Course Teacher: Prof. Dr. M. R.

Kabir

ECONOMICAL & PHYSICAL JUSTIFICATION FOR CANAL

Advantages of Lining
CHAPTER 5
o Seepage Control
o Prevention of Water-Logging
o Increase in Channel Capacity
o Increase in Commanded Area
o Reduction in Maintenance Costs
o Elimination of Flood Dangers

Selection of suitable type of lining

o Low cost
o Impermeability
o Hydraulic efficiency (i.e. reduction in rugosity coefficient)
o Durability
o Resistance to erosion
o Repairability
o Structural stability

Financial Justification and Economics of Canal Lining

(i) Annual benefits:

(a) Saved seepage water by lining:
Let, the rate of water is sold to the cultivators = Tk. R1/cumec
If m cumecs of water is saved by lining the canal annually, then the money saved by lining = Tk. m R1
(b) Saving in maintenance cost:
Let, the average cost of annual upkeep of unlined channel = Tk. R2
If p is the percentage fraction of the saving achieved in maintenance cost by lining the canal, then the
amount saved = pR2 Tk.
The total annual benefits = mR1 + p R2

(ii) Annual costs:

Let, the capital expenditure required on lining is C Tk. & the lining has a life of Y years
Annual depreciation charges = C/Y Tk.
Interest of the capital C = C(r/100) [ r = percent of the rate of annual interest]
Average annual interest = C/2(r/100) Tk. [ Since the capital value of the asset decreases
from C to zero in Y years]
The total annual costs of lining = C/Y + C/2(r/100)

Annual Benefits
Benefit cost ratio = = mR1 pR2
Annual Costs C C r
Y 2 100
If p is taken as 0.4, then
Benefit cost ratio = mR1 0.4 R2
C C r
Y 2 100

1
Problem:
An unlined canal giving a seepage loss of 3.3 cumec per million square meters of wetted area is proposed
to be lined with 10 cm thick cement concrete lining, which costs Tk. 180 per 10 square meters. Given the
following data, work out the economics of lining and benefit cost ratio.
Annual revenue per cumec of water from all crops Tk. 3.5 lakhs
Discharge in the channel 83.5 cumecs
Area of the channel 40.8 m2
Wetted perimeter of the channel 18.8 m
Wetted perimeter of the lining 18.5 m
Annual maintenance cost of unlined channel per 10 square meter Tk. 1.0

Solution:
Let us consider 1 km reach of canal. Therefore, the wetted surface per km = 18.8×1000 = 18,800 m2
(i) Annual Benefits
(a) Seepage loss
Seepage loss in unlined canal @ 3.3 cumec per million sq. m = (3.3/106)×18,800 cumec/km
= 62,040×10–6 cumec/km
Assume, seepage loss in lined channel at 0.01 cumec per million square meter of wetted perimeter
Seepage loss in unlined canal = (0.01/106)×18,800 = 188×10–6 cumecs/km
Net saving = (62,040×10–6 – 188×10–6) cumec/km = 0.06185 cumec/km
Annual revenue saved per km of channel = (0.06185×3.5) lakhs = 0.21648 lakhs = 21,648 Tk.
(b) Saving in maintenance
Annual maintenance cost of unlined channel for 10 square meter = Tk.1
Total wetted perimeter per 1 km length = 18,800 m2
Annual maintenance charge for unlined channel per km = Tk.1,880
Assume that 40% of this is saved in lined channel
Annual saving in maintenance charges = Tk. (0.4×1880) = Tk.752
Total annual benefits per km = Tk. (21,648 + 752) = Tk.22,400
(ii) Annual Costs
Area of lining per km of channel = 18.5×1000 = 18500 m2
Cost of lining per km of channel @ Tk. 180 per 10 m2 = (18500×180/10) Tk. = 333000 Tk.
Assume, life of lining as 40 years
Depreciation cost per year = Tk. (3,33,000/40) = Tk. 8325
Assume 5% rate of interest
Average annual interest = C/2 (r/100) = 3,33,000/2×(5/100) = Tk. 8325
Total annual cost = Tk (8325 + 8325) = Tk. 16,650
Benefit cost ratio = Annual benefits/Annual costs = 22,400/16,650 = 1.35
Benefit cost ratio is more than unity, and hence, the lining is justified.

2
Causes of failure of weir or barrage on permeable foundation:
1. Failure due to Subsurface Flow
(a) Failure by Piping or undermining
The water from the upstream side continuously percolates through the bottom of the foundation and
emerges at the downstream end of the weir or barrage floor. The force of percolating water removes the
soil particles by scouring at the point of emergence. As the process of removal of soil particles goes on
continuously, a depression is formed which extends backwards towards the upstream through the bottom
of the foundation. A hollow pipe like formation thus develops under the foundation due to which the weir
or barrage may fail by subsiding. This phenomenon is known as failure by piping or undermining.

(b) Failure by Direct uplift

The percolating water exerts an upward pressure on the foundation of the weir or barrage. If this
uplift pressure is not counterbalanced by the self weight of the structure, it may fail by rapture.

2. Failure by Surface Flow

(a) By hydraulic jump
When the water flows with a very high velocity over the crest of the weir or over the gates of the
barrage, then hydraulic jump develops. This hydraulic jump causes a suction pressure or negative pressure
on the downstream side which acts in the direction uplift pressure. If the thickness of the impervious floor
is sufficient, then the structure fails by rapture.

(b) By scouring
During floods, the gates of the barrage are kept open and the water flows with high velocity. The
water may also flow with very high velocity over the crest of the weir. Both the cases can result in
scouring effect on the downstream and on the upstream side of the structure. Due to scouring of the soil on
both sides of the structure, its stability gets endangered by shearing.

Bligh’s Creep Theory for Seepage Flow

According to Bligh’s Theory, the percolating water follows the outline of the base of the foundation of
the hydraulic structure. In other words, water creeps along the bottom contour of the structure. The length
of the path thus traversed by water is called the length of the creep. Further, it is assumed in this theory,
that the loss of head is proportional to the length of the creep. If HL is the total head loss between the
upstream and the downstream, and L is the length of creep, then the loss of head per unit of creep length
(i.e. HL/L) is called the hydraulic gradient. Further, Bligh makes no distinction between horizontal and
vertical creep.

Consider a section a shown in Fig above. Let HL be the difference of water levels between upstream and
downstream ends. Water will seep along the bottom contour as shown by arrows. It starts percolating at A
and emerges at B. The total length of creep is given by
L = d1 + d1 + L1 + d2 + d2 + L2 + d3 + d3
= (L1+ L2) + 2(d1 + d2 + d3)
= b + 2(d1 + d2 + d3)
3
 HL
Head loss per unit length or hydraulic gradient = = HL
b 2 d1 d 2 d 3 L

Head losses equal to H L 2d1 , H L 2d 2 , H L 2d 3 ; will occur respectively, in the planes of three
L L L
vertical cut offs. The hydraulic gradient line (H.G. Line) can then be drawn as shown in figure above.

(i) Safety against piping or undermining:

According to Bligh, the safety against piping can be ensured by providing sufficient creep length, given
by L = C.HL, where C is the Bligh’s Coefficient for the soil. Different values of C for different types of
soils are tabulated in Table –1 below:
SL Type of Soil Value of Safe Hydraulic gradient
No. C should be less than
1 Fine micaceous sand 15 1/15
2 Coarse grained sand 12 1/12
3 Sand mixed with boulder and gravel, and for loam soil 5 to 9 1/5 to 1/9
4 Light sand and mud 8 1/8
Note: The hydraulic gradient i.e. HL/L is then equal to 1/C. Hence, it may be stated that the hydraulic
gradient must be kept under a safe limit in order to ensure safety against piping.

(ii) Safety against uplift pressure:

The ordinates of the H.G line above the bottom of the floor represent the residual uplift water head at each
point. Say for example, if at any point, the ordinate of H.G line above the bottom of the floor is 1 m, then 1
m head of water will act as uplift at that point. If h′ meters is this ordinate, then water pressure equal to h′
meters will act at this point, and has to be counterbalanced by the weight of the floor of thickness say t.
Uplift pressure = γw ×h′ [where γw is the unit weight of water]
Downward pressure = (γw ×G).t [Where G is the specific gravity of the floor material]
For equilibrium,
γw ×h′ = γw ×G. t
h′ = G × t
Subtracting t on both sides, we get
(h′ – t) = (G×t – t) = t (G – 1)
'
t= h t = h
G 1 G 1
Where, h′ – t = h = Ordinate of the H.G line above the top of the floor
G – 1 = Submerged specific gravity of the floor material

Lane’s Weighted Creep Theory

Bligh, in his theory, had calculated the length of the creep, by simply adding the horizontal creep length
and the vertical creep length, thereby making no distinction between the two creeps. However, Lane, on
the basis of his analysis carried out on about 200 dams all over the world, stipulated that the horizontal
creep is less effective in reducing uplift (or in causing loss of head) than the vertical creep. He, therefore,
suggested a weightage factor of 1/3 for the horizontal creep, as against 1.0 for the vertical creep.
Thus in Fig–1, the total Lane’s creep length (Ll) is given by
Ll = (d1 + d1) + (1/3) L1 + (d2 + d2) + (1/3) L2 + (d3 + d3)
= (1/3) (L1 + L2) + 2(d1 + d2 + d3)
= (1/3) b + 2(d1 + d2 + d3)
To ensure safety against piping, according to this theory, the creep length Ll must no be less than C1HL,
where HL is the head causing flow, and C1 is Lane’s creep coefficient given in table –2

4
 Table – 2: Values of Lane’s Safe Hydraulic Gradient for different types of Soils

SL Type of Soil Value of Lane’s Safe Lane’s Hydraulic gradient

No. Coefficient C1 should be less than
1 Very fine sand or silt 8.5 1/8.5
2 Fine sand 7.0 1/7
3 Coarse sand 5.0 1/5
4 Gravel and sand 3.5 to 3.0 1/3.5 to 1/3
5 Boulders, gravels and sand 2.5 to 3.0 1/2.5 to 1/3
6 Clayey soils 3.0 to 1.6 1/3 to 1/1.6

Khosla’s Theory and Concept of Flow Nets

Many of the important hydraulic structures, such as weirs and barrage, were designed on the basis of
Bligh’s theory between the periods 1910 to 1925. In 1926 – 27, the upper Chenab canal siphons, designed
on Bligh’s theory, started posing undermining troubles. Investigations started, which ultimately lead to
Khosla’s theory. The main principles of this theory are summarized below:
(a) The seepage water does not creep along the bottom contour of pucca flood as started by Bligh, but
on the other hand, this water moves along a set of stream-lines. This steady seepage in a vertical
plane for a homogeneous soil can be expressed by Laplacian equation:
d2 d2
+
dx 2 dz 2
Where, φ = Flow potential = Kh; K = the co-efficient of permeability of soil as defined by
Darcy’s law, and h is the residual head at any point within the soil.
The above equation represents two sets of curves intersecting each other orthogonally. The resultant
flow diagram showing both of the curves is called a Flow Net.

Stream Lines: The streamlines represent the paths along which the water flows through the sub-soil.
Every particle entering the soil at a given point upstream of the work, will trace out its own path and will
represent a streamline. The first streamline follows the bottom contour of the works and is the same as
Bligh’s path of creep. The remaining streamlines follows smooth curves transiting slowly from the outline
of the foundation to a semi-ellipse, as shown below.

Equipotential Lines: (1) Treating the downstream bed as datum and assuming no water on the
downstream side, it can be easily started that every streamline possesses a head equal to h1 while entering
the soil; and when it emerges at the down-stream end into the atmosphere, its head is zero. Thus, the head
h1 is entirely lost during the passage of water along the streamlines.
Further, at every intermediate point in its path, there is certain residual head (h) still to be dissipated
in the remaining length to be traversed to the downstream end. This fact is applicable to every streamline,
and hence, there will be points on different streamlines having the same value of residual head h. If such
points are joined together, the curve obtained is called an equipotential line.

5
 Every water particle on line AB is having a residual head h = h1, and on CD is having a residual head
h = 0, and hence, AB and CD are equipotential lines.
Since an equipotential line represent the joining of points of equal residual head, hence if piezometers
were installed on an equipotential line, the water will rise in all of them up to the same level as shown in
figure below.

(b) The seepage water exerts a force at each point in the direction of flow and tangential to the
streamlines as shown in figure above. This force (F) has an upward component from the point
where the streamlines turns upward. For soil grains to remain stable, the upward component of this
force should be counterbalanced by the submerged weight of the soil grain. This force has the
maximum disturbing tendency at the exit end, because the direction of this force at the exit point is
vertically upward, and hence full force acts as its upward component. For the soil grain to remain
stable, the submerged weight of soil grain should be more than this upward disturbing force. The
disturbing force at any point is proportional to the gradient of pressure of water at that point (i.e.
dp/dt). This gradient of pressure of water at the exit end is called the exit gradient. In order that the
soil particles at exit remain stable, the upward pressure at exit should be safe. In other words, the
exit gradient should be safe.

Critical Exit Gradient

This exit gradient is said to be critical, when the upward disturbing force on the grain is just equal to the
submerged weight of the grain at the exit. When a factor of safety equal to 4 to 5 is used, the exit gradient
can then be taken as safe. In other words, an exit gradient equal to ¼ to 1/5 of the critical exit gradient is
ensured, so as to keep the structure safe against piping.
The submerged weight (Ws) of a unit volume of soil is given as:
w (1 – n) (Ss – 1)
Where, w = unit weight of water.
Ss = Specific gravity of soil particles
n = Porosity of the soil material

For critical conditions to occur at the exit point

F = Ws
Where F is the upward disturbing force on the grain
Force F = pressure gradient at that point = dp/dl = w ×dh/dl

6
Khosla’s Method of independent variables for determination of pressures and exit gradient for
seepage below a weir or a barrage
In order to know as to how the seepage below the foundation of a hydraulic structure is taking place,
it is necessary to plot the flow net. In other words, we must solve the Laplacian equations. This can be
accomplished either by mathematical solution of the Laplacian equations, or by Electrical analogy method,
or by graphical sketching by adjusting the streamlines and equipotential lines with respect to the boundary
conditions. These are complicated methods and are time consuming. Therefore, for designing hydraulic
structures such as weirs or barrage or pervious foundations, Khosla has evolved a simple, quick and an
accurate approach, called Method of Independent Variables.

In this method, a complex profile like that of a weir is broken into a number of simple profiles; each
of which can be solved mathematically. Mathematical solutions of flownets for these simple standard
profiles have been presented in the form of equations given in Figure (11.5) and curves given in Plate
(11.1), which can be used for determining the percentage pressures at the various key points. The simple
profiles which hare most useful are:
(i) A straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with a sheet pile line on the u/s end and d/s end.
(ii) A straight horizontal floor depressed below the bed but without any vertical cut-offs.
(iii) A straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with a sheet pile line at some intermediate point.

The key points are the junctions of the floor and the pole lines on either side, and the bottom point of
the pile line, and the bottom corners in the case of a depressed floor. The percentage pressures at these key
points for the simple forms into which the complex profile has been broken is valid for the complex profile
itself, if corrected for
(a) Correction for the Mutual interference of Piles
(b) Correction for the thickness of floor
(c) Correction for the slope of the floor

(a) Correction for the Mutual interference of Piles:

The correction C to be applied as percentage of head due to this effect, is given by
D d D
C = 19 '
b b
Where,
b′ = The distance between two pile lines.
D = The depth of the pile line, the influence of which has to be determined on the neighboring pile of
depth
d. D is to be measured below the level at which interference is desired.
d = The depth of the pile on which the effect is considered
b = Total floor length
The correction is positive for the points in the rear of back water, and subtractive for the points
forward in the direction of flow. This equation does not apply to the effect of an outer pile on an
intermediate pile, if the intermediate pile is equal to or smaller than the outer pile and is at a distance less
than twice the length of the outer pile.

7
 Suppose in the above figure, we are considering the influence of the pile no (2) on pile no (1) for
correcting the pressure at C1. Since the point C1 is in the rear, this correction shall be positive. While the
correction to be applied to E2 due to pile no (1) shall be negative, since the point E2 is in the forward
direction of flow. Similarly, the correction at C2 due to pile no (3) is positive and the correction at E2 due to
pile no (2) is negative.
(b) Correction for the thickness of floor:
In the standard form profiles, the floor is assumed to have
negligible thickness. Hence, the percentage pressures
calculated by Khosla’s equations or graphs shall pertain to the
top levels of the floor. While the actual junction points E and
C are at the bottom of the floor. Hence, the pressures at the
actual points are calculated by assuming a straight line
pressure variation.
Since the corrected pressure at E1 should be less than the calculated pressure at E1′, the correction to be
applied for the joint E1 shall be negative. Similarly, the pressure calculated C1′ is less than the corrected
pressure at C1, and hence, the correction to be applied at point C1 is positive.

(c) Correction for the slope of the floor

A correction is applied for a slopping floor, and is taken as positive for the downward slopes, and
negative for the upward slopes following the direction of flow. Values of correction of standard slopes
such as 1 : 1, 2 : 1, 3 : 1, etc. are tabulated in Table 7.4
Slope (H : V) Correction Factor
1:1 11.2
2:1 6.5
3:1 4.5
4:1 3.3
5:1 2.8
6:1 2.5
7:1 2.3
8:1 2.0

The correction factor given above is to be multiplied by the horizontal length of the slope and divided by
the distance between the two pile lines between which the sloping floor is located. This correction is
applicable only to the key points of the pile line fixed at the start or the end of the slope.
Exit gradient (GE)
It has been determined that for a standard form consisting of a floor length (b) with a vertical cutoff of
depth (d), the exit gradient at its downstream end is given by
H 1
GE =
d
2
1 1
Where, λ =
2
α = b/d
H = Maximum Seepage Head

Type of Soil Safe exit gradient

Shingle 1/4 to 1/5 (0.25 to 0.20)
Coarse Sand 1/5 to 1/6 (0.20 to 0.17)
Fine Sand 1/6 to 1/7 (0.17 to 0.14)

8
Problem-2
Determine the percentage pressures at various key points in figure below. Also determine the exit gradient
and plot the hydraulic gradient line for pond level on upstream and no flow on downstream

Solution:
(1) For upstream Pile Line No. 1
Total length of the floor, b = 57.0 m
Depth of u/s pile line, d = 154 – 148 = 6 m
α = b/d = 57/6 = 9.5
1/α = 1/9.5 = 0.105
From curve plate 11.1 (a)
φC1 = 100 – 29 = 71 %
φD1 = 100 – 20 = 80 %
These values of φC1 must be corrected for three corrections as below:

Corrections for φC1

(a) Correction at C1 for Mutual Interference of Piles (φC1) is affected by intermediate pile No.2
D d D
Correction = 19 ' Where, D = Depth of pile No.2 = 153 – 148 = 5 m
b b
d = Depth of pile No. 1 = 153 – 148 = 5 m
5 5 5 b′ = Distance between two piles = 15.8 m
= 19×
15.8 57
b = Total floor length = 57 m
= 1.88 %

Since the point C1 is in the rear in the direction of flow, the correction is (+) ve.
Correction due to pile interference on C1 = 1.88 % (+ ve)

9
10
 (b) Correction at C1 due to thickness of floor: 154
′ ′
Pressure calculated from curve is at C1 , (Fig. 7.1) but we C1 1.0 m
want the pressure at C1. Pressure at C1 shall be more than C1 153
at C1′ as the direction of flow is from C1 to C1′ as shown;
and hence, the correction will be + ve and
FLOW
80% 71%
= × (154 – 153)
154 148
= (9/6)×1
= 1.5% (+ ve) D1, 148
Fig: 5.1

(c) Correction due to slope at C1 is nil, as this point is neither situated at the start nor at the end of a slope
Corrected (φC1) = 71 % + 1.88 % + 1.5 %
= 74.38 % (ans)
And (φD1) = 80 %

(2) For intermediate Pile Line No. 2

d = 154 – 148 = 6 m
b = 57 m
α = b/d = 57/6 = 9.5
Using curves of plate 11.1 (b), we have b1 in this case
b1 = 0.6 + 15.8 = 16.4
b = 57 m
b1/b = 16.4/57 = 0.298 (for φC2)
1 – b1/b = 1 – 0.298 = 0.702
φE2 = 100 – 30 = 70 % (Where 30 % is φC for a base ratio of 0.702 and α = 9.5)
φC2 = 56 % (For a base ratio 0.298 and α = 9.5)
φD2 = 100 – 37 = 63 % (Where 37 % is φD for a base ratio of 0.702 and α = 9.5)

Corrections for φE2

(a) Correction at E2 for sheet pile lines. Pile No. (1) will affect the pressure at E2 and since E2 is in the
forward direction of flow, this correction shall be – ve. The amount of this correction is given as:
D d D
Correction = 19 ' Where, D = Depth of pile No.1, the effect of
b b
which is considered = 153 – 148 = 5 m
5 5 5 d = Depth of pile No. 2, the effect on
= 19× which is considered = 153 – 148 = 5 m
15.7 57 b′ = Distance between two piles = 15.8 m
= 1.88 % (– ve) b = Total floor length = 57 m

(b) Correction at E2 due to floor thickness

Obs E 2 - Obs D2
= × Thickness of floor
Distance between E 2 D 2 E2′ C2′
70% 63% E2 C2
= × 1.0 = (7/6)×1.0 = 1.17 %
154 148
Since the pressure observed is at E2′and not at E2, (Fig. 7.2) and
by looking at the direction of flow, it can be stated easily that
pressure at E2 shall be less than that at E2′, hence, this correction
is negative, Fig: 5.2

Correction at E2 due to floor thickness = 1.17 % (- ve)

11
(c) Correction at E2 due to slope is nil, as the point E2 is neither situated at the start of a slope nor at the end
of a shape
Hence, corrected percentage pressure at E2 = Corrected φE2 = (70 – 1.88 – 1.17) % = 66.95 %
Corrections for φC2
(a) Correction at C2 due to pile interference. Pressure at C2 is affected by pile No.(3) and since the point
C2 is in the back water in the direction of flow, this correction is (+) ve. The amount of this correction is
given as:
D d D Where, D = Depth of pile No.3, the effect of
Correction = 19 '
b b which is considered below the level at which
interference is desired = 153 – 141.7 = 11.3 m
11 11 5 d = Depth of pile No. 2, the effect on
= 19× which is considered = 153 – 148= 5 m
40 57
b′ = Distance between two piles (2 &3) = 40 m
= 2.89 % (+ ve) b = Total floor length = 57 m

(b) Correction at C2 due to floor thickness. From Fig. 11.10, it can be easily stated that the pressure at C2
shall be more than at C2′, and since the observed pressure is at C2′, this correction shall be + ve and its
amount is the same as was calculated for the point E2 = 1.17 %
Hence, correction at C2 due to floor thickness = 1.17 % (+ ve)
(c) Correction at C2 due to slope. Since the point C2 is situated at the start of a slope of 3:1, i.e. an up slope
in the direction of flow; the correction is negative
Correction factor for 3:1 slope from table 11.4 = 4.5
Horizontal length of the slope = 3 m
Distance between two pile lines between which the sloping floor is located = 40 m
Actual correction = 4.5 × (3/40) = 0.34 % (- ve)
Hence, corrected φC2 = (56 + 2.89 + 1.17 – 0.34) % = 59.72 %

(3) Downstream Pile Line No. 3

d = 152 – 141.7 = 10.3 m
b = 57 m
1/α = 10.3/57 = 0.181
From curves of Plate 11.1 (a), we get
φD3 = 26 %
φE3 = 38 %

Corrections for φE3

(a) Correction due to piles. The point E3 is affected by pile No. 2, and since E3 is in the forward direction
of flow from pile No. 3, this correction is negative and its amount is given by
D d D Where, D = Depth of pile No.2, the effect of
Correction = 19 '
b b which is considered = 150.7 – 148 = 2.7 m
d = Depth of pile No. 3, the effect on
2.7 9 2.7 which is considered = 150 – 141.7 = 9 m
= 19×
40 57 b′ = Distance between two piles = 40 m
= 1.02 % (– ve) b = Total floor length = 57 m
(b) Correction due to floor thickness
From Fig. 7.3, it can be stated easily that the pressure at E3 E 3′
shall be less than at E3′, and hence the pressure observed form E3
curves is at E3′; this correction shall be – ve and its amount
38% 32%
= × 1.3 = (16/10.3)×1.3
152 141.7
= 0.76 % (– ve)

Fig:5.3

12
(c) Correction due to slope at E3 is nil, as the point E3 is neither situated at the start nor at the end of any
slope
Hence, corrected φE3 = (38 – 1.02 – 0.76) % = 36.22 %

The corrected pressures at various key points are tabulated below in Table below

Upstream Pile No. 1 Intermediate Pile No.2 Downstream Pile No. 3

φE1 = 100 % φE2 = 66.95 % φE3 = 36.22 %
φD1 = 80 % φD2 = 63 % φD3 = 26 %
φC1 = 74.38 % φC2 = 59.72 % φC3 = 0 %

Exit gradient
Let the water be headed up to pond level, i.e. on RL 158 m on the upstream side with no flow
downstream
The maximum seepage head, H = 158 – 152 = 6 m
The depth of d/s cur-off, d = 152 – 141.7 = 10.3 m
Total floor length, b = 57 m
α = b/d = 57/10.3 = 5.53

1
For a value of α = 5.53, from curves of Plate 11.2 is equal to 0.18.

H 1 6
Hence, GE = = × 0.18 = 0.105
d 10.3

Hence, the exit gradient shall be equal to 0.105, i.e. 1 in 9.53, which is very much safe.

1
= 0.18

13
Practice Problems:
1. An unlined canal giving a seepage loss of 3.3 m3/s per million sq.m of wetted area is proposed to
be lined with 10 cm thick cement concrete lining which cost Tk.18/sq.m. Given the following data
work out the economics of lining and benefit cost ratio.
Annual revenue per cumec of water Tk. 3.5 lacs
Discharge in the canal 83.5 m3/s
Area of the canal 40.8 m2
Wetted perimeter of the canal 18.8 m
Wetted perimeter of the lining 18.5 m
Annual maintenance cost of unlined canal Tk. 0.1/sq.m
Assume any suitable data if required
2. A canal of length 5 km and of discharge capacity 3.5 m3/s is proposed to be lined with boulder
lining. The total cost of lining is estimated as 4 lakhs. The life of lining is considered as 60 years.
Justify the lining in the canal from the following data:
Rate of interest 8%
Seepage loss 2%
Revenue for irrigation water Tk. 75 per hec-m
Maintenance cost per km for lined canal Tk. 1000
Maintenance cost per km for unlined canal Tk. 2500
Base period of crop 120 days
Additional benefit/km Tk. 1000

3. Use Khosla’s curves to calculate the percentage uplift pressure at various key points for a barrage
foundation profile shown in figure below applying necessary corrections. Assume the thickness of
the floor is 0.8 m. Also find exit gradient considering upstream pond level at 103 m.
100 m

1:4 98 m
E1 C1
E2 C2 E3 C3

D1 (94 m)

D2 (92 m) D3 (92 m)

30 m 90 m

4. Use Khosla’s curves to calculate the percentage uplift pressure at points C1, E2, C2, D3 and E3 for a
barrage foundation profile shown in figure below applying necessary corrections. Also determine
the exit gradient. [Assume: floor thickness = 1 m]

160 m Slope (H : V) Correction Factor

6:1 2.5
152 m
E1 C1 149 m
E2 C2 E3 C3

D1 142 m
D2 139 m D3 139 m

20 m 18 m 22 m

14
5. Using Khosla’s curves, determine the following for the apron shown below:
[Assume: floor thickness = 1 m]
160 m 160 m

152 m 152 m
E2 C2 E1 C1 E2 C2

D2 145 m D1 145 m D2 145 m

20 m 32 m 40 m 12 m

Fig. (i) Fig. (ii)

(i) Find pressure at critical points with (ii) Find pressure at C1 and E2 with interference
thickness correction correction

157 m Correction factor for slope,

160 m 3:1 = 4.5
3:1 E3 C3
152 m
E2 C2

D2 145 m D3 145 m

32 m 32 m 20 m

Fig. (iii)
(iii) Find pressure at point C2 with slope correction
6. Using Khosla’s curves, determine the following for the apron shown below: (Spring-2006)
(i) Uplift pressure at points E,D, C, E1 and D1
(ii) Exit gradient
Neglect the effect of floor thickness.

6m

Impervious Floor

E
C E1

6m 8 cm

D
D1
6m
20 m

15
7. Using Khosla’s curves, determine the following for the apron shown below:
(i) Uplift pressure at points C, E1 and D1
(ii) Exit gradient
Assume floor thickness = 1 m

6m

Impervious Floor

E C E1

6m
10 m

D1
25 m
6m

8. Using the Khosla’s curves, determine the following for the apron shown below:
(iii) If percentage of pressure at C2 is 56%, what will be the percentage of pressure at this point
after corrections due to pile interference and slope
(iv) Find exit gradient where, corrections factor for slope, 3:1 = 4.5,
Assume floor thickness = 1 m
158 m

155 m

3:1

154 m
C2
152 m
3m

40 m
147 m
141.7 m

57 m

16