Watson, Caitlin (2023) Comparison of hand watering scheduling methods in domestic gardens. [USQ Project]
![[img]](https://sear.unisq.edu.au/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text (Project – redacted)
Watson_C_Gillies Dissertation_Redacted.pdf Download (6MB) |
Abstract
This project aimed to determine a method of irrigation scheduling using affordable, simple to use technology for manual watering of domestic gardens. Literature shows the volume of hand watering is often inefficient, either water is applied in excess of or too little of what is required by plants (Singer and Munns 2006, p.115; Manning et al. (2013, p.4).
Four methods (M1, M2, M3 and M4) of scheduling hand irrigation were trialed on a vegetable patch in Toowoomba, Queensland during phase 1 of trials (December to February). M1 was a control for comparison - the gardener applied water when they intuitively thought it was required and in amounts they arbitrarily thought appropriate. An irrigation amount of 22mm per application was applied to all other methods. M2 utilised a 3in1 soil meter, which was calibrated by intuition during phase 1. At the end of the phase, the results were averaged on what value irrigation occurred on for 5, 10, and 15cm depths. From this it was determined irrigation should occur by the time a minimum value of 4 and 7 was indicated on the probe for the 5 and 10cm depths respectively. M3 was based on a theoretical landscape evapotranspiration calculation, however plants quickly deteriorated using this method and it was stopped due to insufficient water application and no further calibration of this method was used.
During phase 2 (February to June), M1 and M2 continued and a new method (M4) was introduced. This method assumed the weight loss in a pot plant was due to evapotranspiration, and irrigation occurred at 22mm. M2 was further adjusted, as the values didn’t occur congruently and the 5cm value requirement was discontinued. M1 applied the most irrigation(1175mm), and M2 applied the least (603mm). M3 applied 932mm.
The results of M1, M2, and M4 were compared to theoretical irrigation schedules based on the estimated seasonal (M6) evapotranspiration rates. In all three trialed methods, over-watering was significant. Estimated amounts for each trial plot were 374mm, 286mm, and 374mm for plots associated with M1, M2, and M4 respectively. Gross over watering occurred in M1, with M2 almost doubling the amount of water applied during the trial compared to the estimated amount required.
Copious amounts of data were collected as part of this feasibility study. Further analysis needs to be conducted to make more detailed connections. Further suggested works include: a survey to gauge end user interest and attitudes, and a new trial should be conducted with a larger gardener sample, soil type, and/or seasonal variation.
|
Statistics for this ePrint Item |
| Item Type: | USQ Project |
|---|---|
| Item Status: | Live Archive |
| Faculty/School / Institute/Centre: | Current – Faculty of Health, Engineering and Sciences - School of Agriculture and Environmental Science (1 Jan 2022 -) |
| Supervisors: | Gillies, Malcolm |
| Qualification: | Bachelor of Engineering (Honours) (Environmental) |
| Date Deposited: | 02 Oct 2025 01:47 |
| Last Modified: | 02 Oct 2025 01:47 |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | hand watering; domestic gardens |
| URI: | https://sear.unisq.edu.au/id/eprint/53011 |
Actions (login required)
 |
Archive Repository Staff Only |
