引用本文: | 李文军,莫彦,王振华,等.管道布置形式对毛管末端自动冲洗阀水力性能的影响研究[J].灌溉排水学报,0,():-. |
| Li Wenjun,MO Yan,Wang Zhenhua,et al.管道布置形式对毛管末端自动冲洗阀水力性能的影响研究[J].灌溉排水学报,0,():-. |
|
摘要: |
【目的】探究不同管道布置形式下毛管末端自动冲洗阀水力性能的响应规律,为冲洗阀在滴灌系统中的设计及应用提供理论依据。【方法】利用3D打印加工了4种规格冲洗阀,测试冲洗阀安装在φ16PE管末端(C1)、在1条48 m长滴灌带末端(C2)、在2条48 m长滴灌带并联后的末端(C3)3种布置形式下,冲洗时长FD、冲洗水量FQ、冲洗流速FV、自动关闭所需毛管进口压力最小值H1min等指标的响应规律。【结果】在C2和C3布置形式下,单条毛管冲洗流速由0.82~1.03 m/s降低到0.34~0.66 m/s,毛管进口压力H1和冲洗阀进口压力H2的差值分别为0.114~0.132 Mpa和0.047~0.088 Mpa;相比于C2,C1和C3布置形式的H1min分别平均降低了74.8%和40.4%;当FD或FQ相同时,4种规格冲洗阀所需的H1的大小顺序为C2>C3>C1;当H2<0.05 Mpa,FD下降幅度较大,平均为999.75 s/Mpa,当H2>0.05 Mpa,FD下降幅度较慢,平均为164.7 s/Mpa;无论管道布置形式,FD和FQ与H2成二次函数关系。【结论】FD和FQ与H2相关,与管道布置形式无关;当H2>0.05 Mpa时,FD变化稳定,冲洗效果比较均匀;多条毛管并联后连接冲洗阀可以降低冲洗阀自动关闭所需系统供压,提高冲洗阀的适用性,但冲洗性能能否满足冲洗要求还需要进一步研究。 |
关键词: 引黄滴灌;自动冲洗阀;冲洗时长;冲洗水量;冲洗流速 |
DOI: |
分类号:S275.6 |
基金项目:中国水科院基本科研业务费项目(ID0145B042021),国家重点研发专项课题(2019YFC0409203),国家自然科学基金(51909276),兵团南疆重点产业创新发展支撑计划项目(2020DB004) |
|
Study on the effect of dripline layout form on hydraulic performance of automatic flushing Valve |
Li Wenjun1, MO Yan2, Wang Zhenhua1, Wang Jiandong3, Zhang Yanqun2, Gong Shihong2, Li Qiaoling2
|
1.College of Water Conservancy and Architectural Engineerin, Shihezi University;2.Department of Irrigation and Drainage,China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research;3.Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development in Agriculture, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences
|
Abstract: |
[Objective] To explore the response law of hydraulic performance of automatic flushing valve for drip irrigation under different dripline layout forms, and to provide theoretical basis for the design and application of automatic flushing valve in drip irrigation system. [Method] Four kinds of flushing valves were processed by 3D printing. The flushing valves were installed at the end of 0.5 m Φ16PE pipe (C1), a 48 m long dripline (C2), and two 48 m long driplines which were connected in parallel (C3). The response law of the flushing duration (FD), flushing water volume (FQ), flushing velocity (FV) and the minimum inlet pressure of the dripline required for flushing valve automatic closing (H1min) were studied. Under C2 and C3 treatment, the flushing velocity of single dripline decreases from 0.82~1.03 m/s to 0.34~0.66 m/s, and the difference between dripline inlet pressure H1 and flushing valve inlet pressure H2 is 0.114~0.132 Mpa and 0.047~0.088 Mpa, respectively. Compared with C2, H1min of C1 and C3 treatment decreased by 74.8% and 40.4% on average, respectively. When FD or FQ is the same, the order of H1 required for the four flushing valves is C2 > C3 > C1. When H2 < 0.05 Mpa, FD decreased quickly by 999.75 s/Mpa on average, while when H2 > 0.05 Mpa, FD decreased slowly by 164.7 s/Mpa on average. Regardless of dripline layout form, FD and FQ are quadratic functions of H2. [Conclusion] The FD and FQ are related to H2, and have nothing to do with the dripline layout form. When H2 > 0.05 Mpa, FD changes steadily and the flushing effect would be uniform. Connecting the flushing valve at the end of multiple driplines in parallel can reduce the system pressure for automatic closing of the flushing valve, and could improve the applicability of the flushing valve. However, whether the flushing performance can meet the flushing requirements needs further study. |
Key words: Drip irrigation with Yellow River Water; Automatic flushing valve; flushing duration; flushing water volume; flushing velocity |