Tribhuvan University

Advanced College of Engineering and Management

Department of Civil Engineering
Lalitpur, Nepal

A
Report on
Water availability and Irrigation Water requirement at Diversion Head Work
Of Molung Khola at Okhaldhunga
(As a partial fulfillment of BE in Civil Engineering)
[Course Code: CE 72506]

Submitted to
Dr. Prem Chandra Jha
Department of Civil Engineering
ACEM, Lalitpur

Submitted by
Shishir Bhattarai
Roll no: 074BCE079
Section: B
 ABSTRACT
Discharge is the volume of water flowing through a river channel and it is measure per unit of time and its unit is
cumecs (m³/s). Before designing any structures nearby or across the river/channel it is most important to find out the
maximum amount of water flowing through that river/channel which will occur in some few years or hundreds of years
from present time. For that frequency analysis should be done and structures should be designed for the maximum
flood for the given return period. Mean monthly flow is calculated using four different methods viz. WECS 1990, DHM
2004, MHSP 1997 and MIP 1990. Irrigation projects are designed using 80% reliable flow among these methods.
Similarly, irrigation water requirement is calculated based on different crops, cropping pattern. Evapotranspiration,
soil type, rainfall pattern, crop coefficient of the field and this IWR is compared with 80% reliable flow to calculate the
amount deficit and surplus of water in different period in a year. IWR and 80% reliable flow calculated half monthly
for the better and accurate result resembling the field conditions.
 STATUS OF IRRIGATION IN NEPAL

Agriculture contributes for over two-thirds of Nepal's gross domestic output, which is one of the world's least
developed countries. As a result, irrigation is critical to the country's economic survival. Despite the fact that
irrigation has been practiced for decades, there is a significant need to both extend the presently irrigated area and
enhance the efficiency of existing systems. There is little doubt that irrigation development and management are
critical to the future economic growth of an agricultural nation like Nepal. This article examines the possibility of
large- to medium-sized irrigation projects in the Terai, small-to-medium-sized irrigation projects in the hill areas,
groundwater development, farmer-managed irrigation systems, and restoration of existing irrigation projects.

The entire land area of the nation is 14,080,000 ha, of which 2,320,000 ha is projected to be arable. Agriculture is
the most significant industry, accounting for about two-thirds of the GDP. In the 1980s, the overall trend in total food
production was upward. If the food production index for 1979-81 is taken as 100, it was 111.64 in 1986. However,
when per capita food output is taken into account, it was just 97.17 in 1986. Because agriculture is so important to
the national economy, irrigation, both local and large-scale, is critical for the country.

According to the ADB assessment, of the 2.60 million hectares (ha) of cultivable land, 1.80 million ha is irrigated,
with 1.40 million ha located on the Terai, or plains. Farmer’s control 75% of irrigated land, while the Department of
Irrigation oversees the other 25%. Since the late 1970s, groundwater irrigation, notably through shallow tube wells
(STWs), has been prominent, primarily on the Terai. Groundwater is underused for irrigation, with just 0.25 million
hectares expected to be watered using groundwater. This is barely a fifth of the Terai's 1 million hectares that might
be used for groundwater irrigation. According to the government's groundwater resources assessment, less than
20% of the annual groundwater reserve is used for irrigation, household or industrial purposes.

Irrigation in Nepal
Area in thousands Hectare

Terai Hill Total

Irrigable area 1,870 618 2,488

Area Suitable for
Irrigation 1,246 250 1,496

Area having some

irrigation 405 134 539

Table 1 Condition of irrigation in Nepal

Table of Contents
STATUS OF IRRIGATION IN NEPAL .......................................................................................................................
1.INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Command Area .................................................................................................................................................... 1
Gross command area (GCA): ....................................................................................................................................... 1
Cultivable command area (CCA): ................................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Catchment and Command area under consideration: ......................................................................... 2
Command Area: ............................................................................................................................................... 3
2. Need of the study................................................................................................................................................ 4
3. Objectives of the study ........................................................................................................................................ 4
4. Hydro meteorological database ........................................................................................................................... 4
4.1 Rainfall database ......................................................................................................................................... 4
4.2 Evaporation database ................................................................................................................................. 4
5. Methodology ....................................................................................................................................................... 5
5.1 Mean monthly flows and 80 percentage reliable monthly flows ............................................................... 5
5.1.1 DHM/WECS 1990 ................................................................................................................................... 5
5.1.2 DHM (2004) ............................................................................................................................................ 5
5.1.3 MHSP (1997) method............................................................................................................................. 6
5.1.4 MIP method ........................................................................................................................................... 6
5.2 Method of estimation of IWR....................................................................................................................... 8
6.Observation and Calculation ................................................................................................................................ 9
6.1 Estimation of mean monthly flow and 80 percent reliable flow: ............................................................... 9
6.1.1 Mean monthly flow (𝒎𝟑/𝒔) .................................................................................................................... 9
6.1.2 80 percent reliable flow (𝒎𝟑/𝒔) ............................................................................................................. 9
6.1.3 Comparison of mean monthly flows by different methods .................................................................. 10
6.1.4 Graphs illustrating flood results by various methods ......................................................................... 10
6.1.5 Irrigation water Requirement ................................................................................................................. 12
6.1.6 Comparison of Irrigation Water Requirement (IWR) with 80% monthly flow ....................................... 14
7. Discussions andconclusions .................................................................................................................................. 15
8. Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................... 15
 1.INTRODUCTION

1.1Command Area
The command area, CA, of a water source is the extent of area which can be reliably irrigated from that source.
Reliable irrigation means that the availability of water is always larger than or equal to the irrigation need of a
scheme. The formula used to calculate the command area is scheme water supply (SWS) divided by gross
irrigation need (INgross) or

It is an area which can be irrigated from a scheme and is fit for cultivation. In other words, it is the area around a
dam which is under its command as an irrigation source.

Gross command area (GCA):

 The gross commanded area is defined as the total area which can be irrigated by a canal system such that
unlimited quantity of water is available.
 The area to which water can flow from a canal will be restricted by the drainage boundaries.
 It is the total area lying b/w the drainage boundaries which can be irrigated by a canal system.
 It includes cultivable as well as uncultivable area for example ponds residential area, roads forest etc.

Cultivable command area (CCA):

 The cultivable commanded area is that portion of the gross commanded area which is cultivable or
cultivable.
 Thus, cultivable commanded area may be obtained by subtracting the uncultivable area from the gross
commanded area.

C.C.A = G.C.A - uncultivable area (area not fit for cultivation)

 The cultivable commanded area may be subdivided into the following two categories.
1. cultivable cultivated area: It is that portion of the cultivable commanded area which is
actually cultivated during a crop season.
2. Cultivable uncultivated area: It is that portion of the cultivable commanded area which E
not cultivated during a crop season

1
1.2 Catchment and Command area under consideration:
My catchment is under the area of Molung River in Okhaldhunga district. The detailed information on the catchment
is given below:

 Name of river: Molung Khola

 Location: Okhaldhunga
 District: Okhaldhunga
 Zone: Sagarmatha
 Province : Province 1
 Centroid Latitude: 27.386°
 Centroid Longitude: 86.4257°
 Average elevation: 1689 m
 Rain gauge stations:
o Pakarnas (1203)
o Okhaldhunga (1206)
o Mane Bhanjyang(1207)
 Average monsoon index: 1200mm
 Area of catchment: 267.2508 km2
 Average runoff coefficient: 0.35
 Command area: 26.5 ha
 Type of Soil: Silty loam

Figure 1 molung watershed with outlet point

2
 Figure 2: Watershed with respective rainfall stations and flow paths (Arc Gis)

Command Area:
The command area mostly comprises of the agricultural lands. The total area of the command area was observed
to be 26.5 Hectares.

Figure 3 Command Area

3
 2. Need of the study
For the design of the irrigation system, the mean monthly flow of catchment and irrigation water requirement is to be
calculated precisely. So, the scope of this report is confined to the determination of IWR and MMF and fixing the
approximate canal alignment for the gravity flow.

3. Objectives of the study

 To determine the mean monthly flow (MMF) of catchment by different methods.

 To determine the irrigation water requirement (IWR) in command area.
 To draw IWR and MMF curve and thus obtain the surplus and deficit of water.

4. Hydro meteorological database

Hydro meteorological study is the scientific study of the interaction between meteorological and hydrologic
phenomena, including the occurrence, motion, and changes of state of atmospheric water, and the land surface and
subsurface phases of the hydrologic cycle. Hydro meteorological Database includes rainfall records, stream gauging
data, temperature data, etc. at the stations.

4.1 Rainfall database

This dataset includes rainfall recorded at the stations. The rainfall station near to my catchment is Okhaldhunga
Station.
Station Index Station Latitude Longitude Elevation
1206 Okhaldhunga 27.32° 86.50° 1720 m
Table 2 Rainfall Database

4.2 Evaporation database

This dataset includes records of rate of evaporation at the stations obtained from the hill irrigation book.

4.3 Stream database

A stream gage or gauging station is a location used by hydrologists or environmental scientists to monitor and test
terrestrial bodies of water. Stream gaging is a technique used to measure the discharge, or the volume of water
moving through a channel per unit time, of a stream. The height of water in the stream channel, known as a stage
or gage height, can be used to determine the discharge in a stream. There is no any stream gauge station near by
my catchment area

4
 5. Methodology
5.1 Mean monthly flows and 80 percentage reliable monthly flows
5.1.1 DHM/WECS 1990
It was developed by WECS based on the study of the DHM records, so called WECS/DHM method. For long term
average monthly flows, all areas below 5000m are assumed to contribute flows equally per km2 area. The average
monthly flows can be calculated by the equation:

𝑄𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 (month) = Cx (Area of Basin)𝐴1 * (Area below 5000m + 1)𝐴2 x (Mean Monsoon precipitation)𝐴3

Where:
𝑄𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 (month) is the mean flow for a particular month in m3 /s, C, A1, A2 and A3 are coefficients of the different
months. The catchment area can be calculated from the topographical maps (maps that show contours) once the
intake location is identified. The input data required in the equation are total basin area (km2), basin area below
5000m (km2) and the average monsoon precipitation (km2) estimated from isohyetal map.

Power of area of Power of mean

Constant Power of area of basin below monsoon
Months Coefficient© basin(A1) 5000m+1 (A2) precipitation(A3)
January 0.01423 0 0.9777 0
February 0.01219 0 0.9766 0
March 0.009988 0 0.9948 0
April 0.007974 0 1.0435 0
May 0.008434 0 1.0898 0
June 0.006943 0.9968 0 0.261
July 0.02123 0 1.0093 0.2523
August 0.02548 0 0.9963 0.262
September 0.01677 0 0.9894 0.2878
October 0.009724 0 0.988 0.2508
November 0.00176 0.9605 0 0.391
December 0.001485 0.9536 0 0.3607
Table 3 Values of the coefficient required for WECS method

5.1.2 DHM (2004)

It is modified version of DHM/WECS method. It is applicable prefeasibility of Recci study. The monthly calculations
are done on the following basis:

5
5.1.3 MHSP (1997) method

This method also helps to determine the monthly flow. The monthly flows are determined based on the following
formula:
𝑄𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 (monthly) = C* (Basin Area)𝐴1 * (Mean monsoon precipitation )𝐴2
Where:
C, A1 and A2 are the coefficients whose values are given in the table below:

Month C A1 A2

Jan 0.03117 0.8644 0

Feb 0.02417 0.8752 0

Mar 0.02053 0.8902 0

sApr 0.01783 0.9558 0

May 0.01193 0.9657 0

Jun 0.01135 0.9466 0.2402

Jul 0.01641 0.9216 0.3534

Aug 0.02592 0.9095 0.3242

Sep 0.02206 0.8963 0.3217

Oct 0.01504 0.8772 0.2848

Nov 0.00792 0.8804 0.2707

Dec 0.00538 0.889 0.258

Table 4 values of coefficient used in MHSP method

5.1.4 MIP method

In this method, Nepal is divided into several hydrological regions. In MIP 1990 Nepal is divided into 7 hydrological
regions and in in MIP 2016 it is divided into 22 hydrological regions. MIP method gives reliable prediction only if the
discharge measurement is done during the dry period (November–April). The MIP method is based upon
measurement taken on an intermittent basis. The measurement of lowest discharge usually April is used to predict
the mean monthly discharge of a particular location using a Unit Hydrograph (l/s per sq. Km) which was used to
develop Non-dimensional hydrograph for seven regions.
In MIP 1990 we have first determined the April flow from most suitable method from the above mentioned methods,
then that April flow is used as the April flow in the MIP method and other values are obtained with the help of the
values of monthly hydrograph.

6
 REGIONS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
January 2.4 2.24 2.71 2.59 2.42 2.03 3.3
February 1.8 1.7 1.88 1.88 1.82 1.62 2.2
March 1.3 1.33 1.38 1.38 1.36 1.27 1.4
April 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
May 2.6 1.21 1.88 2.19 0.91 2.57 3.5
June 6 7.27 3.13 3.75 2.73 6.08 6
July 14.5 18.18 13.54 6.89 11.21 24.32 14
August 25 27.27 25 27.27 13.94 33.78 35
September 16.5 20.91 20.83 20.91 10 27.03 24
October 8 9.09 10.42 6.89 6.52 6.08 12
November 4.1 3.94 5 5 4.55 3.38 7.5
December 3.1 3.03 3.75 3.44 3.33 2.57 5
Table 5 Non-Dimensional regional monthly hydrograph for mean monthly flow

REGIONS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
January 2.41 2.15 2.47 2.59 2.42 2.03 3.3
February 1.78 1.62 1.82 1.88 1.82 1.62 2.2
March 1.71 1.31 1.35 1.38 1.36 1.27 1.4
April 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
May 2.6 0.77 2.19 2.19 0.91 2.57 3.5
June 3.91 2.31 3.75 3.75 2.73 6.08 6
July 9.38 9.29 6.89 6.89 11.21 24.32 14
August 21.25 20.77 27.27 27.27 13.94 33.78 35
September 11.88 15 20.91 20.91 10 27.03 24
October 6.56 5.38 6.89 6.89 6.52 6.08 12
November 4.38 3.62 5 5 4.55 3.38 7.5
December 3.19 2.77 3.44 3.44 3.33 2.57 5
Table 6 Non-dimensional monthly hydrograph for Q80

Similarly, in MIP 2016 the 80 percentile flow can be obtained directly, whereas in MIP 1990 the 80 percentile
monthly flow is obtained by first determining the 80 percentage April flow then multiplying that flow with the non-
dimensional hydrograph for each month.

7
5.2 Method of estimation of IWR

Irrigation water requirements can be defined as the quantity, or depth, of irrigation water in addition to
precipitation required to produce the desired crop yield and quality and to maintain an acceptable salt
balance in the root zone. This quantity of water must be determined for such uses as irrigation
scheduling for a specific field and seasonal water needs for planning, management, and development
of irrigation projects.

It is calculated by the formula:

IWR= CWR+ OR+ losses- ER
Where,
IWR=Irrigation Water requirement
CWR= Crop Water requirement
OR= Operational Requirement
ER=Effective rainfall

Crop Water Requirement:

It is the principle factor for estimating irrigation water requirement and planning of irrigation system. It
depends upon evaporation, transpiration and consumptive use.

CWR=ET 0 *Kc
Where,

ET0 = Potential evapotranspiration

Kc = Crop coefficient

Operational Requirement:

It is the water requirement for land preparation, leaching and percolation losses in flooded paddy
fields. They occur at the field level and must be supplied in addition to the crop water requirement.
Crop water requirement and operational water requirements together make up the field water
requirement.

Effective Rainfall:

The effective rainfall is that portion of the reliable rainfall that contributes to meeting the water
requirement of the crop. Effective rainfall is calculated by using the following formula.

Peff=f*P80
Where,

the value of f varies with the rainfall intensity as shown below for paddy crops.
f=0 if P80 <5mm

f=0.85 if 5< P80 <100 mm

f=0.70 if P80 >100 mm, for upland crops, f=0.70 for any value of P80

8
 6.Observation and Calculation

6.1 Estimation of mean monthly flow and 80 percent reliable flow:

6.1.1 Mean monthly flow (𝒎𝟑 /𝒔)

a. DHM 2004

Methods Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
DHM 2004 MMF
(𝑚3 /𝑠) 3.58 2.97 3.50 3.54 4.94 10.13 28.09 42.24 31.05 13.82 6.21 4.27

b. WECS/DHM 1990

Methods Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
DHM WECS 1990
MMF (𝑚3 /𝑠) 3.37 2.87 2.60 2.73 3.74 11.60 35.89 42.90 32.62 14.44 6.03 3.95

c. MSHP 1997

Methods Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
MHSP 1997 MMF
(𝑚3 /𝑠) 3.90 3.32 2.97 3.72 2.63 12.35 34.67 41.61 32.31 15.24 7.39 4.82

d. MIP 1990

Methods Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

MIP MMF (𝑚3 /𝑠) 8.54 5.92 4.35 3.15 5.92 9.86 42.65 78.75 65.61 32.82 15.75 11.81

6.1.2 80 percent reliable flow (𝒎𝟑 /𝒔)

a. MIP 1990
Methods Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

MIP MMF (𝑚3 /𝑠) 2.717 2 1.49 1.10 0.90 1.42 5.181 22.65 19.42 8.42 5.30 3.88

9
6.1.3 Comparison of mean monthly flows by different methods

Comparision of flood estimated by various methods

DISCHARGE (m3/s)

jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sept oct nov dec
MIP 1990 8.54 5.92 4.35 3.15 5.92 9.86 42.65 78.75 65.61 32.82 15.75 11.81
MSHP 1997 3.9 3.32 2.97 3.72 2.63 12.35 34.67 41.61 32.31 15.24 7.39 4.82
WECS/DHM 1990 3.37 2.87 2.6 2.73 3.74 11.6 35.89 42.9 32.62 14.44 6.03 3.95
DHM 2004 3.58 2.97 3.5 3.54 4.94 10.13 28.09 42.24 31.05 13.82 6.21 4.27

DHM 2004 WECS/DHM 1990 MSHP 1997 MIP 1990

Graph 1 Comparison of mean monthly flow by different methods

6.1.4 Graphs illustrating flood results by various methods

DHM 2004
50

40

30

20

10

0
jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sept oct nov dec
Graph 2 Mean monthly flow by DHM 2004

10
 Graph 3 mean monthly flow by WECS/DHM 1990

Graph 4 mean monthly flow by MSHP 1997

Graph 5 mean monthly flow by MIP 1990

(Note: The y-axis on all of the above graphs represents flows on m3/s)

11
 6.1.5 Irrigation water Requirement
The values enlisted below give the half monthly values of the irrigation water requirements throughout
a year. The assumption made in this calculation are: the percolation loss is considered 3 mm/day
whereas the field efficiency is considered 75%. The value of Et0 is calculated using the CROPWAT
8.0 software provided by the FAO. The 80% reliable rainfall at my station of consideration is obtained
from the Hill irrigation book. The values of the crop coefficient and other necessary values are also
obtained from the hill irrigation book.

The values of Irrigation Water requirement calculated in Table 8 are enlisted in comprehensive form
as:

IWR (lps) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

First Half 13.469 16.944 12.046 0.00 0.00 13.055 3.478 0.00 0.0426 0.624 0 12.478

Second half 14.924 14.662 7.836 0.00 0.00 0.8614 0.413 0.00 4.267 8.818 5.811 12.211

Also 80% monthly flow obtained in liters/sec from MIP 1990 in half monthly form is shown in the table
below:
Months Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Mean 2717 2000 1490 1100 900 1420 5181 22650 19420 8420 5300 3880
1st Half 1503.86 1089.63 808.75 598.75 515 645 2120.38 9141.38 10113.75 5585 3040 2217.5
2nd Half 1268.88 936.25 696.25 525 475 1180.13 4774.13 10921.25 8335 3820 2472.5 1794.63

The following table shows the information obtained from CROPWAT 8.0 with database for
Okhaldhunga station (station no: 1206) exported from CLIMWAT 2.0.

Table 7 Data collected from Cropwat 8.

12
The calculation for irrigation water requirement is shown in tabular form as

2
Irrigation Water Requirement: Percolation losses 3mm/day :Field efficiency upland crop 75% ET0 station : Okhaldhunga (1206) Rainfall Station : Okhaldhunga (1206)

Cropping Main Wheat Main paddy Main Wheat

Months Jan Jan Feb Feb Mar Mar Apr Apr May May Jun Jun Jul Jul Aug Aug Sep Sep Oct Oct Nov Nov Dec Dec
Period 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Days 15.5 15.5 14 14 15.5 15.5 15 15 15.5 15.5 15 15 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15 15 15.5 15.5 15 15 15.5 15.5
ET0(mm/d
1.9 2.12 2.51 2.95 3.44 3.96 4.49 4.51 4.04 3.57 3.11 2.85 2.8 2.72 2.63 2.55 2.5 2.54 2.67 2.63 2.42 2.19 1.93 1.83
ay)

29.45 32.86 35.14 41.3 53.32 61.38 67.35 67.65 62.62 55.335 46.65 42.75 43.4 42.16 40.765 39.525 37.5 38.1 41.385 40.765 36.3 32.85 29.915 28.365
ET0 (mm)
P80 (mm) 4.625 5.5 5.5 7.125 10.375 14 18 29.5 48.5 72.875 102.625 142.5 192.5 202.5 172.5 145.125 120.375 86.75 44.25 17.25 5.75 0.5 1.5 2.875
Kc 1.15 1.15 1.1 0.85 0.65 0.45 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.05 1.05 0.95 0.95 0.4 0.65 1.05
ET crop
33.8675 37.789 38.654 35.105 34.658 27.621 51.315 47.025 47.74 46.376 44.8415 43.4775 39.375 40.005 39.31575 38.72675 13.14 19.44475 29.78325
(mm)

Land
55 55 50 50
prep(mm)

Percolation
46.5 46.5 46.5 46.5 45 45
(mm)
Field req
33.8675 37.789 38.654 35.105 34.658 27.621 106.315 102.025 144.24 142.876 91.3415 89.9775 84.375 85.005 39.31575 38.72675 13.14 19.44475 29.78325
(mm)

Eff 3.2375 3.85 3.85 4.9875 7.2625 9.8 71.8375 99.75 134.75 141.75 120.75 101.5875 84.2625 73.7375 37.6125 14.6625 0.35 1.05 2.0125
rain(mm)
I-Net(mm) 30.63 33.939 34.804 30.1175 27.3955 17.821 34.4775 2.275 9.49 1.126 0 0 0.1125 11.2675 1.70325 24.06425 12.79 18.39475 27.77075

E-field (%) 75 75 75 75 75 75 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 75 75 75

E-farm
75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75
(%)
E-main
80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
(%)
I-gross
68.0666667 75.42 77.3422222 66.927778 60.8788889 39.602222 63.8472222 4.212963 17.574074 2.0851852 0 0 0.2083333 20.865741 3.1541667 44.563426 28.422 40.877 61.712
(mm)
I-
gross(l/s/h 0.50826364 0.563172 0.63940329 0.553305 0.45459146 0.2957155 0.49264832 0.0325074 0.1312282 0.0155704 0 0 0.0016075 0.1610011 0.0235526 0.3327615 0.2193 0.30523 0.4608
a)
I-gross
(lps) for 13.4689865 14.924059 16.9441872 14.662584 12.0466738 7.8364612 0 0 0 0 13.0551805 0.8614469 3.477546 0.412615 0 0 0.042599 4.2665288 0.6241444 8.8181809 0 5.81145 12.4768867 12.2112
26.5 ha

Table 8 Calculation of Irrigation water requirement

13
6.1.6 Comparison of Irrigation Water Requirement (IWR) with 80%
monthly flow

The graph below represents the comparison between the 80% monthly flow with the irrigation water
requirement.

Graph 6 Comparison of IWR and 80% monthly flow

14
 7. Discussions and conclusions
Several analyses were done in order to determine the irrigation water requirement for the given command area
of 26.5 hectares. The above graph shows that the irrigation by artificial means is not need to be provided in the
any of the month as the irrigation water requirement is sufficiently fulfilled by the 80-percentage reliable
discharge in the river.
In order to get a clear picture of the dynamics of irrigation water requirement and the minimum available flow in
the river several analyses were done. The monthly mean rainfall was calculated by several methods. There are
variations in the values of the mean monthly flow values, 80 percentage reliable values. It is due to the fact that
different assumptions and approach are used for the calculation of values in different methods. Similarly, the
80-percentage reliable flow was obtained from MIP 1990, since the water measurements were done in the low
flow period so MIP methods are assumed to be somewhat representative of the actual river flow.
Similarly, for IWR the percolation loss is considered as 3 mm/day and the field efficiency as 75%. The value of
80 percentage rainfall, crop coefficient and other necessary values required to calculate the were obtained from
the hill irrigation book. After the calculation of IWR and Q80 flow, the comparative graph was constructed to get
a clear idea of deficit and surplus discharge for irrigation. The relationship is shown in the graph at 6.1.6.

8. Recommendations
After the analysis, it is clear due to the very large watershed delineation at the outlet point of Molung khola, the
discharge available in the river is for every month significantly higher than the Irrigation Water Requirement
(IWR). So, instead of constructing larger diversion works we can choose another smaller stream having
significantly less discharge and smaller watershed area. On doing so, the size of diversion structure can be
reduced and the design of canal can be economized to a large extent.

For the analysis part, it is clear that the methods used in this analysis are kind of outdated so the results
obtained from that kind of analysis may not be accurate. Similarly, there is lack of quality Hydro- Meteorological
data. The density of hydrological and meteorological stations in Nepal is not sufficient so there is lack of quality
data for a small region at some distance from the stations. All these limitations may add up to lot of errors for
the determination of IWR and minimum river flow.
So, the hydro-meteorological stations need to be established at a large number of places all over the country to
provide accurate spatial and temporal data

15
.

Tribhuvan University
Advanced College of Engineering and Management
Department of Civil Engineering
Lalitpur, Nepal

A
Report on
Design of Portable Drip System
(As a partial fulfillment of BE in Civil Engineering)
[Course Code: CE 72506]

Submitted to
Dr. Prem Chandra Jha
Department of Civil Engineering
ACEM, Lalitpur

Submitted by
Shishir Bhattarai
Roll no: 074BCE079
Section: B
CONTENTS

1. Introduction…………………………………………………………18
2. Design Approach of Drip System………………………………..19
3. Design of Portable Drip System…………………………………20
 1. Introduction
Drip irrigation is a method of applying water directly to plants through a number of low flow rate outlets
called emitters or drippers, generally placed at short intervals along small tubing. One of the main
characteristics of this method is point irrigation as compared to area irrigation with sprinklers or flood
irrigation. A network of laterals with drippers supply water and fertilizers to plant roots. Water is generally
discharged at very low rates in the order of 1-2 liters per hour, although higher rates up to 8 liters per hour
or more can be achieved through special drippers. This type of irrigation is adopted in arid regions for fruit
and nut trees, grapes and other vine crops, sugar cane, pine apples, strawberries, flowers and vegetables.

Figure 1 Schematic layout of Drip Irrigation System

1.1 Types of Drip Irrigation System

 Sub-surface drip irrigation = Water is applied below soil surface, rarely used, expensive
 Surface drip irrigation = Water applied directly on soil surface, commonly used
1.2 Suitability of Drip Irrigation in hills of Nepal
 High pressure and clean sediment free water is required which is available in hills of Nepal.
 Flexible pipes and fittings required for drip irrigation can be easily transported even in rural areas.
 Drip irrigation has better efficiency and minimal losses. This makes it beneficial in hills of Nepal where there
is shortage of water.
 Cropping pattern in hills is suitable for drip irrigation as crops grown in hills are usually row crops such as
maize, tomatoes etc.
 Land preparation and surface ditches aren’t required in drip irrigation. As a result, drip irrigation is preferred
in hills where the topography is too rugged for land preparation and surface ditches’ construction.
 Surface irrigation (canals) is expensive as well as inefficient in hills.
 Rate of water application in drip irrigation is low enough to prevent surface erosion in easily erodible hills.
 Drip irrigation is adaptable to any farmable slopes making it suitable to irrigate slopes of hills.
1.3Advantages of Drip Irrigation
 Deep percolation losses are minimum as only root zone of plant is supplied with water.
 Evaporation losses are minimum as only a portion of ground area is wetted.
 There is effective weed control especially for ground area that isn’t wetted.
18
  Water application isn’t affected by wind so irrigation take place at all hours.
 Working pressure of laterals are generally less than that of sprinklers systems thus cheaper and thin-
walled pipes can be used.
 Pipes and dripper components are often less expensive than that of sprinkler system.
 Greater efficiency (90%)
 Prevents diseases by minimizing water contact with leaves, stems and fruits of plants.
1.4 Limitations of Drip Irrigation
 Frequent clogging of drippers, constant supervision required
 Mayn’t suitable to some crops as salinity can develop due to salt accumulating along the fringes of wetted
surface strip
 Root development may be restricted to wetted soil volume near each emitter
 Not suitable for very closely seeded crops such as carrots, radishes etc.
 Expensive (Initial cost is high)
 Moisture distribution mayn’t be uniform
 Direct sunlight reduces lifespan of tubes used for supplying water
 High skill requirement for irrigation water requirement

2. Design Approach of Drip System

Determine net crop consumptive use (mm/d).
 Determine extractable water based on soil type (mm/m of soil).
 Determine crop rooting depth.
 Determine irrigation interval.
 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊
Irrigation interval =
𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊
 Where, Water available to crop = Crop rooting depth x Extractable water
 Determine water application required considering the application efficiency.
 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊∗𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊
Water to be applied =
𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊
 Application efficiency for drip system =90%
 Determine dripper spacing and lateral spacing based on type of crop planted. Lateral spacing
= Minimum 1 meters
 Dripper spacing = Minimum 0.5 meters

 Assume the discharge of dripper, diameter of dripline and working pressure based on
performance table provided by manufacturers.
 Calculate application rate.
 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊ℎ𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊
Application rate =
𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊
 Rate of application must be less than intake rate.
 Determine required number of hours of irrigation per day.
𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊
 Number of irrigation hours per day =
𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊
Note: If the irrigation hours exceed 24 hrs., discharge per dripper must be increased to lower number of
irrigation hours.
 Design lateral such that the friction loss in the pipe is within allowable limits. Correction factor based on
number of emitters used on a lateral is applied while calculating friction loss
.
Allowable pressure variation in lateral = 20 % of working pressure
19
 Pressure required at head of lateral = Working pressure +Friction loss in laterals +Valve loss (0.5m)

 Design distribution pipe such that the friction loss in the pipe is within allowable limits.

Allowable pressure variation = 20 % of head required at head of lateral Pressure required at head of
distribution pipe = Pressure required at head of lateral +Friction loss in distribution pipe (considering losses
in all fittings) Friction loss of all fittings = 20 % of length of distribution pipe

 Design supply line that the friction loss in the pipe is within allowable limits. Allowable pressure variation
= Available head – Head required at head of distribution pipe

3. Design of Portable Drip System

Data
Available
Crop Cauliflower

Peak consumptive use 6.5 mm/day

Soil type Silty loam

Wind 1.4 m/s (Okhaldhunga Station, 1206)

Area 140 x 40 m

Supply line 0.68km = 680 m

Elevation of Collection chamber 911.04m

Elevation of Irrigated Field 868.07m

Elevation of Collection chamber
911.04-868.07 =42.97 m
above irrigated field

A. Irrigation Interval
 Water available for silty loam= 60-120 mm/m of soil
 Extractable water for silty loam= 30-60 mm/day
(say 45 mm/m of soil)
 Crop root depth= 0.4-0.5m (say 0.45m)
 Water available to crop= 0.45*45= 20.25 mm
𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑝 20.25
 Irrigation Interval= = 6.5 = 3.115 days
𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑢𝑠𝑒

(say 3 days)
 Application Efficiency= 90%

20
 𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑎𝑙∗𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑢𝑠𝑒 3∗6.5
 Water to be applied= 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦
= 90
= 0.90 mm every 5 days

B. Dripline Selection
 Lateral spacing= 1.5m (determined by row spacing of crops, atleast 1m)
 Dripper spacing= 0.5m (determined by type of crop)
 Assuming dripper discharge of 2 lit/hr= 2*10-3 m/hr

𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑟 2∗10−3

Rate of application= 𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔∗𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔= 1.5∗0.5 = 2.67*10-3 m/hr=2.67 mm/hr

 Intake for silty loam= 7-10 mm/hr (say 8mm)

Rate of application is less than intake rate of soil. Hence there won’t be any surface runoff. So, the application
rate is okay.

21.67
Required number of hours of irrigation per day = = 8.116 h (say 9 hours)
2.67

Since the spacing of laterals have been determined, the mode of rotations and number of drippers to be
employed at time can be determined. A rotation system can be applied such that 6 laterals will irrigate each day.
These laterals will be moved to next location at the beginning of each day and will return to same position every
3 days.

C. Design of lateral

Assuming 16 mm dripline and working pressure of 1 atm =10.34 m (per dripper)

 Maximum allowable pressure variation in lateral = 20% of working pressure

= 0.2*10.34= 2.06m
 Length of lateral = 70 m each
 Assuming half of the dripper spacing (0.5/2=0.25m) is left on each side,
70−0.25∗1
Number of drippers per lateral= + 1= 139 drippers
0.5

 Discharge per dripper= 2 l/h

 Total discharge at the head of lateral = Number of drippers x Discharge per dripper
= 139 * 2 = 278 l/h = 0.278 m3/h
 Correction factor for 139 drippers, c = 0.351

Now, let us determine the diameter of lateral pipe through trial-and-error approach.

TRAIL 1

We have adopted 16 mm diameter low pressure soft polythene pipe.

For soft polythene pipe, friction factor = 0.0576 Using Darcy-Weisbach equation,
21
 8𝑓𝐿 𝑄2 ∗𝑐
Friction loss= = 0.665m < allowable pressure variation (2.06 m)
𝛱 2 𝑔 𝑑5

Assuming valve loss of 0.5m

Required pressure at the head of lateral = 10.34+ 0.665 +0.5 = 11.505 m = 11.5 m

D. Design of Distribution Pipe


Discharge per lateral= 0.278 m3/h

No. of laterals operating at a time= 6 (3 on each side)

Maximum flow in distribution pipe= 6*0.278= 1.668 m3/h

Length of distribution main= 40m

Friction loss due to all fittings in distribution pipe= 20% of length of pipe
=2*40= 8m
 Equivalent length of distribution main = 40+8= 48m
 Maximum allowable head loss in distribution main=20% of 11.16= 2.32m

Now let us determine the diameter of distribution main through trial-and-error approach.

TRIAL 1

Let’s adopt 40 mm diameter low pressure soft polythene pipe.

For soft polythene pipe, friction factor = 0.0576
Using Darcy-Weisbach equation,

8𝑓𝐿 𝑄2 ∗𝑐
Friction loss= 𝛱 2 =0.479m< allowable pressure variation of 2.26m (OK)
𝑔 𝑑5

Required pressure at the head of distribution main = 11.3 +0.479 = 11.779 m

E. Design of Supply Line

 Length of supply line = 680m
 Maximum flow in supply line = 1.668 m3/h
 Available head = 42.97 m
 Allowable loss in supply line = 42.97-11.779 = 31.191 m

Trial 1

Let’s adopt 40 mm diameter low pressure soft polythene pipe.

For soft polythene pipe, friction factor = 0.0576
Using Darcy-Weisbach equation,

8𝑓𝐿 𝑄2 ∗𝑐
Friction loss= 𝛱 2 𝑔 𝑑5
= 6.7848< allowable pressure variation ( 31.191 ) (OK)

22
Figure 2 Location of components of drip irrigation system

23
Figure3 Layout of main, distribution and main lines for water distribution

24
 Tribhuvan University
Advanced College of Engineering and Management
Department of Civil Engineering
Lalitpur, Nepal

A
Report on
Design of Portable Sprinkler System
(As a partial fulfillment of BE in Civil Engineering)
[Course Code: CE 72506]

Submitted to
Dr. Prem Chandra Jha
Department of Civil Engineering
ACEM, Lalitpur

Submitted by
Shishir Bhattarai
Roll no: 074BCE079
Section : B
Contents
Introduction………………………………………………………27
Types of Sprinkler System……………………………….............27
Suitability of Sprinkler System in hills of Nepal………………...27
Advantages of Sprinkler Irrigation………………………………28
Limitations of Sprinkler System…………………………………28
Design Approach of Sprinkler System…………………………..28
Design of Portable Sprinkler System……………………………29
Introduction
Sprinkler irrigation is an alternative method of irrigation for hilly areas. In sprinkler irrigation system, water is
applied directly in form of spray through network of pipes and pumps, thus creating artificial rain. The spray is
developed by the flow of water under pressure through small orifices or nozzles. The pressure is usually
obtained by pumping. With careful selection of nozzle sizes, operating pressure and sprinkler spacing the
amount of irrigation water required to refill the crop root zone can be applied nearly uniform at the rate to suit
the infiltration rate of soil.
Sprinkler system consists of a rotating sprinkler, with one or two nozzles mounted on a body which is rotated by
the action of water striking the blade. Water is supplied to the sprinkler through laterals, distribution main and
supply line. Several appurtenances such as valves, end plug, elbow etc. are used to control the flow.

Figure 2. Component of a portable sprinkler irrigation system

Types of Sprinkler System

1. Permanent system = Distribution pipework (mains and laterals are fixed and often buried
2. Semi-Permanent system = Main distribution pipes are fixed but laterals are movable from place to place
3. Portable system = Entire network can be moved from place to place

Suitability of Sprinkler Irrigation in hills of Nepal

1. High pressure and clean sediment free water is required which is available in hills of Nepal.
2. Flexible pipes and fittings required for sprinklers can be easily transported even in rural areas.
3. Sprinkler irrigation has better efficiency than flood irrigation and minimal losses. This makes it beneficial
in hills of Nepal where there is shortage of water.
4. Cropping pattern in hills is suitable for sprinkler irrigation. Crops grown in hills such as maize, wheat,
millet etc. don’t need to flooded to be irrigated as in the case of rice.
5. Land preparation and surface ditches aren’t required in sprinkler irrigation. As a result, sprinkler irrigation
is preferred in hills where the topography is too rugged for land preparation and surface ditches’
construction.
6. Surface irrigation (canals) is expensive as well as inefficient in hills.

27
 Advantages of Sprinkler Irrigation
1. Elimination of the channels for conveyance, therefore no conveyance loss
2. Suitable to all types of soil except heavy clay
3. Suitable for irrigating crops where the plant population per unit area is very high, most suitable for oil seeds
and other cereal and vegetable crops
4. Water saving, deep percolation losses are minimum
5. Closer control of water application convenient for giving light and frequent irrigation and higher water
application efficiency
6. Increase in yield
7. Mobility of system
8. May also be used for undulating area
9. Saves land as no bunds etc. are required
10. Areas located at a higher elevation than the source can be irrigated
11. Possibility of using soluble fertilizers and chemicals
12. Less problem of clogging of sprinkler nozzles due to sediment laden water

Limitations of Sprinkler Irrigation

1. High cost and labor requirement
2. Clogging of Nozzle
3. Energy required to operate pumps and filters
4. Requires frequent supervision
5. Wind and pressure effect

Design Approach of Sprinkler System

1.Determine net crop consumptive use (mm/d).
2.Determine extractable water based on soil type (mm/m of soil).
3.Determine crop rooting depth.
4.Determine irrigation interval.
𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑝
Irrigation interval =
𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑢𝑠𝑒
Where, Water available to crop = Crop rooting depth x Extractable water
5. Determine water application required considering the application efficiency.
𝐼𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑎𝑙∗𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑈𝑠𝑒
Water to be applied =
𝐴𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦
Application efficiency for sprinkler system = 60-80% (Best value = 70%)
6. Determine rate of application.
𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑡𝑜 𝑏𝑒 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑑
Rate of application =
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑
Rate of application must be less than intake rate.

7. Select suitable sprinkler based on trial-and-error approach using performance table.

8. Design lateral such that the friction loss in the pipe is within allowable limits. Correction factor based on
number of sprinklers used on a lateral is applied while calculating friction loss..
Allowable pressure variation in lateral = 20 % of working pressure
28
 Pressure required at head of lateral = Working pressure +Friction loss in laterals +Valve loss
(0.5m)
9. Design distribution pipe such that the friction loss in the pipe is within allowable limits.
Allowable pressure variation = 30 % of head required at head of lateral
Pressure required at head of distribution pipe = Pressure required at head of lateral +Friction loss
in distribution pipe (considering losses in all fittings)
Friction loss of all fittings = 20 % of length of distribution pipe
10. Design supply line that the friction loss in the pipe is within allowable limits.
Allowable pressure variation = Available head – Head required at head of distribution pipe

Design of Portable Sprinkler System

Data Available

Crop Cauliflower

Peak consumptive use 6.5 mm/day

Soil type Silty Loam

Wind 1.4 m/s (Okhakdhunga, 1206)

Area 140 x 40 m

Supply line 0.680 km = 680 m

Elevation of Collection chamber 911.04

Elevation of Irrigated Field 868.07m

Elevation of Collection chamber above

911.04-868.07 =42.97 m
irrigated field

1. Irrigation Interval
 Available water for sandy loam = 60-120 mm/m of soil
 Extractable water for sandy loam = 30-60 mm/m of soil
Say 45 mm/ meter of soil
 Crop root depth = 0.4-0.5 m Say 0.45 m
 Water available to crop = 45*0.45 = 20.25 mm
𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑝 20.25
 Irrigation interval = = = 3.115 𝑑𝑎𝑦𝑠
𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑢𝑠𝑒 6.5
Say 3 days
 Application efficiency = 70%
𝐼𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑎𝑙∗𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑈𝑠𝑒 3∗6.5
 Water to be applied = = = 27.85 mm every 5 days
𝐴𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 0.70
27.85
 Assuming 6 hours irrigation per day, Rate of application = = 4.642 mm/h Say 5mm/h
6

29
  Intake rate for sandy loam = 8-12 mm/ h Say 10mm/h
Rate of application is less than intake rate of soil. Hence there won’t be any surface runoff. So, the
application rate is okay.

2. Sprinkler Selection
Referring to performance table provided by manufacturers (Hill Irrigation Engineering, pg.119), it is
evident that single nozzle sprinkler with application rate of 5 mm/h isn’t available. Hence, sprinkler with
application rate closest to the application rate required i.e., 5.2 mm/h was adopted for further
computations.
Now, let us determine the sprinkler spacing by trial-and-error approach.
Trial 1:
From performance table, for application rate of 5.2 mm/h,
 Nozzle diameter= 2.2 mm
 Working Pressure (P) = 2 atm =2*10.34 m = 20.68 m
 Discharge per sprinkler(Q) = 0.22 m3/h
 Diameter of coverage (D) = 11 m
 Spacing: 6x7 m

Sprinkler Spacing Required:

Since there is a prevailing wind along the direction of lateral,
 Spacing along lateral = 60% of diameter = 0.6*11 = 6.6 m Say 6 m
 Spacing of laterals = 65% of diameter = 0.65*11 = 7.15 m Say 7 m
Here, the required sprinkler spacing matches with the spacing specifications of sprinkler under
consideration. Hence, the sprinkler is suitable to be used for irrigation in this case.
Since the lateral spacing is known, we can determine the number of laterals to be employed to irrigate
each day. A rotation system can be applied such that one lateral will irrigate each day. The lateral will be
moved to next location at the beginning of each day and return to same position every 3 days.

3. Design of Laterals
 Maximum allowable pressure variation in the lateral = 20% of working pressure
= 0.2 *20.68 = 4.136 m
 Assuming, half of the spacing between laterals (i.e., 6/2 =3m) is left at either end
𝐿𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝐿𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑙 − 𝐸𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝑆𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔
Number of sprinklers = +1
𝑆𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑏𝑒𝑡𝑤𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑆𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑘𝑙𝑒𝑟𝑠
140−2∗3
= +1 = 22 sprinklers
6
(since 22.33 sprinklers cannot be provided we provide 22 sprinklers and maintain 4m gap)

Sprinklers

3m 6m 7m 3m
Laterals m m m
m

140m
Figure 3 Spacing of sprinklers and laterals (Not to scale
 Correction factor, c for 22 sprinklers = 0.374
30
 Length of lateral = 140 m
Total Discharge at head of lateral = Number of sprinklers x Discharge per sprinkler
= 22 * 0.22 = 4.84 m3/h
Now, let us determine the diameter of lateral pipe through trial-and-error approach.

Trial 1:

Let’s adopt 40mm diameter low pressure soft polythene pipe.

For soft polythene pipe, friction factor=0.0576
4.84 2
8𝑓𝑙𝑄2 8∗0.0576∗140∗( )
3600
Friction loss = 𝑐= 40 5
∗ 0.374 = 3.77m < Allowable pressure variation (4.136m)
𝜋2 𝑔𝑑5 𝜋2 ∗9.81∗( )
1000
(OK)

Assuming valve loss of 0.5 m,

Required pressure at the head of lateral = 20.68 + 3.77+0.5 = 24.95 m

4. Design of Distribution Pipe

Maximum head loss will occur when the laterals on the farther end of the field are in operation.
Hence, the diameter of the distribution pipe must be selected such that loss in the distribution
pipe is within acceptable limits when the laterals at the farthest end are in operation.

 Discharge per lateral = 4.84 m3/h

 No. of laterals operating at a time = 1
 Maximum flow in the distribution pipe = 1*4.84 = 4.84 m3/h
 Length of distribution main = 40m
 Let friction loss of all fittings in the distribution pipe = 20 % of length of pipe
= 0.20 *40 =8m
 Equivalent length of distribution pipe = 40 + 8 = 48 m
 Allowed head loss in distribution pipe = 30% of operating pressure of laterals
= 0.30*24.95 = 7.485 m

Trial 1:

Let’s adopt 40 mm diameter hard polythene pipe.

For hard polythene pipe, friction factor = 0.0363
4.84 2
8𝑓𝑙𝑄2 8∗0.0363∗40∗( )
3600
Friction loss = = 40 5
= 2.1177 m << Allowable head loss (7.092m)
𝜋2 𝑔𝑑5 𝜋2 ∗9.81∗( )
1000
(OK)

5. Design of supply line

 Length of supply line = 680 m

 Maximum flow in supply line = 4.84 m3/h
 Available head = 42.97 m
 Required pressure at start of distribution pipe = 24.95 + 2.117 =27.067 m
 Allowed loss in supply line = 42.97-27.067 =15.903 m
Trial 1:
31
Let’s adopt 50 mm diameter hard polythene pipe.
For hard polythene pipe, friction factor = 0.0363
4.84 2
8𝑓𝑙𝑄2 8∗0.0363∗680∗( )
3600
Friction loss = = 50 5
= 11.797 m < Allowable head loss (15.903m)
𝜋2 𝑔𝑑5 𝜋2 ∗9.81∗( )
1000
(OK)

Figure 4 Location of components of sprinkler irrigation system

32
Figure 5 Layout of main, distribution and main lines for rotational water distribution

33