Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

AMBO RIVER WEIR S.S.I.PROJECT DESIGN DOCUMENT

1
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Contents
LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................4
SAILENT FEATURE..................................................................................5
1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................6
1.1 Location............................................................................................................................6
1.3. Previous Irrigation Practice................................................................................7
1.4. Objectives of the Study......................................................................................7
1.5.Scope of study..……………………………………………………8
1.6. Methodology.......................................................................................................8
2.0 HYDROLOGY....................................................................................................9
2.1 Water Resources and Base flow Measurement...................................................9
2.1.2. Upstream & Downstream utilization............................................................................9
2.2.1. Hydro-Metrological Data Availability..........................................................10
2.2.2 Rainfall data quality test..............................................................................................12
2.2.2.3 Check for variance...................................................................................................13
2.2.3. Selection of Return Period.........................................................................................14
2.3. Design Rainfall Computation...........................................................................14
2.3.5. Selection of distribution (Testing for Goodness of Fit).................................16
2.3.6. Catchment characteristics...........................................................................................19
2.3.6 Watershed characteristics...............................................................................20
3.0. HEAD WORK STRUCTURES DESIGN..........................................32
3.1. Weir Site Geological Condition.......................................................................32
3.1.1. Construction Material Availability.............................................................................33
3.2. Hydraulic Design..............................................................................................33
3.2.2. Crest Level of Weir Determination............................................................................34
3.3.3 Stability Analysis of Weir..............................................................................36
3.3.4. Hydraulic Jump Calculation.......................................................................................37
3.3.5 Scour depth determination..........................................................................................39
3.3.7. Floor Thickness Estimation........................................................................................40
3.3.8. Head Regulator/Canal outlet/.....................................................................................41
3.4.1. Section of retaining wall............................................................................................43
Top Width............................................................................................................................43
Bottom width........................................................................................................................43
3.4.2. Height of retaining wall..............................................................................................43
3.4.3. Stability analysis of the retaining wall.......................................................................44
4.0 IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE SYSTEMS DESIGN...................47
4.1 Irrigable area description................................................................................47
4.1.1. Topography and soil...................................................................................................47
4.1.2. Climate.......................................................................................................................47
4.1.3. Soil characteristics......................................................................................................47
2
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

4.1.4.Existing irrigation practices........................................................................................47

4.2.1.Crop water requirements.............................................................................................48
4.2.3. Irrigation duty.............................................................................................................48
4.3.1. Irrigation Canals Layout.............................................................................................49
6.OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..................................................58
6.1.General..............................................................................................................58
6.2.Irrigation System Operation..............................................................................58
6.2.1.Method of operation....................................................................................................58
6.2.2.Methods of Maintenance.............................................................................................59
7.CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................60
REFERENCE.............................................................................................61

LIST OF TABLE

3
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Table1: Maximum Daily Rain Fall Value of 28 Years for Dejen station...................................................11
Table: Peak rainfall estimates using different statistical distributions………..16
Table: D-index For Gumbel Distribution...................................................................................17
Table: D-index For Log Pearson Type III..................................................................................17
Table: D-index For Normal Distribution......................................................................................18
Table: D-index For Log Normal Distribution.............................................................................18
Table: Summarized D-index For Distributions...........................................................................19
Table8: Slopeclasses in Ambo Watershed…………………………………………………………………………………………21
Table 9 :Determination of Time of Concentration..........................................................................................................................24
Table10 :Runoff analysis........................................................................................................................... 25
Table11: Times of incremental hydrograph.............................................................................................255
Table12 :stream flow potential................................................................................................................266
Table13: Sum weighted “CN”.................................................................................................................266
Table14: Maximum potential Difference b/n rainfall(p)..........................................................................277
Table 15: Cumulative Runoff..................................................................................................................277
Table 16: Tabular value of unit Hydrograph............................................................................................288
Table 17 river slope computation………………………………………………………………..........29
Table18: Tabular stage-discharge curve of ambo river at the weir axis………………………………31
Table19. Force and moment of Weir body………………………………………………………………37
Table20. Force and moment of u/s retaining wall.........................................................................................................45
Table21: Force and moment of d/s retaining wall..........................................................................46
Table22: Factor of safety for u/s and d/s retaining wall.................................................................46
Table23: Main canal hydraulic parameter ......................................................................................50
Table24: Main canal hydraulic parameter ......................................................................................51
Table25: General Item cost estimation..........................................................................................52
Table26: BILL OF QUANTITIES, SPECIFICATION AND COST ESTIMATE...............................53
Table27: Total project cost.............................................................................................................54

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure1: Project location…………………………………………………………………………………..…………6
Figure2 : Land map of ambo watershed……………………………………………………………………………..20
Figure3: Slope map of ambo watershed...................................................................................................21
Figure4: Complex hydrograph ................................................................................................................29
Figure5: Elevation versus Distance curve................................................................................................30
Figure 6: rating curve……………………………………………………………………………………30
Figure 7: River bed condition at the proposed weir site...........................................................................30
Figure8: force and moment act in the weir………………………………………………………………36
Figure9: Length of the jump in terms of sequent depth of jump in horizontal channel..................39
Figure10: Gate Detail………………………………………………………………………………….42
Figure11:Force and moment act in the retaining wall……………………………………………….45
Figure9: Lined Canal Section View…………………………………………………………………………….........51

4
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

SAILENT FEATURE
1. Project name: Ambo Diversion Irrigation Project
2. Name of the stream: Ambo River
3. Location of the weir site
 North: 1177012
 East: 400569
 Zone: East Gojam
 Wereda: Enemaye
 Average Altitude:2682.428m.a.s.l
4. Hydrology
 Design rainfall: 88.8 mm
 Catchment area: 1.315km2
 Longest flow path length: 1.037 Km
 Design flood: 17.72m3/sec
 Design base flow: 24 l/s

5. Diversion Weir
 Weir Height: 2.1 m
 Gross crest length: 10m
 Weir crest level: 2684.606 m.a.s.l
 U/S HFL:2685.534 m.a.s.l
 U/S TEL: 2685.554m.a.s.l
 D/s HFL: 2683.436m.a.s.l
 D/S TEL: 2684.416m.a.s.l
6. Irrigation and drainage systems Infrastructure
 Command area size: 17ha
 Type of soil of the command area: dominantly Eutric vertisoil.
7. Project cost
 General Items cost= 51000Birr
 Headwork cost = 291327.046Birr
 Infrastrasturacture cost=352474.74Birr
 Total project cost = 694801.786Birr
 Cost per hectare = 40870.69Birr

5
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.1Location
The irrigation project is located mainly at YekebahanaKebele, EnemayeWoreda of East Gojjam
Zone in the AmharaRegion. The proposed irrigation project is to be undertaken on Ambo River and
the headwork structures are specifically located at an altitude of about 2682.428masl and
geographical coordinates of 1177012 N (UTM) &400569.1E (UTM).

Figure 1: Project location

6
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

1.2Accessibility
The Ambo-Weir project site is located 36km far from the Woreda town of Bichena.It can be
reached, from the town, using the main Asphalt road that connects Addis Ababa to Debrework town
after driving the first 20km along the Asphalt road and then a dry weathered road (about 16km) that
turns to the left (North) to YekebhanaKebele from the main asphalt road. The dry road directly
leads to the headwork, by traveling on river bed. The headwork site is located at 400569 E, and
1177012 N (UTM) at 2682.428m above sea level.

1.3. PREVIOUS IRRIGATION PRACTICE

There is traditional irrigated area with estimated area of 1.5ha on the right side of the river. At
present time, the main problem of the existing traditional diversion system is lack of utilization of
the required amount of water and seepage loses at some canal reaches. In addition to this,
constructing of the weir structure regularly is time wastage. So, the farmers in the project area are
very much interested to upgrading the traditional scheme to modern scheme.

1.4. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The main objective of the study is preparation of detail design document for weir at Ambo River, so
that traditional diversion system can be improved in to modern diversion system, and more area can
be developed under irrigation.
1.4.1 Major Objective
Hence the objective of this project is to contribute a substantial share in the effort to reduce the risk
of production decrease due to rainfall variability and increase the productivity of the resource in the
project specific area. Specifically, the project is targeted for the following. To make sustainable the
rain-fed crop production on 20ha of land with supplementary irrigation and make extra production
in the dry season possible for 16ha of land with full irrigation. There is a general consensus that
irrigation investments assists to achieve broad food security and poverty reduction impacts and if
efforts are also geared towards up-grading existing traditional farming practices with support to
enhance access to input supply, output marketing and extension to facilitate access to information
and innovations. This objective is achieved by constructing weir structures across Ambo River and
diverting the river flow.
1.4.2 Specific Objectives
Other benefits that can be expected to appear with the launching of the project are:
 Efficiency of water use improvement;
 Improved management of scarce natural resources (land and water);
 Rationale for erosion control and watershed management;
 The formulation of sound and stable structure, with necessary provisions that allow safe,
easy and low-maintenance operation in the service life of the project;
 Develop working drawings;
 Estimation of construction costs.

7
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

1.5. Scope of the study

The irrigation design shall ensure reliability, equity and flexibility of water delivery to farmers. It
will aim at reducing conflicts among water users and will lead to lower operation and maintenance
costs. Updating the existing, if available, computation of the actual evapotranspiration, crop water
requirement, irrigation demand/duty using the existing and recent agronomic, climatologic and soil
data using more appropriate methodologies.
 Design proper irrigation system compatible with local conditions and management
capabilities,
 Establish flood protection measures for the command area and canal structures,
 Planning and layout of the irrigation system, which include irrigation canals, canal spacing,
canal length, location of structures, and water profiles along canal and drains at specified
reaches, which is most economical easily manageable and aligned with topographic feature
and geological investigation.
 Determination and estimation of water application conveyance and other losses and
irrigation efficiencies and consideration of those parameters in design steps.
 Check and test hydraulic and structural designs of main canal considering total demand and
the required capacity and the base flow availability,
 Prepare general plans and drawings for all irrigation infrastructure and irrigation systems
designs,

1.6. METHODOLOGY
The procedures followed for the production of the study document are:
 Site identification in consultation with the community and woreda experts
 Measurement of the river cross section with surveying equipment
 Use topo map and GIS information, then delineating the watershed area
 Local farmers interview and discussion about the crops grown in the locality
 Collecting metrological data from the nearest station( Dejen)
 Topographic Surevey:
o Sureveying the headwork site and the Command area with sufficient radius, using
Total station
 Flow estimation
o Physical observation on flood mark indications and local information about high
flood and critical flow condition of the river
o Analyzing the recorded river flow data and use watershed inputs for further analysis.
o Base flow estimated during the reconnaissance field visit by floating method.
 Irrigable area identification:
o Using local information
o GIS information, GPS to see elevation

8
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

2.0 HYDROLOGY
2.1 Water Resources and Base flow Measurement
2.1.1 Base Flow of Ambo River
During the field visit for data collection, one of the basic data collected was the base flow of the
river Ambo. The base flow data was collected by the technique of floating method and the base
flow which is measured in February 2017 by using floating method by selecting an appropriate
location, a relatively straight reach with defined river banks.The base flow measured at that time is
24 l/s.During the time of both visit periods, the flow in Ambo River was small. There was also some
rain during the detail field data collection period resulting in slight increase of the river discharge.
Elderly people living near the project area have told us that this will reduce much in the months of
April andMay.

2.1.2. Upstream & Downstream utilization

Ambo River there is downstream of the proposed site; appreciable need for water is anticipated for
locals and cattle provisions. Hence, 20% of the minimum flow has to be released for downstream
requirements. For the sake of planning and design, however, the outlet for the diversion is designed
for a discharge of 24 l/s for this project and the project is to be developed for 17 ha of land, which is
most of the time achievable as the flow for most of the time is significant to support this size of
command area.
2.2. Design rain fall determination
For the purpose of flood estimation, the Pearson type III, the Gumball extreme value distribution,
and lognormal distribution seem to have found a wider applicability than many other distributions
(Kaczmarek, 1957). The selection of a suitable distribution for the design rainfall estimation is
performed through different goodness of fit tests.
Theoretical K-T relationships
The magnitude Kt of a hydrologic event may be represented as the mean μ plus the departure ΔX t of
the variety from the mean:
K t =μ́+ Δ X t

9
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

The departure may be taken as equal to the product of the standard deviation σ and a frequency
factor Kt, that is, ΔXt = Ktσ. The departure ΔXt and the frequency factor Kt are functions of the
return period and the type of probability distribution to be used in the analysis.
The previous Equation may therefore be expressed as:
K t =μ́+σX t

In the event that the variable analyzed is y = log x, then the same method is applied to the statistics
for the logarithms of the data, using
X t =x́ + sK t
The above frequency factor equation was proposed by Chow (1951), and it is applicable to many
probability distributions used in hydrologic frequency analysis. For a given distribution, a K-T
relationship can be determined between the frequency factor and the corresponding return period.
This relationship can be expressed in mathematical terms or by a table. For a given return period,
the frequency factor can be determined from the K-T relationship for the proposed distribution, and
the magnitude XT computed by the previous equations. In the event that the variable analyzed is y =
log x, then the same method is applied to the statistics for the logarithms of the data,

2.2.1. Hydro-Metrological Data Availability

Hydrological data is important in order to make hydrological computations, to establish design
criteria and to make any forecast. The most important steps in any hydrological study are the
collection, screening and processing of input data for further analysis. Time spent on ensuring that
the best possible data set is used generally speeds up the analysis to follow. To be able to make
good use of hydrologic data, the data has to be stored in such a way that all possible errors are
removed and that the data is accessible. Dejen metrological station is preferred for this project from
its proximity & homogeneity point of view. It is about 66 km air distance from project site.

10
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Table1: Maximum Daily Rain Fall Value of 28 Years for Dejen station
S.No Years Max.RF X Rank Y=logX (y-ym)2 (y-ym)3
1 1961 20.8 78.3 1 1.8938 0.0000 0.0000
2 1962 51 72.3 2 1.8591 0.0236 0.0036
3 1963 50 65 3 1.8129 0.0115 0.0012
4 1964 51 63.4 4 1.8021 0.0093 0.0009
5 1965 37.6 63.3 5 1.8014 0.0092 0.0009
6 1966 27.2 62.5 6 1.7959 0.0082 0.0007
7 1967 46 61.7 7 1.7903 0.0072 0.0006
8 1968 61.4 61.6 8 1.7896 0.0071 0.0006
9 1969 61.6 61.4 9 1.7882 0.0068 0.0006
10 1970 45.4 59.8 10 1.7767 0.0051 0.0004
11 1971 59.8 56.8 11 1.7543 0.0024 0.0001
12 1972 39.8 55.3 12 1.7427 0.0014 0.0001
13 1973 62.5 54.5 13 1.7364 0.0009 0.0000
14 1974 72.3 52 14 1.716 0.0001 0.0000
15 1975 40.7 51 15 1.7076 0.0000 0.0000
16 1976 56.8 51 16 1.7076 0.0000 0.0000
17 1977 52 50.3 17 1.7016 0.0000 0.0000
18 1978 49.3 50 18 1.699 0.0000 0.0000
19 1979 63.4 49.3 19 1.6928 0.0002 0.0000
20 1980 54.5 48.5 20 1.6857 0.0004 0.0000
21 1981 50.3 46 21 1.6628 0.0018 -0.0001
22 1982 61,70 45.4 22 1.6571 0.0024 -0.0001
23 1983 55.3 44.3 23 1.6464 0.0035 -0.0002
24 1984 63.3 40.7 24 1.6096 0.0092 -0.0009
25 1985 44.3 39.8 25 1.5999 0.0112 -0.0012
26 1986 48.5 37.6 26 1.5752 0.0170 -0.0022
27 1987 65 27.2 27 1.4346 0.0734 -0.0199
28 1988 78.3 20.8 28 1.3181 0.1502 -0.0582
Sum   1469.8   47.7574 0.361 0.0731
Mean   52.5   1.7056    
Standard devation   12.242        

Skewnesscoefficent   1.061        

2.2.2 Rainfall data quality test

11
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

The daily heaviest rainfall data of dejen metrological station from 1961 to 1988 is taken for the
design. Those data, which are not fully recorded, are abandoned and only these data, which are fully
recorded, are taken for computation. Accordingly, 28 years of daily heaviest rainfall data is
available. These data should be checked for its consistency by outlier test. First the reliability of the
data must be checked.

2.2.2.1. Checking Data Reliability

Number of data = 28

Standard deviation,
δ n−1 = 12.242
Mean, X = 52.5mm
δ n−1 12.242
δ n=
Standard error of mean, √n = √ 28 =2.31

σn 2. 31
Relative standard, X
×100=
52. 5( )
×100=4 . 4 %<10 %

Hence the data series could be regarded as reliable and adequate.

2.2.2.2. Checking the existence of outlier

Outliers are data points which depart significantly from the trend of the remaining data. The
observed annual daily maximum rainfall series was subjected to tests for high and low outliers. This
test is conducted using the methodology specified in the US Army Corps of Engineers Manual on
Hydrologic Frequency Analysis.
This is done to check whether the adopted data is within the limited range or not.

X=
∑ RF =1469. 8/28=52. 49 mm
N
∑ Y =48.06mm
−
Y=
∑ Y =47. 7574 /28=1 .7056 mm
N
− −

∑ (Y −Y ) =0 . 369 ∑ (Y −Y )3=−0. 0731

2

12
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

− 2

S y=
√ ∑
((Y −Y ) =
i
( N −1 )

N ∑ ( Y i−Y )3
−
√ 0 .37
27
=0. 197

28×(−0 .0761 )
C s= = =0. 397
( N−1 )( N −2 ) S 3
y
3
( 28−1)( 28−2)× ( 0 . 197 )
.
A) Test for higher outlier
−

Higher outlier Y h =Y +K n S y
−
Where: Y = mean of data in log unit

Kn = From table for sample size N

for data N=28,

K n=2.534
From Table
−

Higher outlier Y h =Y + K n S y=1. 7056+2 .534∗0 . 197=2 . 205

Higheroutlier=(10 )2.205 =160. 325 mm

The Higher data recorded is Less than the high outlier 78.3 mm < 160.325 mm, then the data is accepted for
the next analysis.
B) Test for lower outlier
−

Lower outlier Y l =Y −K n S y
−
Y h =Y −K n S y =1 .7056−2. 534×0 .197=1 .2064
1. 2064
Loweroutlier=(10 ) =16 .084 mm
The Lowest recorded value is (20.08mm) which is greater than the lower outlier (16.084mm). Hence, no
lower outlier. Therefore, the recorded data now is consistent for both outliers and it is possible to use it for
analysis.

2.2.2.3 Check for variance

After checking the outliers, the data should be checked for variability. For variability the formula
used is
δ ∩−1
α= (
√ N∗Mean
∗100 %)
13
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Where, δ n-1 = Standard deviation =12.242

N = Nr of recorded data =28
Mean = 52.5
α = Standard error
α =¿Acceptable .
Therefore the data shows no variability.
2.2.3. Selection of Return Period
Selection of the design return period, also called recurrence interval, depends on economic balance
between the cost of periodic repair or replacement of the facility and the cost of providing
additional capacity to reduce the frequency of repair or replacement vegetated control.
For small – scale irrigation projects, it is recommended that the project design flood once in 100
years can be used for design of storage dams, once in 50 years for design of diversion weirs, and the
flood that occur once in 10-20 years for design of drainage structures. (Irrigation and Drainage
Department IDD Ministry of Agriculture).
In this case the return period is taken as T = 50 Years

2.3. DESIGN RAINFALL COMPUTATION

After checking the consistency of the data for higher and lower outlier, the 28 years data is obtained
as representative for the analysis. The probability of occurrence of maximum probable rainfall is
estimated by the following methods as shown below.

2.3.1.Gumbel’s Extreme distribution function method;

It is the most widely used method for the prediction of maximum annual rainfalls, flood flows and etc. It is
applicable only to annual extreme values.
The frequency factor KT depends on the return period T, Reduced standard deviation and Reduced
mean in Gambel’s Extreme Value.
XT =Ym+ KT∗Sy
Where
YT −YN
KT =
Sn
YN= Reduced mean in Gamble’s extreme value distribution for N sample size from table;
Sn= Reduced standard deviation in Gamble’s Extreme value distribution for N sample size from
table;T=Return period, for diversion weirs 50 years;
Sy= Standard deviation of annual rainfall; and
Ym= Mean of all values annual rainfall.
For sample size N=28, YN =0.5415, and Sn =1.1327
T 50
YT=-(ln (ln( ) ¿) =-(ln (ln ( ¿ ¿ ¿=3.9
(T −1) 50−1
YT−Yn 3.9−0.5415
KT= = =2.965
Sn 1.1327
14
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

XT =µ+ KT∗σn−1
X50=52.5+2.965x12.242
X50 = 88.8mm

2.3.2. Log Pearson type III distribution method

For this distribution , take the logarithms of hydrologic data, Y=log (x), the mean Ym,Standard
deviation Sy and Coefficient of Skewnes Cs are calculated for the logarithms of data. The
frequency factor KT depends on the return period T and the Coefficient of Skewnes Cs. The
variation of KT =f (CS, T) is given in table
The Frequency Factor KT for 50 years return period and Cs=1.061 from table 2.211(By
interpolation)

X=Ym +KT*Sy
X50 =1.7056 + 2.567*0.197 =2.211
X50 =102.211=162.60mm
2.3.3. Normal distribution method;

XT =µ+ KT∗σn−1 Where KT=frequency factor

2.51557+0.01033 w 2
KT =w− ---------- (a)
1+1.143279 w+ 0.1992 w2 +0.00131 w3
1
1
[ ( )]
W = ln 2
P
2

1 1
pr= = =0.02
T 50
1
1
[ ( )]
W = ln
0.022
2
=2.797

1 1
pr= = =0.02
T 50
2.51557+0.01033 ¿ 0.022
KT =0.02− =2.054
1+ 1.143279∗0.02+0.1992 ¿ 0.022 +0.00131∗0.02
X 50=µ+ KT∗σn−1=52.5+2.054∗12.242=77.65 mm=78 mm
2.3.4. Log normal distribution method
This method is similar to normal distribution, but the data variant x is transformed to logarithmic
form and analyzed with the same computation of frequency factorYT =Ym+ KT × Sy.
Where, KT is given in equation (a) above.
Then the value of
YT =1. 7056+2 .054×0. 197=2. 11
X 50=102.11 =128.82mm

15
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

The results of the analysis are shown in the following table, Table 2.

Table1: Peak rainfall estimates using different statistical distributions

Frequency X50
S.n Type of Frequency Analisis Probability Factor (mm)
1 Gambl EVI (Extreme Value) 0.02 2.965 88.8
Log- Pearson Type III
2 Distribution 0.02 2.567 162.6
3 Normal Distribution 0.02 2.054 78
4 log- Normal Distribution 0.02 2.054 128.82

2.3.5. SELECTION OF DISTRIBUTION (TESTING FOR GOODNESS OF

FIT)
The validity of a probability distribution function proposed to fit the empirical frequency
distribution of a given sample may be tested graphically and analytically by D-index test. The D-
index tests for the comparison of the fit of various distributions in the upper tail are used and given
by:
D-index = (1/x) ∑Abs (XI - XI')
Where, XI and XI' are the ithhighest observed and computed values for the distribution respectively.
The distribution giving the least D-index is considered to be the best fit distribution.
The D-indexes of functions used in estimating X50 are:-
Statistical Original Log transformed
parameter data data
mean 52.5 1.7056
stand. deva. 12.242 0.197
Sk. coeffic. 1.601 0.397
Number of data 28  

Gamble’s distribution function

D-index = (1/x) ∑Abs (XI - XI'), ẍ¿ µ+ KT∗σn−1 Where,

√6 x 0 . 5772+ Ln(Ln( T ) ¿
KT=
∏¿ ( T −1 )

16
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Table 2: D-index For Gumbel Distribution

XI-'XI'
Rank RF=XI PR YT KT XI'
74.432
1 78.3 0.027 3.597 1.792 7 3.87
69.357
2 72.3 0.054 2.890 1.377 3 2.94
66.344
3 65 0.081 2.470 1.131 2 1.34
4 63.4 0.108 2.168 0.954 64.174 0.77
62.464
5 63.3 0.135 1.930 0.814 3 0.84
61.044
6 62.5 0.162 1.732 0.698 8 1.46
Sum           11.22

D-index= 11.22/52.5=0.214
Log Pearson type III distribution function
D-index = (1/x) ∑Abs (XI - XI'), XI'¿ ANTILOGOF YT =Ym+ KT∗Sy Where
KT=Z+(Z^2-1)K+1/3*(Z^3-6Z) K^2-(Z^2-1)*K^3+ZK^4+1/3*K^5
2.51557+ 0.01033 w2
Z=w−
1+1.143279 w +0.1992 w2 +0.00131 w3

W =( ln(1/ pr 2))0.5
Table3: D-index For Log pearson Type III

Rank RF=XI PR W K Z KT XI' XI-'XI'

1 78.3 0.027
2.6873 0.1768 1.927 2.348 81.238 2.94
2 72.3 0.054
2.4157 0.1768 1.607 1.823 74.812 2.51
3 65 0.081
2.2416 0.1768 1.398 1.504 70.913 5.91
4 63.4 0.108
2.1093 0.1768 1.237 1.271 68.062 4.66
5 63.3 0.135
2.0007 0.1768 1.102 1.086 65.789 2.49
6 62.5 0.162
1.9074 0.1768 0.986 0.930 63.885 1.39
Sum               19.90
D-index= 19.9/52.5=0.379
17
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Normal distribution function

D-index = (1/x) ∑Abs (XI - XI'), where
2.51557+0.01033 w 2
XI'=µ+ KT∗σn , KT =Z =w−
1+1.143279 w+ 0.1992 w2 +0.00131 w3

Table4: D-index For Normal Distribution

RF=X
Rank I PR W Z KT XI' XI-'XI'
1 78.3 0.027 2.6873 1.927 2.085 121.671 43.37
2 72.3 0.054 2.4157 1.607 2.022 105.244 32.94
3 65 0.081 2.2416 1.398 1.981 95.724 30.72
4 63.4 0.108 2.1093 1.237 1.949 88.971 25.57
5 63.3 0.135 2.0007 1.102 1.923 83.713 20.41
6 62.5 0.162 1.9074 0.986 1.900 79.388 16.89
Sum             169.91
Sum/Xm
          3.2364

D-Index =169.91/52.5 =3.236

D-Index forLog Normal distribution function
D-index = (1/x) ∑Abs (XI - XI'), where
2.51557+0.01033 w 2
XI'= µ+ KT∗σn , KT =Z =w−
1+1.143279 w+ 0.1992 w2 +0.00131 w3
Table5: D-index For Log Normal Distribution
Ran
k RF=XI PR w K Z KT YH' XI' XI-'XI'
0.02 2.687
1 78.3 7 3 0.1768 1.927 2.348 2.168 147.252 68.95
0.05 2.415
2 72.3 4 7 0.1768 1.607 1.823 2.065 116.053 43.75
0.08 2.241
3 65 1 6 0.1768 1.398 1.504 2.002 100.440 35.44
0.10 2.109
4 63.4 8 3 0.1768 1.237 1.271 1.956 90.369 26.97

18
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

0.13 2.000
5 63.3 5 7 0.1768 1.102 1.086 1.919 83.072 19.77
0.16 1.907
6 62.5 2 4 0.1768 0.986 0.930 1.889 77.413 14.91
Sum                 209.80
D-Index=209.8/52.5 =3.996

Table6: Summarized D-index For Distributions

Normal Gumbel Log Normal LogPearsonIII
RF=XI
Rank XI -'XI' XI -'XI' XI -'XI' XI -'XI'
1 78.3 43.37 3.87 68.95 2.94
2 72.3 32.94 2.94 43.75 2.51
3 65 30.72 1.34 35.44 5.91
4 63.4 25.57 0.77 26.97 4.66
5 63.3 20.41 0.84 19.77 2.49
6 62.5 16.89 1.46 14.91 1.39
Sum 169.91 11.22 209.80 19.90
Mean 28.32 1.87 34.97 3.317
D-Index   3.236 0.214 3.996 0.379
X50   78 88.8 128.82 162.6

The distribution function with least D-index value is Gumbel Extreme Value with 0.214.
Hence it fits best of all distribution functions. Therefore, to be economical and wise the
computed design rainfall of 50 year return period i.e. 88.8 mm will be used as design rainfall
2.3.6. Catchment characteristics
From the watershed report of the same project,
 Catchment area estimated = 1.315 km2
 Longest mainstream length = 1037m
 Average stream slope = 0.216
 Curve number in antecedent moisture (II)=81.58

19
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Figure 2: Land use map of Ambo watershed

2.3.6 Watershed characteristics

The watershed for Ambo small scale irrigation scheme is located in the Amhara National Regional
State in East Gojjam zone. Generally, the elevation increased from south east to North West.The
Principal River of watershed is Ambo River. The dominant slope class is gently sloping 3-8% of the
watershed.

20
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Table8: Slope classes in Ambo Watershed

Description Slope Area km2 %-shared
Flat or almost
flat 0-3% 0.266 20.23
Gently sloping 3-8% 0.445 33.84
Sloping 8-15% 0.368 27.98
Moderately
steep 15-30% 0.137 10.42
Steep 30-50% 0.078 5.93
Very Steep >50% 0.021 1.6
Total 1.315 100

Figure3: Slope map of Ambo watershed

21
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

2.3.7 Peak flood analysis by SCS unit hydrograph method

Design flood is calculated SCS (The United States Soil Conservation Service). This method is
widely adopted and more reliable method for flood estimation. The approach considers, watershed
parameters, like Area, Curve number, and time of concentration.

2.3.7.1 Time of concentration (T c)

Time of concentration has been calculated by taking the stream profile of the longest streamline and
dividing it in to different elevation. The time of concentration can be computed by

1 L1.155
Tc= ( )( )
3000
∗ 0.385
H
0.77
1 L
3000 ( √ S )
T =
C =0.126

H 224
S= = =0.216 , H=H 2−H 1=2895−2671=224 , H2=Elevation of watershed divide
L 1037
opposite to the head of the main water course (topographical map)
H1=Elevation of stream bed at proposed intake site.
Where,
Tc = Time of concentration (hr)
L = Length of the main water course (m)
S = slope of the main water course (m/m)

2.3.7.2.Curve number (CN)

Curve number (CN) is achieved based on USSCS method by watershed characterization in terms of land
cover, treatment, hydrologic condition and soil group. From the watershed analysis curve number at
condition II = 81.58. Since peak rainfall is found at an antecedent moisture condition III state, this value has
to be changed to antecedent moisture condition III.
 Conversion factor = 1.1716

 CN Condition (III) = (Factor from Table x CN condition II) =81.58*1.1716 = 95.58 .For detail
analysis of the computation, Refer Excel file, attached here with

2.3.7.3. Area Rainfall

The conversion factor is taken from standard table that relate directly with the size of watershed area.
For the case of Ambo irrigation project,
 Total watershed area = 1.315Km2

ARF=1−0.044 A0.275=1−0.044 × ( 1.315 ) ❑0.275=0.953

22
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

2.3.7.4. Run off Analysis

Input data:
Design Point Rainfall = 88.8mm
Curve number at antecedent moisture condition III = 95.58
Catchment Area, A = 1.315 Km2
Tc = 0.126hr, D = 0.021hr., Tp = 0.09hr; Tb = 0.23 hr; Tr = 0.144hr.
Direct run-off,

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

S = Maximum run off potential difference,

Peak run-off for incremental;

Where, A = Catchment area = 1.315 Km2

Tp = Time to peak (hr)
Q = Incremental run-off (mm)

23
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Table9:Determination of Time of Concentration

step Designation/formula symbol Unit Value
1 Area of catchment (this can be A Km2
determined from 1:50,000 scale 1.315
topographical maps or aerial
topography)
2 Length of main water course L M
from watershed divide to 1037
proposed diversion or storage
site (topographical map)
3 Elevation of watershed divide H2 M
opposite to the head of the 2895
main water course
(topographical map)
4 Elevation of stream bed at H1 M
proposed weir or storage site 2671
(topographical map)
5 Slope of main water course, S m/m
s=H/L=(H2-H1)/L 0.216
6 Time of concentration, Tc Hr
1 L1.155 0.126
Tc= ( )(
3000 )
∗ 0.385
H
7 Rainfall excess duration interval D Hr
D 0.021
If Tc ≤ 3hr, D=Tc/6
If Tc> 3hr, D=1hr
8 Time to peak, tp =0.5D +0.6Tc Tp Hr
0.09
9 Time base of hydrograph, tb = Tb Hr
2.67tp 0.23
10 Lag time, tl = 0.6Tc Tl Hr 0.08
11 Peak rate of discharge created Qp m3/(sec.mm)
by 1mm runoff excess on whole 3.207
0.21 A
of the catchment, qp=
Tp
24
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Table10: Runoff analysis

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Duration Daily Rain fall Rain fall Aerial Aerial Incremental Descending Desending
point profile profile to rainfall aerial order order
rainfall (rainfall point rainfall
of ratio) rainfall
return
period
50
years
Hr Mm % Mm % mm Mm mm no
0-0.021 10.00 8.88 68.00 5.76 0.90 7.37 1
0.021-0.042 11.50 10.21 68.00 6.61 1.04 1.81 2
0.042-0.063 12.50 11.10 68.00 7.20 1.72 1.77 3
0.063-0.084 88.8 13.50 11.99 68.00 7.77 1.77 1.72 4
0.084-0.105 15.50 13.76 68.00 8.92 1.81 1.04 5
0.105-0.126 17.50 15.54 68.00 10.07 7.37 0.90 6

Table11: Times of incremental hydrograph

21 22 23 24 25 26
Rearranged Rearranged
order incremental Times of incremental hydrograph
order Cummulative
order(p)
Time of Time to
Time to end
beginning peak
No. mm Mm Hr Hr Hr
6 0.90 0.90 0.000 0.09 0.23
4 1.72 2.62 0.021 0.11 0.25
2 1.81 4.43 0.042 0.13 0.27
1 7.37 11.80 0.063 0.15 0.29
3 1.77 13.57 0.084 0.17 0.31
5 1.04 14.61 0.105 0.19 0.33

25
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Table12:stream flow potential

 27 28 29 30 31 32
Area ratio Hydro
Sub unit logic Textural
Stream Flow Potential
Land slope Area Soil Class
NO use (Km2) Ratio group
1 Grazi G1(15-30) 0.137 0.104 B Silt loam Fair
ng Sandy
G2(30-50)
2 Land 0.000 0.000 A Loam Poor
Close Sandy
Ac1(30-50)
3 r 0.068 0.052 A Loam Fair
Area/
forest Ac2(>50) Sandy
4 land 0.021 0.016 A Loam Fair
5 Home Hs1(3-8) 0.002 0.002 D silt clay Poor
6 steads Hs2(8-15) 0.010 0.008 B Silt loam Poor
7 Culti Cu1(3-8) 0.699 0.532 D Clay Good
vated
Cu2(8-15)
8 land 0.378 0.287 D Silt Clay Good
9 road   0.000 0.000 D Gravel  
Total CN 1.315    

Table13: Sum weighted “CN”

32 33 34 35
Curve No. Sum weighted "CN"
Weighted "CN"
'CN' II III
69 7.19
68 0.00
36 1.86
36 0.57
80 0.12 81.58 95.58
76 0.58
87 46.25
87 25.01
92 0.00
26
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

  81.58

Table14: Maximum potential Difference b/n rainfall(p)

The maximum potential 11.75
(p-3.2)2/(p+13)
difference b/n Rainfall (p) and  
36 direct runoff (Q), S = mm p (mm) Q (mm)
(25400/CN) - 254, CN=Value 0.90 0.00
corresponding to AMC III 2.62 0.01
4.43 0.31
( P  0.2S ) 2 11.80 4.21
Q
 
13.57 5.48
( P  0 .2 S ) 14.61 6.26
   
37
   
   
25400
S  254 11.75
CN    
   

Table15: Cumulative Runoff

38 39 40 41 42
Peak run Time
Cumulative run Incremental Time of Time to
No. off for to
off run off beginning end
Duration increment peak
Hrs Mm mm m3/sec Hrs  hr  hr
1 0-0.021 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.086 0.230
2 0.021-0.042 0.01 0.006 0.019 0.02 0.107 0.251
3 0.042-0.063 0.31 0.307 0.984 0.04 0.128 0.272
4 0.063-0.084 4.21 0.780 12.507 0.06 0.149 0.293
5 0.084-0.105 5.48 1.268 4.068 0.08 0.170 0.314
6 0.105-0.126 6.26 3.900 2.501 0.11 0.191 0.335

27
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Table16:Tabular value of unit hydrograph

43
Time Ordinate of Hydrograph (m^3/Sec)
(hr) H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 HT
0.00 0.000 0.00
0.021 0.000 0.000 0.00
0.042 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.00
0.063 0.000 0.010 0.240 0.000 0.25
0.084 0.000 0.014 0.481 3.054 0.000 3.55
0.086 0.000 0.015 0.503 3.345 0.993 4.86
0.105 0.000 0.019 0.721 6.108 0.993 0.000 7.84
0.107 0.000 0.019 0.744 6.399 1.088 0.058 8.31
0.128 0.000 0.017 0.984 9.453 2.081 0.669 13.20
0.149 0.000 0.014 0.840 12.507 3.074 1.279 17.72
0.170 0.000 0.011 0.697 10.683 4.068 1.890 17.35
0.191 0.000 0.008 0.553 8.859 3.474 2.501 15.40
0.230 0.000 0.003 0.287 5.472 2.373 1.823 9.96
0.251 0.000 0.143 3.648 1.780 1.459 7.03
0.272 0.000 1.824 1.186 1.094 4.10
0.293 0.000 0.593 0.729 1.32
0.314 0.000 0.365 0.36
0.335 0.000 0.00
               
               
               
               
Qd 17.72

28
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

20.000
18.000
16.000
40 Ordinate of 40 Ordinate of
14.000 Hydrograph (m^3/Sec) Hydrograph (m^3/Sec)
H1 H2
12.000 40 Ordinate of 40 Ordinate of
Hydrograph (m^3/Sec) Hydrograph (m^3/Sec)
10.000 H3 H4
8.000 40 Ordinate of 40 Ordinate of
Hydrograph (m^3/Sec) Hydrograph (m^3/Sec)
6.000 H5 H6
40 Ordinate of
4.000 Hydrograph (m^3/Sec) HT
2.000
0.000

Figure4: complex hydrograph

2.4. Rating curve/Tail water Determination/
The estimation of tail water depth at the weir site provides information on downstream flood level
that can be used for the design of downstream retaining walls, protection work and stability analysis
of the weir. There is no stage-discharge data for Ambo River at the weir site, hence synthetic rating
curve is produced using the longitudinal profile, river cross section at the weir axis and
characteristics of the river as it is accounted by the manning roughness. The flow of the river at the
main weir axis is analyzed by manning’s equation:
2
1
Q= A R 3 √ S
n
Table 17 river slope computation
Remark Elevation
Partial Cumulativ
Northing Easting Elevation Differenc Area (A)
Distance e Distance
e (H)
1 1177011.50 400569.1 2682.42 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00
8 8
2 1177043.00 400572.55 2684.66 (2.24) 31.687 31.687 2.24 35.51
6 5 9
3 1176999.35 400564.41 2682.55 (0.12) 44.408 76.095 0.12 4.64
1 3
4 1177096.79 400632.23 2689.33 (6.91) 118.720 194.815 6.91 672.99
3 3 7
SUM 194.815   713.14

Then by end area method the longitudinal slope of the river can be obtained.

29
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

713.14
Hav=2× ∑ A=2× =7.32
L 194.815

Hav 7.32
Hence, Slope ( S ) = L = 194.815 =0.0376=0.04

n = manning roughness of the river at the weir site (0.035)

S = Longitudinal slope of the river at the weir site= 0.04
Bottom width of the river is 4m, and it is near trapezoidal section

Longitudinal Profile at Weir site

2685
Figure 5:
2685 f(x) = 0.03 x + 2682.24 Elevation versus
2684
distance curve
Elevation (m)

2684
2683 Figure 6: Rating
2683
2682 Curve
2682
2681 Table 18: Tabular
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
stage- discharge curve
Distance (m)
of Ambo River at the
weir axis
Stage Elevation A P B R S N V Q
3
(m) (m.a.s.l) (m 2) (m) (m) (m) (m/m)   (m/s) (m /s)
2682.428
0 0 0 4 0 0.04 0.035 0 0
2682.928 4
0.5 2.002 5 0.0.4 0.04 0.035 3.105 6.218
2683.428 4
1 4.010 6 0.668 0.04 0.035 4.368 17.51
1.008 2683.436 4.042 6.016 0.672 0.04 0.035 4.384 17.72
2683.928 4
1.5 6.023 7 0.86 0.04 0.035 5.169 31.132

2.4.1. Discharge of the river at the weir axis

The peak discharge of the river Ambo calculated by SCS curve number method was found to be
17.72 m3/s,the stage-discharge relation of the river is established at the tail water depth correspond
to the design flood (17.72 m3/s) is equal to 1.008m, for more safety takes the design flood 17.72
m3/s and analyze the weir structure.

30
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

3.0. HEAD WORK STRUCTURES DESIGN

3.1. WEIR SITE GEOLOGICAL CONDITION
The foundation is hard rock formation, so it is better to anchor the weir to the hard rock to a depth of about
0.4 meter. The river channel has defined channel development, nearly straight, and shows almost shallow
and undulations at the centre due to the accumulation of blocky basalt boulders and have stable abutments.
The stream bed at the headwork site shows moderateslope whereas at the lower side of the weir site it is
steep slope. At those beds from which having gentle slope the river bed is covered by hard rock
formation.The right bank of the river at and nearby areas to the headwork is characterized by steep slope.
The proposed canal route lies along this bank. The Right bank near to the proposed weir structure has a
chance to be subjected to flood erosion. Hence, to prevent the channel from further widening and changing
its flow direction near the proposed weir site, retaining work on the bank is required.The left bank is made of
dense dominated by hard rock. This bank extends in both up and downstream directions from the proposed
weir site with the same height and geological formation.

Figure 7: River bed condition at the proposed weir site

31
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

3.1.1. Construction Material Availability

During site investigation, natural construction materials required for the construction of the various
proposed engineering structures at the headwork and possible quarry sites have been identified
within the vicinity of the study area as close to the project site as possible. In addition to identifying
the quality, quantity and accessibility conditions of the construction materials, ownerships of each
proposed production sites have also been studied and described in this report, on separate sub-
sections below. The materials needed for the construction of the structures include rock for masonry
stones, aggregates (both coarse and fine), and water.

3.1.1.1. Masonry Stones and Coarse Aggregate

Source or quarry site for rock that can be used for masonry works has been assessed at the
immediate vicinity of the project area. The coarse aggregate rock is available in sufficient amount.
There is no existing quarry site around the command area. The rock type found at this quarry site is
basalt, which has dark gray colour, fine grained texture, and high strength. The rock unit shows
closely spaced joints that disintegrated and dislodged fragments of the rock are observed in large
quantity, both naturally occurring and due to the existing quarrying practice. In addition to this
intact and jointed (by widely spaced joints) outcrops of the rock unit and subsurface extensions are
found. High quality as well as voluminous quantity of masonry stones for different purposes such
as masonry works and concrete aggregates can be found at different localities around the vicinity of
the project area. For the headwork site, it is found at ‘Yekebahana city’, which is very close to the
headwork site. The masonry in both ridges is black aphanitic basalt.

3.1.1.2. Fine aggregate

Aggregates are highly required for headwork concrete structures and other structures that can be
constructed in the project. The aggregates required for use in concrete works are coarse and fine
aggregates that can be supplied via the youth association organized by the local government which
is also operational during the time of visit. This sand source is being used for different construction
purposes in the nearby towns including woyera, Yetmen and Dejen.

3.2. Hydraulic Design

3.2.1. Shape of the weir
Looking the availability of natural construction materials and considering the river features and
expected flood amount, broad crest type of weir is chosen. As it is:
• Simple for construction
• Weir section is expected only 75% of the peak flood while the remaining flood will pass
over the overflow section of the river course.

32
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

3.2.2. Crest Level of Weir Determination

The Crest level of the weir outlet is fixed based on the following criteria:-
 Maximum elevation of the command area = 2683.866masl
 River bed Level = 2682.428 masl
 Maximum distance between the elevated command area and the diversion site, = 140m
 Head losses due to canal slope = 1/1000*140 = 0.14m
 Canal full supply depth = 0.5m
 Head loss across head regulater =0.10m
 Then, the weir Crest level = Maximum command elevation+totallosses+canal depth =
2683.866+0.74 = 2684.606m
3.2.3. Length of the Weir Determination
The weir length depends on the physical features of the given site & has to be designed to allow the
design flood to safely discharge over the weir. Lacey’sperimeter. The length of the weir for deep
and confined river with stable banks should be approximately equal to the actual width of the river
at the design discharge.

P=4.75 √Qd=4.75 √17.72=20 m

But there is a looseness factor (ratio of actual width of the river and that of calculated from
Lacey formula) between 0.45 and 1.0 (0.5 in most designs).Therefore, length of the weir (L)
will be:-
L=0.5 P=2.375 √Qd=0.5 ×20=10 m
But the length of the weir for deep and confined river with stable banks should be
approximately equal to the actual width of the river at the design discharge. Therefore the weir
crest length=10m
3.2.4. High flood and energy level
The head-discharge equation for the flow over the weir crest:
Qd=C Lo H e3 /2
Where
Qd = Design discharge of the weir
C = Coefficient of discharge (1.705 for broad crested type of weir)
L = Length of the overflow section of the weir
He = Specific energy over the crest of the weir
He: specific energy head (over flow depth + approaching velocity head (m))
ρ: specific weight of weir body (2.3 for masonry)
He is estimated using broad crested weir formula
Q  1.7 LHe3 / 2
33
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

The approach velocity head, Ha has been computed using the following formula:
H a=H e −H d , He=1.026m
Where, Hd = design head (excluding the velocity head) over the weir crest
The approach velocity head can also be expressed in terms of approach velocity:
v a2
H a=
2g
Q Q
v a= =
A Lo ( h+ H d )
Q2
H a=
2 g L o2 ( h+ H d )2
Where, h = 2.1m height of the weir
The value of Hd and Ha can be computed by trial and error from the foregoing two equation of
Ha=0.02 m And Hd=1.006m
The upstream and downstream water and energy level become:
U/S HFL = Zo+ h + Hd =2682.428+2.1+1.006=2685.534m
U/S TEL = U/S HFL + Ha=2685.534+0.02m=2685.554m
D/S HFL = Zo + y3 =2682.428+1.008m=2683.436m
D/S TEL = D/S HFL+ hd=2683.436+0.98=2684.416m
Where; y3 is tail water depth from rating curve y3 is 1.008 m, and velocity of approach was
4.384m/s, for this velocity the velocity head is hd = 0.98m

3.3 Structural design

3.3.1 .Weir Height Determination

The following major factors have been seen in determining the weir crest level:
 Maximum command area elevation

 Deriving head of the intake structure

 Main canal slope

 Loss
 Lowest Point of river center
Hight of weir/h/= 2684.606-2682.428= 2.178m=2.1m

3.3.2. Section of the weir body

34
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Horizontal broad crested weir with vertical drop has been designed on Bligh’s theory.Bligh’s has
given the following expression for the design of the weir wall[ CITATION SKG07 \l 1033 ].
The top width of weir:
Hd 1.006
Bt= = =0.88 m
√ G−1 √ 2.3−1
Where,
G = specific gravity of floor material
The bottom width of the weir (B) should not be less than:
h+ H d 2.1+1.006
Bb= = =2.72m
√ G−1 √ 2.3−1
Provide 0.8m and 2.4m top and bottom width respectively, which will be tested for adequacy during
stability analysis.

3.3.3 Stability Analysis of Weir

Stability analysis is carried out to see the already determined weir section is safe against
overturning, sliding, tension. The stability analysis is carried out considering the effect of the
following forces.
 Water pressure
 Weight of the over flow section
 Sediment load
The extreme load combination is the case where the head is at crest level of the weir and there is no
flow over the weir (static case).
T=1.8

H=3m

Toe
B=5
Ps = Hw*γs

Figure8: Schematic representation of forces for Stability analysis of the weir

Table19. Force and moment of Weir body

Code Dimension Load Lever arm Moment
35
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

(about the
toe)
Vertica Horizonta Positiv Negativ
W2
  Width Depth l l R e e
Pw 2.1 2.1 0.00 21.631 0.7 0.00 15.142
W1 0.8 2.1 38.64 0.00 2 77.28 0.00
W2 0.8 2.1 31.395 0.00 1.067 33.498 0.00
Pu 2.4 2.1 0.00 0.00 1.6 0.00 0.00
Ps 11.6 2.1 0.00 5.959 0.7 0.00 4.171
110.77
Sum 17.8 10.5 70.035 27.59   8 19.313

∑V=70.035KN ∑M(+) =110.778KN.m

∑H=27.59KN ∑M(-) = 19.313KN.m
W1
i) Factor of safety against overturning (Fo)
Fo=∑ M ¿ ¿ ¿----------------------ok safe!!
ii) Factor of safety against sliding (FS) Pw
Ps
μ∑ V 70.035
FS sliding= >1.5 , ∗0.6=2.54∗0.6=1.524 >1. ----------------Ok safe!!
∑H 27.59
iii) Check for tension (i.e. whether the resultant lies within the middle third)
The location of the resultant force from the toe is given by
X =∑ M ¿ ¿ ¿
The eccentricity (e) = X – B/2, B = 2.8m
Hence, e=1.31-2.4/2 =0.11m
B 2.4
The eccentricity (e) should be less than = =0.4 Hence the obtained e= 0.11m < 0.4m.
6 6
⇒The resultant lies within the middle third no tension
Conclusion: From stability analysis, the designed section is safe. To be economical, Provide 0.8m
top width and 2.4m bottom width.

3.3.4. Hydraulic Jump Calculation

As discussed inon geologic condition,the river bed is hard rock and hence stilling basin for energy
dissipation is required. Left side banks are sound rock, a wing walls are required at u/s and D/s
sides, so as to protect the scouring of the bank due to the formation of jumps, and not to flow the
river out of river bank in high flood cases
The water depth at the weir toe can be determined by applying Bernoulli’s equation between the
weir crest and weir toe assuming that the jump forms on a horizontal surface and friction loss is
negligible.
36
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

v 12
Z o+ h+ H e =Z o+ y 1+
2g
Where y1 = water depth (initial depth of the jump) at the weir toe
v1 = velocity at the weir toe
Q q
v1 = =
A y1
Q 44
Where q = discharge intensity over the weir = = 17.72/10= 1.772m3/s/m
L 11
q2
h+ H e= y1 +
2 g y 12
= 2.1+1.026 = y1 + (1.772)2/2gy12
= y13 – 3.126y1 2+ 0.16 = 0
By trial and error y1= 0.235 m
Substituting the given parameter and solving the foregoing equation:
y1 = 0.235m
v1 = 1.772/ 0.235= 7.54m/s
The Froude number at the weir toe:
v
Fr 1= 1
√ g y1
Fr1 = 4.966
The sequent depth of the jump, y2:
y1 2
y 2= ( √ 1+8 Fr 1 −1 )
2
y2 = 1.54 m
q
v 2=
y2

v2 = 1.772/ 1.54 = 1.15m/s

v2
Fr 2=
√ g y2
Fr2 = 0.296
The Froude number changes from 4.966 to 0.296, the state of flow downstream of the weir changes
from supercritical to subcritical flow as a result hydraulic jump is formed downstream of the weir.
The formation of hydraulic jump downstream of the weir is used to dissipate energy in water
flowing over the weir and thus prevents scouring downstream from the structure. The length of the
jump can be estimated in terms of sequent depth for a given Froude number as presented in Figure
9(Chow, 1959)

37
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Hydraulic jump length (L) for Fr1=4.966, using equation L=5*(y2-y1 )=5*(1.54-0.235)= 6.5m

Figure 9: Length of the jump in terms of sequent depth of jump in horizontal channel
The criteria for the choice of type of energy dissipater type are governed by characteristics of the
jump and tail water depth.

3.3.5Scour depth determination

The riverbed may be scoured during flood flow and large scour holes may develop progressively
adjacent to the constructed headwork structures, which may cause undermining of the structure.
This in turn makes the structures out of their functions. Hence, to provide proper cutoff, it is
important to determine the scour depth. This depth can be computed by Lacey formula. And the
scour depth (R)) is given by;-

Where;
,
d = mean diameter of particle size in mm

The scour depth (R) again should be multiplied by proper scour factor which depends on the
condition of reach beds. As per Lacey theory the following bed conditions have been formulated as

38
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

general rule Considering the condition of the river bed is Heavy sand bed, the scour factor 2 is
adopted. Therefore,
R=1.35¿
3.3.6. Creep Length Estimation
The exit gradient according to the creep flow theory proposed by Bligh:
HL
¿=
L
Where; L = total creep length
d1 = the depths of the upstream cut-off piles
d2 = the downstream cut-off piles
b = horizontal floor length between the two piles
Hs = seepage head, is the difference in the water levels upstream and downstream of the intake
L=2 d 1+ B+ 2d 2=2 ×0.4 +2.4+ 2× 0.5=4 m
HL 1 HL
¿= = = ,Ge=1/6 from recommended value of Bligh safe hydraulic gradient
L 6 5.8
L 4
HL= = =0.67 m
¿ 6
Total creep length (LR) required as per Bligh
LR=C × HL=7 ×0.67=4.69m
Where,d1 and d2 are the US and DS sheet piles (cut-off) respectively.

3.3.7.Floor Thickness Estimation

The uplift upstream of the weir is balanced by the weight of water standing above the floor in the
pond. On the downstream side there may not be any such balancing water weight. As a result, the
impervious base floor may crack or rupture if its weight is not sufficient to resist the uplift pressure.
The thickness of the apron (floor) should be designed to resist the unbalanced head which result
from static head a pond level or dynamic head due to unbalance head in jump through at high flood
flow.
4 h'
t= ×
3 G−1

Where, h = residual head for static or dynamic case

(Different from weir height h).
G = Specific gravity of material of intake body.
= 2.3KN/m3 for concrete wall.
Actual creep length(LR)=2d1+2d2+LD+LU+B=2*0.4+2*0.4+4+4+2.4=12m
Seepage head=crest level-bed level=2.1m=weir hight
Residual head (h) at the toe of the weir wall
h 2.4
h ' =h− ( 2d 1+ LU +B )=2.4− ( 0.8+4 +2 )=1.04 m
LR 12

39
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

4 h' 4 1.04
t= × = × 1.0 No need of U/S and D/s apron b/c the river bed is hard rocks
3 G−1 3 ( 2.3−1)

3.3.8. Head Regulator/Canal outlet/

The head regulator is provided on the right side .The sill level of this head regulator is fixed from different
angle observations. Hence this level is fixed based on the optimum route alignment and the maximum
irrigated command level including minor and major losses criteria. Based on this condition, the sill level is
fixed to be 2684.128m.

• Outlet capacity
The minimum command area is determined by the minimum flow of the river. But the canal capacity should
be determined for maximum command area and the corresponding discharge. In this case the outlet capacity
is fixed considering maximum duty and command area and 1 correction factors are considered to account the
variation of duty.
1. Outlet capacity = Duty x command area x correction factor

Where, maximum duty for 18 hr irrigation = 1.1 L/s/ha

Command area = 17ha.
2. Outlet capacity = 1.1 L/s/ha x 17ha x1 = 18.7L/sec

Intake structure is provided at the right bank of the river to regulate the supply of water into the off-
taking canal; to control entry of silt and other material to the off-taking canal as well as to exclude
high flood entering into the off-taking canal. The intake gate is a vertical lifting gate of steel plate
running in a narrow groove formed by two standard angle iron sections.
The flow through the intake) is computed by submerged orifice formula:
Q=C d A √ 2 g H
Where Q = Design discharge of the intake = 0.0187 m3/sec
Cd- discharge coefficient, mostly taken as 0.60 for rectangular orifices
H = Working head = u/s water level – d/s water level for submerged orifice
H = Pond level (crest level) – Full supply level of the off-taking canal (FSL)
H= 2684.606-2684.15=
H = 0.45 m
The working head is equal to the sum of head loss in the regulator and the head required to pass the
full supply discharge into the off-taking canal (driving head)
H = h + hL=0.55m
Where h = driving head
hL = head loss in the regulator
The gate for head regulator is to be vertical sheet metal of size 0.3m x 0.3m and heigt=2m for the
closure of the opening space providing some extra dimensions for the groove insertion, gross area
of sheet metal for the gate will be 0.4m x 0.4m (allowing 5cm insertion for grooves & 10 cm over.
40
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

From the experience the calculated sheet metal thickness is to match then we recommend 4mm
thickness for sheet metal.

Figure 10: Gate detail

3.3.9. U/s and D/s Apron

Length of D/S impervious floor (Ld):-According to Bligh's;
HL
Ld=2.21 ×C ×
√
10
Where, C = Bligh's creep constant = 7 for most design (b/n 5 and 9).
HL=seepage head
HL 0.67
Ld=2.21 C ×
√ 10
=2.21 ×7
√ 10
=4 m

Length of U/S impervious floor (Lu):

The upstream impervious floor can be taken as the balance length:
LU = L- (LD+B+2d1+2d2)
LU=4-(4+2.4+0.8+0.8) =-4m Based on the geologic condition our site there is no d/s and u/s apron.
3.3.10. U/s and D/s Cut off

41
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

The upstream & d/s cut off depth is provided to the extent where scouring damage could extend
over the year. Based on the geologic information, expected hydraulic condition and the sediment
characteristics exhibited at the weir location this provision is considered sufficient.
d 2=1.5 R−D 3
Where, D3 =from rating curve
D3=1.51m
d 2=1.5 R−D 3=1.5× 0.71 m−1.008 m=0.057 m
Depth of upstream cutoff below the river bed.
d1 = 1.25R-(h+Hd)=1.25*0.71-(2.1+1.006)=-2.22m Based on the geologic condition our site we
take 0.4m d/s and u/s cut off for anchorage purpose.
3.4.Retaining wall design
As recommended in the river geology sub-section of this document, the right side bank of the river
needs provision of protection structure. Hence, masonry retaining wall along with main canal is
selected as protection work. It is designed as gravity wall type. Its stability is also checked against
overturning, sliding, and tension developed within the body of the structure. The height of
Maximum design flood governs the height of the wall with some free board provided.
3.4.1. Section of retaining wall
Top Width
b = 25 cm to H/12
4.55
Top width of u/s retaining wall, bU =4/6to 4/12 = 0.5m
12
bU = 0.50 m and the length of the retaining wall u/s of the weir for left side 4m and for right side
6m including the weir width.
Top width of d/s retaining wall, bD =2.8/6 to 2.8/12=0.35 m take 0.4m
 Length of retaining wall just d/s of the weir axis for the right side 4m and the left side 5m
Bottom width
Bottom width of retaining wall:
B = 1/2 H to 2/3 H
Bottom width of u/s retaining wall, Bu = 1/2 x 4 to 2/3 x 4 = 2 m to 2.667m
 We take BD = 2.4 m
Bottom width of d/s retaining wall Bd= 1/2x2.8 to 2/3 x2.8 = 1.4 m to 1.87 m
 We Take Bd = 1.6 m
3.4.2. Height of retaining wall
The height of retaining is fixed based on the water level upstream and downstream of the weir.
 Height of u/s retaining wall = HU = U/S HFL + FBU
Where;
FBU = Freeboard in upstream side
42
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

The river attains maximum water level on the u/s side of the weir when the peak flood passes
through the weir section. The water level at this stage becomes h + Hd
HU = h + Hd+ FBU= 2.1+ 1.006+ 0.5 =3.606 m
The minimum freeboard to be provided upstream of the weir at the maximum design discharge must
not be less than 0. 5 m (Baban, 1995)
HU = 3.606 m
The total height of retaining wall including the foundation:
HTU = HU + D
Where D = Depth of the foundation
Add found depth 0.4 meter below the river bed. Thus, the foundation depth for the retaining wall is
taken as 0.4 meter. Then total height of the retaining wall is 4.006 m
The total height of u/s retaining wall from the bottom of foundation
HTU = HU + D = 3.606+0.4=4m
 Height of d/s retaining wall = HD = y3 + FBD or HD = y2+FBJ whichever greater
Where y3 = tail water depth = 1.008m
y2 = Sequent depth of the jump = 1.54 m
FBD = Freeboard due to tail water depth
FBJ = Freeboard due to jump
The freeboard on the d/s due to jump is added to the side wall so that it will not be overtopped by
surges, splash and sprays and wave action set up by turbulence of the jump. The following
empirical expression provides value that has proved satisfactory for most basins (USBR, 1987).
FBJ = 0.1 (v1+y2)
Where;
v1 = velocity at the weir toe = 7.54 m/s
y2 = sequent depth of the jump = 1.54 m
FBJ = 0.1 x (7.54+1.54) = 0.908 m
Height of d/s retaining wall from jump consideration, HD= 1.54+0.908 = 2.448m
Height of retaining wall from tail water consideration, HD = 1.008+0.908= 1.916m,
Therefore, the height of d/s retaining wall is taken the largest of the two HD = 2.448m
The total height of d/s retaining wall including the foundation:
HTD = HD + D = 2.448 + 0.4=2.8m
3.4.3. Stability analysis of the retaining wall
Retaining wall is designed first to carry the earth pressure at the back of the wall. The critical
condition in the stability of the wall will be occurred when there is no flow in the u/s side while the
wall retains the earth at the back of the wall. Accordingly, the stability analysis will be carried for
this loading condition for both u/s and d/s retaining wall.
The following condition must be satisfied for the stability of masonry retaining wall:
 The development of tensile force in the masonry retaining wall always should be avoided.
 The maximum compressive stress developed at the base of the structure should not be
greater than the permissible limits of the stress for the masonry materials.
43
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

 In order to make the structure safe against sliding from its base, the value of horizontal
pressure (P) should always be less than the resisting force offered by the structure

Ws
H

W1
P

W2

B
Figure 11: Forces acting on retaining wall
The following values/parameters are adopted for the analysis based on the result of geotechnical
investigation and standard unit weight of the materials:
 Unit weight of the masonry = 23KN/m3
 Unit weight of dry compacted back fill at the back of retaining wall = 18 KN/m3
 Internal angle of friction = 40°
 Coefficient of friction between the masonry wall and the foundation = 0.65
Table20. Force and moment of u/s retaining wall
Symbol Forces (KN) Moment arm (m) Moment (KNm)
Value Direction
Wm1 46 2.15 98.9 +
Wm2 87.4 1.267 110.736 +
Ws 68.4 1.267 86.663 +
PsH 51.44 1.333 68.57 -
Summary ∑M+ 296.299
∑M- 68.57
∑Mnet 227.729
∑V 201.8
∑H 51.44

R= √∑ 2 ∑ 2
V + H = 208.25 KN, and the lever arm for the resultant force
∑ M net
r= = 1.09 m
R
e = B/2- r = 2.4/2- 1.09 = 0.11 m eccentricity

44
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

e < B/6 = 0.11<0.4 ok! There is no tension, and the resultant force lies within the middle third of the
bottom.

Table22. Force and moment of d/s retaining wall

Symbol Forces (KN) Moment arm (m) Moment (KN-m)
Value Direction
Wm1 25.76 1.4 36.06 +
Wm2 77.28 0.8 61.82 +
Ws 60.48 0.8 48.38 +
PsH 23.28 0.93 21.65 -
Summary ∑M+ 146.26
∑M- 21.65
∑Mnet 124.61
∑V 163.52
∑H 23.28

R= √∑ V 2+∑ H 2 = 165.17 KN, and the lever arm for the resultant force
∑ M net
r= = 0.754
R
e x= B/2- r = 1.6/2- 0.754 = 0.046.
e < B/6 = 0.046 <0.267 ok! There is no tension, and the resultant force lies within the middle third
of the bottom.
The result of the stability reveals that both u/s and d/s retaining wall is safe against tension,
overturning and sliding so that the dimension adopted for retaining wall is sufficient from stability
point of view.
Table23. Factor of safety for u/s and d/s retaining wall
U/S wing D/S wing
Factor of safety Criteria Evaluation
wall wall
F.S against over M +¿
Fo= −¿ ¿ 4.29>1.5 6.75>1.5 OK!
turning M >1.5 ¿
μ∑ V
F.S against sliding FSs= >1 1.524>1 2.74>1 OK!
∑H
net
B ∑M
Check for tension
2|
ex= −
∑V 6
<
B
| 0.071<0.4
0.037>0.26
7
OK!

Check for stress on ∑ V 1+ 6 e < P 107.21<15

the foundation
Pmax =
B ( B )
all
0
119.83<150 OK!

We take the allowable bearing pressure of compacted uniform sands=150KN/m2

45
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

4.1 IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE SYSTEMS DESIGN

4.2 IRRIGABLE AREA DESCRIPTION

4.1.1. Topography and soil
Topography is an important factor for the planning of any irrigation project so long as it influences
the method of irrigation, drainage, erosion, costs of land development, mechanization, labour
requirement and choice of crops.The soils of the command area are predominantly heavy clay
textured soils (Vertisols). These soils are in general suitable for crops to grow.During the field
survey period, it has been checked that there are no modern irrigation structures in the project area.
However, traditional irrigated crop production is being practiced in the proposed command area by
diverting the river water using traditional canals. Farmers of the project Keble have strong demand
on the transformation of the existing traditional irrigation to modern irrigation scheme. Hence, this
project is designed to irrigate 17ha of land by using lined canal irrigations.

4.1.2. Climate
As per the hydrological analysis and on the basis of the traditional Ethiopian Agro-Ecological
Zones (MOA, 2001), the UGDWIP area is basically classified as Moist dega (sub-moist cool) agro-
ecological zone, indicating better moisture condition in the area in wet seasons. There is no belg
rain season in the project area Despite the fact that the Maher rains are considered adequate, there is
notable variation in terms of onset, distribution and withdrawal from year to year affecting crop
production in general and crop productivity in particular. As the project site has no its own
meteorological station Dejen (for rainfall and minimum and maximum temperature) and (for
relative humidity, wind speed and sunshine hour) meteorological stations data were used for the
project study as long as these stations are relatively near to the proposed command area. In general,
the sources of meteorological data are the National Meteorology Service Agency (NMSA).

4.1.3. Soil characteristics

Soil properties (physical, chemical, etc.) greatly influence the growth and thereby yield of crops
which is grown. The command area has predominantly clay loam textured soils which can be
classified as moderately drained soil.

4.1.4.Existing irrigation practices

At present 1.5ha of land is under full irrigation during the dry season at the project area. Besides,
13ha of command area receive supplementary irrigation for annual crop production due to the
existence of uneven & insufficient rainfall distribution throughout the annual crops growth and
maturity period. Hence, to increase the agricultural product of the project both in full &
supplementary irrigation proper utilization of the natural resource like soil & water is very essential

46
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

task. Currently there is much water lose & soil degradation both at the proposed headwork site &
along the existing earthen canal. Conserving these natural resources & scaling up the degree of
utilization are the basic tasks at the project.

In the future, ambo irrigation project will cover 17ha of land, which can benefit 34 households
assuming one family head holds only one fourth of a hectare of land

4.2.Irrigation water requirement

The aim of water requirement analysis is to determine the quantity of water required for the growth
of a plant, which serves as the basis for the design of irrigation canal and other structures. The
determination of irrigation water requirement therefore needs the study and analysis of cropping
pattern, estimation of crop water requirement, estimation of effective rainfall and estimation of
irrigation efficiency.
4.2.1.Crop water requirements
Crop water requirement is defined as the total water needed for evapotranspiration from planting to harvest
for a given crop in a specific climatic regime when adequate soil water is maintained by rainfall and/or
irrigation so that it does not limit plant growth and crop yield. Water is needed mainly to meet the demands
of evaporation, transpiration and metabolic activities of the plant. The most important and initial step for
planning, designing and implementation of irrigation projects is the determination of crop water
requirements.

4.2.3. Irrigation duty

Irrigation duty is the volume of water required per hectare for the full flange of the crops. Moreover, it helps
in designing an efficient irrigation lined canal system. The area, which will be irrigated, can be calculated by
knowing the total available water at the source and the overall duty for all crops required to be irrigated in
different seasons of the years. The proposed cropping pattern of ambo diversion irrigation project has
showed a maximum net irrigation water requirement (NIWR) in the month of February with the amount of 4
mm/day for 24 working hours (for overall proposed crops). However, for the designing of the irrigation
water application from the overall proposed crops the one that has maximum NIWR was used for irrigation
duty calculation. Accordingly, potato has showed the maximum NIWR (i.e. 5.67 mm/day); and hence taken
for the irrigation project duty calculation as indicated here below: Forambo River Diversion Irrigation
Project, it decided to adopt 62% field application efficiency, 90% distribution canal efficiency, and 95%
conveyance efficiency as the soil is clay loam textured . Hence, the overall/project efficiency for the selected
surface irrigation method has been estimated to 74.5% (62/100*95/100*90/100) which is rounded to 75%.
For the designing of the project, the GIWR is given as follows:
GIWR = 5.67/0.75 = 7.56 [mm/day]
The GIWR, 7.56 mm/day, represents the daily quantity of water that is required to be applied.
The duty is calculated by:
Duty (D) = GIWR × 1000 × 10 / (t × 60×60)
Where; Duty – the duty [l/s/ha]
GIWR – Gross Irrigation Requirement [mm/day]
t – Daily irrigation or flow hours [hrs]
47
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

The duty for the GIWR of 7.56 mm/day and 18 hours of daily irrigation time (t = 18), is supported to be used
with furrow irrigation method. Hence, Duty for 18 working hours, as the site is nearer to farmers’ village and
local farmers have experiences in irrigation, is computed as follows:
D = (7.56 x 1000 x 10) / (18 x 3600) = 1.1l/s/ha
Irrigation water requirement is the basis for determination of irrigation system capacity. For Ambo
project the maximum duty (dry season) calculated for 18 hour daily irrigation period is found to be
1.11/sec/ha. As indicated in the hydrology part under water balance sub-section of this document,
the base flow of Ambo River is 19.2l/s. And 17ha of command area exist at the project area.
4.3. Irrigation Canals alignment and design

4.3.1. Irrigation Canals Layout

Although the irrigation scheme layout has to be prepared taking into consideration the general
topography of the land and the soil characteristics, in this specific site condition, there are layouts of
conveyance & distribution traditionally. Hence, in addition to the modifications of existing layout,
some new layouts have been made. The source of water for the project is Ambo River. Water is
taken to the irrigation area through gravity system from weirstructure. The conveyance system
consists of a Main Canal (MC) taking water from the corresponding weir structure. The Main canal
starts from the weir on the right side of the river bank and conveys water for a length of 140m and
delivers water to field canals at different point as shown on the topographic map. The main canal
conveys water continuously. The field canals are designated as distribution system. They convey
water continuously. But for practical case field canals are operated on rotational basis. In addition to
making new layout, modification of the existing distribution system has been made.

4.3. Hydraulic Design of irrigation canals

4.3.1. Main Canal

The canal capacity was determined based on crop water requirements prepared for the proposed
cropping pattern. The maximum design capacity of the main canal adopted for 17ha is 24 l/sec
based on a duty of 1.1l/sec/ha for 18 hour daily irrigation cycle with 53% efficiency. For the first
140m length, it is masonry lined and rectangular in shape. TheDesigns of the main canal dimensions
are under taken by using Manning’s equation.
1
Q= n
AR 2 / 3 S1 /2
, R=A/P
3
WhereQ = Design discharge, m /s
R = Hydraulic radius of the canal, m
A = Wetted cross sectional area of canal, m2
P = Wetted Perimeter, m
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient
S = Bed slope of the canal

48
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Table24: Hydraulic Parameters of Main

Partial
Northin Distanc Chainag Design Bank CUT(m Fill(m
g Easting e e Elevation CBL level level ) ) slope
400566 1177014 0 0 2684.9489 2684.15 2684.65 2684.85 0.80 0.00 150.00
400552.5 1177000 20.0 20 2684.4901 2684.02 2684.52 2684.72 0.47 0.23
400533.3 1176994 20.0 40 2684.4636 2683.88 2684.38 2684.58 0.58 0.12
400515.8 1176984 20.0 60 2684.3205 2683.75 2684.25 2684.45 0.57 0.13
400499.6 1176972 20.0 80 2684.2403 2683.62 2684.12 2684.32 0.62 0.08
400481.5 1176962 20.0 100 2684.2339 2683.48 2683.98 2684.18 0.75 0.00
400462.9 1176954 20.0 120 2683.8895 2683.35 2683.85 2684.05 0.54 0.16
400444.7 1176945 20.0 140 2683.7896 2683.22 2683.72 2683.92 0.57 0 150

Average Area of Cut Area of Fill Average Area of Fill

  depth Area of cut
OFF
TAKE 0.70 2.24 0.00 0.00 0.00
CANAL   1.33 1.78 0.45 0.23
CANAL   1.63 1.48 0.24 0.34
CANAL   1.60 1.61 0.26 0.25
CANAL   1.75 1.67 0.15 0.20
canal   2.10 1.93 0.00 0.08
CANAL   1.51 1.81 0.32 0.16
CANAL   1.61 1.56 0.25 0.29

Volume of Massonry Massonry

PLASTERING CUM.VOL.CUT
Fill Area (m2) volume(m3)
0.00 1.04 0.00 0 0.00
4.51 1.04 20.80 56 35.68
6.89 1.04 20.80 56 65.24
4.94 1.04 20.80 56 97.52
4.08 1.04 20.80 56 131.01
1.51 1.04 20.80 56 169.54
3.19 1.04 20.80 56 205.72
5.71 1.04 20.80 56 236.93

49
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Lined canal shape (from 0+00 to 00+2683.906m)

FB

A = B*D
P = 2D*B
D R = A/P

Figure 12: Lined Canal Section View

Table 25: Main canal hydraulic parameter
Hydraulic Parameters
Cana
Q F V=
l Are Duty Peri Q
Chainage req D b Ar R=A 1/n*
nam a (m3/s B met S n des.
(m3/s (m) ( ea /P R(2/3)*
e (ha) /ha) er (m3/s)
) m) S0.5
(0+00- 0.001 0.018 0. 0. 0.1 0.00 0.07
M.C
0+60
17
1 7 3
0.3
2 5
0.9 0.167
1
0.02 0.48
2
(0+60- 16.3 0.001 0.018 0. 0.3 0. 0.1 0.9 0.167 0.00 0.07
M.C
0+140) 5 1 0 3 2 5 1 0.02 0.48
2

50
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

5. Bill of Quantity
It includes the estimation of the cost of material & activities to be accomplished.
Table 26 :General Item cost estimation

Item Rate Amount

Unit Quantity
No Description (Birr) (Birr)
30
L.S 1
1.1 Allow for mobilization 00 3000
20
L.S 1 2000
1.2 Allow for demobilization 00
Allow for contraction camp and facilities =4*5m2,
Living room & 0ffices for construction key
20
1.3 personnel, CIS and Interminably painted chip wood No 2
000 40000
wall, Masonry floor cement screened and well
ventilated room complete with doors and windows.
Dewatering of open trenches and excavations, 60
LS 1
1.4 pumps 00 6000
Total 51000
Total for General Items 51000

51
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

Table27: BILL OF QUANTITIES, SPECIFICATION AND COST ESTIMATE

SNO Item of work Unit Quantity Unit rate  

A Weir body        

1 Earth Excavation work

1.1 Site clearance of soil to a depth of 20cm M2 126 10.08 1270.08

1.2 Ordinary soil excavation of the weir body m3 66.55 70.06 4662.493
1.3 Hard rock excavation of 0.4 m depth of weir m3 9.6 315 3024
body
1.4 Masonry work of weir body 1:3 mix ratio m3 33.63 1533.04 51556.135
1.5 Concrete work of bottom weir body by 0.4m M3 9.6 2475.54 23765.184
depth of C-20/1:2:3/mix ratio
1.6 Plastering of weir body with 1:3 mix15mm m2 74 261.9 19380.6
thickness first coaching and 5mm thickness
second coaching
2 Upstream cut off    
2.1 Hard rock excavation to a depth of 0.4m, m3 2 315 630
length 10 m, and 0.5 m thickness
2.2 Concrete of c-20/1:2:3/mix ratio, and 0.5 m m3 2 2475.54 4951.08
thick, 10 m length, 0.4m depth
3 Downstream cut off    

3.1 Hard rock excavation to a depth of 0.4m, m3 2 315 630

length 10 m, and 0.65m thickness
3.2 Concrete of c-20/1:2:3/mix ratio, and 0.4 m m3 2 2475.54 4951.08
thick, 10 m length, 0.3m depth
4 Upstream retaining walls    
4.1 Excavation of soil m3 85.8 70.06 6011.148
4.2 Masonry work with 1:3 mix mortar m3 63.8 1533.04 97807.952
4.3 Plastering of retaining wall in the water m2 49.5 261.9 12964.05
surface with 1:3 mix 15mm thickness first
coaching and 5mm thickness second coaching
4.4 Backfill with selected material at the back of m3 76 67.2 5107.2
the retaining wall
5 Downstream retaining walls    
3
5.1 Excavation of soil m 50.4 70.06 3531.024
5.2 Masonry work with 1:3 mix mortar m3 25.52 1533.04 39123.18

5.3 Plastering of the water surface with 1:3 mix m2 36 261.9 9428.4
52
 Ambo Small Scale Irrigation Project Engineering Design Document

mortar 15mm thickness first coaching and

5mm thickness second coaching
5.4 Backfill with selected material at the back of m3 37.7 67.2 2533.44
the retaining wall
Sub total 0

B Irrigation Infrastructure
6 Irrigation canal    
6.1 Ordinary Soil excavation for 150m length and m3 236.93 70.06 16599.32
average depth of 0.8m.
6.2 Masonry with 1:3 mix m3 145.6 1533.04 223210.62
6.3 Plastering with 1:3 mix 15mm thickness first m2 392 261.9 102664.8
coaching and 5mm thickness second coaching
7 Gate Installation
7.1 irrigation intake gate 40cm*40cm,4mm No 1 10000 10000
thick sheetmetal with 60mm diameter
&2m height of spindle
Sub total 352474.74

8 Access road work m 400 200 88000

Community
participation
total

Table 28: Total project cost

Total project costs

SUMMARY OF BILLS
Bill No. Description Amount (Birr)

1 General Items 51000

2 Headwork 0
3 Irrigation Infrastructure 352474.74
4 Community participation 88000
Total 782801.786

Contingency (5%) 339140.089

Grand Total 821941.875
VAT (15%) 123291.281
Grand Total with VAT 945233.256
Command Area(ha) 17.00
Per hectare Cost without VAT 42914.228
Cost Per hectare with VAT 49351.4

53
 የአነስተኛወንዝጠለፋፕሮጀክትየስራዝርዝር

ሠንጠረዥ-1:- አጠቃላይነገር/እቃ/General Items/ የስራመጠን

መ
ተ መ የአንዱዋ ጠቅላላዋ
ለ
ጠ ጋ/ብር/ሳ ጋ/ብርሳን
. ኪ
ን ንቲም ቲም
ቁ የስራዝርዝር ያ
1
. የስራመሳሪያናእቃዎችንወደሳይት 1
1 ለመውሰድ/Allow for mobilization/ /L.S/
ጥ
1 ቅ
. ል/ 1
2 ስራመሳሪያናየተረፉየስራእቃዎችንስራዉ L.
ሲያበቃከሳይትለመመለስ/Allow for demobilization/ S/
ለተቋራጩግንባታእቃዎችማስቀመጫናመኖሪያየሚያገለግል -4*5 ሜ 2
የቁሳቁስማስቀመጫእሰቶርናለተቋራጩቢሮግድግዳውቆርቆሮበቆርቆሮበውስጥበኩልከም
ፖርሳቶየሆነ፣ወለሉንሲሚንቶግንባታእናሙሉመዝጊያናመስኮትያለውናቤንቲሌቲንግሲስ
1 ተምያለውመሆንአለበት፡፡/ Allow for contraction camp and facilities ቁ
. =4*5m2, Living room & 0ffices for construction key personnel, ጥ 2
3 ር
CIS and Interminably painted chip wood wall, Masonry floor
cement screened and well ventilated room complete with doors
and windows./
ጥ
1 ቅ
. የውሃማስወገጃግዚያዊክፍትቦይ፣ግዚያዊየወንዝጠለፋስራእናበሞተርየወንዙንውሃየማሶገ ል/ 1
4 ድስራመስራት፡፡/ Dewatering of open trenches and excavations, L.
pumps/ S/

አጠቃላይዋጋ

ሠንጠረዥ- 2-የአምቦ ወንዝጠለፋአናትስራመጠን

 AMBO SMALL SCALE PROJECT ENGINEERING DRAFT REPORT

የአንዱዋጋ ጠቅላላዋጋ
ተ. ቁ የስራዝርዝር መለኪያ መጠን
/ብር/ሳቲ /ብር/ሳቲ

 
ሀ የወንዝጠለፋአናትስራ      

AGRICULTURAL GROWTH PROGAM/AGP/ 55

 AMBO SMALL SCALE PROJECT ENGINEERING DRAFT REPORT

1.0 የመሬትቁፋሮስራ
1.1. ግንባተውየሚሰራበትንቦታበ 20 ሜ2 126
ሴንቲሜትርጥልቀትየማጥዳትስራመስራት/ site clearing at an average
depth 20cm/
1.2 የወንዝጠለፋአናትተራ/የተለመደ/ አፈርየቁፋሮስራመስራት/Ordinary soil  ሜ 3 66.55
excavation of the weir body/
1.3 የወንዝጠለፋአናትጠንካራአለት 0.4 ሜ ጥልቀትመቆፈር /Hard rock  ሜ 3 9.6
excavation of 0.4 m depth of weir body /
1.4 የወንዝጠለፋአካልየግንባታስራ በ 1፡3 ቅልቅልመስራት/ Masonry work of  ሜ 3 33.63
weir body 1:3 mix ratio/
1.5 ታችኛውየወንዝጠለፋአካልከአለቱጋርበኮንከሪትግንባታ በ 1:2:3 ቅልቅልስራ  ሜ 3 9.6
በ 0.4 ሜ ጥልቀትመስራት/ Concrete work of bottom weir body by
0.4m depth of
C-20/1:2:3/mix ratio/
1.6 የወንዝጠለፋአካሉንበ 1:3 ቅልቅል 15 ሚ.ሜ ዉፍርትልስንስራ ደረጃ 1 እና 74
5 ሚ.ሜ ደረጃ 2 መስራት/ Plastering of weir body with 1:3 mix
15mm thickness first coaching and 5mm thickness second
coaching/ ሜ2
2 ላይኛውየቆረጣስራ/ Upstream cut off/
2.1 የላይኛውጠንካራአለትየቆረጣስራ 0.4 ሜ ጥልቀት፣በ 10 ሜ ርዝመትና 2
0.5 ሜ ስፋትመቆፈር / Hard rock excavation to a depth of 0.4m,
length 10 m, and 0.5 m thickness/ ሜ3
2.2 የላይኛወንዝጠለፋአካልየቆራጣስራከአለቱጋርበኮንከሪትግንባታ በ 1:2:3  ሜ 3 2
ቅልቅልስራ 0.4 ሜ ጥልቀት፣በ 10 ሜ ርዝመትና 0.5 ሜ ስፋትመስራት/
Concrete work of bottom weir body by depth of 0.4m, length 10
m, and 0.5 m thickness of C-20/1:2:3/mix ratio/
3 የታችኛውየቆረጣስራ
3.1 የታችኛውጠንካራአለትየቆረጣስራ 0.4 ሜጥልቀት፣በ 10 ሜርዝመትና   ሜ 3 2
0.5 ሜስፋትመቆፈር / Hard rock excavation to a depth of
0.4m, length 10 m, and 0.5 m thickness/
3.2 የታችኛውወንዝጠለፋአካልየቆራጣስራከአለቱጋርበኮንከሪትግንባታበ 1:   ሜ 3 2
2:3 ቅልቅልስራ 0.4 ሜጥልቀት፣በ 10 ሜርዝመትና
0.5 ሜስፋትመስራት/ Concrete work of bottom weir body by
depth of 0.4m, length 10 m, and 0.5 m thickness of C-
20/1:2:3/mix ratio/
4 የላይኛውየክንፍስራ/ Upstream retaining walls/
4.1 የላይኛውክንፍየቁፋሮስራመስራት/Ordinary soil Excavation of U/s  ሜ 3 85.8
retaining wall/
4.2 የላይኛውክንፍ በ 1:3 ቅልቅልስራመስራት/ Masonry work with 1:3 63.8
mix mortar of U/s retaining wall /
4.3 የላይኛውክንፍየልስን 1:3 ቅልቅል 15 ሚ.ሜውፍረት ደረጃ 1 እና 5 ሚ.ሜ ሜ2 49.5
ደረጃ 2 ስራመስራት/Plastering of retaining wall in the water
surface with 1:3 mix 15mm thickness first coaching and
5mm thickness second coaching
4.4 የላይኛውክንፍመሰረትበቀይአፈርመጠቅጠቅ/Backfill with selected ሜ3 76
material at the back of the retaining wall/
5 የታችኛውክንፍስራ/Downstream retaining walls/
5.1 የታችኛውክንፍየቁፋሮስራመስራት/ Ordinary soil Excavation of ሜ3 50.4
U/s retaining wall/
5.2 የታችኛውክንፍበ 1:3 ቅልቅልስራመስራት/ Masonry work with 25.52
1:3 mix mortar of U/s retaining wall /
5.3 የታችኛውክንፍየልስን 1:3 ቅልቅል 15 ሚ.ሜውፍረትደረጃ 1 እና ሜ2 36

AGRICULTURAL GROWTH PROGAM/AGP/ 56

 AMBO SMALL SCALE PROJECT ENGINEERING DRAFT REPORT

5 ሚ.ሜደረጃ 2 ስራመስራት/Plastering of retaining wall in the

water surface with 1:3 mix 15mm thickness first coaching
and 5mm thickness second coaching
5.4 የላይኛውክንፍመሰረትበቀይአፈርመጠቅጠቅ/Backfill with ሜ3 37.7
selected material at the back of the retaining wall/
ንዑስድምር-ሀ /Sub total/
ለ የመስኖመሰረተልማት/Irrigation Infrasturucture/
6 የመስኖቦይስራ/Irrigation canal/
6.1 የመስኖቦይተራ/የተለመደ/ አፈርቁፈሮ 140 ሜ ሜ3 236.93
ርዝመትአማካኝጥልቀት 0.8 ሜ/Ordinary Soil excavation
for 140m length and average depth of 0.8m./
6.2 የመስኖቦይ/የግንባታስራ በ 1፡3 ቅልቅል/Masonry with 1:3 mix/ ሜ3 145.6
6.3 የመስኖቦይልስንበ 1:3 ቅልቅል 15 ሚ.ሜውፍረትደረጃ 1 እና ሜ2 392
5 ሚ.ሜደረጃ 2 ስራመስራት/Plastering with 1:3 mix 15mm
thickness first coaching and 5mm thickness second
coaching/
7 የወንዝጠለፋመውጫበርስራ/Gate Installation/
7.1 የመስኖቦይየውሃመውጫ 40 ሳ.ሜ*40 ሳ.ሜ*4 ሚ.ሜ ቁጥር
ውፍረትጠፍጣፉዝርግብርት ከ 60 ሚ.ሜ
ዲያሜትርቤርጋጋርእናባለ 2 ሜ ከፍታማዞሪያ/irrigation
intake gate 40cm*40cm,4mm thicknes sheet of metal with
60mm diameter &2m height of spindle/ 1
ንዑስድምር-ለ /Sub total/
8 የሳይትመግቢያመንገድማስተካከል/ጠረጋ/ m 400 የማህበረሰብ
ስራመስራት/Access road work/ ----------- ተሳትፎስራ
አጠቃለይድምር

ሠንጠረዥ-3: አጠቃላይየፕሮጆክትየስራመጠን
አጠቃላይየፕሮጆክትየስራመጠን
አጠቃላይየስራመጠን
ተ.ቁ የስራዝርዝር/Description/ መጠን/በብር/Amount (Birr)

1 አጠቃላይነገር/እቃ/General Items/ የስራመጠን

2 የወንዝጠለፋአናትየስራመጠን
3 የመስኖመሰረተልማት
አጠቃላይድምር
ቫት (15%)
አጠቃላይድምርከቫትጋር

AGRICULTURAL GROWTH PROGAM/AGP/ 57

AMBO SMALL SCALE PROJECT ENGINEERING DRAFT REPORT

6.OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

6.1.GENERAL
The main objective of the operation and maintenance aspect of an irrigation scheme is to
facilitate the timely delivery of the required irrigation water to farms and to keep the
irrigationsystem in an optimum operating condition. This section therefore, discusses the main
functionsof the subject matter under consideration for the scheme.

6.2.IRRIGATION SYSTEM OPERATION

6.2.1.Method of operation

The farmers would organize themselves and form groups (water user association-WUA) in order
to handle the water management. Rotational water distribution would be applied within the
group. The rotational distribution is then to distribute water by turn to the whole scheme
according to the timely need of crop water requirement. For better and efficient water
management, crop diversification should be avoided within a group. This would reduce the
complexity of water distribution system of the scheme during one irrigation season. At farmers’
level of operation, a constant flow and variable irrigation time is advisable. To ensure equitable
distribution of water the amount of water released through field canals should be proportional to
the available command area.
 Due to the above reasons;

 Field canals rotational system has been arranged

 In order to minimize the water losses during conveyance and application:

 Water users association (WUA) should assign gate keeper who is responsible to
control unnecessary gate opening, damage and losses through gates.

 Every damage on the canal system, and gates should be followed by the WUA and
immediate action should be undertaken.

 For technical failure beyond the capacity of the local community should be
informed to the Wereda irrigation and immediate action should be taken.

 Frequent supervision to the canal system is needed. Remove silt, weed, and any flow
blocking objects from the canal system.

 Water application should be done by furrow rather than flooding.

 Water application should be based on the proposed irrigation hour and rotation. This
will reduce water application losses

AGRICULTURAL GROWTH PROGAM/AGP/ 58

AMBO SMALL SCALE PROJECT ENGINEERING DRAFT REPORT

6.2.2.Methods of Maintenance
The maintenance tasks are categorized into two types: - routine activities, and repairs. The
routine maintenance activities that are carried out periodically include:-
- Regular cleaning of sediments and weeds from canals and drains;
- Inspection and lubrication of gates; and
- Maintenance of cracked lined canals, regulating and control structures.

Repair works include task carried out more frequently and quickly, and include those task that
are generally unpredictable. They also include emergency works. The activities included in this
category are:-
- Repairing overtopped or breached canals;
- Repairing jammed gates;.
Regular inspection of the irrigation facilities should be carried out as part of the maintenance
activities. These tasks could be carried out immediately after the end of the main rains in
September and during the rainy season. This could concentrate on the interceptor drains and the
flood protection works, the main canal and the field drains.

AGRICULTURAL GROWTH PROGAM/AGP/ 59

AMBO SMALL SCALE PROJECT ENGINEERING DRAFT REPORT

7.CONCLUSIONS& RECOMMENDATIONS

Traditionally, there is an irrigation practices from Ambo river water source at the project area.
From time to time the irrigation practice shows a change or growth. There are much water losses
at diversion point and along the conveyance & distribution system. This implementation of this
project maximizes the efficient utilization of the existing water resource by minimizing losses of
water.The designs of each of these structures with their working drawings have been executed.
Though the banks & bed of river are designed to make them stable, continues removal of silt
(may be annual) from the headwork at the entry line of water to the weir outlet has be done by
project beneficiaries. All headwork structures should be constructed as per their design. But,
when the site engineer encounter the problem can make modification on the design with clear
justification.
The project is proposed both for supplementary & fully irrigation system. For supplementary of
annual crops, more than 17ha of command area will be in irrigation development. Tofulfil or to
bring the objective of the project to reality, the designs of headwork structures such as retaining
wall, gates and infrastructure such as conveyance have been executed .In the case of conveyance
& distribution structure, there is one main canal length of 140m is designed to be lined.

AGRICULTURAL GROWTH PROGAM/AGP/ 60

AMBO SMALL SCALE PROJECT ENGINEERING DRAFT REPORT

REFERENCE

 Hydraulic structural design guide line for small scale irrigation project in Amhara region
 Ethiopian Ministry of irrigation department manual(IDD)
 PART 1-3F design guide lines on diversion structure
 ARORA, K.R., Irrigation Water Power and Water Resources Engineering, Professor of
Civil Engineering, Engineering College, Kota (Raj.)
 Irrigation Engineering And Hydraulic Structure (Garge)
 Chow, V.T., Maidment, D., and Mays, L. W., (1988). Applied Hydrology. McGraw Hill.
 Continental Consultants, ESRDF Manual, Volume IV; Irrigation Engineering Practice
 Hydrology and weir design manual

AGRICULTURAL GROWTH PROGAM/AGP/ 61