Lee
unread,Feb 11, 2024, 4:26:51 AM2/11/24Sign in to reply to author
Sign in to forward
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to SWAT-user
Hi SWAT Community,
I'm currently working with reservoir irrigation in my SWAT model, specifically using manual irrigation settings with an IRR_EFM (irrigation efficiency) of 0.7 and ICANAL set to 1. My goal is to simulate the 30% conveyance loss that occurs as water travels through a canal from the reservoir to the irrigated HRU. However, I've encountered a challenge: I cannot input a canal shapefile into SWAT, which leaves me questioning how SWAT simulates conveyance loss without explicit canal location data.
The SWAT theory documentation (2009) mentions that an irrigation efficiency factor accounts for losses from the source to the soil, including both conveyance and evaporative loss. This raises a question: where exactly does SWAT simulate this conveyance loss? Is it assumed to occur within the irrigated HRU itself, implying that water is transferred from the reservoir to the HRU without in-between losses, and that both conveyance and evaporative losses are modeled only within the HRU?
Additionally, I'm seeking clarity on the role of ICANAL, which, according to the SWAT input/output documentation (2012), is a code for irrigation canals, with 0 indicating no canal and 1 indicating an irrigation canal that restricts outflow. However, I find the input/output documentation and theory documentation lack detailed explanation of how ICANAL influences the simulation.
Could anyone provide insights or further explanation on how conveyance losses are modeled in SWAT, especially in the absence of explicit canal location data, and the exact functionality of ICANAL in this context?
Thank you for your assistance.
Best,
Lee