International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2022) 8:13

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-022-00360-8

TECHNICAL NOTE

Development and Evaluation of Arduino‑Based Automatic Irrigation

System for Regulation of Soil Moisture
Hong‑Hu Zhu1 · Yuan‑Xu Huang2 · He Huang2 · Ankit Garg2   · Guo‑Xiong Mei3 · Hai‑Hong Song2

Received: 6 August 2021 / Accepted: 17 January 2022 / Published online: 31 January 2022
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022

Abstract
In cities, green infrastructure has been used to mitigate flood risk, improve water quality, and harvest precipitation as a
water source. Effective maintenance of green infrastructure requires optimal irrigation of plant root systems during the
prolonged drying period. Based on the measurement of soil moisture, various drip irrigation systems have been developed.
Surface irrigation, however, has the disadvantage of loss of soil moisture through evaporation. In addition, the growth of
plants is mainly dependent on subsurface soil moisture, especially within the root zones. Therefore, there is a need to develop
an automatic system regulating soil moisture at different depths. In this study, an Arduino-based irrigation control system
was developed to regulate the volumetric water contents of soil within a certain depth range. A one-dimensional soil col-
umn test was conducted to demonstrate its performance. The test results show that the system enabled the regulation of soil
water content within the specified range (12–20%) with an error of 2%. The error was further minimized by recalibrating
the upper limit of the system. This study provides an improved green infrastructure irrigation system to control the moisture
distribution within the soil subsurface.

Keywords  Automatic irrigation system · Subsurface · Soil moisture · Arduino

Introduction
A case study of Beijing shows that 53.1% of farmers
adopted engineering water-saving irrigation technolo-
gies to cope with water scarcity, such as using automatic
irrigation systems (AISs) [1]. Process automation as
an improvement of irrigation control systems has been
applied for a long time [2]. Dominguez-Nino et al. [3]
used differential irrigation scheduling using an automated
algorithm of water balance. Their results show that the
crop irrigated by AIS had similar performances com-
pared with that managed by an experienced farmer. The
AIS used by Barkunan et al. [4] initially captures a soil
* Ankit Garg
ankit@stu.edu.cn
1
School of Earth Sciences and Engineering, Nanjing
University, Nanjing 210023, People’s Republic of China
2
Guangdong Engineering Center for Structure Safety
and Health Monitoring, Shantou University, Shantou,
People’s Republic of China
3
College of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Guangxi
University, Nanning, People’s Republic of China
image, then calculates its wetness level and finally sends
the data to the microcontroller and the farmer’s mobile
phone. After three months of testing, it was found that
in comparison with conventional flood and drip irriga-
tion, the AIS could save nearly 41.5% and 13% of water,
respectively.
The upgradation of microcontrollers, soil moisture
sensors, and their control programs can also enhance the
efficiency of the irrigation control system [5, 6]. One
component that has been widely used in irrigation control
systems is Arduino. As a portable open-source electronic
platform, Arduino can be programmed, verified, and
uploaded to microcontrollers to design embedded appli-
cations of irrigation control systems [7]. Many studies
combine soil moisture sensors with Arduino to establish
irrigation control systems. Moisture content is often used
as a control parameter since it can be determined from
the dielectric permittivity of water, which is greatly dis-
tinct from that of air, soil minerals, or organic matter.
Thus, changes in volumetric water contents (VWCs) of
in situ soils can be detected using the sensor [8, 9]. In the
study of Rahim et al. [10], two types of controllers have
been compared, including the Fuzzy Logic Controller

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
13 
Page 2 of 9
and On–off Controller. The former was more efficient
than the latter in terms of water usage. Fiber optic sen-
sors and digital image processing methods have recently
been developed for soil moisture measurement [11–13].
These methods further enhance the measuring accuracy
and spatial coverage of irrigation control systems. An
attempt was recently made to reduce the sensor size to
avoid disturbance to the soil mass [14].
Currently, most irrigation control systems are based on
the measurement of near-surface soil moisture [4, 15]. Sur-
face irrigation, however, has the disadvantage of loss of
soil moisture through evaporation. In addition, the growth
of plants is mainly dependent on subsurface soil moisture,
especially within the root zones. Therefore, there is an urgent
need to develop an automatic system regulating soil moisture
at different depths.
On the other hand, to design an effective ground irrigation
system, it is vital to understand the water uptake and trans-
port process in plants. Water uptake by plant roots depends
on the transpiration reduction function and root distribution
[16]. The former signifies the relationship between normal-
ized root water uptake with soil moisture or matric poten-
tial [17]. When the soil moisture is lower than the optimum
water content, the actual transpiration term model can be
presented as:
S(h) = 𝛼(h)Smax , (1)
where S(h) is the actual plant evapotranspiration; Smax is
the maximum plant evapotranspiration; α(h) is the pre-
scribed transpiration reduction function; and h is the pres-
sure head. Figure 1 shows the actual evapotranspiration
model proposed by [16]. In the figure, h1 is the anaerobio-
sis point, while h4 is the wilting point. When h is above
h1 or below h4, the root water uptake is assumed to be nil.
The range between h2 and h3 is the field capacity, and h3
Fig. 1  Typical transpiration
reduction function showing the
relationship between normal-
ized root water uptake with soil
matric potential
13
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2022) 8:13
depends on the transpiration demand of the atmosphere.
For soil moisture that varies within the range of field
capacity, the root water uptake is assumed to be maxi-
mum. In addition to the transpiration reduction function,
another parameter that affects water uptake at different
depths is root distribution. Several types of root distribu-
tion functions, such as uniform [16], linear [18], and para-
bolic [19], have been proposed. These root distributions
signify the nonuniformity in root water uptake within the
subsurface. Such a distribution will also influence the
efficient usage of irrigated water, which is usually not
taken into account in previous systems [1]. In general,
the water requirement for a plant is not uniform in their
different life stages. Hence, it is also essential to regulate
soil water contents at different depths. Such a system is
an invaluable tool to control water distribution in “Green
infrastructure”, which has been used to mitigate flood risk
and improve water quality and harvest precipitation as a
water source in urban areas. Normally, green infrastruc-
ture consists of vegetated rooftops, roadside plantings,
absorbent gardens, and biofiltration units for stormwater
management [20]. They utilize various vegetation whose
root depths may go up to 15  cm. Furthermore, irriga-
tion of green infrastructure is critical for its maintenance,
especially in a metropolis region where time and cost
become most important.
This study proposes a simple irrigation control system
for regulating subsurface soil moisture. An Arduino-based
control system that governs the VWCs of the soil at different
depths within a specific range has been designed and devel-
oped. The system details are introduced, followed by vali-
dation using a one-dimensional (1D) soil column test. The
performance of the automated irrigation system for green
infrastructure is then interpreted using the measurement of
soil volumetric water content under automated irrigation.
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2022) 8:13 Page 3 of 9  13
Multiple soil moisture
sensors
PC with LabVIEW Arduino
3
Water tube at a
programing interface, LabVIEW
4 depth of 5 cm
5 Water tube at a
Water pump
depth of 10 cm
Water tube at a
depth of 15 cm
(a)
(c)
Fig. 2  a Processing flow chart and b control unit of irrigation control
system containing Arduinofg uno, soil moisture sensors, water pump,
relay module, c, d LabVIEW Graphical interface in PC. Arduino uno
Methodology
Proposed Control Irrigation System
Figure 2 shows the processing flow chart and the control
unit of the irrigation control system containing multiple
soil moisture sensors (installed at various depths of soil),
water irrigation pump, Arduino Uno (the control unit) and
PC LabVIEW (Laboratory Virtual Instrument Engineering
Workbench). LabVIEW is a visual programming language
platform that was developed by national instruments (NI),
USA [21]. Once a measurement is acquired, the written pro-
gram in LabVIEW can analyze it with the help of built-in
library functions. New algorithms can be designed, and the
output can be displayed using a computer [22].
In addition, a relay module and a power supply for
Arduino are also needed. The working logic of this system
is mentioned as follows. (1) Arduino Uno receives the VWC
information from the soil moisture sensor; (2) Arduino Uno
deals with the data and then converts electrical signals into
digital signals, which are sent to the PC by a USB cable; (3)
The data is compared with the range of soil moisture range
set in LabVIEW. If the current soil moisture reading is lower
Soil moisture sensors
USB Cable to computer for
Relay module
Transformer
Circuit board
(b)
(d)
deals with the data and regulate the water pump based on data col-
lected from soil moisture sensors
than the lower bound, Arduino sends a signal to turn on the
water pump. On the other hand, if the soil moisture is higher
than the upper bound, Arduino sends a command to turn off
the water pump. The purpose of setting up a soil moisture
range instead of just setting one limited value is to protect
the relay module and the water pump and thus prolong the
service life of the equipment. The EC-5 sensor fabricated by
Decagon Services Ltd. is adopted for measuring soil mois-
ture in terms of VWC. The rated accuracy of EC-5 is ±1–2%
VWC with soil-specific calibration and ±3% VWC for pot-
ting soil (3–14 dS/m) [23, 24]. A water pump (220 V, 2.5 W)
was used to irrigate the soil. The delivery head of the pump
is 0.4 m and can transport 200 L of water in an hour under
the maximum power. Due to the benefit of the LabVIEW
interface (Fig. 2c, d), it is relatively easy to send a command
to the water pump to switch it ON or OFF. The input device
(in this case, EC-5 sensor) is selected. Real-time data from
EC-5 sensors can be displayed. The user interface allows
utilizing individual values or averages of three sensors to
further examine whether the soil moisture at each depth lies
within a specified range or not. Autocontrol can be switched
on to control the water pump based on soil moisture readings
at each depth and corresponding criteria. To obtain the soil
13
13 
Page 4 of 9 International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2022) 8:13
Table 1  Summary of various hardware utilized in soil moisture regulation (i.e., or irrigation) control system
Element Model number Power requirement
Water content sensors EC-5 2.5–3.6VDS 10 mA
Relay module SRD-05VDC-SL-C 250 V 10A
Transformer From 220 to 5 V
Circuit board DSP28035 U21A
Water pump 2.5 W 220 V
Tube
Wire
Total
suction at the pumping depth, a soil suction sensor MPS-5
was placed at this depth and connected with ProCheck (a
portable reading device). Measurements were recorded at
30-min intervals during the testing period.
Table 1 summarizes the cost and the main functions of
hardware utilized in soil moisture regulation (i.e., or irriga-
tion) control systems. The major cost of the system is from
EC-5, which is a relatively cheap and reliable sensor widely
used in laboratory tests and field monitoring [25–27]. Com-
bining the economic benefits of reduction in water usage and
labor cost, this system seems to have the potential to over-
come its hardware cost. Furthermore, it can also improve
the performance of green infrastructure through enhanced
vegetation growth under regulated soil moisture.
Setup of the Soil Column for Preliminary Testing
of the Proposed Irrigation Control System
Figure 3a shows an overview of the experimental setup
containing a 1D soil column [25 cm (height) and 20 cm
(diameter)] connected with the proposed irrigation control
system (Fig. 2b). Holes were drilled at the bottom of the test
container to allow drainage of water. Since this experiment
aimed to evaluate the functioning of the proposed irrigation
control system, the test soil was compacted at 70% degree
of compaction with a soil density of 1.3 g/cm3. Similar com-
paction levels are often adopted in green infrastructure (i.e.,
green roofs [28]). The soil selected for investigation is silty
sand, which contains approximately 92% sand, 7% silt and
1% clay by weight.
Three acrylic tubes (inner and outer diameters of 8 mm
and 10 mm, respectively) were inserted in the soil column
from sides at different depths (5 cm, 10 cm and 15 cm, refer
to Fig. 3b) for irrigation. These tubes were inserted into the
soil up to the column center. These tubes have minute holes
(perforated) facing downward to allow water flow by gravity.
The hole size was determined based on trial experiments,
which were conducted in a pot to check smooth water flow
under similar soil conditions. Based on trial experiments, the
13
Price (Chinese Main function
RMB)
1500 Measuring soil volumetric water content
4 Connecting Arduino with water pump
67 Regulating voltage
30 Connecting the lead of components
10 Drawing water
2
5
1618
size of holes was selected to minimize its blockage caused
by soil grains. Ball valves, hose pipes and plastic pipes were
used to make a composite for smooth passage of water from
a source (i.e., a bucket of water, as shown in Fig. 3a, c). For
simplicity, the initial VWC before the start of testing was
kept close to the residual condition by subjecting the column
to natural drying for 60 days under no irrigation. The lower
and upper limits were set as 12% and 20%, respectively. This
particular range corresponds to the field capacity for silty
sand soils [29]. It is assumed that moisture in the entire 1D
column has come to equilibrium at residual water content.
Soil VWC, soil matric suction, and weight of water in the
bucket (i.e., water source) were constantly measured with
time. The irrigation control system was switched on to auto-
matically control irrigation based on detected soil moisture
at different depths. The test was stopped after more than
three drying–wetting cycles.
The EC-5 calibration method is as follows: first, the sen-
sor is completely immersed in water. At this time, the indica-
tor number in LabVIEW is the highest value, and the average
value is obtained by placing EC-5 into the water repeatedly,
which is 100%. Secondly, the sensor is completely placed
in a sandy loam that is oven dried at 105 ℃ for 24 h. The
sensor is also placed repeatedly to obtain an average value of
0%. Finally, the lowest value was subtracted from the high-
est value to determine the corresponding calibrated range
in LABVIEW. The range was divided into 100 equal parts
for determining the corresponding values in LabVIEW for
12% and 20%.
The soil suction sensor (TEROS 21) consists of an oscil-
lator (for indirectly measuring dielectric permittivity and
water content) and a piece of porous ceramic disk with a
known water release curve. During suction measurement,
the oscillator is used to generate an electromagnetic field,
which charges the ceramic disk. The stored charge is then
used to deduce the dielectric permittivity and correspond-
ing water content. When the water in the surrounding soil
reaches equilibrium within the ceramic disk, the water
content of the porous material is then determined using
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2022) 8:13 Page 5 of 9  13

USB cable to Acrylic tube

Arduino
computer for
L=15 cm D=10 mm
programing One cm one hole d=8 mm
LabVIEW No sealing
Procheck
D1=5 cm

D2=10 cm
Water pump

Modified plastic D3=15 cm

Electronic balance
bucket filled with soil

Crosswise: open
Vertical: close

Soil moisture
Water pipe

(b)
sensors

(a)

(c)
(d)

Fig. 3  Experimental setup for preliminary testing of newly developed automatic irrigation control system

dielectric permittivity. This water content is further con-
verted to soil suction based on the known water release
curve of the ceramic disk. Saha et al. [30] demonstrated that
the sensor can reliably measure soil suction up to 1700 kPa
(i.e., beyond the normal wilting point of 1500 kPa). The
error of the soil suction sensor measurement is ±10% of the
actual reading (i.e., +2 kPa) [31].
It should be noted that since each part of the system is
independent and can be modified based on the requirements
[32, 33], it has the potential to be used in green infrastructure
(i.e., green roofs). It will be relatively easy to tune the set-
tings (upper and lower limits, rate of water pumping, etc.)
according to the actual requirements of a given vegetation.
It should be noted that the sensor should be compatible with
Arduino Uno. In summary, the major differences between
the new irrigation system and the existing systems are as
follows:
1. The water distribution method was changed to subsur-
face drip irrigation in shallow soil layers to reduce the
loss of water due to evaporation. This method allows
the transport of water directly to regions along with an
option to regulate water at different depths. Such regu-
lation can be utilized to distribute water in the ground
according to the actual plant root density distribution.
Based on the practical needs of green infrastructures,
the theoretical core of the automatic irrigation system
is the relation of plant root water uptake rather than the
evaporation dissipation of plants in most existing irriga-
tion systems.
2. Compared with large-scale automatic irrigation systems,
the new design is more accurate, which makes it more
targeted to meet the actual need for green infrastruc-
tures.

13
13 
Page 6 of 9 International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2022) 8:13

Results and Discussion

Figure 4 shows the variation in soil VWC (at 5 cm, 10 cm

Fig. 4  Volumetric water content and irrigated water vs. time at differ-
ent depths of soil
and 15 cm depths) and weight of irrigated water with respect
to elapsed time. It can be found from the figure that after
approximately 50 ms (ms), there is a sudden increase in
VWC at all depths. The increase in VWC almost coincides
with the loss of weight of water in the bucket. There is likely
a minimal delay of approximately 30 ms that is caused by
processing by Arduino Uno [34]. Nevertheless, such delays
have an almost insignificant impact on soil moisture regu-
lation. Processing delay may be more crucial for Arduino
application in monitoring heart rate [34]. However, in such
systems, the effect may be insignificant due to the relatively
lower permeability of soils. It can be observed that VWC
varies between 17 and 24% for all cases. Furthermore, it
was also found that the variation rate in VWC is slightly
higher at shallower depths (i.e., 5 cm) than at deeper depths
(10 cm and 15 cm). This is similar to that observed by [35].
The irrigated water for the first time was 331 g, 583 g and
623.5 g at depths of 5 cm, 10 cm and 15 cm, respectively. In
addition, the amount of irrigated water (for 150 h of testing)
was 1333 g, 1373 g and 1072 g at depths of 5 cm, 10 cm
and 15 cm, respectively. Considering the errors in measure-
ment (±5%), the control of the proposed regulation system
appears to be reasonable. This implies that there is a higher
need for the regulation of soil moisture at shallower depths
for crops with lower root depths. The relationship between
VWC and soil suction (Fig. 5) follows a trend that is consist-
ent with other similar soils [36]. Soil suction (Fig. 5) appears
to remain less than 10 kPa, which is just at the lower limit of
measurement accuracy of the MPS-6 sensor. It is reasonable
to assume that the suctions remain more or less similar at all
depths, considering the accuracy of the measurement probes.
Under a flow rate of 200 L/h, a tube of 2 m causes a
minimal delay in pumping the water. This is because, in the
first irrigation, AID needed to pump water until the VWC
reached 20%. When the VWC is 3% higher than the higher
limited value (refer to Fig. 4a), there is still a large amount
of dry soil in the 1D column, which will create a total head
gradient for the downward movement of water. This further
causes VWC to decrease at shallower depths. In contrast,
if VWC is 3% less than the higher limit value, VWC is still
within the desired range. In the subsequent time when AID
needed to pump water to keep the VWC within 12–20%,
there was still some water that existed in the tube, and its
water level was slightly lower than the irrigated depth. The
time spent transporting water into the 1D column was found
to be less than 1 s. Due to this phenomenon, VWC is seldom
higher than the higher limit value.
Based on Fig. 4a, b, c, although the irrigation frequency
decreases with an increase in depth, the ability of the

13
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2022) 8:13 Page 7 of 9  13

irrigation control system to maintain soil moisture increases.

In general, VWC tends to remain within the range of the
100% root water extraction rate most of the time. This indi-
cates that compared to sensor sensitivity, the stability of sen-
sor input data is more critical to determine the suitability
of the irrigation control system and the layout of sensors/
water irrigation tubes. However, it was also found that the
interreplicate variability (i.e., the fluctuation in output values
among units of the same sensor subjected to essentially the
same condition) may be a major source of uncertainty in
sensor data for these cases [37].
Furthermore, when the VWC drops below the lower lim-
iting value, the water pump is turned on (not shown in the
figure), which allows water to flow from the bucket into the
soil at a particular depth. It should be noted that the readings
of VWC are almost consistent with the reduction in water
level in the bucket. However, the soil VWC continues to
rise and sometimes goes beyond the upper limiting value.
This is expected since water will continue to pump from
the bucket until the value of the moisture sensor reaches
the upper limiting value. Although this loss is minimal, it
is crucial for field applications. To overcome this problem,
trials were conducted to manually calibrate or redetermine
the “virtual” upper limiting value (to be set in LabVIEW) so
that there was no excess irrigation. Hence, the upper limiting
value was reduced by approximately 3% to minimize any
extra loss of moisture. In general, as observed from dry-
ing–wetting cycles, soil moisture can be regulated within a
specified range with minimal error. It should be noted that
the current study mainly demonstrates the applicability of
the proposed irrigation system.
During the preliminary field experiments, the same irri-
gating method (soil type, irrigation rate, irrigation depth and
sensor setting depth) was used. Water flowed approximately
1 m in 20 s, and the irrigation center was restored below the
anaerobic point within an hour. It can be concluded that this
irrigating system has potential in-field applications. Future
work is needed to validate such systems with plant growth
in the field.

Conclusions

The current study demonstrates a simplified control system

for regulating soil moisture within field capacity at differ-
ent depths. This system was based on Arduino Uno, which
processes and regulates soil VWCs within specific ranges.
The range is set using LabVIEW, which involves visual
Fig. 5  Volumetric water content vs. soil suction at different depths of programming. A simple 1D column experiment validates
soil the functionality of the proposed system. Drying–wetting
cycles were simulated using the automated irrigation con-
trol system. It was observed that the system was able to
maintain soil moisture within a 100% root water extraction

13
13 
Page 8 of 9
rate for most of the time irrespective of depth. The range of
VWC at a depths of 5 cm, 10 cm and 15 cm is 19.3–24.2%,
18.5–21.2% and 17.4–20.1%, respectively. The depth of
5 cm corresponds to the largest fluctuation in VWC, fol-
lowed by 10 cm and 15 cm. A minimal error (2%) was found
in terms of water loss during wetting. The error was further
minimized by recalibrating the upper limiting value. Further
studies will be conducted to evaluate the efficiency of such
systems on the water use efficiency and growth of plants
with different rooting depths in both greenhouse and fields.
Acknowledgements  The authors are thankful to the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 41907252 and 41722209) for
the financial support. The suggestions provided by Prof Brijesh Yadav
(IIT Roorkee, India) and Dr Feng Song (Fuzhou University, China)
during the development of the system are gratefully acknowledged.
Availability of Data and Materials  Data will be made available on rea-
sonable request.
Declarations  Understanding soil surface water content using light reflection
Conflict of Interest  The authors declare that they have no conflicts of
interest.
References
1. Zhang B, Fu Z, Wang J et al (2019) Farmers’ adoption of water-
saving irrigation technology alleviates water scarcity in metropo-
lis suburbs: a case study of Beijing, China. Agric Water Manag
212:349–357. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​agwat.​2018.​09.​021
2. Bennett S (1996) A brief history of automatic control. Control
Syst Mag IEEE 16(3):17–25. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​37.​506394
3. Dominguez-Nino JM, Oliver-Manera J, Girona J et al (2020) Dif-
ferential irrigation scheduling by an automated algorithm of water
balance tuned by capacitance-type soil moisture sensors. Agric
Water Manag 228:105880. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​agwat.​2019.​
105880
4. Barkunan SR, Bhanumathi V, Sethuram J (2019) Smart sensor for
automatic drip irrigation system for paddy cultivation. Comput
Electr Eng 73:180–193. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​compe​leceng.​
2018.​11.​013
5. Zbigniew S, Dariusz M, Vaclav K et al (2020) Time domain
reflectometry flat sensor for non-invasive monitoring of moisture
changes in building materials. Measurement 165:108091. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​measu​rement.​2020.​108091
6. Sandeep GS, Saravanan Y, Eswaraiah V et al (2020) An in-field
integrated capacitive sensor for rapid detection and quantification
of soil moisture. Sens Actuators B Chem 321:128542. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1016/j.​snb.​2020.​128542
7. Rajalakshmi R, Vidhya J (2019) Toxic environment monitoring
using sensors based on Arduino. In: IEEE International confer-
ence on system, computation, automation and networking (ICS-
CAN), pp 1–6
8. Hailemariam H, Shrestha D, Wuttke F et  al (2017) Thermal
and dielectric behaviour of fine-grained soils. Environ Geotech
4(2):79–93. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1680/​jenge.​15.​00042
9. Capobianco V, Cascini L, Cuomo S et al (2020) Wetting-dry-
ing response of an unsaturated pyroclastic soil vegetated with
13
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2022) 8:13
long-root grass. Environ Geotech. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1680/​jenge.​
19.​00207
10. Rahim S, Hussain MH, Rahim SRA et al (2020) An automatic
irrigation system for plants using fuzzy logic controller consider-
ing volumetric water content. J Phys Conf Ser 1432(1):012011
(IOP Publishing)
11. Cao DF, Zhu HH, Wu B, Wang JC, Shukla SK (2021) Investigat-
ing temperature and moisture profiles of seasonally frozen soil
under different land covers using actively heated fiber Bragg grat-
ing sensors. Eng Geol 290:106197
12. Meng W, Li X, Cheng L, Hou S, Wu G, Deng Z (2020) A modified
soil water content measurement technique using actively heated
fiber optic sensor. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical
Engineering 12(3):608–619. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.j​ rmge.2​ 019.​
11.​003
13. Gadi VK, Alybaev D, Raj P, Garg A, Mei G, Sreedeep S, Sahoo L
(2020) A novel python program to automate soil colour analysis
and interpret surface moisture content. Int J Geosynth Ground Eng
6:21. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40891-​020-​00204-3
14. Cao DF, Shi B, Zhu HH et al (2018) A soil moisture estimation
method using actively heated fiber Bragg grating sensors. Eng
Geol 242:142–149. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​enggeo.​2018.​05.​024
15. Gadi VK, Garg A, Manogaran IP, Sekharan S, Zhu HH (2020)
theory: a novel color analysis technique considering variability
in light intensity. J Test Eval 48(5):4053–4066. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1520/​JTE20​180320
16. Feddes RA, Kowalik PJ, Zaradny H (1978) Simulation of field
water use and crop yield. Simulation monographs. Pudoc,
Wageningen
17. Gao GY, Zhou FX, Wang X (2021) Steady-state analysis of heat–
moisture–salt coupling in unsaturated layered soil. Environ Geo-
tech. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1680/​jenge.​18.​00169
18. Prasad R (1988) A linear root water uptake model. J Hydrol 99(3–
4):297–306. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​0022-​1694(88)​90055-8
19. Fatahi B, Khabbaz H, Indraratna B (2010) Bioengineering ground
improvement considering root water uptake model. Ecol Eng
36(2):222–229. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ecole​ng.​2008.​12.​027
20. Stovin V, Poë S, De-Ville S, Berretta C (2015) The influence of
substrate and vegetation configuration on green roof hydrologi-
cal performance. Ecol Eng 85:159–172. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
ecole​ng.​2015.​09.​076
21. Aswale PS, Sali S, Zarole S et al (2016) Automatic irrigation
control system based on Lab-VIEW Arduino interfacing. Int J
Innov Res Technol 2(12):261–264
22. Naveenkumar R, Krishna P (2013) Low cost data acquisition and
control using Arduino prototyping platform and Labview. Int J Sci
Res 2(2):366–369
23. Bordoloi S, Hussain R, Gadi VK et al (2018) Monitoring soil
cracking and plant parameters for a mixed grass species. Géotech
Lett 8(1):49–55. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1680/​jgele.​17.​00145
24. Gadi VK, Hussain R, Bordoloi S et al (2019) Relating stomatal
conductance and surface area with evapotranspiration induced
suction in a heterogeneous grass cover. J Hydrol 568:867–876.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jhydr​ol.​2018.​11.​048
25. Sakaki T, Limsuwat A, Smits KM et al (2008) Empirical two-
point α-mixing model for calibrating the ECH2O EC-5 soil mois-
ture sensor in sands. Water Resour Res. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1029/​
2008w​r0068​70
26. Rosenbaum U, Huisman JA, Weuthen A et al (2010) Sensor-to-
sensor variability of the ECHO EC-5, TE, and 5TE sensors in
dielectric liquids. Vadose Zone J 9(1):181. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
2136/​vzj20​09.​0036
27. Payero JO, Qiao X, Khalilian A et al (2017) Evaluating the effect
of soil texture on the response of three types of sensors used to
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2022) 8:13 Page 9 of 9  13
monitor soil water status. J Water Resour Prot 9:566–577. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​4236/​jwarp.​2017.​96037
28. Getter KL and Bradley RD (2007) Effect of substrate depth and
planting season on sedum plug survival on green roofs. J Environ
Hortic 25(2):95–99. https://​doi.​org/​10.​24266/​0738-​2898-​25.2.​95
29. Rab MA, Chandra S, Fisher PD et al (2011) Modelling and predic-
tion of soil water contents at field capacity and permanent wilting
point of dryland cropping soils. Soil Res 49(5):389–407. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1071/​SR101​60
30. Saha A, Sekharan S, Manna U (2020) Evaluation of capacitance
sensor for suction measurement in silty clay loam. Geotech Geol
Eng 38(4):4319–4331
31. Garg A, Bordoloi S, Ganesan SP, Sekharan S, Sahoo L (2020) A
relook into plant wilting: observational evidence based on unsatu-
rated soil–plant-photosynthesis interaction. Sci Rep. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1038/​s41598-​020-​78893-z
32. Selvaraj J, Paul P, Jingle I et al (2019) Automatic wireless water
management system (AWWMS) for smart vineyard irrigation
using IoT technology. Int J Oceans Oceanogr 13(1):211–218
33. Mafuta M, Zennaro M, Bagula A et  al. (2012) Successful
deployment of a wireless sensor network for precision agricul-
ture in Malawi. In: Proceedings of 2012 IEEE 3rd international
conference on networked embedded systems for every application
(NESEA). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​nesea.​2012.​64740​09.
34. Mallick B, Patro AK (2016) Heart rate monitoring system using
finger tip through arduino and processing software. Int J Sci Eng
Technol Res 5(1):84–89
35. Zhou WC, Xu ZH, Ross D et al (2019) Towards water-saving
irrigation methodology: field test of soil moisture profiling using
flat thin mm-sized soil moisture sensors (MSMSs). Sens Actuators
B Chem 298:126857. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​snb.​2019.​126857
36. Soltani H, Muraleetharan KK, Bulut R et al (2019) Prediction
of soil suction using measured climatic data. Environ Geotech
6(6):334–352. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1680/​jenge.​15.​00064
37. Lo TH, Rudnick DR, Singh J et al (2020) Field assessment of
interreplicate variability from eight electromagnetic soil mois-
ture sensors. Agric Water Manag 231:105984. https://d​ oi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​agwat.​2019.​105984
Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
13