JIMMA INSITITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIROMENTAL ENGINEERING

SCHOOL OF HYDRAULIC AND WATER RESOURCE ENGINEERING
A FINAL YEAR PROJECT ON DESIGN OF ASHIRO SMALL SCALE
IRRIGATION PROJECT

JUNE 2/ 2017

JIMMA-ETHIOPIA
Group members ID No

1. ASHENAFI DECHASA 00740/05

2. AYANTU AYANA 00774/05
3. GEMACHU BEKELA 01879/04
4. FOZIA KEMAL 01139/05
5. SENA LIGABA 01809/05
6. SALAHADIN HUSSIEN 00981/04
7. TEMESGEN G/MICHAEL 03175/04
DECLARATION

THIS IS TO DECLARE THAT THIS PROJECT ENTITLED: ASHIRO SMALL SCALE

IRRIGATION PROJECT WORK IS DONE AND SUBMITTED BY

NAME OF STUDENT SIGNITURE

1.ASHENAFI DECHASA ---------------
2.AYANTU AYANA ---------------
3.FOZIA KEMA ---------------
4.GEMACHU BEKELA ---------------
5.SENA LIGABA ---------------
6.SALAHADIN HUSSIEN ---------------
7. TEMESGEN G/MICHAEL ---------------

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE

BACHELOR DEGREE IN HYDROULIC & WATER RESOURCE ENGINEERING IN
JIMMA UNIVERSTY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF:-

SIGNITURE
1.MR.KENENI ELIAS (PHD) ---------------
2.MR.WANA GEYISA(MSC) ---------------
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Acknowledgement
Above all, we would much attribute to the almighty God who gave us a life worth living and the
strength to accomplish this work.
We would like to give special thanks to our advisor Mr.Keneni Elias (Phd Fellow ) and Mr.Wana
Geyisa (Msc Fellow.) who gave us a complete and series comments, suggestion and give the
direction how to do this project
We would like to express our gratitude to all those who help us for the success and
accomplishment of our final project, whose support was either direct or indirect during
our project progress.
Our thanks will still be incomplete if we did not mention the effort of our friends and classmates
for giving us encouragement, valuable discussions throughout the work of this Project.

Page i
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Executive Summary
Water is vital to life and development in all parts of the world. In our country agricultural
sectors play a key role in economic growth; as such the irrigation scheme is an item of high
priority in developmental activities. The implementation of Ashiro small scale Irrigation project
is one of the irrigation projects essential to overcome the adverse effect of erratic rainfall
dependent agricultural activities in Ethiopia.
Ashoro small-scale irrigation project is located in Oromia regional state of Arsi zone, Adaba
woreda.
The hydrologic data processing is determined by rainfall frequency analysis, development of
composite hydrograph by USSCS method has been included, peak design flood is 97.20 m3/s.
Crop water requirements for the proposed crops of cabbage, tomato, and onion, their crop
pattern and scheme is included in the project. The duty is 0.5l/s/ha. The base flow is 10l/s. As the
dry season flow is not sufficient for the crops to be on the safest side, we incorporate night
storage design.
Design of diversion head work structure should consider the possible dangers that can cause
significance and slight collapse of the designed structure. As a result the safety and consistency
of such structure maintains the intended function for the user and for the local community as a
whole. The design of diversion head work for this particular project focuses on vertical broad
crested weir type. The canal alignment, hydraulic design of canal network, design of conveyance
structures and design of furrow irrigation system are elaborated in detail of design of irrigation
system design part.
The project cost estimation and environmental impact assessment, positive and negative impacts
of the project, and mitigation measures are described in the sections seven and eight of this
project. Generally, the cost benefit analysis ratio indicates that the project is feasible.
The conclusions and recommendations for this project work have also be drawn out at the end of
this paper.

P a g e ii
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Table of Contents

Acknowledgement ............................................................................................ i

Executive Summary ........................................................................................ ii

Table of Contents ........................................................................................... iii

LIST OF TABLE .............................................................................................. ix

LIST OF FIGURE ............................................................................................ xi

LIST OF ABBERIVATION ............................................................................... xii

CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................... 1

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................. 1

1.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AREA .................................................... 3

1.1.1 Cathment characterstics .................................................................................................. 3
1.1.2 Location and Topography............................................................................................... 3
1.1.3 Location and Accessibility ............................................................................................. 4
1.2 Objective of the project ......................................................................................................... 5
1.2.1 General Objective ........................................................................................................... 5
1.2.2 Specific Objectives ......................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Methodology of the study ..................................................................................................... 5
1.4 Topography ........................................................................................................................... 6
1.5 Soil ........................................................................................................................................ 6
1.6 Climate .................................................................................................................................. 6
1.7 Land Use Pattern ................................................................................................................... 6
1.8 EXISTING STATE OF AGRICULTURE ............................................................................ 8
1.8.1 Farming System .............................................................................................................. 8
1.8.2 Farm Size and Land Tenure............................................................................................ 9
1.8.3 Existing Cropping Practices and cropping pattern ....................................................... 9

P a g e iii
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
CHAPTER TWO ............................................................................................. 10

HYDROLOGICAL DATA ANALYSIS ............................................................... 10

2.1 General ................................................................................................................................ 10
2.2 Meteorological Data Availability ........................................................................................ 10
2.3 Water resource..................................................................................................................... 11
2.4 Selection of return period .................................................................................................... 11
2.5 Rainfall Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 12
2.5.1Point Rainfall Analysis .................................................................................................. 12
2.6 Data Consistency Test ......................................................................................................... 13
2.6.1 Checking Data Reliability ............................................................................................ 13
2.6.2 Data Outlier Test .......................................................................................................... 14
2.7 Maximum Flood Computation ............................................................................................ 25
2.7.1 Flood Analysis .............................................................................................................. 26
2.8 Estimation of Flood Peaks................................................................................................... 31

CHAPTER 3 .................................................................................................. 50

WATER DEMAND, AGRONOMY AND WATER DELIVERY ASPECTS .............. 50

3.1 General ................................................................................................................................ 50
3.2 Duty and Delta of the crop .................................................................................................. 50
3.2.1 Delta.............................................................................................................................. 50
3.2.2 Duty of water ................................................................................................................ 51
3.3 Crop water requirement ....................................................................................................... 51
3.4 Determination of crop water requirement (ETcrop) ........................................................ 54
3.4.1Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo) ............................................................................. 55
3.5 Cropping Pattern ................................................................................................................. 60
3.6 Crop Coefficient (kc) .......................................................................................................... 61
3.7. Irrigation Efficiency ........................................................................................................... 67
3.8 Irrigation scheduling ........................................................................................................... 68
3.8.1 Field irrigation supply scheduling ................................................................................ 70
3.9 Determination of Design Discharge .................................................................................... 71

CHAPTER FOUR ........................................................................................... 73

HEAD WORK DESIGN .................................................................................. 73

P a g e iv
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
4.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 73
4.2 Head work site selection ..................................................................................................... 73
4.3 location of the weir .............................................................................................................. 73
4.4 selection of weir type .......................................................................................................... 74
4.5 Head Work Design .............................................................................................................. 75
4.5.1 Type of head work structure ......................................................................................... 75
4.5.2 Highest Flood Level Determination ............................................................................. 75
4.6 Tail water depth determination ........................................................................................... 75
4.6.1 Manning‟s Roughness coefficient ................................................................................ 78
4.6.2Tail Water Depth Computation corresponding to peak flow ........................................ 78
4.6.3 Discharge of the river ................................................................................................... 79
4.7 Design of Diversion Weir ................................................................................................... 81
4.7.1 Crest length/ water way ................................................................................................ 82
4.7.2 Flow over the Weir Crest.............................................................................................. 82
4.7.3 Top and bottom width................................................................................................... 86
4.8 Water surface profile at the weir site .................................................................................. 87
4.8.1Water Surface Profile at the U/S of the Weir ................................................................ 87
4.8.2Water Surface Profile D/S of the Weir .......................................................................... 88
4.9 Energy dissipation ............................................................................................................... 90
4.10 Dimension of stilling basin ............................................................................................... 92
4.11 Scour Depth Determination............................................................................................... 93
4.12 Cut offs .............................................................................................................................. 93
4.13 Design of under sluice ....................................................................................................... 94
4.14 Head Regulator .................................................................................................................. 95
4.15 Depth of sheet pile............................................................................................................. 96
4.16 Impervious Floor ............................................................................................................... 96
4.17 Thickness of Impervious Floor by Bligh‟s Theory ........................................................... 98
4.18 Check by Khosla, s Theory ............................................................................................... 98
4.19 Structural Design of the Weir.......................................................................................... 101
4.19.1 Stability analysis of the weir .................................................................................... 101
4.20 Design of wing wall ...................................................................................................... 110
4.21 Design of divide wall ...................................................................................................... 118
4.22 Design of an embankment earth fill dyke ....................................................................... 119

Page v
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
CHAPTER 5 ................................................................................................ 120

IRRIGATION CANAL SYSTEM DESIGN ....................................................... 120

5.1General ............................................................................................................................... 120
5.2 Canal capacity ................................................................................................................... 120
5.3 Need of irrigation .............................................................................................................. 121
5.3.1 Main canal alignment ................................................................................................. 121
5.3.2 Secondary canal alignment ......................................................................................... 121
5.3.3 Tertiary canal alignment ............................................................................................. 121
5.4 Canal design ...................................................................................................................... 122
5.4.1 General........................................................................................................................ 122
5.4.2 Design parameters ...................................................................................................... 122
5.5 Main canal design.............................................................................................................. 127
5.6 Secondary canal design ..................................................................................................... 128
5.7 Tertiary canal design ......................................................................................................... 130
5.8 Division Boxes .................................................................................................................. 131
5.9 Design of intake ................................................................................................................ 134
5.10 Design of drop structure .................................................................................................. 136
5.11 Design of Night Storage Reservoir (pond) ...................................................................... 139
5.11.1 Determination of pond capacity ............................................................................... 139
5.12 Design of Turn outs ......................................................................................................... 140
5.13 Irrigation system .............................................................................................................. 141
5.13.1 General...................................................................................................................... 141
5.13.2 Selection of Irrigation Methods ................................................................................ 141
5.13.3 Surface irrigation method ......................................................................................... 142

CHAPTER 6 ................................................................................................ 147

DRAINAGE................................................................................................. 147
6.1 General .............................................................................................................................. 147
6.2 Requirement of drainage ................................................................................................... 147
6.3 Selections of drainage systems .......................................................................................... 148
6.3.1 Surface drainage systems............................................................................................ 148
6.3.2 Subsurface drainage system........................................................................................ 149
6.4 Alignment of surface drainage .......................................................................................... 149

P a g e vi
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
6.5 Design of surface drainage ................................................................................................ 149
6.6 Selection of Drainage System ........................................................................................... 149
6.6.1 Capacity of drainage ................................................................................................... 150
6.6.2 Permissible velocity .................................................................................................... 150
6.6.3 Side slope.................................................................................................................... 150
6.6.4 Manning coefficient (n) .............................................................................................. 150
6.6.5 Longitudinal (bed) slope ............................................................................................. 151
6.7 Design of Drainage Canals ................................................................................................ 151
6.7.1 Mean Annual Rain fall (MAR) ................................................................................... 151
6.7.2 Drainage coefficient (DC) .......................................................................................... 152
6.7.3 Types of drainage canals ............................................................................................ 152
6.8 Design of Tertiary Drain ................................................................................................... 152
6.8.1 Design of sub collector ............................................................................................... 154
6.8.2 Design collector drain ................................................................................................. 157

CHAPTER SEVEN ....................................................................................... 160

Economic Analysis ..................................................................................... 160

7.1 General .............................................................................................................................. 160
7.2 Cost Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 160
7.3. Material ............................................................................................................................ 160
7.3.1. Site clearance ............................................................................................................. 160
7.3.2. Excavation ................................................................................................................. 160
7.3.3. Concrete ..................................................................................................................... 160
7.3.4. Mortar ........................................................................................................................ 161
7.3.5. Masonry ..................................................................................................................... 161
7.3.6. Carting away .............................................................................................................. 161
7.4. Unit rate analysis .............................................................................................................. 162

CHAPTER EIGHT ........................................................................................ 171

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................................................ 171

8.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 171
8.2 Back Ground information.................................................................................................. 171
8.3 Objective of the study ....................................................................................................... 172
8.3.1 General Objectives ..................................................................................................... 172

P a g e vii
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
8.3.2 specific objectives...................................................................................................... 172
8.4 Assessment of environmental impact ................................................................................ 172
8.4.1 Assessment of positive environmental impact ........................................................... 172
8.4.2. Assessment of negative environmental impact ......................................................... 172
8.5 The Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................. 174
8.5.1. Environmental mitigation plan .................................................................................. 175
8.6 Environmental Management Plan ..................................................................................... 175
8.7 Environmental Monitoring and Auditing .......................................................................... 176

CHAPTER NINE .......................................................................................... 177

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 177

9.1 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 177
9.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 179

REFERENCES............................................................................................. 180

APPENDICES .............................................................................................. 181

P a g e viii
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

LIST OF TABLE
Table: 1.1 The major land use types of Adeba Wereda ________________________________________________ 7
Table: 1.2 the major land use types of Lencha washo kebele ____________________________________________ 8
Table: 2.1 Guideline for selecting the return period___________________________________________________ 11
Table: 2.2 24-hours Maximum Daily Rainfall of Adaba Station __________________________________________ 12
Table: 2.3 computation of rainfall frequency analysis _________________________________________________ 13
Table: 2.4 skewness ranges _____________________________________________________________________ 15
Table: 2.5 Determination of threshold value for outliers of daily heaviest rainfall __________________________ 15
Table: 2.6 Rearranged maximum daily rainfall of Adaba station ________________________________________ 17
Table: 2.7 Computation of rain fall frequency analysis ________________________________________________ 17
Table: 2.8 skewness ranges _____________________________________________________________________ 18
Table: 2.9 Determination of threshold value for outliers of daily heaviest rainfall __________________________ 19
Table: 2.10 Rearranged maximum daily rainfall of Adaba station _______________________________________ 20
Table: 2.11 Computation of rainfall frequency analysis _______________________________________________ 20
Table: 2.12 Determination of threshold value for outliers of daily heaviest rainfall _________________________ 21
Table: 2.13 Rearranged maximum daily rainfall of Adaba station _______________________________________ 22
Table: 2.14 Computation of rainfall frequency analysis _______________________________________________ 23
Table: 2.15 Determination of threshold value for outliers of daily heaviest rainfall _________________________ 24
Table: 2.16 Corrected reliable data for computation of rainfall frequency analysis _________________________ 25
Table: 2.17 Summary of result for 50 years return period storm ________________________________________ 30
Table: 2.18 CN adjustment for below and above average moisture condition ______________________________ 34
Table: 2.19 collecting the above values in tabular form _______________________________________________ 36
Table: 2.20 Design Rainfall Arrangement in relation to rain fall profile and areal to point ratio _______________ 38
Table: 2.21 computation of cumulative Rain fall ____________________________________________________ 39
Table: 2.22 Direct run off computation ____________________________________________________________ 39
Table: 2.23 Computation of peak discharge for each incremental run off _________________________________ 39
Table: 2.24 calculation of design discharge ________________________________________________________ 41
Table: 2.25 Peak Discharge Analysis Using Complex Hydrograph Method ________________________________ 48
Table: 3.1 Determination of effective rainfall through different methods in mm ___________________________ 53
Table: 3.2 ETo determination using pen-man montieth method ________________________________________ 59
Table: 3.3 cropping pattern data ___________________________________________________ 61
Table: 3.4 Dry crop data ________________________________________________________________________ 64
Table: 3.5 Field Water Supply ____________________________________________________________________ 66
Table: 3.6 Irrigation interval and application depth __________________________________________________ 70
Table: 4.1 River bed slope computation ___________________________________________________________ 76
Table: 4.2 Sample value of manning’s ____________________________________________________________ 78
Table: 4.3 Tail Water Depth Estimation along River X-Section __________________________________________ 79
Table: 4.4 Computation of the backwater curve at different points U/S of the weir _________________________ 88
Table: 4.5 Stability analysis of dynamic case_______________________________________________________ 104
Table: 4.6 Forces and moments acting on weir at static case _________________________________________ 108
Table: 4.7 the various Forces and their moments about the toe. ______________________________________ 112
Table: 4.8 The Various Forces and their moment about the toe _______________________________________ 116
Table: 5.1 Recommended Side Slope of Canals _____________________________________________________ 124
Table: 5.2 Longitudinal Slopes of Canals __________________________________________________________ 125

P a g e ix
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 5.3 Permissible velocities (unlined canal) ____________________________________________________ 125
Table: 5.4 Permissible velocity (lined canal) _______________________________________________________ 126
Table: 5.5 Roughness coefficients _______________________________________________________________ 126
Table: 5.6 Tabulated result for secondary canal ____________________________________________________ 128
Table: 5.7 Tertiary canal tabulated result _________________________________________________________ 130
Table: 5.8 Drop structure tabulated form _________________________________________________________ 138
Table: 5.9 Furrow infiltration and inflow rate _____________________________________________________ 144
Table: 5.10 Spacing between rows and plants ______________________________________________________ 144
Table: 6.1 Maximum permissible velocity for different soil type _______________________________________ 150
Table: 6.2 Maximum side slope for drain canals for different soil type __________________________________ 150
Table: 6.3 possible values of Manning coefficient for different value of Hydraulic _________________________ 151
Table: 6.4 Yearly total rain fall of Adaba station. ___________________________________________________ 151
Table: 6.5 DC for different ranges MAR value ______________________________________________________ 152
Table: 6.6 Cross-section of tertiary drain__________________________________________________________ 154
Table: 7.1 Take off sheet ______________________________________________________________________ 162
Table: 7.2 bill of quantity (BOQ) ________________________________________________________________ 166
Table: 7.3 required workers and cost paid per day (assume) __________________________________________ 169
Table: 7.4 Estimation of project benefit __________________________________________________________ 170

Page x
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

LIST OF FIGURE
Figure 1.1 Location map of the study area __________________________________________________________ 4
Figure 2.1 Composite hydrograph curves for each excess runoff ________________________________________ 49
Figure 2.2 Composite hydrograph curves for peak runoff _____________________________________________ 49
Figure 4.1 Elevation versus distance curve __________________________________________________________ 77
Figure 4.2 stage discharge curve _________________________________________________________________ 80
Figure 4.3 Tail water rating curve _________________________________________________________________ 80
Figure 4.4 Head over the weir ____________________________________________________________________ 83
Figure 4.5 Weir body schematic Section ___________________________________________________________ 86
Figure 4.6 A typical water profile over the weir _____________________________________________________ 89
Figure 4.7 Energy dissipation ____________________________________________________________________ 91
Figure 4.8 Stability analysis of the weir ___________________________________________________________ 103
Figure 4.9 Forces act on weir ___________________________________________________________________ 107
Figure 4.10 Upstream wing walls _______________________________________________________________ 112
Figure 4.11 Downstream wing wall ______________________________________________________________ 115
Figure 5.1 Rectangular main canal ______________________________________________________________ 128
Figure 5.2 Cross-section of trapezoidal main canal _________________________________________________ 129
Figure 5.3 Plan View of Division Box (sample)______________________________________________________ 132

P a g e xi
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

LIST OF ABBERIVATION
ASSIP Ashiro Small Scale Irrigation project
RH Relative Rumidity
IR Irrigation Requirement
ER Effective Rainfall
NIR Net Irrigation Requirement
GIR Gross Irrigation Requirement
GW Ground Water
CWR Crop Water Requirement
Ea Application Efficiency
FC Field Capacity
WP Welting Point
TAM Total Available Moisture
PWP Permanent Welting Point
ETO Potential evapotranspiration
FAO Food and Agricultural organization
ETC Crop Water Requirement
U/S Upstream
TEL total energy level
HFL high flood level
D/S Downstream
Max.RF maximum rainfall
a.m.s.l, above mean sea level
KC Crop coefficient
MAR Mean Annual Rainfall
USASCS United States American Soil Conservation Services
CN Curve Number
AMC Antecedent Moisture Content
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
UTM Universal Topographic Map

P a g e xii
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION
Water is one of the most valuable resources that must be used or utilized in efficient manner. For
irrigation, with an adequate water supply, suitable soil, suitable design and construction of
irrigation structure and good management should ensure sustained high yields of crop per unit
area of land. The success of an irrigation project in meeting these requirements depends to a
large extent on the proper functioning of its water conveyance and distribution system
(Clemmens and Moden, 2007). Since inherently there is no single type of well managed
irrigation system more or less efficient than one another. Management is the key for efficient,
profitable and good performed irrigation (Claudio, 2009).
Presently the problem of the global warming is becoming the main issue of the world as well as
the country which results increase in temperature and decrease in rainfall both in amount and
distribution. This unreliable rainfall and desertification in turn reduce the production return from
the existing limited natural resource. This problem is beomming the main constraint for
development and increasing agricultural production. Besides increase in population is another
constraint which needs special mechanism to facilitate food availability for the rapid increasing
population.
Irrigation plays an important role in the development of agricultural sector and contributes much
in economy development of the country. It ensures production of high value crop, protection of
crop failures due to drought, cultivation of suitable multi cropping practices in a season;
maximize the value of land and farmers and increase their living standards, create job
opportunity and generate additional income.
Irrigation water is artificial application of water to the land through different structure to assist
the production of crops. The amount of irrigation water applying in the field depends on climatic
data such as, rainfall, both maximum and minimum temperature, sunshine hrs., wind speed and
relative humidity. The above climatic data except rain fall are used to calculate reference
evapotranspiration using CROPWAT 8 computer programme developed by FAO. Then crop
water requirement (CWR), net and gross irrigation water requirement (NIR & GIR) and volume
of water are calculated by considering the amount of rainfall, crop growth stage and different

Page 1
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
losses through the different irrigation structure. Crop water requirement is the daily required of
water for the crops starting from planting till harvesting. Net irrigation requirement is the amount
of irrigation water that applies in the crop root zone without including water losses. Gross
irrigation requirement is the sum of net irrigation requirement and water losses due to
conveyance loss (seepage, infiltration...), application loss (field application loss due to irrigation
crew) and evaporation loss.

The major constraint in any small scale irrigation to produce optimum production per unit of
water is proper water management and efficient operation and management of water distribution
and irrigation canals. In addition incorrect irrigation system design and construction have a
significant contribution for poor performance of irrigation water conveyance (Christopher et al.,
1997). Particularly on surface irrigation system, the limitations are inefficient with large tail
water loss, loss to deep drainage, limited ability to apply small amount of water and poor water
distribution uniformity (Claudio, 2009). The main problems that can be found in an irrigation
canal network which have impacts on poor performance are limited amounts of water available
at the water source, high water consumption in fields close to the water source resulting in water
shortages at the tail end of the scheme, illegal manipulation of canals and structures, siltation,
plant growth, water losses, frequent overtopping and low water levels due to canal erosion
(Bosch and Vanden, 1992).

One possible approach to conserve this precious resource and to get rid of the above problem
may be through improving the performance of the existing small-scale irrigation network and
improving its management and utilization level. As such development of performance indicators
and rigorous evaluation methodology is needed to help managers to improve their system.
Evaluation exercise is useful tool to aid scheme manager to compare the efficiency of alternative
system and operating procedures to improve existing irrigation scheme (Claudio, 2009).
Irrigation plays an important role in the development of agricultural sector and contributes much
in economy development of the country. It ensures production of high value crop, protection of
crop failures due to drought, cultivation of suitable multi cropping practices in a season;
maximize the value of land and farmers and increase their living standards, create job
opportunity and generate additional income.

Page 2
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

1.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AREA

1.1.1 Cathment characterstics
General

For Ashiro Small Scale Irrigation Project area Ashiro stream has been found the only alternative
source to use for the irrigation purpose.

Accordingly, Ashiro stream has an estimated catchment area of 64km2 and catchment length of
about 19.7 km has been selected as potential water source. Based on the preliminary assessment,
there are no potential pollutants along its catchment and there are no known potential users at
upstream site.

Ashiro stream is un-gauged and its minimum and maximum flows are not known, however,
during the preliminary assessment elders leaving nearby the stream has been asked about the
sever drought flow. Their response is that the steam is perennial and they haven‟t seen any
remarkable dry period flow during the recent drought that has occurred in the country.

1.1.2 Location and Topography

Ashiro Small-Scale Irrigation Project is located in Oromia regional state, West Arisi Zone,
Adeba Wereda, Lencha Washo Peasant Association (PA). It is about 12.5 km from Wereda town
Adeba and 1.5 km from main asphalt road to Robe /Goba town. The Location of Ashiro small
scale irrigation is 70 02‟.827‟‟ N latitude and 390 28‟.55‟‟E longtude with the altitude range of
2415-2459 m a .s.l.

Ashiro small scale irrigation project area is situated at Geographical UTM of 552553E &
778913N in Adaba Ana/district. The main source of irrigation in the project area is Ashiro
stream. The stream headwork site is located at about 9kms away from Adaba town. It covers a
total drainage area of 64km2. 58% of the catchment is covered with dense forestland, 37% with
cultivated land and the rest 5% with open woodland. The upper reaches of the catchment area is
forest land with rugged mountain terrain slope, while the lower part of the drainage area is flat
and the stream flows to Wabe River. The length of drainage area is about 19.7 km2 and the
overall slope is around 6.8%.

Page 3
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
1.1.3 Location and Accessibility
Ashiro site is located in Ganda washa in Adaba District of West-Arsi Zone. The communities
nearby/around the envisaged irrigation development site are sedentary agricultural people
producing food crops using rain-fed and traditional irrigation method. The geographical
coordinate of the project area is: From 551494.09E to 552617.1280E to and 779797.5426N to
778925.6845N with an average elevation of 2444.53m a.s.l.

Besides, it is accessible by asphalt, all weathered road and dry weathered road up the project site.
The site is 7 km far from Adaba town and which is 3km along the asphalt road, and 4 km along
all-weathered road.

Figure 1.1 Location map of the study area

Page 4
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

1.2 Objective of the project

1.2.1 General Objective

The main objectives of the project are:

 To design small scale irrigation to irrigate command area of about 15ha

1.2.2 Specific Objectives

The specific objectives of the particular project design are:

 To evaluate the existing agricultural situation of the area including crops

grown, the cropping pattern, farming practices (both crops and livestock
husbandry);
 To investigate the suitability of climate and water to irrigated agriculture;
 To estimate crop water requirements; and
 To estimate input requirements of irrigated crops and determine crop and
farm budgets.
 To document the data required for detail design of small-scale irrigation project
based on the information obtained from feasibility report of the project
 To determine crop and irrigation water demands
 To conduct design of the headwork
 To determine and design hydraulic structures based on standard procedures

1.3 Methodology of the study

Methodology describes the process needed to be followed to perform the overall design
procedure.

The following steps have been followed to execute the project work in general.
 Raw data are available from the feasibility report
 Hydrological analysis to get maximum design flood discharge
 Assessment of water demand of the crop
 Design of headwork (weir)

Page 5
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
 Design of irrigation system(canal irrigation system)
 Drainage system design
 Overall cost and benefit analysis of the project
 Assessment of environmental impact assessment
1.4 Topography.

The command area is found mainly at the right side of the river with a general feature having an
average slope of 0%-4% that can be taken as an indication for its suitability for surface irrigation.
Based on the soil study of the area, the dominant type of the soil is clay which is found good for
irrigation for it has good moisture holding capacity. Besides the irrigation drainage duty of the
area is 0.5l/sec/ha.

1.5 Soil
The texture of the soils in the study area is clay. The soils are very dark brown in dry and black
in moist. In general the study area has soil depth of greater than 150cm. This indicates that soil
depth is not a critical limitation for root development and soil moisture storage. Soils of the study
area ranges from imperfectly drained to poor-drained soil condition. Thus, drainage structures
are required to avoid the water logging problems.

1.6 Climate
According to information from Adeba wereda agricultural office Woreda exhibits two agro-
climates (Dega 85% and Weina dega 15%).
Adeba Meteorological station is the nearest station to the project area. Thus, all the
meteorologial data used were collected from Adeba meteorological station.
0
The mean minimum annual temprature is 5.3 C while the mean maximum annual temprature is
o
23.9 C. The annual mean temperature of the Adeba Meteorological station is 14.6 oC. The mean
annual rain fall of the wereda is 845.8 mm.

1.7 Land Use Pattern

The Woreda comprises about 142,609 hectares of land. About 25.04% of the total land is
currently under cultivation.

Page 6
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Other land use categories includes grazing land 8.41%, forest land 35.42%, homestead 3.27%
and others 25.56% which represents degraded, eroded and stony areas. The pattern of land use of
the Woreda is shown in Table3 below.

Table: 1.1 The major land use types of Adeba Wereda

No Land use types Area Proportion

(Ha) Table 1
(%)
1 Cultivated land 35714 25.04
2 Grazing land 11992 8.41
3 Forest land 50517 35.42
4 Homestead 4660 3.27
6 Land owned by different 3280 2.3
organizations
7 Others 36446 25.56
Total 142609 100

Source: Adeba Wereda Agricultural office

The Peasant association in which Ahsiro irrigation project located comprises about
2151hectares of land. About 40.55 % of this area of land is currently under cultivation.
Other land use categories includes grazing land 0.78%, forest land 58.43%, and others
0.24% which represents degraded, eroded and stony areas. The pattern of land use of the
kebele is shown in Table4 below.

Page 7
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table:1. 2 the major land use types of Lencha washo kebele

No Land use types Area Proportion

(Ha) (%)
1 Cultivated land 872.25 40.55
2 Grazing land 16.75 0.78
3 Forest land 1257 58.43
4 Homestead - -
5 Vegetables and fruits - -
6 Land owned by different - -
organizations
7 Others 5 0.24
Total 2151 100
Source: Lencha washo kebele Development center office

1.8 EXISTING STATE OF AGRICULTURE

1.8.1 Farming System
Agriculture is the principal occupation of the population of the area. The farming system is
cereal dominant, oxen cultivation and mixed farming where livestock production is under taken
complimentary to crop production. Cattle/oxen are kept mainly for drought power and milk
production. Farming is mainly subsistence and crop production is predominantly carried out
under rainfed condition.
There is no clear pattern of crop rotation system practiced by the farmers. However, the presence
of pulses and other non-cereal crops in the cropping pattern serves in maintaining soil fertility
and checking various pest problems associated with single/mono cropping. Fallowing is seldom
practiced as a result of shortage of land per household.

Page 8
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
1.8.2 Farm Size and Land Tenure
At Woreda level, land holding per farm family ranges from 1 to 5 hectares with an average
holding size of 3 hectares. In the project area, however, land holdings ranges from 1 to 0.25ha
with an average of 0.625. These holdings are fragmented and some farmers cultivate land both
within and outside the scheme area.
Shortage of Oxen: Oxen are the major source of farm power. However, due to scarcity of grazing
land and shortage of other feed sources, about 6 % of the farming population has no oxen and 94
% of the the farmers own oxen in the project area, While in the peasant association in which the
project is located about 7.5 % of the farming population has no oxen and 92.5 % own oxen.

1.8.3 Existing Cropping Practices and cropping pattern

The cropping calendar for major crops of the area and the main operations are presented in the
following table. These operation calendars follow normal rainfall regime as in many parts of the
highlands of Oromia. In times of abnormality such as late set of the rains, area coverage and
volume of production are greatly affected. At present most of the farmers of the command area
and the surrounding area produce crops only once in a year. But there are some farmers in and
around the project area who produce two times per year using traditional irrigation. They
produce cereals and some vegetables at the main rainy season and vegetables by traditional
irrigation.

Page 9
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

CHAPTER TWO

2. HYDROLOGICAL DATA ANALYSIS

2.1 General
Hydrology is used in engineering mainly in connection with the design and operation of
hydraulic structure. For the analysis and design of any water resource project adequate data and
length of records are Necessary. A hydrologist is often challenged with lack of adequate data.
The basic hydrological data required are: Climatologically data, Hydro meteorological data like
(temperature, wind velocity, humidity, etc.), Precipitation records ,Stream-flow records, Seasonal
fluctuation of ground water table or piezometric heads, Evaporation data, Cropping pattern,
crops and their consumptive use, Water quality data of surface streams and ground water,
Geomorphologic studies of the basin, like (area, shape and slope of the basin, mean and median
elevation) mean temperature (as well as highest and lowest temperature recorded). The design of
water resource project like irrigation project, the peak magnitude of the flood are of great
important to design economical as well as structures with less probability of failure.
In the design of hydraulic and irrigation structures, the peak flow that can be expected
within assigned frequency is of primary important. Under estimation of peak flow would
result inadequate capacity of structures and its consequence is failure.
To estimate the magnitude of peak flood, the following methods may be used depending on
the data availability namely: Rational method, Empirical formulas, Unit hydrograph
technique, flood frequency studies, Snyder’s and SCS methods.

2.2 Meteorological Data Availability

Rainfall and other related meteorological data availability is core for any projects that inquire
hydrological analysis. However, sufficiently availability of such data in a required position is
rarely happening phenomena in developing countries.
For Ashiro irrigation project the ideal station near the catchment area is Adaba meteorological
stations. Design rainfall is computed based on the availability and nature of data recorded in the
station.

P a g e 10
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Though the station has relatively more records, all years are not fully recorded. Therefore,
records of years having no missed data are taken. For this design 10years daily maximum rainfall
data is processed.

2.3 Water resource

The water source for the envisaged project site is Ashiro River left side of the river. The River is
perennial in its type and capable of irrigating the proposed irrigable land due to this modern
irrigation water to be made available. From the hydrologic study result the base flow of the river
is 10lit/sec.

2.4 Selection of return period

Return period (T) is the average interval in year between events when equal or excess to a given
magnitude. It may however be clearly understood the concept of return period does not imply
that the event of any given magnitude will occur at a constant or event approximately constant
interval of n years .It only indicates average frequency of occurrence of an event over a long
period of time of years .
Selecting higher return period means the corresponding flood magnitude is also very high.

Table: 2.1 Guideline for selecting the return period

Type of structure Return period (year)

1.Spillways for project with storage more than 60Mm3 1000

2.Barrage and minor dams with storage less than 60Mm3 100

3. Spillway of small reservoir dam in considering not endangering urban

10-20
residences

Diversion weir 50-100

Source; Subermanya (1989) and Nevac (1972).

In our cases the structure which is going to be constructed is weir, so return periods of 50 years
has been adopted. For small diversion structures, a design flood of 50 or 100 years
recurrence interval is recommended.

P a g e 11
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

2.5 Rainfall Data Analysis

2.5.1Point Rainfall Analysis
For design storm determination, Daily highest annual series of rainfall data is used. This
constitutes the maximum daily rainfall out of the 365 days for every year for which the rainfall
record is available. The calculation is performed using Adaba metro-station and found to be the
best representative of the project area.
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 rainfall) is estimated for a recurrence interval of 50 years, for diversion weirs.
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. (Flood routing)

Table: 2.2 24-hours Maximum Daily Rainfall of Adaba Station

S.N Year of Daily highest
recorded rainfall
1 1997 32.2
2 1998 43.5
3 1999 41.6
4 2000 36.4
5 2001 26.1
6 2002 40.1
7 2003 36.6
8 2004 36
9 2005 91.5
10 2006 26.8

P a g e 12
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 2.3 computation of rainfall frequency analysis

Year of Daily
highestDescendi
recorde ng Ran (Y- (Y- (X-
S.N d RF(mm) (x) k Y=log x Ym)^2 Ym)^3 Xm)^2
1.9614210 0.141266 2542.176
0.053095763
1 1997 32.2 91.5 1 9 7 4
1.6384892 0.002800
2 1998 43.5 43.5 2 6 8 0.000148228 5.8564
1.6190933 0.001124
3.7686E-05
3 1999 41.6 41.6 3 3 1 0.2704
1.6031443
5.43131E-06
4 2000 36.4 40.1 4 7 0.000309 0.9604
1.5634810 0.000487
-1.07724E-05
5 2001 26.1 36.6 5 9 8 20.0704
1.5611013 0.000598
-1.46433E-05
6 2002 40.1 36.4 6 8 5 21.9024
0.000856
-2.50609E-05
7 2003 36.6 36 7 1.5563025 4 25.8064
1.5078558 0.006038
-0.000469289
8 2004 36 32.2 8 7 9 78.8544
1.4281347 0.024784
-0.003901898
9 2005 91.5 26.8 9 9 7 203.9184
1.4166405
-0.004820464
10 2006 26.8 26.1 10 1 0.028536 224.4004
15.855664 0.206802
0.044044981
Sum 410.8 2 9 3124.216
Mea 1.5855664
n 41.08 2

2.6 Data Consistency Test

The daily heaviest rainfall data of Adaba Town metrological station from 1997 to 2006 is taken
for the design. These data, which are not fully recorded, are abandoned and only the data, which
are fully recorded, are taken for computation. Hence 10 years of daily heaviest rainfall data is
available. These data is checked for its consistency and reliability.

2.6.1 Checking Data Reliability

From the above table it is gained that:

Number of data=10

P a g e 13
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

∑
Standard deviation (Xi), √ , since ∑ 216

=√ ,

= 18.63

∑
Standard deviation (Yi), √

Mean, X=41.08

Before proceeding to the other analysis the adequacy of rainfall data series should be checked
and it should be realized. The data series should be considered and adequate if relative
standard error, ≤10%, where is the relative standard error.

Standard error of mean, = = 5.89

√ √

Relative standard error, e / x *100 = (5.89/41.08)*100= 14.33 %>10%.

Therefore the data is not reliable and adequate.

2.6.2 Data Outlier Test

This is done to check whether the adopted data is within the limited range or not.

Input data:

∑
Ẋ= = = 41.08mm

∑ = 15.85mm

∑
= = 1.585

∑ = 0.21,∑ = 0.044

=√ =√ = 0.153

Skewness coefficient (Cs)

P a g e 14
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
∑
Cs = = =1.71

Tests for Outliers

Outliers are data points that depart significantly from the trend of the remaining data. The
detention or retention of these outliers can significantly affect the magnitude of statistical
parameters computed from the data, especially for small samples. As shown from the above
calculations the station skew is greater than +0.4, so based on the following principle the Cs
value falls in the second case. Therefore, it needs checking for higher outlier. -0.4<Cs<+0.
Table: 2.4 skewness ranges
Case1 If skewness(Cs) < -0.4 check for lower outlier

Case2 If skewness(Cs) > +0.4 check for higher outlier

Case3 If skewness(Cs) -0.4<Cs<+0.4 check for both outlier

(Source: Ven Te chow, 1964)

Table: 2.5 Determination of threshold value for outliers of daily heaviest rainfall

Parameters Value log transferred Remark

Coefficient of skewness, Cs 1.71
Standard deviatiob n, Sy 0.153
Mean, Ym 1.59
No of data 10
Kn 2.036 Value from table(
depend on sample size
n=10)

Lower outlier determination

Since it is stated that the skewness coefficient is greater than +0.4, our data recorded with respect
to lower outlier is within reasonable range. So, there is no lower outlier. Thus, the data is only
checked for higher outlier.
To detect the outlier the following frequency equations are applied.

P a g e 15
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Lower outlier, Yh=Ym-Kn×Sy Where Ym=mean of data in log unity
Kn=from table for sample size N
From above calculated value for data N=10, Ym=1.59, Sy=0.153, Kn=2.036 and Cs=1.71
Lower outlier Yh =Ym - Kn×Sy =1.59-2.036×0.153= 1.278
Lowest datum RL= 10Yh
=101.278=18.96mm
The lowest record daily heaviest rainfall data is 26.1mm in the 2006 which is greater than the
threshold value of lower outliers. Hence the daily heaviest rainfall data recorded with respect to
lower outlier is within reasonable range. Thus, there is no lower outlier.
Higher outlier determination

To detect the outlier the following frequency equations are applied.

Higher outlier, Yh=Ym + Kn×Sy
Where Ym=mean of data in log unity
Kn= from table for sample size N
From above calculated value for data N=10, Ym=1.59, Sy=0.153, Kn =2.036, and Cs=1.71
Higher outlier Yh =Ym +Kn × Sy
Yh =1.59+2.036×0.153=1.902
Highest datum, RH=10Yh
= 101.902 = 79.71mm
The highest record daily heaviest rainfall data is 91.5mm in the 2005 which is greater than the
threshold value of higher outliers. Hence the daily heaviest rainfall data recorded with respect to
higher outlier is out of the range. So, the recorded sample in year 2005 is dropped out but our
data less than 10 in this case difficult to obtain Kn .Therefore the highest rainfall recorded is
91.5mm is replaced by 79.71mm( obtained from higher outlier test) and the frequency analysis
has been done for sample of 10 years.

P a g e 16
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
FIRST ITERATION:-
Table: 2.6 Rearranged maximum daily rainfall of Adaba station
S.N Year of Daily highest
recorded rainfall
1 1997 32.2
2 1998 43.5
3 1999 41.6
4 2000 36.4
5 2001 26.1
6 2002 40.1
7 2003 36.6
8 2004 36
9 2005 79.71
10 2006 26.8

Table: 2.7 Computation of rain fall frequency analysis

Daily
Year of highest
Descending
S.N recorded RF(mm) (x) Rank Y=log x (Y-Ym)^2 (Y-Ym)^3 (X-Xm)^2
0.033366723
1 1997 32.2 79.71 1 1.90151281 0.103643572 1584.756481
0.000204479
2 1998 43.5 43.5 2 1.63848926 0.00347082 12.952801
6.17129E-05
3 1999 41.6 41.6 3 1.61909333 0.001561652 2.886601
1.30922E-05
4 2000 36.4 40.1 4 1.60314437 0.000555487 0.039601
-4.16901E-06
5 2001 26.1 36.6 5 1.56348109 0.000259033 10.896601
-6.30518E-06
6 2002 40.1 36.4 6 1.56110138 0.000341296 12.257001
-1.26056E-05
7 2003 36.6 36 7 1.5563025 0.000541637 15.217801
-0.000368906
8 2004 36 32.2 8 1.50785587 0.005143718 59.305401
-0.003473191
9 2005 79.71 26.8 9 1.42813479 0.022934315 171.636201
-0.004325575
10 2006 26.8 26.1 10 1.41664051 0.026547841 190.467601
0.025455256
Sum 399.01 15.7957559 0.164999372 2060.41609
Mean 39.901 1.57957559

Retest for outliers

Outliers are data points that depart significantly from the trend of the remaining data.
The detention or Retention of these outliers can significantly affect the magnitude of statistical
parameters computed from the data, especially for small samples. As shown from the above

P a g e 17
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
calculations the station skew is less than -0.4, so based on the following principle the Cs value
falls in the first case. Therefore, it needs checking for lower outlier. -0.4<Cs<+0.4.

Table:2.8 skewness ranges

Case1 If skewness(Cs) < -0.4 check for lower outlier

Case2 If skewness(Cs) > +0.4 check for higher outlier

Case3 If skewness(Cs) -0.4<Cs<+0.4 check for both outlier

From the above table it is gained that:

∑ =399.01mm ∑ =15.796mm
Average (Xm) =39.901mm Average (Ym) =1.58mm
∑ =2060.416 ∑ =0.165
N=10 ∑ =0.0254
∑
Standard deviation (X), √ =√ =15.131

∑
Standard deviation(Y), √ √

∑
Skewness coefficient = 1.43

Before proceeding to the other analysis the adequacy of rainfall data series should be checked
and it should be realized. The data series should be considered and adequate if relative standard
error, ≤10%, where is the relative standard error.

11.99% Where
√ √

11.99% > 10%. Therefore the data is not reliable and adequate.
Tests for Outliers

Outliers are data points that depart significantly from the trend of the remaining data. The
detention or retention of these outliers can significantly affect the magnitude of statistical
parameters computed from the data, especially for small samples. As shown from the above
calculations the station skew is greater than +0.4, so based on the following principle the Cs
value falls in the second case. Therefore, it needs checking for higher outlier. -0.4 < Cs < + 0.4

P a g e 18
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 2.9 Determination of threshold value for outliers of daily heaviest rainfall
Parameters Value log transferred Remark

Coefficient of skewness, Cs 1.43 Calculated above

Standard deviation, Sy 0.135 Calculated above
Mean, Ym 1.58 Calculated above
No of data 10 Given

Kn 2.036 Value from table

Higher outlier determination

To detect the outlier the following frequency equations are applied.

Higher outlier, Yh=Ym + Kn×Sy
Where Ym=mean of data in log unity
Kn= from table for sample size N
From above calculated value for data N=10, Ym=1.58, Sy=0.135, Kn =2.036, and Cs=1.43
Higher outlier Yh =Ym +Kn ×Sy
Yh =1.58+2.036×0.135=1.855
Highest datum, RH=10Yh
= 101.855 = 71.61mm
The highest record daily heaviest rainfall data is 79.71mm in the 2005 which is greater than the
threshold value of higher outliers. Hence the daily heaviest rainfall data recorded with respect to
higher outlier is out of the range. So, the recorded sample in year 2005 is dropped out but our
data less than 10 in this case difficult to obtain Kn. Therefore the highest rainfall in the first
outlier test is 79.71mm which is greater than 71.61mm,so that better to replace 79.71mm by
71.61mm and the frequency analysis has been done for sample of 10 years.

P a g e 19
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
SECOND ITERATION:-

Table: 2.10 Rearranged maximum daily rainfall of Adaba station

S.N Year of Daily highest

recorded rainfall
1 1997 32.2
2 1998 43.5
3 1999 41.6
4 2000 36.4
5 2001 26.1
6 2002 40.1
7 2003 36.6
8 2004 36
9 2005 71.61
10 2006 26.8

Table: 2.11 Computation of rainfall frequency analysis

Year of Daily
highest Descending
S.N recorded RF(mm) (x) Rank Y=log x (Y-Ym)^2 (Y-Ym)^3 (X-Xm)^2
0.021964232
1 1997 32.2 71.61 1 1.854973674 0.07842912 1057.485361
0.000256866
2 1998 43.5 43.5 2 1.638489257 0.004040837 19.439281
8.61849E-05
3 1999 41.6 41.6 3 1.619093331 0.001951135 6.295081
2.248E-05
4 2000 36.4 40.1 4 1.603144373 0.00079652 1.018081
-1.49743E-06
5 2001 26.1 36.6 5 1.563481085 0.000130887 6.205081
-2.63968E-06
6 2002 40.1 36.4 6 1.561101384 0.000191001 7.241481
-6.45478E-06
7 2003 36.6 36 7 1.556302501 0.000346674 9.554281
-0.00030165
8 2004 36 32.2 8 1.507855872 0.004497822 47.485881
-0.003162727
9 2005 71.61 26.8 9 1.428134794 0.021546389 151.068681
-0.003965407
10 2006 26.8 26.1 10 1.416640507 0.025052929 168.766081
0.014889386
Sum 390.91 15.74921678 0.136983315 1474.55929
Mean 39.091 1.574921678

From the above table it is gained that:

∑ =390.91mm ∑ =15.749mm
Average (Xm) =39.091mm Average (Ym) =1.575mm
∑ =1474.559 ∑ =0.137

P a g e 20
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
N=10 ∑ =0.0149
∑
Standard deviation (X), √ =√ =12.799

∑
Standard deviation(Y), √ √

∑
Skewness coefficient = 1.112

Before proceeding to the other analysis the adequacy of rainfall data series should be checked
and it should be realized. The data series should be considered and adequate if relative standard
error, ≤10%, where is the relative standard error.

10.36% Where
√ √

10.36% > 10%. Therefore the data is not reliable and adequate.
Tests for Outliers

Outliers are data points that depart significantly from the trend of the remaining data. The
detention or retention of these outliers can significantly affect the magnitude of statistical
parameters computed from the data, especially for small samples. As shown from the above
calculations the station skew is greater than +0.4, so based on the following principle the Cs
value falls in the second case. Therefore, it needs checking for higher outlier. -0.4<Cs<+0.4.
Determination of threshold value for outliers of daily heaviest rainfall.
Table: 2.12 Determination of threshold value for outliers of daily heaviest rainfall
Parameters Value log transferred Remark

Coefficient of skewness, Cs 1.112 Calculated above

Standard deviation, Sy 0.123 Calculated above
Mean, Ym 1.575 Calculated above
No of data 10 Given
Kn 2.036 Value from table

P a g e 21
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Higher outlier determination

To detect the outlier the following frequency equations are applied.

Higher outlier, Yh=Ym + Kn×Sy

Where Ym=mean of data in log unity

Kn= from table for sample size N

From above calculated value for data N=10, Ym=1.575mm, Sy=0.123, Kn =2.036, and
Cs=1.112

Higher outlier Yh =Ym +Kn × Sy

Yh =1.575+2.036 × 0.123=1.825

Highest datum, RH=10Yh

= 101.825 = 66.83mm

The highest record daily heaviest rainfall data is 71.61mm in the 2005 which is greater than the
threshold value of higher outliers. Hence the daily heaviest rainfall data recorded with respect to
higher outlier is out of the range. So, the recorded sample in year 2005 is dropped out but our
data less than 10 in this case difficult to obtain Kn . Therefore the highest rainfall in the second
outlier test is 66.83mm which is less than 71.61mm,so that better to replace 71.61mm by
66.83mm and the frequency analysis has been done for sample of 10 years.
THIRD ITERATION:-
Table:2.13 Rearranged maximum daily rainfall of Adaba station
S.N Year of Daily highest
recorded rainfall
1 1997 32.2
2 1998 43.5
3 1999 41.6
4 2000 36.4
5 2001 26.1
6 2002 40.1
7 2003 36.6
8 2004 36
9 2005 66.83
10 2006 26.8

P a g e 22
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Retest for outliers

Outliers are data points that depart significantly from the trend of the remaining data. The
detention or retention of these outliers can significantly affect the magnitude of statistical
parameters computed from the data, especially for small samples. As shown from the above
calculations the station skew is less than -0.4, so based on the following principle the Cs value
falls in the first case. Therefore, it needs checking for lower outlier. -0.4<Cs<+0.4.

Table: 2.14 Computation of rainfall frequency analysis

Daily
highest
Year of Descending
S.N recorded RF(mm) (x) Rank Y=log x (Y-Ym)^2 (Y-Ym)^3 (X-Xm)^2
0.01620388
1 1997 32.2 66.83 1 1.8249715 0.0640343 796.199089
0.00029498
2 1998 43.5 43.5 2 1.6384893 0.00443127 23.882769
0.000104966
3 1999 41.6 41.6 3 1.6190933 0.00222519 8.922169
3.04383E-05
4 2000 36.4 40.1 4 1.6031444 0.00097487 2.211169
-6.01292E-07
5 2001 26.1 36.6 5 1.5634811 7.124E-05 4.052169
-1.26675E-06
6 2002 40.1 36.4 6 1.5611014 0.00011707 4.897369
-3.81027E-06
7 2003 36.6 36 7 1.5563025 0.00024395 6.827769
-0.000262951
8 2004 36 32.2 8 1.5078559 0.0041044 41.126569
-0.002972733
9 2005 66.83 26.8 9 1.4281348 0.02067461 139.546969
-0.003744161
10 2006 26.8 26.1 10 1.4166405 0.02411217 156.575169
0.009648742
Sum 386.13 15.719215 0.12098908 1184.24121
Mean 38.613 1.5719215

From the above table it is gained that:

∑ =386.13mm ∑ =15.719mm
Average (Xm) =38.613mm Average (Ym) =1.572mm
∑ =1184.24 ∑ =0.121
N=10 ∑ = 0.00965
∑
Standard deviation (X), √ =√ =11.47

∑
Standard deviation(Y), √ √

P a g e 23
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
∑
Skewness coefficient = 0.858

Before proceeding to the other analysis the adequacy of rainfall data series should be checked
and it should be realized. The data series should be considered and adequate if relative standard
error, ≤10%, where is the relative standard error.

9.4% Where
√ √

9.4% <10 %( ok!) . Therefore the data is reliable and adequate.

Tests for Outliers

Outliers are data points that depart significantly from the trend of the remaining data. The
detention or retention of these outliers can significantly affect the magnitude of statistical
parameters computed from the data, especially for small samples. As shown from the above
calculations the station skew is greater than +0.4, so based on the following principle the Cs
value falls in the second case. Therefore, it needs checking for higher outlier. -0.4<Cs<+0.4.

Table: 2.15 Determination of threshold value for outliers of daily heaviest rainfall

Parameters Value log transferred Remark

Coefficient of skewness, Cs 0.858 Calculated above

Standard deviation, Sy 0.116 Calculated above

Mean, Ym 1.572 Calculated above

No of data 10 Given

Kn 2.036 Value from table

Higher outlier determination

To detect the outlier the following frequency equations are applied.

Higher outlier, Yh=Ym + Kn×Sy
Where Ym=mean of data in log unity
Kn= from table for sample size N

P a g e 24
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
From above calculated value for data N=10, Ym=1.572, Sy=0.116, Kn =2.036, and Cs=0.858
Higher outlier Yh =Ym +Kn × Sy
Yh =1.572+2.036×0.116=1.808
Highest datum, RH=10Yh
= 101.808 = 64.26mm
The highest record daily heaviest rainfall data is 66.83mm in the 2005 which is greater than the
threshold value of higher outliers. Hence the daily heaviest rainfall data recorded with respect to
higher outlier is out of the range. So, the recorded sample in year 2005 is dropped out but our
data less than 10 in this case difficult to obtain Kn . Therefore the highest rainfall in the first
outlier test is 66.83mm which is greater than 64.26mm,so that better to replace 66.83mm by
64.26mm and the frequency analysis has been done for sample of 10 years.

Table: 2.16 Corrected reliable data for computation of rainfall frequency analysis
Daily
Year of highest
Descending
S.N recorded RF(mm) (x) Rank Y=log x (Y-Ym)^2 (Y-Ym)^3 (X-Xm)^2
0.013434144
1 1997 32.2 64.26 1 1.807940721 0.056511911 671.0172
0.000318205
2 1998 43.5 43.5 2 1.638489257 0.004660912 26.46074
0.000116751
3 1999 41.6 41.6 3 1.619093331 0.002388761 10.52354
3.56958E-05
4 2000 36.4 40.1 4 1.603144373 0.001084121 3.041536
-3.05814E-07
5 2001 26.1 36.6 5 1.563481085 4.53912E-05 3.083536
-7.57802E-07
6 2002 40.1 36.4 6 1.561101384 8.31197E-05 3.825936
-2.69483E-06
7 2003 36.6 36 7 1.556302501 0.000193652 5.550736
-0.000242533
8 2004 36 32.2 8 1.507855872 0.003889083 37.89634
-0.002868347
9 2005 64.26 26.8 9 1.428134794 0.020187746 133.5411
-0.003622313
10 2006 26.8 26.1 10 1.416640507 0.023586164 150.2095
0.007167843
Sum 383.56 15.70218382 0.112630859 1045.15
Mean 38.356 1.570218382

2.7 Maximum Flood Computation

Maximum probable flood is a hypothetical flood at a selected location, whose magnitude is such
that there is no chance of its being exceeded. It is estimated by combining the most hydrological
and meteorological conditions considered reasonably possible at the particular location under
consideration.

P a g e 25
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
As it has been described earlier 10 years 24 hr (daily) heaviest Rainfall data is obtained from Adaba
Meteorological station, that are used for the determination of the maximum probable flood. Based on the
available data, the following methods are used to estimate the design flood.

2.7.1 Flood Analysis

2.7.1.1 Design Rainfall Computation

After checking the consistency of the data for higher and lower outlier, the 10 years data is
obtained as representative for the analysis. To analyse 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. The probability of occurrence of maximum probable rainfall is estimated by the following
methods as shown below.
1. Normal Distribution Method
2. Gumbel‟s Distribution Method
3. Log Pearson type Three Distribution Method
4. Log Normal Distribution Method
The suitability of the methodology for different countries is different. Example, Germany log
Pearson type three, UK GEV and USA Log Pearson type three. However, in case of Ethiopia no
institute proposed a certain methodology. The sample statistics of data distribution should be
tasted for goodness of fit criteria as satisfactory basis for selection.
Taking return period of 50 years (for diversion weir) the design rainfall is determined by the
following method.
1. Normal Distribution Method

From the above table it is gained that:

∑ =383.56mm ∑ =15.702mm
Average (Xm) =38.356mm Average (Ym) =1.57mm
∑ =1045.15 ∑ =0.112
N=10 ∑ =0.0072
∑
Standard deviation (X), √ =√ =10.77

P a g e 26
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

∑
Standard deviation(Y), √ √

∑
Skewness coefficient = 0.731

XT=Xm +KT×
Where, XT=Annual Maximum rain fall T years return Period.(T=50 Years)
Xm=Mean rain fall data
KT=Frequency factor
=Standard deviations

p= = =0.02 <0.5 ( ) = (ln( ))^0.5

w =2.797

Therefore, KT=2.054
XT=Xm + KT*
XT =38.356+2.054×10.77
XT=60.47mm

Therefore the maximum probable point rain fall of 50 years return period analyzed in normal
distribution method is 60.47 mm.
2. Gumbel’s Distribution Method

The distribution is applicable to extreme hydrologic events such as maximum daily rain fall, rain
intensity and peak flood flows and expressed by an equation;
XT=Xm+ KT* ------------------------------------------------------ (***)
Where Xm =mean of the annual maximum daily rainfall
T= Annual maximum rainfall of T years return period (design storm)
KT= Frequency factor expressed as;
KT = …………………………………………………(**)

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

P a g e 27
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

YT =-[ln [ln( )} …………………………………………..(*)

Where, Yn= reduced mean in Gumble‟s extreme value, distribution for sample size from table
Sn =reduced standard deviation in Gumble‟s extreme value distribution for sample size
from table.
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.
=standard deviation of annual rain fall.
∑
√

To determine the distribution parameters when it is applied to asset of data distribution the
following steps are followed.
1. Assemble the maximum daily rainfalls data and note the sample size N. Here the daily rain
2.fall data is the variety X, find and Xm and .
3. Using table and determine Yn and Sn appropriate to given N.
4. Find Yt for a given T by equation (*)
5. Find KT by equation(**)
6. Determine the required XT by equation (***)
∑
Xm = = 38.356

∑
√ =10.77

YT=-[ ln [ln( )]=3.902

For N=10 from table

Yn=0.4952
Sn=0.9496

XT=Xm + KT* =38.356+3.587×10.77=76.98mm

Therefore, the maximum probable point rainfall of 50 year return period analyzed in Gumbel
method is 76.98mm.

P a g e 28
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
3 .Log Pearson Type Three Distribution Method

This distribution is extensively used in USA for project sponsored by U.S government. In this
the variant is first transformed into logarithmic form (base 10) and the transformed data is then
analyzed. If X is the variant of random hydrologic series of Y variants
Y= logX -------------- (*) are first obtained. For this Y series, for any recurrence interval T
YT=Ym + kzSy------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (**)
Ym= mean of value=1.57mm(from table above)
Where kz = frequency factor which is a function of recurrence interval T and the coefficient of
skew Cs.
Sy=Standard deviation of the Variant sample:-
∑
√

And Cs=coefficient of skew of variant Y.

∑

N=sample size =number of year of recorded =10

The variation of kz=f (Cs, T) is given in table (Ven Te chow Applied hydrology page-393). After
finding for YT by equation… (**), the corresponding value of XT is obtained by equation … (*)
as for recurrence interval T=50
Kz = f(Cs, T)=f(0.731, 50) by using interpolation:-
Cs T
0.7 2.407
0.731 X(KT)
0.8 2.453
Kz=2.42
YT=Ym+ kz×Sy= 1.57+2.42×0.111=1.838
XT=antilog (YT) = antilog (1.838)=68.86mm
Therefore the minimum probable point rainfall of 50 years return period analysed in log Pearson
type III distribution method is 68.86mm.

P a g e 29
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
4. Log normal Distribution Method

Log normal distribution method is especial type of log Pearson type three distribution method
with Cs=0, i.e from table for Cs=0 and T50, Kz=(0,50)=2.054
From table (Ven Te Chow) for Cs=0, T50, kz=2.054
Y50=Ym + kz×Sy
YT =1.57+2.054×0.111=1.798
XT=Antilog (YT)= antilog(1.798)=62.81mm
Therefore the minimum probable point rainfall of 50 years return period analyzed in log normal
distribution method is 62.81mm.

Table: 2.17 Summary of result for 50 years return period storm

METHODS Maximum Storm (P) Calculated (For Return Period
Of 50 Years)

Normal Distribution Method 60.47mm

Log normal Distribution Method 62.81mm

Log Pearson Type Three Method 68.86mm

Gumbel Distribution Method 76.98mm

As we can see from the above four methods the maximum rainfall obtained by Gumbel
Distribution Method is the highest (76.98mm). The lowest rainfall is given by Normal
Distribution Method (60.47mm) .We adopted the design storm ( maximum daily rainfall )
obtained by Gumbel Distribution Method ( 76.98mm), because it gives a bit larger amount
rainfall value than other distribution. Taking the conservative value of flood for the design of
structure will make the structure safe and stable. Here adopting the higher storm magnitude will
not affect the economy of the structure as the difference very less when compared.
Hence, Design Point Rainfall pd=76.98mm.

P a g e 30
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

2.8 Estimation of Flood Peaks

A flood is an unusually high stage in a river normally the level at which the river overflows its
banks and inundates the adjoining area (flood plains). From the various characteristics of the
flood hydrograph, probably the most important and widely used parameter is the flood peak.
To estimate the magnitude of a flood peak the following alternative methods are used:
1. Rational method
2. Empirical method
3. Unit-hydrograph technique, and
4. SCS Curve Number method.
1. The Rational Method
Most widely used for analysis of runoff rate for a small catchments(less than 50 km2) for the
purpose of like urban storm drainage, inexpensive structures which is derived based on the
catchments characteristics and uniform rain fall intensity over the entire catchments related with
frequency for a duration at least equal to time of concentration to the water shed Rain fall occurs
with a uniform intensity for a duration of at least equal to time of concentration of the water shed
area and, Rain fall occurs over the entire area with a uniform intensity. Even though our
catchment area is with the limit, this method is not applied to our project. Because runoff and
rain fall, intensity is not given.
The rational formula is only applicable to small-size (<50 km2) catchments .It finds considerable
application in urban drainage designs and in designs of small Culverts and Bridges. The basic
equation of rational method is given by
QP =

Where:-
QP -is peak discharge /peak flow rate in( m3/sec).
C -Runoff coefficient

C= ,C- varied from 0 (minimum) to 1(maximum)

I=I (tc,p)- The mean rainfall intensity in (mm/hr) for a given duration of „tc‟ and for a given
probability of excedance ( chance of occurring(p)).
A= Area of watershed in „km2‟.A=64km2>50km2(no need to calculate the peak discharge).
Time of concentration (tc) is calculated by using Kirpitch equation

P a g e 31
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Tc= )0.77
√

Where:-
L= Basin length in „m‟.
The use of this method to compute Qp requires parameters; Tc, I (tc ,p) and Limitation:
Calculation of mean run off coefficient is difficult if the catchments covered by different land
features with different area coverage (but in our cases run off coefficients of different land
feature is not given.)
Is only applicable to small-size (<50 km2) catchments.
Estimation of I (tc ,p) requires some other regional constants based on catchments characteristics.
Because of the above limitations, rational method is not applicable for the determination of peak
flood for Ashiro irrigation project.
2. Empirical Formula
The empirical formulae used for the estimation of the flood peak are essentially regional
formulae based on statistical correlation of the observed peak and important catchment
properties. To simplify the form of the, only a few of the flood peaks are used. For example,
almost all the formula use the catchmentʾs area as a parameter affecting the peak flood and most
of them neglect the flood frequency as a parameter. By far the simplest of the empirical
relationships are those which relate the flood peak to the drainage area. The maximum flood
discharge Qp from a catchment area A is given by these formulae as:
Qp = f (A)
Dr. Admassu Gebeyehu developed an empirical formula similar to be used in some catchments
of Ethiopia based on regional statistical correlation of climatologically and hydrological data.
However, it can only be used for rough estimation of mean annual flood peaks. His equation is:
QP=Q (1+Kt×CV)………….general formula
Q=0.87×A^0.7 (Dr.Admassu‟s relation)
Where:- A-Catchments area (km2) = 64km2
Kt-frequency factor
√
Kt = [ 0.57721 + ln (ln[ )]

= 2.59

P a g e 32
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
T= return period = 50yrs
Cv = the average Coefficient of variation (0.38 for most cases)
Q = 0.87×640.7 = 15.98m3/sec
QP = 15.98(1+2.59×0.38) = 31.71m3/sec.
The empirical formula method is not convenient for the determination of peak flood of Ashiro
stream.
3. Synthetic Unit Hydrographe Technique (SNYDER’S METHOD)
Snyder (1938) developed a set of empirical equation for synthetic unit hydrographs in USA. This
equation used with some modifications in many other countries and so called Snyder‟s Synthetic
Unit Hydrograph. For our case Snyder‟s method is not applicable because, it works for
derivation of unit hydrograph for catchment, where rain fall & run off data not available.
4. SCS Curve Number method.
4.1 Peak flood analysis by SCS unit hydrograph method
Design flood is calculated by using SCS (The United States Soil Conservation Service) method.
This method is widely adopted and more reliable method for flood estimation. The approach
considers, watershed parameters, like Area, Curve number, and time of concentration.
4.1.1 Determination of curve numbers for the study area
Curve number (CN) is achieved based on USSCS method by watershed characterization in terms
of land cover, treatment, hydrologic condition and soil group. From the watershed analysis curve
number at condition II =74.74 since peak rainfall is found at an antecedent moisture condition II
state, this value has to be changed to antecedent moisture condition III.
The SCS method has an index, which is called curve numbers (CN) to represent the
combined hydrologic effect of soil, land use; agricultural land treatment class hydrologic
conditions and antecedent soil moisture. The SCS method has also developed a soil
classification system that consists of four hydrologic groups according to their minimum
infiltration rate which is obtained for a bare soil after prolonged wetting. The groups are
identified by the letters A, B, C, and D.
Group A: deep sand, deep loess, aggregated silts, high infiltration
rate,>7.6mm/hr;
Group B: shallow loess, sandy loam, moderate infiltration rate (3.8 to 7.6mm/hr);

P a g e 33
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Group C: clay loams, shallow sandy loams, soils low in organic content and soils high in clay,
low infiltration rate (1.3 to 3.8 mm/hr)
Group D: soils that swells significantly when wet, heavy plastic clay, and certain saline soils,
very low infiltration rate (<1.3mm/hr)
The soil characteristics associated with each group have been determined. The SCS uses an
antecedent rainfall index to estimate three antecedent moisture conditions (I-dry, II-normal, III-
wet). The relationship between rainfall and runoff for these three conditions is experienced as
curve numbers, CN. Each storm in a rainfall series is assigned one of the three curve numbers
according to antecedent rainfall.
Curve number adjustments for water shade moisture states are made according to three classes of
antecedent moisture condition (AMC), which is the index of the watershed wetness on the day of
the storm and determined by the total rainfall in the 5 day period preceding storm.
Three levels of AMC are used for different soil groups:
AMC I: Lowest runoff potential, the watershed soils for satisfactory placing or cultivation.
AMC II: The average condition
AMC III: The highest runoff potential, the watershed is practically saturated from antecedent
rains.
Table: 2.18 CN adjustment for below and above average moisture condition

Total 5 days antecedent rainfall (mm)

AMC Dormant Growing season

season
I <12 <36

II 12<28 36-53
III >28 >53

Source: Applied Hydrology, Ven Te Chow et.al. 1988

Equivalent curve numbers have been computed by the following formula:

CN (I) = = AMC I

AND

P a g e 34
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

CN (III) = = AMC III

The weighted CNw of each catchment can be calculated by the formula:

CNw= ∑

Where; A is the area of each land use classification.

AMC (I) =

AMC ( ) = 40.6+30.34+3.38=74.74= CN ( )

AMC (III) = = =87.18 = CN(III)

4.1.2 Hydrograph analysis for peak flood determination

A) Time of concentration (Tc)
The time of concentration is defined as the time for runoff to travel from the hydraulically most
distant point in the drainage point in the drainage basin to the outlet or point of interest; it is also
defined as the distance between the end of excess rainfall and the inflection point in the recession
limb of the dimensionless curvilinear unit hydrograph. Time of concentration has been calculated
by taking the stream profile of the longest streamline and dividing it in to different elevation.
Kirpich formula is adopted for computation. The main problem in this formula is the limit of
number of streamline division. Stream line shall be divided according to the slope class.
The formula is, Tc=∑ ………………………………………………………. (2.11)

Tci = ( ) 0.77 (Source: Ministry Of water Resources Hydrological Studies

√

guide line).
Si =

Where:- Tc= time of concentration (hrs)

L=Length of main water course (Basin length, L=19.7km=19700m).
H1= level of watershed divide opposite to the head of main watershed (H1=3800m).
H2= level of bed of stream at proposed weir site (H2 = 2460m).
Si= slopes of main water course (m/m).
Si = = .

Tci = ( ) 0.77 = ( ) 0.77 =1.902hr.

√ √

P a g e 35
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Rain fall excess duration, D , if ………Tc<3hr.

D if………Tc>3hr.

In this case Tc <3hr (1.902<3), Therefore, D= = .

Adopted rainfall excess duration (D)=0.32hr.

Time to peak: Tp=0.5D+0.6Tc= 0.5×0.32+0.6×1.902=1.301hr.
Time of base of hydrography: Tb=2.67 Tp=2.67×1.301=3.47hr.It is the time difference between
starting time and end of time in a hydrography.
Lag time : Tl=0.6Tc=0.6×1.902=1.14hr.It is the time interval between from mid-point of unit
rainfall excess duration to peak of unit hydrograph.
Peak rate of discharge created by 1mm rainfall excess on whole of the catchment: qp =

m3/sec.

Table: 2.19 collecting the above values in tabular form

Parameters Unit Value
Catchment Area Km2 64
Length of main river M 19700
Time of concentration, Tc Hr. 1.902
Rain fall exess duration, Tc <3hr, Hr. 0.32
D
Time to peak, Tp = 0.6Tc + 0.5D Hr. 1.301
Time to base, Tb = 2.67Tp Hr. 3.47
Peak rate of discharge Created by m3/sec 10.33
1 mm run off, qp =

Lag time, Tl = 0.6Tc Hr. 1.14

qp= The time to

peak flow:

P a g e 36
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Where:- Tp=

qp=peak runoff rate (m3/sec) D=Duration of excess

rainfall.
A=watershed area (km2). Tp=time to peak.
Ri=runoff volume (mm)=area under the hydrography. Tl=time of lag.
Tp=time to peak (hrs). Tc=time of
concentration.
B) Rainfall profile and Areal Rain fall distribution

Rain fall profile is the distribution of design rain fall with respect to time in the in the whole
watershed area. It needs developed models for the selected drainage area. I f there is no
sufficient modelling data in the vicinity, standard curves may be adopted. Similarly, as the area
of watershed gets larger, coincidence of all hydrological incidences become less and less. This
can be optimized by changing the calculated point rainfall to areal rain fall. The conversion
factor is taken from standard table that relate directly with the size of watershed area and type
of gauging station.

P a g e 37
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 2.20 Design Rainfall Arrangement in relation to rain fall profile and areal to point ratio
Duration Design RF Areal Areal Incremental Descending Descending
point profile point RF RF order order
RF RF number
ratio
Hr Mm % % Mm Mm mm

0-0.32 76.98 28 58.76 12.66 12.66 12.66 1

0.32- 76.98 36 61.56 17.06 4.43 5.31 2
0.64
0.64- 76.98 42 67.96 21.97 4.91 4.91 3
0.96
0.96- 76.98 50 70.87 27.28 5.31 4.46 4
1.28
1.28-1.6 76.98 52 73.29 29.34 2.06 4.43 5
1.6-1.92 76.98 58 75.71 33.80 4.46 2.06 6
4.2Runoff Analysis
Input data:
Design Point Rainfall = 76.98mm
Curve number at antecedent moisture condition III =87.18
Catchments Area, A = 64 Km2
Tc=1.902 hr, D = 0. 32hr., Tp =1.31hr; Tb =3.47hr; Tl = 1.14hr.

Direct run-off, Q = Where, I=Rearranged cumulative run-off depth (mm

S=Maximum run of potential difference, = -254

Peak run-off for incremental; Qp =

Where, A=Catchment area= Km2

T p=Time to peak hr.
Q = Incremental run-off (mm)

P a g e 38
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 2.20 computation of cumulative Rain fall

Rearranged Rearranged Cumulative Time of Incremental

order incremental RF hydrography
RF Time of Time Time
beginning to to end
peak
No Mm P(mm) Hr. Hr. Hr.

6 2.06 2.06 0 1.301 3.47

4 4.46 6.52 0.32 1.622 3.79
3 4.91 11.43 0.64 1.942 4.11
1 12.66 24.09 0.96 2.262 4.43
2 5.31 29.40 1.28 2.582 4.75

5 4.43 33.83 1.6 2.902 5.07

Table: 2.22 Direct run off computation

The maximum potential difference between Rainfall (P)
and direct runoff(Q) S=37.35

S= , CN Corresponding to AMC III

Formula for Q, Unit

P(mm) Q(mm)

2.06 0

Q= Mm 6.52 0

11.43 0.3796

24.09 5.1181

29.4 8.1127

33.83 10.9064
Table: 2.23 Computation of peak discharge for each incremental run off

P a g e 39
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Duration Cumulative Incremental Peak runoff Time of Incremental

Runoff Runoff incremental hydrography

Qp= Time of Time Time

beginning to to
peak end
Hr Mm Mm m3/sec Hr Hr Hr

0-0.32 0 0 0 1.301 3.47

0
0.32- 0 0 0.32 1.622 3.79
0
0.64
0.64- 0.3796 3.921 0.64 1.942 4.11
0.3796
0.96
0.96- 4.7385 48.951 0.96 2.262 4.43
5.1181
1.28
1.28-1.6 2.9946 30.936 1.28 2.582 4.75
8.1127
1.6-1.92 2.7937 28.860 1.6 2.902 5.07
10.9064

4.3Design Rainfall Arrangement

Since the time of concentration is 1.902 hours which is less than three hours, the unit storm
duration /D/ would be one sixth of 1.902 hour. The rainfall distribution profile within a day
(24hrs), which is expressed in percentage, has been arranged based on the rainfall profile &
increment hour curve developed by Ministry of Water Resources hydrologic design guideline.
The obtained percentage for a given hour interval has been multiplied with point design rainfall
76.98 mm.
The point rainfall obtained per unit time increment interval has been distributed over the whole
catchment area 64km2. For this given area & each time interval, its percentage is read from a
real-time curve developed, and multiplied with earlier calculated values to get nominally a real
rainfall.
The increment per time interval is calculated, and then they are arranged as alternative block
order 6, 4, 3, 1, 2, 5.This is a judicial arrangement that gives a computed flood greater than one

P a g e 40
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
based on the assumption that the greatest hourly increment of the rain occurs during the first hour
of a storm and a smaller flood than that computed by assuming the greatest hourly increment of
rain occurs during the 6th hour of storm.

Table: 2.24 calculation of design discharge

Duration Daily point Rainfall Areal to Areal Increme Descend

rainfall for Rain Fall to ntal ing
Ratio
return period ratio Rainf
Order
of 50 years as daily all
rainfall

Hr Mm % % Mm mm Number

0-0.32 76.98 28 58.76 12.66 12.66 (1)

12.66

0.32-0.64 76.98 36 61.56 17.06 4.43 (2)5.31

0.64-0.96 76.98 42 67.96 21.97 4.91 (3)4.91

0.96-1.28 76.98 50 70.87 27.28 5.31 (4)4.46

1.28-1.6 76.98 52 73.29 29.34 2.06 (5)4.43

1.6-1.92 76.98 58 75.71 33.80 4.46 (6)2.06

12 Fill 0-Dhr, D-2Dhr, …5D-6Dhr

P a g e 41
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
13 Determine the magnitude of the daily rain fall with the
given recurrence interval by applying statistical
method

Determine the magnitude of the daily rainfall with the

given recurrence interval by applying statistical
method.

14 Read from Annex ----fig---,the rain fall profile

(%) occurring in D, 2D, 3D, 4D, 5D, 6Dhrs and put in

14.

15 Multiply col.13 and col.14 to find the rainfall profile

(mm) enter in 15.

16 Read from table ----area to point rainfall ratio for

different duration in particular catchments.

17 Multiply col.15 and col.16

18 Calculate incremental rainfall by deducting the current

Arial rainfall from the preceding Arial rainfall as
written in 18.

19 Assign order to the rainfall depths in descending order

1-6

20 21 22 23 2 2
4 5

Rearranged order Rearran Cumula Time of incremental hydrograph

ged tive
increm

P a g e 42
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
ental rainfall
rain fall

Time of Time Time to end

beginnin to (hr)
g (hr) peak
(hr)

6 2.06 2.06 0 1.301 3.47

4 4.46 6.52 0.32 1.622 3.79

3 4.91 11.43 0.64 1.942 4.11

1 12.66 24.09 0.96 2.262 4.43

2 5.31 29.40 1.28 2.582 4.75

5 4.43 33.83 1.6 2.902 5.07

20 From 19 mention the rearranged order as6,4,3,1,2,5 (arbitrary but

considering ascending and descending feature of hydrograph ordinate
where peak value is middle of the hydrograph).

21 Fill in the corresponding incremental rain fall value to the rearranged

order of 20 from 17.

22 Fill in the cumulative rainfall value of 21 by adding with the rainfall

value in preceding duration.

23 Fill in the time of beginning of the hydrograph 0,D,2D…,5Dhr

24 Fill in the time peak as Tp, D+Tp, 2D+Tp… 5D+Tp or add Tp in every
value of 23 and mention in24.

P a g e 43
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
25 Fill in the time of end as Te,D+Tb,2D+Tb,…5D+Tb

26 27 28 29 30

Land use cover Area ratio (%) “CN” Weighted ”CN” “CN”

Hydrologic AMC CN
al soil

Group “C”

1.Dense forest land 0.58 70 40.6 II 74.74

2.Moderetely 0.37 82 30.34

cultivated land

3.Open wood land 0.05 76 3.8 III 87.18

26 Identify all type of land cover such as

Dense forest land, moderately
cultivated land, open wood land,
etc...From catchments map or aerial
photo.

27 Find ratios of each type of land use

cover to the total catchments area is
and enter 27.

28 As certain hydrological soil groups

each types of land use cover as below.

Group A: low run off potential

Group B: moderate run off potential

P a g e 44
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Group C: moderate high run off

Group D: high run off potential

Find the corresponding curve

number(CN) From table

29 Multiply column.27 and col.28 and

inter in col. 29

30 Add col. 29 the CN is corresponding to

antecedent moisture condition III
(AMC-III). Find CN

for AMC-III from table

No Description/Formula Symbo Unit Exam

l ple

31 Find the maximum potential deference b/n rainfall (P) and S M CN=8
direct run off (Q), which is given by the following formula. 7.18

25400 S=37.
 254
S= CN 35

CN= value of corresponding to AMC –III

32 Substituting the value of “S” in the following formula, giving the relation b/n direct run
off (Q) and rainfall (P).

( P  0.2S ) 2
Q=
( P  0.8S )

33

P a g e 45
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Substituting the value of P1 as mentioned 22 23
in col. 20, in the above formula and fined
P(mm) Q(mm Remark
find the corresponding value of Q (33)
)
enter; Enter the value of Q in col. 35.
2.06 0.00 P < 0.2s ( Q = 0 )

6.52 0.00 P < 0.2s ( Q = 0 )

11.43 0.3796 P > 0.2s

24.09 5.1181 P > 0.2s

29.40 8.1127 P > 0.2s

33.83 10.906 P > 0.2s

4

34 35 36 37 38 39

Duration Cumulativ Incremental Pea Time of Time Time Composite

e Runoff run off k beginning to to end hydrograp
run peak h
Col.(23) Col.(25
off
Col.(2 )
for
4)
incr
em
ent

Hr Mm Mm M3 Hr Hr Hr
/s

0-0.32 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 1.301 3.47

P a g e 46
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
0.32-0.64 000 0.00 0.0 0.32 1.622 3.79

0.64-0.96 0.3796 0.3796 3.9 0.64 1.942 4.11

21

0.96-1.28 5.1181 4.7385 48. 0.96 2.262 4.43

951

1.28-1.6 8.1127 2.9946 30. 1.28 2.582 4.75

936

1.6-1.92 10.9064 2.7937 28. 1.6 2.902 5.07

860

34 Enter the same time as in col.12, 0-D, D-2D, 2D-3D… 5D-6D.

35 There are the value of Qas found out in col.33 corresponding to the value of P

36 F incremental runoff by reducing the value of col; 35 by preceding value.

37 Multiply col. 36 and peak rate of runoff corresponding to 1mm run off excess as
found incol.11

38 Plot triangular hydrograph with time of beginning, peak time and time to end as
mentioned in 23,24,25 and peak run off as mentioned in col.37

39 Plot composite hydrograph by adding all the triangular hydrographs .The resultant
hydrograph will be composite hydrograph of desired return period. The coordinate
of the peak of hydrograph will give the peak run off with desired return period.

P a g e 47
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 2.25 Peak Discharge Analysis Using Complex Hydrograph Method

Base
Q1 Q2 Q4 Flow Q total
TIME (m³/sec) (m³/sec) Q3 (m³/sec) (m³/sec) Q5 (m³/sec) Q6(m³/sec) (m³/sec) (m³/sec)
0 0 0.01 0.01
0.32 0 0 0.01 0.01
0.64 0 0 0 0.01 0.01
0.96 0 0 0.963686636 0 0.01 0.973686636
1.28 0 0 1.927373272 12.0309677 0 0.01 13.96834101
1.301 0 0 1.990615207 12.8205 0.498967742 0.01 15.32008295
1.6 0 0 2.891059908 24.0619355 7.603317972 0 0.01 34.56631336
1.622 0 0 2.957313364 24.8890645 8.126046083 0.48764977 0.01 36.47007373
1.942 0 0 3.921 36.9200323 15.72936406 7.580737327 0.01 64.16113364
2.262 0 0 3.342254613 48.951 23.33268203 14.67382488 0.01 90.30976152
2.582 0 0 2.763509225 41.7257601 30.936 21.76691244 0.01 97.20218182
2.902 0 0 2.184763838 34.5005203 26.36980074 28.86 0.01 91.92508487
3.47 0 0 1.157490775 21.6757196 18.26479705 21.29889299 0.01 62.40690037
3.79 0 0.578745387 14.4504797 13.69859779 17.03911439 0.01 45.77693727
4.11 0 7.22523985 9.132398524 12.77933579 0.01 29.14697417
4.43 0 4.566199262 8.519557196 0.01 13.09575646
4.75 0 4.259778598 0.01 4.269778598
5.07 0 0.01 0.01

 From the analysis, the 50 year return period design run off is 97.20m 3
/s( flood peak at the

head work location).

P a g e 48
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Composite Hydrograph

120
97.202
100
UH-1
80 UH-2
Discharge (m³/sec)

UH-3
60 UH-4
UH-5
40
UH-6
Base Flow
20
Q total
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
-20 Time(hr)

Figure 2.1 Composite hydrograph curves for each excess runoff

Composite Hydrography
120
Discharge(m³/sec)

100

80

60
Q total
40

20

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
-20
Time (hr)

Figure 2.2 Composite hydrograph curves for peak runoff

P a g e 49
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

CHAPTER 3
3. WATER DEMAND, AGRONOMY AND WATER DELIVERY
ASPECTS
3.1 General
Every crop requires a certain quantity of water after a certain field interval throughout its period
growth .If the natural rain is sufficient and timely so as satisfy both those requirement no
irrigation water is required for raising that crop.
To design properly an irrigation scheme it is necessary to know the crop water requirements.
The function of water with respect of growth of plant and its yield are:
1. Solvent for gaseous, minerals and other soluble food.
2. Conduct and translocation of solutions in cell and tissues.
3. as an active reagent in photosynthesis and hydrolysis.
The factors that affect the water requirement of plants are: type of soil, type of plant,
metrological variables like sunshine, temperature, humidity, rainfall and wind etc.
3.2 Duty and Delta of the crop
3.2.1 Delta
Each crop requries a certain amount of water after a certain fixed interval of time,throughout its
period of grouth. The depth of water require every time,generally varies from 5 to 10cm depend
up on the type of crop,climet and soil.with the interval of time(frequncy of irrigation). The
summation of total water depth supplied during the base period of a crop, for its full grouth, will
evidently represent the total quantity of water required by the crop for its full-fledged
nourishment. This total quantity of water requred by a crop for its full growth,(maturity) or total
8+7\depth of water (in cm) is called its delta(∆)
The average values ofb deltas for a certain crops are represent the total water requrment of the
crops. The actual requrment of irrigation water may be less, depending upon the useful rainfall.
Moreover, these values represent the value on the field, i.e.‟delta on field‟ which includes the
evaporation and percolation losses.

P a g e 50
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
3.2.2 Duty of water
The „duty‟ of water is the relationship between the volume of water and the area of the crop it
matures. It may be define as the number of hectares of land irrigated for full growth of a given
crop by supply of 1m3/s of water continuously during the entire base period (B) of the crop.
Thus, if water flowing at a rate of one cubic meter per second, runs continuously for B days, and
matyres 200 hectares, then the duty of water for that particular crop will be define as 200hectares
per cumec to the base of B days. The duty generally represented by the letter D.

Duty and delta are related as

Where depth of water in cm, B in dayes and D duty in hectore/cumec

This is calculated as followes
Let there be a crop of base period B days. Let one cumec of water be applied to this crop on the
field for B days. Now, the volume of water applied to this crope during B days
m3

By defination of duty (D), one cubic meter supplied for B dayes matures D hectares of land
Therefore,this qu(V) matures D hectares of land or 104D sq.m of area.

Total depth of water applied on this land

3.3 Crop water requirement

Crop water requirements are defined as “the depth of water needed to meet the water loss
through evapo-transpiration of a disease free crop, growing in large fields 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.
CWR=IR+ER+S+GW
A.Irrigation requirement of crops (IR)
It is defined as the part of water requirement of crops that should be fulfilled by irrigation.
IR=CWR-(ER+S+GW)

P a g e 51
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
B.Effective rainfall
It is defined as the rainfall that is stored in the root zone and can be utilized by crops. All the
rainfall that falls is not useful or effective. The different methods used to calculate ER from
monthly total rainfall data are as follows;
Fixed percentage effective rainfall
The effective rainfall is taken as a fixed percentage of the monthly rainfall
ER=% of total rainfall
Dependable rainfall
An empirical formula developed by FAO/AGLW based on analysis for different arid and sub-
humid climates. This formula is3 as follows
ER=0.6×total rainfall -10 ----------------for total rainfall<70mm
ER=0.8×total rainfall-24 ----------------for total rainfall>70mm
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
Where a, b, c, d and Z are variables to be defined by the user.
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×(125-0.2×total rain fall)/125 for total rainfall<250mm
ER=125+0.1×total rainfall for total rainfall>250mm

P a g e 52
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Table: 3.1 Determination of effective rainfall through different methods in mm

Effective rainfall (in mm)
Month Rain Fixed % Dependabl Empirical
Mm USDA (80%) e Formula
January 20.4 19.7 16.3 2.2 5.2
February 26.9 25.7 21.5 6.1 8.4
March 53.1 48.6 42.5 21.9 57.2
April 70.1 62.2 56.1 32.1 69.1
May 47.7 44.1 38.2 18.6 18.9
June 71.2 63.1 57.0 33 69.8
July 181.7 128.9 145.4 121.4 147.2
August 186.5 130.8 149.2 125.2 150.5
September 78.1 68.3 62.5 38.5 74.7
October 40.6 38 32.5 14.4 15.3
November 4.4 4.4 3.5 0.0 0.0
December 5.2 5.2 4.2 0.0 0.0
Total 785.9 639 628.7 413.3 616.3

From the table we adopt USDA soil conservation Service method, since it estimates more
effective rainfall for minimum total rainfall. (I.e. for high total rainfall much of the rain is
percolated to root zone). The effective rainfall has been calculated by USDA soil conservation
method which relates monthly effective rainfall to monthly total rainfall for different values of
monthly ETcrop. Generally the lower the rainfall the higher the percentage efficiency since less
water is lost to runoff and deep percolation.
C. Carry over soil moisture
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.

P a g e 53
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
D. Net irrigation requirement
After the exact evapotranspiration of crops have been determined, the NIR should be determined.
This is the net amount of water applied to the crop by irrigation exclusive of ER, S, and GW.
NIR=CWR-ER-S-GW
NIR is determined during different stages of crop by dividing the whole growing season in to
suitable intervals. The growing season is more preferably divided in two decades. The ETcrop
during each decade is determined by subtracting those contributions from the ETcrop.
E. Gross irrigation requirement
Usually more amount of water than the NIR is applied during irrigation to compensate for the
unavoidable losses. The total water applied to satisfy ET and losses is known as gross irrigation
requirement (GIR).
GIR= where, Ea=application efficiency

F. Potential evapotranspiration (PET)

This is also called reference crop evapotranspiration (ETO) and it is the rate of
evapotranspiration from an extensive surface, 8 to 15cm tall, green grass cover of uniform
height, actively growing, completely shading the ground and not short of time
3.4 Determination of crop water requirement (ETcrop)
ETcrop = Kc × ETo
The value of Kc varies with the type of crop, its stage of growth, growing season and the
prevailing weather condition. The effect of local conditions and agricultural practices
This includes; -
 The variation in climate over time
 Distance and altitude
 Size of field
 Soil water availability
 Irrigation and cultivation methods and practices

The effect of local condition and agricultural practices on crop water requirement: includes the
local effect of variations in climate over time, distance and altitude, size of fields, water
availability, irrigation water quality, etc

P a g e 54
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
3.4.1Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo)
Reference evapotranspiration (ETO):- is the rate of evapotranspiration from an extensive
surface of 8mm to 15mm tall, green grass cover of uniform height, actively growing, completely
shading the ground and not shortage of water (FAO 24,1983 ).
There are different methods, which are adopted to estimate the ETo values which need specific
data. The most widely used methods are as follows:
 FAO Blaney-Criddle Method
 Radiation Method
 Hargrave‟s Class A Pan Evaporation Method
 FAOPan evaporation Method
 Penman Method
 Penman-montheith Method
 Thornthwaite Method
1. Blaney-criddle method

This method is suggested where only temperature data are available and is given by;

ETo=c[p(0.46T+8)]

Where ETo=Reference crop evapotranspiration in mm/day for the month considered

o
T=mean daily temperature in c over the month

p=mean daily percentage of total annual daytime hours obtained from table for a given
month and latitude

c=adjustment factor which depends on minimum relative humidity, sunshine hours and
daytime wind estimates

2. Thornthwaite method

This is also available for temperature data.

ETo=1.6×b×(

P a g e 55
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Where ETo=potential evapotranspiration in cm/month

0
Tm=mean monthly temperature in c

I=actual heat index, obtained from monthly heat index I of the year

I= ( ) ^1.514 and I = ∑ =∑ ^1.514

The constants a and b are obtained as;

a= (67.5 ) – (77.1 ) + (0.0179)I + 0.492

a=b= ( )

3. Hardgrave‟s class A pan evaporation method

ER or CU is related to pan evaporation (Ep) by a constant Kc, called consumptive use
coefficient; ET=Kc×Ep

Where ET=CU=consumptive use

Ep=pan evaporation

Ep=0.459R×Ct×Cw×Ch×Cs×Ce

Where Ct=coefficient of temperature

2 o
=0.393+0.02796Tc+0.0001189Tc , Tc=mean temperature in c

Cw=coefficient for wind velocity

2
=0.708+0.0034V-0.0000038V , V=mean wind velocity at 0.5m above the

ground, km/day

Ch=coefficient of relative humidity

=1.25-0.0087H-0.75×10 , H=mean percentage relative

Humidity at noon

P a g e 56
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Cs=coefficient for percentage of possible sunshine

=0.542+0.0085-0.78× +0.62× , S=mean sunshine percentage

Ce=coefficient of elevation

=0.97+0.0098E , E=elevation in 100 of meters

4. Modified penman method

For areas where measured data‟s on temperature, humidity, and sunshine durations or radiation
are available, the penman method is adopted.
The method uses mean daily climatic data, since day and night time weather conditions
considerably affect level ET; an adjustment for this is included.
The modified penman equation is,
ETo= [W×Rn +(1-W) ×f(u )×( )
Where W×Rn=radiation term
(1-W) ×f (u) × ( ) = aerodynamic ter
ETo=reference crop evapotranspiration, mm/day
W=temperature-related weighting factor
Rn=net radiation in equivalent evaporation, mm/day
=wind-related function
difference between the saturation vapor pressure at mean air
temperature and the mean actual vapor pressure of the air, mbar
c=adjustment factor to compensate for the effect of day and night weather conditions.
5. Penman-monteith method (direct estimation of ETo)

Penman equation has been adopted to estimate evapotranspiration in mm/day as follows;

ETo = ×

Where, ETo=reference evapotranspiration in mm/day

2
C=constant to convert units from kg/m /s to mm/day

P a g e 57
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

R N =net radiation at the earth‟s surface in kg/m 2

=(1-r)Rs-Rnl where, r=albedo=.23(grass)

Rs=(.25+.5n/N)Ra ,Ra-extrateresterial Radiation

Rs=short wave radiation

Rnl=long wave radiation

Rnl = (.34 -.139√ )(.1+.9n/N)

n actualhour sofsunshine

N possiblehoursofsunshine

6
L=latent heat of vaporization=2.45×10 J/kg

S=slope of the temperature-saturation vapor pressure curve

S=

Cp=specific heat of air at constant temperature=1004.6J/kg.k

 a =density of air=1.2047kg/m 3 at sea level

e d =actual vapor pressure of the air at 2m height in kpa

e s =saturation vapor pressure for the air temperature at 2m height in kpa

and = × RH/100

 =psychometric constant=0.067kpa/k at sea level

P a g e 58
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

r a =aerodynamic resistance in s/m

From the above five methods of determination of ETo,the pen-man monteith method is proposed
because of Blaney-criddle and Thornthwaite methods use temperature data only so that the other
climatic conditions are ignored. And also Hardgrave‟s method is not considering all climate data.
The pen-man monteith method is done using the computer software Cropwat 8.0 windows as
follows for the available climatic data‟s.

Table: 3.2 ETo determination using pen-man montieth method

MONTHLY ETO PENMAN-MONTEITH DATA

Country: ETHIOPIA Station: ADABA

Altitude: 2485 m. Latitude: 7.01 °N Longitude: 39.4 °E
Min Max Humi Wi
Month Sun Rad. ETo
Temp Temp dity nd
Ho MJ/m?/ mm/
°C °C % m/s
urs day day
Januar 12
9.1 30.9 71 9.5 21.1 20.4
y 5
Februa 13
10.1 31.2 71 9.6 22.3 26.9
ry 3
13
March 11.2 30.8 74 8.9 22.1 53.1
3
14
April 12.2 30.2 77 8.4 21.3 70.1
2
12
May 12 30.8 75 8.8 21.3 47.1
5
10
June 12 30.5 76 8.8 20.9 71.2
7
July 13.3 28.6 79 10 6.4 17.5 181.7

P a g e 59
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
7
August 13.1 27.9 85 99 6.8 18.5 186.5
Septem
12.7 28.7 86 99 7.8 20.2 78.1
ber
Octobe 10
11.7 29 79 8.2 20.3 40.6
r 7
Novem 12
9.8 29.5 75 9.7 21.5 4.4
ber 5
Decem 12 10.
8.8 30.2 69 21.6 5.2
ber 5 2
Averag 11 8.5
11.33 29.85 76.4 20.7 59.6
e 8.9 9

Crop selection
During the final study of the proposed project, selection of potential crops has been given due to
the focus of the following situations.
 Climatic conditions of the particular area
 Availability of water
 Type of soil
 The economic importance of the crop
 Stable food for the local people
 Method of irrigation
 Yield response factor and water utilization efficiency
 Labor requirements
 Markets among others
These proposed crops includes Onion,Potato and Head Cabbage.
3.5 Cropping Pattern
Cropping pattern indicates that the area under crops in different crop season. The cropping patter
depends on;

P a g e 60
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Availability of water- the cropping pattern should be planned such that the crops can be
irrigated during the critical irrigation demand.
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.

Table: 3.3 CROPPING PATTERN DATA

Cropping pattern name: Dry Cropping Pattern
Area
N Are
(ha)
o Plantin Harvest a
. Crop file crop name g date date (%)
6
...ata\CROPWAT\d
1 ata\ Onion 01/10 9/12 40
5
...CROPWAT\data\ 01/
2 crop Potato 10 09/12 33
4
...CROPWAT\data\ Head 01/
3 crop Cabbage 10 14/03 27

Those cropping pattern is for the two season of crop by adjusting planting and harvesting date at
the given period.

3.6 Crop Coefficient (kc)

To account for the effect of the crop characteristic on crop water requirement, crop coefficient
(KC) are presented to relate evapotranspration of a disease –free crop growth in large fields under

P a g e 61
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
optimum soil water and fertility condition and achieving full production potential under the
given growth environment.

Where kc is coefficient of the crop.

The procedure for the selection of appropriate KC values takes in to account
 the crop characteristics
 time of sowing or planting
 stage of development
 general climatic conditions
Normally crops have four stages of development.
1. Initial period (Init): during this period, the leaf area is small, and evapotranspiration is
predominately in the form of soil evaporation. Therefore, the Kc during the initial period is large
when the soil is wet from irrigation or rainfall and is low when the soil surface is dry.
Germination and early growth when the soil surface is not or is hardly covered by the crop (good
cover=10%)
2. Development stage (Deve): as the crop develops and shades more and more the ground,
evaporation becomes more restricted and transpiration gradually becomes the major process.
Good cover 70% -80%
3. Mid-season stage (Mid): at this stage the Kc reaches its maximum value. From at raiment of
effective full ground cover to time of start of maturing indicated by discoloring of leaves.
4. Late season stage (Late): the Kc value at the end of the late season stage reflects crop and
water management practices. This value is high if the crop is frequently irrigated until harvested
fresh.
If the crop is allowed to senescence and to dry out in the field
before harvest, the Kc value will be small, due to less efficient stomata conductance of leaf
surfaces.
The Kc coefficient for any period of the growing season can be derived by considering that
during the initial and mid-season stages Kc is constant and equal to the Kc value of the growth
stage under consideration. During the crop development and late season stage, Kc varies linearly
between the Kc at the end of the previous stage (Kc prev) and the Kc at the beginning of the next
stage (Kc next), which is Kc end in the case of the late season stage:

P a g e 62
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
∑
+[ ](

Where:

i day number within the growing season [1.. length of the growing season],

Kc i crop coefficient on day i,

L stage length of the stage under consideration [days],

 (Lprev) sum of the lengths of all previous stages [days]

The steps needed to arrive the kc value for different growing stages are as follows:
1. Establish planting or sowing date from local information or from practice in climatic
zones.
Determine total growing seasons and length of crop development stages from local
information or from literature.
2. Kc for initial stage: predict irrigation and/or rainfall frequency for predetermined ETo
values and obtain Kc value from table for known humidity and wind speed values (FAO 33)
3. Kc for mid season: for given climate (humidity and wind) select Kc values from table
and/or plot a straight line
4. Late season stage: for time of full maturing (harvest with in few days) select Kc values
from tables as above. Assume a straight line between Kc values at the end of mid season
period and at the end of growing season.
Development stage: assume straight line between Kc values at end of initial to start of mid
season stage.

P a g e 63
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 3.4 Dry crop data
Crop Name: Onion Planting date: 01/10 Harvest: 23/01

L
Initi M at tot
Stage al Develop id e al

Length (days) 25 30 10 5 70

Kc. Values 0.7 --> 1 1

0. 0.
Rooting depth (m) 0.3 --> 3 3

0. 0.
Critical depletion 0.3 --> 3 33

0. 0.
Yield response f. 0.45 0.45 8 3 2

Crop height (m) 0.3

Crop Name: Potato Planting date: 01/10 Harvest: 09/12

L
Initi M at tot
Stage al Develop id e al

11
Length (days) 25 30 45 15 5

1. 06
Kc. Values 0.5 --> 15 5

P a g e 64
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
0. 0.
Rooting depth (m) 0.4 --> 4 4

0. 0.
Critical depletion 0.35 --> 35 35

0. 0.
Yield response f. 0.45 0.45 7 2 1.8

Crop height (m) 0.4

Crop Name: Head Cabbage Planting date: 01/10 Harvest: 14/03

L
Initi M at tot
Stage al Develop id e al

16
Length (days) 40 60 50 15 5

1. 0.
Kc. Values 0.7 --> 05 95

0. 0.
Rooting depth (m) 0.4 --> 4 4

0. 0.
Critical depletion 0.45 --> 45 45

0. 0. 1.4
Yield response f. 0.2 0.2 45 6 5

Crop height (m) 0.4

P a g e 65
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
(source :-FAO DRAINAGE PAPER NO-56)

Table: 3.5 Field Water Supply

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Precipitatio
n
1.Onion * * * * * * * * * 89. 118.6 39.
9 8
2.Potato 100. * * * * * * * * 64. 124.9 159
7 1 .8
3.Head 128. 122 58.2 * * * * * * 74. 79.5 108
Cabbage 4 .1 3
Net scheme
irr.req
In 1.1 1.2 0.5 * * * * * * * * *
mm/day
In 34.7 33 15.7 * * * * * * 20. 21.5 29.
mm/month 1 2
In L/s/h 0.13 0.14 0.06 * * * * * * 0.0 0.08 0.1
7 1
Irrigated 27 27 27 * * * * * * 27 27 27
area(% of
total area)
Irr.req for 0.48 0.5 0.22 * * * * * * 0.2 0.31 0.4
aqctual 8
area (l/s/h)

The “*” in the specified months indicates that, there is enough effective rainfall in the
command area so that water is not diverted.

The peak crop water requirement period from the above table is during January=0.5 l/s/ha.

P a g e 66
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Therefore, 0.5 l/s/ha amount of water diverted in the field satisfy water requirement of the
crop.

3.7. Irrigation Efficiency

To account the loss of water incurred during conveyance and application to the field, an
efficiency factor should be included when calculating the project irrigation requirement. Project
efficiency is normally subdivided in to three stages each of them is affected by different set of
conditions.
Conveyance efficiency (Ec)-Ratio between water received at inlet to a block of field and that
released at the project headwork.
Field canal efficiency (Eb)-Ratio between water received at the field inlet and the received at
the inlet of the block of the field.
Field application efficiency (Ea)-Ratio between water directly available to the crop and that
received at the field inlet.
Project efficiency (Ep)-Ratio between water made directly available to the crop that released at
the headwork.

Efficiency values for different condition

Conveyance efficiency
Continuous supply with no substantial change inflow
Rotational supply in project of 3000-7000ha and rotation areas 0.9
70-3000ha, with efficient management 0.8
Rotational supply in large schemes (>10000ha) and small Rotational supply in large
sachems (>10,000hactar) & small schemes (<1000hactar) with respective problem,
Communication & less effective management.
Based on predetermined schedule =0.7
Based on advance request= 0.65
Field canal efficiency
Blocks larger than 20ha
Unlined=0.8
lined or piped=0.9

P a g e 67
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Blocks up to 20ha
Unlined= 0.7
lined or piped=0.8
Field application efficiency
light soil =0.55
medium soil=0.7
heavy soil=0.6
Source (siyrce FAO, 1978) ICID/ILRI
Therefore , project efficiency is the product of conveyance and field canal and field application.
For Ashiro Small scale irrigation project:
Conveyance Efficiency (Ec) =0.65 for command area 15ha
Field Canal Efficiency (Eb) = 0.7 for blocks up to 20ha
Field application efficiency (Ea) = 0.6 for clay soil
Ep = Ec × Eb × Ea
= 0.65×0.7×0.6= 0.273 thus, for this the proposed irrigation efficiency is 27.3%.
3.8 Irrigation scheduling
Irrigation scheduling is the schedule in which water is applied to the field. The scheduling of
irrigation can be field irrigation scheduling and filed irrigation supply scheduling.
Field irrigation scheduling
It is done at the field level. The two field irrigation scheduling parameters;
A.Depth of irrigation (d)
It is the depth of water that can be retained in the crop root zone between the field capacity
and the given depletion of the available moisture content.

The depth irrigation (d) is given by;

Where

d net =net depth, m

As=apparent specific gravity of soil

P a g e 68
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
D=effective root zone depth, m

FC=water content of the soil at FC

PWP= water content of the soil at PWP

P=depletion factor

Because of the application losses such as deep percolation and runoff losses, the total depth
of water to be applied will be greater than the net depth of water

The gross depth of application, d gross = =

Where Ea=field application efficiency and others are as defined above.

B.Irrigation interval (I)

It is the time gap in days between two successive irrigation applications. The interval or
frequency of irrigation is given by;

I(days) =

Where, =the peak rate of crop evapotranspiration, m/day and others are as defined
above.

P a g e 69
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 3.6 Irrigation interval and application depth

D ETc.
( peak
A m FC- E (m/day dnet(m dgross( I(day
Crop S ) PWP P a ) m) mm) s)

2 0 0
. 0. . . 0.0046
Onion 7 3 0.15 3 6 4 36.45 60.75 7

0
2 . 0
Potat . 0. 3 . 0.0053 42.52 70.87
o 7 3 0.15 5 6 5 5 5 8

0
Head 2 . 0
Cabb . 0. 4 . 0.0053
age 7 4 0.15 5 6 1 72.9 121.5 14

3.8.1 Field irrigation supply scheduling

This is the schedule of water supply to individual fields or command area. It is the schedule of
the total volume of water to be applied to the soil during irrigation.

It is expressed as q×t =

Where,
q=stream size or application rate, lit/sec
t=application time, sec
Ea=application efficiency
p=depletion factor
As=application specific gravity

P a g e 70
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
A=area of the command (field) in ha
D=effective root zone depth, m
In the above equation q×t indicates the total volume of water applied to the field during irrigation
at the head of the field. But the total volume of water diverted at the headwork will obviously be
greater than this value, because there is loss of water during conveyance and distribution canals.
The volume of water to be diverted is given by;

Q×t =

Where Q = flow rate at headwork, lit/sec

Ep = project efficiency and others are as defined above
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. The result is shown in Annex at end of this project paper.
FIR = ………….……………………………………………………. Eqn (4. 6)

Where; Ea = Application efficiency

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 as:
GIR = ………………….……………………..………………………… Eqn (4.7)

Where EP = project efficiency

3.9 Determination of Design Discharge
The net scheme irrigation requirement computes the total irrigation water needs at scheme level
over a certain time step.

Design discharge =

Project efficiency (pa) =Eb×Ec×Ea =0.273

Since the irrigation water is not applied for 24hr, we need to multiply the design discharge by the
working time factor. Adopting 12hours of irrigation, the design discharge becomes.
Working time factor= = 0.5

P a g e 71
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

QDESIGN = /working time factor

QDesign = = 27.47 L/S

=54.94 l/s

=0.0549m3/s
Irrigation Duty (D) = 0.5 l/s/ha.

P a g e 72
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

CHAPTER FOUR
4. HEAD WORK DESIGN
4.1 Introduction
This section comprises of design of structures that deals with the provision of water from the
water source point as well as protection of topographic nature of land at headwork. The selection
of structures type to be used for the water diversion & retaining works will be
Executed.Their proper dimensions of these structures also will be designed taking into
consideration their stability, practicality & economically achievable.
4.2 Head work site selection
Head work site of this project was selected based on design and construction suitability of
foundation nature, river bank, and proximity to command area. In addition to these guiding
principles, the following points are considered;
 nearly straight, well defined River X-section
 Impervious and strong foundation condition
 It includes the maximum irrigable area with minimum possible diversion height.
 The site is relatively accessible.
 The site is selected in such a way that the backwater effect does not cause any damage to
the adjoining areas
4.3 location of the weir
Initially, it is difficult to decide on the location of the proposed structure without having
topographic maps of the project area and layout of the river course. However, by walking along
the river up and downstream of the location where the existing intake is or where the farmers
believe it is an appropriate location; it is possible to identify a few places for the proposed
structure. In our cases we did not get the chance to visit river up and down stream of the river but
the topographic map of the catchment area had been given to us in addition to the topographic
map of the catchment area ,geologic set up of the river bank has been discussed in the
introduction parts of this project.

P a g e 73
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
The following factors have to be considered when selecting the site for diversion weirs.
 Location of the Irrigated Area.
 Stability of the river bank.
 Construction materials and resources available.
 Topographic survey.
 Soil investigation.
 Hydrological data.
4.4 selection of weir type
When a weir is designed, the designer should consider the skill of the people who are expected to
implement the structure. There are weirs of different types and shapes and most of them are
constructed to serve the same purpose. The designer should not impose a weir with a shape
which cannot be constructed easily by the local builders.
The followings are common types of weir:
1. Ogee shaped weir: it is known for best hydraulic efficiency (can accommodate large
amount of flow with small depth).Hence it is preferable for high discharge bearing rivers.
However, it needs skilled manpower for construction.
2. Broad crested weir: it is the most simply type weir both for design and construction, but
has low hydraulic efficiency as compared to ogee weir. This type of weir is recommended for
low discharging rivers and where skill of implementing bodies is in doubt.
3. Vertical drop weir: this one has vertical downstream face, just like the natural Tisa bay
fall. The downstream face of the weir is not acting to smoothening and energy dissipation of
the coming flood and boulder effects. However, energy is expected to be dissipated at the bed
of the rivers. Hence, the river bed should be sound rock.
In deciding the type of the weir, the following conditions should be considered.
 Economy of construction
 Physical feasibility
 Foundation condition
 Size of the project

P a g e 74
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

4.5 Head Work Design

4.5.1 Type of head work structure
At the selected head work site, it is possible to irrigate the command area by gravity, through
only diverting water directly without raising the level of water considering reference to the
highest point of the command area. Hence, intake structure has been recommended for Ashiro
small-scale irrigation project.
Along with intake structure other structures included are breast wall, operation slab, bed bar,
trash rack & right side retaining structures are the main components of the head work structures.
Breast wall & operation slab have been provided to aid the operation of gate & to prevent over
flow of river flood into the main canal. Similarly, trash rack is provided at the river side of intake
to exclude boulders, trees & etc. from entering into outlet pocket that clog the gate. To retain
river bed & banks, bed bar is buried within river bed and there is extended canal retaining
structure where the bank gets sinusoid. We are selected broad crested weir.
4.5.2 Highest Flood Level Determination
The design flood discharge that may occur within the design period, can cause damages to the
head work structures above the river bed (for any) & destabilize river bed & river banks that
leads malfunctioning of the project. So, the river training works and some head structures have to
be properly designed based on the magnitude of flood depth.
Hence for the Ashiro small scale irrigation project computation of the flood depth is a very
essential input in the designing of head work structures such as retaining wall, thickness of the
gate leaf, breast wall height & scouring depth. River cross sectional area, river slope &
foundation nature of the river are among the factors that affect the magnitude of the flood effect.
4.6 Tail water depth determination
This is a normal flow depth of flood in the river channel during the occurrence of flood
discharge. It is obtained by Manning‟s empirical formula taking into consideration the bed
material of river, river cross sectional area & its slope. Depth of flood flow is computed as
follow:
Slope of river(S): It is the longitudinal slope of river at upstream & downstream for 219.06m
length. The slopes of individual distance are calculated and averaged arithmetically (table
below). Two general method used to compute river bed slope method :

P a g e 75
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

A. Area end method

B. Best fit line method

Table: 4.1 River bed slope computation

Par
tial
Distanc
N Stat e(m)
Elevatio hei Cumulative Are Descending
o ion
n(m) ght height a order
2453.7
5
2453.7
0 0 0 2451 0 0 0
3
0.7 2452.1
1 20 20 2451.72
2 0.72 7.2 2
0.4 2452.0
2 40 20 2451.27
5 0.27 9.9 6
0.7 2452.0
3 60 20 2452.06
9 1.06 13.3 6
1.0 2451.7
4 80 20 2451
6 0 10.6 2
1.1 2451.7
5 100 20 2452.12
2 1.12 11.2 2
1.1 38.4 2451.2
6 120 20 2451
2 2.73 9 7
0.7 49.9 2451.2
7 140 20 2451.72
2 2.26 1 7
0.4 32.6
8 160 20 2451.27 2451
5 1 1
0.7 25.4
9 180 20 2452.06 2451
9 1.54 3
1 1.6 42.8
200 20 2453.75 2451
0 9 2.74 8
1 219 0.0 52.2
19.06 2453.73
1 .06 2 2.73 244
S
U 2.7 293.
M 219.06 3 68

P a g e 76
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

A. Area-End method
 Individual are, An =0.5×(cumulative 2nd+cumulative 1st)×Distance 2nd.
 Average height, Havg =

Havg =

 Average slope , I=

I=

Therefore, average river bed slope at the diversion site is 0.012 (1.2%). OR by using the second
method:-

B. Best fit line method

RIVER BED SLOPE PROFILE(BEST FIT LINE

METHOD)
2454.5
2454
2453.5
2453
RIVER BED SLOPE PROFILE(BEST
2452.5
Elevation(m)

FIT LINE METHOD)

2452
2451.5 Linear (RIVER BED SLOPE
PROFILE(BEST FIT LINE
2451 METHOD))
y = -0.0121x + 2453.2
2450.5 R² = 0.8198
2450
0 50 100 150 200 250
Distance(m)

Figure 3.1 Elevation versus distance curve

From the graph above, the slope of the river bed is 0.0121 (y=-0.0121x+2453.2) linear equation
y= mx+b (m is the slope of the line).

P a g e 77
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

4.6.1 Manning’s Roughness coefficient

The Manning‟s roughness coefficient is taken from standard table based on the river nature. The
river at the headwork site has got winding natural streams. Manning‟s roughness coefficient (n =
0.035) is adopted.

Table: 4.2 Sample value of manning’s

Type of Canal N

Concrete lined channel 0.013

Unlined Earth channel 0.02

Straight, stable deep natural 0.03

channel
Winding natural stream 0.035
Variable rivers, vegetated 0.04
banks
Mountainous stream, rock beds 0.05

4.6.2Tail Water Depth Computation corresponding to peak flow

Tail water depth of the river is equal to the flood depth and amount at the proposed weir site
before construction of the weir. It is used to see the flood feature after the hydraulic jump.
During field visit, the flood mark of the river at the proposed diversion site was ambiguous and is
not used as flood estimation technique. The river cross-section was surveyed at the main weir
axis for different depth of the river using river cross - section data (Area and wetted perimeter).
After the design peak discharge is calculated, it is obvious to find the T.W.D. which will be used
for deciding the bottom elevation of the downstream floor.
The water discharge is calculated by Manning‟s open channel formula. Basic inputs for the
analysis and the detail procedure are described as follows:

P a g e 78
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
4.6.3 Discharge of the river
Input data:
Manning's roughness coefficient, n =0.035
Average river bed slope, S = 0.0121
V= × ×√

Where, R=Hydraulic radius=(Area/Perimeter)

Q=V*A

Table: 4.3Tail Water Depth Estimation along River X-Section

m =1
Elevation Bed W.Depth Water Wett.Perm. Hydraulic Slope Roughness Velocity Discharge
Top Width Rad. R I avg
El.(m) d (m) Area A(m2) P (m) Coeff. N V (m/Sec) Q (m3/Sec)
(m) (m) (m/m)
2453.54 12 0 0 12 0 0.0121 0.035 0 0
2453.79 12 0.5 5.834 12.54 0.465231 0.0121 0.035 1.88651294 11.0059165
2454.29 12 1 11.333 13.07 0.8671 0.0121 0.035 2.85770151 32.3863312
2455.04 12 1.5 16.5 13.61 1.212344 0.0121 0.035 3.57357632 58.9640093
2455.84 12 2 21.334 14.14 1.508769 0.0121 0.035 4.13491039 88.2141784
2456.8 12 2.3 24.07 14.46 1.664592 0.0121 0.035 4.41506337 106.270575
2457.8 12 2.4 24.96 14.568 1.713344 0.0121 0.035 4.50089645 112.342375
2458.85 12 2.5 25.833 14.68 1.759741 0.0121 0.035 4.58183012 118.362417

P a g e 79
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Stage-Discharge Relation
2460

2459

2458

2457
Stage(m)

2456 Stage-Discharge
Relation
2455

2454

2453
0 50 100 150
Discharge(m3/sec)

Figure 4.2 stage discharge curve

Tail water rating curve

3

2.5

1.5
Stage(m)

Tail water rating curve

1

0.5

0
0 50 100 150
Discharge(m3/sec)

Figure 4.3 Tail water rating curve

P a g e 80
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
From the above table ,used to compute the highest flood level(HFL) and tail water depth by
using interpolation based on the peak flood discharge (Q peak= 97.2021m3/sec).
Discharge Elevation
88.2142 2455.84
97.2021 x (HFL)
106.27058 2456.8
X=HFL=2456.82m
Tail water depth
Discharge Depth
88.2142 2
97.2021 X (TWD)
106.27058 2.3
Tail water depth=2.15m
Tail water level= River bed level +corresponding discharge height from d/s rating curve.
TWL=2453.5m +2.15m=2455.65m .a.s.l.
4.7 Design of Diversion Weir
Maximum river flow/Flood, Qmax= 97.2021m3/sec
Longitudinal slope of the river, S=0.0121
Water depth in main canal = 0.27m
River bed level = 2453.5m
Average elevation of the highest point in the field= 2454.03m
Length of main canal= 600m
Head loss at turnout loss=0.05m
Head loss a cross head regulator=0.1m
Average particle size (from laboratory analysis), d mean=3.0mm
Tail water depth (from tail water curve), D3= 2.15m
11. Head loss a cross the filed=0.00m
12. Silt height = 0.5m

Slope= = =0.0008

Drop due to main canal (head loss in the main canal) =600m×0.0008=0.48m.

P a g e 81
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Therefore, the crest level of the weir=2454.03m+0.27m+0.05m+0.1m+0m+0.48m=2455.16m
Therefore, Weir height = Crest Level of the Weir – River Bed Level
=2455.16m-2453.5m
H=1.66m, take 1.7m for design.
4.7.1 Crest length/ 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. The length of waterway is usually determined from Lacey‟s wetted
perimeter. Lacey developed the equations based on the analysis of large amount of data collected
on several river gullies.
The wetted perimeter, p is given by
P=4.75*√ Where Q=design discharge=97.2021m3/sec (obtained from hydrological analysis)
p=wetted perimeter
P=4.75*√ =4.75*√ =46.83m Using looseness factor it can be reduced to be more
Economical.Looseness factor is the ratio of overall length of weir to lacey perimeter for design
discharge.

Lf= where Lf = looseness factor

Length of weir= (Lf)*perimeter

Recommended Lf for river is (0.45-1)… (Dr K.R Arora, 2009)
Since our water way gained above is very wide it should be multiplied by factor 0.47
Hence, Le=0.47*46.83 = 22.01m provide actual length of weir 22m.
4.7.2 Flow over the Weir Crest
When a weir is constructed across the river, head is produced above the crest of the weir. This
head is an important factor in the design of hydraulic structures. In this section we need to
determine He, Hd and Ha (or Vh) as indicated on Figure 2 below. Flow over the weir crest is
computed to fix Upstream High flood level (U/s HFL), Energy level (EL), Tracing river flow
profile, Estimating back water curve, Flow depth for stability analysis, etc. The required head
over sill, He, for passing a discharge Q, with an effective waterway L, has to be worked out
from the following formula, which is meant for flow that is uncontrolled (without any
gate control).

P a g e 82
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Discharge over the weir is generally expressed by the following equation Q=CdLHe3/2
Where, Q = design discharge (m3/s).
He = Height of energy line above the crest (m)
L = length of the weir.

Cd = discharge coefficient. The coefficient Cd is not constant but depends on many factors such
as head above sill, shape and width of sill, upstream slope and downstream slope of the
sill, height above the upstream floor (P) and roughness of the surface. For roughly
estimation of river flow over the weir crest, most designers use Cd = 1.7 for broad created weir
and 2.1 for ogee shaped weirs. Effective waterway length is part of the weir crest at which free
over flow is fully observed.

Figure 4.4 Head over the weir

P a g e 83
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Water depths on the weir crest

1. Total energy head, He
Length of the weir L = 22m.
2/3
He=

He= ) 2/3=1.89m

2. Design head, Hd
The approach velocity

Va=

From the figure,

Substitute the value of Va from Eq-1 into Eq-2

The values of Hd can be obtained from equation 3 by trial and error method.
Hence, the value of Hd= 1.81m.
Computation of Ha, and Approach velocity, Va

√ √ /sec.

P a g e 84
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Tail water depth- Discharge rating curve, tail water depth equivalent to the flood discharge (i.e.
Q =97.2021 m3/sec) is found to be 2.15m
Tail water depth =River bed level +Corresponding discharge height from d/s rating curve.
Tail water level = 2453.54m a.s.l + 2.15m = 2455.69m a.s.l.
 River bed level = 2453.54m a.s.l
 Weir top level, = 2453.54m+1.7m=2455.24m
 D/S T.E.L

Level of D/S T.E.L = HFL before construction + ( )

High flood level before construction of the weir (D/S HFL) is = river bed level+ tail water depth
(From tail water curve)
Where HFL before construction, D/S HFL
= tail water depth corresponding to design discharge =2455.69 m a.s.l
D/S HFL=2455.69m a.s.l
Ha = Va2/2g= He –h = 1.89 m – 1.81 m = 0.08m
 D/s TEL =Tail water level (D/S HFL) +ha=2455.69m a.s.l + 0.08m =2455.77m
 U/S HFL =U/S TEL –velocity head
 Where U/S TEL = RL of weir crest + He
= 2455.16m a.s.l + 1.89m
= 2457.05m a.s.l
 Velocity head = 0.08m
 U/S HFL =2457.05m a.s.l – 0.08m =2456.97m a.s.l
 Afflux
 Afflux = U/S HFL- D/S HFL
= 2457.05m a.s.l –2455.69m a.s.l = 1.36m > [1m-1.2m] the allowable afflux
which is 1m.

The calculated afflux is greater than the allowable afflux, but the river bed is steep slope so that
this elevation can be attained a little distance on the upstream. In addition to this, protection
walls are provided on one hand and, there is no area needed to be secured from flood damage in
the vicinity on the other hand. Therefore, the afflux could be 1m.

P a g e 85
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

4.7.3 Top and bottom width

According to the beligh‟s formula, top and bottom width of the weir body is determined
as follows the basic section of weir body for non-submerged condition is determined as follows:
Top width, B‟ = ………………………………..eq(3.3)
√

B‟ = = 1.73m, Adopt B‟ =1.8m.

√

Bottom width, B= …………………………………eq(3.4)

√

B= =3.28m, Adopt B=3.3m.

√

Where, H: Height of weir (m) = 1.7m

He: specific energy head (over flow depth + approaching velocity head (m))
G : specific weight of weir body (G=2.2 (for masonry).
He: is estimated using broad crested weir formula
Q = 1.7 L He 3/2
where L =weir crest length = 22m including scouring sluice width

Figure 4.5 Weir body schematic Section

P a g e 86
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

4.8 Water surface profile at the weir site

The water profile of the weir at the upstream and downstream should be determined which will
be used in design of the appurtenant structures of the weir and infixing the dimension of these
structures. Therefore, the water profile upstream and downstream of the weir is determined as
follows.
4.8.1Water Surface Profile at the U/S of the Weir

The level of the back water curve is needed to determine the safe level of the embankment and
super structures so as to know the length of the wing wall and to know whether the embankment
needs some treatment measures to protect the overtopping of water over the river bank due to the
construction of the weir. Therefore it is important to know where the effect of backwater curve
will cease.
Water profile U/S of the weirs needs to be known for two purposes:
A. To determine the height of the river banks u/s of the weir and,
B.To find out whether the water surface is height enough to deliver the required discharge to the
off take canal.
There are several methods to determine the water profile upstream of the weirs. Out of these for
our particular scheme; the profile by approximate method is selected, which is given as;.

Y=

Where, y = Water rise at a distance X U/S of the weir above the normal water depth
X = distance from the crest to the point where y is required to be determined
S= slope of the river bed(s = 0.012)
o = rise of water above the normal water depth at the weir site. (x = 0)
First let‟s determine the end point where y becomes zero. At this point the effect of the
backwater curve disappears. It is computed as follows.

Y=

=XS-2 0=0

Where, o= U/S HFL-D/S HFL= 1.36m

P a g e 87
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

X=

Therefore the effect of construction of weir on the water profile during peak flood ceases at
226.67m away from the axis.

Table: 4.4 Computation of the backwater curve at different points U/S of the weir

Y=
Assumed
interval(x)
0 1.36
20 1.130588235
40 0.922352941
60 0.735294118
80 0.569411765
100 0.424705882
120 0.301176471
140 0.198823529
160 0.117647059
180 0.057647059
200 0.018823529
220 0.001176471
226.67 2.94118E-10

The effect of constructing a barrier (weir) on u/s water surface diminished and disappears at
226.67m u/s of the weir and this indicates that no infrastructure is to be laid in this gap without
considering this rise of water.
4.8.2Water Surface Profile D/S of the Weir
Once the crest level is decided, it is required to draw the water profile for Q max. (For 50 year
return period) discharge. The water profile is required to:
 Carry out the stability analysis of the weir
 Design the weir structurally
 Design the downstream wing wall, and protection works downstream of the apron.

P a g e 88
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Construction of weir elevates the total energy line U/S of the structures. The difference b/n the
U/S and D/S energy grade line becomes high. Therefore, the energy must be dissipated before it
reaches the natural river course; otherwise it causes damage to the banks and D/S apron. The
flow over the weir is super critical. Therefore the energy tends to dissipate by a hydraulic jump
d/s of the weir. Thus we need to compute the conjugate depths y1 and y2 and compare the value
of y2 with the tail water depth y3. Depending on the condition of the tail water with respect to the
y2, the downstream apron/impervious floor/stilling basin level should be adjusted.
The water profile D/S of the weir is required to carry out the stability analysis of the weir as well
as to design the D/S wing wall and other river bank protection D/S of the weir

(0)
Ha
Hd

D/S
HFL
p

Figure 4.6 A typical water profile over the weir

Analysis of the D/S profile is carried out for the Q =97.2021 m3/s , q=4.42m3/s/m
The position of the jump on horizontal surface can be determined by Appling Bernoulli‟s
equation b/n the weir crest and weir toe
Applying Bernoulli‟s equation b/n (0) and (1)

P+ Hd = Y1 +

Where Y1= initial depth of the jump

P a g e 89
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
V1= Velocity at the points of initial jump
V1=

q =Discharge intensity
q= /sec/m.

V1=

1.7+1.89 = y1+

3.59= y1 +

By trial and error y1=0.5746m.

V1= = 7.69m/sec.

Froude number Fr1= = =3.23> 1, it is super critical flow.[2.5-4.5].oscillating

√ √

jump.
Critical depth yc is equal to

Yc =( ) =( )

Y1<yc , implies that the flow takes place from supercritical to subcritical flow .The post /
sequent jump .y2.
The post jump depth or conjugate depth, y2 calculated from Upstream is known
y1=0.5746m.The downstream depth y2 will be:-

= √ -1)

Y2=2.35m
The difference between y2 and y3 must be zero for best hydraulic condition. In general case the
difference can be increased up to the range of 0.2m to o.4m. In this case y2 is nearly equal to y3 ,
implies no need to depress the bed of the river. Y2=Y3 hydraulic jump occur at the toe of the
weir.
4.9 Energy dissipation
Construction of weirs elevates the total energy line upstream of the structure. The difference
between the upstream and downstream energy grade line become very high. Therefore, the
energy must be dissipated before it reaches the natural river course, otherwise it causes damage

P a g e 90
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
to the banks and downstream of the apron. The flow over the weir is in a supercritical state.
Therefore, the energy tends to dissipate through a hydraulic jump downstream of the weir. To
control location of the jump, the apron and stilling basin are designed to suit a range of river
discharges.
U/S TEL

U/S HFL He=1.89 D/S HFL

y3

1.7m

y1 y2

Figure 4.7 Energy dissipation

The head loss caused by hydraulic jump is the drop in energy from section (0) and section (1).
q= /sec/m

V1=

1.7+1.89 = y1+

3.59= y1 +

By trial and error y1=0.5746m.

V1= = 7.69m/sec.

3.59= y1 +

By trial and error y1=0.5746m.

P a g e 91
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

V1= = 7.69m/sec.

Froude number Fr1= = =3.23> 1, it is super critical flow.[2.5-4.5].oscillating

√ √

jump.
Critical depth yc is equal to

Yc=( ) =( )

Y1<yc , implies that the flow takes place from supercritical to subcritical flow .The post /
sequent jump .y2.
The post jump depth or conjugate depth, y2 calculated from Upstream is known
y1=0.5746m.The downstream depth y2 will be:-

= √ -1)

Y2=2.35m
As y3=y2 the jump occurs on horizontal apron there is need to construct stilling basin in order to
mitigate erosion of horizontal apron.
4.10 Dimension of stilling basin
Length of basin =4.2 y2=4.2*2.35=9.87m
Height of chute block H=y1=0.5746m
Width of chute block b=y1=0.5746m
Space between chute blocks, S=2.5*y1=2.5*0.5746=1.4365m
Length of chute block l=2*y1=2*0.5746=1.1492m
Height of end sill h=0.2*y2=0.2*2.35= 0.47m
Width of the end sill = 0.15y2=0.1*2.35=0.235m
Slope of end sill is 2:1

hl= ES1-ES2= Y1+

ES= = =1.036m

Hj(height of jump)=y2-y1=2.35m-0.5746m=1.7754m
Li(length of jump)=5(y2-y1)=5(2.35-0.5746)=8.877m.So,the minimum length of the d/s
impervious length is about 8.877m from the toe of the weir.

P a g e 92
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

4.11 Scour Depth Determination

Irrigation structures should be designed against scour which occurs due to surface flow.
According to Lacey, the normal depth of scour „R‟ in alluvial soils is given by:

R = 1.35( ……………………………….……equ3.1.

Lacy silt fact f =1.75√ …………………………………..equ3.2.d=3mm average mean

diameter of particle
f =1.75√ = 3.031

R = 1.35 * ( = 2.512m

Depth of sheet pile

Depth of D/S sheet pile below the river bed ,d2
d2= 1.75R – T.W .D
d2 = 1.75*2.512-2.15=2.246m, Adopt d2 =2.0m
Depth of U/S sheet pile below the river bed,d1
d1= 1.5R – (h +Hd)
d1= 1.5*2.512-(1.7+1.81)=0.258m
Adopt d1 =1.0m

4.12 Cut offs

The weir foundation will be laid on relatively fresh rock after removing the top most weathered
rock with a depth 0.2m from the minimum river bed level and an average depth of 0.5m from the
remaining weir axis accordingly the longitudinal and cross-sectional dimension of the weir.
Therefore only nominal anchorage (cut off) depth 1.0m is provided for u/s and 1m depth for d/s
after the removal of weathered rock. This cut of depth is to anchor the weir body with the fresh
rock, thereby blocking seepage in b/n the bed rock and the weir. The weathered rock is exposed
at the center of the river but overlain by silt clay soil at the banks, so removal the specified
thickness of weathered rock is done after excavating the overlain silt clay soil deposit. Cut off
dimensions are fixed based on the geological study conducted along the river cross section at the
weir site.

P a g e 93
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

4.13 Design of under sluice

The function of the under sluice is to prevent high sediment loads entering the canal off-takes
.The under sluice dimension /capacity have fixed to pass the maximum of 10% to 20% of high
flood discharge and 5 times main canal capacity.
The main functions of under sluice are;
 Enables the canal to draw silt free water from surface as much as possible.
 Scour the silt deposited in front of the canal off take (regulator)
 Preserve a clear and defined river channel approaching the regulator.
Here, the under sluice is mainly provided to remove silt deposition and to increase the efficiency
of water abstracting to the main canal through the head regulator.
Capacity
The capacity of the under sluice is determined based on the general guide lines and site
conditions stated below;
 The capacity should be at least five times the canal discharge to ensure proper scouring.
 Capacity of passing about 10% to 20% of the maximum flood discharge at high floods.
 During construction, it should be able to pass the prevailing (at least base flow) discharge
of the river.
Using a broad crested weir formula, Q=Cd* L* Hd3/2
Where Q=discharge through under sluice =15%*97.2021m3/sec=14.58m3/sec.
Cd coefficient of discharge = 1.7, L= Length of under sluice section, m
Hd= water depth above the crest of the under sluice during high flood
(p + Hd =1.7+1.81 = 3.52 m)
Hence L= = =1.29m, Use L=1m length of sluice at the intakes.

For a 1m length of the scouring sluice, one layer 1 m by 1m sheet metal is used.
The critical case in the case of under sluice is during non-flow condition. The high flood
condition is expected during summer. In this condition, water is not required for irrigation. If so,
the under sluice should be fully opened/Taken away/.

P a g e 94
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

4.14 Head Regulator

Command being the prime objective of raising the crest of the head regulator above the channel
bed, the crest level will be fixed with due consideration to level of highest field under command,
preferred command on the highest field, canal bed slope, canal length, losses through structures,
including the canal head regulator.
The pond level upstream of the canal head regulator will generally be obtained by adding the
working head to the designed full supply level in the canal, depending on the command
topography, subject to the limiting height of the main structure. The working head will include
the head required for passing the design discharge into the canal and the head losses in the
regulator.
The head regulator is a structure at the head of a canal taking off from a reservoir behind a weir.
It is provided to;
 Regulate supply in the canal
 Control the entry of silt in the canal
 Shut out the river floods
For an orifice flow, QD=Cd*A√
So, using the above formula for Qd, by changing the values of depth and width, we can find the
exact amount of discharge that is expected to pass through the intake canal.
But we should first find the value of Q as follows:
Q = Max. Duty*Command area, where
Max. Duty, l/s/ha = 0.5
Command area, ha = 15
Therefore, Q (m3/s) = 0.0075
Width of gate, (m) = 0.5 (assume), sometimes equal to canal water depth.
Height of gate, (m) = 0.5 (assume)
For the first iteration of the intake structure, the area of the sluice gate is taken to be 0.4m*0.4m
and the driving head, hL, of the intake is assumed to be between0.2 and 0.4m, and 0.3 is taken
for this case.
Using the above formula for Qd, the value of Cd = 0.6, also take the value of hL(deriving head) =
0.3m

P a g e 95
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Deriving head =0.3
Cd = 0.62
The area of the intake = 0.4m*0.4m=0.16m2
Using the above formula for Qd, the value of Cd=0.62, Also take the value of h L (driving head),
0.3m
Qd=Cd*A*(2ghL) 0.5 = 0.62*0.16m2*(2*9.81*0.3)0.5=0.241m3/s/ha
Since this value, 0.241m3/s/ha is greater than the amount of discharge wanted to pass through the
canal, 0.0075m3/s/ha thus, the canal head regulator dimension is enough to deliver the flow
(0.0075m3/s) to the canal.
The gate for head regulator is to be vertical sheet metal of size 0.5m x 0.5m for the closure of the
opening space providing some extra dimensions for the groove insertion, gross area of sheet
metal for the gate will be 0.55m x 0.6m (allowing 5cm insertion for grooves).
(0.5m+5cm) × (5cm+0.5m + 5cm)= 0.55m×0.6m.
4.15 Depth of sheet pile
 Depth of D/S sheet pile below the river bed ,d2
d2= 1.75R – T.W .D
d2 = 1.75*2.512-2.15=2.246m, Adopt d2 =2.0m
The thickness of d/s cut off t=0.5m
 Depth of U/S sheet pile below the river bed,d1
d1= 1.5R – (h +Hd)
d1= 1.5*2.512-(1.7+1.81)=0.258m
Adopt d1 =1.0m
The thickness of u/s cut off t=0.5m
4.16 Impervious Floor
Seepage head, Hs= Pond level – Bed Level

=2455.16-2453.5

=1.66m=1.7m (weir height)

By Bligh ' s theory, the total creep length (L) is given by:

Total creep length, L =C*HS …………………………………..equ3.3

P a g e 96
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Where, C=Bligh ' s Creep coefficient taken as (5-9) for gravel foundation

Let us take C=9

HS is the head difference between U/Sand D/S (1.7m, weir height)
L=9*1.7=15.3m
Hence the total length of the floor is 15.3m
 Length of downstream impervious floor, L
d

LD=2.21*C √

=2.21*9 √

Ld =8.2m
 Length of upstream impervious floor, L
u
Lu=L- (Ld+B+2d 1 +2d2)

Lu =15.3-(8.2 +3.3+2*1+2*2)

Lu = -2.2m

The analysis shows, there is no need of providing U/s impervious floor, hence, the u/s cutoff
should be located at the heel of the weir, but for allowance provide a nominal floor length
3m.

For the u/s impervious floor let us take nominal value of Lu= 3m

Therefore the floor length (b) = Lu + B+Ld=3m+3.3m+ 8.2m=14.5m

 Total creep length changed into=b+2d 1 +2d 2 =14.5+2*1+2*2=20.5m

Protection Work
A.D/S protection work
Minimum length of D/S concrete blocks = 1.5d2 = 1.5*2 = 3m. Provide 1m*1m*1m concrete
blocks over 0.5m thick inverted filter.
Minimum length of launching apron = 2.5d2 = 2.5*2 = 5m.
√
Thickness of launching apron, =0.5m

B. Up stream Protection Work

Minimum length u/s concrete block=1d1=1*1=1m

P a g e 97
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Provided 1m*1m*1m concrete block cover 0.6m thick gravel
Minimum length u/s lunch apron=2d1=2*1=2 m

Thickness lunch apron=t=√ * =√ * 0.5m

4.17 Thickness of Impervious Floor by Bligh’s Theory

Seepage head = 1.7m,
Creep length = 20.5m.
Specific gravity=2.24
Residual head at point the toe of weir wall
H=Hs- (2d1+Lu+B)= 1.7-

The thickness of D/S floor at the toe is then obtained by;

t= = *( ) Provide a thickness of 1.08m for a length 4m

Thickness of downstream floor after 4m from the function of the weir wall.
H=Hs-

H=1.7-

t= = *( ) Provide a thickness of 0.73m

4.18 Check by Khosla, s Theory

A. Pressure at Key Points (E1 ,C1 and D1) at the Upstream pile

( ) and ( )
√
Where, 𝞴= and

d is upstream depth below upstream floor thickness and b is total length of the floor .
b=14.5m and d=1m
Thus,

√ √
From the above formula, and 𝞴= and

finally:

( )=

P a g e 98
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

( )=

Based on the values of E and D

= 100-28.41 = 71.59%

The values of and must be corrected for three corrections as follows:

Correction for
a. Correction at C1 for Mutual Interference of downstream pile

c=19*√ * +

Where: D is depth of downstream pile=2m

b‟ is distance between the two pile = 13.5m
b is total floor length = 14.5m
d is depth of upstream pile =1m

c=19*√ * +

since the point c1 is in the rear or back water in the direction of flow , the correction is positive.
C1=1.51% (+ve)
b. Correction at C1 due to the thickness of floor
Pressure at C1 shall be more than at C‟1 as the direction of flow is from C1 to C‟1 and hence the
correction will be +ve .

Correction for thickness at C1,C1t=* +

C1t=* +

c. Correction at C1 due to slope

Correction due to slope at C1 is nil (horizontal), as this point is neither situated at the start nor at
the end of a slope.
Therefore, corrected =71.59%+ 1.51%+0.02% = 73.12% and =71.63%
B. Pressure at Key Points (E2 ,C2 and D2) at the Downstream pile

( ) and ( )

P a g e 99
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
√
Where, 𝞴= and

d is downstream depth below upstream floor thickness and b is total length of the floor .
b=14.5m and d=2m
√
And, 𝞴=

( )

( )

The values of and must be corrected for three corrections as follows:

Correction for
a. Correction at E2 for Mutual Interference of upstream pile

c=19*√ * +

Where: D is depth of downstream pile=2452.54-2451.54=1m

b‟ is distance between the two piles(cutoff) = 13.5m
b is total floor length = 14.5m
d is depth of upstream pile =2452.54-2450.04=2.5m

c=19*√ * +

since the point c1 is in the rear or back water in the direction of flow , the correction is positive.
C1=1.51% (-ve). The point E2 is affected by pile No 1 and since E2 is the forward direction of
flow from pile No 2.
b. Correction at E2 due to the thickness of floor
Pressure at E2 shall be less than at E‟2 as the direction of flow is from E‟2 to E2 and hence the
correction will be -ve.

Correction for thickness at E2,E2t =* +

E2t=* +

c. Correction at E2 due to slope

Correction due to slope at E2 is nil.
Therefore, corrected =28.48%- 1.51% -0.014%= 26.96%% and =28.41%
Exit gradient

P a g e 100
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
 Total length of the impervious floor, b=14.5m
 Depth of downstream pile, d2=2453.04-2450.54=2.5m
√
 ,

 GE= =
√ √

4.19 Structural Design of the Weir

For the weir to be broad crested
0.5Hd < b < 2HD
0.5 (1.81) < b <2 (1.81) ,b=3.3m
0.905<b<3.62, OK!
Maximum head on the structure:
Dynamic case = Head water- Tail water
= (1.89+1.7) – 2.15=1.44m
Static case = Weir crest- River bed
=2455.16-2453.5= 1.7m
4.19.1 Stability analysis of the weir

Besides satisfying the hydraulic requirements, the designed structure has to be safe against
Overturning, sliding, tension and such related structural parameters. Hence the designed section
is checked for stability requirement.
The external forces acting on weir varies from region to region and hence considering the
geology of the area and behavior of the river foundation condition, the stability analysis is
carried out on the effect of the following forces.
 Water pressure
 Weight of the over flow weir section
 Silt pressure
 Water pressure: -The resultant force due to external water
= ½ γwh2, a citing at h/3 from base, where γwis the unit
Weight of water (i.e. 10 KN/m3) and h is the depth of water
Weight of the over flow weir section: - the weight of the weir body is the major resisting force
and a unit length of the weir is considered.

P a g e 101
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
 Unit weight of sound masonry =23kN/m3
 Silt pressure:- the force due to silt is considered up to canal outlet level and given by,
Psilt = ½ ka γsub h2 and it acts at h‟/3 from base
Where ka = coefficient of active earth pressure
γsub = submerged unit weight of silt material
h‟ = height of silt deposited (i.e. from the river bed up to crest)
The weir section developed under the hydraulic design has checked for structural safety as
follows:
Structural analysis deals with checking the stability of the weir against.
i. - Over turning
ii. - Sliding
iii. Tension
Analysis of the weir stability for two conditions should be taken such as:
A).Dynamic case
B). Static case
A) Dynamic case -Conditions:
 Dynamic case
 Uplift pressure was considered for the general weir section.
 Water wedge weight was considered for the weir crest only (critical depth)
 Downstream water pressure was considered

Unit weight of water is 10KN/m3 and that of sound masonry work is 23KN/m3

Unit weight of silt = 19kN/m3
 Moment is taken about the toe per meter width
 Angle of internal friction=350(Assumption)

 Active internal friction (ka) = = = 0.271

P a g e 102
ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
HF
L
Hd W
 H
=He-
w d

W W
Pw H1
2
1 1.7
y1=0 P
1 w
Pw
2
W (H+Hd) =  wHt
Pu

3.3m

P2 P1

Figure 4.8 Stability analysis of the weir

P a g e 103
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Table: 4.5 Stability analysis of dynamic case

Code Load Load Lever Moment( Moment(KN

vertical(KN/m) Horizontal(KN arm, KN-m) -m)
) R(m)
Downward(+ve Anticlock Clock wise(-
) and upward(- Toward U/S wise(+ve) ve)
ve) (+ve) and
toward D/S(-
ve)

W1=Se =Ap* m=1.8*1. =1.5+(0 =lever

lf 7*23 =70.38 .5*1.8) arm*load
weight =2.4 =70.38*2.
1 4

=168.912
W2= Self =Ap* =0.5*1.7*23 = *1.5=1 =29.325*1=29.

weight 2 *1.5 =29.325 325

Ps=silt Ps=0.5*ka* = *0.5 =0.3049*0.1

, 2
pressur *z 67=0.051
=0.167
e ,
=

Ps=0.5*0.271*
9*0.52=0.3049

Pw=Water pressure Pw1=0.5* * = *1.81 =15.385*0.6

hd*1.7 03=9.277
=0.603
Pw1=0.5*10*1
.81*1.7

Pw1=15.385

P a g e 104
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Pw2=1.7*10*1 = =0. =0.85*28.9=

.7 24.565
85
Pw2=28.9

Pw3=0.5*10*0 = *0.57 =1.65*0.1

2
.5746 =-1.65 92=0.3168
46=0.1
92

Up=Uplif Pu1=0.5746* = =1. =18.962*1.6

t pressure 3.3* w 5=31.287
65
pu1=0.5746*3
.3*10=-
18.962

Pu2=0.5*3.3* = *3.3 =18.569*2.2

1.1254* w =40.852
=2.2
Pu2=0.5*3.3*
1.1254*10=-
18.569

Ww=wei Ww1=AW1* = +1. =30.6*2.4

ght of w =73.44
5=2.4
water
Ww1=10*1.7
*1.8=30.6 =12.75*1
= *1.5
Ww2=AW1* =12.75
=1
w

Ww2=10*0.5
*1.5*1.7=12.7
5

Sum ∑V=105.524 ∑H=42.94 ∑M ∑M -

P a g e 105
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
+ve=284.7 ve=106.032
438

1. Stability against sliding:-

Factor of safety against sliding
∑
FS= ∑ = =0.41<0.75

Therefore the weir is safe against sliding.

2. Stability against overturning:-
Factor of safety against overturning
∑
Fo=∑ = =2.68>1.5

So, it is safe against overturning.

3. Stability against overstress (tension):-
Factor of safety against overstress.

e=| -X|<
∑
x= ∑
= =1.69

e=| -X|< = -1.69=0.04<0.55 = =0.55

0.04<0.55, hence the weir is safe against over stress (no tension).
The weir is stable in all cases.

4. Factor of safety against contact pressure

The contact pressure (stress) on the foundation at the toe or heel of the weir body should be less
than the allowable bearing capacity of the foundation material .Maximum and minimum
compressive stress developed at the toe of the weir is given by:

∑
max= *(1+ )=34.30KN/m2
∑
min= *(1- )=29.65KN/m2

P a g e 106
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
B) Static Case
Force acting on the weir includes:
Self-weight of weir is considered at all section of the weir.
Up lift pressure was considered for the weir section (zero at the toe).
Water weight was considered at the upstream face of the weir on the height of the weir.

W
W2
H
1.7
Pw1

Figure 4.9 Forces act on weir Pu

P a g e 107
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 4.6 Forces and moments acting on weir at static case

Code Load Load Lever Moment( Moment(KN

vertical(KN/m) Horizontal(KN arm, KN-m) -m)
/m) R(m)
Downward(+v Anticlock Clock wise(-
e) and Toward U/S wise(+ve) ve)
upward(-ve) (+ve) and
toward D/S(-
ve)

W1=Sel =Ap* m=1.8*1 =1.5+(0 =lever

f weight .7*23 =70.38 .5*1.8) arm*load
1 =2.4 =70.38*2.
4

=168.912
W2= Self =Ap* =0.5*1.7*2 = *1.5=1 =29.325*1=29.

weight 2 3*1.5 =29.325 325

Pw=Water pressure Pw1=0.5* * = *1.7 =14.45*0.56

2
z 7=8.19
=0.567
Pw1=0.5*10*1
.72

Pw1=14.45

UP=uplif Pu=0.5*3.3*1 = *3.3 =28.05*2.2=

t pressure .7* w 61.71
=2.2
Pu=0.5*3.3*1
.7*10=-28.05

P a g e 108
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Ps=silt Ps=0.5*ka* = *0.5 =0.3049*0.1

,
pressure *z2 67=0.051
=0.167
,
=

Ps=0.5*0.271*
9*0.52=0.3049

Sum ∑V=71.655 ∑H=14.75 ∑M ∑M –

+ve=198.2 ve=69.951
37

1. Stability against sliding:-

Factor of safety against sliding
∑
FS= ∑ = =0.21<0.75

Therefore the weir is safe against sliding.

2. Stability against overturning:-
Factor of safety against overturning
∑
FO=∑ = =2.83>1.5

So, it is safe against overturning.

3. Stability against overstress (tension):-
Factor of safety against overstress.
e=| -X|<
∑
x= ∑
= =1.79

e=| -X|< -1.79=0.14<0.55 = =0.55

0.14<0.55, hence the weir is safe against over stress (no tension).

P a g e 109
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
The weir is stable in all cases.
4. Factor of safety against contact pressure
The contact pressure (stress) on the foundation at the toe or heel of the weir body should be less
than the allowable bearing capacity of the foundation material .Maximum and minimum
compressive stress developed at the toe of the weir is given by:

∑
max= *(1+ )=27.24KN/m2
∑
min= *(1- )=16.187KN/m2

Stability analysis shows that the designed weir section (i.e. 1.8m top width and 3.3 m bottom
width) is safe structurally and also it is economical.
4.20 Design of wing wall
sufficient free board should be provided for u/s and d/s using wall in order to protect the wall and
embankments from being over topped by surges,splesh& sprey,and wave action setup the
turbulence of hydraulic jump and not to allow high flood water to bypass the structure. The
common practice in the design of well is adopted for this project, assign tentative dimensions and
check for the overall stability of the structures.
To control the spillage of flood in to the irrigation canal and to protect the scouring of banks due
to the incoming high velocity wing wells are provided.
Therefore the maximum footing depth or height that should be provided in this situation can be
determined as shown below.

Wing wall length

The wing wall length is determined considering the topographic feature of the river bank.
Lw=5√

Lw=5√ =7.84m
Lw=8m

P a g e 110
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

A) Dimension of u/s wing well

-u/s height of wing well=H +he + fb
where, H is height of weir=1.7m
he is total flow head over the crest of the weir=1.89m
fb is free board=0.5m(assumed)
Therefore, u/s height of wing wall=1.7+1.89+0.5=4.09m (above u/s river bed)
-Top width of wall, B= = =1.728m
√ √

Use B= 1m from practical point of view (source soil mechanics arora)

-Base width of retaine wall = 3.3m
-Top elevation of the wing wall =u/s river bed +H +He
=2453.54+1.7+1.89=2457.13m
-Front face: vertical
-Foundation depth =1m (assumed)
-B =unit cross section of the wall =1m
-Ps =force due to soil pressure
Ws =weight of soil
1) Stability analysis for u/s of the wing walls
The u/s wing wells are used for guiding the river water to confine it within river width, protect
u/s river banks not to be over topped. Gravity type wing walls are proposed to be constructed
with stone masonry embedded into a cement sand mortar designed as gravity walls. The stability
analysis of the u/s wing walls are carried for critical section described above as follows.
-Coefficient (ka) of earth pressure using Rankine formula.

Ka= = =0.271

P a g e 111
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Figure 4 Upstream wing walls

Table: 4.7 the various Forces and their moments about the toe.
Moment
Moment (KNm)
Horizo
KNm
ntal Lever Clock
Vertical Load load arm Antichock wise (-
Code (KN/m) (KN/m) R(m) wire (+ve) ve)

Wm=
Weight Wm1 = ×Ap
of =
= 23×1m×4.09×1
masonr 94.07×0.5=4
y =94.07 = = 0.5 7.035

Wm2= m×AP = 3.3-

×2.3 =94.95×1.77
=23×

=1.77 =168.06

P a g e 112
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
=94.95

Wm3 = m×Ap =

=23×1m×3.3×1 1+ (2.3) =75.9×1.65

=75.9 =2.53 =125.235

Ws
Ws = s×As×b
=Weig
=1= (2. =74.313×2.5
ht for
=18× ×2.3×3.59 3) 3
backfill
soil =74.313 =2.53 =188.011

Ps
= kaŶs

= ×0.2
Ps =
71×18×
Active
=1.55×5
soil
= ×4.59 1.385
pressur =51.38
e 5 =1.53 =78.619

∑ ∑ ∑

Sum ∑

1) Stability against sliding

Fs= = =0.151<0.75, it is safe

2) Stability against over turning

Fs= = =6.7>1.5, it is safe

3) Stability against over stress (tension)

P a g e 113
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

e=/ -x/<

x= = =1.325

e=/ -x/<

e=/ -1.325/<0.55 , = =0.55

e =0.325<0.55,it is safe(tension)
4) Factor of safety against contact pressure
The contact pressure (stress) on the foundation should be less than the allowable bearing capacity
of the foundation material. Maximum and minimum. Compressive stress developed toe of the
weir given by
δmax = *(1+ ) =163.542KN/

δmin = *(1- ) =42.05KN/

The foundation condition should be checked with respect to this value construction.
From stability analysis, the desired wall section (i.e 1m top width and 3.3m bottom width is safe)
(B) Dimension of the D/S Wing wall
 D/s wing wall Height = TWD + Fb
Where, TWD is Tail water depth = 2.15m
Fb = Free board = 0.5m (Assumed)
Therefore, D/S Height of wing wall = TWD + Fb = 2.15+0.5 =2.65m (Above River Bed
level)
 Top width Of wall, B= = = 1.726m
√ √

Use B = 1m from practical point of view (source soil Mechanics Arora)

 Base width of Retaining well = 3.3m
 Top elevation of the wing wall = D/S River bed + TWD +Fb
D/s River bed =2453.04
 Top elevation of the wing wall =2453.04 + 2.15 +0.5
=2455.69m
 Front Face: vertical
 Foundation Depth = 1m (Assumed)

P a g e 114
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
 Ps = Force due to soil pressure
 US = Weight of soil

Figure 4.11 Downstream wing wall

P a g e 115
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 4.8 The Various Forces and their moment about the toe
Horizont Moment
Vertical al Lever Moment KN.m
Load(K Load(KN arm Anticlock clockwise (-
Code Nm) m) R(m) wise (+ve) ve)

Wm1
= m×A
p

=23×1
m×2.65 =0.5×60.95
=

=60.95 0.5 =30.475

Wm2
= m×A
p

=23×1×
×2.3×2
=3.3-
.15 56.8675×1.7
×2.3 7
=56.867
5 =1.77 =100.655

Wm3=
s×AS×b

=23×1×
Wm=Wei
3.3×1 =1.65×75.9
ght of = =

Masonary =75.9 1.65 =125.235

Ws = Ws = 1+ (2 =44.505×2.5

P a g e 116
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Weight of s×s×b .3) 3
back fill
=18× × =2.53 =112.5976

2.3×2.1
5

=44.505

Ps
= kaŶs

=
Ps = = ×0.271
×3.15 =1.05×24.20
Active soil ×18×
pressure =1.05 =25.41

∑ ∑ ∑ = ∑

Sum 386.9626

B) Stability analysis for d/s of the wing wells

The stability analysis of the d/s wing well are carried out based on the following assumption and
data Angle of response ( ) in all condition =35
Coefficient (Ka) of earth pressure using Rankine formula.

-Ka = = =0.271

-Active earth pressure Ps = Ka

1) Stability against sliding

Fs= = =0.102<0.75, it is safe

2) Stability against over turning

Fs= = =14.52>1.5, it is safe

3) Stability against over stress (Tension)

P a g e 117
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

e=/ -X/<

X= = = =1.44

e=/ -1.44/< , = =0.55

e=0.21<0.55, it is safe (No tension)

4) Factor of safety against contact pressure
δmax = ×(1+ ) =99.75KN/

δmin = ×(1 )=44.63KN/

The foundation condition should be checked with respect to this value construction.
-From stability analysis the desired wall section (i.e 1m top width and 3.3m bottom width is safe)
4.21 Design of divide wall
The divide wall separates the under sluice from the main weir portion and allows a silt free water
flow to the head regulator by depositing the silt in the under sluice pocket. It is a wall
constructed parallel to the direction of flow of river to separate the weir proper section & the silt
excluder section there by facilitates scouring operations. If there are head regulator on both sides,
silt excluders & there by divide walls have to be provided on both sides. Without divide walls
currents approach the scouring sluices from all directions and their effectiveness is reduced. With
the provision of divide walls flow can be concentrated along the regulator face.
The second objective of the wall is to separate the floor of the scouring sluices which is generally
at lower level than of the remaining portion and thus prevent turbulent action.
The third reason is to prevent cross currents and flow parallel to the weir which will cause
scouring.
The length of the divide wall on the upstream side extends a little bit the head regulator;
Sometimes may extend up to the end of the upstream impervious floor. On the downstream side,
thought is common to extend the wall to the end of the downstream impervious floor; it can be
extended till the toe of the weir wall.
Design consideration
While designing the wall the following forces has to be taken into consideration:
(a) Silt pressure up to the full tank level on the pocket side when the river level is low. At this
time there is no water on the river side or the pocket side.

P a g e 118
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
(b) Difference of water pressure of about 0.25 to 2.0m on both sides depending on the height of
the wall.
Wall height fixation
The existing topographical condition at the weir axis and HFL are considered to be most
governing parameters for fixing the wall height and freeboard (0.35m-0.4m).
U/S wall height = U/s HFL - foundation level + free board
U/S wall height=2457.05m-2454m +0.4m=3.45m
D/S wall height = D/s HFL - foundation level + free board
D/S wall height=2455.69m-2454m+0.4m=2.09m
The downstream wall height can be made as steps to reduce the wall height.

Divide wall thickness

Considering the wall height, the load‟s acting on the wall and the materials proposed for wall
construction (i.e the stone masonry, concrete), we can provides a divide wall of 0.5-1.0m
thickness of rectangular section.
4.22 Design of an embankment earth fill dyke
In addition to the wing wall, for flood protection, embankment earth fill dyke will be used. The
structure is selected from economical view. Hence the reason that using embankment earth fill
dyke constructed from natural available material. The wing wall parts including 8m from u/s part
designed as the previous way and considered as masonry structures. And the total length of
embankment earth fill dyke taken (226.67m-8m=218.67m).

P a g e 119
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

CHAPTER 5
5. IRRIGATION CANAL SYSTEM DESIGN
5.1General
Canals are designed to distribute water properly in the system that will make irrigation possible
and efficient. The purpose of the design of main and secondary canal lines is to distribute water
just as evenly from the intake to the command area. Whereas drains are designed to dispose of
the water from the field which may create water logging in the field. Soil and crop characteristics
represent basic quantities in the compatibility of the canal hydraulic parameters.
The layout of the network distribution depends on the slope and Shape of the land, which is
suitable to irrigation practices. The network system or main canal, secondary canals and tertiary
canals are to be designed properly by providing sufficient canal area. Based on the topography of
the command area, the main canal, secondary, and field canals run along the contour; while
tertiary canals are aligned across the contour. The type and method of irrigation is surface and
furrow irrigation respectively.
 Canal alignment is straight as for as possible.
 The average slope of a main canal is flatter than the average slope of a branch canals.
The command area of the project is beyond Ashiro River between 2415m and 2459m amsl,
contour elevations. Contour canals are suitable for hilly terrains to avoid excessive slope, cutting
and filling.
The main canal starts from the diversion weir. All field canals are supplied by tertiary canals;
which are generally governed by the orientation and direction of field, and the method of
irrigation.
5.2 Canal capacity
The aim of this study is the determination of the quantity of water required for the growth of
plant, which serve as the basic for the design of irrigation canal and stuctures.The determination
of irrigation water requirement therefore need the study and analysis of cropping pattern ,
estimation of crop water requirement , estimation of effective rainfall and estimation of
irrigation efficiency.

P a g e 120
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

5.3 Need of irrigation

The population of the project area are totally dependent on rain fed agriculture where by the
rainfall is expected twice in a year. Along this line, the other concern is fast growing population
from year to year without noticeable increase in food production to satisfy the demand which
would ultimately endanger the food security of the area .The population of the project area are ,in
general ,not self-sufficient in food production. The irrigation facility for 15 hectares of land, if
provided, will improve the crop in quantity as well in quality.
5.3.1 Main canal alignment
The layout of the primary canal is based on the minimum drawdown level of the storage,
topography of the command area, and expected maximum cultivable command area. In addition,
the length of the canal should be small as much as possible. Main canal is the largest canal in the
system and it takes off from headwork.
Considerations on the canal alignment
Maintain the head of the secondary canal to irrigate more area
 Minimum number of falls, cross drainage structures, chutes etc.
 Minimum length of canal per hectare
 So as to minimize seepage loss, the alignment is done in canals more on cutting
5.3.2 Secondary canal alignment
The layouts of secondary canals depend on the layout of the tertiary and primary canals. Major
considerations of the choice of layout of secondary canals are:
 Divide the command area in to suitable size for layout and management
 Convey water in efficient way to each tertiary canal perpendicularly
 To cover all suitable command area even in hills
 Minimum length of canals
 Minimum number of falls, cross drainage structures
5.3.3 Tertiary canal alignment
Tertiary canals are smaller canals in Ashiro irrigation system network, which supply water to
field canals. At the same time, it carries the full supply water to irrigate the field. The tertiary
canal layout is designed by considering
 the method of irrigation

P a g e 121
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
 the easiness of operation and management
 the slope of cultivable land
 minimum number of tertiary canals
 the irrigation of more area in gross command
 minimum drainage and canal infrastructures
 And a canal should be aligned on a watershed or ridge as far as possible because it
ensures irrigation on both sides of the canal and avoids cross drainage works.
5.4 Canal design
5.4.1 General
To take away water from the canal headwork such as weir, barrage, storage reservoir or storage
dam to the field; a well-designed distribution system consisting of a network of canals is
required.
Based on the water requirements of crops on the area to be irrigated, the entire system of main
canal, secondary canal, tertiary canal and field distributaries should be designed properly. The
canals are designed for a certain realistic value of peak discharge that must pass through them, to
provide sufficient irrigation water to the command area. Therefore, the design of canal is based
on the irrigation water requirement. The designed canal is unlined; because in Ashiro irrigation
project area, there is an impermeable soil and has hard foundation. The canals passing through
such area have no tendency to shift their courses and they do not cause much problem for
designing irrigation structure.
5.4.2 Design parameters

5.4.2.1. Duty
Duty is the capacity of water to irrigate the land. It is the ratio of the area of the land to be
irrigated to the quantity of water required. The field water supply of the project estimated by
using “crop Wat 8”. The duty of canal is 0.5l/s/ha.
5.4.2.2 Time factor
Time factor is the ratio of the number of days the canal actually runs during a watering period to
the total number of days of the watering. Take 12hr working time out of the 24 hr of the day.

P a g e 122
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
5.4.2.3 Slope
Slope is fixed by the design discharge and silt factor or velocity. A steeper slope with maximum
permissible velocity will be more economical, but the FSL will be lower. Additionally the design
slope is flatter than the natural available slope. Fall is provided to adjust the slope, but the
number of falls must be of minimum.
5.4.2.4 Side slope selection
Canal side slope depends on the material in which it is constructed and banks are made. Based on
whether the canal is in cut or in fill, and as per the soil types, the canals are designed as steep as
possible in order to limit excavation volumes and reduce excavation and disposal costs as well as
simplicity of construction. For erodible soils, the slopes are checked against the criterion of
maximum allowable velocity, or by the principle of attractive force. Other factors considered in
canal slope selection include, inter alignment, method of construction, depth of canal and level of
ground water table. Side slopes through cuts in rock and lined canals can be vertical.
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.

P a g e 123
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 5.1 Recommended Side Slope of Canals
Soil type Side slope (Horizontal : vertical )

Cut Fill

Sound rock 0.125 :1 1.5: 1

Poor rock 0.5: 1 1.5: 1

Gravelly soil 0.75 : 1 1.5: 1

Compact clay soil 1:1 1 .5 : 1

Clay soil 1.5: 1 2:1

Loam soil 1.5: 1 2:1

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

Sandy soil 3 :1 4:1

(Sahasrabudhe, 1994 page 197)

The recommended slop for main & secondary canal is 1V: 1.5H or 1V: 2H.
For our case use side slope 1V: 1.5H (clay soil)
5.4.2.5 Side slope for lined canal
Based on soil type that is found in the irrigable area i.e. Clay soil the permissible velocity lies
from 0.41m/s to 1.67m/s.
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
5.4.2.6. 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.

P a g e 124
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Take longitudinal slope from below table between the ranges. But for lined main canal
1/800 to 1/1000.
S=0.0035 for unlined canal and 0.00125 for lined canal.

Table: 5.3 Longitudinal Slopes of Canals

Types of canals Range of slope

Main canal 0.00048 to 0.000258
Secondary canal 0.000258 to 0.000392
Tertiary canal 0.0002 to 0.0005

5.4.2.7 Permissible velocity

Permissible velocity is the one which can be resisted by the canal boundary surfaces. This
velocity is taken depending on the soil type. The velocity of design canal should be self-cleaning;
in other word, it should not deposit silt on canal, and should not also scour the bed and sides of
the canal. The maximum value of mean velocity must be safe against erosion. Based on soil type
that is found in the irrigable area.

Table: 5.4 Permissible velocities (unlined canal)

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

1 Loam clay soil or loam 0.38 to1.37

2 Clay soil 0.41 to 1.67

4 Sandy clay 0.52 to 1.83

5 Ordinary 0.60 to 0.90

6 Gravel hard rock >3

[Arora 2003]

P a g e 125
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 5.5 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

4 Masonry 2.0

5.4.2.8 Roughness Coefficient (n)

Roughness coefficient is depending up on the roughness of the canal boundary.

Table: 5.5 Roughness coefficients

Material Coefficient(n)

Wood 0.013-0.165

Steel 0.0125-0.018

Concrete 0.013-0.018

Masonry 0.02-0.036

Earth 0.0225-0.035

[Sahasrabudhe, 1984 page 136]

Take n value 0.028 (masonry)

5.4.2.9 Design discharge

Free board
It is the margin between full supply level (FSL) of canal and bank level. The recommended free
board by Lacey‟s is used,
Fb=0.2+0.15Q1/3
Where,Fb=Free board (m)
Q=Design discharge (m3/sec)

P a g e 126
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Comparison is made with USBR recommendation. Freeboard for main, secondary and tertiary
canals is varying from 0.2 to 0.35m.
5.5 Main canal design
One main canal off takes from the intake point of the head works. The Ashiro Main canal is
designed to supply water to sc1 and sc2 canals simultaneously.
Design of lined rectangular canal
Economical lined Rectangular section criteria;
Available data efficient section
Q=0.0549m3/sec R=

n=0.028 (masonry) B = 2y
S=0.00125 (lined canal)
Side slop 1:1.5
Using manning equation
⁄ ⁄

⁄
⁄
( )

Y=0.27m (water depth)

B=2y=2×0.27m=0.54m
A=B×y=0.54×0.27=0.1458m2
P=2y+B=2×0.27+0.54=1.08m
R= A/P = 0.1458/1.08 = 0.135m
⁄ ⁄

⁄ ⁄

= 0.33m/s<2 m/s , ok !
Fb=0.2+0.15Q1/3
Fb=0.25m

P a g e 127
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

FB

D Y

Figure 5.1 Rectangular main canal

5.6 Secondary canal design

The design principle of the secondary canal is the same as that of the main canal using the lacey
theory. The secondary canal is designed, so that it can have the capacity to irrigate the respective
command area and for its long slope. There are two secondary canals along the entire command
area.

Table: 5.6 Tabulated result for secondary canal

Area Duty Discharge V
Canal (ha) (m3/s/ha) (m3/s) (m/s) A(m2) Y(m) B(m) Fb(m) P(m) R(m)
SC-1 9 0.0005 0.0045 0.42 0.0265 0.058 0.4 0.36 0.609 0.0435
SC-2 6 0.0005 0.003 0.41 0.0202 0.051 0.32 0.222 0.504 0.04

Sample calculation:-

For SC-1;-(earthen trapezoidal canal)

A = B×y+ m×y2
P = 2×√ +B

V= =

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

P a g e 128
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
S = the bed slope of the canal
Q=9ha×0.0005 m3/s/ha =0.0045m3/s
Fb = 0.2 + 0.15 = 0.36m
Ss = 1V:1.5H
V Permissible = (0.41-1.67)m/sec
S =0.0035 (Unlined canal) (0.0225 -0.035)
For most Economic Section R =

A = By + m , Assume B = 0.4m
A = 0.4y + 1.5
n = earthen canal (0.0225 – 0.035) = 0.035
0.0045 × 0.035 = (0.4y +1.5 ) ( )^2/3 × (0.0035)^1/2

= (0.4y + 1.5 )

By trial and error, y = 0.058m

Canal parameters
Y =0.058m, B= 0.4m
A = 0.4 × 0.058 +1.5 × = 0.0265
P = B + 2y√ = 0.4m + 2×0.058√

P = 0.609m, R= = = 0.0435m

V = ×A = × 0.0265 × (0.0435) ^2/3

V= 0.45m/sec between the permissible velocity range (0.41-1.67).

The cross section of the canal is trapezoidal

B
Figure 5.2 Cross-section of trapezoidal main canal

P a g e 129
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

5.7 Tertiary canal design

The design principle of tertiary canal is the same as that of the secondary canal. There are 5
tertiary canals along the entire area the cross sectional dimensions is presented on tabular form
for their respective command area and longitudinal slope of 0.0035

Table:5.7 Tertiary canal tabulated result

Duty
V
Area (m3/s/ha R= Fb(m
3 2
Canal (ha) ) Q (m /s) A(m ) P(m) A/P (m/sec) Y(m) B(m) )

TC1-
1 3.5 0.0005 0.00175 0.0144 0.444 0.03 0.42 0.040 0.30 0.22

TC1-
2 3 0.0005 0.0015 0.0124 0.419 0.0295 0.45 0.036 0.29 0.20

C1-3 2.5 0.0005 0.00125 0.0112 0.403 0.028 0.45 0.034 0.28 0.22

TC2-
1 3.5 0.0005 0.00175 0.0134 0.399 0.034 0.45 0.044 0.24 0.22

TC2-
2 2.5 0.0005 0.00125 0.0102 0.353 0.0288 0.45 0.037 0.22 0.22

Sample calculation
TC1-1:- Trapezoidal earthen canal
A = B×y+ m×y2
P = B + 2y√

V= =

Where:
B = the bottom width of the main canal
D = the depth of water in the main canal
m = the side slope of the drainage canal

P a g e 130
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
R = the mean hydraulic radius of main canal
A = the area of main canal section.
P = the wetted perimeter of the canal section
S = the bed slope of the canal
Q=3.5ha×0.0005 m3/s/ha =0.00175m3/s
Fb = 0.2 + 0.15 = 0.22
Ss = 1V:1.5H
V Permissible = (0.41-1.67)m/sec
S =0.0035 (Unlined canal) ( 0.0225 -0.035)
For most Economic Section R =

A = By + m , Assume B = 0.3m
A = 0.3y + 1.5
n = earthen canal (0.0225 – 0.035) = 0.035
0.00175 × 0.035 = (0.3y +1.5 ) ( )^2/3 × (0.0035)^1/2

= (0.3y + 1.5 )

By trial and error, y = 0.04m

Canal parameters
Y =0.04m, B= 0.3m
A = 0.3× 0.04 +1.5 × = 0.0144m2
P = B + 2y√ = 0.3m + 2×0.04√

P = 0.444m, R= = = 0.03m

V = ×A = × 0.0144 × (0.03)^2/3

V= 0.42m/sec between the permissible velocity range (0.41-1.67).

5.8 Division Boxes
The proportional division of water between receiver canal and delivery canal is effected by
providing division box. According to the requirement this project is provided with one division

P a g e 131
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
box. For this irrigation project division box is proposed to divide water from the secondary canal
to tertiary canals.
Using broad crested weir formula, Q= CLH3/2
C = coefficient of discharge, C= 1.7
Q1=1.71×L1×H1^3/2 and Q2=1.71×L2×H2^3/2
Since = H1 = H2

= , L1 = Lo ( )

= , L2 =L1 ( )

Qd Lo L1 Q1

L2

Q2

Figure 5 Plan View of Division Box (sample)

Qd = Q1 + Q2
The chain ages, and detail Hydraulic parameters of all division boxes are summarizes in the
following table.
Formulae used;

Lo =

L1 = Lo × )

L2 =Lo×( )

B = Width of Division Box =b+2×m×D

P a g e 132
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
D = Depth of Division Box
Bo = Width of the incoming canal
Ho = Depth of the incoming canal
Q = discharge of incoming canal,

m = Side slope of the incoming canal

The depth of (height of) the division box, D = d+Fb
D = Supply depth
d=Supply depth
Fb=Free board
c= discharge coefficient, c= 1.7
Assuming equal discharge coefficient & sill height for two or three dividing canals, the
proportion becomes.
Q1/Q2 = Q2/Q3= L1/L2=L2/L3……….
Q1= is flow in canal 1
Q2 = is flow in canal 2
L0=Length of throat,=B0 for the incoming canal
L1= is effective crest length of weir sill across opening to canal 1
L2= is effective crest length of weir sill across opening to canal 2
Q1= CL1 (H) 3/2
L1 = Q1/CH 3/2
L2 = L1×Q2/ Q1
D= total canal depth of the incoming canal
Qd = 0.0549m3/sec
Q1=0.045m3/sec
B = 0.54m
Assume Dead height = 0.20m
Sill height = 0.20m
H = over flow depth, 0.3m
The depth of (height of) the division box, D= y+fb
Using broad crest formula to divide proportionally

P a g e 133
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Q = C×L×
Where Q=discharge over rectangular sill
C=coefficient discharge=1.7
L=effective length

Lo = = = 0.187m

L2= ×0.162=0.01m

Where: B = width of main canal = 0.54m

y= depth of main canal = 0.27m
WD = width of division box
Note: In our case, to regulate the discharge, manually operating gates at called vertical gate made
up of steel are installed openings of L1 and L2 designed for division box.

5.9 Design of intake

The required discharge through intake, Q = 15 ha × 0.5 l/s/ha
= 7.5 L/s or 0.0075m3/s
Where, Q= discharge through intake pipe (m3/s)
And 0.5 L/s /ha is the duty of crop taken including all losses through the canal
RCC pipe, L= 10m (assume)

Intake loss, H= ( ) (FT)

Where FT = Entry loss + Exit loss + Friction loss (FL)

= 0.5 + 1.0 + F1

F1 = where f =

, where

P a g e 134
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
n= roughness coefficient = 0.014
(Dp)=0.50m
Hence, using 100% full pipe of diameter 0.50m,
The intake loss, h is calculated as follows.

f= = 0.0306m and FL = = 0.612m

The, total friction loss,

(FT) = 0.5m+1.0m+0.612m = 2.112m

A= = = 0.196 m2 and V= = =0.038 m/s

Therefore, h =

= = 0.0041m

Check for Intake Capacity by the Orifice formula

Q intake = CA (2gh) ½ where C = Coefficient of discharge =0.85
A = Area of the R.C.C pipe (m2)
g= acceleration due to gravity
= 0.85 × 0.196 (2×9.81 × 0.0041)1/2
= 0.0473m3/s

Hence, since 0.0473m3/s > 0.0075 m3/s, so it is safe.

 Level of River bed = 2453.54m a.s.l

 Sill height, H =0.5 m
 Level of intake at the gate = 2454.04m
 Crest level = river bed level + weir height
= 2453.54m +1.70m =2455.24m
Level of Top intake pipe = river bed level + sill height + pipe diameter
=2453.54+ 0.50 +0.5m =2454.54 m
Since the top level of intake pipe < the crest level of the weir, the desired capacity of water can
easily flow in to the intake pipe.

P a g e 135
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
A steel bar mesh is used at the in let of the pipe to protect debris and other foreign materials.
5.10 Design of drop structure
Drops are provided at places where the ground slope is steeper than the canal bed slopes. For
easy of construction and operation all drop heights with in the scheme are made standard. They
are all vertical drops with standard dimensions. In some cases they are designed with raised crest
level so as to minimize the effect of the approaching velocities.
Drop structures are flow control structures that are installed in canals when the natural land slope
is too steep. The drops allow reducing the canal bed slopes to convey water without causing
erosive velocities. For this, the canal is divided into different reaches over its length; each reach
follows the design canal gradient. When the bottom level of the canal becomes too high
compared to the natural ground level, drop structures are installed. Vertical drops are used for the
dissipation of up to 1.5 m head for unlined canals and up to 2 m head for lined canals. If it‟s
greater than 1.5m for earthen canal chute is design.
An important aspect of a drop is the stilling basin, required to avoid downstream erosion.
A drop of 0.75m, 0.5m, and 0.25m, designed for Ashiro SSIP. Drops are also used for off take
position adjustment.
a. Critical hydraulic
1. Design discharge, Q (m3/s)
2. Height of drop, h (m)

3. Width of drop, bc =

Where
d = water depth of the canal, m
4. Critical discharge, q = Q/bc

5. Critical depth, dc =( )^1/3

6. Lip height, a = dc/2, a  0.15

b. Stilling basin
√
1. Basin width, B = ,m

2. Basinlength,L=2.5+[ +0.7( )^3]√ ,m

Sample design 0.75m high drop on Sc1, at a station 0+030m is then made as a sample.

P a g e 136
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Only vertical type drop is selected throughout the whole canals length.
Sample Design of Drops
Canal: Sc1 (0+030m), Drop height, h = 0.75m
Hydraulic elements of the canal
Q= 0.0045m3/s, V= 0.42m/s, b= 0.40m, d=0.058m
√ √
Basin Width, B = = =0.12m

Width of drop, bc= = = 0.24m

Critical discharge, q= = = 0.018m3/s/m

Critical depth, dc = ( ) ^1/3 = 0.032m

Lip height, a = = 0.016m, a  0.15, a=0.15m

Basin length, L = 2.5 + [ + 0.7( ) ^3] √ ,m=2.51m

Upstream (L1) and downstream (L2) protections

L1=L2= 1.2+ = 1.3m

P a g e 137
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 5.8 Drop structure tabulated form

Can Chain Drop Q(m3/s B(Can d(flo V(m/se Basin Basin L1and a dc Q bc
al age ec) al) w) c) width( length( L2
Heig
B) L)
ht

30.00 0.75 0.0045 0.4 0.058 0.42 0.12 2.51 1.3 0.15 0.0 0.0 0.2
32 18 4

40.00 0.75 0.0045 0.4 0.058 0.42 0.12 2.51 1.3 0.15 0.0 0.0 0.2
Sc1 32 18 4

70.00 0.75 0.0045 0.4 0.058 0.42 0.12 2.51 1.3 0.15 0.0 0.0 0.2
32 18 4

140.00 0.75 0.0045 0.4 0.058 0.42 0.12 2.51 1.3 0.15 0.0 0.0 0.2
32 18 4

150.00 0.75 0.0045 0.4 0.058 0.42 0.12 2.502 1.3 0.15 0.0 0.0 0.2
32 18 4

170.00 0.25 0.0045 0.4 0.058 0.42 0.12 2.501 1.3 0.15 0.0 0.0 0.2
32 18 4

10.00 0.5 0.003 0.32 0.051 0.41 0.1 2.5 1.28 0.15 0.0 0.0 0.1
3 16 9

Sc2 20.00 0.5 0.003 0.32 0.051 0.41 0.1 2.5 1.28 0.15 0.0 0.0 0.1
3 16 9

P a g e 138
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

5.11 Design of Night Storage Reservoir (pond)

In Ashiro irrigation project, night storage pond is required as the base flow of Ashiro river shows
deficit. After releasing 20% of the base flows for the downstream users.
Qdo (Base flow) = *10L/sec=2L/sec.(for the downstream users) and the remaining base flow

will be 10L/sec-2L/sec=8L/sec.
Qdesign=54.94L/sec.
Therefore, Qdesign>Qbaseflow in this case better to provide pond (night storage reservoir).
Irrigation hour = 12hr=24hr-12hr=12hr the water will be stored in the night storage.
5.11.1 Determination of pond capacity
Irrigable land for Ashiro = 15 ha
Water duty = 0.5l/s/ha
Irrigation hour = 12 hrs
Capacity per 12 hrs = 15hax0.5lit/s/ha x12hrx3600 s/hr x 1m3/1000 lit
= 324m3
Adding 35% for dead storage (seepage & siltation)
Total demand per 12 hrs = 1.35x324 m3 = 437.4m3
Inflow capacity per 12 hrs = 0.0549m3/s x12 hrs x3600 s/hrs
= 2373.4m3.
The total water depth in the pond is taken to be 1.75m (assume)
Inner slope 1V:2H
Outer slope 1V:1.5H
A=1.3125+1.75+1.75B
A=3.063+1.75B
V=A*D= (2.3+3.063+1.75B)* 1.75
324= (2.3+3.063+1.75)*1.75
B=bottom width=26m
T=top width=26+1.5+2=29.5=30m

P a g e 139
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

5.12 Design of Turn outs

Turnout is a structure at the head of a water course which connect it with a supply canal. A pipe
turnout type is used for its best silt conduction. After the water is released through the orifice (the
pipe conduit), it enters a trapezoidal field canal and a trapezoidal Tertiary canal. For all off takes
from main canal and secondary canals outlet gets are provided depending on their corresponding
irrigable lands or plots.
Design Considerations
Q =Cd A√ where Cd = 0.8
HL = Working head

= 0.5V2 +

Main canal (T0-1),

Q=15ha*0.5l/sec/ha=7.5l/sec=0.0075m3/sec.
h=driving head=0.05m
Q = Cd* A √

0.0075 = 0.8.A √
A = 0.0095m2
D = 0.109m (pipe diameter)
Secondary canal (T0-2),
Q=9ha*0.5l/sec/ha=4.5l/sec=0.0045m3/sec.
h=driving head=0.05m
Q = Cd* A √

0.0045 = 0.8.A √
A = 0.00568m2
D = 0.085m (pipe diameter)
Tertiary canal (T0-3),
Q=3.5ha*0.5l/sec/ha=1.75l/sec=0.00175m3/sec.
h=driving head=0.05m
Q = Cd* A √
0.00175 = 0.8.A √

P a g e 140
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
A = 0.0022m2
D = 0.053m (pipe diameter)
5.13 IRRIGATION SYSTEM
5.13.1 General
Irrigation water can be conveyed, distributed and applied to the fields by either or a combination
of the two methods:
 Gravity system
 Pressurized system
Gravity conveyance and distribution systems comprise of open canal systems and canal
structures for controlling and regulating the flow. Water flows by gravity from the headwork to
the required off-take point and be distributed again by gravity. Even the field application of
water to the crops is by gravity in which the water flows on the surface of the soil where it
infiltrates.
In pressurized irrigation systems, water is conveyed and distributed either on the whole or part of
the system by closed conduit (pipelines) under pressure. In several irrigation systems around the
world, a combination of gravity and pressurized conveyance and distribution system can be used.
The water might be conveyed in some convenient part of the system by gravity and when it is
required to lift it to a higher canal, a pump can be used to pump it to the higher elevation.
Similarly, the field application of the water to the crops can also be done under pressure with
pressurized system such as sprinkler and drip systems or a combination of surface and
pressurized systems.
5.13.2 Selection of Irrigation Methods
The selection of irrigation methods depends on a number of factors such as:-
 topography
 soil type
 water quality and water availability
 Affordability etc.
The choice of irrigation method for ASSIP is surface irrigation method due to many reasons in
its favor; the more important ones are summarized as below:-

P a g e 141
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Capital cost than other methods which can manage with locally available materials, but for
pressurized irrigation technique, the materials are to be imported from the five main surface
irrigation methods, furrow and basin irrigation method is proposed under Samira irrigation
project.
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 such as onion, potato, Head cabbage, are used to be cultivated in the project
area also suitable for surface irrigation
5.13.3 Surface irrigation method
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.
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, whereas ponding is the preferred term for basin
irrigation (no tail water runoff)
Depletion (vertical recession) phase: is 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, Infiltration to occur.
Surface irrigation methods applied in the forms of:-
 Furrow irrigation
 Basin irrigation
 Border irrigation
Furrow irrigation
Furrows are narrow ditches dug on the field between the rows of crops. The water runs along
them as it moves down the slope of the field.

P a g e 142
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
The water flows from the field ditch into the furrows by opening up the bank or dyke of the ditch
or by means of siphons.
Border irrigation
In border irrigation, the field to be irrigated is divided into strips (also called borders or
Border strips) by parallel dykes or border ridges. The water is released from the field ditch onto
the border through gate structures called outlets.
Basin irrigation
Basins are horizontal, flat plots of land, surrounded by small dykes or bunds. The banks prevent
the water from flowing to the surrounding fields. Basin irrigation is commonly used for rice
grown on flat lands or in terraces on hillsides. Trees can also be grown in basins, where one tree
usually is located in the center of a small basin.
In case of Ashiro irrigation project farrow irrigation is used because of the following reasons:-
 Furrow irrigation is suitable for many crops
 The method reduces labor requirements in land preparation and irrigation so it is economical.
 Uniform flat or gentle slopes are preferred for furrow irrigation which should not exceed
0.5%.
 Soils that crust easily are especially suited to furrow irrigation because the water does not
flow over the ridge, and so the soil in which the plants grow remains friable.
 In clay soils, the infiltration rate is much lower than in sandy soils, so Furrows can be
recommended for clayey than for sandy soils.
Design consideration of Furrow
 Furrow spacing
 Furrow slope
 Furrow length
 Furrow stream
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 - 90cm apart
spacing 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.

P a g e 143
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 5.9 Furrow infiltration and inflow rate
Soil Infiltration Furrow inflow (l/s/1000m
texture rate(mm/hr) length)
Clay 1-5 0.03-0.15
Clay 5-10 0.15-0.3
loam
Sources

Table: 5.10 Spacing between rows and plants

Crop Suggested space between Rows and
plants(cm)
Potato 80 x 30
Head Cabbage 70 x 50
Onion 60 x 40
Source (1997)

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. For Clay to clay loam
soil the recommended slope is 0.05%-0.2%. (A.M.Michael, 1978) slope recommended for border
apply to furrow)
In our case we adopted that the furrow slope 0.2% for Ashiro irrigation project.
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 furrows length also depends on the gradients of different farms15ha irrigated land is divided
by 32m, 48m,and 64m length of furrow and 55 furrow is equal to 1ha.
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 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.

P a g e 144
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
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 2.5lit/se.
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 = (Michael, 1997)

Where Qm-maximum non-erosive flow rate of furrow

S-selected furrow slope (%)
As we select furrow slope is 0.2%
Qmax =0.6/0.2 (l/s) =3l/s
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 front‟s 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.

P a g e 145
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Time of cut off (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

P a g e 146
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

CHAPTER 6
6. DRAINAGE
6.1 General
Drainage is the term applied to systems for dealing with excess water that describe all the
processes where by surplus water is removed from the land. It includes both internal drainage of
soil and the collection and dispersal of surface runoff.
By its nature, irrigation creates periodically saturation condition of upper layers of soil formation
over a long period where intensive irrigation is practiced; even deep soil layers tend to become
saturated and consequently underground water table rises in absence of adequate drainage
facilities. The knowledge of drainage engineering is very essential to solve this problem.
Waterlogged land is of little use; however, it can be utilized after providing proper drainage
arrangement. Usually in undulating country, the surface slopes are sufficient to carry off this
surplus water into the ditches and stream without any engineering construction. Low lying flat
areas are usually invariably near or below the flood level of the river. In order to prevent the area
from flooding the river must be trained; it is usually done by constructing of embankments
6.2 Requirement of drainage
Irrigation system design without drainage is incomplete. Soil has the capacity of holding water,
which enables plant to grow by drawing water and nutrient in solution in the water from the soils
through their root system. The structure of the soil consists of framework of solid materials
enclosed by complex system of pore and channel that provide a space within the soil for air and
water.
When all this space is filled with water, the soil is termed as saturated. A soil can only remain in
a saturated condition, if it is below water table and cannot drain truly. It may be temporarily
saturated during and immediately after irrigation or heavy rainfall. Saturation capacity is
maximum amount of water or moisture that a soil can hold at saturation, it depends on the
volume of its pore space.
In order for plant to grow, apart from availability of water, air also is needed, and hence soil
should be permanently saturated with water. A good soil, therefore, has internal drainage
characteristic, which means water must be able to move fairly and easily through the soil, that
excess water can remove when required.

P a g e 147
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
So far irrigated lands are concerned the following benefits may be achieved from adequate
drainage scheme.
Those are:
1. It facilitates early ploughing and in turn early sowing crop
2. It actually extends the crop root zone. Thus, more soil moisture is made available crop
growth
3. It maintains higher soil temperature. Soils that are water logged take more time for
warming up. The reason is, water logged soil require more heat to raise the temperature of a
given of water by 1°c than to raise the temperature of value of air by 1°c.
4. It helps in maintaining proper area of upper soil. The aeration and higher temperature
increased the bacteriological activities in the soil.
5. In the processes of draining the land, harmful salts are leached out
6. It also improves the sanitary conditions and makes surrounding clean
6.3 Selections of drainage systems
Drainage may be artificial or natural. Drains are termed artificial when they are constructed after
proper consideration of existing conditions and function to be served. Artificial drains are
generally constructed to dispose of surplus water quickly, before it gets absorbed deep into the
soil. Drainage can be classified into two main systems. Those are Surface drainage system and
subsurface drainage system
6.3.1 Surface drainage systems
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

P a g e 148
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
1. The removal of storm rainfall where the subsurface drainage is not economically feasible
2. The collection and disposal of surface irrigation runoff
3. The collection and disposal of drainage in deltaic area
6.3.2 Subsurface drainage system
Subsurface drainages are required for soils with poor internal drainage and a high water table.
This type of drain does not hinder movement in the field but they have high initial investment
cost.

However, here in our case we have recommended to use the surface drainage system because of
the fact that our project is small scale and low cost of installation.

6.4 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 the
situation is to align the drain clear 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.
6.5 Design of surface drainage
When we design surface drainage for a given irrigable command area, the following parameters
are to be considered.
6.6 Selection of Drainage System
Drain size physical condition of the soil, topography, required drain spacing and annual
operation and maintenance costs are dictate for selection of drain system.The other advantages
are:
 It need low initial investment cost
 It can drain large quantity of water within the stipulated time

P a g e 149
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
 It maintained in good condition easily
6.6.1 Capacity of drainage
Drainage should be designed to carry the maximum anticipated flood efficiently.
6.6.2 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 permissible velocity
1.22m/sec.

Table: 6.1 Maximum permissible velocity for different soil type

Soil type Max. velocity (m/sec)
Sand and sandy loam 0.726
Silt loam 0.91
Sandy clay loam 1.07
Clay loam 1.22
Heavy loam 1.52

6.6.3 Side slope

Side slope of the drainage canal to be adopted depends on the type of the soil formation in which
drain is dug. The side slope of the drainage canal is 1.5H: 1V, this corresponds with clay soil.

Table: 6.2 Maximum side slope for drain canals for different soil type
Soil type Side slope (H:V)
Sand, silt clay 3:1
Sand, clay, silt loam 1.5:1
Fine clay, clay loam 1:2

6.6.4 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 to 0.025. . [Lutin, 1978]

P a g e 150
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 6.3 possible values of Manning coefficient for different value of Hydraulic
Hydraulic Radius N
<2.5 0.04-0.045
2.5-4 0.035-0.04
4-5 0.03-0.35
>5 0.025-0.03

6.6.5 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 designing drainage systems.
6.7 Design of Drainage Canals
6.7.1 Mean Annual Rain fall (MAR)
MAR is the average of the total yearly rain fall of along years recorded, which is an important
parameter needed for the design of surface drainage system.

Table: 6.4 Yearly total rain fall of Adaba station.

Daily
highest

Year RF(mm/day) TRF(mm/yr)

1997 32.2 386.4
1998 43.5 522
1999 41.6 499.2
2000 36.4 436.8
2001 26.1 313.2
2002 40.1 481.2
2003 36.6 439.2
2004 36 432
2005 66.83 801.96
2006 26.8 321.6

Where: MAR= mean annual rainfall

P a g e 151
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
For Ashiro irrigable area, MAR = 463.356mm/year.
6.7.2 Drainage coefficient (DC)
The drainage coefficient uses to get 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:
The value of Dc can be obtained by different empirical method.
1.Hudson(1975)
He suggested that:
I.For MAR 1000mm; Dc=MAR/100 mm/day
II.For MAR 1000mm; Dc=10 mm/day
Therefore in our case MAR=463.356mm/yr which is less than 1000mm
So use the formula DC=10 mm/day
2. 1% of MAR
DC=0.01×463.356, DC=4.63

Table: 6.5 DC for different ranges MAR value

MAR(mm) <750 750-1000 1000-1250 1250-1500
DC(mm/day) 5-7.5 7.5-9 9-12 12-25

MAR=463.356mm/yr DC =between [5-7.5]=DC=average=6.25mm/day

The value of Dc is the maximum of the above listed or determined values
Therefore DC=10mm/day
Side Slope, Manning‟s Roughness Coefficient and Maximum Permissible velocity
6.7.3 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.
6.8 Design of Tertiary Drain
Tertiary drain collects the excess water that drained by the field drain to ward tertiary drain from
tertiary unit. The area which drained by tertiary drain is the sum of the areas of the fields under
tertiary unit.

P a g e 152
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
They are designed with trapezoidal cross-section with 1.5:1 (H:V) side slopes. The hydraulic
designs of the drainage channels are normally designed using the Manning equation.
Sample calculation DC1 (Drain canal).
Available data
Area to be drained A=3.5ha
Drainage coefficient, DC = 10mm/day
Bed slope, S=0.001 (assume)
Capacity of the drain, Qd= Dc*A= 10mm/day*3.5ha

For the most efficient cross section and for minimum volume of excavation the bottom width is
determined by:-
B= 2Dtan (ϴ/2)
B = bottom width, m
D = depth of flow of water
ϴ = Angle between the side and the horizontal
= tan-1(1/1.5) = 33.69ᴼ
In this case, D= 0.04m

B = 2Dtan (ϴ/2) = 2×0.04×tan (

The wetted perimeter (p) m= 1.5

P = B+2D√ √
Area of cross-section, A
A = B×D+mD2= 0.0241×0.04+1.5×0.042=0.0034m2
The hydraulic radius R
R=A/P=0.0034m2/0.168m
R=0.02m<2.5m, n=(0.04-0.045), so n=0.04
The velocity of flow (v), in the drain can be determined from Manning‟s equation
V= <1.22m/sec

Therefore, v = vp =1.22m/sec.

P a g e 153
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
The discharge of flow, Manning:
Q=A×V
Q=0.0034m2×1.22m/sec
Q=0.0043m3/sec˃0.0041m3/sec, (ok!)
Free board of tertiary drain
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. FB= 0.15m (FB= 10 to 20cm)
For the trapezoidal drainage canal
B = 0.0241m
D = 0.04m
DT = D + FB = 0.04m + 0.15m = 0.19m
Where: DT = the total depth of canal including free board.

Table: 6.6 Cross-section of tertiary drain

Area
Drainage (ha) Q V (m/s) D B A P R FB

DC1-1 3.5 0.00175 1.22 0.04 0.0241 0.00340 0.168 0.02 0.15
DC1-2 3 0.0015 1.22 0.036 0.0238 0.00273 0.154 0.0177 0.15
DC1-3 2.5 0.00125 1.22 0.034 0.0225 0.00245 0.145 0.0168 0.15
DC2-1 3.5 0.00175 1.22 0.044 0.0292 0.00418 0.188 0.0222 0.15

DC2-2 2.5 0.00125 1.22 0.037 0.0245 0.00296 0.158 0.0187 0.15

6.8.1 Design of sub collector

DC-1(Drain canal).
Available data
Area to be drained A=9ha
Drainage coefficient, DC = 10mm/day
Bed slope, S=0.001 (assume)
Capacity of the drain, Qd= Dc×A= 10mm/day×3.5ha

P a g e 154
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

For the most efficient cross section and for minimum volume of excavation the bottom width is
determined by:-
B= 2Dtan (ϴ/2)
B = bottom width, m
D = depth of flow of water
ϴ = Angle between the side and the horizontal
= tan-1(1/1.5) = 33.69ᴼ
In this case, D= 0.058m

B = 2Dtan (ϴ/2) = 2×0.058×tan (

The wetted perimeter (p) m= 1.5

P = B+2D√ √
Area of cross-section, A
A = B×D+mD2= 0.035×0.058+1.5×0.0582=0.0071m2
The hydraulic radius R
R=A/P=0.0071m2/0.244m
R=0.029m<2.5m, n=(0.04-0.045), so n=0.04
The velocity of flow (v), in the drain can be determined from Manning‟s equation
V= <1.22m/sec

Therefore, v=vp =1.22m/sec.

The discharge of flow, Manning:
Q=A×V
Q=0.0071m2×1.22m/sec
Free board of tertiary drain
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. FB= 0.15m (FB= 10 to 20cm)
For the trapezoidal drainage canal
B = 0.035m
D = 0.058m

P a g e 155
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
DT = D + FB = 0.058m + 0.15m = 0.208m
Where: DT=the total depth of canal including free board.
DC-2 (Drain canal).
Available data
Area to be drained A=6ha
Drainage coefficient, DC = 10mm/day
Bed slope, S=0.001 (assume)
Capacity of the drain, Qd= Dc×A= 10mm/day×3.5ha

For the most efficient cross section and for minimum volume of excavation the bottom width is
determined by:-
B= 2Dtan (ϴ/2)
B = bottom width, m
D = depth of flow of water
ϴ = Angle between the side and the horizontal
= tan-1(1/1.5) = 33.69ᴼ
In this case, D= 0.051m

B = 2Dtan (ϴ/2) = 2×0.051×tan (

The wetted perimeter (p) m= 1.5

P = B+2D√ √
Area of cross-section, A
A = B×D+mD2= 0.031×0.051+1.5×0.0512=0.0055m2
The hydraulic radius R
R=A/P=0.0055m2/0.215m
R=0.0256m<2.5m, n=(0.04-0.045), so n=0.04
The velocity of flow (v), in the drain can be determined from Manning‟s equation
V= <1.22m/sec

Therefore, v=vp=1.22m/sec.
The discharge of flow, Manning:
Q=A×V

P a g e 156
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Q=0.0055m2×1.22m/sec
Free board of tertiary drain
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. FB= 0.15m (FB= 10 to 20cm)
For the trapezoidal drainage canal
B = 0.035m
D = 0.058m
DT = D + FB = 0.058m + 0.15m = 0.208m
Where: DT=the total depth of canal including free board.

6.8.2 Design collector drain

Available data
-Drainage area, A=15 ha
-Drainage coefficient, DC =10 mm/day
- Drainage discharge, Q = DC×A
Q = 10 mm/day×15ha
Q= 0.0174m3/sec
-Bed slope, S=0.001
-Side slope, m = 1.5
-Manning roughness coefficient, n= 0.04
Now, from Manning equation
Q= A

A = = 0.022 ------------------------------- (1)

√

Since, Q = 0.0174m3/sec
S =0.001
For trapezoidal drainage canal:
-The area of the drain section is given by
A = BD + m --------------------------- (2)
-Wetted perimeter of the drain section

P a g e 157
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

P = B + 2D√ --------------------------- (3)

-R is hydraulic radius of the drainage canal

R= = √
----------------------------- (4)

However, for efficient and economical design of trapezoidal drainage canal the following
equation is true.
R= -------------------------------------------- (5)

Equating eq. (4) and (5) we get the following relation between D & B.

From equation (4), R = = √

From equation (5), R =

Then, R = = √
=

 = ,Since m =1.5

- By solving the above equation,

B = 0.61D----------------------- (6)
-by substituting this value in eq (2), eq (3), and eq (4)
A = BD + m 0.61D×D+1.5 =2.11
P = B+2D√ = 0.61D + 3.61D = 4.22D

R= = √
= = 0.5D

From equation (1)

A = (2.11 ) × (0.5D

A = (2.11 ) × (0.5D) ^2/3 = = 0.022

√

By Solve the equation, D = 0.23m.

Form equation (6), B = 0.61D = 0.61 0.23 = 0.14m
Free Board (FB)

P a g e 158
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
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 our case, take a free board of 0.2m.
For the trapezoidal drainage canal
B = 0.14m
D = 0.23m
DT = D + FB = 0.23m + 0.2m = 0.43m
Where: DT=the total depth of canal including free board

P a g e 159
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

CHAPTER SEVEN
7. Economic Analysis
7.1 General
A project is economically feasible, if the total benefit which results from the project exceeds the
total cost spent to implement the project. That mean benefit-cost ratio at the project should be
greater than unity.
A widely accepted method is the construction of a ratio of expected project benefit to expected
project costs on a common time basis. Costs include these necessary to implement a project, such
as investment costs operation and maintenance expenses, other direct cost and any associated
costs that are needed to make the products or service of the project available for use or sale.
7.2 Cost Evaluation
Before economies of an engineering project can be evaluated, it is necessary to reasonably
estimate the various cost and revenue components that describe the project .So, the costs of all
civil works have been determined from the quantities of each and every component of structures.
7.3. Material
7.3.1. Site clearance-
Prior to starting earth work on by pass canal& weir, main canal etc the area under consideration
shall be free from trees, bushes, insitu stones.Cost for site excavation for 1m2 of site excavation
the cost will be 12 birr.
7.3.2. Excavation
This includes reworked sediments and Fractured and jointed biotitic and boulders. It can be
excavated by means of sledgehammers, wedges and miners bars.
- Weir – before earth work (foundation excavation) of weir is started, it is better to finish the
weir before rain coming.
The cost of excavation for foundation will be 40birr/m3.
7.3.3. Concrete
Assume C-15 grade concrete used for Ashiro small scale irrigation project
Cement=140birr/bag
Sand =563birr/m3

P a g e 160
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Aggregate=500birr/m3
Water=0.27birr/m3
Assume

Cement grade c-15 mix ratio 1:3:6 (sum=1+3+6=10)

Dry material required to make 1m3 concrete=1.55m3( 55% shrinkage and wastage)
3
Cement= =0.155m3

Sand= m3=0.465m3
3
Aggregate= =0.93m3

1 bag cement =0.035m3

So, cement required = use 4 bag of 50kg

Bulk density of cement =1440kg/m3

Cement required in kg=0.155m3*1440kg/m3=223.2kg
Material cost
Cement =4.42bag*140birr/bag=618.8birr
Sand =0.465m3*563birr/m3
7.3.4. Mortar
The ratio used here is 1:3; the allowable moisture of sand is 20 to 27 %
7.3.5. Masonry
Stone used for masonry should be from quality quarry
-It should be well jointed
-Where needed, it should be well back filled
-All structures need to be masonry is clearly shown on all drawings.
7.3.6. Carting away
This includes removal of all excavated material away from the work area. Especially carting
away in the weir excavation should be carefully done. I.e. any unnecessary soils & fragmented
river boulder have to be kept far away from construction area and not to be deposited in the
natural river course.

P a g e 161
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

7.4. UNIT RATE ANALYSIS

Unit rate analysis is a base for project cost analysis. After the quantities of each engineering
work of the project are determined in quantity take off sheet, it is to be multiplied by a unit cost
of quantity to estimate the price of the quantified activity. The unit costs adjusted to the current
prevailing market situation including factor of safety for current cost escalation of construction
materials and activity ratings are shown

Table: 7.1 TAKE OFF SHEET

S.N Description size Product Remark
1. Camping For site clearance working space (ws)=1m
1.1 Site clearance 17 L=1m+15000mm+1m=17m
11 187m2 W=1m+9000mm+1m=11m
A=L*W=17m*11m=187m2
1.2 Excavation 15.6 for excavation working space ws=25-30cm
Comment:-foundation plan is 9.6 let assume ws=30cm=0.3m
not given 0.24 35m3 L=0.3m+15m+0.3m=15.6m
W=0.3m+9m+0.3m=9.6m
1.3 Back fill Assume column size c=300mm*300mm
There is back fill around the 35 Vb=35-0.3*0.3*0.24=34m3
column footing the volume 0.3
of soil , which is required to 0.3
fill the voids , is equal to the 0.24
volume of voids around the 34m3
footing volume of backfill
1.4 Cart away –to find the 35 CA=excavation-backfill
volume of soil to be disposed 34(deduct) =35m3-34m3=1m3
of the site ,deduct the back 1m3
fill from the total column of
excavated

2. Foundation wall 48 The stone for the foundation wall is measured

1.5 by its volume.
0.4 28.8 The volume is then calculated by the product
1.08(deduct) of the length, width and height.
27.72m3 From the given drawing the width of the
foundation wall is 40cm ,its depth 150cm after
deducting 5cm for the lean concrete
Length of the foundation wall including
column
L=2*15+2*9=48m
V=l*w*h
Vcolumn=8(0.3*0.3*1.5)=1.08m3

P a g e 162
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
The actual volume of the stone in the
foundation wall will be =28.8-1.08=27.72m3

2.1 Hard rock excavation 10

5
2.6
130m3
3. Canal system WS=(1+tw+1m)*(1+bw+1)
Lined main canal L=600m
Clearing up to 15cm depth
soil 940m2
Excavation normal soil 14000m3
Back fill soil 820m3
Masonary work with 1:3 730m3
mortar work
Plastering 1;3 mix , 3 coat 100m2
3.1 Secondary canal (sc-1)
L=180m
Clearing up to 15cm depth 300m2
soil
Excavation normal soil 100m3
Masonary work with 1:3 32m3
morta work
Plastering with 1;3 mix ,3 150m2
coats
Back fill 18m3
3.2 Secondary canal (sc-2) L=50m
Clearing up to 15cm depth 150m2
soil
Excavation normal soil 25m3
Masonary work with 1:3 80 m3
morta work
Plastering with 1;3 mix ,3 100
coats
Back fill 10 m3
1.4 Earthen tertiary canal
L=1206m
Clearing 15 cm depth 1200
Excavation normal soil 15000 m3
Back fill 1000 m3
1.5 Structure on canals
1.5.1 Division box
Of soil including deposting 3
the excavated stuff as and
where directed
Including cost and 4

P a g e 163
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
conveyance of all materials,
labour charges, curing etc
Mix 20mm thick complete for 9
exposed faces of masonary
walls including racking of
joints and curing etc
Selected material fill in 10km 1.3
borrow area, spread &
compact 20cm
300mm thick cemented 1.2
stone pitching
Simple Handpicked steel 5
gates
1.6 Head work
Site clearance 400
Foundation excavation 72
Carting away excavated 50
materials
Hard rock excavation 130
Back fill with local soil 80
Masonary work for weir 133.593
proper and side walls
Concrete (1:2:4) for stiling 84.3
basin and up stream floor
Pointing (all guide wall) 16.06
Intake pipe (RCC) Installation 18
1.7 u/s flood protection
works/dyke of 2m top width
,1.5;1 slope and 100m length.

Back fill and compaction 1064

1.8 Pond structure
Excavation of ordinary soil 3574
Fill and compction with red 73
clay or equivalent material
1.9 Drainage work
Site clearance 860m2
Trench Excavation 2496m3
Back fill with local soil 860m3
1.10 Access road
Site clearance 11244m2
Cutting and filling with select 2km
material to an average depth
of 0.5m,width 4 to

P a g e 164
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
1.11 Drop structure
Clearing up to 15 cm 8m2
Foundation excavation 6m3
Masonary work with 1:3 3m3
mortar
Plastering with 1;3 mix , 3 6m2
coats
Back fill 2m2
1.12 u/s retaining wall
Normal soil excavation 170m3
Masonary work with 1:3 200m3
mortar
Plastering with 1;3 mix , 3 180m2
coats
Concrete c-15 (1;3;6) 6.5m3
1.13 D/s retaining wall
Normal soil excavation 63m3

Masonary work with 1:3 80m3

mortar
Plastering with 1;3 mix , 3 100m2
coats
Concrete c-15 (1;3;6) 6.5m3

1.14 u/s and d/s cut off

Excavation of banks 130m3

1.15 u/s and d/s apron

Excavation of normal soil 80m3

P a g e 165
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 7.2 BILL OF QUANTITY (BOQ)

s.n Types of work Unit Quantity Unit Cost Total

Cost(Birr)
1 Camping and
mobilization
1.1 Mobilization & LS 1 10,000.00 10,000.00
Demobilization
1.2 Camping
Living Rooms & Office Pcs 6
3m*3m
Store 5m*5m : 1
Kitchen 3m*3m : 1
Toilet 2m*2m : 1
Guard House 2m*2.5m : 1
Fence 55m*55m : 1
1.2.1 Site clearance M2 187 12 2244.00
1.2.2 Foundation excavation M3 35 40 1400.00
1.2.3 Carting away excav M3 40 40.00
ation materials 1
1.2.4 Masonry M3 25 1,799.20 44,979.92
1.2.5 20cm thick hard core M3 20 1,288.23 25,764.66
1.2.6 10cm thick hard core M3 10 3,099.39 30,993.93
1.2.4 CIS waling G-32 M2 310 241.92 74,994.17
1.2.5 GIS roofing G-32 M2 145 241.92 35,077.92
1.2.6 Fencing 55m*55m m 200 25.00 5,000.00
SUBTOTAL 230494.60
2 HEAD WORK
2.1 Earth work
2.1.1 Site clearance M2 400 112 4800.00
2.1.2 Foundation excavation M3 72 40 2880.00
2.1.3 Carting away excavated M3 50 40 2000.00
materials
2.1.4 Hard rock excavation M3 130 280.00 36,400.00
2.1.5 Back fill with local soil M3 80 56.00 4,480.00
2.2.1 Masonary work for M3 133.593 1,548.10 206,815.32
weir proper and side
walls
2.2.2 Concrete (1:2:4) for M3 84.3 3,099.39 261278.58
stiling basin and up
stream floor
2.2.3 Pointing (all guide wall) M2 16.06 87.31 1,402.14
2.2.4 Intake pipe (RCC) M 18 1,000.00 18,000.00
Installation
2.25 Plastering and cement M2 52.08 156.13 8,131.39
screed all external

P a g e 166
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
faces of the weir &
stilling basin with
cement mortar 1:3
2.4 Gate Work
2.4.1 Simple intake gate NO 1 8,000.00 8,000,00
fixing as per drawing
2.4.2 Simple sluice gate NO 1 10,000.00 10,000.00
fixing as per drawing
2.5 U/s and D/s stone for M2 1.5 575.83 863.75
protection
SUBTOTAL 565051.69
3 CANAL
Lined Canals
3.1.1 Site clearance M2 940.00 12 11280.00
3.1.2 Trench Excavation M3 14000 40 560000.00
3.1.3 Back fill with local soil M3 823.76 111,22 91,618.59
3.14 Masonary M3 729.80 1,548.10 1,129,803.38
3.1.5 Concrete M3 92.67 150.00 13,900.50
SUBTOTAL 1806601.97
4 Teritary drain
excavation & shaping
4.1 Site clearance M2 860 24 20640.00
4.2 Trench Excavation M3 2496 60 149760.00
4.3 Back fill with local soil M3 860 60 51600.00
SUBTOTAL 222000.00
5 Pond structure
5.1 Excavation of ordinary M3 3574 92.40 330,237.60
soil
5.2 Fill and compction with M3 73 124.88 9,115.88
red clay or equivalent
material
SUBTOTAL 475,508.26

6 Access road
6.1 Site clearance M2 11244 16.80 188,899.20
6.2 Cutting and filling with Km 2 7,000 14000.00
select material to an
average depth of
0.5m,width 4 to
SUBTOTAL 202899.20
7 DIVISION BOX

P a g e 167
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
7.1 Of soil including 3 92.40 292.91
deposting the
excavated stuff as and
where directed
7.2 Including cost and 4 1,458.84 6,083.36
conveyance of all
materials, labour
charges, curing etc
7.3 Mix 20mm thick 9 143.98 1,251.19
complete for exposed
faces of masonary walls
including racking of
joints and curing etc
7.4 Selected material fill in M3 1.3 111.20 144.56
10km borrow area,
spread & compact
20cm
7.5 300mm thick cemented 1.2 281.00 328.77
stone pitching
7.6 Simple Handpicked 5 500.00 2,500.00
steel gates
SUBTOTAL 10,600.79
TOTAL 3,513,156.51
VAT(15%) 526973.47
GRAND TOTAL 4040129.98
COST PER HECTARE 269,341.99

P a g e 168
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 7.3 required workers and cost paid per day (assume)

S/N Description Unit Working Unit Total cost

day cost birr
birr/day
1 Engineer 3 303 180 163620

2 Forman 1 303 160 48480

3 Survey 2 303 100 60600
4 Mason 6 303 190 345420
5 Permanent Labor 15 303 40 181800

6 Temporary Labor 30 118 40 141600

TOTAL 941,520.00
PROJECT COST = over all construction cost + human resources cost
= 3,513,156.51+ 941,520.00 = 4454676.51
Estimation of Project benefit the Purpose of Irrigation Project is to increase the crop production
in this case all the Agricultural out puts are sold for the assumed life time of the project which is
10 yrs.
Present project cost= birr
Assume that the annual operation and maintenance cost of the project cost is 15%, contingency
cost is 10% of the initial investment. i.e.
= (0.15*4454676.51+ 0.1*4454676.51)
= 1113669.13Birr
Total project cost= 4454676.51+ 3,562,183= 5568345.64 Birr
Project Benefit
Since irrigation schemes are implemented for the purpose of producing agricultural products
through the year the benefit of the project is obtained by assuming as if all the agricultural out
puts obtained are sold for the proposed project life time.

P a g e 169
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table: 7.4 Estimation of project benefit

No crop Are yield price price inp no of labour OM total profit total
type a (qt/h (birr/ (price/ ut cost C cost (birr/h profit
(ha a) qt) ha) cost labour/ (birr/h (birr/h a) birr
) ha a) a)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
onion 6 240 500 120000 150 30 1800 200 3500 11650 6990
0 0 00
Potato 5 120 260 31200 130 20 1600 200 3100 28100 1405
0 00
Cabba 4 160 150 24000 100 15 1200 200 2400 21600 8640
ge 0 0
SU 9259
M 00

Assume that the annual operation and maintenance cost of the project cost is 15%, contingency
cost is 10% of the initial investment. i.e.
= (0.15*925900+ 0.1*925900)
= 231475 Birr
Net benefit =925900- 231475 = 694425 Birr

Benefit cost ratio (

A. Assume Net revenue remain constant for 10 year

Annual benefit of 10 year = 10 * 694425 = 6944250 Birr
Total project cost = 5568345.64
Benefit cost ratio = 1.24

Therefore the project is feasible.

P a g e 170
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

CHAPTER EIGHT
8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
8.1 INTRODUCTION
Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is one of the environmental management tools that
enable to identify and predict both positive and negative environmental impacts of a proposed
project. And EIA found ways to increase the positive impacts and avoid, minimize or put
mitigation method for the adverse impacts prior to decision-making.
Irrigation is a technology that uses the surface water to supply for crops, where there is soil
moisture stress for crop growth. It is a labour-intensive technology, which can absorb much
labour in agriculture.
Therefore, the EIA report uses the results of the environmental impact assessment like significant
impacts, project alternatives, and mitigation measures. Finally, the environmental management
plan will be formulated as a base line for environmental protection of the irrigated agriculture
that is going to be established in small scale irrigation project.
The environmental impact assessment should be an integral part of the Project detail study and
design phase of proposed irrigation project.
The construction of some infrastructures can cause negative impact to the construction areas on
natural resources, livestock and human directly or indirectly. It also can have positive impact to
the above things therefore before construction activities are under taken environmental impact
assessment should to be done.
8.2 Back Ground information
The Ashiro SSIP is found in Arsi Zone, Ganda washa in Adaba district at about 7-kms of Adaba
town.
This study is meant to ensure the protection of the environment and sustainability of the
development projects. This would help to mitigate the negative impacts that may be caused by
the newly developed irrigation project.

P a g e 171
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

8.3 Objective of the study

8.3.1 General Objectives
The general objective of EIA study on Ashiro irrigation project is to investigate the potential
positive as well as adverse impacts of the proposed project and to suggest appropriate mitigation
measure. Identify impacts of the project and to find ways and means to enhance the positive
impacts and reduce adverse impacts of the project at early stage in project planning and design.
8.3.2 specific objectives
 To identify ecological, social and economic impacts of the proposed project
 To predict the characteristics of these impacts
 To suggest mitigation measures
 To prepare appropriate environmental management plan
 To assess alternatives including a no scenario
8.4 ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
8.4.1 ASSESSMENT OF POSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
This irrigation project has positive impact for the community of the area in terms of:
 Creating sustainable agriculture.
 It improves food security for the farmers and communities.
 Increases food production and income rate.
 Creates additional opportunities for work and additional incomes
 A number of farmers will be introduced with new farming systems and technologies.
 Alleviate famine and insure food self sufficiency
8.4.2. ASSESSMENT OF NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
The full extent of irrigated farming implies a major interference with the environment. The
creation of new schemes and command area & schemes extension along the main line alters the
physical environment; habitat and often involves displacement marine animals, new
concentration of people; new and almost completely artificial ecosystem is created.
Negative impacts are impacts that the project produce on the area of project which affect the
people around the project area and community as the environment over which the project is
located. Among these the major negative impacts of the project are:

P a g e 172
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
 Pollution of water quality
 Outbreak of disease
 Water logging
 Loss of land
 Soil erosion,
 Impacts on hydrology
A. Pollution of water quality
Irrigation may contribute in various ways to the problem of water pollution. One of these is
seepage into the ground water of the nitrates that have been applied to the soil as fertilizers
sometimes up to 50%, sinks into the underground reservoir. The underground water may thus get
polluted; and if consumed by people through wells, etc it is likely to cause such as anemia, will it
ultimately affect the fishing existing in the surrounding water body.
B. Outbreak of diseases
Due to excessive application of water & due to leakage from canals the pits and depressions get
filled up with water. This stagnant pool of water act as breeding places for mosquitoes and the
region becomes malarial prone.
C. Water logging
Soil is said to be water logged when the ground water table gets connected to soil water in the
crop root zone and remains therefore the major period in the year. Negative impacts of water
logging include Reduction crop yield because of the stoppage of air circulation, Difficulty in
Ploughing, other tilling practices, Salt efflorescence, Growth aquatic weeds increase and causing
more tilling expenses.
C. Loss of land
Since the method is surface or overhead irrigation the great area is lost by aligning canal
&furrows. The main impact for the surrounding local community will be losses of grazing land,
bush land and wood land areas that comprise bushes and grasses which used to build houses.
Moreover, the communication network and social infrastructure will be affecting.
D. Soil erosion
During the clearance of trees and vegetation, capacity which consequences light surface flow
&soil erosion. At the heavy rain fall the flood flow easily facilitate soil erosion since there are no
enough trees to mitigate and reduce the flow. During the practice of the land leveling the soil is

P a g e 173
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
disaggregated and is comes structurally weak. Earth work activities for roads, civil works,
construction camps, etc. will remove and district the natural vegetation and top soil particularly
on the steeper slopes increasing the potential for erosion. Roads are important contributor to soil
erosion, primarily because they concentrate and distribute runoff as channel flow rather than a
uniform over land or subsurface flow.
E. Impacts on Hydrology
The irrigation structures have little impact on the total available water but some detrimental
effect on the distribution of water in terms of space and time. This has a significant effect on
aquatic resource, recession agriculture wild life movements and other human activities
downstream of the scheme. All these and other effects are brought about through the reduction
and flood modification.
F.Impact of the project on Human Health.
Impact rose from the concentration of people and animals associated with irrigation schemes.
Risk arises from water related diseases encouraged by the pressure of large amount of surface
water.
8.5 The Mitigation Measures
Pollution of water quality
 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

Outbreak of diseases
 Avoidance of stagnant water or slowly moving water
 Filling of draining of borrow pits along canals
 Water logging
 Reducing inflow
 Lining of the canal
 Reducing of intensity of irrigation
 Designing canals with lower depth to reduce seepage

P a g e 174
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Water logging
 Burying pipe drains installed at low depth to reduce the water table depth.
Soil erosion
 For any road construction side drains longitudes drains, culverts and appropriate angle of wet
and fill should be incorporated to combat soil erosion.
Loss of land
 Allocation of financial compensation on the basses of lost income from the land and use.

8.5.1. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION PLAN

To mitigate impact during the design construction and operational period is the following:
 As much as possible reducing un necessary clearance of shrubs and fallow.
 Reducing unnecessary excavation that affects farmlands.
 Using labour power, for excavation will be better if possible.
 Healthy post must be provided
 Fair water user‟s association and good water management must be provided
 As much as possible care for wild life must be expected
8.6 Environmental Management Plan
Management Plan (EMP) enumerating set of measures to be adopted to maximize the positive
impacts and minimize the adverse impacts. The most reliable way to ensure the implementation
of EMP is to integrate the management measures in the overall project planning, from the design,
the construction and the operation phases. For optimal integration, manageable links for funding,
operation, training and monitoring have been proposed. For every issue discussed in the
following sections, estimated costs for implementation of the management measures have been
done. A total of about 2% of the project capital shall be ear marked for the environmental
management measures. The measures include mitigation or enhancement measures as found
appropriate to the nature of impacts. These are:

 Restoration plan for quarry sites;

 Public health;
 Agro-chemicals use;
 Training and extension services for farmers;

P a g e 175
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
 Control of water pollution;
 Livestock development;
 Canal bank plantation;
 Infrastructure for agricultural development;
 Control of water logging and soil Salinization;
 Establishment of environmental management unit.
8.7 Environmental Monitoring and Auditing
The environmental management unit of the project will undertake regular monitoring of the
expected impacts and the extent of mitigation activities. Moreover, the project will be open for
environmental authority to undertake its own inspection. From the monitoring point of view, the
important parameter is water quality in the project area. An attempt has been made to establish
early warning of indicators of stress on the environment. Suggested monitoring details are
outlined as follows:-
 The surface water quality in surrounding water bodies needs to be monitored.
 Identification of water-related diseases, sites, adequacy of local vector control and
curative measures, status of public health are some of the parameters which should be closely
monitored for fixed times in a year with the help of data maintained in the local dispensaries
or hospitals.
In order to improve Environmental impact assessment process auditing program is a must.
Auditing comes after monitoring which the predicted out comes and can be used to assess the
quality of predictions and effectiveness of mitigation measures take in the process of
mitigation impact assessment.

P a g e 176
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

CHAPTER NINE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
9.1 Conclusions
Based on the results of this project design the following conclusions can be drawn:
 From feasibility study result the type of soils and geology characteristics of the project area is
suitable for irrigation.
 For hydrological analysis of the project site, the nearby station metrological data of 10 years
of maximum annual daily rainfall of Adaba station was taken and analyzed to get maximum
or peak design flood by United States Soil Conservation Service method (USSCS).
 According the agro industrial input demand of the country, Ashiro small scale Irrigation Project
is meant to enhance crop production. Therefore, head cabbage, tomato, onion are selected. Its
crop water requirement is worked out by penman monteith method using CPOPWAT VERSION
8.0 software. The duty is 0.5l/s/ha.
 USDA soil conservation service method is used to calculate the effective rainfall, because it
estimates more effective rainfall for minimum total rainfall. (I.e. for high total rainfall much
of the rain is percolated to root zone).
 The design of any irrigation and hydraulic structures is based on the capacity and property of
the soil and foundation.
 Based on the peak discharge broad crested weir and components of head work structure were
designed and relevant dimensions provided. The critical condition has been considered for
stability analysis.
 Suitable canal alignment was done and rectangular lined canal (600m start from head work) and
trapezoidal unlined canal for the remaining section is selected based on soil criteria and flow
velocity. Different components of canal structures such as drops, diversion box, etc. Were
designed.
 In order to create a favorable condition for plant growth, apart from availability of water to
avoid saturation of the command face system in area, surface drainage system is designed.
The design contains lateral drain (collect irrigation water from furrow), sub collector drain
and collector drain.

P a g e 177
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
 The project is expected to be best profitable for the beneficiaries since its benefit to cost ratio
is much attractive.
 The environmental impact assessment for the project area is also well through-out. With the
extension of negative impacts, valuable remedial measures are proposed for each effect.

P a g e 178
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

9.2 Recommendations
 To make efficient use of the project, farmers need to be supported through training and provision
of other services like inputs (fertilizers, agrochemical), extensions, credit, market etc.
 To have efficient use of water and to keep the structure operational, establishment of water user‟s
association is important
 For the project to give the expected services all the concerned bodies such as farmers, farmer
associations and government agencies need to manage, follow and monitor the whole activities
of the project.
 Since most of the canals in the project command area are unlined, frequent maintenance or silt
removal is needed as to make the canals durable.
 Design of any irrigation project need technical skills to operate. To have skilled and efficient
workers it is better to give periodical training for easily adoption of new technology systems.

P a g e 179
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

REFERENCES
1. K. SUBRAMANYA, Professor of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur,
2004.
2. Chow V. T., Maidment D.R., and Mays L.W., 1988. Applied Hydrology. McGraw-Hill, New
York. (R., 1995)
3. Manual on study and design of irrigation structures by Debebe Lijalem and Sisay Chanie.
4. Baba R.Design of diversion weir, small scale irrigation in hot climate,weily & soon 1995
5. Garg, SK, Irrigation (Chow V.T., 1995)& hydraulics structure 12th edition, New Delhi 1995
6. FAO, Guide line for predication of crop water requirement, irrigation &drainage paper 24 and
56FAO, Rome, Italy.
7. Asawa G.L, 2005 irrigation and water resources engineering
8.Sharsrabudhe, S. (1994). Irrigation Engineering and Hydraulic structure, 6th edition. S.k.
KATARIL.
9.R.Maidment, D. (1992). Hand Book of Hydrology. McGraw Hill international book company
USA.
10. Guideline, manuals and standard Designs of small and medium scale irrigation projects in
Ethiopia (Ministry of Water Resources, July, 2002)
11. Ragunath, (1996). Hydrology: Principles, analysis, design. New Delhi: New Age
Publishers.
12. Clemmens, A. and Moden, D. 2007, Water use and productivity of irrigation systems.
Springer-Irrig Sci 25:247-261.
14. Claudio, D. J. 2009. Performance assessment of water distribution in small scale irrigation,
the case study of chokwe irrigation system in Mozambique. An MSc Thesis Presented at the
UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education, Delft, the Netherlands
15. Bosch, B.E., and Vaden, N. 1992. Irrigation water management training manual no 7. A joint
work of International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement and FAO Land and
Water Development Division. FAO, Rome.

P a g e 180
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

APPENDICES
Table.1 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

P a g e 181
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Table 2. Reduced mean y n in Gumbel's extreme value distribution, N = sample size

N 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 0.4952 0.4996 0.5035 0.5070 0.5100 0.5128 0.5157 0.5181 0.5202 0.5220
20 0.5236 0.5252 0.5268 0.5283 0.5296 0.5309 0.5320 0.5332 0.5343 0.5353
30 0.5362 0.5371 0.5380 0.5388 0.5396 0.5402 0.5410 0.5418 0.5424 0.5430
40 0.5436 0.5442 0.5448 0.5453 0.5458 0.5463 0.5468 0.5473 0.5477 0.5481
50 0.5485 0.5489 0.5493 0.5497 0.5501 0.5504 0.5508 0.5511 0.5515 0.5518
60 0.5521 0.5524 0.5527 0.5530 0.5533 0.5535 0.5538 0.5540 0.5543 0.5545
70 0.5548 0.5550 0.5552 0.5555 0.5557 0.5559 0.5561 0.5563 0.5565 0.5567
80 0.5569 0.5570 0.5572 0.5574 0.5576 0.5578 0.5580 0.5581 0.5583 0.5585
90 0.5586 0.5587 0.5589 0.5591 0.5592 0.5593 0.5595 0.5596 0.5598 0.5599
100 0.5600

Table 3. Reduced standard deviation Sn in Gumbel's extreme value distribution, N = sample size
N 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 0.9496 0.9676 0.9833 0.9971 1.0095 1.0206 1.0316 1.0411 1.0493 1.0565
20 1.0628 1.0696 1.0754 1.0811 1.0864 1.0915 1.0961 1.1004 1.1047 1.1086
30 1.1124 1.1159 1.1193 1.1226 1.1255 1.1285 1.1313 1.1339 1.1363 1.1388
40 1.1413 1.1436 1.1458 1.1480 1.1499 1.1519 1.1538 1.1557 1.1574 1.1590
50 1.1607 1.1623 1.1638 1.1658 1.1667 1.1681 1.1696 1.1708 1.1721 1.1734
60 1.1747 1.1759 1.1770 1.1782 1.1793 1.1803 1.1814 1.1824 1.1834 1.1844
70 1.1854 1.1863 1.1873 1.1881 1.1890 1.1898 1.1906 1.1915 1.1923 1.1930
80 1.1938 1.1945 1.1953 1.1959 1.1967 1.1973 1.1980 1.1987 1.1994 1.2001
90 1.2007 1.2013 1.2020 1.2026 1.2032 1.2038 1.2044 1.2049 1.2055 1.2060
100 1.2065

P a g e 182
ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

P a g e 183
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

Table.4 Frequency factor for the Pearson type III distribution with negative skew coefficient
Skew Coefficient (Cs)
recurrence interval (year)
1.0101 1.0526 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 1000
percent chance(z)
99 95 50 20 10 4 2 1 0.5 0.1
0 -2.326 -1.645 0 0.842 1.282 1.751 2.054 2.326 2.576 3.09
-0.1 -2.4 -1.673 0.017 0.846 1.27 1.716 2 2.252 2.482 2.95
-0.2 -2.472 -1.7 0.033 0.85 1.258 1.68 1.945 2.178 2.388 2.81
-0.3 -2.544 -1.726 0.05 0.853 1.245 1.643 1.89 2.104 2.294 2.675
-0.4 -2.615 -1.75 0.066 0.855 1.231 1.606 1.834 2.019 2.201 2.54
-0.5 -2.686 -1.774 0.083 0.856 1.216 1.567 1.777 1.955 2.108 2.4
-0.6 -2.755 -1.797 0.099 0.857 1.2 1.528 1.72 1.88 2.016 2.275
-0.7 -2.824 -1.819 0.116 0.857 1.183 1.488 1.663 1.806 1.926 2.15
-0.8 -2.891 -1.839 0.132 0.856 1.166 1.448 1.606 1.733 1.937 2.035
-0.9 -2.957 -1.858 0.148 0.854 1.147 1.407 1.549 1.66 1.749 1.91
-1 -3.022 -1.877 0.164 0.852 1.121 1.366 1.492 1.588 1.664 1.88
-1.1 -3.087 -1.894 0.18 0.848 1.107 1.324 1.435 1.518 1.581 -
-1.2 -3.149 -1.91 0.195 0.844 1.086 1.282 1.379 1.449 1.501 -
-1.3 -3.211 -1.925 0.21 0.838 1.064 1.24 1.324 1.383 1.424 -
-1.4 -3.271 -1.938 0.225 0.832 1.041 1.198 1.27 1.318 1.351 1.465
-1.5 -3.33 -1.951 0.24 0.825 1.018 1.157 1.217 1.256 1.282 -
-1.6 -3.388 -1.962 0.254 0.817 0.994 1.116 1.66 1.197 1.216 -
-1.7 -3.444 -1.972 0.268 0.808 0.97 1.075 1.116 1.14 1.155 -
-1.8 -3.499 -1.981 0.282 0.799 0.945 1.035 1.069 1.187 1.097 1.13
-1.9 -3.553 -1.989 0.294 0.788 0.92 0.996 1.023 1.037 1.044 -
-2 -3.605 -1.996 0.307 0.777 0.895 0.959 0.98 0.99 0.995 -
-2.1 -3.656 -2.001 0.319 0.765 0.869 0.923 0.939 0.946 0.949 -
-2.2 -3.705 -2.006 0.33 0.752 0.844 0.8888 0.9 0.905 0.907 0.91
-2.3 -3.753 -2.009 0.341 0.739 0.819 0.855 0.864 0.867 0.869 -
-2.4 -3.8 -2.011 0.351 0.725 0.795 0.823 0.83 0.832 0.833 -
-2.5 -3.845 -2.012 0.36 0.711 0.771 0.793 0.798 0.799 0.8 -
-2.6 -3.889 -2.013 0.368 0.696 0.747 0.764 0.7968 0.769 0.769 -
-2.7 -3.932 -2.012 0.376 0.681 0.724 0.738 0.74 0.74 0.741 -

P a g e 184
 ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]
Table 5. Runoff curve number for selected agricultural, suburban number for selected
agricultural, suburban (AMC II, Ia=0.2 S)
Land Description Hydrologic soil group
A B C D
Cultivated land: with out conservation 72 81 88 91
treatment 62 71 78 81
Cultivated land: with conservation treatment
Pasture or range land: poor condition 68 79 86 89
Pasture or range land: good condition 39 61 74 80
Meadow: good condition 30 58 71 78
Wood or forest land: thin stand, poor cover, 45 66 77 83
no mulch 25 55 70 77
Wood or forest land: good cover
Open space, lawn, parks, golf courses,
commentaries, etc 39 61 74 80
Good condition: grass cover on 75 % or more 49 69 79 84
of the area
Fair condition: grass cover on 50% to 75% of
the area
Commercial and business area (85 % 89 92 94 95
impervious)
Industrial districts (72 % impervious) 81 88 91 93
Residential
Average lot size Average %
impervious 77 85 90 92
1/8 acre or less 65 61 75 83 87
¼ acre 38 57 72 81 86
1/3 acre 30 54 70 80 85
½ acre 25 51 68 79 84
1 acre 20
Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways, etc 98 98 98 98
Streets and roads:
Paved with kerbs and storm sewers 98 98 98 98
Gravel 76 85 89 91
Dirt 72 82 87 89

P a g e 185
ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

P a g e 186
ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

P a g e 187
ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

P a g e 188
ASHIRO SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT 2017 [Year]

P a g e 189