDA Soil Cons. Ser. Tech Paper 96.
Boumans, J.H. 1963 Some principles governing the drainage and irrigation of saline soils. Reclamation of salt
affected soils in Iraq. Publ. II Intern. Wageningen, Inst. Land Reel. and Improvement.
Chow, V.T. 1964 Handbook of applied hydrology. New York, McGraw Hill Book Co.
Dastane, N.G. & Joshi, M.S. 1961 Evaluation of moisture conservation methods. Proc. Dry Farming Seminar,
Bombay. Indian Coun. Agri. Res.
Dastane, N.G., Vamadevan, V.K., & Saraf, C.S. 1966 Review of techniques employed in determination of water
requirements of rice in India. Proc. Intern Rice Comm. Meeting, Louisiana.
Dastane, N.G. et al. 1970 Review of work done on water requirements of crops in India. Poona, Navabharat
Prakashan.
Dastane, N.G. 1972 A practical manual for water use research in agriculture. 2nd edition. Poona, Navabharat
Prakashan.
De Martonne. 1926 Quoted by Thornthwaite, C.W. & Holzman, B. In measurement of evaporation from land and
water surfaces. USDA Tech. Bull. 817: 1-143.
De R., & Ray S. 1973 Agronomic practices in field crops under favourable and unfavourable rain fall conditions.
Paper presented at 1st SIDA/FAO Seminar for Plant Scientists in Africa and the Near East, Cairo.
Doering, E.J. 1963 A direct method for measuring the upward flow of water from the water table. Soil Sci. 96:
191-195.
Duley, F.L. & Coyle, J.J. 1955 Farming where rainfall is 8 to 20 inches a year. USDA Yearbook Water. 407-415.
Evans, C.E. & Lemon, E.R. 1957 Conserving soil moisture. USDA Yearbook Soil, 340-358.
Gangopadhyaya, M. et al Measurement and estimation of evaporation and evapotranspiration. Geneva, Rep.
CIMO, Working Group on Evaporation Measurement. WMO. Tech. Note 83.
Gilbert, M.J. & Van Bavel, C.H.M. 1954 A simple field installation for measuring maximum evapotranspiration.
apotranspiration. Amer. Geophys. Union, Trans. 35: 937-942.
Hagan, E.M., Haise, H.R., & Edminster, T.W. 1967 Irrigation of agricultural lands. Wisconsin, Amer. Soc. Agron
II.
Harrold, L.L. & Dreilbelbis, F.R. 1958 Evaluation of agricultural hydrology by monolith lysimeter. USDA Tech.
Bull. 1179, 1-166.
Harrold, L.L. & Dreilbelbis, F.R. 1967 Evaluation of agricultural hydrology by monolith lysimeter. USDA Tech.
Bull. 1367: 1-123.
Harrold, L.L. 1968 Measuring evapotranspiration by lysimetry, ASAE, 28-33.
Hayes, G.I. & Buell, J.H. 1955 Water and our forests: trees also need water at the right time and place. In Hater
Yearbook, USDA 1955: 219-28.
Hershfield, D.M. 1964 Effective rainfall and irrigation water requirements. J. Irrig. and Dr. Div. ASCE 90: IR 2:
3920: 33-47.
Hillel, D. et al. 1969 New design of a low cost hydraulic lysimeter system for field measurement of
evapotranspiration. Israel J. Agri. Res. 19: (2), 57-63.
Hillel, D., Krentos V.D. &. Stylianou. 1972 Procedure for and test of an internal drainage method for measuring
soil hydraulic characteristics in situ. Soil Sci. 114 No. 5. 395-400p.
Jenkins, W.J. 1951 Dry farming in Australia. Bom. Agri. Dept. Bull. 184.

57
Kanitkar, M.V. 1944 Dry farming in India. ICAR Sci. Monograph No. 15. New Delhi.
Khushlani, K.B. 1956 Irrigation: practices and design. Vol. 1. New Delhi, Gent. Water & Power Comm.,
Government of India.
Konstantinov, A.I. 1963 Evaporation in nature. Leningrad, Gidrometeoizdat.
Kung, P. 1971 Irrigation agronomy in monsoon Asia. Rome, AGPC MISC/2 FAO.
Lang, R, 1920 Verwitterungund Bodenbildeng ALS einfuhrung in die Boden-Kunde, as quoted by Thornthwaite,
C.W. and Holzman, B. (1942). Measurement of evaporation from land and water surfaces. USDA Tech. Bull.
817; 1-143.
Linacre, E.T, 1963 Determining evapotranspiration rates. J. Agri. Sci. 29 (3): 165 - 67.
McGuinness,, J.L. & Bordne, E.F. 1972 A comparison of lysimeter derived PET with computed values. ARS,
USDA Tech. Bull. 1452.
MoIlroy, I.C, & Angus, E.D. 1963 The aspendale multiple weighed lysimeter installation. Tech. P. 14.
Melbourne, CSIRO, Div. Meteorol. Physics. 1-29.
Miller, A. & Thompson, J.C. 1970 Elements of meteorology. Ohio, Merrill Pub. Co.
Molen, W.H. van der & Boumans, J.H. 1963 Drainage in relation to salinity. Syllabus 2nd. Wageningen, Post
Grd. Training Centre on Land Drainage, Intern. Inst. for Land Reel. and Improvement.
Ogrosky, H.O. & Mockus, V. 1964 Hydrology of agricultural lands. Sec. 21 in Handbook of hydrology by V.T.
Chow. Hew York, McGraw Hill Book Co. 1-79.
Penman, H.L. 1948 Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil and grass. London, Proc. Roy. Soc. (Ser.A)
193: 120-45.
Pharande, K.S. & Dastane, N.G. 1964 Effective rainfall. New Delhi, Postgraduate School J., Indian Agri. Res,
Inst.
Prescott, J.A. 1949 A climatic index for leaching factor in the soil formation. J. Soil Sci. I (I): 9-19.
Pruitt, W.O. & Angus, D.E. 1960 Large weighing lysimeter for measuring evapotranspiration. Amer Soc. Agro.
Eng. Trans. 3: 13-15, 18.
Ramdas, L.A. 1960 Crops and weather in India. New Delhi, Indian Council of Agri Res. Pub.
Rege, R.D. et al. 1943 Problems of sugarcane physiology in the Deccan Canal tract. Water requirement. Indian J.
Agri. Sci. 8: 413-33.
Rose, C.W., Byrne, G.F. & Begg, J.E. 1966 An accurate hydraulic lysimeter with remote weight recording.
CSIRO. Div. Land Res. Tech. P. 27: 1-31.
Sastry, A.S.R. 1956 Utilizable rainfall by the crops. India, Ann. Rep. Gent. Board Irri. and Power. 315-24.
Slatyer, R.O. & McIlroy, I.G. 1961 Practical micro-climatology with special reference to water in soil-plant-
atmospheric relationships. GSIRO Australia. 1-296.
Stamm, G.G. 1967 Problems and procedures in determining water supply requirements for irrigation projects.
Chap. 40 in irrigation of agricultural lands by Hagan et al. Wisconsin, Amer. Soc. Agron. Agronomy II.
Stanhill, G. 1958 An irrigation gauge for commercial use in field and glass house practice. J. Agri. Engr. Res. 3:
292-298.
Tanner, C.B. 1967 Measurement of evapotranspiration. Chapter 29 in irrigation of agricultural lands. Agron II.
Wisconsin, Amer Soc. Agron.
Thornthwaite, C.W. 1931 The climate of North America according to a new classification. Geog. Rev. 21 (4):
633-55.
Thornthwaite, C.W. 1948 An approach towards a rational classification of climates. Geog. Rev. 38; 55-94.
Thornthwaite, C.W. & Mather, J.R. 1955 The water balance. Drexel Inst. Tech. Publ. in Climatol, 8: 1-104.
Transeau, E.N. 1905 Forest centres of E. America. Amer. Naturalist 39. 875-89.
U.S. Dept. of Agri. (Soil Con. Service). 1967b Irrigation water requirements. T.P.21.
U.S. Dept. of Agri. (Soil Con. Service). 1967c National eng. handbook, Sec. 4 hydrology. Suppl. A, Part 3. 18.
U.S. Dept. of Agri. (Ari. Res. Service). 1968 Field manual for research in agricultural hydrology. Agri.
Handbook No. 224.
U.S. Dept. of Agri. (Soil Con. Service). 1969 Engineering field manual for conservation practices.
FAO IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PAPERS
1. Irrigation practice and water management, 1971 (E* F* S*)
2. Irrigation canal lining, 1971 (E**** F**** S****)
3. Design criteria for basin irrigation systems, 1971 (E**)
4. Village irrigation programmes - a new approach in water economy, 1971 (E* F*)
5. Automated irrigation, 1971 (E* F* S**)
6. Drainage of heavy soils, 1971 (E* F* S***)

58
7. Salinity seminar, Baghdad, 1971 (E* F*)
8. Water and the environmente, 1971 (E* F* S*)
9. Drainage materials, 1972 (E* F* S*)
10. Integrated farm water management, 1971 (E* F* S*)
11. Planning methodology seminar, Bucharest, 1972 (E* F*)
12. Farm water management seminar, Manila, 1972 (E*)
13. Water-use seminar, Damascus, 1972 (E* F*) -
14. Trickle irrigation, 1973 (E* F* S*)
15. Drainage machinery, 1973 (E* F*)
16. Drainage of salty soils, 1973 (E* F* S*)
17. Man's influence on the hydrological cycle, 1973 (E* F* S**)
18. Groundwater seminar, Granada, 1973 (E* F* S**)
19. Mathematical models in hydrology, 1973 (E*)
20. Water laws in Moslem countries, Vol. 1, 1973 (E* F* A***)
21. Groundwater models, 1973 (E*)
22. Water for agriculture, 1973 (E** F** S**)
23. Simulation methods in water development, 1974 (E** F** S**)
24. Crop water requirements (revised), 1977 (E* F* S*)
25. Effective rainfall, 1974 (E* F* S*)
26. Small hydraulic structures (Vole. 1 and 2), 1975 (E* F*** S*)
27. Agro-meteorological field stations, 1976 (E* F*** S***)
28. Drainage testing, 1976 (E* F*** S***)
29. Water quality for agriculture, 1976 (E* F* S*)
30. Self-help wells, 1977 (E***)
Availability: February 1978
E - English * Available
F - French ** Out of print
S - Spanish *** In preparation
A - Arabic **** New edition in preparation in the FAO Land and Water Development Series:
FAO Irrigation and Drainage Papers ore available through authorized
FAO Sales Agents or directly from Distribution and Sales Section,
FAO, Via delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy

59