water
Article
Numerical Investigation for Rehabilitation and Lining of
a Problematic Canal
Amir Ibrahim 1 , Abdel Hamed M. Khater 2, * , Christina F. Gad 3
Citation: Ibrahim, A.; Khater, A.H.M.;
Gad, C.F.; Elzahry, E.F.M. Numerical
Investigation for Rehabilitation and
Lining of a Problematic Canal. Water
2023, 15, 3288. https://doi.org/
10.3390/w15183288
Academic Editors: Husnain Haider
and Haroon R. Mian
Received: 30 July 2023
Revised: 12 September 2023
Accepted: 13 September 2023
Published: 18 September 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Water 2023, 15, 3288. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15183288
and Elzahry Farouk M. Elzahry 4
1 Civil Engineering Department, Benha Faculty of Engineering, Benha University, Benha 13512, Egypt;
amir.ibrahim@bhit.bu.edu.eg
2 National Water Research Center, El-Qanater El-Khayreya 13621, Egypt
3 Civil Engineering Department, Higher Institute of Engineering, El Shourok Academy, Cairo 11837, Egypt;
k.gad@sha.edu.eg
4 Civil Engineering Department, Shoubra Faculty of Engineering, Benha University, Shoubra 11629, Egypt;
alzahry.alzahry@feng.bu.edu.eg
* Correspondence: abdo_khatter@yahoo.com
Abstract: Canal lining and rehabilitation aim to distribute water, reduce losses, and ensure that water
reaches the ends of the canals. Recognizing the need to improve the management of the irrigation
system and maintain the width of strategic adjacent roads to canals, the Western Meleg Canal in
Menoufia Governorate, Egypt, was selected as a case study. A reach of 1500–3400 km faces problems
that impede the implementation of the lining sector as a result of the proximity of the buildings
that could not be removed on the canal banks. Two alternatives, including the contraction of the
bed width or coverage of the reach from 1500 km to 3400 km on the Western Meleg Canal, were
explored. A coupled one-two dimensional numerical model to replicate the water surface profile and
flow velocity was implemented. The total cost of each alternative was approximately estimated. The
results show that the contraction of the bed width along the considered reach has a limited effect
on the levels and velocities of water along the canal, as water levels increased by 2 to 6 cm from the
design levels before the contraction of the width of the bed, and the maximum velocity of the water
was 0.72 m/s. In the case of covering the selected reach, the difference in water pressure through the
coverage (1500:4000 km) was 74 cm, and the coverage works under free flow. The estimated cost of
covering is more than four times the cost of plain concrete lining. The findings of this study may help
decision-makers and could be implemented in other such canals.
Keywords: canal lining; Western Meleg Canal; numerical model; water levels; velocities of water
1. Introduction
The three main types of losses in irrigation canals are water seepage from the canal’s
sides and bed, losses of evaporation from the open surface of the channel’s top width, and
transpiration losses from weeds and grass. The author in [1] suggested using an approach
to calculate bed width and water depth using known discharge, side slope, longitudinal
slope, Manning’s coefficient, evaporation rate, and soil type. To guarantee that the irrigation
system works properly and that water is used efficiently, these losses must be decreased.
Unlined canals are used to replenish groundwater through seepage, while lined canals are
mostly used to stop water seepage through the soil. The transmission losses between the
stream and the underlying aquifers were examined using the reach length water balance
(RLWB) method [2]. In [3], the outcomes of a numerical simulation used to examine the
factors that contribute to seepage from earthen channels were evaluated. The performance
of irrigation schemes is impacted by a number of variables, including planning, design,
construction, facility operation, maintenance, and water application [4]. For example,
equity [5–7], adequacy [8,9], productivity [10,11], sustainability [12,13], and flexibility [14]
are just a few of the indicators that researchers have used to assess the performance of
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/water
Water 2023, 15, 3288 2 of 18

irrigation schemes. In many studies, characteristics of performance indicators have been

introduced and analyzed. Water availability [15], profitability [16], resiliency [17], timeliness
of irrigation [18,19], irrigation intensity [20], and regularity [21] have all been studied.
Canal lining can be defined as adding a layer of impermeable material over the exca-
vated surface of the canal to minimize the leakage of water into the surrounding soil. In
cases where the canal lining is on the side slope of the canal, it should be stable enough to
protect the lining layer from excessive lateral forces. The probable technical and environ-
mental effects of such a national project were discussed by authors in [22]. Lining 30% of
the early section of watercourses led to an average yearly water savings of 10.32 ha-m, ac-
cording to [23]. The author in [24] provided a method for selecting the best seepage-control
lining for canals based on optimal performance levels and calculations of the present rates
of various types of traditional (concrete monolithic and reinforced concrete prefabricated)
and geosynthetic (geomembrane, geocomposite) coatings. In [25], researchers studied the
competence, equity, efficiency, and dependability indices to determine how well water
delivery performed in a western Turkish irrigation network. Regarding competence, equity,
confidence, and dependability, the water supply performance of the analyzed canals was
rated as inappropriate in each irrigation season. The physical structure and the manage-
ment section are where these difficulties’ root causes can be found, according to an analysis
of the spatial and temporal dimensions of these indices. The authors in [26] demonstrated
that the hydraulic characteristics of the liner had a significant impact on the amount of
seepage. The most effective liners were concrete, geo-membrane, and bentonite; in the
absence of pumping, these percentages would be around 99%, 96%, and 54% via wells from
the aquifer, respectively.
Both lined and unlined canals have been investigated by a huge number of authors.
Those in [27] investigated how the Al-Hagar Canal’s lining affected the flow characteristics
and compared the canal’s before- and after-lining conditions. Al-Hagar Canal water losses
were 38.74% when unlined but fell to 29.25% when lined. In a particular region of Pakistan’s
Indus Basin, the differences in water losses caused by lined and unlined streams were
evaluated [28]. The lining was found to have reduced water loss by 22.5%. The maximum
water losses from canal networks are from seepage losses. If the soil of the canal ensures
higher losses, canal lining is the most suitable and applicable solution. According to [29], the
two precast concrete slabs’ joint cracks and the geomembrane’s perforations were to blame
for the increasing seepage loss. The combination of fresh concrete and geomembrane lining
decreased seepage by 86% when compared to unlined canals; after three years of operation,
the combination could still reduce seepage by 68%. The author in [30] indicated that
three case studies have been simulated and compared, including unlined, lined, and lined
canals with a drainage pipe. The results demonstrate that irrigation canal rehabilitation has
decreased the losses from canals, resulting in lowering the groundwater, where the case of
lining gave a higher reduction than the case of lining with a drainage pipe.
Economically viable changes in the operation and management of irrigation systems
have been the subject of extensive research. One such study [31] laid the foundation for
utilizing performance assessments to enhance irrigation services. Furthermore, researchers
have delved into the utilization and challenges associated with canal models [32]. They
identified three key factors—distance, time-step, and weighting parameters—that were
hypothesized to impact the model’s output accuracy. The modelling of open channel
flows holds paramount importance in hydraulic and irrigation engineering. Numerous
investigations have focused on simulating flow in single channels or open channel net-
works. Examples include studies using a 2D curvilinear grid [33,34], a 2D numerical
model for sediment transport in alluvial shallow-wide streams in the River Nile [35], the
simulation of open channel network flows employing a finite element approach [36], and
the simulation of a sub-critical flow at open-channel junctions [37]. Additionally, a 1D
model was verified through comparisons with the outputs of the 1D SOBEK model of
the El-Mahrousa Canal [38]. The SOBEK model serves a vital role in decision-making for
Water 2023, 15, 3288 3 of 18

significant river projects, daily river level forecasts, realistic high-water level assessments
for safety evaluations, and salt intrusion calculations during dry seasons.
Given that SOBEK is a 1D model, its applicability is restricted to problems with
negligible 2D or 3D impacts; it may be used to conduct studies on flood mitigation, canal
system development, river dredging methods, and salt intrusion at lower levels of rivers.
Some of these models should occasionally be modified to incorporate specific operational
parameters or irrigation system architecture that are not represented in the model. In case
studies, these models were commonly applied by many scholars (e.g., [39–49]). Egypt’s
growing population, along with municipal and industrial needs, has led to water shortages.
Due to the growing need for irrigation water and the limited water resources, it is
imperative for irrigation systems to enhance their dependability and effectiveness in the
coming years, according to [50,51]. This necessity has drawn the attention of decision-
makers keen on improving irrigation system efficiency. To address this, this study opted
to reconstruct a natural canal, complete with its functional cross-sections, and compare
it to the restored canals within Egypt’s canal networks. This choice was driven by the
lack of available data. Employing this approach facilitates the prediction of the water,
environmental, and financial outcomes of the NPCR.
This study involved simulating the water surface profile in a canal affected by flow
conditions. Specifically, the Western Meleg Canal in Menoufia, Egypt, was chosen as
part of an irrigation network restoration plan due to its strategic location near the vital
Shebeen-Berket Al-Sabaa Road. However, a segment of this canal, spanning from 1500 to
3400 km, faced challenges in implementing a concrete lining due to nearby buildings that
could not be removed. Consequently, two scenarios were examined: narrowing the canal
width and covering this problematic stretch. These scenarios underwent hydraulic and cost
assessments. This study included a hydraulic analysis of the current state of the canal’s
restoration issues using a hydraulic model. It also examined the rehabilitation design for
various components, including dry pitching, concrete work, and covering. Additionally,
the impact of these scenarios on water levels and flow velocities along the Western Meleg
Canal was investigated.

2. Description of the Study Area

The Western Meleg Canal branches from the Bahr Shebin Canal in front of Regulator
km 53.500; the canal inflows through two gates on the Bahr Shebin Canal; the width of
the opening is 3 m; and the canal serves a total area of (44.1 × 106 ) m2 . The discharge of
the canal ranges from 200,000 to 250,000 cubic m per day. It extends on the right side of
the Western Meleg Canal, along the Shebin Al-Kom-Berket Al-Saba road, for a distance
of 1.500 km; then, the road goes away from it after 1.500 km, and it is parallel again at
2.900 km and extends parallel to the right side until the end of the canal, which is 6.230 km
long. There is a parallel road on the left mainland of the canal starting at 1.500 km. The
canal passes through a large population block on the right and left sides (the village of
Meleg). The Western Meleg Canal feeds three canals: the Maqtaa Shamma Canal, which
takes water on the left side at 2.600 km and extends 8.680 km to serve (7.98 × 106 ) m2 ; the
Al-Ghouri Canal, which takes water on the left side at 6.200 km and extends 13,680 km to
serve (22.26 × 106 ) m2 ; and the Al-Halfaya Canal, which drains the Western Meleg Canal
(end of the canal) and extends for a length of 5.950 km to serve (7.14 × 106 ) m2 . Figure 1a
shows the location of the region of the Western Meleg Canal, as well as the locations of
the Maqtaa Shamma, Al-Ghouri, and Al-Halfaya Canals. Figure 1b shows a graph of
cross-sectional changes along the canal; the hydraulic and design data of the canal are
shown in Table 1, and since the Western Meleg Canal is located within the national project
for the lining and rehabilitation of canals, the design sector for lining these canals is (30 cm
Big Cobbles + 10 cm plain concrete).
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 31

Water 2023, 15, 3288 4 of 18

rehabilitation of canals, the design sector for lining these canals is (30 cm Big Cobbles + 10
cm plain concrete).
(a)

(b)

Figure 1. (a) The location of the region of the Western Meleg Canal; (b) cross-sectional changes for
Figure 1. (a) The
bed width location
along of the region of the Western Meleg Canal; (b) cross-sectional changes for
the canal.
bed width along the canal.
Table 1. The design data of the Western Meleg Canal.
Table 1. The design data of the Western Meleg Canal.
Bed Width Bed Level Bed Slope
Canal From (km) To (km) Bed Width Bed Slope Side Slope
Canal From (km) To (km) (m) Bed Level (m)
(m) (cm/km) Side Slope
(m) (cm/km)
Intake 1.500 5.50 9.01 8.0 1:1
Intake 1.500 5.50 9.01 8.0 1:1
1.500 1.900 5.50 8.90 8.0 1:1 + Retaining wall in left side
1.500
1.900 1.900
2.600 5.50 5.50 8.90 8.88 8.0 8.0 1:1 + Retaining wall1:1
in left side
1.900
2.600 2.600
3.200 5.50 5.00 8.88 8.83 8.0 7.0 1:1
1:1 + Retaining wall in left side
Western Meleg
2..600
3.200 3.200
3.280 5.00 5.00 8.83 8.80 7.0 7.0 1:1 + Retaining wall1:1
in left side
Western Meleg
3.310
3.200 3.400
3.280 5.00 5.00 8.80 8.79 7.0 7.0 1:1 1:1
3.400
3.310 4.000
3.400 5.00 4.00 8.79 7.0 Box section (2.30 × 4 m) 1:1
4.000 6.230 5.00 8.71 7.0 1:1
3.400 4.000 4.00 Box section (2.30 × 4 m)
4.000 6.230 5.00 8.71 7.0 1:1
It is clear from the design data of the Western Meleg Canal that the bed width is 5.50 m
in It
theis distance
clear fromfrom
the design datatoof2.600
the intake the Western
km, andMeleg Canalofthat
the slope thethe
bedbed width
in this is 5.50 is
distance
m 8incm/km.
the distance
Whilefrom the width
the bed intakeisto5.0
2.600
m inkm,the and the slope
distance from of thekm
2.600 bedtointhe
this distance
end is
of the canal
and the While
8 cm/km. designthe
of the
bedslope
widthbedisin
5.0this
m distance is 7 cm/km,
in the distance from side
2.600slopes
km toalong the length
the end of the of
the and
canal canalthearedesign
1:1. There is aslope
of the box section
bed inwith this one vent, is
distance a bed width side
7 cm/km, of 4.0slopes
m, andalong
a height
the of
2.30 m
length of on
thethe canal.
canal ThisThere
are 1:1. coverage is located
is a box sectioninwith
the distance
one vent,from
a bed3.400
widthkmofto4.0
4.000
m, km;
and at
some distances
a height of 2.30 malong
on thethe canal,
canal. there
This are vertical
coverage retaining
is located walls
in the on the
distance left 3.400
from bank. km to
4.000 km; at some distances along the canal, there are vertical retaining walls on the left
3. Numerical Model
bank.
Figure 2 illustrates the research methodology employed. Hydraulic modelling was
employed to assess the impact of two factors: narrowing the bed width and covering
 3. Numerical Model
Figure 2 illustrates the research methodology employed. Hydraulic modelling
Water 2023, 15, 3288 employed to assess the impact of two factors: narrowing the bed width and 5 of 18coverin

Western Meleg Canal segment from 1,500 km to 3,400 km. Given that lining work
commenced on the canal, the current canal conditions were simulated using design c
the Western Meleg Canal segment from 1500 km to 3400 km. Given that lining work
sections, and model variables were adapted to the non-lined distances. Moreover
had commenced on the canal, the current canal conditions were simulated using design
study examined
cross-sections, the
and canal’s
model status
variables after
were the lining
adapted processdistances.
to the non-lined and its condition following
Moreover, the
width
studyreduction andcanal’s
examined the coverage.
status after the lining process and its condition following bed
width reduction and coverage.

Figure 2. A flowchart of the research method.

Figure 2. A flowchart of the research method.
SOBEK-1D was the primary modelling tool employed throughout this investigation
dueSOBEK-1D wasinthe
to its versatility primaryfor
accounting modelling tool employed
various local-scale throughout
factors. This this investig
model possesses
the capability to handle complex canal configurations, including variable
due to its versatility in accounting for various local-scale factors. This model possessecross-sectional
shapes, as well as simulate the flow within extensive canal networks featuring numerous
capability to handle complex canal configurations, including variable cross-sect
lateral off-takes and hydraulic structures, such as weirs and culverts. SOBEK was selected
shapes, as wellthe
for modelling asdrainage
simulate the flow
system within
because extensive
of its high canaltonetworks
adaptability featuring nume
adjusting Manning’s
lateral off-takes
coefficient value,and hydraulic
a critical structures,
parameter. such as of
The foundation weirs and culverts.
SOBEK-1D relies on SOBEK
the Saint-was sele
forVenant
modellingequations, which are system
the drainage rooted inbecause
continuityof and momentum
its high principles.
adaptability They are Mann
to adjusting
a collection of equations that describe the dynamic behavior of irrigation
coefficient value, a critical parameter. The foundation of SOBEK-1D relies on the S canal networks
that are frequently useful:
Venant equations, which are rooted ∂Q in continuity
∂H and momentum principles. They
collection of equations that describe + W = 0 (1)
∂x the ∂t dynamic behavior of irrigation canal netw
that are frequently useful:  2
Q
∂Q ∂ A  
+ + gA S f − S0 = 0 (2)
∂t ∂x
where the discharge is Q, the longitudinal distance along the channel in the direction of
flow is x, time is t, water surface width is W, water depth is H, the bed slope of the channel
is S0 , the slope of the energy grade line is Sf , and the gravitational acceleration is g.
According to [52], the flow in SOBEK-2D is described by fundamental equations that
encompass three key components: the continuity equation, the momentum equation for the
x-direction, and the momentum equation for the y-direction used in [46]. The continuity
equation is expressed as follows:

∂ξ ∂(u.H ) ∂(v.H )
+ + =0 (3)
∂t ∂x ∂y
 Water 2023, 15, 3288 6 of 18

where velocity in the x-direction is u, velocity in the y-direction is v, and water level above
the plane of reference is ξ. For two-dimensional flow, two momentum equations were
calculated, together with the continuity equation. The momentum equations can be written
as follows:
∂u ∂u ∂u ∂ξ u |V |
+ u + v + g + g 2 + αu|u| = 0 (4)
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂x C h

∂v ∂v ∂v ∂ξ v |V |
+ u + v + g + g 2 + αv|v| = 0 (5)
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂y C h
where velocity magnitude V = (u2 + v2 )0.5 , the Boussinesq coefficient is α, gravitational
acceleration is g, and the Chezy coefficient is C. The Delft scheme was used to numerically
solve these equations. This method uses a staggered grid to solve the De Saint-Venant
equations in [52]. The connection nodes and calculation points in this staggered grid define
the water levels, whilst the intermediate reaches or reach segments define the discharges.
OR PEER REVIEW A numerical model was created for the entire length of the Western Meleg Canal, 15 of which
31
reaches a length of 6.230 km. All the intakes on the canal were represented, including the
Maqtaa Shamma Canal km 2.600, the Al-Ghouri Canal km 6.200 and the Al-Halfaya Canal
6.230 km. The numerical model was designed using the design cross-sections and data of
based on the maximum discharge
the structures built on passing through
the canal. For thelevels
the water canaland(2.89 m3/s), and
the discharges at thethe Man- of
boundaries
the canal (boundary conditions), the hydraulic model was designed
ning’s coefficient (n) was used (n = 0.03 s/m ) before the lining according to the unlined
1/3 based on the maximum
passing through the canal (2.89 m3 /s), and the Manning’s coefficient (n) was
distances based ondischarge
model calibration by the field data. Manning’s coefficient was used (n
used (n = 0.03 s/m1/3 ) before the lining according to the unlined distances based on model
= 0.018 s/m ) for calibration
1/3 the case by after the lining
the field according
data. Manning’s to thewas
coefficient Ven Te(nChow
used = 0.018tables
s/m1/3and thecase
) for the
previous experiences in lining.
after the The water
lining according to thelevels
Ven Teand
Chowvelocities
tables and along the canal
the previous wereinde-
experiences lining.
duced for all the study scenarios.
The water Figure
levels and 3 shows
velocities alongathe
plan
canal ofwere
the Meleg
deduced Canal
for allon
thethe numer-
study scenarios.
ical model. Figure 3 shows a plan of the Meleg Canal on the numerical model.

Meleg canal

Figure 3. DefinitionFigure
sketch3. of the Meleg
Definition Canal
sketch of theon the Canal
Meleg SOBEK-1D model. model.
on the SOBEK-1D

Model Calibration Model Calibration

Calibration is the process of adjusting the input parameters of the model until obtain-
Calibration ising
theresults
process
that of adjusting
match the fieldthe input parameters
measurements. of the
Several runs weremodel untiltoobtain-
performed achieve the
ing results that match the field measurements.
best agreement between measured Several runs values
and computed were performed to achieve
from the model. This was the
carried
out by adjusting
best agreement between measured roughness coefficientsvalues
and computed along the modelled
from canal. This
the model. The downstream
was carried river
reaches can be well simulated using a coupled one-two-dimensional
out by adjusting roughness coefficients along the modelled canal. The downstream river (1D-2D) flow model.
Thus, a model was schematized based on the numerical SOBEK software package [52],
reaches can be well simulated using a coupled one-two-dimensional (1D-2D) flow model.
Thus, a model was schematized based on the numerical SOBEK software package [52],
which is the 1D analysis along the modelled canal and the 2D unsteady formulations of
the full dynamic equations along overland water flooded flow.
 Water 2023, 15, 3288 7 of 18

which is the 1D analysis along the modelled canal and the 2D unsteady formulations of the
full dynamic equations along overland water flooded flow.
In this calibration, the Western Meleg Canal’s maximum discharge was reached, and
the design cross-sections were used before the lining work. In Figure 4, the Manning
coefficient of soil was established at a value of 0.03 based on the field data, which were
achieved using the SOBEK model. The water levels along the canal were observed if all the
intakes were shut off. As shown in this figure, they ranged from 10.35 m at the beginning to
R PEER REVIEW 9.62 m at the end and are very close to the design water level for the canal. On 16
theof 31
coverage,
there is a 9.8 cm difference in water pressure, and the coverage operates in free flow. The
canal’s water depths range from 1.06 to 1.34 m, and its flow velocities range from 0.36 to
0.62 m/s.

Figure 4. Bank, bed, and water

Figure levels
4. Bank, bed, at
andthe maximum
water discharge
levels at the maximum(without
dischargelining).
(without lining).

4. Results
4. Results The numerical model of the Western Meleg Canal was executed after inputting all
The numericalrelevant
modeldata,of the
and itWestern Meleg Canal
utilized Manning’s wasvalues
coefficient executed after
for four inputting
distinct scenarios.all
These
scenarios were evaluated
relevant data, and it utilized Manning’s coefficient using the designated
values for four distinct scenarios. These dis-
cross-sections. The maximum canal
charge observed was 2.89 m3 /s in three cases: (a) in the absence of water withdrawal from
scenarios were evaluated using the designated cross-sections. The maximum canal dis-
side intakes along the canal; (b) with the closure of the intake at the Maqtaa Shamma Canal
charge observed was 2.89 km),
(at 2.600 m3/swhile
in three cases:at(a)
the intakes thein the absence
Al-Ghouri Canalof (atwater withdrawal
6.210 km) fromCanal
and Al-Halfaya
side intakes along the canal;
(at 6.230 km)(b) with
were the closure
operational; of the
(c) with the intake
operation atof
the
allMaqtaa Shamma
intakes along Canal
the Western Meleg
(at 2.600 km), whileCanal, including
the intakes atthe
theMaqtaa Shamma
Al-Ghouri Canal,
Canal (atAl-Ghouri
6.210 km) Canal,
andand Al-HalfayaCanal
Al-Halfaya Canal.
(at 6.230 km) were4.1.operational;
First Scenario (c) withthethe
(Runing Canaloperation
Model withoutof all intakes along the Western
the Lining)
Meleg Canal, includingFigurethe Maqtaa
5 shows Shamma Canal,
a comparison Al-Ghouri
between the waterCanal,
levels and
of theAl-Halfaya Ca- (a,
cases of operation
nal. b, and c) along the Western Meleg Canal before lining, the Manning’s coefficient value of
0.030, and a comparison between the flow velocities of the cases of operation along the
canal. The
4.1. First Scenario (Runing thecomparison
Canal Modelof the water levels
without revealed that the highest water levels occurred
the Lining)
at the passage of the maximum discharge, and without operating the intakes, the lowest
Figure 5 shows a comparison
water between
level appeared when allthethewater
intakeslevels of the cases
were operating of canal,
on the operation
where(a, theb,
water
and c) along the Western Meleg
levels ranged fromCanal
10.29 mbefore lining, the
at the beginning Manning’s
of the coefficient
canal to 9.54 m at the endvalue
of theofcanal,
and the between
0.030, and a comparison flow velocities
the ranged from 0.33 to
flow velocities of0.55
them/s, which
cases reduced thealong
of operation water pressure
the
difference on the coverage to 6.7 cm. In the second case, the Maqtaa Shamma Canal was
canal. The comparison of the water levels revealed that the highest water levels occurred
closed, but the Al-Ghouri and Halfaya Canal intakes were operating. The water levels
at the passage of the maximum
ranged from 10.34discharge, and without
m at the beginning operating
of the canal to 9.54 mthe intakes,
at the end, flowthe lowestalong
velocities
water level appeared when all the intakes were operating on the canal, where the water
levels ranged from 10.29 m at the beginning of the canal to 9.54 m at the end of the canal,
and the flow velocities ranged from 0.33 to 0.55 m/s, which reduced the water pressure
difference on the coverage to 6.7 cm. In the second case, the Maqtaa Shamma Canal was
closed, but the Al-Ghouri and Halfaya Canal intakes were operating. The water levels
 Water 2023, 15, 3288 8 of 18

Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 3

the canal in this case ranged from 0.34 to 0.61 m/s, and the water pressure difference on
coverage was less than when all intakes were closed, at 8.8 cm.

(a)

(b)
Figure 5. Comparison
Figure 5. Comparisonofofthethemodel
model results (withoutlining)
results (without lining) at the
at the maximum
maximum discharge:
discharge: (a) water
(a) water
levels; (b)(b)
levels; flow velocities
flow .
velocities.

4.2. Second Scenario (Runing the Canal Model with the Lining)
4.2. Second Scenario (Runing the Canal Model with the Lining)
In this scenario, Figure 6a shows a comparison between the water levels of the cases
ofIn this scenario,
operation (a, b, andFigure 6a the
c) along shows a comparison
Western Meleg Canalbetween theand
after lining water levels
shows thatof
thethe case
of operation
water levels (a,along
b, andthe c) along
canal, the Western
as inferred from theMeleg Canalmodel,
numerical after varied
lining from
and 10.12
shows m that the
water levels along the canal, as inferred from the numerical model, varied from 10.12 m
at the beginning of the canal to 9.58 m at the end. They were lower than the water levels
before
at the lining to of
beginning increase the velocity
the canal to 9.58after
m atthe lining
the end.works.
They Thewere flow velocities
lower than along the level
the water
before lining to increase the velocity after the lining works. The flow velocities to
canal ranged from 0.39 to 0.72 m/s, and the water depths in the canal varied from 1.02 m along the
1.16 m. The water pressure difference increased the coverage to 13.9 cm, and the coverage
canal ranged from 0.39 to 0.72 m/s, and the water depths in the canal varied from 1.02 m
was still under free flow when the maximum discharge of the Western Meleg Canal was
to 1.16 m. The
passed. The water
canal’spressure difference increased
design cross-sections the coverage
were used after lining works to 13.9
withcm, and the cover
a Manning
age was still under free flow when the maximum discharge of the Western Meleg Cana
was passed. The canal’s design cross-sections were used after lining works with a Man
ning roughness coefficient of 0.018, and the water levels along the canal were calculated i
all canal intakes were closed. Figure 6b shows a comparison between the flow velocitie
 Water 2023, 15, 3288 9 of 18

roughness coefficient of 0.018, and the water levels along the canal were calculated if all
canal intakes were closed. Figure 6b shows a comparison between the flow velocities of
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW the cases of operation along the canal. It is clear from the comparison of the water levels 18 of 31
that the maximum water levels occurred when the maximum discharge was passed and
without operating the intakes. The flow velocities along the canal in this case ranged from
the0.37 to 0.64 m/s, and the water pressure difference on the covering was less than 11.14 cm.
Maqtaa Shamma Canal intake was closed and only the Al-Ghouri and Al-Halfaya Ca-
Water levels ranged from 10.11 m at the beginning of the canal to 9.54 m at the end when
nal intakes were operating. In this case, the flow velocities along the canal ranged from
the Maqtaa Shamma Canal intake was closed and only the Al-Ghouri and Al-Halfaya Canal
0.40 to 0.74
intakes m/s.
were The maximum
operating. velocity
In this case, appeared
the flow at along
velocities the entry to the
the canal coverage
ranged from if thetodiffer-
0.40
ence in water pressure on the coverage was 14.83 cm. The speeds rose,
0.74 m/s. The maximum velocity appeared at the entry to the coverage if the difference and the water
depths reduced,
in water ason
pressure compared to before
the coverage andcm.
was 14.83 after
Thelining. Thus,
speeds rose,when
and thelining
waterthe canal, the
depths
width needs
reduced, asto be reduced
compared to maintain
to before and after the canal’s
lining. water
Thus, level.
when lining the canal, the width
needs to be reduced to maintain the canal’s water level.

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure6. 6.
Comparison
Comparisonof of the modelresults
the model results(after
(after lining)
lining) at the
at the maximum
maximum discharge:
discharge: (a) water
(a) water levels; lev-
els;(b)
(b)flow
flow velocities
velocities. .

4.3. Third Scenario (Runing the Canal Model after Contraction the Bed Width)
The hydraulic model of the Western Meleg Canal was run using the cross-sections of
the design after the lining works and the contraction for the bed width in a distance from
 Water 2023, 15, 3288 10 of 18

4.3. Third Scenario (Runing the Canal Model after Contraction the Bed Width)
The hydraulic model of the Western Meleg Canal was run using the cross-sections of
the design after the lining works and the contraction for the bed width in a distance from
1500 km to 3400 km, so that the bed width in this distance was 4.00 m and the maximum
3
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW discharge of the canal was 2.89 m /s. The width proposed for the bed, which was 23 4 m,
of was
31
greater than the critical bed width, according to the specific energy equations.
The energy equation was applied between the two sections along the canal in which
the bed was gradually contracted (15:1) from b1 = 5.50 m to b2 = 4.0 m, as shown in Figure 7.
</annotation>
The application of the energy equation gives the following:
</semantics>
E1 = E2 + HL1−2 (6)
</math>
<!-- MathType@End@5@5@
Q2 --> Q2
y1 + 2
= y2 + + H L 1−2 (7)
2gA1 2gA22
whereEEisisthe
Where thespecific energy, HL is head losses,
specificenergy, losses, yyisisthe
thewater depth,QQisisthe
waterdepth, thedischarge,
discharge,g is
the
g is gravitational
the gravitational acceleration, AA
acceleration, is is
the cross-section
the cross-section area, and
area, the
and subscripts
the subscripts 1 (b1=
1 (b1=5.50
5.50m)
m)and
and2 2(b(b
2 2==5.50
5.50m)
m)denote
denotethe
thetwo
twosuccessive
successiveSections
Sections11and and2.2.

Figure 7. 7.
Figure The bed
The width
bed changed
width to to
changed 4.04.0
mm in in
thethe
distance from
distance 1.500
from km
1.500 3.400
toto
km km
3.400 .
km.

Figure
Figure 8a8a shows
shows a comparison
a comparison between
between thethe water
water levels
levels of of
thethe operating
operating cases
cases (a,(a,
b, b,
andand c) c) along
along thethe Western
Western Meleg
Meleg Canal
Canal after
after lining
lining works
works andand the
the contraction
contraction ofofthethebedbed
width
width inin
thethe distance.
distance. It It also
also shows
shows that
that thethe water
water levels
levels along
along thethe canal,
canal, asas inferred
inferred from
from
the numerical model, varied from 10.16 m at the beginning
the numerical model, varied from 10.16 m at the beginning of the canal to 9.59 m at the of the canal to 9.59 m at the
end of the canal; the flow velocities along the canal ranged from
end of the canal; the flow velocities along the canal ranged from 0.37 to 0.72 m/s; and the 0.37 to 0.72 m/s; and the
water
water depths
depths inin the
the canal
canal varied
varied from
from 1.03
1.03 mm toto 1.17
1.17 m.m.The The pressure
pressure difference
difference between
between
thethe coverage
coverage was
was 13.89
13.89 cm,cm, and
and thethe coverage
coverage waswas still
still under
under free
free flow
flow when
when thethe maximum
maximum
discharge
discharge of of
thethe Western
Western Meleg
Meleg CanalCanal waswas passed.
passed. The The designed
designed cross-sections
cross-sections of theofca- the
canal were used after the lining works with a Manning coefficient
nal were used after the lining works with a Manning coefficient of 0.018, causing the canal of 0.018, causing the
bedcanal
widthbedtowidth
be 4.0tombein4.0 themdistance
in the distance
from 1.500 from km 1.500 km to
to 3.400 km.3.400
Thekm. waterThelevels
wateralong
levels
along the canal were deduced in case all outlets on the canal
the canal were deduced in case all outlets on the canal were closed. Figure 8b shows a were closed. Figure 8b shows
a comparison
comparison between
between thethe different
different flow flow velocities
velocities of the
of the operating
operating cases
cases along
along thethe canal.
canal. It It
is is clear
clear that
that thethe maximum
maximum water
water levels
levels occurred
occurred at at
thethe passage
passage ofof
thethe maximum
maximum discharge
discharge
and without the operation of all intakes. The lowest water level
and without the operation of all intakes. The lowest water level occurred when all intakes occurred when all intakes
were operated on the canal, as the water level range in this case was from 10.10 m atat
were operated on the canal, as the water level range in this case was from 10.10 m the
the
beginning of the canal to 9.54 m at the end. In this case, the water
beginning of the canal to 9.54 m at the end. In this case, the water velocity along the canal velocity along the canal
varied
varied between
between 0.40
0.40 andand 0.64
0.64 m/s,
m/s, and and thethe differential
differential in in water
water pressure
pressure onon thethe coverage
coverage
decreased by 11.13 cm. As for the closure of the Maqtaa
decreased by 11.13 cm. As for the closure of the Maqtaa Shamma Canal intake and Shamma Canal intake and the
the
operation of Al-Ghouri and Al-Halfaya Canal intakes, the water levels ranged from 10.15 m
operation of Al-Ghouri and Al-Halfaya Canal intakes, the water levels ranged from 10.15
at the beginning of the canal to 9.55 m at the end of the canal,; the flow velocities ranged
m at the beginning of the canal to 9.55 m at the end of the canal,; the flow velocities ranged
along the canal in this case from 0.38 to 0.74 m/s; and they increased. The difference in
along the canal in this case from 0.38 to 0.74 m/s; and they increased. The difference in
water pressure on the coverage was 14.84 cm, where, in this case, the maximum water
water pressure on the coverage was 14.84 cm, where, in this case, the maximum water
velocity was at the entrance of the coverage.
velocity was at the entrance of the coverage.
Water2023,
Water 2023,15,
15,3288
x FOR PEER REVIEW 24
11 of 31
of 18

(a)

(b)
Figure 8. Comparison of the model results (after contracting the bed width) at the maximum dis-
charge:8.(a)Comparison
Figure water levels; of
(b)the
flowmodel results
velocities. (after contracting the bed width) at the maximum
discharge: (a) water levels; (b) flow velocities.
4.3.1. Studying Effect of Contracting the Bed Width (4.0 m)
4.3.1. Studying Effect of Contracting the Bed Width (4.0 m)
When the maximum discharge in the Western Meleg Canal was determined using
When the maximum discharge in the Western Meleg Canal was determined using
the design cross-sections of the canal after the lining works with a Manning coefficient of
the design cross-sections of the canal after the lining works with a Manning coefficient of
0.018, the water levels and velocities along the canal were compared for the canal lined
0.018, the water levels and velocities along the canal were compared for the canal lined
without contracting the
without contracting the bed
bed width
width (5.50
(5.50 m)
m) and
and the
the canal
canal lined
lined with
with contracting
contracting thethe bed
bed
width (4.0 m). In the distance, from 1500 km to 3400 km, for the two cases: (1) all
width (4.0 m). In the distance, from 1500 km to 3400 km, for the two cases: (1) all intakes on intakes
on the
the Western
Western Meleg
Meleg Canal
Canal werewere operated,
operated, andand (2) there
(2) there waswas no water
no water withdrawal
withdrawal fromfromthe
the side
side intakes
intakes of canal.
of the the canal.
(1) Operating all intakes on the Western Meleg Canal
(1) Operating all intakes on the Western Meleg Canal
The study examined the operation of all intakes along the Western Meleg Canal, in-
The study examined the operation of all intakes along the Western Meleg Canal,
cluding the Maqtaa Shamma Canal, Al-Ghouri Canal, and Al-Halfaya Canal. Figure 9a
including the Maqtaa Shamma Canal, Al-Ghouri Canal, and Al-Halfaya Canal. Figure 9a
provides a comparison of water levels in the lined canal before and after narrowing the
provides a comparison of water levels in the lined canal before and after narrowing the
bed width in the specified stretch. Interestingly, there was stability in water levels from
bed width in the specified stretch. Interestingly, there was stability in water levels from
3400 km to the end of the canal at 6230 km, as the coverage width at 3400 km matched the
3400 km to the end of the canal at 6230 km, as the coverage width at 3400 km matched the
post-contraction bed width (4.0 m). However, a modest increase in water levels, ranging
post-contraction bed width (4.0 m). However, a modest increase in water levels, ranging
from 2 cm to 6 cm, occurred only in the segment from the intake up to 2600 km compared
from 2 cm to 6 cm, occurred only in the segment from the intake up to 2600 km compared
to levels before the bed width reduction.
to levels before the bed width reduction.
 Figure 9b presents a comparison of flow velocities in the lined canal before and after
the bed width contraction. Similar to the water levels, flow velocities remained stable from
3400 km to the end of the canal at 6230 km. The bed width contraction led to a slight rise
in water levels coupled with a decrease in water velocity of 0.023 m/s in the stretch from
the intake to 1500 km. However, water velocity increased by 0.13 m/s in the span from
Water 2023, 15, 3288 12 of 18
1500 km to 2600 km compared to pre-contraction velocity levels. Overall, the maximum
water velocity post-bed width contraction reached 0.64 m/s, well within acceptable limits.

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure 9.
9.Operation
Operationofof
allall
intakes before
intakes andand
before afterafter
the bed
the width contraction
bed width at theat
contraction maximum dis-
the maximum
charge: (a) water levels; (b) flow velocities.
discharge: (a) water levels; (b) flow velocities.

There
Figurewas no waterawithdrawal
9b presents comparisonfrom thevelocities
of flow side intakes of the
in the canal.
lined canal before and after
Thiswidth
the bed studycontraction.
examined Similar
the complete closure
to the water of allflow
levels, intakes alongremained
velocities the Western Meleg
stable from
Canal,
3400 km with no withdrawal
to the of water.
end of the canal Figure
at 6230 10a provides
km. The bed width a comparison
contraction ledof water levelsrise
to a slight in
the lined canal before and after the bed width was narrowed at the specified
in water levels coupled with a decrease in water velocity of 0.023 m/s in the stretch from distance.
Interestingly, waterkm.
the intake to 1500 levels remained
However, stable
water from 3400
velocity km tobythe
increased end
0.13 of the
m/s canal
in the at from
span 6230
km, both before and after the bed width contraction. However,
1500 km to 2600 km compared to pre-contraction velocity levels. Overall, as a result of the bed width
maximum
reduction, there
water velocity was a modest
post-bed increase in reached
width contraction water levels, ranging
0.64 m/s, wellfrom 1 cm
within to 4.7 cm,
acceptable oc-
limits.
curring only
There in no
was thewater
segment from thefrom
withdrawal headtheregulator up toof2600
side intakes km compared to water
the canal.
levelsThis
before theexamined
study bed widththereduction.
complete closure of all intakes along the Western Meleg Canal,
with no withdrawal of water. Figure 10a provides a comparison of water levels in the lined
canal before and after the bed width was narrowed at the specified distance. Interestingly,
water levels remained stable from 3400 km to the end of the canal at 6230 km, both before
and after the bed width contraction. However, as a result of the bed width reduction, there
was a modest increase in water levels, ranging from 1 cm to 4.7 cm, occurring only in the
segment from the head regulator up to 2600 km compared to water levels before the bed
width reduction.
 determined that it is important to lower the sections during the lining and not to work
with the same design sections. This is necessary to maintain the water depth. To maintain
the water levels inside the canal, as described in the first scenario, the distance had to be
made smaller, which caused the water levels to rise relative to those after the lining with-
Water 2023, 15, 3288 out suffocation. The maximum speed allowed within the coverage was similar 13 of 18to the
speed after the lining without contraction and was within the range that is acceptable.

(a)

(b)
Figure 10. All intakes on the canal were closed before and after the bed width contraction at the
Figure 10. All intakes on the canal were closed before and after the bed width contraction at the
maximum discharge: (a) water levels; (b) flow velocities.
maximum discharge: (a) water levels; (b) flow velocities.

4.3.2. Effect
Figureof10b
Contracting the Bed Width
shows a comparison onthe
between Quantities of Lining
flow velocities of theMaterial
lined canal before
and after2the
Table bed width
shows contraction.
the quantities There was
of cobbles and stability
concreteinneeded
the flow tovelocities in thein the
line the canal
distance
distance from1.500
from 3.400kmkmtoto3.400
the end
kmofbefore
the canal
andatafter
6.230contracting
km, where,thebecause of the bed
bed width. It shows
width contraction, a rise in water levels occurred, accompanied by a decrease in the water
velocity values by 0.026 m/s. At a distance of 1.500 km from the intake, the water velocity
increased. In the distance, from km 1.500 to km 2.600, it increased by 0.14 m/s compared
to the velocity before the bed width contraction. In general, the maximum water velocity
after the bed width contraction was 0.72 m/s, which is within the permissible limits. Due
to the rise in velocities during lining, which causes the water depths to decrease, it was
determined that it is important to lower the sections during the lining and not to work
with the same design sections. This is necessary to maintain the water depth. To maintain
the water levels inside the canal, as described in the first scenario, the distance had to be
made smaller, which caused the water levels to rise relative to those after the lining without
suffocation. The maximum speed allowed within the coverage was similar to the speed
after the lining without contraction and was within the range that is acceptable.
 After contraction 763.80 m3 2810.10 m3
Saving percentage 24.29% 20.70%

4.4. Forth Scenario (Covering)

Water 2023, 15, 3288 14 of 18
The fourth scenario serves as an alternative to the third scenario, where a section
spanning from 1500 to 3400 km was covered using two pipes, each with a diameter of 1.80
m,4.3.2.
instead of of
Effect contracting
Contracting thethecanal bottom.
Bed Width on Within thisofscenario,
Quantities the Western Meleg Canal
Lining Material
experienced
Table 2its maximum
shows discharge,
the quantities and and
of cobbles the concrete
canal’s design
needed cross-sections
to line the canalpost-lining,
in the
with a Manning coefficient of 0.018, were applied. The
distance from 1.500 km to 3.400 km before and after contracting the bed distance from 1.500It to
width. 3.400 km
shows
wastheentirely covered
percentage by the two
of quantities that 1.80
werem diameter
provided, aspipes. Waterinlevels
the savings cobblesalong the 20.7%
reached canal were
evaluated for all operation
and in concrete caseswhich
reached 24.29%, (a, b, are
andveryc). Figure 11a illustrates a comparison of water
good percentages.
levels along the Western Meleg Canal after lining and covering the designated stretch for
a,2.b,Quantities
Table
cases and c. Figureof cobbles
11band concrete a
provides forcomparative
the canal bed from
view1.500 km to 3.400
of water km.
velocities under these
operation Case/Material
scenarios. Concrete Cobbles
It can be noticed
Before contraction
that when all intakes on
1008.80 m3
the canal were closed, water levels along
3545.10 m3
the canal, as determined by the numerical model, ranged from 10.51 m at the canal’s outset
After contraction 763.80 m3 2810.10 m3
to 9.59 m at the canal’s end. Flow velocities within the canal spanned from 0.26 to 1.00
m/s, andSaving
waterpercentage
depths varied from 1.00 24.29% m to 1.55 m. The water pressure 20.70%
difference over
the covered section (1.500–4.000 km) amounted to 74 cm, with the coverage maintaining
4.4. Forth Scenario (Covering)
free flow. The lowest water levels were observed when all canal intakes were operational,
rangingThe fromfourth
10.46 scenario
m at theserves as an
canal’s alternativetoto9.54
beginning the mthird scenario,
at the end. In where a section flow
this scenario,
spanning from 1500 to 3400 km was covered using two pipes, each with a diameter of
velocities ranged from 0.28 to 0.93 m/s, and the water pressure difference over the cover-
1.80 m, instead of contracting the canal bottom. Within this scenario, the Western Meleg
age increased to 76 cm. For the case involving the closure of the Maqtaa Shamma Canal
Canal experienced its maximum discharge, and the canal’s design cross-sections post-lining,
intake
with and the operation
a Manning of the
coefficient Al-Ghouri
of 0.018, and Halfaya
were applied. Canal intakes,
The distance from 1.500water levelskm
to 3.400 ranged
from 10.51 m at the canal’s
was entirely covered by the two 1.80 m diameter pipes. Water levels along the canal were the
outset to 9.54 m at the canal’s end. Flow velocities within
canal under for
evaluated thisallscenario
operation ranged from
cases (a, 0.26
b, and c).to 1.03 m/s,
Figure and the pressure
11a illustrates a comparison difference
of wateron the
coverage reached
levels along 76 cm, with
the Western Melegthe maximum
Canal after liningwater
andvelocity
covering occurring at the
the designated coverage
stretch for en-
cases a, b, and c. Figure 11b provides a comparative view of water velocities under these
trance.
operation scenarios.

(a)

Figure 11. Cont.

Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 28 of 31
Water 2023, 15, 3288 15 of 18

(b)
Figure 11. Comparison of the water levels derived from the model (before covering) at the maxi-
Figure 11. Comparison of the water levels derived from the model (before covering) at the maximum
mum discharge: (a) water levels; (b) flow velocities.
discharge: (a) water levels; (b) flow velocities.

4.5. Scenario Costs

It can be noticed that when all intakes on the canal were closed, water levels along the
canal, as determined by the numerical model, ranged from 10.51 m at the canal’s outset to
Table 3 shows the difference between the total cost of executing the second scenario
9.59 m at the canal’s end. Flow velocities within the canal spanned from 0.26 to 1.00 m/s,
of canal lining and the fourth scenario of canal coverage for the distance from 1.500 to
and water depths varied from 1.00 m to 1.55 m. The water pressure difference over the
3.400 km, section
covered which(1.500–4.000
indicates that
km)the cost oftocoverage
amounted 74 cm, withis more than four
the coverage times the
maintaining freecost of
lining.
flow. The lowest water levels were observed when all canal intakes were operational,
ranging from 10.46 m at the canal’s beginning to 9.54 m at the end. In this scenario,
Table
flow3.velocities
The cost execution
ranged fromof two
0.28scenarios for the
to 0.93 m/s, anddistance from
the water 1.500 km
pressure to 3.400 km.
difference over the
coverage increased to 76 cm. For the case involving the closure of the Maqtaa Shamma
The Price (USD)
Canal intake
Cobbles (m3) Concrete and the operation
(m3) Covering (m) of the Al-Ghouri and Halfaya Canal intakes, Total waterCost
levels
(USD)
Alternatives Cobbles Concrete Covering
ranged from 10.51 m at the canal’s outset to 9.54 m at the canal’s end. Flow velocities
Scenario 2 7513 2544 the canal----------
within 22.58 ranged from
under this scenario 51.610.26 to 1.03 m/s, and the pressure
300,939.38
Scenario 4 --------- -------- 1900 --------- ---------- 709.67
difference on the coverage reached 76 cm, with the maximum water velocity occurring 1,348,373
at
Note: $ ≈ USD. entrance.
the coverage

4.5.
4.6. Scenario Costs
Discussion
Table 3 shows the difference between the total cost of executing the second scenario
The hydraulic model of the canal also simulated the reach after lining works, bed
of canal lining and the fourth scenario of canal coverage for the distance from 1.500 to
width contraction, and covering of the distance from 1.500 km to 3.400 km, for the follow-
3.400 km, which indicates that the cost of coverage is more than four times the cost of lining.
ing three cases: (1) no water withdrawal from the intakes along the canal; (2) closure of
theTable
intake
3. Theof cost
theexecution
Maqtaa of Shamma Canal
two scenarios for at
thekm 2.600from
distance only, while
1.500 km tointakes of the Al-Ghouri
3.400 km.
Canal and Halfaya Canal were turned on; and (3) all intakes along the Western Meleg
Canal, including the Maqtaa The Price (USD)
(m)Shamma Canal, Al-Ghouri Canal, and Halfaya Canal, were
Total Cost
Cobbles (m3 ) Concrete (m3 ) Covering
Alternatives Cobbles Concrete
turned on. It is clear that the effect of narrowing the bed width of the Western Covering (USD)
Meleg Canal
Scenario 2 7513 on the water 2544 levels was above the design levels by 2 to 6 cm, and the maximum flow ve-
---------- 22.58 51.61 300,939.38
Scenario 4 --------- locity was-------- 1900 is a safe
0.72 m/s, which ---------
velocity in----------
lined canals. 709.67 1,348,373
For the covering alternative,
Note: $ ≈ USD.
the pressure difference through the covering (1.500: 4.000 km) is 74 cm, and the covering
operates under free flow. The cost of covering is four times greater than the cost of plain
4.6. Discussion
concrete lining. New canal designs should be considered by irrigation directories and re-
The hydraulic model of the canal also simulated the reach after lining works, bed
search
widthcentres in Egypt
contraction, to gain of
and covering thethebest hydraulic
distance performance
from 1.500 after
km to 3.400 km,rehabilitations
for the followingand to
maintain the required
three cases: water
(1) no water levels. from the intakes along the canal; (2) closure of the
withdrawal
intake of the Maqtaa Shamma Canal at km 2.600 only, while intakes of the Al-Ghouri Canal
5. Conclusions
A comprehensive case study was conducted to address the need for improved irriga-
tion system management near the Meleg El Gharbia Canal in Menoufia Governorate,
Egypt. This study focused on a specific section of the canal, spanning from 1.500 to 3.400
Water 2023, 15, 3288 16 of 18

and Halfaya Canal were turned on; and (3) all intakes along the Western Meleg Canal,
including the Maqtaa Shamma Canal, Al-Ghouri Canal, and Halfaya Canal, were turned
on. It is clear that the effect of narrowing the bed width of the Western Meleg Canal on the
water levels was above the design levels by 2 to 6 cm, and the maximum flow velocity was
0.72 m/s, which is a safe velocity in lined canals. For the covering alternative, the pressure
difference through the covering (1.500:4.000 km) is 74 cm, and the covering operates under
free flow. The cost of covering is four times greater than the cost of plain concrete lining.
New canal designs should be considered by irrigation directories and research centres
in Egypt to gain the best hydraulic performance after rehabilitations and to maintain the
required water levels.

5. Conclusions
A comprehensive case study was conducted to address the need for improved irriga-
tion system management near the Meleg El Gharbia Canal in Menoufia Governorate, Egypt.
This study focused on a specific section of the canal, spanning from 1.500 to 3.400 km,
facing challenges related to the proximity of existing buildings along the canal banks, which
could not be removed. The presented study utilized a hydraulic model of the Western
Meleg Canal, initially considering its maximum discharge as 2.89 m3 /s before lining, with
a Manning’s roughness coefficient of n = 0.030. The hydraulic model was then used to
simulate various scenarios, including the post-lining phase, bed width contraction, and
covering of the canal from 1.500 km to 3.400 km, where the bed width was set at 4.00 m.
Three distinct cases were examined: (1) no water withdrawal from the intakes along the
canal; (2) closure of the intake of the Maqtaa Shamma Canal at km 2.600, while opening
intakes of the Al-Ghouri Canal and Halfaya Canal; (3) activation of all intakes along the
Western Meleg Canal, including the Maqtaa Shamma Canal, Al-Ghouri Canal, and Halfaya
Canal. The study revealed that narrowing the bed width of the Western Meleg Canal had
a limited impact on water levels and flow velocities, with water levels remaining within
2 to 6 cm of design levels, and it had a maximum flow velocity of 0.72 m/s, which is
considered safe for lined canals. Regarding covering the canal, the pressure difference
along the covered stretch (1.500 to 4.000 km) was 74 cm, and the covering operated under
free flow conditions. However, it was noted that the cost of covering was significantly
higher than plain concrete lining.
The study’s key recommendation was to contract the bed width of the Western Meleg
Canal from kilometer 1.500 to kilometer 3.400 to 4.0 m. This change had a limited impact
on water levels and velocities but preserved the width of an adjacent road (Shebeen
—Berket El-Saba). To mitigate the rise in velocities during lining, the study suggested the
importance of adjusting the design sections to maintain water depth. In conclusion, these
findings support Egypt’s national project for canal lining and rehabilitation, emphasizing
the need for customized canal designs and a focus on hydraulic performance and water
level maintenance during rehabilitation efforts. Each canal slated for rehabilitation should
undergo an individualized study to determine optimal design dimensions.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, numerical model, investigation, data curation, and writ-
ing review and editing, A.I.; methodology, formal analysis, investigation, data curation, and writing
original draft preparation, A.H.M.K.; formal analysis, investigation, and writing original draft prepa-
ration, C.F.G.; numerical model, writing original draft preparation, and writing review and editing,
E.F.M.E. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: The data are available from the first author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments: The authors express their sincere thanks to Fahmy Abdelhaleem, Benha Univer-
sity, Egypt, for his help in obtaining data and producing this paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Water 2023, 15, 3288 17 of 18

References
1. Tawfik, A.M. Design of channel section for minimum water loss using Lagrange optimization and artificial neural networks. Ain
Shams Eng. J. 2021, 12, 415–422. [CrossRef]
2. Portoghese, I.; Brigida, S.; Masciale, R. Assessing Transmission Losses through Ephemeral Streams: A Methodological Approach
Based on the Infiltration of Treated Effluents Released into Streams. Water 2022, 14, 3758. [CrossRef]
3. Asl, R.H.; Salmasi, F.; Arvanaghi, H. Numerical investigation on geometric configurations affecting seepage from un-lined earthen
channels and the comparison with field measurements. Eng. Appl. Comput. Fluid Mech. 2020, 14, 236–253.
4. Small, L.E.; Svendsen, M. A framework for assessing irrigation performance. Irrig. Drain. Syst. 1990, 4, 283–312. [CrossRef]
5. Molden, D.J.; Gates, T.K. Performance measures for evaluation of irrigation-water-delivery systems. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 1990,
116, 804–823. [CrossRef]
6. Steiner, R.A. An Analysis of Water Distribution Strategies Using the Irrigation Land Management Model. Ph.D. Thesis, Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY, USA, 1991.
7. Kalu, I.L.; Paudyal, G.N.; Gupta, A.D. Equity and efficiency issues in irrigation water distribution. Agric. Water Manag. 1995,
28, 335–348. [CrossRef]
8. Wijayaratna, C.M. Assessing Irrigation System Performance: A Methodological Study with Application to Gal Oya Scheme, Sri
Lanka. Ph.D. Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA, 1986.
9. Goldsmith, H.; Makin, I.W. A comparison of two methodologies for assessment of irrigation performance under the Warabandi
system. Irrig. Drain. Syst. 1991, 5, 19–29. [CrossRef]
10. Burton, M.A. A Simulation Approach to Irrigation Water Management. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK, 1992.
11. Kaushal, R.K.; Tyagi, N.K.; Bhirud, S. Diagnostic analysis of tertiary canal water delivery system and approaches to improved
management. Indian J. Agric. Eng. India 1992, 2, 47–53.
12. Abernethy, C.L. Performance Measurement in Canal Water Management: A Discussion; Paper 86/2; ODI-IIMI Irrigation Management
Network: London, UK, 1986; p. 25.
13. Bos, M.G. Performance indicators for irrigation and drainage. Irrig. Drain. Syst. 1997, 11, 119–137. [CrossRef]
14. Merriam, J.L.; Styles, S.W.; Freeman, B.J. Flexible irrigation systems: Concept, design, and application. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 2007,
133, 2–11. [CrossRef]
15. Plusquellec, H.L.; McPhail, K.; Polti, C. Review of irrigation system performance with respect to initial objectives. Irrig. Drain.
Syst. 1990, 4, 313–327. [CrossRef]
16. Abernethy, C.L. Performance criteria for irrigation systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Irrigation Theory
and Practice, Southampton, UK, 12–15 September 1989; pp. 12–15.
17. Mujumdar, P.; Vedula, S. Performance evaluation of an irrigation system under some optimal operating policies. Hydrol. Sci. 1992,
37, 13–26. [CrossRef]
18. Meinzen-Dick, R. Timeliness of irrigation. Irrig. Drain. Syst. 1995, 9, 371–387. [CrossRef]
19. Makadho, J. Irrigation timeliness indicators and application in smallholder irrigation systems in Zimbabwe. Irrig. Drain. Syst.
1996, 10, 367–376. [CrossRef]
20. Sarma, B.S.; Rao, V.V. Evaluation of an irrigation water management scheme—A case study. Agric. Water Manag. 1997, 32, 181–195.
[CrossRef]
21. Lenton, R.L. A note on monitoring productivity and equity in irrigation systems. In Productivity and Equity in Irrigation Systems;
Pant, N., Ed.; Ashish Publishing House: New Delhi, India, 1984.
22. Ashour, M.A.; Sayed, T.; Abdalla, A.A. Water-saving from rehabilitation of irrigation canals case study: El-Sont canal, Assiut
Governorate. Aswan Univ. J. Environ. Stud. AUJES 2021, 2, 190–201. [CrossRef]
23. Solangi, G.S.; Katbar, N.M.; Khokhar, J.I.; Panhawar, S.; Bhatti, N. Impact of watercourse lining on water conservation in the
Gadeji Minor Command, Sindh, Pakistan. Mehran Univ. Res. J. Eng. Technol. 2018, 37, 49–58. [CrossRef]
24. Kosichenko, Y.M.; Bae, O.A. Selection of an Effective Seepage-control Lining for Canals made of Traditional and Geosynthetic
Materials. Power Technol. Eng. 2021, 54, 819–824. [CrossRef]
25. Unal, H.B.; Asik, S.; Avci, M.; Yasar, S.; Akkuzu, E. Performance of water delivery system at tertiary canal level: A case study of
the Menemen Left Bank Irrigation System, Gediz Basin, Turkey. Agric. Water Manag. 2004, 65, 155–171. [CrossRef]
26. Elkamhawy, E.; Zelenakova, M.; Straface, S.; Vranayová, Z.; Negm, A.; Scozzari, A.; Abd-Elaty, I. Seepage loss from unlined, lined,
and cracked-lined canals: A case study of Ismailia canal reach from 28.00–49.00 Km, Egypt. In Proceedings of the EGU General
Assembly Conference, Vienna, Austria, 23–27 May 2022.
27. Gad, M.; Abdelhaleem, H.M.; Waleed, O.A. Forecasting the seepage loss for lined and un-lined canals using artificial neural
network and gene expression programming. Geomat. Nat. Hazards Risk 2023, 14, 2221775. [CrossRef]
28. Arshad, M.; Ahmad, N.; Usman, M.; Sabbir, A. Comparison of water losses between un-lined and lined watercources in Indus
basin of Pakistan. J. Agric. Sci. Pak. 2009, 46, 280–284.
29. Han, X.; Wang, X.; Zhu, Y.; Huang, J.; Yang, L.; Chang, Z.; Fu, F. An experimental study on concrete and geomembrane lining
effects on canal seepage in arid agricultural areas. Water 2020, 12, 2343. [CrossRef]
30. Abd-Elziz, S.; Zeleňáková, M.; Kršák, B.; Abd-Elhamid, H.F. Spatial and Temporal Effects of Irrigation Canals Rehabilitation on
the Land and Crop Yields, a Case Study: The Nile Delta, Egypt. Water 2022, 14, 808. [CrossRef]
Water 2023, 15, 3288 18 of 18

31. Molden, D.; Burton, M.; Bos, M. Performance assessment, irrigation service delivery and poverty reduction: Benefits of improved
system management. J. Irrig. Drain. 2007, 56, 307–320. [CrossRef]
32. Contractor, D.; Schuurmans, W. Informed use and potential pitfalls of canal models. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 1993, 119, 663–672.
[CrossRef]
33. Trottier, J.; Unny, T.; Al-Nassri, S. Two Dimension-Curvilinear Grid for Open Channel Flow Simulation. Appl. Math. Model. 1983,
7, 48–56. [CrossRef]
34. Abdel-Aal, G.M.; Basiouny, M.E.; Nassar, M.A.; Nassralla, T.H.; Mohammed, A.S. Effect of Abstraction Patterns on Flow Field by
Using Sobek and ISIS. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2014, 61, 521–543.
35. Nassar, M.A. A 2-d Model Simulating the Sediment Transport in Rivers. Master’s Thesis, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt,
2002.
36. Zhang, Y. Simulation of Open Channel Network Flows using Finite Element Approach. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul.
2005, 10, 467–478. [CrossRef]
37. Kesserwani, G.; Ghostine, R.; Vazquez, J.; Mose, R.; Abdallah, M.; Ghenaim, A. Simulation of Subcritical Flow at Open-Channel
Junction. J. Adv. Water Resour. 2008, 31, 287–297. [CrossRef]
38. Nassar, M.A. One-dimensional hydrodynamic model simulating water stage in open channels (ws-1). Int. J. Model. Simul. Sci.
Comput. 2010, 1, 303. [CrossRef]
39. Wahl, T.; Lentz, D. Physical hydraulic modelling of canal breaches. In Hydraulic Laboratory Report HL-2011-09; U.S. Department of
the Interior Bureau of Reclamation: Denver, CO, USA, 2011; p. 56.
40. Ibrahim, S.; EL-Belasy, A.; Abdelhaleem, F. Prediction of breach formation through the Aswan High Dam and subsequent flooding
downstream. Nile Water Sci. Eng. J. 2011, 4, 99–111.
41. Abdelhaleem, F.; El-Ghoreb, E.; El-Belasy, A. Managing water and salt balance of Wadi El-Rayan Lakes, El-Fayoum, Egypt. MEJ
Mansoura Eng. J. 2013, 38, 45–63. [CrossRef]
42. Shawky, Y.; Nada, A.; Abdelhaleem, F. Environmental and hydraulic design of thermal power plants outfalls case study: Banha
thermal power plant, Egypt. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2013, 4, 333–342. [CrossRef]
43. Ibrahim, A.S. Simulation of Flow in Open Channels Under the Continuous Irrigation System. Master’s Thesis, Benha University,
Benha, Egypt, 2014.
44. Abd El Ghany, S.H.; Saleh, O.K.; Osman, M.A. Applying different abstraction pattern to achieve better water management. Alex.
Eng. J. 2019, 58, 181–187. [CrossRef]
45. Syarifudin, A.; Destania, H.R.; Hamdani, Y. Prediction of Canal Erosion on Tidal Swamp Delta Telang I, Banyuasin Regency,
South Sumatra. International Conference Computer Science and Engineering. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019, 1339, 012002. [CrossRef]
46. San, Z.M.; Zin, W.W.; Kawasaki, A.; Acierto, R.A.; Zar Oo, T. Developing Flood Inundation Map Using RRI and SOBEK Models:
A Case Study of the Bago River Basin, Myanmar. J. Disaster Res. 2020, 15, 277–287. [CrossRef]
47. Abdelhaleem, F.; Amin, A.; Basiouny, M.; Ibraheem, H. Adaption of a formula for simulating bedload transport in the Nile River,
Egypt. J. Soils Sediments 2020, 20, 1742–1753. [CrossRef]
48. Ibrahim, A.S. Improving irrigation system management: A case study: Bahr Sanhoor Canal, Fayoum. Egypt. J. Water Land Dev.
2022, 53, 1–9. [CrossRef]
49. Bishehgahi, H.B.; Rizi, A.P.; Mohammadi, A. Rehabilitation of operation regimes in aged irrigation schemes based on hydraulic
simulation. Water Supply 2022, 22, 3617. [CrossRef]
50. Abdelhaleem, F. Discharge estimation for submerged parallel radial gates. Flow Meas. Instrum. 2016, 52, 240–245. [CrossRef]
51. Allam, M.; Allam, G. Water resources in Egypt: Future challenges and opportunities. Water Int. 2007, 32, 205–218. [CrossRef]
52. SOBEK. Sobek Hydrodynamics, Rainfall Runoff and Real Time, Control User Manual Sobek Help Desk; Deltares: Delft, The Netherlands, 2019.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.