Figure 1:
Spam traffic sample.
Figure 2:
An overview of the system. IoT, Internet of Things.
Figure 3:
System control architecture.
Figure 4:
Block diagram of wireless sensor node.
Table 1:
Nomenclature used in the work.
| Symbol | Definition |
|---|---|
| Sm | Soil moisture |
| t | Ambient temperature |
| h | Ambient humidity |
| Fm | Flow meter |
| Pwl | Pump water level |
| Twl | Tank water level |
| ir_on | Start irrigation |
| ir_off | Stop irrigation |
| Vref_fm | Flow meter reference value |
| prv | Water level reference value |
| trv | Tank level reference value |
| Vref_sm | Soil moisture reference value |
| ET0 | Reference evapotranspiration |
| ETC | Crop evapotranspiration |
| Sa | Area of evapotranspiration |
| Ra | Active radius |
| ETm | Palm evapotranspiration |
| ψ | Function modeled using neural network |
| Wc | Crop water needs as a function of ψ |
| Sv1 | Solenoid valve1 |
| Sv2 | Solenoid valve2 |
| IA | Area actually irrigated in percentage. |
| C | Irrigated crop |
| CIc | Crop intensity |
| Kc | Crop coefficient |
| Ppi | Palm production income |
| Popi | Pomegranate production income |
Figure 5:
Proposed algorithm scheme.
Figure 6:
The organizational chart of irrigation algorithm.
| 1: Inputs: trv, prv |
| 2: Output: ir_on or ir_off |
| 3: for setup do |
| 4: Select → pwl for prv & twl for trv |
| 5: end for |
| 6: for~setup do |
| 7: Read t, h, Sm, Fm |
| 8: Connect and send data using QTT |
| 9: Switch (expression [W]) |
| 10: { |
| 11: Case Sv1:….break |
| 12: Case Sv2:….break |
| 13: } |
| 14: end for |
| 15: End |
| 1: Inputs: S |
| 2: Output:P |
| 3: for setup do |
| 4: for i: = 1 to 2 do |
| 5: while (Vref_sm > Sm & Twl > trv & Vref_fm > Fm) |
| 6: Svi→Ci |
| 7: Read(Svi) |
| 8: end for |
| 9: end for |
| 10: End |
Figure 7:
Farm’s layout prototype and smart irrigation system.
Table 2:
Settings for deployment.
| Parameter | Value | Voltage |
|---|---|---|
| Wi-Fi-module | ESP8266 | 3.3–5.5 V |
| Humidity and temperature | DHT11 | 5.5 V |
| Switch module × 5 | (4) Channels | 5.0 V |
| Solenoid valve | Brass valve 1/2 3/4 | 12 V |
| Flow meter | – | – |
| Water level sensor | Float switch | 12 V |
| Architecture | Crop field | – |
Figure 8:
The control box design for installation.
Figure 9:
Overall system design.
Figure 10:
Detailed controller interface diagram.
Figure 11:
Different real studied cases.
Table 3:
The predefined parameters and the products (palm and pomegranate).
| Years | Palm’s products (Date Nour) and predefined parameter | Pomegranate’s products and predefined parameter | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Temp (°C) | DHT (%) | Hum_sol (%) | Water_irr (m3/tree) | Kg/tree | Temp (°C) | DHT (%) | Hum_sol (%) | Water_irr(m3/tree) | Kg/tree | |
| Winter | 12 | 65.82 | – | 8.67 | 12 | 65.82 | – | 2.6 | ||
| Autumn | 22.66 | 51.49 | – | 4.8 | 80.5 | 22.66 | 51.49 | – | 3.03 | |
| 2016 | 18.14 | |||||||||
| Spring | 20.33 | 46.28 | – | 8.15 | 20.33 | 46.28 | – | 5.82 | ||
| Summer | 30.66 | 42.72 | – | 7.29 | 30.66 | 42.72 | – | 7.19 | ||
| Winter | 10.77 | 62.93 | – | 7.52 | 10.77 | 62.93 | – | 3.25 | ||
| Autumn | 21.4 | 55.88 | – | 4.13 | 21.4 | 55.88 | – | 1.94 | ||
| 2017 | 110.5 | 15.87 | ||||||||
| Spring | 22.17 | 48 | – | 8 | 22.17 | 48 | – | 2.89 | ||
| Summer | 31.37 | 39.55 | – | 8.3 | 31.37 | 39.55 | – | 6.02 | ||
| Winter | 11.91 | 60.13 | – | 6.41 | 11.91 | 60.13 | – | 1.88 | ||
| Autumn | 22.71 | 52.81 | – | 3.89 | 22.71 | 52.81 | – | 2.09 | ||
| 2018 | 99 | 20.41 | ||||||||
| Spring | 21.15 | 47.08 | – | 7.94 | 21.15 | 47.08 | – | 2.91 | ||
| Summer | 31 | 43.9 | – | 9.01 | 31 | 43.9 | – | 5.79 | ||
Table 4:
The measured parameters and the products (palm and pomegranate).
| Years | Palm’s products (Date Nour) and measured parameters | Pomegranate products and measured parameters | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Temp (°C) | DHT (%) | Hum_sol (%) | Water_irr (m3/tree) | Kg/tree | Temp (°C) | DHT (%) | Hum_sol (%) | Water_irr (m3/tree) | Kg/tree | |
| Winter | 11.89 | 53.47 | 85.11 | 5.81 | 11.89 | 53.47 | 79.42 | 0.16 | ||
| Autumn | 22.52 | 54.11 | 59.56 | 3.09 | 125.5 | 22.52 | 54.11 | 61.08 | 0.8 | |
| 2019 | 27.3 | |||||||||
| Spring | 19.72 | 46.17 | 80.47 | 6.92 | 19.72 | 46.17 | 69.75 | 2.4 | ||
| Summer | 32.23 | 37.45 | 52.6 | 7.15 | 32.23 | 37.45 | 59.82 | 5.28 | ||
| Winter | 12.11 | 57.67 | 74.27 | 5.17 | 12.11 | 57.67 | 71.41 | 0.85 | ||
| Autumn | 22.85 | 53.15 | 67.87 | 3.90 | 22.85 | 53.15 | 59.17 | 1.04 | ||
| 2020 | 127 | 29.48 | ||||||||
| Spring | 21.27 | 48.67 | 69.58 | 4.98 | 21.27 | 48.67 | 62.3 | 3.29 | ||
| Summer | 31.16 | 41.02 | 55.57 | 7.06 | 31.16 | 41.02 | 55.8 | 6.42 | ||
| Winter | 12.65 | 51.09 | 81.19 | 6.95 | 12.65 | 51.09 | 80.05 | 1.98 | ||
| Autumn | 24.10 | 51.85 | 66.4 | 3.28 | 24.10 | 51.85 | 62.71 | 2.77 | ||
| 2021 | 126.5 | 31.75 | ||||||||
| Spring | 22.29 | 54.16 | 68.82 | 7.05 | 22.29 | 54.16 | 63.6 | 2.69 | ||
| Summer | 35.29 | 38.56 | 52.59 | 8.20 | 35.29 | 38.56 | 59.47 | 6.88 | ||
Table 5:
The production income (palm and pomegranate).
| Years | Ppi (Date Nour) | Max Z | ∆ | % ∆ | Popi (TND) | Max Z | ∆ | %∆ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 14892 | ~14830 | 62 | 0.42 | 1387 | ~1265 | 122 | 0.82 |
| 2017 | 19890 | ~19780 | 110 | 0.55 | 1249 | ~1270 | 21 | 1.68 |
| 2018 | 17820 | ~17960 | 140 | 0.78 | 1441 | ~1389 | 52 | 3.61 |
| 2019 | 31375 | ~30975 | 400 | 1.27 | 2149 | ~2158 | 9 | 4.19 |
| 2020 | 29845 | ~28741 | 1104 | 3.7 | 2653 | ~2710 | 57 | 2.15 |
| 2021 | 25300 | ~26050 | 750 | 3 | 2640 | ~2609 | 31 | 1.17 |
Figure 12:
An illustration of a mobile irrigation control application.
Figure 13:
IoT data that boost productivity. IoT, Internet of Things.
Figure 14:
IoT information, variations, and simulation of data between them. IoT, Internet of Things.