INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES AND IRRIGATION

ENGINEERING

FINAL YEAR PROJECT

ON
GEDI SMALL SCAL IRRIGATION PROJECT
GEDI SMAL SCAL IRRIGATION PROJECT
Submitted in partial requirement for the award of the degree of
BACHLER OF SCIENCE
IN
WATER RESOURCES AND IRRIGATION ENGINEERING
AT
ARBAMINCH UNIVERSITY
BY:

Under the guidance of

Ato Gabr Mehari (M.SC)
Ato Fisha Sahlie (B.SC)

ARBAMINCH UNIVERSITY
WATER TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE
WATER RESOURCES AND IRRIGATION ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Firstly we would like to give our almighty God who allocates all things to prepare this
project and fulfilmement of our whishes.
Secondly, we would like to express our deepest hearted thanks to Arbaminch
University for giving the chance to prepare this design document. And our thanks are
also for our department water resources and irrigation engineering for the preparation
of advisors to guide ourselves.
Our sincere thanks extends to our advisors to ato Gabr Mehari (MSC) and ato Fisha
Sahlie (BSC) for the proper guidance, comments, allocations and suggestions during
our design reports to reach up to the points of goal.
We would like to thanks for Arbaminch university library workers for giving
reference materials whenever we required without any tiredness‟s.

Last but not the least our heartful and grand thanks give for our families to help to
prepare this design document reports both in their finically and economically and in
their guidance for our life span in our educations from the begging up to the end today
know.

i
EXCUTIVE SUMMARRY

This report describes the over view of the development of irrigation water delivery in
the area of gedi irrigation project. In our preliminary design of gedi irrigation project,
the report has been divided in ten chapters.

In the first chapter, the overview, the project area, the geological data, and the
topography of the project are described. In chapter two the estimation of peak
discharge in relation of peak rainfall has to be described. The special water
requirement, the selection of crop, the type of crop and the schedule of irrigation by
using crop watt window 8 soft ware have to be explained under the third chapter. In
the fourth chapter the water demand design especially furrow method design
describes in this chapter. The layout, design and construction of irrigation canal is
located under chapter five. In the sixth chapter the selection of weir, the location of
weir, the type of weir, the construction methodology of weir and the construction
method of weir parts such as head regulators, guide walls (u/s &d/s), under sluce have
to be located under this chapter. The layout of , the design means and proper
construction of drainage canal describes under chapter seven. In chapter eight the
estimation of excavation (cut & fill) and the cost of the project has to be describes.
The impact assessment, mitigation measures and impact of the project on
environmentally and socially (negative& positive aspects) have to be located under
chapter nine. In last but not the least the recommendation and conclusions of our
report have to be describes in chapter ten.

ii
TABLE OF CONTENT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................. i
EXCUTIVE SUMMARRY ...........................................................................................ii
TABLE OF CONTENT ............................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLE .......................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURE...................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF ABBRBATION ............................................................................................. ix
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1
1.1 General ............................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Objective of the project ................................................................................... 2
1.3 The Project Area.............................................................................................. 2
1.3.1 Background .............................................................................................. 2
1.3.2 Location and access of the project area ................................................... 2
1.4 Topography ..................................................................................................... 4
1.5 Geology ........................................................................................................... 4
1.5.1 Geology along headwork structures......................................................... 4
1.5.2 Construction Materials Availability......................................................... 4
1.6 Soil .................................................................................................................. 5
1.7 Water Quality .................................................................................................. 5
2. HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 6
2.1 Data Availability ............................................................................................. 6
2.2 Climates........................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Water Source Potential .................................................................................... 7
2.4 Peak Rainfall Determination ........................................................................... 7
2.5 Peak Discharge Determination ...................................................................... 15
2.5.1 Rational method ..................................................................................... 16
2.5.2 Empirical formula .................................................................................. 17
2.5.3 Unit Hydrograph Technique .................................................................. 18
2.5.4 SCS Curve Number Method .................................................................. 18
3. WATER DEMAND, AGRONOMY AND WATER DELIVERY ASPECTS ... 21
3.1 Crop selection ................................................................................................ 22
3.2 Cropping pattern ............................................................................................ 22
3.2.1 Crop land allocation ............................................................................... 23
3.2.2 Optimization .......................................................................................... 24
3.2.3 Crop coefficient (Kc) ............................................................................. 24
3.3 Crop water requirement ................................................................................. 26

iii
 3.3.1 Determination of crop water requirement (ETcrop) .............................. 27
3.3.2 Irrigation Requirement ........................................................................... 28
3.4 Irrigation efficiencies .................................................................................... 32
3.4.1 Field application efficiency (Ea) ............................................................ 32
3.4.2 Field canal efficiency (Eb) ..................................................................... 32
3.4.3 Conveyance efficiency (Ec) ................................................................... 32
3.4.4 Project efficiency (Ep) ........................................................................... 33
3.4.5 Net irrigation requirement (NIR) ........................................................... 33
3.4.6 Leaching Requirement (LR) .................................................................. 33
3.4.7 Field irrigation Requirement (FIR) ........................................................ 33
3.4.8 Gross Irrigation Requirement (GIR) ...................................................... 34
3.5 Irrigation Scheduling ..................................................................................... 34
3.5.1 Depth of irrigation.................................................................................. 35
3.5.2 Irrigation Interval (T) ............................................................................. 35
3.6 Determination of Design Discharge .............................................................. 36
3.7 Methods of Water Delivery and Delivery Scheduling .................................. 38
3.7.1 Main System .......................................................................................... 38
3.7.2 Tertiary System ...................................................................................... 38
4. SURFACE IRRIGATION METHODS ............................................................... 39
4.1 Choice of Irrigation Method .......................................................................... 39
4.2 Surface Irrigation Method ............................................................................. 39
4.3 Furrow Irrigation ........................................................................................... 40
4.4 Design Consideration of Furrow Irrigation ................................................... 40
5. DESIGN OF CANALS AND CANAL STRUCTURES ..................................... 50
5.1 Canal Alignment ........................................................................................... 50
5.2 Hydraulic Design of the Canal ...................................................................... 51
5.2.1 Permissible velocity ............................................................................... 53
5.2.2 Tractive Force ........................................................................................ 54
5.3 Full Supply Discharge (FSD) ........................................................................ 55
5.4 Design of Main Canal ................................................................................... 58
5.4.1 Design of Right block Main Canal ....................................................... 58
5.4.2 Design of left block main canal ............................................................. 60
5.5 Tertiary Canal Design ................................................................................... 63
5.6 Design of Canal Structures ............................................................................ 64
5.6.1 Culverts .................................................................................................. 64
5.6.2 Canal Drop ............................................................................................. 65
5.6.3 Division Box .......................................................................................... 68

iv
 5.6.4 Farm turnout........................................................................................... 69
5.6.5 Flow control structures(Gates) ............................................................... 70
5.6.6 Access Roads ......................................................................................... 71
6. DESIGN OF DRAINAGE CANALS .................................................................. 72
6.1 Design of Surface Drainage Canals .............................................................. 72
6.2 Alignment of surface drainage ...................................................................... 73
6.3 Types of drainage canals ............................................................................... 76
7. HEAD WORK DESIGN...................................................................................... 82
7.1 Location of Diversion Weir......................................................................... 82
7.2 Selection of Type of Weir ............................................................................. 82
7.3 Design of head work structures ..................................................................... 83
7.3.1 Hydraulic Design of A Weir .................................................................. 83
7.3.2 Weir wall design (Structural) ................................................................. 86
7.3.3 Design of impervious floor and protection works ................................. 88
7.3.4 Water profile downstream of the weir ................................................... 92
7.3.5 Water surface profile upstream of the weir............................................ 96
7.3.6 Stability Analysis of the Weir ................................................................ 96
7.3.7 Design Of Under Sluice Protection........................................................ 99
7.3.8 Design of Canal Head Regulator ......................................................... 100
7.3.9 Divide Wall .......................................................................................... 102
7.3.10 Design of Silt Excluder ........................................................................ 103
7.3.11 Guide Bank .......................................................................................... 104
8. COST ESTIMATION ........................................................................................ 109
9. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT .............................................. 111
9.1 Description of potential Impact ................................................................... 111
9.1.1 Positive environmental impact of the project ...................................... 111
9.1.2 Negative impacts of the project ........................................................... 112
9.2 Mitigation measures .................................................................................... 113
10. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION . ............................................ 115
10.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................. 115
10.2 Recommendations ................................................................................... 116
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 117
ANNEXES ................................................................................................................. 118

v
LIST OF TABLE

Table 2-1 Maximum daily rainfall Values of 23 years for Meteorological station of ... 8
Table 2-2 Guide line for selecting return periods for different hydraulic structure ..... 10
Table 2-3 Normal Distribution method detail calculation ........................................... 11
Table 2-4 log- Pearson type III distribution method detail calculation ....................... 14
Table 2-5 Summary of the results of all methods ........................................................ 15
Table 2-6 Summary of the results of all methods ........................................................ 20
Table 3-1Selected crops, planting date & land allocation ........................................... 23
Table 3-2 seasonal cropping arrangement ................................................................... 24
Table 3-3 growing stage (days) and Kc values of the proposed crops season one .... 25
Table 3-4 growing stage (days) and Kc values of the proposed crops season two . 26
Table 3-5 Summary of the result of effective rainfall calculated using different
methods in mm............................................................................................................. 30
Table 3-6 Irrigation requirement .................................................................................. 31
Table 3-7 Irrigation schedule ....................................................................................... 36
Table 3-8Scheme Supply wet season ........................................................................... 36
Table 3-9Scheme Supply dry season ........................................................................... 37
Table 4-1furrow infiltration and inflow rate ................................................................ 41
Table 4-2 spacing between rows and plants ................................................................ 41
Table 4-3Relation of maximum non erosive flow rates to critical slope of furrows ... 43
Table 4-4 Furrow irrigation design for the selected crops .......................................... 47
Table 4-5Furrow irrigation design for the selected crops ............................................ 49
Table 5-1permissible velocity for unlined canal .......................................................... 53
Table 5-2 Permissible velocity (lined canal) ............................................................... 54
Table 5-3 Critical tractive force for different soil ........................................................ 54
Table 5-4 Side Slope for Various Soils........................................................................ 56
Table 5-5The Value of N for Different Type Of Bed Material. .................................. 57
Table 5-6 Factor f-values of the shape of the cross section (Adapted from Meijer
1989) ............................................................................................................................ 59
Table 5-7 Summary of right main canal calculation .................................................... 62
Table 5-8Summary of left main canal calculation ....................................................... 62
Table 5-9Summary of tertiary canal calculation .......................................................... 63
Table 6-1capacity of left Drainage canal ..................................................................... 75

vi
Table 6-2 Hydraulic parameters of left drainage canal ............................................... 78
Table 6-3 Hydraulic parameters of left drainage canal ............................................. 80
Table 7-1 result of water surface profile before the jump ........................................... 94
Table 7-2 Water surface profile after jump.................................................................. 95
Table 7-3 u/s water profile ........................................................................................... 96
Table 7-4 Force and moment acting on the weir ......................................................... 98
Table 7-5 Stability analysis of D/s guide wall ......................................................... 107
Table 7-6 Stability analysis of U/s guide wall bank ................................................. 108
Table 8-1Cost estmation ............................................................................................ 109

vii
LIST OF FIGURE

Figure 1-1 Loaction Map of Southern Nations & Nationalities regional state .............. 3
Figure 1-2 Location of the Woreda for Geddii Irrigation project on the Regional M .. 3
Figure 5-1 typical cross section of main canal.......................................................... 62
Figure 5-2 typical cross section of tertiary .................................................................. 64
Figure 5-3 Division box .............................................................................................. 69
Figure 6-1 capacity of left Drainage canal .................................................................. 74
Figure 6-2Typical cross section 0f drainage canal ...................................................... 81
Figure 7-1 Downstream channel section..................................................................... 83
Figure 7-2Stage-Discharge Curves .............................................................................. 84
Figure 7-3 Weir floor thiknees and protection work ................................................. 92
Figure 7-4 Force acting on the weir .......................................................................... 97
Figure 7-5 Force U/S Guide Bank ............................................................................. 107

viii
LIST OF ABBRBATION

SNNPRS Southern Nations and Nationalities Regional State

NMSA National Meteorological Services Agency
SCS Soil Conservation system
CN Curve number
AMC Antecedent moisture content
PMF Probable maximum flood
DC Drainage coefficient
MAR Mean annual rainfall
LDrc Left drain canal
MDr Main drain canal
RDrC Right drain canal
FSL Full supply level
TEL Total energy line
HFL High flood level
D/S Down stream
U/S Up stream
CWR Crop Water requirement
ETo Reference crop evapo transpiration
FAO Food agricultur organization
NIR Net irrigation requirement
FIR Field irrigation Requirement
GIR Gross Irrigation Requirement
EIA Environmental impact assessment
CVR critical velocity ratio
FSD Full supply discharge
RTC Right tertiary canal
LTC Left tertiary canal

ix
 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

Ethiopia is one of the developing countries and around 85% of the total population
depends on agriculture most of the agricultural practice is rain fed crop production.
However, due to the back ward method farming, un reliable rainfall, including
population and drought. The nation faced series food shortage. . These food shortages
were followed by sever famines that resulted in the loss of the lives of millions of
citizens. Hence, it is obvious that the agricultural system has to be improved and
irrigation practice should be spread extensively to bring about sustainable food self-
sufficiency and to earn foreign exchange.

Irrigation is essential to over come deficiencies in and stable agricultural production

through out the year especially in arid and semi arid area. It is mainly vital in areas
where The amount and the timing of rainfall are not adequate to meet the moisture
requirement of crops.Though our country has ample sources of water for irrigation
and arable lands, only insignificant amount has been utilized, and the country has
expand to serve drought and famine for the past few decades. As matter of fact, a
decrease in soil fertility and the dependency of the formers on rain fed agriculture,
which is the production of crop with erratic rainfall distribution decreases the yield.

The design and development of irrigation schemes ensures sustainable solution

towards agricultural challenges. The contribution of a well formulated irrigation
scheme to the project area is significant towards maintaining and/or increasing the
production capacity of the farmers. Nowadays, implementation of small and medium
scale irrigation scheme is being given priority in the water sector development
strategy of Ethiopia. The Irrigation Scheme Development & Administration Agency
of the Southern Nations and Nationalities Regional State (SNNPRS) has identified a
number of projects with a promising potential for irrigation development. Geddii
project is one such project, which has been initiated by the Agency. It is located in the
north-eastern corner of the region, adjoining the Oromia Regional State. The area like
most other areas in the region, is known for year round rainfall. (Tefera, 2012)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 1

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

1.2 Objective of the project

By doing this project we face problems that we will come across in our real life
activities. This teach us how to find solutions for any type of problems be it social,
economical, technical or any else. Therefore, the main objective of this project is to
equip us with good ability in grasping problems and how to work and execute
particularly in water works development plans, construction, operation and
maintenance. In line with this, the objective of this report is partial fulfillment of the
requirements of the Degree of Bachelor of Science in „Water Resources and Irrigation
Engineering.

1.3 The Project Area

1.3.1 Background

There is very limited experience in the project area on the development and use of
irrigation. There is an effort to divert the flow in Geddii stream. This effort is not
being used successfully by the farmers. The main reasons are lack of capacity to
effecively maneuver the undulating terrains and conflict of social interest on equitable
water usage.

In the surrounding kebeles of the woreda as well, there is limited experience on

irrigation. With possible intervention on Geddii stream, the local community will
have the opportunity to fully understand the benefits of irrigated agriculture compared
to the conventional rain-fed agriculture, and thus contribute to the nation-wide effort
of maximizing the utilization of the available production potential.the production
capacity of the local farmers is continuously affected by moisture deficit that has
adversely affected production in the past. The main reason mentioned by the local
people – as well as the local administrative bodies – is the shoratage of rainfall that
occurs at the time of critical development for the crops. This is further aggravated by
the recent trend in climatic changes which made it difficult for the farmers to predict
such incidences and be prepared against severe yield reduction –or in some cases total
loss.

1.3.2 Location and access of the project area

Geddii stream is located in Gewata Woreda of Kefa zone of SNNPRS. Kefa

administrative zone of Gewata woreda at Chebro kebele. It is found on 435km away

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 2

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

from Addis Ababa- via-Jima Addis Ababa highway. The stream passes through a
other villages in highland areas, before passing throug Chebaro, and Midabo kebeles,
and continuing further downstream to other kebeles.

Figure 1-1 Loaction Map of Southern Nations & Nationalities regional state

Figure 1-2 Location of the Woreda for Geddii Irrigation project on the Regional Map
The project area is located in Kaffa Zone, Gewata Woreda. The irrigable area and the
headwork are found in Chebaro Kebele, close to the Woreda town Konda.

Access ; Access to the project area is possible through Jimaa or Bonga towns. The
Jima road is preferred for access from Addis Ababa. The other route passing through
Bonga is used when accessing the project from the regional capital Hawassa.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 3

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

The distance from the nearest zonal town Bonga to Konda woreda is 105Kms on an
all weather road. Currently it takes about 2.5 to 3 hours drive with a 4WD vehicle.

Access to the site is possible from a junction to the road from Gimbo to Konda, called
Midabo. Midabo is an adjacent kebele to Chebaro, the project area, and is found about
8Kms from before reaching Konda town.

The project is located about 5 kms from Midabo, which can be accessed using 4WD
cars in dry seasons through a temporary road. To allow year round access,
maintenance and upgrading of this access is required. (Tefera, 2012)

1.4 Topography

The command area begins immediately from a few meters from the head work. The
command area is on both sides of the river with in the villages.The command area has
some undulating topography on the sides of the command and a little sloppy area on
the tail of the command. Generally the slope of the area is from 2-10%. Therefore, the
furrow alignment, planting geometry and irrigation application method has to be
considered. (Tefera, 2012)

1.5 Geology

1.5.1 Geology along headwork structures

The weir site is located at a point where straight flow regime is found, by considering
the required head for irrigating the identified command area. At this location, silty
clay surface geology is obtained, with weathered basalt stones available in close
proximity. The overall condition at the selected weir axis is considered suitable for
planning and constructing a diversion structure.

The subsurface geology at the weir location is best described by the Geological Cross
section map shown below (adopted from the Engineering Geological report). The
foundation condition for the structure will be highly weathered rock formation
dictating a design for pervious condition.

1.5.2 Construction Materials Availability

The project area has the basic construction materials required in sufficient quantity.
These include Stone, sand and clear water for concrete works. Sand is available from
the nearby river delineating the boundary with Oromia regional state.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 4

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

1.6 Soil
In all the test pits taken at the command area the depth of the soil is very deep which
is greater than 2 m. The command area is highly dominated by clay soil. (Tefera,
2012)

1.7 Water Quality

The source of water for Geddi river is mainly a spring source i.e. the water in Geddi
stream is very clear water( no need of water treatment) It is suitable to crops. (Tefera,
2012)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 5

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

2. HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS

Hydrologic design is important for safety, economy and proper functioning of

hydraulic structures. The hydrologic design estimates the maximum, minimum or
average flood which the structure is expected to handle. This estimate has to be made
quite accurately in order that the project can function properly.

All water resources system must be planned for future hydrological events for which
the time of occurrence can be forecasted. In order to forecast the hydrological events,
data is necessary. The available data is daily heaviest rainfall of 23 years.

For Geddii project area, however, finding representative data was difficult in nearby
locations. The closest metrological stations found were that of Bonga and Chira
towns, located 34 and 26 kms away respectively. These stations yield sufficient data.
Other stations were reported to exist closer to the project. However, either the
available data was of short duration, or incomplete or both. Hence the hydrologist
analysis is limited to the use of the above two stations, namely bonga station and
Chira station.

The flood forecasting is based on data from Chira station, because it is located closer
to the project area, as compared to the other station. (Tefera, 2012)

2.1 Data Availability

There is peak daily rainfall from the near by data from Chira station, because of non-
existence of gauged flow data, no discharge data .Since our attention is determining
runoff discharge, it is possible to convert peak daily rainfall data to runoff through
different methods.

2.2 Climates
The nearby meteorological stations around the project area are Chira and Bonga,
which are about 26 km north east and 34 km south west of the project site
respectively. Since chira station is an agronomic station, most of the climatic variables
were taken for the study. Only rainfall and temperature data was used from Bonga
station. In this case, Chira station is assumed to represent meteorological parameters
required for the estimation of evapotranspiration (Temperature, Relative Humidity,
Wind speed and Sunshine Hours).

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 6

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

The mean maximum and minimum temperature of the project area is 27.36 and
12.31oc respectively. The mean annual temperature of the project site is 19.83oC. The
temperature of the project area is estimated from Bonga station. Maximum
temperatures of greater than the mean occur from November to April, and minimum
temperatures less than the mean occurs from November to February and The average
annual rainfall at Bonga Station is about 2997.8 mm.
Monthly wind speed variation of the project site is from 0.77 to 0.98 m/sec. The
yearly average is 0.86 m/sec. The average daily duration of sunshine hours at Chira is
6.1 hours. Sunshine hours duration is maximum in the dry season, October to April,
and minimum in the rainy season May to September. The maximum sunshine hours
duration of 8.16 hours occurs in January. The average relative humidity varies from
about 66.70% in February to 82.09 % in July. Relative humidity is the maximum in
July and August. The yearly average is 73.21%. The daily maximum rainfall data was
used from 1985 to 2007 was used for peak flood estimation. The data source is the
National Meteorological Services Agency (NMSA).These data have been taken from
Chira meteorological station. (Tefera, 2012)

2.3 Water Source Potential

The available water source for Gedi irrigation scheme is Gedi River, which contains
plenty of water all over the year.and it is mainly a spring source(very clear water)
located in the upper watershed.

Flow measurement was carried out on the stream. A fairly appropriate site was found
about 100 meters downstream of the selected weir site. Using a float-method, flow
rate was measured to be 175 liters per second. (berhe, 2012)

2.4 Peak Rainfall Determination

Rainfall Frequency Analysis Method

Hydrologic processes such as floods are exceedingly complex natural events. They
are result of a number of component parameters and are therefore very difficult to
model analytically. For example, the floods in a catchment depend upon the
characteristics of the catchment‟s, rainfall and antecedent conditions, each one of
these factors in turn depend upon a lots of constituent parameters. This makes the

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 7

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

estimation of the flood peak a very complex problem leading to many different
approaches.

Due to the lack of flow (discharge) data we are forced to analysis the peak daily rain
fall for computation of peak discharge.

In the analysis of rainfall frequency, the probability of occurrence of a particular

extreme rainfall (24 hr maximum rainfall) is important. Such information is obtained
by the frequency analysis of point rainfall depth .Then the probability of occurrence
of point rain fall (24 hr maximum rain fall ) is estimated for a recurrence interval of
50 years ,for diversion weirs. (subramanya, 1994)

The prediction of peak flows from rainfall over a catchments involves estimation of
daily maximum rainfall for a given return period and conversion of the daily
maximum rainfall to run off hydrograph at the desired location.

Table 2-1 Maximum daily rainfall Values of 23 years for Meteorological station of
Gedi

year of record 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Daily Heaviest 46.6 52 46.7 62.5 40 70 70.3 36.1 44.5 54.3 40.1 70
Rainfall
year of record 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Daily Heaviest 70.5 55 50.8 44.5 54.5 40 47 50.3 38 45.6 40
Rainfall

Outlier test

This test helps to avoid those data lie out of the range in between the lowest datum
and the highest datum .The lowest datum and the highest datum are calculated as
follows.
Let ………………………….………….…..…….2. 1
Lowest datum
Highest datum
Where YL = ……...........………………....……2. 2
YH = ………..……….……...…………..2. 3

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 8

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Where; Yavg – mean of the data

n-1 - standard deviation of the data
Kn - factor from (annex 1A) Corresponding to number of year data.
Yavg = 1.697
n-1 =
kn = 2.448
N = 23
YL = 1.697-2.448*0.091
= 1.474
RL = 10YL = 101.474
= 29.785

Therefore the smallest datum is 29.785 mm. Since there is no any data lower than this,
all the available data can be if they satisfy condition in next step.

Higher outlier YH = 1.697+2.448*0.091

= 1.9198
RH = 10YH
= 101.9198
= 83.13196 mm
Therefore; the highest datum is 83.13196 mm. Since there is no any data higher than
this, all the available data can satisfy our condition. (there is no rejection of data)

To analyze the maximum discharge expected in T years we can use the frequency
distribution function listed below, but the data in hand may fit to only one of them.
Therefore, before employing the methods it have to be checked for the fittest one.
Some of the commonly used frequency distribution functions for the prediction of
extreme maximum values are;
I. Normal distribution method
II. Gumbel distribution method
III. Log-Pearson type III distribution method
IV. Log-normal distribution method

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 9

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 2-2 Guide line for selecting return periods for different hydraulic structure

Sr No Structure Recommended return period

(t)
1 Spillway storage is more than 60Mm3 100 years
2 Barrage and minor dam (storage less than 100 years
60Mm3
3 Spillway small reservoir dam on the convey 10-20 years
side
4 Pick up weir 50-100 years
5 Small bridge on the main high way 50-1000 years
(subramanya, 1994)

Taking return period of 50 years (subramanya, 1994)the design rainfall for the project
area can be determined as follows.

I. Normal Distribution method

X  K *  n1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . …………..….....................2. 4

Where XT = annual mean maximum flow of T year return period

̅ = mean of annual maximum flow

n-1 = standard deviation of the sample size

KT = frequency factor expressed as,
2 2 3
KT=W((2.51557+0.8O285W+0.01033W )/(1+1.143279W+0.1992W +0.00135W ))

W = (ln (1/) 2)1/2 √ ( ) but ρr = == = 0.02

W =√ ( ) = 2.797

Therefore, KT = 1.9603
̅ = 50.839

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 10

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 2-3 Normal Distribution method detail calculation

Year of records Daily Heaviest X-Xave (X-Xave)^2

Rainfal
1985 46.6 -4.23913 17.97023
1986 52 1.16087 1.347619
1987 46.7 -4.13913 17.1324
1988 62.5 11.66087 135.9759
1989 40 -10.8391 117.4867
1990 70 19.16087 367.1389
1991 70.3 19.46087 378.7255
1992 36.1 -14.7391 217.242
1993 44.5 -6.33913 40.18457
1994 54.3 3.46087 11.97762
1995 40.1 -10.7391 115.3289
1996 70 19.16087 367.1389
1997 70.5 19.66087 386.5498
1998 55 4.16087 17.31284
1999 50.8 -0.03913 0.001531
2000 44.5 -6.33913 40.18457
2001 54.5 3.66087 13.40197
2002 40 -10.8391 117.4867
2003 47 -3.83913 14.73892
2004 50.3 -0.53913 0.290661
2005 38 -12.8391 164.8433
2006 45.6 -5.23913 27.44848
2007 40 -10.8391 117.4867
sum 1169.3
2687.395
√ ̅̅̅̅

=√

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 11

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

II. Gumbel Distribution Method

It is one of the widely used probability distribution function for estimation of peak,
maximum rain falls, wind speed etc and expressed by the equation,

̅ ……………………………………………2. 5
Where XT = annual maximum of mean flow of T year return period
KT = frequency factor and expressed as,
n-1 = standard deviation of the sample size.
̅
. . . …………………………………………..…………2. 6

YT be a reduced variety, a function of T and is given by,

. .. . . . . . . . . . .. . …………………….………2. 7

n= reduced mean, it is a function of sample size.

Sn = reduced standard deviation which is also a function of the sample.
̅ n and Sn are obtained from table given in the annexes (annexes1B and 1C)
These equations are used under the following procedure to estimate the peak flood
magnitude corresponding to a given return period based on the mean flow series.
Assemble the maximum daily rainfall data and note the sample size N. Here the
rainfall data is variety ̅ .
 Find ̅ and x-1 for the given data,
 Using table determine yn and Sn appropriate to given N,
 Find YT for a given T by equation 2.7
 Find KT by equation 2.6
 Determine the required XT by equation 2.5
By using the table done in the normal distribution method we can get the values of ̅
and n-1.

Therefore, ̅ =50.839mm and

√∑ ̅̅̅

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 12

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

From the (table2A&3A )given in the Annex ̅ n= 0.5283 and Sn=1.0811

.

( )

= 3.902

KT =

XT = ̅ +K n-1

= 50.839+3.121*11.0523
= 86.317 mm
III. log- Pearson type III distribution method
In this method the flow data is first transformed in to logarithmic form (base ten) and
the transformed data is then analyzed. If X is the variety of random flow series then
the series of Z varieties where, Z are obtained for this series for any recurrence
interval T.
.2. 8
̅ ………………. . . . . . . . . . ….. . . . . . . . ……. . . . . . . . . . .2. 9
Where, kz = a frequency factor which is a function of T and the coefficient of
skewness, Cs
z= standard deviation of Z variety sample.

∑ ̅
= √
∑ ̅
Cs = . .………………………………..………… . . . 2. 10

Where, ̅ = mean of the sample.

N = sample size = number of year of record.
The variation of kz =f (CS, T) is given the( annex 1D)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 13

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 2-4 log- Pearson type III distribution method detail calculation

Year of records Daily Heaviest Z=log x z- z- 2 z- 3

Rainfall
1985 46.6 1.668386 -0.0285 0.000812 -2.3143E-05
1986 52 1.716003 0.01912 0.000366 6.98986E-06
1987 46.7 1.669317 -0.02757 0.00076 -2.0948E-05
1988 62.5 1.79588 0.098997 0.0098 0.000970203
1989 40 1.60206 -0.09482 0.008991 -0.0008526
1990 70 1.845098 0.148215 0.021968 0.003255925
1991 70.3 1.846955 0.150072 0.022522 0.003379866
1992 36.1 1.557507 -0.13938 0.019426 -0.00270748
1993 44.5 1.64836 -0.04852 0.002355 -0.00011425
1994 54.3 1.7348 0.037917 0.001438 5.45113E-05
1995 40.1 1.603144 -0.09374 0.008787 -0.00082368
1996 70 1.845098 0.148215 0.021968 0.003255925
1997 70.5 1.848189 0.151306 0.022893 0.003463914
1998 55 1.740363 0.043479 0.00189 8.21961E-05
1999 50.8 1.705864 0.00898 8.06E-05 7.24257E-07
2000 44.5 1.64836 -0.04852 0.002355 -0.00011425
2001 54.5 1.736397 0.039513 0.001561 6.16918E-05
2002 40 1.60206 -0.09482 0.008991 -0.0008526
2003 47 1.672098 -0.02479 0.000614 -1.5226E-05
2004 50.3 1.701568 0.004685 2.19E-05 1.02813E-07
2005 38 1.579784 -0.1171 0.013712 -0.00160571
2006 45.6 1.658965 -0.03792 0.001438 -5.4519E-05
2007 40 1.60206 -0.09482 0.008991 -0.0008526
Sum 39.02832 0.181741 0.006495052
∑
̅

= 39.02832/23
= 1.696883

∑ ̅
z= √

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 14

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

=√ = 0.091

∑ ̅
Cs = .

= = 0.43

For Cs = 0.43 and T = 50yr, kz = 2.276 from in (the annex 1D)

Therefore, ̅
= 1.696883+2.276 *0.091
= 1.904mm
XT = 10Zt = 101.904
=
80.168mm
IV. Log-Normal Distribution Method
Log-normal distribution is a special type of Pearson type III distribution with C s = 0,
i.e. from table (4A) in the annex for Cs =0 and T50, Kz = 2.054
̅
= 1.884
XT = 10Zt = 101.884
= 76.524mm
Table 2-5 Summary of the results of all methods
Estimation method Maximum mean rain fall(mm)

Normal distribution 81.754

Gumbel distribution 86.317
Log-Pearson type III 80.168
Log-normal distribution 76.524
As we can see from the above table, the maximum rainfall obtained by Gumbel
distribution method is the highest (86.317mm). The lowest rainfall is given by Log-
normal distribution.

2.5 Peak Discharge Determination

Maximum design discharge is the peak river discharge that corresponds to a certain
return period .The maximum design discharge Qmax. Is used in the design to
determine the back water curve results from constructing the weir ,which enables to

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 15

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

predict the highest water level that occurs average once every T years ,where T is the
selected return period of the discharge . The Qmax. Determines the water afflux on
the weir and hence the height of the weir, wing walls and the cross bridge is estimated
.It also gives information to determine the height of dykes if required.

The following methods can be used to estimate the magnitude of peak flood.
1. Rational Method
2. Empirical Method
3. Unit Hydrograph Technique

2.5.1 Rational method

The rational formula is found to be suitable for peak flow prediction in small
catchments areas of up to 50km2.The equation of rational method is given by;

. . . . . . ……………………………………2. 11

Where: Q = maximum rate of runoff, m3/s

C = dimensionless runoff coefficient, dependent upon land use
= design rainfall intensity, in mm/ hour, for a duration equal to the time

of concentration of the watershed

A = drainage area, km2
Assumptions
The Rational Method is based on the following assumptions:
• The peak flow occurs when the entire watershed is contributing to the flow
• The rainfall intensity is the same over the entire drainage area
• The rainfall intensity is uniform over a time duration equal to the time of
concentration, tc . • The frequency of the computed peak flow is the same as that of
the rainfall intensity.
Design Parameters
1) Time of concentration, tc
The time of concentration is the time required for water to travel from the
hydraulically most remote point of the basin to the point of interest.
For small natural catchments, a formula derived from data published by Kirprich for
agricultural areas could be used to give tc in hours by the following relationship:

( ) ……………………..…………2. 12
√

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 16

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

( )
√

2) Rainfall Intensity, I
The rainfall intensity, I, is the average rainfall rate, in inches per hour, for a storm
duration equal to the time of concentration for a selected return period .Rainfall
intensity, duration curve and frequency curves are necessary to use the Rational
method. Itcp =125mm/hr( from graph in annex 1E ) that is a function of return period
and time of concentration
3) Runoff Coefficient, C
The runoff coefficients for different land uses within a watershed are used to generate
a single, weighted coefficient that will represent the relationship between rainfall and
runoff for that watershed.The ground cover and a host of other hydrologic
abstractions considerably affect the coefficient. Recommended coefficients for
various land uses based on soil type and land slope parameter is given in ( in the
annexes 1F) C=0.3
Therefore the peak discharge is calculated as follows

2.5.2 Empirical formula

The empirical formula used for the estimation of peak flood are essentially regional
formula based on statistical correlation of the observed peak and important
catchment‟s properties. To simplify the form of the equation, only a few of the many
parameters affecting the flood peaks are used. For example, almost all the formulae
use the catchment‟s area as a parameter affecting the peak flood and most of them
neglect the flood frequency as a parameter. In view of these the empirical formula are
applicable only in the region for which they were developed.

E.g. Dr. Admassu′s empirical formula is one of the applicable for some part of
Ethiopia.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 17

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Where A = Catchment area (km2)

Kz = frequency factor
√
Kz , * ( )+-

T = return period
Cv = the average coefficient of variation
= 0.38 for most catchment.
The empirical formula method is not convenient for the determination of peak flood
of Gedi River.

2.5.3 Unit Hydrograph Technique

A unit hydrograph is defined as the hydrograph of direct run-off resulting from one-
unit depth (1cm) or rainfall excess occurring uniformly over the basin and at a
uniform rate for specified duration in hours, (Subramanya, 2000). This method is
convenient for watershed areas ranging 25-5000km2. The proposed watershed area for
the gedi project (Gedi River Basin) is out of range, and also this method requires a
large number of observed data, for which more number of gauging stations required to
install in the watershed. The unit hydrograph method is not convenient for the
determination of peak flood of Gedi River.

2.5.4 SCS Curve Number Method

The SCS peak flow method calculates peak flow as a function of drainage basin area,
potential watershed storage and the time of concentration. This rainfall-runoff
relationship separates total rainfall into direct runoff, retention, and initial abstraction.
Assumptions
Basin should have a fairly homogenous CN values
CN should be 40 or greater
Ia /p should be between 0.1 and 0.5
TC should be 0.1 and 10 hr
Basin should have one main channel or branch with nearly equal time of
concentration
Neither channel nor reservoir routing can be incorporated
Fp factor is applied only for ponds and swamps that are not in the tc flow path

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 18

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Design Parameters of the SCS Curve Number Method Are:

A. Soils
The soil type or classification, the land use and land treatment, and the hydrologic
condition of the cover are the watershed factors that will have the most significant
impact on estimating the volume of rainfall excess, or runoff.
B. Hydrologic Condition
Hydrologic condition represents the effects of cover type and treatment on infiltration
and runoff. It is generally estimated from the density of plant and residue cover across
the drainage area. Good hydrologic condition indicates that the cover has a low runoff
potential, while poor hydrologic condition indicates that the cover has a high runoff
potential.
C. Runoff Curve Number (CN) Determination
The Soil Conservation Service's curve numbers are dimensionless numbers indicating
the runoff potential of a basin. The development of the curve number method was
based on 24-hour rainfall-runoff data. It is based on the following catchment
properties
 Hydrologic soil group
 Land use and treatment
 Ground surface conditions
 Antecedent moisture conditions Ponce (1985)
Curve numbers were developed on the basis of average antecedent moisture
conditions, that is, AMC II. By changing from AMC II to ill the PMF peak flow rate
increased by about 50 percent. Ponce (1985) These curve numbers can be adjusted to
AMC I or III using the following equations, so that an adjustment is required the
adjustment is as follows

……………..........................……………..2. 15

Calculate the retention SR using equation 2.9

25400
S =  254
CN
25400
=  254
82

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 19

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

depth of direct runoff using equation

…………………………………….…………2. 16

from annexes1G
Coefficients,c0, c1,c2 are
C0 = 2.54004
C1 = -0.61624
C2 = -0.15691 from annexe 1G
Peak flow using equation
( )……………...…….……………2. 17

( )
= 0.264767 m3/s/km2/mm

Table 2-6 Summary of the results of all methods

Estimation method Peak discharge (m3/s)

Rational method 25.52
Empirical formula not convenient
Unit Hydrograph Technique not convenient
SCS Curve Number Method 27.994
Therefore we select the 27.994 m3/s to be safe and reliable

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 20

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

3. WATER DEMAND, AGRONOMY AND WATER DELIVERY

ASPECTS

There are no vital requirements of crop than water. It has a number of useful functions
in the process of plant growth, it is the important constituents of plants. The following
are the main functions of irrigation water. It acts as a solvent for nutrients. Water
forms the solution of the nutrients and this solution is absorbed by roots. Thus, water
acts as the nutrients carrier. The irrigation water supplies moisture, which is essential
for the chemical action, which is with in the plant leading to its growth. The irrigation
water supplies moisture, which is essential for the life of bacteria, which are
beneficiary for plant growth. Water acts as an active reagent in photosynthesis and
hydrolysis.
Factors that affect the water requirements of a plant are;
 Type of soil
 Type of plant
 Metrological variants like:
 Sunshine,
 Temperature,
 Humidity,
 Rainfall and wind.
Water is the critical input for obtaining maximum production of a particular crop
which has its own tolerance limits of soil moisture variation that do not affect its
yield. The moisture availability in the root zone of the crop could be maintained
within the crop tolerance limits by adopting water management practice.

Crop Water requirement is the depth needed to meet the water loss through
evapotranspiration of a disease free crop growing in large fields under restricting soil
condition including soil water and fertility achieving full production potential under
the given growing environment (FAO, Guide Lines for computing crop water
requirement, Irrigation And Drainage Project Paper 56, 1994)
The knowledge of total crops water requirement is important in determining the crops
needed. The major things needed are the following:
o Loss through evaporation
o Loss through transpiration
o Plant metabolism

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 21

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

o Application loss and special needs like leaching requirement.

3.1 Crop selection

Selecting suitable crop in relation to the available water supply and climatic condition
of an area is very essential step in crop water demand assessment.
Generally crop selection is based on the following variables:
 Suitability of soil– the selected crops should give a maximum possible yield
wit little or no additional inputs which will increase the soil nutritive value
and provide adequate drainage facility during high impoundment.
 Method of irrigation
 Climate – the climate should be suitable for crops
 Availability of labor & farm machineries
 Water requirement – It should be considered so that availability of water to
meet the plant needs is ensured
 Market & profit – priority should be given to those high markets.
 Socio economic aspect value
 Farmers‟ preference
 Yield response factor and water utilization efficiency.
Taking the above variables into consideration, the following crop types were selected
for Gedi Irrigation Project: Maize, ,Haricot Bean, Spiceses Vegetable and
fruits(Onion, pepper ,potato carrot, cabbage) and Coffee . (Tefera, 2012)

3.2 Cropping pattern

It is the sequence in which plants (crops) are grown on the total area. The cropping
pattern of the project (e.g. Crops, crop rotation & intensity) is essential input
consideration in the over all project planning.
The over all objective of cropping pattern is maximizing the utilization of land water
in order that the beneficiaries are capable of implementing the proposed program in
terms of supplying the labor & other inputs required to increase the percentage of the
total cropped area.
Cropping pattern depends on the following factors: availability of water, type of soil,
climatic condition, value of crops, socio economic aspects
Availability of water:- The cropping pattern should be planned such that the crops
can be irrigated during the critical irrigation demand.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 22

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Type of soil:-Detail soil survey should be conducted to determine the suitable type of
crop for a particular land.
Climatic conditions:-Crops requiring more water should be grown in the when
rainfall is available.
Value of crop:- As far as possible, the crops which have high market value should be
grown.
Socio-economic aspects:- While deciding the cropping pattern, the socio-economic
aspects and specific requirements of the region should be considered.
Generally there are two cropping seasons for a year season:
 Season one
 Season two

3.2.1 Crop land allocation

The crop allocation has been based on the soil data taken from the field to be
irrigated. Crops are allocated to suit a particular soil so that maximum amount of crop
production is obtained on the basis of this. There for the various crops are allocated
using the optimization technique. It is a system by which one obtains maximum profit
from a given plot of land by subtracting all the costs involved during its production
the benefit that would be obtained. Since the important data such as crop yield, labor
required per hectare & labor price per day from local people for computation of the
net benefit was not available.
Table 3-1Selected crops, planting date & land allocation
Planting Crop Area Area Harvesting
S.No Crop type date duration (%) (ha) date
1 Maize 10, Mar 125 69 55 12,julay
2 Haricot bean 15, Mar 90 16 13 12,jun
3 Coffee 01, julay 365 15 12 30,jun
4 Onion 20,Sep 120 35 28 17,jan
5 Potato 15,Sep 130 25 20 22,jan
6 Cabbage 10,Oct 165 10 8 23,mar
7 Carrot 15,Oct 100 10 8 22,Jan
8 Pepper 10,Sep 125 5 4 12,jan

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 23

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 3-2 seasonal cropping arrangement

Season 1 crops (wet season crops) Season 2 crop (dry season crops)
Maize Onion
Haricot bean Potato
coffee Cabbage
Carrot
Pepper
Coffee

3.2.2 Optimization

Optimization is the technique that helps to find the condition that to gives maximum
profit or minimum costs. This method has a wide range application in many
engineering problems.
The optimization technique in our case is needed to allocate the selected crops over
the total irrigable land to satisfy farmers need in other words, the technique helps to
decide what amount of area out of the total irrigable land certain should occupy so as
to give maximum benefits.
In this project, the goal is to maximize the benefit by optimally allocating the area for
each crop. Therefore, optimization refers to an economical decision. But to do the
optimization problem the given data is not sufficient and we done by the given data
on the feasibility report.

3.2.3 Crop coefficient (Kc)

Where field conditions differ from the standard conditions, correction factors are
required to adjust ETc.The crop coefficient is used to relate the potential
evapotranspiration (ETo) to the consumptive use of the crop (ETc). It can be
presented as;

The selection of Kc depends on the information of the crop;

 Date of growing
 Climatic data-these are wind speed and humidity
 Length of the total growing season, including

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 24

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

i. Initial stage –germination and early growth whether the soil surface is not
or hardly covered by the up to 10% ground cover.
ii. Development stage-runs from end of initial stage to attainment of
efficient full ground cover. Effective full cover for many crops initiation of
flowering.
iii. Mid season stage-runs from attainment of effective full ground cover to
time of start of maturing.
iv. Late season stage- runs from end of mid season stage until full maturing
or harvesting.
Steps needed to arrive at the Kc values for different growing stages are as follows
Establish planting or growing date from local information or from practices in similar
climatic zones. Determine total growing seasons and length of crop development
stages from local information or literatures. Kc for initial stage predict irrigation
and/or rainfall frequency for predetermined ETo; obtain Kc value from graph of ETo
verses assumed irrigation interval and plot Kc value or it may be selected from table
for known humidity and wind speed values. (FAO, 1994) Kc for mid season –For a
given climate (humidity and wind), select Kc value from table and plot as a straight
line. Kc for late season stage –For time of maturity (harvest within few days) select
Kc values from table as above. Assume a straight line between Kc values at the end of
mid season and at the end of growing season. Development stage- Assume a straight
line between Kc values at the end of initial stage to start of mid season stage.
Table 3-3 growing stage (days) and Kc values of the proposed crops season one

Planting Base
Crop date Initial dev Mid Late Initial Mid late period
Maize 10, Mar 20 35 40 30 0.3 1.2 0.35 125
Haricot
bean 15, Mar 20 30 30 10 0.5 1.05 0.9 90
coffee 01, julay 60 90 120 95 1 1.1 1 365

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 25

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 3-4 growing stage (days) and Kc values of the proposed crops season two

Planting
Crop date Initial dev Mid Late Initial Mid late Base period
Onion 20,Sep 15 25 60 20 0.45 1 0.85 120
Potato 15,Sep 25 30 45 30 0.5 1.15 0.75 130
Cabbage 10,Oct 40 60 50 15 0.7 1.05 0.95 165
Carrot 15,Oct 20 30 30 20 0.7 1.05 0.96 100
Pepper 10,Sep 30 35 40 20 0.6 1.05 0.9 125
Coffee 01, julay 60 90 120 95 1 1.1 1 365
(FAO-33, 1994)

3.3 Crop water requirement

Crop water requirement is defined as” the depth of water needed to meet the water
loss through evapotranspiration (ETcrop) of a disease free, growing in large fields,
under non-restricting conditions including soil water and fertility and achieving full
production potential under the given growing environment.” (FAO-24, 1983)

The water requirement of crops may be contributed from different sources such as
irrigation requirement, effective rainfall, soil moisture storage and ground water
contributions.

…………………..…………………….3. 2
Where, CWR = crop water requirement
IR = irrigation requirement
ER = effective rainfall
S = carry over soil moisture in the root zone
GW = ground water contribution
Factor affecting crop water requirement:
 Amount of precipitation
 Temperature
 Day light hour
 Stage of growth
 Humidity
 Wind velocity

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 26

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

 Quality of water
 Soil characteristic
The knowledge of the total water requirement is essential to know the
i. The total volume at water to be stored in the reservoir ( demand)
ii. The area that can be irrigated with available and usable volume or discharge
iii. To decide the economics of the project
iv. To assess and recover charge far water supplied
v. To compare the utilization and efficiency at the project
vi. To assess and recover charges for water supplied

3.3.1 Determination of crop water requirement (ETcrop)

To calculate ETcrop, three-stage procedure is recommended.
i. The effect of climate given by the reference crop evapotranspiration (ETo)
Reference crop evapo transpiration is the rate of evaporation from an extensive
surface 8 to 15 cm tall, green cover of uniform height, actively growing, completely
shading the ground and not in shortage of water. Estimation of the potential evapo-
transpiration for irrigation project depends on the metrological and climatic data of
nearby station, which has nearly the same latitude and longitude to the commend area
used. The widely used methods to estimate reference crop evapo-transpiration are:
a) Blaney-criddle method
b) Thornthwaite method
c) Hardgrave‟s method
d) pan evaporation method
e) modified penman method
f) pen-man monteith methods
The choice of the method must be based on the type of climatic data available and on
the accuracy required in determining water needs. The penman monteith method
equation becomes the new standard for estimating the potential ETO according to
1990 FAO‟s manual. The method is suitable to directly estimate the potential ET if
the crop resistance is known. (DELFT, 1992)
This approach is proved to be superior in submitter experiment [Johnson et-al 1990]
that give close result with the actual value.
Because of Blaney-criddle and Thornthwaite methods use temperature data only so
that the other climatic conditions are ignored. Hardgrave‟s and Modified penman

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 27

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

methods are over estimated. The FAO Penman-Monteith method is recommended as

the sole method for determining ETo. The method has been selected because it closely
approximates grass ETo at the location evaluated, is physically based, and explicitly
incorporates both physiological and aerodynamic parameters.

Penman-monteith method (direct estimation of ETo)

This method is recommended in the FAO expert consolation held in May 1990 in
Rome . (FAO-56, 1996)
And the relationship is given as:

( )
………………………………3. 3

The pen-man monteith method is done using the computer software cropWat 8
windows ver. 4.3 as follows for the available climatic data‟s.(Annex 2A)

3.3.2 Irrigation Requirement

It is defined as the part of water requirement of crops that should be fulfilled by
irrigation. In other words, it is the water requirement of crops excluding effective rain
fall, carry over soil moisture and ground water contributions.

Where; GW = ground water contribution.

S = Carry over soil moisture
ER = effective Rainfall
A. Effective rainfall
Effective rainfall can be defined as the rain fall that is stored in the root zoon can be
utilized by crops. All the rainfall that falls is net effective. As the total amount of
rainfall various, so does the amount of water effective rainfall. Some of the seasonal
rainfall that fall will be as unnecessary deep percolation; surface runoff and some
ware may remain in the soil after the crop is harvested. From the water requirement of
crops point of view, this water, which is lost, is ineffective.
There are four methods used to calculate the effective rainfall from entered monthly
total rainfall data. These are described below.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 28

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

I. Fixed percentage effective rainfall

The effective rainfall is taken as affixed percentage of the monthly rainfall from entire
monthly total rainfall data.
ER= a% of total rainfal
Where; a is a fixed percentage to be given by the user to account for losses due to
runoff and deep percolation. An average value of 0.8 was adopted for this project
and total rainfall is the average total rain fall in mm/month.
Sample calculation
Effective rainfall f the month of January which has rainfall of 41mm is calculated as:
Peff = a * Ptotal
= 0.8 * 41
= 32.8mm
II. Dependable rainfall
An empirical formula developed by FAO/AGLW based on analysis for different arid
and sub-humid climates. The combined effect of dependable rain fall (80 %
probability of exceedence) and estimated losses due to runoff and percolation. This
formula is as follows
ER=0.6*total rainfall -10 ----------------for total rainfall<70mm
ER=0.8*total rainfall -24 ----------------for total rainfall>70mm
Sample calculation
The effective rainfall for the month of February which has rainfall of 78mm is
calculated as:
Peff = 0.8 *Ptotal - 24
= 0.8* 78 -24
= 38.4mm
III. Empirical formula for effective rainfall

This formula is similar to FAO/AGLW formula (see dependable rainfall method

above) with some parameters left to the user to define. The formula is as follows;

ER=a*total rainfall-b ----------------total rainfall<Z mm

ER=c*total rainfall-d ----------------total rainfall>Z mm

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 29

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Value for a, b, c, d and Z are correlation coefficients. Adaptation of this empirical

relation needs predetermined values of the coefficients from a long term rain fall of a
given area.
But according to the CROPWAT window program, these constants are given as
a = 0.5, b = -5, c = 0.7, and Z = 50 mm.
Sample calculation
Effective rainfall for the month of February which has rainfall of 78mm is calculated
as:
Peff = 0.7 * Ptotal +20
= 0.7* 78 +20
= 74.6mm
IV. Method of USDA soil conservation service
The effective rainfall is calculated according to the formula developed by USDA soil
conservation service which is as follows.
ER=total rainfall*(125-o.2*total rain fall)/125-------total rainfall<250mm
ER=125+0.1*total rainfall -------total rainfall>250mm
Sample calculation
Effective rainfall for the month of April which has rainfall of 199mm can be
calculated as:

Table 3-5 Summary of the result of effective rainfall calculated using different
methods in mm

Fixed USDA
Month Total percentage Dependable Empirical method
January 41 32.8 14.6 15.5 38.3
February 78 62.4 38.4 74.6 68.3
March 146 116.8 92.8 122.2 111.9
April 199 159.2 135.2 159.3 135.6
May 204 163.2 139.2 162.8 137.4
Jun 218 174.4 150.4 172.6 142
July 182 145.6 121.6 147.4 129

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 30

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

August 194 155.2 131.2 155.8 133.8

September 197 157.6 133.6 157.9 134.9
October 150 120 96 125 114
November 102 81.6 57.6 91.4 85.4
December 88 70.4 46.4 81.6 75.6
Total 1799 1439.2 1157 1466.1 1306.1

As can be seen from the Table 3.5, the highest effective rainfall was given by fixed
persentegel methods and The lowest was given by dependable method.
In general, as the rain intensity is high, more will be lost in the form of runoff and less
will reach the root zone of the crop and vice versa. Based on this, dependable method
gives conservative value of effective rain fall. Thus the one calculated by dependable
is adopted.
B. Ground water contribution (GW)
The actual contribution from the ground water table is dependent on the depth of
ground water table below the root zone and capillary characteristics of soil. For clayey
soils the rate of movement is low and distance of upward movement is high whole for
a light textured soil the rate is high and the distance of movement is low.
C. Carry over soil moisture (S)
This is the moisture retained in the root zone between cropping seasons or before the
crop is planted. The source of this moisture is either from rainfall that means
according before sowing or it may be the moisture that remained in the soil from past
irrigation
Table 3-6 Irrigation requirement
crope Etcpeak (mm/day) remark
Maize 4.7 annex 2F
Haricot bean 4.1 annex 2E
Coffee 5 annex 2D
Onion 3.68 annex 2G
Potato 4.21 annex 2H
Cabbage 4.61 annex 2I
Carrot 3.87 annex 2J
Pepper 3.83 annex 2K

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 31

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

3.4 Irrigation efficiencies

3.4.1 Field application efficiency (Ea)

It is the ratio between water directly available to the crop and that received at the field
inlet. It is expressed as
Ea= where, Ea=application efficiency

Wf=Water delivered to the irrigated plot

Ws=water stored in the root zone.
For surface method of irrigation
 Light soil.............................Ea=0.55.
 Medium soil..........................Ea=0.7
 Heavy soil..........................Ea=0.6 (FAO-24,1983)
 In Gedi irrigation area heavy soil is exists, therefore, Ea=0.6 has been taken

3.4.2 Field canal efficiency (Eb)

It is the ratio between water received at the field inlet and that received at the inlet of
the block of fields. It is expressed as
Eb= Where Eb = Field canal efficienc

WP = water received at the field inlet

Wf = water delivered to the field channel.

For blocks larger than 20ha.

Unlined ........................................Eb=0.8.
Lined............................................Eb=0.9.
For blocks up to 20ha.
Unlined..............................................Eb=0.7.
Lined..................................................Eb=0.8.
For Gedi irrigation area for blocks larger than 20ha and unlined, Eb=0.8

3.4.3 Conveyance efficiency (Ec)

 Continuous supply substantial change in flow 0.9
 Rotational supply in the project of 3000-7000 ha & rotation area of 70
– 300 ha with efficient management 0.8

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 32

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

 Rotational supply in large scheme > 10000 ha 0.7

 Small scheme < 1000 ha 0.65
 For Gedi irrigation area, its command area is 80ha which is between 70-
300ha.
Therefore, Ec=0.8

3.4.4 Project efficiency (Ep)

It is the ratio between water made directly available to the crop and that released at
the head works. It is expressed as
→ Ep=0.4
3.4.5 Net irrigation requirement (NIR)
It is the amount of irrigation water required to meet the evapotranspiration needs of
crops as well as leaching requirement (LR) etc.
Thus NIT=CIR + water lost in deep percolation for the purposes of leaching.
NIT = IR + LR……………………………………………...…………………..3.4
Where; LR= leaching requirement
3.4.6 Leaching Requirement (LR)
Leaching requirement is amount of water applied in excess of consumptive use so that
the excess salts are washed down from the root zone.
For surface irrigati method, leaching requirement can be estimated by:
Ecw  ETc  Re 
LR  ……………………………………..……………………3. 5
Le 5  Ece  Ecw 

Where Le = leaching efficiency (fraction

Ecw = electrical conductivity or the irrigation water found from the water sample
test result (mm/hol/cm)
Ece = electrical conductivity of soil saturation extracts for a given crop.
Re = effective rainfall (mm)
ETc = the evapotranspiration of the crop in the season (mm)
On gedi irrigation project there is no need of leaching requirement
3.4.7 Field irrigation Requirement (FIR)
FIR is the amount of water required to meet NIR, the water lost in the field water
courses & during field application of water.(Annex2)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 33

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

NIR
FIR  …………………………………………………………….3. 6
Ea
Where;Ea = Application efficiency.

3.4.8 Gross Irrigation Requirement (GIR)

The total amount of water applied through irrigation is termed as gross irrigation
water requirement. In other words it is net irrigation requirement plus loss in water
application and other losses. The gross irrigation requirement can be determined for
field, for a farm, for an outlet, command area or for an irrigation project, depending
on the need, by considering the appropriate lo
Where; NIR = Net irrigation requirement
Ep = project efficiency
To estimate the gross irrigation requirement of the project it is important to know the
efficiency with which the project is to operate. The project efficiency is the product of
other efficiencies such as conveyance, application and field channel efficiency. These
efficiencies are described in the following sections.
sses at various stages of the crop.
NIR
GIR  ………………….……………………..…………………………3. 7
Ep

3.5 Irrigation Scheduling

Irrigation scheduling is the practice of fixing irrigation depth and irrigation interval
based on water balance of the field. Scheduling is affected by a number of factors, for
example, during early stage of growth plants need less irrigation depth but frequently
application; whereas during late stage of growth they require more depth but can be
applied less frequently. This is mainly due to variation in rooting depth,
evapotranspiration and other factors. Irrigation should be supplied as soon as the
moisture falls up to optimum level known as MAD or moment allowable deficit
(hence, fixing irrigation frequency) and its quantity should be just sufficient to bring
the soil moisture up to field capacity (hence, fixing irrigation depth). (Irrigation
scheduling is calculated by using CROPWAT8.0 computer package and presented in
appendix)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 34

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

3.5.1 Depth of irrigation

It is the quantity of water that should be applied to bring the soil moisture to field
capacity. Hence it is the depth of water that can be stored in the root zone between the
allowable level of soil depletion for the given crop and the field capacity.

The maximum net amount of water that can be supplied per irrigation is expressed by
taking account that only part of the soil is wetted.

Where, Dnet = irrigation depth /irrigation requirement

AMC = Available soil moisture content (140mm/m FAO-24 for medium
textured soil)
Drz = Maximum root zone depth in m, from CROPWAT8 computer package
P = Depletion factor in mid-season stage ( annex 2)
Because of application losses such as deep percolating & runoff losses, the total
depth of water to be applied will be greater than the net depth of water.
d net 
d gross 
Ea Ea is field application efficiency

3.5.2 Irrigation Interval (T)

It is the time gap between two successive or consecutive irrigations. Irrigation should
be applied on time because delayed irrigation could cause considerable reduction in
crop yield, particularly at stages when the crop is sensitive to water stress. Irrigation
interval should take into account the soil water depletion requirement of the crops
which vary with evaporative demand, rooting depth, soil type and other factors.

T= d(gross)/ETc peak

Where, T=irrigation interval

ETc peak=maximum consumptive use ratio of the crop during the growing
season (from CROPWAT 8.0 computer package)
Actually, the computed peak irrigation interval should be reduced by certain
magnitude, so as to allow for any needed farm operation.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 35

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 3-7 Irrigation schedule

crope T(interval) in day remark
Maize 12 annex 2N
Haricot bean 12 annex 2M
Coffee 55 annex 2L
Onion 12 annex 2O
Potato 11 annex 2P
Cabbage 9 annex 2Q
Carrot 13 annex 2R
Pepper 11 annex 2K

Scheduling of irrigation application is very important for successful plant growth &
production. Water is not applied randomly at any time & in any quantity. Irrigation
scheduling indicates how much irrigation water has to be given to the crop, & how
often or when this water is given. How much & how often water has to be given
depends on the irrigation water need of the crop.

3.6 Determination of Design Discharge

The net scheme irrigation requirement computes the total irrigation water needs at
scheme level over a certain time step. It is calculated on a monthly basis taking into
account the Irrigation requirement of the crops in the field over the period under
analysis and the correspondent cropped area. It is expressed in average mm/day, in
mm/month and in l/s/ha
It should be noted that, as the Irrigation requirement represent, the Net scheme
irrigation requirement does not take into consideration soil water contribution to the
crop.
Table 3-8 Scheme Supply wet season
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Precipitation deficit
1 coffee 116 86.3 57.6 5.7 0 0 0 0 0 20.9 58 75
2 haricout bean 0 0 0 0 0 6.1 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 MAIZE 0 0 1.3 0 1.7 0 2.2 0 0 0 0 0
Net scheme Irr.req.
in mm/da 0.6 0.5 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 0.3 0.4

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 36

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

in mm/day 17.4 12.9 9.5 0.9 1.2 1 1.5 0 0 3.1 8.6 11.3
in l/s/h 0.07 0.05 0.04 0 0 0 0.01 0 0 0.01 0 0.04
Irrigated area 15 15 84 15 69 16 69 0 0 15 15 15
(% of total area)
Irr.req.for actual area 0.43 0.36 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0 0 0.08 0.2 0.28
(l/s/ha)

Table 3-9 Scheme Supply dry season

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Precipitation
deficit
1 Carrot 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 35 70.8
2 CABBAGE 108.9 82.3 35.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.4 20.7 51
3 Potato 66.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.9 66.8 81.2
4 onion 49.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 10.2 51.8 65.2
5 Sweet 36.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5.9 54.6 71.1
6 coffee 116.2 86.3 57.6 5.7 0 0 0 0 0 20.9 57.6 75
Net scheme
Irr.req.
in mm/da 2.3 0.8 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 1.7 2.3
in mm/day 71.7 21.2 12.2 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.6 9.4 51.8 70.1
in l/s/h 0.27 0.09 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.2 0.26
Irrigated area 100 25 25 15 0 0 0 0 40 100 100 100
(% of total area
Irr.req.for actual 0.27 0.35 0.18 0.02 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.03 0.2 0.26
area
(l/s/ha)
The peak net scheme irrigation requirement has been found to be 0.43l/s/ha in wet
season and 0.35l/s/ha in dry season .there for we adopte the maximum of the two (i.e.
0.43l/s/ha) in The total irrigable land of area was fixed as 80 ha during the feasibility
study of the project.

Maximumnetirrigation requirement * totalirrga tionarea

Designdisch arg e 
Pr ojecteffic iency

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 37

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

As Ea has already been considered in the calculation of net irrigation requirement in

the CROPWAT 8.0 computer package, only the values of Ec and Eb are taken for
design discharge calculation. The CROPWAT computer package considers Ea of
60%in computing net irrigation requirement. Thus, Ep=0.4
0..43l / s / ha * 80ha
` Therefore, Designdisch arg e 
0.4
=86l/s
Since the irrigation water is not applied for 24hr, we need to multiply the design
discharge by the working time factor. Adopting 16hours of irrigation, the design
discharge becomes,
Design discharge=86l/s*24/16*hr/hr

=129l/s =0.129m3/s

3.7 Methods of Water Delivery and Delivery Scheduling

The delivery schedules highly depend on the field irrigation methods and field
irrigation requirements. The objective of a water delivery and distribution system is to
deliver water adequately, efficiently and reliably to the users there by improving
production.

In all the cases the system should deliver the required water that can sustain the field
crops within the irrigation interval (T).

3.7.1 Main System

The capacity of main canal should be as much as possible to carry the peak discharge
required through out the season. The distribution system selected is continuous flow.
According to the schedule, the adjustable all secondary canals are operational every
day. So the sum of the discharges of tertiary canals is the main canal discharge.

3.7.2 Tertiary System

The distribution system selected is adjustable flow and the soil of the area is clay soil
type. In this case variable flow rates will be diverted to the tertiary unit‟s .Adjustable
flow regulator is needed for the purpose

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 38

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

4. SURFACE IRRIGATION METHODS

Irrigation water may be applied to crop by loading it on the field surface, by applying
it beneath the soil surface, by spraying it under pressure or by applying it in drops.
The common methods of irrigation are surface, subsurface, sprinkler and drip.

The water supply, the type of soil, the topography of the land and the crop to be
irrigated determine the correct method of irrigation to be used. Whatever the method
of irrigation, it is necessary to design the system for the most efficient use of water by
the crop. (Micheal, 1997)

4.1 Choice of Irrigation Method

The choice of surface irrigation method has many reasons in its favor; the more
important ones are summarized below

 Surface irrigation suitable for an area under study, being within the Margin of
slop for any of surface irrigation methods.
 It is a proven technique currently used in Ethiopia and also in the Study area.
 The proposed crop (sugarcane)to be cultivated in the project area also suitable
for surface irrigation.
 Capital cost than other methods which can managed with locally available
materials, but for pressurized irrigation technique , the materials are to be
imported From the five main surface irrigation method, furrow and basin
irrigation method is proposed under gedi irrigation project.

4.2 Surface Irrigation Method

In surface irrigation, water is applied directly to the soil surface from a channel
located at the upper reach of the field. Gravity provides the major driving force to
spread water over the irrigated field. Once distributed over the surface of the field and
after it has entered the soil, water is often redistributed by forces other than gravity.

Generally, in a surface irrigation event has four distinct hydraulic phases can be
discerned:

Advance phase: the time interval between the start of irrigation and arrival of
the advancing (wetting) front at the lower end of the field.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 39

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Ponding (wetting storage or continuing) phase: the irrigation time

extending between the end of advance and inflow cut-off. The term “Wetting”
phase is usually used for furrow and border where tail water runoff can occur,
where as ponding is the preferred term for basin irrigation (no tail water
runoff)
Depletion (vertical recession) phase: the time interval between supply cut-
off and the time that water dries up at the inlet boundary.
Recession (horizontal recession) phase: the time required for the water to
recede from all points in the channel, starting from the end of the depletion
phase. The time difference at each measuring station between the clock time
or cumulative time for advance and recession is the opportunity time, T,
infiltration to occur.

4.3 Furrow Irrigation

Furrow irrigation refers to water that is discharged into and runs down small sloping
channels (called furrows or corrugations) which are cut or pressed into the soil. The
two most common furrow irrigation systems are the straight furrow irrigation and
graded furrow irrigation. Water infiltrates from the bottom and sides of furrows
moving laterally downward to wet the soil and to move soluble salts, fertilizers and
herbicides carried in the water.

As compared to other methods, the furrow method has several distinct advantages.

Water in the furrows contacts only one-half to one-fifth of the land surface,
thereby reducing pudding, and crusting of the soil, and evaporation losses.
Earlier cultivation is possible which distinct advantage in heavy soils is.
The method reduces labor requirements in land preparation and irrigation so
economical.
Furrow can be adopted to use, without erosion, on wide range of natural sloped lands.

4.4 Design Consideration of Furrow Irrigation

The design of a surface irrigation system first involves assessing the general
topographic conditions, soils, crops, farming practices anticipated and farm operator‟s
desires and finance for the field or farm in question. Moreover, the first priorities in
agriculture today is the development of irrigation design that are more efficient in the

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 40

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

use of both water and energy resources for the varieties of crops and farming
practices.
One of the purposes of design of surface irrigation systems is to facilitate operational
practices so that the system can be managed and operated according to the plan and
the desired goal can be achieved.
Furrow spacing
Furrow can be spaced to fit the crops grown and the type of machines used for
planting and cultivation. Crop like potatoes, maize, cotton and sugarcane are planted
60 to 90cm apart between all furrows. Furrows should be spaced close enough to
ensure that water spreads to sides into ridge and the root zone of the crop to replenish
the soil moisture uniformly.
Table 4-1furrow infiltration and inflow rate

Soil texture Infiltration rate(mm/hr) Furrow inflow (l/s/1000m length)

Clay 1-5 0.03-0.15

Clay loam 5-10 0.15-0.3

Silt loam 10-20 0.3-0.5

Sandy loam 20-30 0.5-0.8

Sand 30-100 0.8-2.7

Table 4-2 spacing between rows and plants

Crop Suggested space between Rows and plants(cm)

Maize 75 x 30

Potato 80 x 30

Tomato 150 x 20

Pepper 60 x 40

Onion 60 x 40

source (Micheal, 1997)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 41

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Furrow slope
The slope or grade of the furrow is important because it controls the speed at which
water flows down the furrow.
A minimum furrow grade of 0.05% is needed to ensure surface drainage. In our case
we adopted that the furrow slope is 0.5% the study area.
As the furrow grade increases, the range of infiltration slows down and the side
spread of water into the crop ridge decreases, so that wastage may occur at the end of
the furrow.

Furrow Length

The optimum length of the furrow is usually the longest furrow that can be safely and
efficiently be irrigated. Long furrow are an advantage inter cultivation. The length is
too long; water soaks into deep at the head of the furrow by the time the stream
reaches the lower end. This result in over-irrigation at the upper end or under-
irrigation at the lower end.

The optimum length of the furrows is usually the longest furrow that can be
efficiently irrigated. It may be as short as 45m on soils which take up water rapidly or
as much as 300m or longer on the soils with low infiltration rate. The length of the
furrow may often be limited by the size and shape of the field.
Furrow Stream
The size of the furrow stream is the one factor which can be varied after the furrow
irrigation system has been installed. The size of the stream usually varies from 0.5 to
2.5 liters per second. To obtain the most uniform irrigation, the largest stream of
water that will not cause erosion is used in each furrow at the beginning of irrigation.
Its purpose is to wet the entire length of each furrow as quickly as possible, thus
enabling the soil to absorb water evenly through the entire furrow length. The
maximum size of irrigation stream that can be used at the start of the irrigation limited
by consideration of erosion in furrows, over topping of furrows and prevention of run-
off at the down steam end.
The maximum non-erosive flow rate is estimated by the following empirical equation.
Qm = 0.6/s (Micheal, 1997)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 42

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 4-3Relation of maximum non erosive flow rates to critical slope of furrows

Furrow slopes % Maximum flow rate Qmax (l/s)

0.1 6.0
0.3 2.0
0.5 1.2
2.0 0.3
(after Booher 1974)

Design of furrow system

The following parameters are used for design of the furrow system.
 The parameter of the intake families: soil with similar infiltration
characteristics is based on one – dimension infiltration families. The
classification is based on one –dimension infiltration furrow irrigation by taking
in to account the wetted perimeter of the furrow and the furrow spacing. This
purpose the adjusted wetted perimeter is used for design.
 Reduced inflow perimeter (P2): This is the furrow perimeter corresponding to
cut –back stream.
 Advanced time (Ta): The time at which the advance water front (run in stream)
reaches a particular point.
 Opportunity time (To): It is the difference of between the water fronts reaches a
particular point along the furrow and the time at which the tail records from the
same point.
 Recession time (Tr): The time for out flow of water to stop after inflow at the
head of the furrow has ended in recession time.
Infiltration in furrow system and calculation of required infiltration time must
be handled differently than for other types of surface system. This is because
infiltration takes place on the wetted perimeter of the furrow and the adjusted
wetted perimeter is given by the following equation.

……………………………………..4. 1

Where Q - volumetric inflow rate, l/s

n - Manning roughness coefficient
s - Furrow slop or hydraulic gradient (m/m)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 43

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

In most cases, after the flow has stabilized and gets uniform, the hydraulic gradient is
equal to the furrow slop. A roughness coefficient of 0.04 is normally used for design
of furrow irrigation system. (Cuenca, 1989)

The advanced time (Ta): for a stream of water moving down the furrow is
given by

Ta = ( )…………………………………………..4. 2

Where Ta – advance time (minute)

L - Distance down the furrow (m)
Q - Volumetric inflow rate (l/s)
S - Slope, m/m
The net infiltration time or opportunity time (Tn):

Tn = ( ) ……………………………………….4. 3

Where dn - net irrigation depth (application depth)

dn = RAM*P*D
Where RAM-readily available moisture from CROPWAT4window version
P - Depletion factor of sugarcane
D - Root depth of the sugarcane
dn - net irrigation depth
Cut of time (Tco): Tco reflects an irrigation management decision made by
the former and designer. It should be an adequate length of time to infiltrate a
satisfactory depth of water over the length of the furrow without causing
excessive deep percolation.
Tco = Ta+Tn-Tr, min ……………………………………………………4. 4
Where Tr is recession time is assumed zero for open–ended gradient furrow (i.e. for
furrows whose slope is not equal to zero) without loss of accuracy.
There before Tco = Ta + Tn
The average infiltration opportunity time

Toavg =Tco - ,Where = ….4. 5

Gross application depth (dg)

…………………………………………………....4. 6

Average infiltration depth (davg)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 44

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

…………………………………………..4. 7

Surface run off (dro)

dro = dg – davg…………………………………………………….4. 8
Deep percolation (Dp)
Dp= davg-dn…………………………………………………………....4. 9

Percentage of Dp = * 100 (< 10%)………………………………………4. 10

Distribution pattern efficiency, Ed

Ed = * 100 (>50%)……………………………………………….4. 11

If the value of deep percolation and distribution efficiency is greater than the standard
specification value, cut-back condition is necessary to minimize the deep percolation
of the water .In this condition some formula is modified.
Sample calculations for onion:
Parameters needed furrow design
Soil type-clay
Intake family for the given soil type, IF = 0.15
For IF =0.15;
A = 0.711 f = 7.34

B = 0.683 g = 1.414*10-4
C=7
Furrow spacing, W = 80cm
Furrow slope, S=0.5% (0.05 to 0.5% is recommended)
Furrow length, L=250m (max. is 370m for clay of s=0.5%)
Manning‟s roughness coefficient, n=0.025
Net irrigation depth, dn=50.4mm
Design parameter
 Advance time

Ta = ( )=

 Adjusted wetted perimeter

P = 0.265 + 0.227

P=0.265*(

 Net infiltration depth

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 45

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

dn = RAM*P*D RAM=80mm
p=0.63
D=1m
Dn=80*0.63*1=50.4
Where RAM-readily available moisture from CROPWAT8window version
P - Depletion factor
D - Root depth of the sugarcane
dn - net irrigation depth
 Net infiltration time

Tn = ( )

( )
Tn= ( ]

 Design cutoff time

Tco=TA+ Tn =51.66+1216.848 =1268.51min
 Average infiltration opportunity time

Toavg = Tco - Where = =0.4166

Toavg=

 Gross application depth (dg)

dg =

 Average infiltration depth (davg)

davg = [

 Surface run off (dro)

dro = dg - davg
dro = 456.66-51.16=405.502mm
 Deep percolation (Dp)
Dp = davg-dn
Dp = 51.16-50.4=0.76mm

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 46

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Percentage of Dp = * 100 (< 10%)

Dp =

 Distribution pattern efficiency, Ed

Ed = * 100 (>50%)

Ed = which is not ok so it needs some modification.

Furrow irrigation design for the remaining crops follows similar procedure and
tabulated below.
Table 4-4 Furrow irrigation design for the selected crops

Crops Potato Maize cabbage Pepper Onion carrot Green beans

L(m) 250 100 100 100 50 50 250
S% 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Dn(mm) 50.4 126 12.6 21.12 31.5 16.8 50.4
W(m) 0.8 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.38 0.3 0.8
P(m) 0.411 0.411 0.411 0.411 0.411 0.411 0.411
TA(min) 51.66 7.4 16.094 16.094 7.4 7.404 51.66
Tn(min) 1216.85 4064.194 78.53 74.73 53.91 60.9 1216.848
Tco(min) 1268.51 4080.288 94.63 90.82 61.31 8.01 1268.51
Tav(min) 1245.95 1245.95 87.01 83.21 57.71 4.42 1245.952
dg(mm) 456.66 4196.87 170.329 163.484 232.35 38.46 456.66
dav(mm) 51.16 61.82 22.64 22.18 32.41 20.05 32.74
dro(mm) 405.51 4135.04 147.68 141.3 199.93 18.41 423.92
dp(mm) 0.762 61.82 1.05 1.06 0.913 3.25 -17.65
dp (%) 1.52 49.06 4.84 5.02 2.89 19.4 35.03
Ea (%) 11.04 3.01 12.68 12.92 13.56 43.68 11.04
NB: If the value of deep percolation and distribution efficiency is greater than the
standard specification value, cut-back condition is necessary to minimize the deep
percolation of the water .In this condition some formula is modified.
The distribution patter efficiency is less than 50%, therefore we use cut back
condition.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 47

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Cut back stream,Q2

Q2 = = = 0.5 l/s

Reduced inflow perimeter

P2 = 0.265 + 0.227

P2= =0.265

Net application time under cut back condition

Tn =

⁄ ⁄
Tn =
Time of cut back
Tcb = Ta =7.404min
Time of cut off
Tco = Tn + Ta
Tco=81.99+7.404=89.403min
Average infiltration time

Tavg =

Tavg=

Average infiltration depth under cut back condition

Davg=

Davg=34.87mm
 Gross application depth

dg=

 Surface run off dro

dro=dg - davg =183.42-34.87=148.56mm
 Deep percolation depth
Dp = davg –dn =34.87-31.5=3.365min

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 48

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

 Distribution efficiency, Ed =

Still it is not greater than 50% therefore we use cut back flow conditions.
Output of cutback flow model

Table 4-5Furrow irrigation design for the selected crops

Basi Max Average Recessio Applicatio

Basin n infiltrated applied Cutoff Advance n n
Cr lengt widt depth(m depth(mm time( time time(mi efficiency
op h (m) h(m) m) ) min ) (min) n) (%)
cof
fee 28 28 59 56 150 56 260 90

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 49

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

5. DESIGN OF CANALS AND CANAL STRUCTURES

Irrigation scheme which utilize weir a barrage or a storage reservoir necessitates the
construction of network of canals. The entire system of canals (main and branches)
distributed over the field are to be designed properly for certain realistic value of
maximum discharge, that must pass through them so as to provide sufficient irrigation
to the command area; the success of the flow irrigation depends on the perfect design
of the network of canals
The design of canals is carried out in considerations of Kennedy‟s and Lacey‟s theory
which are based on the characteristics of sediment load i.e. (silt) in canal water.
The design consideration of irrigation canals naturally varies according to the type of
soil, again the velocity of flow in the canal should be critical (i.e., none silting and
scouring).

5.1 Canal Alignment

A canal has to be aligned in such a way that it covers the entire area proposed to be
irrigated. It is clear that irrigation water, (in flow type) should reach the field by
gravity to accomplish the requirement. Irrigation canal is always aligned in such a
way that the water gets proper command over the whole irrigable area.
(Sahasrabudhe, 1994)

General Consideration for Canal Alignment

The following points should be kept in mind in alignment of canal

 The alignment should not pass through the valuable lands, religious places,
villages, etc. to avoid unnecessary compensation and unwanted conflict.
 The alignment should be short as far as possible, but to make it short the
alignment should not be taken through the area where irrigation is not yet all
possible.
 The alignment should be straight as far as possible.
 The alignment should cross the natural stream, drainage, etc approximately
at the right angles. At the crossing point, the width of the drainage should be
minimum and the banks should be well defined.
 The alignment should not involve heavy cutting or banking.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 50

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

 The alignment along the ridge line or water shade line is very good as the
water shed canal can irrigate the area on both the side. Moreover, cross
drainage work may be avoided.
 The alignment should be such that the maximum area may be irrigated with
minimum length of the canal.
 The alignment should not pass through the water logged area because the
canal may be collapsed due to the heavy moisture in the area.
 The alignment should not pass through the sandy soil as the percolation in the
loss soil will be more and the duty of the soil will be less. (NNBasak, 1999)

5.2 Hydraulic Design of the Canal

Canal is designed in a way which, it‟s longitudinal and cross section is fixed out to
suit requirements; thus various canals dimension like bed width, depth, side slope,
longitudinal slope, etc. are to be fixed in the design of irrigation canal. Irrigation
canals are designed to take the maximum discharge safely which is called full supply
discharge.
Regime channels
While design a properly functioning channel, one must think to design such a channel
in which neither silting nor scouring take place, such channel is known as stable
channel or regime channel, so whatever silt has entered in to the channel at its head it
keeps in the suspension so that it doesn‟t it settle down and deposited at any point of
the channel. I.e. the velocity of the channel should be such that, it doesn‟t produce
local silt by erosion of channel bed and side slope.
1. Kennedy’s theory
He defined the critical velocity (VO) in a channel as the mean velocity which will just
keep the channel free from silting or scour and related it to the depth of flow by the
equation by introducing factor m, up on the type of the soil, m which is called the
critical velocity ratio. (C.V.R)
VO = C1*MYC2 = 0.55my0.64
Where, C1 & C2 are constant depend up on silt charge.
C1 = 0.55 & C2 = 0.64 = in SI units (Garg page 91)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 51

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

2. Lacey’s theory
Lacey argue that a channel showing no silting no scouring may actually not be in
regime and he classify in to three regime conditions.
a) True regime
Artificially constructed channel having a certain fixed section and a certain fixed
slope and only full filling the requirements of, Q is constant, flow uniform, silt charge
amount is constant, silt grade is constant, type and size of silt is always the same and
channel is flowing through a material which can be scoured as easily as it can be
deposited, but in practices all the above listed condition can never be satisfied.
b) Initial regime and final regime
When only the bed slope of the channel varies and its cross section or wetted
perimeter remains unaffected , even the channel is can exhibit no silting no scouring
properties called initial regime. they can be achieved only a working stability due to
the rigidity of their banks, their slope and velocities are higher and cross sections
narrower than what would have been, if the side where not rigid. And regime theory is
not applicable to them, as they are in fact not the channel in alluvium.
If there is no resistance from the sides and all the variable such as perimeter depth,
slope etc. are equally free to vary and finally gate adjusted according to Q and silt
grade then the channel is said to have achieved permanent stability called final
regime. Regime theory is applicable to such a channel in which all variable are
equally free to vary, has a tendency to assume a semi-elliptical section.
Lacey‟s calculation procedure.

V= [m/s] …………………………………………………5. 1

( ) ……………………………………5. 2
Bed slope , S= * + 5. 3

Where, Discharge Q – cumec

Area A = Q/V [m2]
Velocity V - [m/s]
Wetted perimeter, p = 4.75√ [m]
f – Silt factor = , f = 1.76√
dm - average particle size [mm]

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 52

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Criteria’s for Selecting Canal Design Theory

Design of channel by Kennedy‟s theory vary depending up on selecting bed slope s ,

to fit the topographical slope & B/D ratio, he doesn‟t fix regime slope for irrigation
channel as that of the lacey‟s theory. Lacey indicated that the true regime shape of the
channel is semi elliptical, but he did not give any equation for its shape
 The true regime condition defined by lacey are hypothetical not real in practice.
 Since the canal passes through the different bed of soil it is difficult to use single
lacey‟s factor, f
 Lacey did not consider silt charge rather silt grade
 Lacey did not take in to account the increase in silt concentration due to loss of
water evaporation and seepage. (Arora K. , 2002)
Hence the lacey‟s equations are Empherical and highly specific for channels flowing
in particular regions.I.e. this equation cannot be universally applied. Moreover the
value of silt factor is required in the use of lacey‟s theory, since information on
particle size; it is preferred to use Kennedy‟s theory for the design of channels.

5.2.1 Permissible velocity

Depending on whether there is a non erodible or an erodible canal, a permissible
velocity can be used as a criteria for a design of the canal. A minimum permissible
velocity is that which will not start sedimentation. It is determined by sediment
transport capacity of the flow. A maximum permissible velocity is that which will not
cause erosion of the canal. This velocity is very uncertain and variable and can be
estimated only with experience and judgment. (Chow, 1983)
Table 5-1permissible velocity for unlined canal

S.no Type of material Permissible velocity(m/sec)

1 Loam clay soil or loam 0.38 to 1.37
2 Clay soil 0.41 to 1.67
3 Heavy clay 0.45 to 1.70
4 Sandy clay 0.52 to 1.83
5 Ordinary 0.60 to 0.90
6 Moorum 1.50
7 Gravel hard rock Greater than 3
(Arora K. , 2003)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 53

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 5-2 Permissible velocity (lined canal)

S.no Type of lining Maximum permissible velocity

(m/sec)
1 Boulder lining 1.5
2 Brick tile lining 1.8
3 Cement concrete lining 2.7

5.2.2 Tractive Force

Tractive force or shear force is the force applied by the flowing water on the canal bed
and the sides in the direction of flow. This force per unit area is called a unit tractive
force or shear stress.
Consider a canal reach of length L and canal cross sectional area A, the volume of
water stored in the canal reach is, V = gAL = AL . The component of this weight in
the direction of the flow direction is AL sin = ALS where S is the canal slope.
This component is tractive force.
The concept of the tractive force method originates primarily from the work done by
the US Bureau of reclamation.
The design of canal on tractive force approach is based on the fact that the actual
shear stress on the bed and the sides of the canal should be less than the critical
(maximum allowable shear stress). Critical shear stress is the stress on the bed of the
canal at which the bed material starts to move with the flowing water.
For design o crt

Where o- is the actual bed shear stress

crt - is the critical allowable shear stress
Table 5-3 Critical tractive force for different soil
2 2
Soil type crt (kg/m ) Soil types crt (kg/m )
Medium sand 0.17 Fine gravel 0.37
Sandy loam 0.20 Volcanic ash 0.37
Alluvial silt 0.25 Stiff clay 1.12
Silty loam 0.25 Coarse gravel 1.47
Coarse sandy 0.25 Shale and hard pan 3.18
(Arora, 2003)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 54

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

5.3 Full Supply Discharge (FSD)

The maximum discharge capacity of the channel for which it is discharged, is known
as full supply discharge the water level of the canal corresponding to full supply
discharge in full supply level (FSL). (Basak, 1999)
The capacity of the canal should be such as to full fill the max peak demand of all the
crops that are required to be irrigated at any one time amongst all the season.
(Garge, 2003)
In this project, the irrigated crops are and the net crop requirement which obtained
from the CROP WATT 8.0 soft ware result is 0.43l/s/ha.
Design Input data’s
a) Command area
The command area has some undulating topography on the sides of the command and
a little sloppy area on the tail of the command. Generally the slope of the area is from
2-10%. the area right bank and left of the river which has total command area of 80ha
with moderate slope is suitable for surface irrigation methods. Therefore, the furrow
alignment, planting geometry and irrigation application method has to be considered.
b) Time factor
A time factor is a factor used to calculate design discharge for specific area which
obtained by dividing the actual flow hours required for irrigation along the main canal
to one day (24hrs)

Time factor =

c) Canal side slope

I .Side slope for unlined canal
The slope to be given to the sides depends on the angle of the internal friction
for a particular soil .in other word the slope adopted should also be remembered
that the side slopes adopted in cutting and filling are not the same.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 55

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 5-4 Side Slope for Various Soils

Soil type Side slope (Horizontal : vertical )

Cutting Embankment
Sound rock 1/8 :1 1 :1

Poor rock 1/2: 1 1 :1

Gravelly soil 3/4 : 1 1 :1

Compact clay soil 1:1 1 :1

Clay soil 1 :1 2:1

Loam soil 1 :1 2:1

Sandy loam soil 2:1 to 3:1 2:1 to 3:1

Sandy soil 3 :1 4:1
(Sahasrabudhe, 1994)
II. Side slope for lined canal
The canal can be made fairly water tight by limiting the canal section with various
materials. In ordinary lined canal, the steepest satisfactory side slope from
construction point of view is ranging from 1.25:1 to 1.5:1
d) Longitudinal slope
Canal bed slope depends up on the slope of the natural ground for economy in the
earth work and bed slope should be the same as the ground slope as in the case of
contour canal because it affects the velocity of flow.
 Large canals, Q > 15 m3/s, ………0.10 to 0.30 ‰
 Intermediate canals, ………………0.20 to 0.40 ‰
 Small canals, Q < 0.3 m3/s,………..0.30 to 0.50 ‰ (Abebe.D, 2011)
e) Roughness Coefficient
The roughness of the canal bed affects the velocity of the flow. The roughness is
caused due to the ripple s formed on the bed of the canal. so the roughness coefficient
was introduced by the R.G Kennedy to calculate the mean velocity flow.
The value of „‟n‟‟ depends on the type of the bed material of the canal (Basak, 1999)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 56

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 5-5The Value of N for Different Type Of Bed Material.

Material Roughness coefficient (n)

Wood 0.013 to 0.0165
Steel 0.0123 to 0.018
Concrete 0.013 to 0.018
Masonry 0.02 to 0.036
Earth 0.0225 to 0.035
(Sahasrabudhe, 1994)
f) Free board
The gap between full supply level and the bank level of the canal is known as free
board
The amount of free board depends up on.
 Canal size
 Discharge
 Wave action etc
According to the lacey free board is given by formula.
Fb = 0.20 + 0.15Q1/3 , where, Q is canal capacity [m3/s]
Summary of Input data’s
 Net irrigation requirement=0.43l/sec/ha
 Right Total command area =55.13ha
 Left Total command area =25.86ha
 Conveyance efficiency, Ec=80% see chap 3
 Application efficiency, Ea=60% see chap3
 Field canal efficiency, Eb =80% see chap 3

 Time factor = =2

Design discharge for right command area(QdR)

′
QdR

= 0.1185 m3/sec

Design discharge for left command area(QdL)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 57

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

′
QdR

= 0.0556 m3/sec

 Design discharge, QdR=0.1185 m3/sec

 Design discharge, QdL=0.0556 m3/sec
 Roughness coefficient, n=0.029(for earth material table 5.5)
 canal side slope, Z =0.5(for unlined canal on clay soil table 5.4 )
 Free board, FB=0.20+0.15Q1/3
 Critical velocity ratio the velocity should be non sliding and non
scouring that the actual should almost equal to permissible velocity according to
Kennedy theory
 Permissible velocity, Vcr =0.41 to 1.67 from table 5.2
 Tractive force limit, τcr =1.12 for stiff clay soil Table
 B/D ratio for Q < 0.2 m3/s B/D = 1
Q > 0.2 m3/s B/D 1.75Q0.35 (Abebe.D, 2011)
 Longitudinal slope of main canal (S =0.003 to 0.017) from the given
topo map.

5.4 Design of Main Canal

In Geddi irrigation project a given main canals are unlined and in both sides of the
command area. i.e right and left main canals 200m and 87m long respectively up to
the first reach of the main canal which is directly off taking from the head weir.

5.4.1 Design of Right block Main Canal

The design consideration is naturally vary according to the type of soil. Again the
velocity of the flow in the canal should be critical. That is the velocity should be none
silting and none scouring.
After a long research in different canals and different conditions R.G.Kennedy,
executive engineer, Punjab and Gerlad lacey, chief engineer UP have established
some theory of design of canal which is known as Kennedy theory and lacey theory.
These two theory are based on the characteristics of the sediment load (i.e. silt in
canal water) .

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 58

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

The design of lined and aligned canal involves different practical and economical
consideration. (Basak, 1999)
In Geddi irrigation project B/D is used to design unlined canal
Data available:
Canal capacity (FSQ) =QpR =0.1185
Manning coefficient (n) =0.029 (for Earthen ) table 6.1
bed slope of the main canal (s) =
The cross section of the main canal varies as the distance of the canal increases. This
is because the design of main canal is hold by considering the amount of water
diverted through the off taking canal upstream of each division canals

b
d

 2 1 z2 
0.5
z 
(b/d) recom. = 1.0, for Q ≤ 0.2 m3/s
The Manning-Strickler formula can be re-written as:
Q= f. km. d8/3. S0.5………………………………………5. 4
1
3  b 
5
 3

 Q  8    z 
d   d  
0.5  Where: f   2 
 f .k m .S    b  
0.5 
 2. 1  z 2  
  d  

Values of factor f prepared as a function of b/d and z, i.e. the shape of the
cross section is shown below.
Table 5-6 Factor f-values of the shape of the cross section (Adapted from Meijer
1989)

b/d
0 1 1.5 2 3 4 6 8 10
z

0 - 0.481 0.853 1.26 2.13 3.05 4.95 6.89 8.86

0.5 0.184 0.898 1.32 1.76 2.68 3.62 5.55 7.51 9.48

1 0.500 1.30 1.73 2.18 3.11 4.06 6.00 7.96 9.93

1.25 0.668 1.48 1.92 2.38 3.30 4.25 6.18 8.14 10.11

1.5 0.836 1.66 2.10 2.56 3.48 4.43 6.36 8.31 10.28

2 1.17 2.01 2.45 2.90 3.83 4.77 6.69 8.63 10.59

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 59

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

2.5 1.50 2.34 2.78 3.23 4.15 5.09 7.00 8.93 10.88

3 1.83 2.67 3.11 3.56 4.47 5.40 7.30 9.22 11.17

f=0.898 from table

Km=1/n=1/0.029= 34.48
3
 Q  8
d  0.5  = (
 f .k m .S 
=0.5 m
Therefore b/d=1 & b=0.5
Trapezoidal canal:
A  by  my 2 ……………………….…5. 5

=0.5*0.5+(0.5*0.52)
= m2

P  b  2 y * 1  m 2 …………………5. 6

=0.5+2*0.5*√
= 1.618m
A
Then, R  = 0.232m
P
Where y is flow depth, b is bottom width, m is side slope, A is the area of flow and P
is the wetted perimeter.
Fb = 0.20 + 0.15Q1/3
FB= 0.2+0.15*0.11851/3
= 0.27m
Check whether the flow velocity is within the permissible limit on range 0.41 to 1.67
for clay soil.
V=Q/A=0.1185/0.375=0.412 m/s This implies that our canal does not cause
either silting or scouring.

5.4.2 Design of left block main canal

Canal capacity (FSQ) =QpR =0.1185
Manning coefficient (n) =0.029 (for Earthen ) table 6.1
bed slope of the main canal (s) =
b
d

 2 1 z2 
0.5
z 
Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 60
 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

(b/d) recom. = 1.0, for Q ≤ 0.2 m3/s

The Manning-Strickler formula can be re-written as:

Q= f. km. d8/3. S0.5

1
3  b 
5
 3

 Q  8    z 
d   d  
0.5  Where: f   2 
 f .k m .S    b  
0.5 
 2. 1  z 2  
  d  


Values of factor f prepared as a function of b/d and z, i.e. the shape of the
cross section is shown below.

f=0.898 from table

Km=1/n=1/0.029= 34.48
3
 Q  8
d  0.5  = (
 f .k m .S 
=0.205m
Therefore b/d=1 & b=0.205
Trapezoidal canal:

A  by  my 2

=0.205*0.205+(0.5*0.2052)
= m2
P  b  2 y * 1  m2

=0.205+2*0.205*√
= 0.664m
A
Then, R  = 0.095m
P
Where y is flow depth, b is bottom width, m is side slope, A is the area of flow and P
is the wetted perimeter.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Fb = 0.20 + 0.15Q1/3 5. 7

FB= 0.2+0.15*0.0561/3
= 0 0.257m
Check whether the flow velocity is within the permissible limit on range 0.41 to 1.67
for clay soil.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 61

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

 V=Q/A=0.056/0.063=0.88 m/s This implies that our canal does not cause
either silting or scouring.

FB

B
Figure 5-1 typical cross section of main canal
Table 5-7 Summary of right main canal calculation

CANALS area Qd
m s l/se m3/s d B A P R FB TD V
0.5 0.003 RMC 55.13 118.53 0.12 0.50 0.50 0.38 1.62 0.23 0.20 0.70 0.41
0.5 0.003 RMC-R1 52.81 113.54 0.11 0.24 0.24 0.08 0.77 0.11 0.20 0.44 1.35
0.5 0.003 RMC-R2 51.56 110.85 0.11 0.23 0.23 0.08 0.76 0.11 0.20 0.43 1.34
0.5 0.003 RMC-R3 48.34 103.93 0.10 0.23 0.23 0.08 0.74 0.11 0.20 0.43 1.32
0.5 0.003 RMC-R4 46.66 100.32 0.10 0.23 0.23 0.08 0.73 0.10 0.20 0.43 1.31
0.5 0.003 RMC-R5 41.97 90.24 0.09 0.22 0.22 0.07 0.70 0.10 0.20 0.42 1.27
0.5 0.003 RMC-R6 39.72 85.40 0.09 0.21 0.21 0.07 0.69 0.10 0.20 0.41 1.25
0.5 0.003 RMC-R7 32.43 69.72 0.07 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.64 0.09 0.20 0.40 1.19
0.5 0.003 RMC-R8 27.62 59.38 0.06 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.60 0.09 0.20 0.39 1.15
0.5 0.003 RMC-R9 19.47 41.86 0.04 0.16 0.16 0.04 0.53 0.08 0.20 0.36 1.05
0.5 0.003 RMCR10 10.59 22.77 0.02 0.13 0.13 0.03 0.42 0.06 0.20 0.33 0.90
0.5 0.003 RMCR11 5.01 10.77 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.32 0.05 0.20 0.30 0.75
0.5 0.003 RMCR12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00

Table 5-8Summary of left main canal calculation

CANALS area Qd
M s ha l/se m3/s d B A P R FB TD V
0.5 0.015 LMC 25.86 55.60 0.06 0.21 0.21 0.06 0.66 0.10 0.20 0.41 0.88
0.5 0.015 LMC-R1 23.70 50.96 0.05 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.64 0.09 0.20 0.40 0.86
0.5 0.015 LMC-R2 19.64 42.23 0.04 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.60 0.09 0.20 0.39 0.82
0.5 0.015 LMC-R3 17.52 37.67 0.04 0.18 0.18 0.05 0.57 0.08 0.20 0.38 0.80
0.5 0.015 LMC-R4 12.67 27.24 0.03 0.16 0.16 0.04 0.51 0.07 0.20 0.36 0.74
0.5 0.015 LMC-R5 7.55 16.23 0.02 0.13 0.13 0.03 0.42 0.06 0.20 0.33 0.65

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 62

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

5.5 Tertiary Canal Design

The design principle of tertiary canal is the same as that of the main canal. There are
27tertiary canals along the entire area the cross sectional dimensions is presented on
tabular form. For their respective command area and longitudinal slope.
Table 5-9Summary of tertiary canal calculation
CANALS area Qd
m s l/se m3/s D B A P R FB TD V
0.5 0.012 RTC1 2.32 4.16 0.0042 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.26 0.04 0.22 0.31 0.42
0.5 0.017 RTC2 1.25 2.24 0.0022 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.19 0.03 0.22 0.28 0.41
0.5 0.015 RTC3 1.74 3.12 0.0031 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.23 0.03 0.22 0.29 0.43
0.5 0.015 RTC4 1.48 2.65 0.0027 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.21 0.03 0.22 0.29 0.41
0.5 0.015 RTC5 1.68 3.01 0.0030 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.22 0.03 0.22 0.29 0.42
0.5 0.015 RTC6 4.69 8.40 0.0084 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.33 0.05 0.23 0.33 0.55
0.5 0.015 RTC7 2.25 4.03 0.0040 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.25 0.04 0.22 0.30 0.46
0.5 0.015 RTC8 4.61 8.26 0.0083 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.32 0.05 0.23 0.33 0.55
0.5 0.015 RTC9 2.68 4.80 0.0048 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.27 0.04 0.23 0.31 0.48
0.5 0.015 RTC10 4.81 8.62 0.0086 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.33 0.05 0.23 0.33 0.55
0.5 0.015 RTC11 3.62 6.49 0.0065 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.30 0.04 0.23 0.32 0.51
0.5 0.015 RTC12 4.53 8.12 0.0081 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.32 0.05 0.23 0.33 0.54
0.5 0.015 RTC13 4.83 8.65 0.0087 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.33 0.05 0.23 0.33 0.55
0.5 0.015 RTC14 4.05 7.26 0.0073 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.31 0.04 0.23 0.32 0.53
0.5 0.015 RTC15 3.55 6.36 0.0064 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.29 0.04 0.23 0.32 0.51
0.5 0.015 RTC16 2.03 3.64 0.0036 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.24 0.03 0.22 0.30 0.44
0.5 0.015 RTC17 4.01 7.18 0.0072 0.10 0.10 0.01 0.31 0.04 0.23 0.32 0.53
0.5 0.018 RTC18 1.00 1.79 0.0018 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.18 0.03 0.22 0.27 0.40
0.5 0.015 LTC-1 2.16 3.87 0.0039 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.24 0.04 0.22 0.30 0.45
0.5 0.015 LTC-2 2.72 4.87 0.0049 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.27 0.04 0.23 0.31 0.48
0.5 0.015 LTC-3 1.34 2.40 0.0024 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.20 0.03 0.22 0.28 0.40
0.5 0.015 LTC-4 2.12 3.80 0.0038 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.24 0.03 0.22 0.30 0.45
0.5 0.015 LTC-5 4.85 8.69 0.0087 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.33 0.05 0.23 0.33 0.55
0.5 0.015 LTC-6 2.60 4.66 0.0047 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.26 0.04 0.23 0.31 0.47
0.5 0.015 LTC-7 2.52 4.52 0.0045 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.26 0.04 0.22 0.30 0.47
0.5 0.015 LTC-8 4.80 8.60 0.0086 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.33 0.05 0.23 0.33 0.55
0.5 0.015 LTC-9 2.75 4.93 0.0049 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.27 0.04 0.23 0.31 0.48

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 63

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

FB

Figure 5-2 typical cross section of tertiary

5.6 Design of Canal Structures

5.6.1 Culverts
Culverts are the structures constructed at the crossing of roads, drainages & irrigation
canals for
Making the water flow freely .It consists of a barrel which can be circular or
rectangular on entrance and exit flow in culverts can be either free flow (open
channel) or pipe flow (pressure flow).
Whenever road has to cross on existing drain or canal or some times when a drain has
to cross an existing road small bridge, culvert is constructed at the point of crossing .
Design of Culvert along main canal

Q=Cd*A*
2 gh …………………………..5. 8

Where, A=Cross sectional area of the pipe.

Cd=coefficient of discharge, (=0.8 for submerged flow)
H=head available, (assumed H=0.1m)

0.059=0.8*A* 2 * 9.81 * 0.1

A=0.0527m2

4 * 0.0527
d=  0.26  0.3m

Q 0.059
V2=   1.12m / sec
A 0.0527

v 64
f  64.  ( for la min ar flow ) .
DV Re

Let   1000kg / m3 ,   1x10 3 kg / m.s,

VD 4 Q 4 1000 * 0.059
Re      2.5 x10^5
 D  1x103 * 0.3

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 64

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

=0.00026

he=0.5(v12-v22)/2g=0.00144
ho=0.5(v32-v22)/2g=0.00144
total head loss=hf+ho+he=0.00026+0.00144+0.00144=0.0032m

Q=Cd*A*
2 gh

√
H=0.0998<0.1& V2=1.12(1<V2<2m3/s) which is recommended for culvert

5.6.2 Canal Drop

Whenever the available natural ground slope is steeper than the designed bed slope of
the channel, the difference is adjusted by constructing vertical falls or drops in the
canal bed at suitable interval. (Garge, 2003)
Canal drop is a structure Constructed on a channel to lower down the water level and
the bed level of the channel. Because of the drop of the water at the fall, the potential
energy of the water is converted in to the kinetic energy, which may damage the D/S
portion of the canal by scouring action. (Arora K. , 2002)
The canal fall is therefore designed to dissipate the surplus energy at the right main
canal b/n reach two and three.
For this project, a rectangular weir with raised crest from the category of vertical drop
has been adopted.
Available data: of main canal
 Discharge U/S, Qd = 0.111
 Discharge D/S, Qd = 0.111
 Drop , adopted , HL=1m
 Bed width U/S b=0.235m
 Bed width D/S =0.235m
 Full supply level U/S=1704.185
 Full supply level D/S =1703.185
 Bed level U/S =1703.4
 Bed level D/S= 1702.4
 Water depth U/S, D1 =0.26
 Water depth D/S, D2 = 0.26

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 65

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

 Neglect the velocity of approach

Design Procedure
STEP 1.-Determination of Crest Dimensions
i) Crest length=Bed width of the canal =0.235m
ii) Drop HL= 1m
iii) Top width of crest (b)
b=.552*d^.5 d-Height of the crest above d/s bed level height of
u/sFSL above d/s
Bed level=d+H where H-is depth of crest level u/s FSL
d+H=1.785
d=(1.785-H)
b=.552*(1.785-H)^.5 =0.645
iv) Discharge formula applicable will be
Q=C*L*H^3/2*(H/b)^1/6 C=1.85 (For rectangular crest)
L=1.28m
0.111=0.435*H^3/2*(1.812H)/(.552*(1.785-H)^.5)^1/6
By trial error H=.421m
R.L of crest =1=1704.185m-0.421 =1703.764m
D=1.785-0.421=1.364m
B=.552*1.364^.5=0.64m take B=0.6m
Q=

H = 0.24m
R.L of crest =U/S FSL-H
= 1704.93-0.24=1704.69m
 Height of crest above D/S bed, d= crest level –D/S bed level
= 1704.69-1703.67=1.019m
 Top width of crest wall, √
√
 The assumed top width is correct and to be provided.

 Bottom width ,

Where G = 2.24m

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 66

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

1) Cistern
The depth of cistern;

m
RL of cistern = d/s bed level –x = 1703.67-0.29=1703.38m
2) The length of cistern, √ √ = 0.13m
Impervious floor design
 Maximum seepage heads Hs =Crest level- D/S bed level
Hs=1704.69-1703.67=1.02m
 Total creep length, L= cHs,
 Take Bligh creep coefficient, c=9
L= 9*1.02=9.18m
 Depth of U/S cut off

 Depth of D/S cut off

 Vertical creep length =2(0.7+0.73)=2.86

 Length of impervious floor , b= L-2.86=9.18-2.86=6.32m
 Minimum length of D/S floor ,Ld=2(d2+L2)+HL
Ld =2(0.26+0.73) +1m=2.98m
 Length of U/S floor = b-Ld-1.1
= 6.32-2.98-0.7=2.64m
3) Thickness of impervious floor
a) Residual head as the D/S toe of the crest wall

( ) …………………………………………5. 9

= 0.29+ )*(2.98+3) = 0.95m

Thickness of the floor

Thickness of floor=0.77m
b) Residual head at end of D/S floor

( ) m

Thickness of the floor,

Providing nominal thickness for U/S floor=0.4m

4) U/S wing wall

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 67

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Top level of U/S using wall =1704.185+0.5 =1704.685m

Top level of D/S wing wall =1703.185+0.5=1703.685m

5.6.3 Division Box

Division structures or boxes regulate the flow from one canal to another or several
others.
 They usually consists of a box with vertical walls in which controllable
opening are provided.
 Metal or wooden sluice gates or stop logs are usually installed to regulate
the division of flow of all times and to shut off in any branch when
desired.
 The width of each out-let is generally proportional to the division of water
to be made.
. The division of flow can be on continuous basis or rotational basis.
a) Continuous: the flow will be proportionally divided into two or more small
canals. This can be achieved by providing width of the openings in
proportional to the discharge required.
b) Rotational: in this case the opening should be equipped with gates to close
and open the opening on turn.
Design of division boxes
Sample calculation:
 Station at end RMC-RO
 To provide RMC-R1 toRMC-RO and RTC1
N.B RMC= Main canal and RTC=Branch canal
Available data;
QO=QRMC-R0=0.1185m3/sec
Q1=QRMC-R1=0.1135m3/sec
Q2=QRTC1=0.0042m3/sec
A broad crest formula to divide proportionally is used.
3

Q=C*L*H 2
…………………………………………..5. 10
Where, Q=discharge over rectangular weir sill
(m3/s)
C=discharge coefficient, use 1.77

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 68

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

L=effective length of crest (openings in meter)

H=over flow depth (m)
Assuming that :
 Crest level and crest form are in the same direction
 Equal coefficient of discharge & sill height for the divided canal
Assuming sill height s=0.20 & dead height=0.20
H=0.40m
3
2
Then Q=C*L*H
Q1 0.1135
L= 3
 3
 0.25m
2 2
C*H 1.77 * 0.4
And from proportion
Q1 L1 Q *L 0.0042 * 0.25
  L2  2 1   0.01m
Q2 L2 Q1 0.1135
Then similar procedures follow for all the remaining division.

gate

Inlet Q

QRTC1 Q Out
let
Figure 5-3 Division box

5.6.4 Farm turnout

An outlet or farm turnouts is a structure at the head of a water course which connect
to the supply canal farm outlets are unit structures provided on tertiary canals, to
convey water equally to tertiary unit.
Design considerations

 The intake canal of turnout should be large enough and set low enough to
carry the design flow.
 The minimum height of water surface of supply canal over the top of the get
opening should consider the head loss

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 69

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

 It should draw its due share of silt.

 For non-modular out-lets, the flow designed for submerged condition.
Sample Design

Q=Cd*A* 2 gh ……………………………………………………………5. 11
Where, A=Cross sectional area of the pipe.
Cd=coefficient of discharge, (=0.8 for submerged flow)
H=head available, (assumed H=0.1m)

0.0042=0.8*A* 2 * 9.81 * 0.1

A=0.0037m2

4 * 0.0037
d=  0.0691  0.1m

Q 0.0042
V=   1.135m / sec
A 0.0037

Where, f‟=coefficient of friction

L=Length of pipe=1m
D=diameter of pipe
v 64
f  64.  ( for la min ar flow )
DV Re

Let   1000kg / m 3 ,   1x10 3 kg / m.s,

VD 4 Q 4 1000 * 0.0042
Re      5.3x10^ 4
 D  1x10 3 * 0.1

=0.0012

 HL= 0.0993m which is nearly equal to the assumed head

H=0.1m, hence OK

5.6.5 Flow control structures(Gates)

flow control structures(Gates) are physical structures that are used to control and
regulate the state of flow in the canal.
They can be:
 Water level regulators or
 Discharge regulators

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 70

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Water level can be set to the target value by rising and dropping the gates units the
target is set.
In Geddi command area we prefer to provide manual regulator (gates) at tertiary
canals and farm out lets. This is for the reason that to safe the economic cost of the
design and without any extra knowledge the users can operate easily by manual.

5.6.6 Access Roads

Access roads are provided in irrigation schemes layout for the purpose of facilities for
the movement of machine and the farm from the irrigation command area.
a) Main access road :
The main access road may be laid parallel to the main canal starting from the
diversion weir site up to the end of the irrigation command area; this access road will
have sub base and gravel surfacing and the width of the main access road in about
6.0m.
b) Tertiary access roads
These access roads are close to each plots of area which are parallel to all tertiary
canals they are gravel surface with 5.0m width

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 71

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

6. DESIGN OF DRAINAGE CANALS

Excess rainfall lies on the ground surface infiltrates title the ground. since the mean
annual rainfall in the area (2997.8mm). .
When this rainfall exceeds the crop water requirement drainage has to be applied.
There are two types of drainage system
1. Surface drainage
2. Sub-surface drainage
Surface drainage is needed for project area to remove excess rainfall where
sub-surface drainage is not economically feasible and to collect and dispose of surface
irrigation runoff.
In our project, surface drainage system has been found to be very suitable due to its
lesser cost, easy construction and feasible management condition.

6.1 Design of Surface Drainage Canals

Surface drainage problem occur in nearly flat area, uneven land surface with
depression or ridges preventing natural runoff and in areas without outlet. Soils with
low infiltration rates are susceptible to surface drainage problem. Surface drainage is
intended for safe removal of excess water from the land surface through land shaping
and canal construction. Function of the system may be considered as:
-Collection systems
-conveying systems
-Outlet system
Water from the individual field is collected and is then removed through a system to
the outlet. Generally, surface drainage is required for:-
 The removal of storm rainfall where the subsurface drainage is not
economically feasible.
 The collection and disposal of surface irrigation runoff.
 The collection and disposal of drainage in deltaic area.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 72

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

6.2 Alignment of surface drainage

The following points should be given great consideration in marking an alignment of

drain.
Firstly, alignment should follow a natural drainage line that is the lowest contouring
in the valley. To reduce the cost of drainage scheme the drain should have minimum
length. It can be achieved by taking alignment straight rather than zigzag.
Secondly, alignment of drain should not pass through ponds or marshes. The reason is
that such drain may act as feeder line to the marsh and the pond will go on expanding.
The solution to align the drain clears off the pond.
Thirdly, so far as possible drains should not cross irrigation canals. The reason is that
some expensive structures will have to be constructed at the crossing point. It
increases the cost of drainage scheme.
When we design surface drainage for a given irrigable command area, the following
parameters are to be considered.
 Capacity of drainage
Drainage should be designed to carry the maximum anticipated flood efficiently.
 Permissible velocity
The velocity of the drain water should be such that the ditch is kept clean by the
flow. In other words, ditch should be self-cleaning for the design velocity. It should
also be seen that no scouring of bed and side scour. The maximum value of mean
velocity must be safe against erosion. Based on soil type, which found in the irrigable
area for clay the permissible velocity ranges from 0.41 to 1.67m/sec.
 Side slope of drain
Side slope of drain is obtained from table based on the soil type. Thus,
the side slope H/V ratio 0.5:1 b/c, it is clay soil.
 Manning coefficient (n)
Manning coefficient of the drainage canal to be adopted depends on the type of the
soil formation of the project area. It is averaged is 0.025
 Longitudinal (bed) slope
Longitudinal slope of the drain is given by the general slope of natural ground; of
course slope should be fixed in correlation to the permissible velocity. An efficient
drain is one, which is so designed as not to produce velocity, which may induce either
silting or scouring. Economy and efficiency should be the main considerations in

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 73

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

designing drainage systems. Generally, the bed slope is determined from Top map of
the irrigable area.
 Drainage coefficient (DC)
The drainage coefficient is the amount of water that must be removed from soil
surface in order to have sustainable agriculture. It depends on depth of irrigations,
method of irrigation, leaching requirement and soil characteristics. There are different
methods for estimating drainage coefficient. Those are:
 1 %MAR method
Where: MAR= mean annual rainfall
For GEDI irrigable area, MAR =2997.8mm.
DC = 1 %* 2997.8mm
DC 29.978mm
 Hudson 1983 ‟s method
In this method the following two conditions are considered
If MAR <1000 mm, DC = 10 mm/day
If MAR >1000 mm, DC = MAR/100 mm/day
Since MAR 2997.8 mm, DC = 29.978mm/day
From the above two methods the value of the drainage coefficient (Dc) for the
maximum one is taken for design of the drainage canal. DC 29.978mm/day
In this project area we design two main canals, which it gives direct to tertiary canal.
In order to prevent our command area from water logging, we design tertiary drainage
canal on each tertiary unit on the left side &e right side the command area.
The capacity of the drainage canal is determined based on the area coverage of
tertiary canals.

Figure 6-1 capacity of left Drainage canal

Drainage A (ha) left side DC(mm/day Qdr(m3/sec left side

Canals (at Left
side of canal)
LDrC1 2.16 29.978 0.00074946
LDrC2 2.72 29.978 0.00094376
LDrC3 1.34 29.978 0.00046494
LDrC4 2.12 29.978 0.00073558

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 74

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

LDrC5 4.85 29.978 0.0016828

LDrC6 2.6 29.978 0.00090212
LDrC7 2.52 29.978 0.00087436
CDrC8 4.8 29. 978 0.00166546
LDrC9 2.75 29.978 0.00095417
MDr 25.86 29.978 0.00897264
Note, LDrc left drain canal.
MDr main drain canal.
RDrC right drain canal
MDrC main drain canal
Table 6-1capacity of left Drainage canal

Drainage A (ha) right DC(mm/day) Qdr(m3/sec right side

Canals right side side
RDrC1 2.32 29.978 0.000694
RDrC2 1.25 29.978 0.00043371
RDrC3 1.74 29.978 0.00060473
RDrC4 1.48 29.978 0.00051352
RDrC5 1.68 29.978 0.00058291
RDrC6 4.69 29.978 0.00162729
RDrC7 2.25 29.978 0.00086743
RDrC8 4.61 29.978 0.00159953
RDrC9 2.68 29.978 0.00092988
RDrC10 4.81 29.978 0.00166893
RDrC11 3.62 29.978 0.00125603
RDrC12 4.53 29.978 0.00157177
RDrC13 4.83 29.978 0.00167559
RDrC14 4.05 29.978 0.00140523
RDrC15 3.55 29.978 0.00123174
RDrC16 2.03 29.978 0.00090400
RDrC17 4.01 29.978 0.00139135
RDrC18 1 29.978 0.0003469
RMDrC 55.13 29.978 0.02000

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 75

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

6.3 Types of drainage canals

From different types of drainage canals, the trapezoidal drainage canal is
selected. The reason is that trapezoidal canal is more stable than the other channels. In
addition, it is more economical.(source, drainage engineering hand out)
Sample calculation
Data available: for left side drain canal
 Drainage coefficient(Dc)=29.978mm/day
 Drainage area(A,tota)= 25.86ha
 Drainage dis charge(Qdr)=DC*A= sec
 Side slope ,s= ⁄

 Side slope, m=V/H, ⁄ =0.5

 Manning‟s roughness coefficient
take n=0.025
1
AR 2 / 3 S 1 / 2
Q=n ----------------------------6. 1

A =Q /√ =0.015862
Since, Qd 0.00897264 e
For trapezoidal canal
-The area of the drain section is given by
A  BD  mD2
-Wetted perimeter of the drain section

P  B  2D 1  m 2
-R is hydraulic radius of the drainage canal
A BD  mD 2
R 
P B  2D 1  m 2

Where:
B - The bottom width of the drainage canal
D - The depth of water in the drainage canal
m- The side slope of the drainage canal
R -The mean hydraulic radius of drainage canal
A - The area of drainage section.
P- The wetted perimeter of the drain section

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 76

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

S - The bed slope of the drain.

However, for efficient and economical design of trapezoidal drainage canal the
following equation is true.
D
R
2
Equating eq (4) and (5) we get the following relation between D & B.
A BD  mD 2
R 
P B  2D 1  m 2
From equation (4),
D
R
From equation (5), 2

A BD  mD 2 D
R  
P B  2D 1  m 2 2
Then,
Since m=0.5
- By solving the above equation,
B = 1.236D
-by substituting this value in eq (2), eq (3), and eq (4)
A=BD+
=1.236D*D+
A=2.236

P=B+2D√
P=3.472D
R= ⁄ = √

R =
R=0.5D
From equation (1)
A =2.236 = √
=0.015862
By Solve the equation, D = 0.375m
Form equation (6), B =1.236D
By solving B=1.236*0.375m
B=0.464m
The hydraulic radius, R
R=0.5D

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 77

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

R= 0.5*0.375
=0.188m
The wetted perimeter (p)
P=3.472D
=3.472*0.375
P=1.302m
Area of cross-section, A
A=2.236
= 2.236*
A=0.341
The velocity of flow v , in the drain can be determined from Manning‟s equation
V=
V=0.186m/sec -----------------------ok the calculated 'v' in permissible 'v'
The discharge of flow (Manning)
Q =A*V=0.3

Q ≥ Qd 0.058 0.00897264 e ------------------------- ok!

Free Board (FB)

The top of canal banks has to be maintained higher than the level to allow for waves
and possible fluctuation in supply. The vertical distance between the top of drainage
canal banks and the full supply level of drainage canal, known as free board. For this
case, take a free board of 0.1m.
DT = D + FB
DT =0.375+0.1 0.475m
Table 6-2 Hydraulic parameters of left drainage canal

Drain
type Qdr slope n m B(m) Area( P(m) D(m) FB
(m3/sec
LDrc1 0.00074946 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.464m 0.012 1.302m 0.0732 0.1
LDrc2 0.00094376 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.464m 0.014 1.302m 0.0799 0.1
LDrc3 0.00046494 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.464m 0.008 1.302m 0.0613 0.1
LDrc4 0.00073558 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.464m 0.012 1.302m 0.0728 0.1
LDrc5 0.0016828 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.464m 0.022 1.302m 0.0992 0.1

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 78

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

LDrc6 0.00090212 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.464m 0.014 1.302m 0.0786 0.1
LDrc7 0.00087436 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.464m 0.013 1.302m 0.0776 0.1
LDr8 0.00166546 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.464m 0.022 1.302m 0.0989 0.1

Sample calculation of right side

Data available: Right side drainage canal
 Drainage coefficient(Dc)=29.978mm/day
 Drainage area(A , total)= 55.13ha
 Drainage dis charge(Qdr)=DC*A= sec
 Side slope ,s= ⁄

 Side slope, m=V/H, ⁄ =0.5

 Manning‟s roughness coefficient
take n=0.025
1
AR 2 / 3 S 1 / 2
Q= n

A =Q /√ =2.236 = 0.035
Since, Qd =0.02
From this Eq, D= 0.265m
Form the above equation (6), B =1.236D
B=0.328m
The hydraulic radius, R
R=0.5D
R=0.133m
Area of cross-section, A
A=2.236
= 2.236*
A=0.157
The velocity of flow v , in the drain can be determined from Manning‟s
equation
V=
V=0.147m/sec.----------------ok the calculated 'v' in permissible 'v'
The discharge of flow (Manning)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 79

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Q= A*V = 0.157

Q ≥ Qd 0.023 0.02 e ------------------------- ok!

Free Board (FB)

The top of canal banks has to be maintained higher than the level to allow for waves
and possible fluctuation in supply. The vertical distance between the top of drainage
canal banks and the full supply level of drainage canal, known as free board. For this
case, take a free board of 0.1m.
DT = D + FB
DT =0.265+0.1 0.265m
Top width (T)
BT=B+2*m*D 0.328m+2*.5*0.265m=0.46m
Table 6-3 Hydraulic parameters of left drainage canal

Drain Qdr (m3/sec Slope n m B(m) Area( P(m) D(m) FB

type
RDrC1 0.000694 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0012 0.133 0.071 0.1
RDrC2 0.00043371 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0008 0.133 0.06 0.10
RDrC3 0.00060473 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0015 0.133 0.077 0.1
RDrC4 0.00051352 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0009 0.133 0.064 0.1
RDrC5 0.00058291 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0010 0.133 0.067 0.1
RDrC6 0.00162729 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0029 0.133 0.098 0.1
RDrC7 0.00086743 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0015 0.133 0.077 0.1
RDrC8 0.00159953 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0028 0.133 0.097 0.1
RDrC9 0.00092988 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0016 0.133 0.079 0.1
RDrC10 0.00166893 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0030 0.133 0.099 0.1
RDrC11 0.00125603 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0022 0.133 0.089 0.1
RDrC12 0.00157177 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0028 0.133 0.097 10.
RDrC13 0.00167559 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0029 0.133 0.099 0.1
RDrC14 0.00140523 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0025 0.133 0.093 0.1
RDrC15 0.00123174 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0022 0.133 0.088 0.1
RDrC16 0.00090400 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0016 0.133 0.079 0.1
RDrC17 0.00139135 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0024 0.133 0.092 0.1
RDrC18 0.0003469 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.0006 0.133 0.055 0.1

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 80

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

RMDr 0.02 0.0002 0.025 0.5 0.0328 0.157 0.133 0.265 0.1

FB

Figure 6-2Typical cross section of drainage canal

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 81

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

7. HEAD WORK DESIGN

Diversion head works are structures constructed across a river (head of a canal) to
facilitate a regulated and continuous diversion of water into the off-taking canal. The
obstruction is of smaller in comparison with the dam. It raises the water level locally
and supports the water against its face.
A diversion head work serves the following function
1. It raises the water level on its upstream side.
2. It regulates the supply of water in to the canal.
3. It controls the entry of silts in to the canal.
4. It creates temporary storage up stream of the weir

7.1 Location of Diversion Weir

Diversion head work is generally located in boulder stage or through stage of a river
at the site near to the common area. In diversion head work selection cost is governing
for appropriate decision.
The following point should be remembered while selecting the location of the head
work.
 At the site the river should be straight and narrow
 The river bank should be well defined
 The valuable land should not be submerged when the weir or the Barrage is
constructed.
 The elevation of the site should be higher than the area to be irrigated
 The site should be easily accessible by roads or rail ways
 The material of construction should be available in vicinity of the site
 The site should not be far away from the command area from the command
area of the project, to avoid transmission loss. (Basak, 1999)

7.2 Selection of Type of Weir

There are various types of weir in use. The classification of weirs may be done is
number of ways. The classification of weir according to the function:
1. Storage weir: They are constructed purely for storing water. They are termed as
low dams also.
2. Pick-up weirs: In a storage project the reservoir water is discharge in the river
through supply sluices. This released water is picked up by constructing a weir a

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 82

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

cross the river where canals take off a series of such pick-up weirs may be
constructed to utilize the available water
3. Intake weir: They are constructed as a part of head works. They raise the water
level by obstructing the river flow. The water is then diverted to the canal.
4. Waste Weirs: They are generally used as spill ways for reservoirs. It protects the
reservoir and the main storage dam. (NNBasak, 1999)
Under Gedi irrigation project pick up (vertical drop weir) weir is selected because of
the following reasons.
 The simplicity for construction.
 The relation to the function of the weir.
 The skill and the experience of the workers availability.
 In the present situation also vertical drop pick up weir is selected in
Gedi irrigation project.

7.3 Design of head work structures

7.3.1 Hydraulic Design of A Weir
Hydraulic data of weir means fixing the dimension of vertical drop weir. The
following is the procedure of the design.
Tail water curve

The rating of the downstream channel section is computed using Manning‟s Equation.
The section data and roughness values used are shown in figure below. (Tefera, 2012)

1712

Left Bank Stream Center Right Bank

1710  n= 0.050
n= 0.030 n= 0.050


1708

1706

1704

1702
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Distance, L(m)

Figure 7-1 Downstream channel section

The average bed slope of the river is estimated to be 0.01m/m. The estimated rating
for the above cross section at this slope is shown in figure below.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 83

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Q vs H
1.2
depth of flow water (m)
1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
discharge ,Q(m^2/s)

Figure 7-2S tage-Discharge Curves

water way
It is the width provided at the site for the river water to flow. In other word, it is the
length of the weir. Approximate water way to provide between the abutments may be
calculated from lacey‟s regime perimeter formula.
√
Where Pw – is the wetted perimeter at the site at the river, but in this case it denotes
the length of the weir between the abutments in meter and denoted by L.
√
Q – The design discharge in m3/s
√ = 25.135 but we take the actual bank width that is 15m
Discharge intensity

Normal scour depth (R)

where, q = discharge intensity

. R = Scour depth
f = silt factor for standard silt
f=2.7379
Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 84
 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Regime velocity

Under the flood condition when the weir expected to attain regime condition
where R = scour depth
,
Approach velocity head = 0.083

Upstream and downstream TEL

Head over the crest

q = 1.70 *(He) 3/2
Can be determined from broad crusted weir formula

Where = He=Total energy level above the crest of the

weir
ha = velocity head.
Hd = water head above the crest of the weir
Pond level

The water level of the canal corresponding to full supply discharge is full supply level
(FSL).
FSL of the canal depends on the following factor.
 Design discharge of the canal.
 Head loss in the head regulator and turn out.
 Topography of the area.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 85

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

The FSL of the canal immediately downstream of the head regulator =1703.9

maximum seepage head for the worst condition ( WL on u/s at pond level and no
tail water ) from :

7.3.2 Weir wall design (Structural)

The weir wall is trapezoidal cross section and the u/s face of the weir is vertical.

A) Top Width

The largest of the following is adopted. (Arora, 2003)

I. Where, d = a maximum depth of water over the crest

√

= 0.662m, G = specific gravity of the wall material (2.2for masonry)

√

II. =0.150m,

III. where shutter height (No shutter provided).

Therefore a=1
B) Bottom width (B)
This should be fixed so that there is development of tension on the base of the weir.

For preliminary design

√ √

However the actual width of the base should be determined as the maximum of the
following situation.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 86

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

I).No flow condition

This occurs when the u/s water level at the pond level and there is no tail water on the
downstream.
The over turning moment (Mo) about toe the weir

, where

S – Height of shutter (in our case shutter is not provided)

Weight of the water (9.81KN/m2)
The resting moment is due to the weight of the weir for a vertical up stream face of
the weir.

Equating the over turning and the resisting moment, we get B=0.79 by trial and error

ii).High flood condition (submerged weir)

During high flood the over turning moment is from difference between upstream and
downstream water pressure diagrams.

…………………. a

The resisting moment (Mr) at outer middle third point

…………………… b

Equating equation (a) and (b)

by trial and erro the value of b have to be computed

iii). High flood condition, free discharge

In this case the d/s water level remains below the crest level.

H 3 dH 2 D3
  where D = tail water depth
6 2 6

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 87

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013


6

The resisting moments are obtained from case 1 , based on the level of water level on
the d/s side .If D is large use case 2 and if D small, use case 1. In our case D is small
and hence we adopt case 1 i.e no flow condition.
B can be determined equating Mo and Mr.
Finally, the largest B from the three cases has to be adapted.

by trial and erro the value of b have to be computed

B=0.85m
Finally, the largest B from the three cases has to be adapted.
B=2m

7.3.3 Design of impervious floor and protection works

i. The total length of impervious floor
The total floor length must be greater than L>CHs
it is so much minimum .therefore we take the
total length of impervious floor.

ii. Length of d/s impervious floor (ld)

a. weirs with shutters, d Hs / 13 By Bligh)

b. weirs without shutters,  H / 10

1.006 / 10
iii. Length of upstream impervious floor (  u).
Ld (L = total creep length, B = base width.)

this implies that doesn`t need upstream floor length but we provide
a nominal floor length 3m
Therefore the total floor length

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 88

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

A. thickness of floor by bligh’s theory:

Generally nominal thickness is provided on the u/s as weight of water counter balance
uplift
On downstream: Bligh‟s theory: determine the residual pressure at any point and,
4  h 
 
3  G 1 
Khosla‟s theory: determine the pressures at the key point of the piles and linear
( h)
variation in between them more accurate.)
G 1
Thicknesses at some 4 points are determined & the thickness is reduced in steps for
ease in construction
Hs = 0.96m L = 13.96m
Thus, residual pressure at the too of the weir
Hs
L
0.96
13.3

Floor thickness at ( ) ( )

Provide a thickness of0.6 for a length of 1m .

At a distance 1 m from the toe, (B)

 0.96 
 
 13.3 
4
h / G  1 4
0.51/ 2.24  1 .
3 3
 Provide a thickness of 0.6 m for the next 1m ( from 1 to 2 m from the toe)

At a distance 2 m from the toe of the wall, point C

 0.96 
 
 13.3 

4  hc 
  ( )
3  G 1 

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 89

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Provide a thickness of 0.5m for next 1m (2 to 3m from toe )

At a distance 2 m from the toe of the wall, point C

 0.96 
 
 13.3 

4  hc 
  ( )
3  G 1 
Provide a thickness of 0.4m for next 1m (3 to 4m from toe )
Check by Khosla‟s theory

Ex gradient (GE): length of floor, b = 8.9m =13.3m-2*0.2-2*2 = 8.9m

√ √

 ( safe)!!
√ √

Uplift pressure
U/s pile, b = 8.9m. d =0.2 m

b
D/s pile, d2 = 2     8.9 / 2  4.45,  = 2.88
d2
100 (  2)
 E  cos 1  40.95%
 
100 (  1)
D  cos 1  27.88%
 
a) Correction for thickness

-U/S pile: Correction for  C 

 D   C  * t1 =
90.53  86.56 * 0.3m  5.96%
d 0.2m

-D/s pile: Correction for  E  

40.95  27.88 *0.4m   2.61%
2m

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 90

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

b) Correction for mutual interference

d  D D
  1
 b  b
Effect of pile 2 on pile1: C = +19
 1.57  0.052  0.052
 C   19  *   0.257 %
 8.9  8.9

Effect of pile 1 on pile 2: C = - 19

0.2  1.72 * 1.72
  1.8%
8.9 8.9
Corrected pressures
Pile 1:  C = 86.56 + 5.96+ 0.257 = 92.78%
 D  90.5 %,  E = H = 0.96m
Pile 2:  E  40.95 – 2.61 – 0.04 = 38.3%
 D = 27.88 %, Pc = 0.00
Uplift pressures
1. Point C of u/s pile (1), Pc = 0.947 * 0.96m = 0.909 m.
2. Point E of pile 3 :- PE = 0.383 *0.96m = 0.37m
Check against uplift pressures
The thickness of the floor can be checked against uplift from the calculated pressures.
At point P ( beginning of d/s floor )

Pressure, Pp = 0.37 +
0.909  0.37 * 4  0.61m.
8.9
h 0.61
Required thickness, t1 =  = 0.51m <0.64m (safe).
G  1 2.2  1

Pressure At 1m from the toe Pp = 0.37 +

0.909  0.37 * 3  0.55m.
8.9
h 0.55m
Required thickness, t2 =   0.46m < 0.56m (safe).
G  1 2.2  1

Pressure At 2m from the toe Pp = 0.37 +

0.909  0.37 * 2  0.49m.
8.9
h 0.49m
Required thickness, t3 =   0.41m  0.48m (safe).
G  1 2.2  1

Pressure At 3m from the toe Pp = 0.37 +

0.909  0.37 *1  0.43m.
8.9
h 0.43m
Required thickness, t3 =   0.36m  0.4m (safe).
G  1 2.2  1
Water profile at the weir site

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 91

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Water surface profiles at the weir site are required for

 Structural design of weir ( stability )
 Design of wing walls and protection works
 Safe level of embankments to accommodate the flow
 Checking whether the intakes receive water at all stages
Protection works

A. D/s protection works

i. Launching apron: on d/s of the block protection.
Thickness 1.50 m in horizontal position
Length = 2.5 *d2.
=2.5*2=5m
B. Upstream protection works :

i. Launching apron: - u/s of the black protection.

Length = 2* d1 generally
=2*0.2=0.4m
Thickness = 1.5 m

Figure 7-3 Weir floor thiknees and protection work

7.3.4 Water profile downstream of the weir

Construction of a weir increases the TEL and thus this energy has to be dissipated
before the flow reaches the river channel. Since the flow over the weir is supercritical,
the energy can be dissipated by formation of a hydraulic jump.
Hydraulics of a jump

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 92

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Hydraulic jump is a phenomenon of rapidly varied flow at which the state of flow
changes from supercritical to sub critical. A hydraulic jump occurs only when the
upstream flow is supercritical (F1>1). At the hydraulic jump the energy of flow will
be lost.
Hydraulic jump on a horizontal surface
Y1 – depth before jump (pre jump depth)
Y2 - depth after jump ( post jump depth )
y1 and y2 are called conjugate depths of a hydraulic jump
To determine the water depth ,y1 the well known Bernoulli equation is used.

P+He=y1+

V1= =

Y13-2.07Y12+0.178=0
Y1 has three values
 One negative root and has no any physical meaning
 The other two represent the alternative depth for the same energy.the true
value is that Y1 must less than the critical depth, Yc, since the flow befor the
jump is supercritical.
By trial and error y1=0.318m
Critical depth is expressed by

q2
yc  3, yc  criticalde pth
g

1.867 2
yc  3  0.575m
9.81
Therefore the actual value of y1 is 0.318m
V1= = =5.871m/s

v1 5.871
F1 = = = 3.324
gy1 9.81* 0.318

Then the sequent depth y2

y2 

y1 * 1  8F12  1
,

2

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 93

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

y2 

0.318 * 1  8 * 3.324 2  1 
 1.344m
2
( y 2  y1 ) 3
Head loss, Hl  ,
4 y1 y 2

(1.344  0.318)3
Hl   0.632m
4 * 0.318 *1.344
length of jump=5(y2-y1)

=5(1.344-0.318)=5.13m

Tw=1<Y2=1.344m in this case the jump will recede d/s to a point where the flow

condition allow the jump to occur. Since the river bed every hard, as per head work

geology, the rock can simply resist the expected scouring that might be caused by the

water fall (jump).

A. Pre- jump water profile
The water profile before the jump can be determined from the energy equation.
Specific energy at the selected point is determined by Montague curves.
General Procedure
1. Select different point such as A, B, C, & D on the slope surface of the weir.
2.Determine the specific energy Es by subtracting the level of A, B,&D from the TEL.
Ef = U/S TEL – the level of the sloping surface.
3. From mantgue‟s curve determine the depth of the water y corresponding the
specific energy (Es).
4. Water surface = level of sloping surface + y
Computation
Let as consider the 4 points A, B , C & D at the level of 782.8m, 782.3m, 781.8m&
781.3m
Table 7-1 result of water surface profile before the jump

Points A B C D
Elevation of glacis 1704.31 1704.11 1703.91 1703.71
Specific energy = U/S TEL - RL 1.26 1.46 1.66 1.86
Depth (Y) 0.86 0.75 0.64 0.48
Energy of water surface 1705.17 1704.86 1704.55 1704.19
(Garge, 2003)

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 94

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

A. Post jump water profile

To plot the water surface profile after the jump point (p) it is necessary to know the
incoming Froude No F1.
F1 =
√

Know q and y1, F1 can be determined. Graphs are available between ( s for

different value of Froude No F1.

General procedure
1. Select different point such as M, N, D &Q downstream of a jump.
2. Determine the froud No (Fr21) from t he relation of Fr2 =
√

3. Determine the horizontal distance of (x) of this point from the point p and then
evaluate the value of of different point, where y1 is the initial pre-jump depth.

4. Determine the value of of the different point from the graph for the value of F1

obtained from the step 2and 3 above.

5. Determine the depth y for different points from value and obtained the water

surface level.
6. Join the water surface level to obtain the post joint profile
Where, y- water depth at different point, y1- initial depth
Computation
Consider four point M, N, O, &Q at distance 1m, 2m, 3m,&4m from the point P.
Fr1
Fr2 = 11.08
Table 7-2 Water surface profile after jump

Water surface profile after jump

Point M N O Q
Distance(x) 1 2 3 4
x/y1=x/0.318 3.14 6.29 9.43 12.58
y/y1 2.31 3.20 3.90 4.20
Y 0.39 0.54 0.66 0.71
Elevation of water surface = 1703.89 1704.04 1704.16 1704.21
1703.5+y

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 95

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

7.3.5 Water surface profile upstream of the weir

Required for the following reasons
- To determine the height of the river banks upstream
- To check whether the off taking canals can be fed with the required discharge
The water surface profile u/s of the weir can be determined with several methods.
However, for preliminary design, the approximate method can be used. However the
method does not take in to account the geometry of the channel.
( xs  2  h) 2
y= where y = rise in water level at x distance u/s of the weir above yn.
4h
x= distance from the weir upstream
S= slope of the river bed
 h  Rise in WL above normal depth at weir (x= o)

S=0.21%=0.0021
Hd=He-ha=0.981
H=1.006
Yn=1
h  (h+Hd) – yn=(1.006+0.981)-1=0.987

( xs  2  h) 2
y=
4h
Table 7-3 u/s water profile

x 10 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650
y 0.97 0.88 0.79 0.7 0.61 0.53 0.46 0.39 0.33 0.27 0.22 0.17 0.13 0.09

700 750 800 850 900

0.06 0.04 0.02 0.01 0
7.3.6 Stability Analysis of the Weir
Structural analysis deals with checking the stability of the weir against.
i. - Over turning
ii. - Sliding
iii. Tension
Force acting on the weir.
 Static pressure

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 96

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

 Friction force at the base (up lift pressure) to counter

balance the sliding horizontal force
 Weight of the weir
 Silt-pressure

Figure 7-4 Force acting on the weir

Analysis of the weir for three conditions should be taken:
i. There is no flow downstream
ii. Submerged flow
iii. When the weir is empty
But it is observed that from the above three conditions the static conditions ( when
there is no flow downstream is considered the critical one , therefore analysis of the
weir only for static condition is carried out
Overterning
Fo=Sum of stabilizing moments/sum of overturning moments
Fo>1.5
Slidding
Fs=μ* ΣV/ΣH
μ=0.65-0.75
Fs>1.5
Tension
If e<=B/6 no tension

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 97

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 7-4 Force and moment acting on the weir

Lever arm
Code Dimension Load (about the toe) Moment
Width Depth Vertical Horizontal R Positive Negative
0.5*1.01*1.01* 4.969*0.335
Pw 1.006 1.006 0.000 9.81=4.969 1/3*1.006=0.335 0.000 =1.667
1*1.01*22 22.142*1.5
W1 1.000 1.006 =22.142 0.000 1/2+1=1.500 =33.213 0.000
0.5*1*1.01* 11.071*0.667
W2 1.000 1.006 22=11.071 0.000 2/3*1=0.667 =7.381 0.000
Pu 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.333 0.000 0.000
0.5*8.243*1.01*
Ps 8.243 1.006 0.000 0.632=1.684 1/3*1.006=0.335 0.000 0.565
Sum 11.249 4.026 33.213 6.652 4.171 40.594 2.232

Note:- PS = ½* * ka * hs 2 where hs silt height = 0.8m (assumed)

Ka = active earth pressure =

where angle of internaresponse

Ka = 1.305

= 18 KN / m3 [Moudi]
= = 18KN/m3 – 9.81KN/m3 = 8.19KN/m3
I) Check for over turning
∑
∑
= 18.19 > 1.5 … OK!

II) Check for sliding

∑
Friction factors = ∑
= 4.99 >1.5 OK!

III) Check for stress

̅ =∑ ∑
= = 1.16
∑

e = ( ̅ ) = (1.16-1 = 0.16 < B/6 * 0.33 …… hence no tensions develop

[Moudi]
Therefore the weir is safe against over stress

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 98

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

7.3.7 Design Of Under Sluice Protection

They are opening provided in the body of a weir or any cut at law levels. They are
located in the smaller compartment in front of still pond. These sluices are perfectly
control by means of gates which are operated from top.
Naturally the sluices should be located quite below the crest of the head regulator
(Generally 1.8m below). Thus the scouring sluices maintenance the channel clear and
defined in front of the head regulator.
The sluices can also be used during the peak flood period to the lower discharge over
the crest of the weir.
Under sluices is used for quick lower of u/s high flood level because the discharge
intensity over the sluice portion is greater than that is the weir portion. (Sahasrabudhe,
1994)
Design consideration

Sill of the under-sluice pocket is kept at or slightly above the deepest river bed and
about 0.9 to 1.8m below the sill of the canal head regulator.
The length of the under-sluice pocket between the divide wall and the head regulator
may be taken as 1.5times the upstream length of divide wall.
However, this length is governed by discharging capacity of the under-sluices, which
should be sufficient to enable them to serve their main functions, described above.
The discharging capacity of under-sluices may be selected as follows:
i. They should be able to ensure sufficient scouring capacity for which the
discharge
capacity should at least twice the full supply discharge of the main canal at its
head.
ii. They should be able to pass the dry weather – flow and low floods during the
months excluding the rainy season .without the necessity of dropping the weir
Shutters.
iii. They should be able to dispose of 10 to 15% the high flood discharge during
several floods. (Garge, 2003)
 Assume the under sluice passé about 15% of the total discharge
- Qu = under sluice discharge = 0.15*28=4.2m3/s
Water way length(assume 2m). (Basak, 1999)
qu = 4.2/2m = 2.1

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 99

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

The minimum length of d/s floor (Ld)

√ √ [For under sluice without shutter]
Total length of d/s impervious floor and d/s protection given by

L= √ √ m

Depth of sheet pile from scour consideration:

Depth of scour R =1.35

R = 1.35 = 2.17m

Bottom level of D/s cut off = D/S HFL - 1.5R

= 1704.488-1.5*2.17 = 1701.23m
Bottom level of U/S cut off = U/S HFL-1.25R
= 1705.488-1.25*2.17 = 1702.77m

7.3.8 Design of Canal Head Regulator

It is a structure constructed at the entrance (the head) of the canal where it takes off
from the river .The regulator serves the following purpose.
 It regulates the flow of irrigation water entering in to the canal.
 It can be used as a meter for measuring the discharge.
 It regulates and prevents excessive silt entry in to the canal.
(Sahasrabudhe, 1994)
It is a aligned at 90 to the weir but slightly larger angles up to about 110 are now
considered preferable as they provided a smoother entry. The height flood in the river
may rise much higher than the pond level and the prevent water from spilling over the
gates during flood RC breast wall is provided from the pond level to above the high
flood level. (Arora, 2003)
Design procedure
C. Head Regulator For Right Main Canal
- Full supply of off taking canal = 0.119
- Full supply of canal = Pond level-Modular head
= 1704.45m - 0.55m =1703.9m
- Water depth in the canal at head = 0.241m
- Safe exit gradient for canal bed material = 1/6
- Crest level of head regulator = FSL-water depth

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 100

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

= 1703.9-0.241 = 1703.659m
The water way for regulator is for the full supply discharge of 0.119m3/sec can pass
through it.
Discharge Q through the regulator is given by [Garge 2003]

Q= √ √
Where Cd1 = 0.577 & Cd2 = 0.8
h1- depth of D/S water level in the channel above the crest
Hv - head due to velocity
H - difference of water level U/S and D/S of the crest.
Neglecting Velocity head hv we get
Q= √ √
H = 0.55
H1=0.241

0.119 = √ √
0.119 = 1.114B
B= 0.107m adopt B= 0.1m
Provide 2 piers of 1.5m thickness each on the side (Garge 2003)
Overall waterway of the regulator = 1.5*2+0.1=3.1m
D. Head Regulator for Left Main Canal
- Full supply of off taking canal = 0.056m3
- Full supply of canal = Pond level-Modular head
= 1704.45m - 0.55m =1703.9m
- Water depth in the canal at head = 0.205m
- Safe exit gradient for canal bed material = 1/6
- Crest level of head regulator = FSL-water depth
= 1703.9-0.205 = 1703.695m
The water way for regulator is for the full supply discharge of 0.056m3/sec can pass
through it.
Discharge Q through the regulator is given by [Garge 2003]

Q= √ √
Where Cd1 = 0.577 & Cd2 = 0.8
h1- depth of D/S water level in the channel above the crest

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 101

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Hv - head due to velocity

H - difference of water level U/S and D/S of the crest.
Neglecting Velocity head hv we get
Q= √ √
H = 0.55
H1=0.205

0.056 = √ √
0.056 = 1.024B
B=0.116 m adopt B= 0.12m
Provide 2 piers of 1.5m thickness each on the side. (Garge, 2003)
Overall waterway of the regulator = 1.5*2+0.12=3.12m

7.3.9 Divide Wall

It is constructed at right angle to the weir axis. It divides the river channel in to
compartment. Thus in the smaller compartment, which is nearer to the head regulator,
a still pond is created.
Divide wall have the following functions:
 It separates the floor of the scouring sluice from that of the weir proper.
 It provides comparatively still pocket in front of the canal head regulator so
that
silt gets deposited in it and relatively clear water enters the canal.
 It helps in the minimizing the effect of the main river current on the flow
condition in the head regulator.
a) Dimensions of Right divide wall
- Width of the head regulator, B= 0.1m
- The length of divide wall on the upstream = 0.58*B=0.58*0.1 = 0.058m (take
0.1m)
- D/S extends up to the end weir glacis(toe) = 2m
- Dived wall height = weir height +some factor of safety=1.006+0.3=1.306m
- The top width of the wall =1.5m (slope 0.5H:1V). (Arora K. , 2002)
b) Dimensions of left divide wall
- Width of the head regulator, B= 0.12m

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 102

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

- The length of divide wall on the upstream = 0.58*B=0.58*0.12 = 0.07m (take

0.1m)
- D/S extends up to the end weir glacis(toe) = 2m
- Dived wall height = weir height +some factor of safety=1.006+0.3=1.306m
- The top width of the wall =1.5m (slope 0.5H:1V). (Arora K. , 2002)

7.3.10 Design of Silt Excluder

It is design that the bottom layer of water which is highly charged with silt and
sediment will pass down the tunnels and escape over the floor of the under-sluice
way(s),since the gates of the under sluice way(s) shall be kept open up to the top of
the tunnels. The clearer water over the top of the roof of the excluder tunnels will thus
enter the canal through the head regulator.
A. Design procedure of right silt Excluder
- Full supply discharge of canal = 0.119
- Crest level of the under sluice = 1703.5m
- Crest level of the head regulator = 1703.659m
- Usually, two or three bays of under sluice of the weir are covered by the
excluder.
However excluder covering only one bay has been designed. (Garge, 2003)
- Design discharge =15% to 20% of canal discharge. (Garge, 2003)
Q=

- A minimum velocity of 2 to 4.5m/sec must be maintained through the tunnels in

order to keep them free from sediment.
 2m/sec- adopted for the design

 Area of cross section A = m2

Height of tunnels generally varies from 0.5 to 0.6m for Sandy River and 0.8 to 1.2m
for boulder Stage River. (Garge, 2003)
Height of tunnel (h) =crest level of head regulator-crest level of under sluice
=1703.659-1703.5=0.2m
Total clear width =

- For clear span of 0.2m (assume)

Number of tunnel =

- Assume thickness of divide wall =0.3m

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 103

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Overall width =0.1*1+0.3=0.4m

B. Design procedure of left silt Excluder
- Full supply discharge of canal = 0.056
- Crest level of the under sluice = 1703.5m
- Crest level of the head regulator = 1703.695m
Q=

- A minimum velocity of 2 to 4.5m/sec must be maintained through the tunnels in

order to keep them free from sediment.
 2m/sec- adopted for the design

 Area of cross section A =

Height of tunnel (h) =1703.695-1703.5=0.2m

Total clear width =

- For clear span of 0.2m (assume)

Number of tunnel =

- Assume thickness of divide wall =0.3m

Overall width =0.031*1+0.3=0.331m
Only one bay sluice will be used for silt excluder.

7.3.11 Guide Bank

The guide bank are generally provided in pairs symmetrical in plan and may either by
kept parallel or may diverge slightly up steam of the work. Symmetrical and parallel
guide banks are usually adopted.
The purpose of the guide bank is force the river in to a restricted channel and thus
ensuring smooth and on almost axial flow near the weir site.
Principle and factor governing the design of guide banks.
i. Top level of guide banks:-The top level of guide banks in governed by HFL,
flux, velocity head and freeboard .It can be obtained by adding all these
values.
ii. Shape of guide bank in plan:- As stated earlier ,the guide banks are generally
provided in pairs, symmetrical in plan and may either be kept parallel or may
diverge slightly upstream of the work.
iii. Length of the guide bank: spring and Gales have correlated the length of the
guide bank with the length of structure between the abutments (L).

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 104

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Design Procedure
Maximum discharge = 28m3
Highest flood level (HFL) =1705.488m
River bed level = 1703.5m
Water way between guide bank = 15m
The length of guide banks U/S of weir = 1.25*L (Garge 2003)
= 1.25*15=18.75m
The length of guide banks D/S of weir = 0.25*L (Garge 2003)
= 0.25*15=3.75m
The radius of the curved head (upstream portion) may be kept
=0.45*L=0.45*15=6.75m
The upstream end of guide bund may, therefore, be curved in such a way as to make
an angle of 60
a) Cross section of the guide bunds for d/s section
The HFL at wire site = 1705.488m
Assuming a free board of 0.3m,
The top level of guide bund = 1705.488 + 0.3 = 1705.788m
To be move safe and making an allowance for future statement etc; let us
Height of the bund above river bed level = 1705.788 – 1703.5 = 2.288m
Assume top width of 0.5m and side slope 1.5H:1V
b) Cross section of the guide bunds for u/s section
Height of bund over river bed = 2.288m + afflux
= 2.288m + 1m = 3.288m
Provide top width of 0.5m on side slope 1.5H:1V
c) Design of stone of pitching and apron
The sloping water side of entire guide bund as well as the sloping rear side the curved
portions are pitched with one man stone (i.e. a stone which can be lifted by one
person-weighting 40 to 50kg) or concrete block (apron)
Thickness of stone pitching on the side (t)

Thickness of apron (T)

T = 1.9t = 1.9*0.18m = 0.35m
The length of apron is given by 1.5D

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 105

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Where D – depth of scour below the original depth

At nose of guide banks D = 1.25R-y
Where D – scour depth below bed level
y – Water depth below HFL
R – Lacey‟s normal scour depth

( )

( )

y = 1705.488 – 1703.5 = 1.988m

→For nose of guide bunk portion D = 1.25R - y
= 1.25*1.627 – 1.988
= 0.046m
Length if the apron = 1.5*D = 1.5*0.046 = 0.069m say (0.1m)
Structural Analysis of Guide Banks

The structural analysis of guide banks should be taken for the worst condition (i.e.
during empty condition)
Force acting on the wall of guide bank
- Weight of the wall (w1,w2)
- Weight of the bank fills (w3)
- Active Rankin force (pS)
A. D/S Guide Wall

Figure.7.4 Force On D/S Guide Walls.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 106

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 7-5 Stability analysis of D/s guide wall

Code Load Lever Arm, Moment

Vertical Horizontal R Posetive Negative

W1 22.5*2.6*05 0.5/2=0.25 29.1*0.25=7.3

=29.1
W2 ½*22.5*3.43 1/3*3.432+ 99.9*1.6=164.3
*2.6=99.9 0.5=1.6

W Soil ½*19*3.432* 2/3*3.432+ 84.4*2.8=235.2

2.6=84.4 0.5=2.8
P Soil ½*0.33*19* 2.6/3=0.9 21.0*0.9=18.1
*2.62= 21.0
SUM 213.4 21.0 406.8 18.1

Check for sliding

∑
Fs ∑
Fs = 7.62>1.5-very safe
Where, Fs=factor of safety of sliding
Overturning
∑
Fs ∑
= =22.6>1.5….safe
Check for tension
∑ ∑
̅ ∑
= =1.82
e = B/2- ̅ = -1.82=0.14
e< = 0.14 < = 0.66………..ok!
B. U/S Guide wall

Figure 7-5 Force U/S Guide Bank

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 107

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Table 7-6 Stability analysis of U/s guide wall bank

Code Load Lever Arm, Moment

Vertical Horizontal R Posetive Negative

W1 40.4 0.3 10.1

W2 199.1 2.1 426.8
W Soil 168.1 3.8 636.8
P Soil 40.4 1.2 48.3
SUM 407.6 40.4 1073.7 48.3

∑ ∑
Check for slidin Fs ∑
= ∑
= 7.57 > 1.5 ………ok!
∑ ∑
Check for over turning Fs ∑ ∑
= 22.24> 1.5 ………… ok!

Check for tension

∑ ∑ ∑
̅ ∑
= ∑
= 2.52

e= ̅ = 5.432/2-2.52= 0.2

e< = 0.2< 5.432/6 = 0.91 ……………..OK!

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 108

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

8. COST ESTIMATION
A project is economically feasible if the total benefit of the project exceeds the total
cost of the project, (i.e. benefit cost ratio of the project should be greater than one).
So economic analysis is essential for YEDI PROJECT to decide whether the project is
feasible or not. The initial investment cost is determined by carrying out quantity
surveying.

Table 8-1Cost estmation

S/N Description Unit Quantity Unit cost Total cost

Weir Body , cut off and D/S
1 Apron
1.1 U/S cut off
Excavation m3 18.000 120.000 2160.000
Lean concrete m3 2.250 2462.000 5539.500
1.2 D/S cut off
Excavation m3 112.500 120.000 13500.000
Lean concrete m3 3.750 2462.000 9232.500
1.3 D/S Apron
Excavation m3 112.500 120.000 13500.000
1.4 Weir Body
Excavation m3 17.400 120.000 2088.000
Lean concrete m3 6.750 2462.000 16618.500
concrete m3 58.650 2829.000 165920.850
Masonry m3 23.850 1963.000 46817.550
Form work m2 3.910 222.000 868.020
2 Divide Wall
Excavation m3 0.023 120.000 2.784
Masonry m3 0.024 1963.000 47.181
3 Under Sluice
Excavation m3 0.572 120.000 68.640
Lean concrete m3 0.072 2462.000 176.033
4 Upstream Guide Wall
Excavation m3 19.709 120.000 2365.092
Lean concrete m3 0.275 2462.000 675.819
Masonry m3 19.709 1963.000 38688.963
5 D/S Stream Guide Wall
Excavation m3 10.223 120.000 1226.784
Lean concrete m3 0.944 2462.000 2323.340
Masonry m3 10.223 1963.000 20068.142
6 canal
6.1 right main canal
excavation m3 317.516 120.000 38101.974

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 109

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

6.2 left main canal

excavation m3 86.705 120.000 10404.658
6.3 right terciary canal
excavation 381.019 120.000 45722.315
6.4 left terciary canal
excavation 104.047 120.000 12485.589
7 culvert
excavation m3 2.700 120.000 324.000
Lean concrete m3 0.270 2462.000 664.740
form work m2 0.456 222.000 101.232
concret m3 2.700 2829.000 7638.300
8 drop
excavation m3 28.144 120.000 3377.336
Lean concrete m3 2.814 2462.000 6929.167
form work m2 65.142 222.000 14461.524
concret m3 79.924 5829.000 465875.189
Masonry m3 260.799 1963.000 511948.437
9 division box
excavation m3 9.754 120.000 1170.450
Lean concrete m3 0.975 2462.000 2401.373
concret m3 3.902 2829.000 11037.344
form work m2 17.557 222.000 3897.599
Grand total
Total cost 1478428.925

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 110

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

9. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The environment is composed of various systems comprising of physical, biological

and socio-economic sub systems, which are subjected to construction of development
works, like water resource development projects. These changes may shape the
environment for the better or the worse, which necessitates that they be analyzed in
the design of such projects. Environmental impact assessment is therefore, a
systematic structured identification, prediction, and evaluation of the environmental
consequences of a propose actions.

The impact of the proposed action will be identified by using the existing
environment as a control. A change in the environment is the difference in the
environment between the control, the existing environment and the new environment,
the altered condition caused by a project.
When to conduct EIA
EIA should be conducted as early as possible in the project and program to influence
planning, designing, implementation and operational management. Hence, EIA should
be conducted at all stages of development.

9.1 Description of potential Impact

The impacts of the project are classified in to two groups:-
i. Positive impacts
ii. Negative impacts

9.1.1 Positive environmental impact of the project

The implementation of the project substantially changes the mode of life of the
society as the user receives more income from intensified crop production. As the
result of the implementation of the irrigation project the following positive impacts
may be expected.
 Increased production
 Increasing the reliability of agricultural production
 Famine relief – famine follows drought. Irrigation helps in altering the drought
to famine.
 Rise in social standards – with increased food production and assured supplies
of food and water, more money is available with farmers and raises their
standard of living.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 111

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

 Flood control
 Socio –Economic impact

9.1.2 Negative impacts of the project

The likely negative environmental impacts as the result of the implementation of the
project are discussed in the following sections.

 Organic and inorganic pollution

 Pollution of Water quality
 Public health
 Water logging
 soil erosion
 Biological & ecological changes
Organic and inorganic pollution

The use of pesticides and fertilizers to increase the yield should be carried out with
care not to impair the normal condition. Farmers should be given proper extension
service on how to use chemical fertilizer and other agrochemical inputs to avoid the
misuse.
On the command area, the prominent fertilizer used are urea and DAP. Some
pesticides are also used. This will bring also an increase in the use and generation of
nutrient organic compounds and pathogens. This will result in pollution of
environment and water use problems. The discharge of drainage water polluted by
pesticides and fertilizers may have some effect on the water quality of domestic water
source if they mix.
Pollution of Water quality
Irrigation may contribute to the problem of water pollution in various ways. During
construction period, earthwork activities for construction of the proposed conveyance
canal and irrigation infrastructure are likely to yield high sediment loads.
Where as, during the operation phase, the sediment rating, down stream of the dam
will be much lower due to sediment deposing in the reservoir. All these changes may
bring changes to the water quality.

Public health
During construction period there will be increased risk of the transmission of endemic
diseases and sexually transmitted diseases including HIV/Aids, due to increased

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 112

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

movement and interaction between the local community and the construction force.
During the operation of the irrigation project, malaria transmission could intensify and
cause a major risk to public health.
Water logging
Through scientifically not correct, farmers think that irrigating more water will give
more yields and this excess water may percolate in to the ground water and raise the
water table. When the water table raise, salinity and water logging occurs. This will
degrade the fertile land.
Biological & ecological changes

The observation made in the project area, the cultivated land is covered with trees,
forests, bushes & shrubs. But with the increase of fertile land demand for farming &
different related needs this resource is will be endangered. This in turn will have a
remarkable negative effect on the ecological attributes. Due to the implementation of
the project in the farmer‟s area, there might be decreased grazing land, hazarded to the
wiled & domestic animals to cross large canals.

9.2 Mitigation measures

Even though, it is not possible to eliminate the negative impact of the project, they
have to be minimized to certain threshold level to sustainable development. There
fore; the following mitigation measures we recommended to reduce the adverse
effects.
The Mitigation Measures of Organic and inorganic pollution

 Establishment of biological, physical & chemical water quality criteria for

agricultural water use
 Improve the awareness of the community about use of fertilizers & chemical on
water quality
 Proper design of sewages for agricultural water
The Mitigation measures Pollution of Water quality

Establishments of biological and physical water quality criterion for

agricultural water use
Improving awareness of the community about effect of fertilizers and
chemicals on water quality

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 113

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

Proper disposal of swages from agricultural water i.e. well designed

drainage system should be adopted
The Mitigation measures of Public health
o Avoidance of stagnant water or slowly moving water
o Provision of safe water supply
o Sufficient health services and vector control
The Mitigation measures of Water logging
 Lining of canals and watercourses
 Reducing the intensity of irrigation
 Exercising economical and scientific use of water system
The Mitigation measures of Biological & ecological changes
 Intimating a forestation an uncultivated land, establish local forestry agents
and create tenure step ups and all make up of the farmers mind to aware the
effects and consequent of deforestation.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 114

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

10. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION .

10.1 Conclusions
 From feasibility study result the type of soils and geology characteristics of the
project area is suitable for irrigation.
 Peak rain fall is estimated using Gumbel‟s frequency analysis method based on
23 years shaviest rain fall data which is recorded in bonga station 86.317mmand
the peak discharge is estimated by SCS Curve Number Method 27.994m3/s

 According the agro industrial input demand of the country,Gedi IrrigationProject

is meant to enhance crop production. Therefore Maize, ,Haricot Bean, Spiceses
Vegetable and fruits(Onion, pepper ,potato carrot, cabbage) and Coffee crops
are selected. There crop water requirement is worked out by penman monteith
method using CPOPWAT 8.0. The duty is 0.43l/s/haduring the dry season.
 From topographical nature of command area, suitable canal alignment was done
and trapezoidal unlined canal section is selected based on soil criteria. The design
of the cross section of the canal fixed by using B/D ratio. And also different
components of canal structures such as culverts, drops, diversion box, canal out let
and an access road were also designed at appropriate locations.
 Based on the peak discharge vertical drop pickup weir and components of head
work structure were also designed and relevant dimensions provided.
 Coffee is desiged by basin irrigation .Since most of the crops raw crops on the
project area .furrow irrigation is the method can be adopted. Furrow system is
designed based on soil type and crop type, by providing relevant furrow spacing ,
furrow slop and furrow length based on appropriate guide lines.
 In order to create a favorable condition for plant growth , apart from availability
of water to avoid saturation of the command face system is area ,surface drainage
system is designed based on drainage coefficient 29.978mm/day which is obtain
empirical guide line of MER of 23 years rain fall data.
 The cost of the project is approximately estimated by considering the dimension
of the structure and the materials used for construction of the structure. The
approximant cost of the project was estimated to be ETB.
 The environmental impact assessment is also assessed based on the type of the
project and the measurement of its negative impact under taken.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 115

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

10.2 Recommendations
 Project specific information such as appropriately scaled topographic maps
was not available and hence detail field level design and total cost estimation
could be roughply estmaited ..

 Eventhougth the USSC method is mostly applicable for estimation of design

discharge, the peak discharge is designed using Gumbel‟s frequency analysis
method, due to the non availability daily rain fall data of the project area, and
hence the appropriate peak discharge estimation may be carried out daily
obtaining the necessary rainfall data relates to the project area.

 For this particular project, the crop land allocation to maximize the benefit
by optimally allocating the area for each crop not designed. Due to the lake of
yiled data of the project but we done by the given data on the feasibility
report.

 Since land leveling is a pre-requisite for any surface method of irrigation, due
consideration may also be given for land leveling job on the project area.
Special attention for proper operation and maintenance of the surface method
of irrigation as well as the surface drainage to have the efficient irrigation
system are also to protect the project area from water logging condition

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 116

 Final Year Project on Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project 2013

REFERENCES
Abebe.D. (2011). (irrigation structure handout).
Arora. (2003). Irrigation, Water Power And Water Resources Engineering.
Arora, K. (2002). Irrigation, Water Power And Water Resources Engineering, Standard
Publishers. NAIA Saraf,Delhi.
Basak, N. (1999). Irrigation Engineering.
Chow, C. t. (1983). applied hydrology.
Cuenca. (1989). Irrigation Theory and Practice. universty of Arizona USA.
DELFT. (1992). principle of hydrology.
FAO. (1994). Guide Lines for computing crop water requirement, Irrigation And Drainage
Project Paper 33.
FAO. (1994). Guide Lines for computing crop water requirement, Irrigation And Drainage
Project Paper 56.
FAO. (1994). Guide Lines for computing crop water requirement, Irrigation And Drainage
Project Paper 33. FAO.
Garge, S. (2003). ,Irrigation Engineering And Hydraulic Structures.
Micheal, A. (1997). Irrigation theary and practice .
NNBasak. (1999). Irrigetion Engineering.
Sahasrabudhe, J. (1994). Irrigation Engineering and Hydraulic Structures.
subramanya. (1994). engineering hydrology,2nd edition.
Tefera, B. (2012). Gedi Small Scale Irrigation Project Feasibility Report.

Water Resources and Irrigation Eng. AMU Page 117

ANNEXES

Page 118
Annex 1 HYDROLOGY
A) Table of kn value for different sample size (Chow, 1983)
sample size n Kn sample size n Kn

10 2.036 37 2.65
11 2.088 38 2.661
12 2.134 39 2.671
13 2.175 40 2.682
14 2.213 41 2.692
15 2.247 42 2.7
16 2.279 43 2.71
17 2.309 44 2.719
18 2.335 45 2.727
19 2.361 46 2.736
20 2.385 47 2.744
21 2.408 48 2.753
22 2.429 49 2.76
23 2.448 50 2.768
24 2.467 55 2.804
25 2.486 60 2.837
26 2.502 65 2.866
27 2.519 70 2.893
28 2.534 75 2.917
29 2.549 80 2.94
30 2.563 85 2.961
31 2.577 90 2.981
32 2.591 95 3
33 2.604 100 3.017
34 2.616 110 3.049
35 2.628 120 3.078
36 2.639 130 3.104
140 3.129

Page 119
B) Table of Reduced mean in Gumbel’s extreme value distribution, N= sample size

C) Table of Reduced standard deviation Sn in Gumbel’s extreme value distribution,

N=sample size

Page 120
D) Table of Kz=F(Cs,T) for use in Log-Pearson Type III Distribution

Page 121
E. Intensity-Duration curve for various recurrence intervals (Adopted from ERA
manual 2003)

Page 122
E) Table Runoff coefficients for Rational formula

Page 123
F) Table Coefficients for SCS peak Discharge Method

Page 124
G) Table of Ia/P for selected rainfall depths and Curve Numbers

Page 125
ANNEX 2 CROPWAT
Common Data
A) MONTHLY ETO PENMAN-MONTEITH DATA
(File: D:\crop\BONGA.pen)
Country: Location 51 Station: BONGA
Altitude: 1725 m. Latitude: 7.21 °N Longitude: 36.28 °E
Month Min Temp Max Temp Humidity Wind Sun Rad ETo
°C °C % km/day hours MJ/m?/day mm/day
January 10 29 59 95 7.1 18.4 3.85
February 11 29.7 62 104 6.4 18.4 4.03
March 11.9 29.2 67 181 6.3 19.1 4.5
April 12.7 28.1 71 130 6.6 19.6 4.2
May 12.6 27.4 75 112 6.2 18.4 3.83
June 12.4 25.9 76 104 5.3 16.7 3.43
July 12.4 24.3 74 95 3.7 14.5 3.03
August 12.4 24.6 72 104 4.1 15.4 3.22
September 11.7 25.8 75 86 5.1 17.2 3.43
October 11 27.8 79 95 6.7 19 3.74
November 10.3 28.1 69 78 7.1 18.7 3.65
December 10.3 28.4 66 69 7.4 18.5 3.56
Average 11.6 27.4 70 104 6 17.8 3.71
B) SOIL DATA
(File: C:\ProgramData\CROPWAT\data\soils\BLACK CLAY SOIL.SOI)
Soil name: BLACK CLAY SOIL
General soil data:
Total available soil moisture (FC - WP) 200.0 mm/meter
Maximum rain infiltration rate 30 mm/day
Maximum rooting depth 180 centimeters
Initial soil moisture depletion (as % TA 50%
Initial available soil moisture 100.0 mm/meter
C) DRY CROP DATA
crop
Stage initial develop mid late total
Length (days) 60 90 120 95 365
coffee Kc Values 1 1.1 1
Rooting depth (m) 1.8 1.8 1.8
Critical depletion 0.5 0.5 0.5
Yield response f. 1 1 1 1 1
Cropheight (m)
Length (days) 20 35 40 30 125
Kc Values 0.3 1.2 0.35
Maize Rooting depth (m) 0.3 1 1
Critical depletion 0.55 0.55 0.8
Yield response f. 0.4 0.4 1.3 0.5 1.25
Cropheight (m) 2
Length (days) ` 30 30 10 90
haricot bean Kc Values 0.5 1.05 0.9
Rooting depth (m) 0.3 0.7 0.7
Critical depletion 0.45 0.45 0.6
Yield response f. 0.2 1.1 0.75 0.4 1.15
Cropheight (m) 0.4
Length (days) 15 25 60 20 120
Kc Values 0.45 1 0.85
Onion Rooting depth (m) 0.6 0.6 0.6
Critical depletion 0.25 0.25 0.25
Yield response f. 0.45 0.45 0.8 0.3 1.1
Cropheight (m)
Length (days) 25 30 45 30 130
Kc Values 0.5 1.15 0.75
potato Rooting depth (m) 0.3 0.6 0.6
Critical depletion 0.25 0.3 0.5
Yield response f. 0.45 0.8 0.8 0.3 1.1
 Cropheight (m) 0.6
Length (days) 40 60 50 15 165
Kc Values 0.7 1.05 0.95
Cabbage Rooting depth (m) 0.25 0.5 0.5
Critical depletion 0.45 0.45 0.45
Yield response f. 0.2 0.4 0.45 0.6 0.95
Cropheight (m) 0.4
Length (days) 20 30 30 20 100
Kc Values 0.7 1.05 0.95
Carrot Rooting depth (m) 0.3 0.6 0.6
Critical depletion 0.25 0.3 0.5
Yield response f. 0.45 0.8 0.8 0.3 1.1
Cropheight (m)
Length (days) 30 35 40 20 125
Kc Values 0.6 1.05 0.9
pepper Rooting depth (m) 0.25 0.8 0.8
Critical depletion 0.2 0.3 0.5
Yield response f. 1.4 0.6 1.2 0.6 1.1
Cropheight (m) 0.7
D) CROP WATER REQUIREMENTS
ETo station: BONGA Crop: coffee
Rain station: BONGA Planting date: 01/08

Stage Kc ETc ETc Eff rain d(net) FIR d(gross)

MONTH Decade mm/dec mm/day mm/dec mm/dec Irr Req mm/day
Aug 1 Init 1 3.2 31.6 42.9 0 0.00 0
Aug 2 Init 1 3.2 32.2 44 0 0.00 0
Aug 3 Init 1 3.3 36.2 44.2 0 0.00 0
Sep 1 Init 1 3.4 33.6 45.5 0 0.00 0
Sep 2 Init 1 3.4 34.3 46.4 0 0.00 0
Sep 3 Deve 1 3.5 35.4 41.6 0 0.00 0
Oct 1 Deve 1 3.7 36.6 36.2 0.5 0.83 1.25
Oct 2 Deve 1 3.8 38.1 32 6.1 10.17 15.25
Oct 3 Deve 1 3.8 42 27.7 14.3 23.83 35.75
Nov 1 Deve 1 3.8 38.3 22.6 15.7 26.17 39.25
Nov 2 Deve 1.1 3.8 38.4 17.9 20.5 34.17 51.25
Nov 3 Deve 1.1 3.9 38.5 17.1 21.4 35.67 53.5
Dec 1 Deve 1.1 3.9 38.6 17.3 21.2 35.33 53
Dec 2 Deve 1.1 3.9 38.7 16.4 22.2 37.00 55.5
Dec 3 Mid 1.1 4 44.1 12.6 31.6 52.67 79
Jan 1 Mid 1.1 4.1 41.3 6.7 34.6 57.67 86.5
Jan 2 Mid 1.1 4.2 42.3 2.3 40.1 66.83 100.25
Jan 3 Mid 1.1 4.3 47.3 5.8 41.5 69.17 103.75
Feb 1 Mid 1.1 4.4 43.7 9.2 34.4 57.33 86
Feb 2 Mid 1.1 4.4 44.3 11.4 32.9 54.83 82.25
Feb 3 Mid 1.1 4.6 36.8 17.9 18.9 31.50 47.25
Mar 1 Mid 1.1 4.8 47.7 25.3 22.5 37.50 56.25
Mar 2 Mid 1.1 5 49.5 31.5 18 30.00 45
Mar 3 Mid 1.1 4.8 53.2 36 17.2 28.67 43
Apr 1 Mid 1.1 4.7 47.3 41.6 5.7 9.50 14.25
Apr 2 Mid 1.1 4.6 46.2 46.9 0 0.00 0
Apr 3 Late 1.1 4.5 44.8 46.7 0 0.00 0
May 1 Late 1.1 4.3 43.1 45.8 0 0.00 0
May 2 Late 1.1 4.1 41.4 46.1 0 0.00 0
May 3 Late 1.1 4 43.5 47.4 0 0.00 0
Jun 1 Late 1.1 3.8 37.7 50.1 0 0.00 0
Jun 2 Late 1.1 3.6 35.9 52 0 0.00 0
Jun 3 Late 1 3.4 34.2 48.2 0 0.00 0
Jul 1 Late 1 3.3 32.5 42.5 0 0.00 0
Jul 2 Late 1 3.1 30.8 38.7 0 0.00 0
Jul 3 Late 1 3.1 34.2 40.4 0 0.00 0
sum 1435 1157 419
E) CROP WATER REQUIREMENTS
ETo station: BONGA Crop: Green beans
Rain station: BONGA Planting date: 15/03
Stage Kc ETc ETc Eff rain d(net) FIR d(gross)
MONTH Decade mm/dec mm/day mm/dec mm/dec Irr Req mm/day
Mar 2 Init 0.5 2.3 13.5 18.9 0 0.00 0.00
Mar 3 Init 0.5 2.2 24.2 36 0 0.00 0.00
Apr 1 Deve 0.6 2.4 23.7 41.6 0 0.00 0.00
Apr 2 Deve 0.7 3.1 30.5 46.9 0 0.00 0.00
Apr 3 Deve 0.9 3.7 37 46.7 0 0.00 0.00
May 1 Mid 1 4.1 41.1 45.8 0 0.00 0.00
May 2 Mid 1.1 4 40.1 46.1 0 0.00 0.00
May 3 Mid 1.1 3.9 42.5 47.4 0 0.00 0.00
Jun 1 Late 1 3.5 35.2 50.1 0 0.00 0.00
Jun 2 Late 0.9 3.1 6.1 10.4 6.1 10.17 15.25
Sum 294 389.9 6.1
F) CROP WATER REQUIREMENTS
ETo station: BONGA Crop: MAIZE (Grain)
Rain station: BONGA Planting date: 10/03
Stage Kc ETc ETc Eff rain
d(net) FIR d(gross)
Irr Req
MONTH Decade mm/dec mm/day mm/dec mm/dec mm/day
Mar 1 Init 0.3 1.3 1.3 2.5 1.3 2.17 3.25
Mar 2 Init 0.3 1.4 13.5 31.5 0 0.00 0.00
Mar 3 Deve 0.3 1.4 14.8 36 0 0.00 0.00
Apr 1 Deve 0.5 2.1 21.1 41.6 0 0.00 0.00
Apr 2 Deve 0.7 3.1 31.2 46.9 0 0.00 0.00
Apr 3 Deve 1 4.1 40.7 46.7 0 0.00 0.00
May 1 Mid 1.2 4.7 46.7 45.8 0.9 1.50 2.25
May 2 Mid 1.2 4.6 45.6 46.1 0 0.00 0.00
May 3 Mid 1.2 4.4 48.4 47.4 0.9 1.50 2.25
Jun 1 Mid 1.2 4.2 42.3 50.1 0 0.00 0.00
Jun 2 Late 1.1 3.7 37.3 52 0 0.00 0.00
Jun 3 Late 0.8 2.7 26.7 48.2 0 0.00 0.00
Jul 1 Late 0.5 1.7 16.8 42.5 0 0.00 0.00
Jul 2 Late 0.4 1.1 2.2 7.7 2.2 3.67 5.50
Sum 389 545 5.4
G) CROP WATER REQUIREMENTS
ETo station: BONGA Crop: Onion
Rain station: BONGA Planting date: 20/09

Stage Kc ETc ETc Eff rain d(net) FIR d(gross)

MONTH Decade mm/dec mm/day mm/dec mm/dec Irr Req mm/day
Sep 2 Init 0.45 1.54 1.5 4.6 1.5 2.50 3.75
Sep 3 Init 0.45 1.59 15.9 41.6 0 0.00 0
Oct 1 Deve 0.5 1.81 18.1 36.2 0 0.00 0
Oct 2 Deve 0.7 2.63 26.3 32 0 0.00 0
Oct 3 Mid 0.93 3.44 37.9 27.7 10.2 17.00 25.5
Nov 1 Mid 1 3.68 36.8 22.6 14.2 23.67 35.5
Nov 2 Mid 1 3.65 36.5 17.9 18.6 31.00 46.5
Nov 3 Mid 1 3.62 36.2 17.1 19.1 31.83 47.75
Dec 1 Mid 1 3.59 35.9 17.3 18.6 31.00 46.5
Dec 2 Mid 1 3.56 35.6 16.4 19.2 32.00 48
Dec 3 Late 1 3.64 40 12.6 27.5 45.83 68.75
Jan 1 Late 0.94 3.51 35.1 6.7 28.5 47.50 71.25
Jan 2 Late 0.87 3.36 23.5 1.6 21.2 35.33 53
Sum 379.4 254.4 178.4

H) CROP WATER REQUIREMENTS

ETo station: BONGA Crop: Potato
Rain station: BONGA Planting date: 15/09

Stage Kc ETc ETc Eff rain d(net) FIR d(gross)

MONTH Decade mm/dec mm/day mm/dec mm/dec Irr Req mm/day
Sep 2 Init 0.5 1.72 10.3 27.8 0 0.00 0.00
Sep 3 Init 0.5 1.77 17.7 41.6 0 0.00 0.00
Oct 1 Deve 0.5 1.83 18.3 36.2 0 0.00 0.00
Oct 2 Deve 0.64 2.4 24 32 0 0.00 0.00
Oct 3 Deve 0.87 3.23 35.5 27.7 7.8 13.00 19.50
Nov 1 Mid 1.09 4.02 40.2 22.6 17.5 29.17 43.75
Nov 2 Mid 1.15 4.21 42.1 17.9 24.1 40.17 60.25
Nov 3 Mid 1.15 4.17 41.7 17.1 24.6 41.00 61.50
Dec 1 Mid 1.15 4.14 41.4 17.3 24 40.00 60.00
Dec 2 Mid 1.15 4.1 41 16.4 24.6 41.00 61.50
Dec 3 Late 1.11 4.06 44.6 12.6 32 53.33 80.00
Jan 1 Late 0.98 3.66 36.6 6.7 29.9 49.83 74.75
Jan 2 Late 0.84 3.25 32.5 2.3 30.3 50.50 75.75
Jan 3 Late 0.77 3 6 1.1 6 10.00 15.00
sum 431.7 279.3 220.8
I) CROP WATER REQUIREMENTS
ETo station: BONGA Crop: CABBAGE Crucifers
Rain station: BONGA Planting date: 10/10

Stage Kc ETc ETc Eff rain d(net) FIR d(gross)

Irr Req
MONTH Decade mm/dec mm/day mm/dec mm/dec mm/day
Oct 1 Init 0.7 2.55 2.5 3.6 2.5 4.17 6.25
Oct 2 Init 0.7 2.62 26.2 32 0 0.00 0.00
Oct 3 Init 0.7 2.6 28.6 27.7 0.8 1.33 2.00
Nov 1 Init 0.7 2.58 25.8 22.6 3.1 5.17 7.75
Nov 2 Deve 0.7 2.56 25.6 17.9 7.7 12.83 19.25
Nov 3 Deve 0.75 2.7 27 17.1 9.9 16.50 24.75
Dec 1 Deve 0.81 2.89 28.9 17.3 11.6 19.33 29.00
Dec 2 Deve 0.87 3.09 30.9 16.4 14.4 24.00 36.00
Dec 3 Deve 0.93 3.4 37.4 12.6 24.9 41.50 62.25
Jan 1 Deve 0.99 3.73 37.3 6.7 30.6 51.00 76.50
Jan 2 Mid 1.05 4.05 40.5 2.3 38.2 63.67 95.50
Jan 3 Mid 1.06 4.16 45.7 5.8 40 66.67 100.00
Feb 1 Mid 1.06 4.22 42.2 9.2 33 55.00 82.50
Feb 2 Mid 1.06 4.29 42.9 11.4 31.5 52.50 78.75
Feb 3 Mid 1.06 4.45 35.6 17.9 17.7 29.50 44.25
Mar 1 Late 1.06 4.61 46.1 25.3 20.9 34.83 52.25
Mar 2 Late 1.02 4.58 45.8 31.5 14.4 24.00 36.00
Mar 3 Late 0.98 4.31 12.9 9.8 0 0.00 0.00
sum 582 287.2 301.1
J) CROP WATER REQUIREMENTS
ETo station: BONGA Crop: Carrot
Rain station: BONGA Planting date: 15/10
Stage Kc ETc ETc Eff rain d(net) FIR d(gross)
Irr Req
MONTH Decade mm/dec mm/day mm/dec mm/dec mm/day
Oct 2 Init 0.7 2.62 15.7 19.2 0 0.00 0.00
Oct 3 Init 0.7 2.6 28.6 27.7 0.8 1.33 2.00
Nov 1 Deve 0.73 2.7 27 22.6 4.3 7.17 10.75
Nov 2 Deve 0.85 3.09 30.9 17.9 12.9 21.50 32.25
Nov 3 Deve 0.96 3.48 34.8 17.1 17.7 29.50 44.25
Dec 1 Mid 1.05 3.76 37.6 17.3 20.2 33.67 50.50
Dec 2 Mid 1.05 3.74 37.4 16.4 21 35.00 52.50
Dec 3 Mid 1.05 3.84 42.2 12.6 29.7 49.50 74.25
Jan 1 Late 1.03 3.87 38.7 6.7 32.1 53.50 80.25
Jan 2 Late 0.98 3.78 37.8 2.3 35.5 59.17 88.75
Jan 3 Late 0.95 3.72 7.4 1.1 7.4 12.33 18.50
sum 338.1 161 181.7
 K) CROP WATER REQUIREMENTS
ETo station: BONGA Crop: Sweet Peppers
Rain station: BONGA Planting date: 10/09

Stage Kc ETc ETc Eff rain d(net) FIR d(gross)

Irr Req
MONTH Decade mm/dec mm/day mm/dec mm/dec mm/day
Sep 1 Init 0.6 2.02 2 4.5 2 3.33 5.00
Sep 2 Init 0.6 2.06 20.6 46.4 0 0.00 0.00
Sep 3 Init 0.6 2.12 21.2 41.6 0 0.00 0.00
Oct 1 Deve 0.6 2.19 21.9 36.2 0 0.00 0.00
Oct 2 Deve 0.68 2.56 25.6 32 0 0.00 0.00
Oct 3 Deve 0.82 3.04 33.5 27.7 5.7 9.50 14.25
Nov 1 Deve 0.96 3.52 35.2 22.6 12.5 20.83 31.25
Nov 2 Mid 1.05 3.83 38.3 17.9 20.3 33.83 50.75
Nov 3 Mid 1.05 3.81 38.1 17.1 21 35.00 52.50
Dec 1 Mid 1.05 3.78 37.8 17.3 20.4 34.00 51.00
Dec 2 Mid 1.05 3.74 37.4 16.4 21 35.00 52.50
Dec 3 Late 1.03 3.76 41.4 12.6 28.8 48.00 72.00
Jan 1 Late 0.96 3.58 35.8 6.7 29.2 48.67 73.00
Jan 2 Late 0.91 3.51 7 0.5 7 11.67 17.50
sum 395.7 299.6 168

CROP IRRIGATION SCHEDULE

L) Table format: Irrigation schedule Coffee

Date Day Stage Rain Ks Eta Depl Net IrrDeficit Loss Gr.Irr Flow d(net) T (Interval)
mm fract. % % mm mm mm mm l/s/ha mm l/s/ha mm day
1-Aug 1 Init 0 1 100 51 183 0 0 458 53 274.74 56
11-Feb 195 Mid 0 1 100 51 183 0 0 457 0.27 274.08 55
31-Jul End End 0 1 0 3

M) Table format: Irrigation schedule Haricot bean

Date Day Stage Rain Ks Eta Depl Net IrrDeficit Loss Gr.Irr Flow d(net) T (Interval)
mm fract. % % mm mm mm mm l/s/ha mm l/s/ha mm day
15-Mar 1 Init 0 0.9 91 53 33 0 0 82.1 9.51 49.26 12
12-Jun End End 0 1 100 12
 N) Table format: Irrigation schedule MAIZE (Grain)

Date Day Stage Rain Ks Eta Depl Net IrrDeficit Loss Gr.Irr Flow d(net) T (Interval)
mm fract. % % mm mm mm mm l/s/ha mm l/s/ha mm day
12-Mar 3 Init 0 1 100 56 38 0 0 94.7 3.65 56.82 12
12-Jul End End 16 1 100 4

O) Table format: Irrigation schedule Onion

T
Date Day Stage Rain Ks Eta Depl Net IrrDeficit Loss Gr.Irr Flow d(net) (Interval)
mm fract. % % mm mm mm mm l/s/ha mm l/s/ha mm day
20-Sep 1 Init 0 0.67 67 51 61 0 0 152.6 17.66 91.56 25
2-Dec 74 Mid 0 1 100 27 31.9 0 0 79.7 0.13 47.82 13
30-Dec 102 End 0 1 100 25 30.3 0 0 75.8 0.31 45.48 12
14-Jan 117 End 0 1 100 26 31.1 0 0 77.7 0.6 46.62 13
17-Jan End End 31.6 1 100 2

P) Table format: Irrigation schedule Potato

T
Date Day Stage Rain Ks Eta Depl Net IrrDeficit Loss Gr.Irr Flow d(net) (Interval)
mm fract. % % mm mm mm mm l/s/ha mm l/s/ha mm day
15-Sep 1 Init 0 0.67 67 52 31.7 0 0 79.2 9.17 47.52 11
22-Nov 69 Mid 0 1 100 30 36 0 0 90.1 0.15 54.06 13
16-Dec 93 Mid 0 1 100 30 36.3 0 0 90.7 0.44 54.42 13
6-Jan 114 End 0 1 100 41 49.7 0 0 124.2 0.68 74.52 18
22-Jan End End 0 1 100 34

Q) Table format: Irrigation schedule Cabbage Crucifers

T
Date Day Stage Rain Ks Eta Depl Net IrrDeficit Loss Gr.Irr Flow d(net) (Interval)
mm fract. % % mm mm mm mm l/s/ha mm l/s/ha mm day
10-Oct 1 Init 0 0.91 91 55 27.6 0 0 68.9 7.98 41.34 9
10-Jan 93 Dev 0 1 100 47 45.7 0 0 114.2 0.14 68.52 15
26-Jan 109 Mid 0 1 100 48 48.1 0 0 120.3 0.87 72.18 16
11-Feb 125 Mid 0 1 100 46 46.4 0 0 116 0.84 69.6 15
23-Mar End End 0 1 100 7
 R) Table format: Irrigation schedule Carrot

T
Date Day Stage Rain Ks Eta Depl Net IrrDeficit Loss Gr.Irr Flow d(net) (Interval)
mm fract. % % mm mm mm mm l/s/ha mm l/s/ha mm day
15-Oct 1 Init 0 0.67 67 53 32.4 0 0 80.9 9.36 48.54 13
26-Dec 73 Mid 0 1 100 32 38.4 0 0 96 0.15 57.6 15
12-Jan 90 End 0 1 100 41 49.2 0 0 123 0.84 73.8 19
12-Jan End End 4.9 1 100 24

S) Table format: Irrigation schedule Sweet Peppers

T
Date Day Stage Rain Ks Eta Depl Net IrrDeficit Loss Gr.Irr Flow d(net) (Interval)
mm fract. % % mm mm mm mm l/s/ha mm l/s/ha mm day
10-Sep 1 Init 0 0.62 62 52 27.1 0 0 67.8 7.85 40.68 11
12-Jan End End 0 1 100 49
Annex 3
A) Take of sheet
S/ N Un Leng Wind Depth or Ar Quant
N Description o it th th Height ea ity
Weir Body , cut off and
1 D/S Apron
1.
1 U/S cut off
Excavation of Hard rock 1 m3 3 15 0.4 18.0
Lean concrete 1 m3 3 15 0.05 2.3
1.
2 D/S cut off
Excavation of Hard rock 1 m3 5 15 1.5 112.5
Lean concrete 1 m3 5 15 0.05 3.8
1.
3 D/S Apron
Excavation of Hard rock 1 m3 5 15 1.5 112.5
1.
4 Weir Body
Excavation of Hard rock 1 m3 2 15.00 0.58 17.4
3
Lean concrete 1 m 9 15.00 0.05 6.8
3.9
Reinforced concrete 1 m3 15 1 58.7
1.5
Masonry 1 m3 15 9 23.850
m^
Form work 1 2 3.9
2 Divide Wall
Excavation for hard rock 2 m3 0.116 0.2 0.5 0.023
Masonry 2 m3 0.116 0.2 1.036 0.024
3 Under Sluice
Excavation for hard rock 2 m3 1.43 0.5 0.4 0.6
3
Lean concrete 2 m 1.43 0.5 0.05 0.1
6 Upstream Guide Wall
Excavation for hard rock 2 m3 5.49 0.5 3.59 19.7
3
Lean concrete 2 m 5.49 0.5 0.05 0.3
Masonry 2 m3 5.49 0.5 3.59 19.7
7 D/S Stream Guide Wall
Excavation for hard rock 2 m3 3.932 0.5 2.6 10.2
Lean concrete 2 m3 3.932 2.4 0.05 0.9
3
Masonry 2 m 3.932 0.5 2.6 10.2
3
Total masory m 53.8