Canal Head Regulator

It is a structure constructed at the head of a canal taking off from a reservoir behind a weir or a
barrage. It consists of a number of spans separated by piers which support the gates provided for
regulation of flow into the canal.

Figure. Section through a Canal Head Regulator

Design Considerations for Canal Head Regulator

1. The waterway of the head regulator should be sufficient to pass the required discharge
into the canal with the designed pond level (or the level to which water can be raised up in the
river at low stage by the weir).

The crest level of regulator, called the sill lecvel, is not only governed by silt considerations, but
also by discharge considerations. The full supply discharge has to pass through the regulator
openings, the height of which will be equal to the difference of pond level and sill level. The
smaller the height of the openings, the larger will be the width of the openings. In other words, if
the sill level is raised too much, the clear waterway of the regulator will increase, and, therby
making it more costly.

The waterway of the regulator is fixed so that the full supply discharge of the canal could easily
pass over the crest of the regulator with designed pond level, with ample factor of safety to allow
for future silting up of the canal and subsequent rise in in FSL.

The required width of waterway may be calculated by the discharge formula as follows:

Page 1 of 5
a) For a head regulator with a broad crest and sloping glacis at downstream;
𝑄 = 1.7 𝐵 − 𝑘 𝑛 ℎ ℎ3/2

where Q = discharge (m3/s)

B = length of waterway;
h = head over the crest of the regulator, i.e., difference b/n pond level and crest level;
n = number of end contractions, and
k = constant, depending on the shape of the nose of the pier (varies from 0.01 to 0.03).

b) If the head regulator is provided with a very wide and shallow waterway, the drowned
weir formula is used to calculate the discharge (Refer to Fig. belw);

Page 2 of 5
The width of the waterway (B) calculated above, generally works out to be more than the normal
width of the canal downstream. In such a case, the sill level may be lowered, so as to increase the
head and to decrease waterway to make it equal to the width of the canal. But the sill level is also
governed by silt exclusion considerations, and therefore, many a times, it may not be possible to
lower the sill level. In such a case, the calculated value of waterway is provided and the normal
required width of the canal is obtained by contracting the wings.

2. From the crest of the regulator a glacis is provided for the development of hydraulic jump
under different discharge conditions.

3. Beyond the glacis a horizontal floor of length at least five times the maximum height of
the jump, i.e., 5(D2 – D1) is provided.

4. During high floods, the water level in the river pocket will be much higher than the pond
level. To avoid spilling of this water over the canal regulator gates, R.C. wall, known as breast
wall, is provided from the pond level up to the river HFL. This wall spans for the entire length of
the regulator and will rest over the piers of rhe regulator bays. It will be subjected to vertical self-
weight and horizontal water pressure acting against it from the u/s side. Its design may be done
as cantilever retaining wall for horizontal water pressure, and as a girder spanning b/n the
supports for its self-weight.

Page 3 of 5
5. The length and thickness of horizontal floor, glacis, protection works, etc. are worked out
on the same principle as are applicable to weir design. The worst condition for uplift occurs,
when high flood is passing down the weir and there is no flow in the canal.

Example
The head regulator of a canal has 3 openings each 3 m wide. The vertical opening of the gate is
1.0 m. The head on the regulator is 0.45 m (Afflux). If the u/s water level rises by 0.20 m, find
how much the gates must be lowered to maintain the canal discharge unaltered.
Solution
The width of regulator openings = 3 x 3 = 9 m.

Types of Regulation
There are two methods of regulation adopted at the head regulator to control the entry of silt into
the canal:

Page 4 of 5
 i. Still pond regulation
ii. Semi-Open flow regulation

In the first method, when the canal is running, all the gates of the undersluices are kept closed.

i) Still pond regulation: In this method of regulation when the canal is running all the
canals of the undersluices are kept closed. Thus, in the undersluices pocket, only as much
discharge is drawn as is required for the canal. The velocity of flow in the in the undersluices
pocket, therefore, gets reduced which causes the silt to deposit in the pocket and relatively clear
water enters the canal. The silt is allowed to accumulate in the pocket till it reaches to a level
about 0.5 m below the crest of the regulator. The canal is then closed and the gates of the
undersluices are opened so that the deposited silt gets scoured and discharged in the d/s side. The
scouring operation takes place for about 24 hours and during this period the supply in the canal is
shut off. This method of regulation is very useful in controlling the amount of silt entering the
canal. However, the main drawback of this method is that the supply in the canal has to be
stopped during the cleaning operation during the cleaning operation of the undersluices pockets.

ii) Semi-open flow regulation: In this method of flow regulation, the gates of the
undersluices are always kept partially open so that water in excess of the canal requirement
enters the undersluices pocket and the same is allowed to be discharged through the undersluices
pocket to the d/s side. The water entering the pocket thus gets divided into two parts, i.e., the top
water (above the crest of the regulator) which is relatively clean enters the canal through the
regulator, and the bottom water (below the crest of the regulator) which is silt laden escapes
through the undersluices to the d/s side. Due to continuous flow through the undersluices, certain
velocity is maintained in the pocket which keeps silt in suspension and the same is discharged to
the d/s side without being deposited in the pocket. However, this method does not provide proper
control on the entry of silt into the canal because the turbulence created in the pocket may
sometimes cause even the coarser material to rise up and enter the canal. The advantage of this
method is that as there is continuous scouring of silt from the pocket and the canal need not be
closed for this purpose.

Page 5 of 5