Wollega University

Shambu Campus

Faculty of Technology

Department of Water Resources and Irrigation Engineering (WRIE)

2025
Drainage Engineering Module

Abebe Besha (MSc)

Wollega University
4/25/2025
 Drainage Engineering Module

Objective of the Course

students will be understanding irrigated agriculture, soil salinity, drainage for salinity control
and land reclamation. At the end of the course students are able to know the different
components of surface and sub-surface drainage systems, design surface and subsurface
drainage systems for irrigated agriculture and water logged areas and also be aware about the
importance of surface, sub-surface drainage and soil salinity control for Irrigated agriculture.

Learning Outcomes

At the end of the course students will be able to:

 Understand soil salinity, drainage for salinity control and land reclamation,
 Know the different components of surface and sub-surface drainage systems,
 Design surface and subsurface drainage systems for irrigated agriculture and water
logged areas,
 Know interrelationship between drainage and agricultural productivity,
 Know the impacts of drainage on the agricultural lands,
 Apply skills required in operation and maintenances of the components of drainage
systems.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) I

 Drainage Engineering Module

Table of Contents
Objective of the Course ........................................................................................................................... I
Learning Outcomes .................................................................................................................................. I
Chapter one ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1. Introduction to drainage Engineering ............................................................................................. 1
1.1 What is drainage? ................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 History of Land Drainage......................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Main objective of land drainage ............................................................................................. 4
1.4 Techniques and Components of Drainage .............................................................................. 5
1.4.1 technique of field drainage systems ............................................................................... 8
1.5 Design Considerations for Land Drainage ............................................................................. 15
1.6 Drainage system layout......................................................................................................... 17
1.7 Importance of Drainage ........................................................................................................ 20
1.7.1 Drainage to Control Water Ponding.............................................................................. 20
1.7.2 Drainage to Control Water logging ............................................................................... 20
1.7.3 Drainage to Control Salinization ................................................................................... 21
Chapter two .......................................................................................................................................... 22
2. Factors Related to Drainage.......................................................................................................... 22
2.1 Drainage as part of an agricultural development project..................................................... 22
2.2 Agricultural Objectives of Drainage ...................................................................................... 24
2.2.1 Objectives and Effects ................................................................................................... 24
2.3 Field drainage system and crop production ......................................................................... 25
2.4 Water table and Crop Production ......................................................................................... 27
2.5 Water table and Soil Conditions ........................................................................................... 28
2.6 Environmental Aspects of Drainage...................................................................................... 32
2.6.1 Side-effects inside the Project Area .............................................................................. 33
2.6.2 Side-effects outside the Project Area ........................................................................... 37
2.7 Soil and Hydrological Conditions of Drainage ....................................................................... 40
2.7.1 Water table ................................................................................................................... 40
2.7.2 Depth to the Water table .............................................................................................. 41
2.7.3 Groundwater Quality .................................................................................................... 42
2.7.4 Drainage Surplus ........................................................................................................... 43
2.7.5 Hydraulic Conductivity .................................................................................................. 44
2.7.6 Drainable Pore Space .................................................................................................... 46

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) II

 Drainage Engineering Module

2.7.7 Topography ................................................................................................................... 47

2.7.8 Impermeable Layers...................................................................................................... 48
Chapter three ........................................................................................................................................ 49
3. Surface drainage systems ............................................................................................................. 49
3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 49
3.2 Components of surface drainage systems ............................................................................ 50
3.2.1 Land forming, land shaping and land grading ............................................................... 50
3.3 Design of surface drainage systems...................................................................................... 58
3.3.1 Design criteria ............................................................................................................... 58
3.3.2 Drainage design equations............................................................................................ 64
3.3.3 Hydraulic design of surface drainage ............................................................................ 65
3.4 Maintenance of surface drains ............................................................................................. 68
3.5 Economics of surface drains ................................................................................................. 70
3.5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 70
3.5.2 Computation of costs and benefits for economic analysis ........................................... 71
3.5.3 Indices for Economic evaluation ................................................................................... 72
Chapter Four ......................................................................................................................................... 77
4. Sub-Surface Drainage Systems...................................................................................................... 77
4.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 77
4.2 Components of sub-surface drainage system ...................................................................... 77
4.3 Types of sub surface drainage systems................................................................................. 77
4.4 Design of depth and spacing of sub-surface drainage systems ............................................ 79
4.4.1 Design criteria ............................................................................................................... 79
4.4.2 Principles of the Drainage Equations. ........................................................................... 80
4.5 Drainage to control water logging ...................................................................................... 104
4.6 Construction and maintenance of sub surface drains ........................................................ 105
4.7 Economics of sub-surface drains ........................................................................................ 110
4.7.1 Net Present Value (NPV) ............................................................................................. 110
4.7.2 Benefit-Cost Ratio (B-C Ratio) ..................................................................................... 110
4.7.3 Internal Rate of Return (IRR) ....................................................................................... 110
4.8 Special Drainage Situations ................................................................................................. 111
4.8.1 Compound drainage system (surface and sub-surface) ............................................. 111
4.8.2 Drainage of Sloping Lands ........................................................................................... 112
4.8.3 Tube well drainage system ......................................................................................... 114

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) III

 Drainage Engineering Module

4.8.4 Interceptor Drainage ................................................................................................... 116

Chapter five ......................................................................................................................................... 121
5. Soil Salinity .................................................................................................................................. 121
5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 121
5.2 Dissolved salt in the ground water ..................................................................................... 122
5.2.1 Sources of Dissolved Salts in Groundwater: ............................................................... 122
5.3 Measuring ground water salinity ........................................................................................ 123
5.4 Soil Salinity Test .................................................................................................................. 123
5.5 Salinization due to irrigation ............................................................................................... 124
5.6 Drainage for salinity control ................................................................................................ 126
5.6.1 Types of Drainage Systems for Salinity Control .......................................................... 126
5.7 Land reclamation techniques for salt affected soils. .......................................................... 126
5.7.1 Types of Reclamation Techniques .............................................................................. 126
5.7.2 Reclamation of Alkali Soils .......................................................................................... 129
5.7.3 Reclamation of Acidic Soils ......................................................................................... 130
References .......................................................................................................................................... 133

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) IV

 Drainage Engineering Module

Chapter one

1. Introduction to drainage Engineering

These lecture notes deal with drainage of agricultural lands with special emphasis on irrigated
agriculture. When irrigation is introduced in an area to improve crop production two important
risks on the natural environment are those of water logging and salinization. Drainage can be
used to reduce or eliminate these negative effects of irrigation. Because drainage is a subject
which is at least as comprehensive as irrigation, just a small part of the possible subjects that
deal with drainage can be discussed.

1.1 What is drainage?

Land drainage—the removal of excess water via open ditches, subsurface tile drains, vertical
drains, or through the creation of dikes and pumping the water out from embanked areas—is
widely used not only in agriculture but also in the forestry industry, municipal and industrial
construction, the mining industry, the construction of sport facilities, and the organization of
recreation zones. Land drainage, or the combination of irrigation and land drainage, is one of
the most important input factors to maintain or to improve yields per unit of farmed land.

Land drainage allows humans to bring low-productive areas (marshes, the sea bottom,
inundated and waterlogged territories around water storage basins, etc.) into agricultural use
and to raise the efficiency of farming.

The definition of land drainage, as given in the constitution of the International Commission
on Irrigation and Drainage/ICID (1 979), reads:

‘Land drainage is the removal of excess surface and subsurface water from the land to enhance
crop growth, including the removal of soluble salts from the soil.

1.2 History of Land Drainage

Land drainage has a long history: the first drainage systems were created in Ancient Egypt,
China, and India as early as in the third millennium BC. Since that time drainage technology
has improved considerably, in parallel with the general scientific and technical progress of our
civilization.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 1

 Drainage Engineering Module

Records from the old Indus civilizations (i.e. the Mohenjo-Daro and the Harappa) show that
‘around 2500 B.C. the Indus Valley was farmed. Using rainfall and floodwater, the farmers
there cultivated wheat, sesame, dates, and cotton. Surplus agricultural produce was traded for
commodities imported from neighbouring countries. Irrigation and drainage, occurring as
natural processes, were in equilibrium: when the Indus was in high stage, a narrow strip of
land along the river was flooded; at low stage, the excess water was drained (Snelgrove 1967).

The situation as sketched for the Indus Valley also existed in other inhabited valleys, but a
growing population brought the need for more food and fibre. Man increased his agricultural
area by constructing irrigation systems: in Mesopotamia c. 3000 B.C. (Jacobsen and Adams
1958), in China from 2627 B.C. (King 191 1, as quoted by Thorne and Peterson 1949), in Egypt
c. 3000 B.C. (Gulhati and Smith 1967), and, around the beginning of our era, in North America,
Japan, and Peru (Kaneko 1975; Gulhati and Smith 1967).

Although salinity problems may have contributed to the decline of old civilizations
(Maierhofer, 1962), there is evidence that, in irrigated agriculture, the importance of land
drainage and salinity control was understood very early. In Mesopotamia, control of the water
table was based on avoiding an inefficient use of irrigation water and on the cropping practice
of weed-fallow in alternate years. The deep-rooted crops shoq and agul created a deep dry zone
which prevented the rise of salts through capillary action (Jacobsen and Adams 1958). During
the period from 1122 B.C. to 220 A.D., saline-alkali soils in the North China Plain and in the
Wei-Ho Plain were ameliorated with the use of a good irrigation and drainage system, by
leaching, by rice planting, and by silting from periodic floods (Wen and Lin 1964).

In the second century B.C., the Roman Cat referred to the need to remove water from wet fields
(Weaver 1964), and there is detailed evidence that during the Roman civilization subsurface
drainage was also known. Lucius Inunius Moderatus Columella, who lived in Rome in the first
century, wrote twelve books entitled: ‘De Re Rustica’ in which he described how land should
be made suitable for agriculture (Vutik 1979) as follows:

‘A swampy soil must first of all be made free of excess water by means of a drain, which
may be open or closed. In compact soils, ditches are used; in lighter soils, ditches or closed
drains which discharge into ditches. Ditches must have a side slope, otherwise the walls
will collapse. A closed drain is made of a ditch, excavated to a depth of three feet, which is
filled to a maximum of half this depth with stones or gravel, clean from soil. The ditch is

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 2

 Drainage Engineering Module

closed by backfilling with soil to the surface. If these materials are not available, bushes
may be used, covered with leaves from cypress or pine trees. The outlet of a closed drain
into a ditch is made of a large stone on top of two other stones.’

During the middle Ages, in the countries around the North Sea, people began to reclaim
swamps and lacustrine and maritime lowlands by draining the water through a system of
ditches. Land reclamation by gravity drainage was also practised in the Far East, for instance
in Japan (Kaneko 1975). The use of the windmill to pump water made it possible to turn deeper
lakes into polders, for example the 7000-ha Beemster Polder in The Netherlands in 1612
(Leeghwater 1641). The word polder, which originates from the Dutch language, is used
internationally to indicate ‘a low-lying area surrounded by a dike, in which the water level can
be controlled independently of the outside water’

During the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries, drainage techniques spread over Europe, including
Russia (Nosenko and Zonn 1976), and to the U.S.A. (Wooten and Jones 1955). The invention
of the steam engine early in the 19th century brought a considerable increase in pumping
capacity, enabling the reclamation of larger lakes such as the 15 000-ha Haarlemmermeer,
southwest of Amsterdam, in 1852.

In the 17th century, the removal of excess water by closed drains, essentially the same as
described above by Columella, was introduced in England. In 1810, clay tiles started to be
used, and after 1830 concrete pipes made with Portland cement (Donnan 1976). The
production of drain pipes was first mechanized in England and, from there, it spread over
Europe and to the U.S.A. in the mid-19th century (Nosenko and Zonn 1976). Excavating and
trenching machines, driven by steam engines, made their advent in 1890, followed in 1906 by
the dragline in the U.S.A. (Ogrosky and Mockus 1964)

The invention of the fuel engine in the 20th century has led to the development of high-speed
installation of subsurface drains with trenching or trenchless machines. This development was
accompanied by a change from clay tiles to thick-walled, smooth, rigid plastic pipes in the
1940’s, followed by corrugated PVC and polyethylene tubing in the 1960’s. Modern machinery
regulates the depth of drains with a laser beam.

The high-speed installation of subsurface drains by modern specialized machines is important

in waterlogged areas, where the number of workable days is limited, and in intensively irrigated
areas, where fields are cropped throughout the year. In this context, it is good to note that
ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 3
 Drainage Engineering Module

mechanically-installed subsurface drainage systems are not necessarily better than older, but
manually-installed systems. There are many examples of old drains that still function
satisfactorily, for example a 100-year-old system draining 100 ha, which belongs to the
Byelorussian Agricultural Academy in Russia (Nosenko and Zonn 1976).

Since about 1960, the development of new drainage machinery was accompanied by the
development of new drain-envelope materials. In north-western Europe, organic filters had
been traditionally used. In The Netherlands, for example, pre-wrapped coconut fibre was
widely applied. This was later replaced by synthetic envelopes. In the western U.S.A., gravel
is more readily available than in Europe, and is used as drain-envelope material. Countries with
arid and semi-arid climates similar to the western U.S.A. (e.g. Egypt and Iraq) initially followed
the specifications for the design of gravel filters given by the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation/USBR (1978). The high transport cost of gravel, however, guided designers to
pre-wrapped pipes in countries like Egypt (Metzger et al. 1992), India (Kumbhare et al. 1992),
and Pakistan (Honeyfield and Sial 1992).

1.3 Main objective of land drainage

Plant roots require a favourable environment to extract water and nutrient solutions to meet the
plant’s requirement. For most crops, soil moisture ranging from field capacity to 50% of the
field capacity in the root zone is considered ideal. Only a few crops such as rice and jute need
standing water on the field at certain stages of their growth. Chemically, a neutral and non-
saline soil is ideal for proper growth and yield of most food crops. Excess water and/or high
salt concentration in the root zone or at the land surface do not allow the plant roots to function
normally. As a result, the plant growth and yield are adversely affected. In the extreme cases
of water logging and salinity, the seeds may not germinate and the plants may wilt permanently.
The result is a loss of agricultural production. Land drainage, as a tool to manage excess surface
water and groundwater levels, plays an important role in maintaining and improving crop
yields:

 Drainage prevents a decrease in the productivity of arable land due to rising water tables
and the accumulation of salts in the root zone.
 Drainage is the only way to reclaim the land which is not cultivated due to water logging
and salinity problems.

Agricultural land drainage in essence is both a preventive and a curative measure for the
prevention of physical and chemical degradation of soils and for the reclamation of already
ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 4
 Drainage Engineering Module

degraded lands. Thus, drainage of agricultural lands is an effective technique to maintain a

sustainable agricultural system as well as to avoid environmental damage.

1.4 Techniques and Components of Drainage

Open channels and subsurface drainage, as well as reclamation measures for agricultural land
(soil profiling, mole ploughing, furrows, etc.), are generally used to remove surface runoff
and to lower the water table. The main components of a drainage system are considered
below.

A drainage system has three components:

 A field drainage system, which prevents ponding water on the field and/or controls the
water table.
 A main drainage system, which conveys the water away from the farm.
 An outlet, which is the point where the drainage water is led out of the area.

The field drainage system is a network that gathers the excess water from the land by
means of field drains, possibly supplemented by measures to promote the flow of water
to these drains.
The field drainage system is the most important component for the farmers. More details on
field drainage systems are given in the following section.

The main drainage system is a water-conveyance system that receives water from the
field drainage systems; surface runoff and groundwater flow, and transports it to the
outlet point.
The main drainage system consists of some collector drains and a main drainage canal. A
collector drain collects water from the field drains and carries it to the main drain for disposal.
Collector drains can be either open drains or pipe drains.

The main drain is the principal drain of an area. It receives water from collector drains,
diversion drains, or interceptor drains (= drains intercepting surface flow or groundwater flow
from outside the area), and conveys this water to an outlet for disposal outside the area. The
main drain is often a canalized stream (i.e. an improved natural stream), which runs through
the lowest parts of the agricultural area (Figure 1).

The outlet is the terminal point of the entire drainage system, from where the drainage
water is discharged into a river, a lake, or a sea.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 5

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 1: components of a drainage system

Figure 2: main drainage system

An outlet can be one of two kinds: a gravity outlet or a pumping station.

A gravity outlet is a drainage structure in an area which has outside water levels that rise and
fall. There, the drainage water can flow out when the outside water levels are low (Figure 3).
In delta areas, drainage by gravity is only possible for a few hours a day when tides are low. In
the upstream regions of a river, drainage by gravity might not be possible for several weeks,
during periods when river levels are high.

A pumping station is needed in areas where the water levels in the drainage system are lower
than the water level of the river, lake or sea.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 6

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 3: gravity outlet system

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 7

 Drainage Engineering Module

1.4.1 technique of field drainage systems

A field drainage system can be a surface drainage system (to remove excess water from the
surface of the land) or a subsurface drainage system (to control the water table in the soil). In
surface drainage, field drains are shallow graded channels, usually with relatively flat side
slopes (Figure 4).

In subsurface drainage, field drains can be either open drains or pipe drains. Open drains and
pipe drains have the same function. The difference between them is the way they are
constructed: an open drain is an excavated ditch with an exposed water table (Figure 5A); a
pipe drain is a buried pipe (Figure 5B).

Figure 4: Field drain for surface drainage

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 8

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 5 Field drain for subsurface drainage

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 9

 Drainage Engineering Module

Surface drainage systems

A surface drainage system always has two components:

 Open field drains to collect the ponding water and divert it to the collector drain.
 Land forming to enhance the flow of water towards the field drains.

A surface drainage system is a system of drainage measures, such as open drains and
land forming, to prevent ponding by diverting excess surface water to a collector drain.
Land forming is defined as changing the micro-topography of the land to meet the requirements
of surface drainage or irrigation. Three land-forming systems are distinguished: bedding, land
grading, and land planning. Bedding is the oldest surface drainage practice. Under this system
the land surface is formed into beds by manual labour, animal traction, or farm tractors. The
beds are separated by parallel shallow, open field drains oriented in the direction of the greatest
land slope (Figure 6). The water drains from the beds into the field drains, which discharges
into a collector drain constructed at the lower end of the field and perpendicular to the field
drains.

Bedding is a surface drainage method accomplished by ploughing land to form a series of

low narrow ridges, separated by parallel field drains.

Figure 6 :A bedding system

The bedding system is normally used for grassland. In modern farming, bedding is not
considered an acceptable drainage practice for row crops, because rows adjacent to the field
drains will not drain satisfactorily. To overcome the disadvantages of the bedding system, two
other methods of land forming have been developed: land grading and land planning. Land
grading is the process of forming the land surface to predetermined grades, so that each row or
surface slopes to a field drain.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 10

 Drainage Engineering Module

Land grading is the forming of the surface of the land to predetermined grades so that each
row or surface slopes to a field drain.
Land grading for surface drainage consists of forming the landscape by cutting, filling, and
smoothing it to plane continuous surfaces (Figure 7). It is a one-time operation, involving the
transport of earth according to specified cuts and fills based on the predetermined grades. Land
grading for surface drainage differs from land levelling for irrigation in that, for drainage, a
non-uniform grade is required. The grades can be varied as much as is necessary to provide
drainage with the least amount of earthmoving. After land grading it is sometimes necessary to
break up the soil which has become compacted by the construction machinery. Compared to
bedding, land grading reduces the number of field drains, thus reduces the need

Figure 7: land grading for surface drainage is the forming of the land surface to
predetermined grades

Land planning is the process of smoothing the land surface with a land plane to eliminate minor
depressions and irregularities without changing the general topography (Figure 8). It is
frequently applied in conjunction with land grading, because irregular micro-topography in a
flat landscape in combination with heavy soils can cause substantial crop losses.

Land planning is smoothing the land surface with a land plane to eliminate minor
depressions and irregularities without changing the general topography.

Figure 8: land planning for surface drainage is the process of smoothing the land surface

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 11

 Drainage Engineering Module

Subsurface Drainage Systems

A subsurface drainage system is a system for the removal of excess water and salts from the
soil using the groundwater as a vehicle.

A subsurface drainage system is a man-made system that induces excess water and
dissolved salts to flow via the soil to pipe or open drains, from where it can be evacuated.
If one has decided to install a subsurface drainage system, one has to make a choice between
open or pipe drains. Open drains have the advantage that they can receive overland flow and
thus can also be used for surface drainage. The disadvantages of open drains are the loss of
land, the interference with the irrigation system, the splitting-up of the land into small farm
blocks, which hampers farming operations, and a maintenance burden. To overcome these
disadvantages, pipe drains can be installed. The choice between open or pipe drains has to be
made at two levels: for field drains and for collector drains. If the field drains are to be pipes,
there are still two options for the collectors:

 Open collector drains, so that we have a singular pipe drainage system.

 Pipe collector drains, so that we have a composite pipe drainage system.

In a singular pipe drainage system, each field pipe drain discharges into an open collector drain
(Figure 9). In a composite system, the field pipe drains discharge into a pipe collector (Figure
10), which in turn discharges into an open main drain. The collector system itself may be
composite with sub-collectors and a main collector.

A singular drainage system is a drainage system in which the field drains are buried pipes
and all field drains discharge into open collector drains.

Figure 9: In a singular pipe drainage system each pipe drain discharges in to an open
collector drain

A composite drainage system is a drainage system in which field drains and collector drains
are buried pipes.
ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 12
 Drainage Engineering Module

For subsurface drainage, a distinction can also be made between different types of systems. A
random system connects scattered wet spots, often as a composite system. If the drainage has
to be uniform over the whole area, the drains are installed in a regular pattern. This pattern can
be either a parallel grid system, in which the field drains join the collector drain at right angles,
or a herringbone system, in which they join at sharp angles. Both regular patterns may occur
as singular or composite systems.

Figure 10: In composite system the collector drain is also a buried pipe

Tube well drainage systems are, similar to subsurface drainage system, used to control the
water table; however, better use is made of the more permeable deeper soil layers (Figure 11).

A tube well drainage system is a network of tube wells to lower the water table, including
provisions for running the pumps, and drains to dispose of the excess water.

Figure 11: Tube well drainage is a technique of controlling the water table by removing
the excess water from the (more permeable) underground

Combined Drainage Systems

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 13

 Drainage Engineering Module

Sometimes combined surface and subsurface drainage systems are used. Whether this is
needed depends on a combination of factors like the intensity and duration of the rainfall,
surface storage, the infiltration rate, the hydraulic conductivity, and the groundwater
conditions. Some examples of combined systems are:

 In irrigated areas in arid and semi-arid regions, where the cropping pattern includes rice
in rotation with 'dry-foot' crops (maize, cotton, etc.), as in the Nile-Delta in Egypt.
Subsurface drainage is needed for salinity control of the dry-foot crops, whereas surface
drainage is needed to evacuate the standing water from the rice fields, e.g. before
fertilizer applications or to dry the crop before harvest.
 Areas with occasional high-intensity rainfall (say more than 50 mm/day) that causes
water ponding at the soil surface, even when a subsurface drainage system is present.

In both cases, the standing water could be removed by the subsurface drainage system, but this
would either take too long or require drain spacings which are economically unjustifiable. In
such circumstances, it is generally more efficient to remove the ponded water by surface
drainage.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 14

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 12: In the Nile Delta, Egypt, rice is cultivated alongside ''dry-foot'' crops

1.5 Design Considerations for Land Drainage

In the ICID definition of drainage, ‘the removal of excess water’ indicates that (land) drainage
is an action by man, who must know how much excess water should be removed. Hence, when
designing a system for a particular area, the drainage engineer must use certain criteria to
determine whether or not water is in excess. A ground-water balance of the area to be drained
is the most accurate tool to calculate the volume of water to be drained.

Before the water balance of the area can be made, a number of surveys must be undertaken,
resulting in adequate hydro- geological, hydro-pedological, and topographic maps. Further, all
sub- surface water inflows and outflows must be measured or estimated. Precipitation and the
relevant evapotranspiration data from the area must be analyzed. In addition, all relevant data

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 15

 Drainage Engineering Module

on the hydraulic properties of the soil should be collected. The above processes in drainage
surveys should be based on a sound theoretical knowledge of a variety of subjects.

In some cases, the proper identification of the source of ‘excess water’ will avoid the
construction of a costly drainage system. For example:

 If irrigation water causes water logging, the efficiency of water use in the water- supply
system and at field level should be studied in detail and improved;
 If surface-water inflow from surrounding hills is the major cause of excess water in the
area, this water could be intercepted by a hillside drain which diverts the water around
the agricultural area;
 If the problem is caused by the inflow of (saline) groundwater, this subsurface inflow
could be intercepted by a row of tube wells, which dispose of their effluent into a drain
that bypasses the agricultural area;
 If the area is partially inundated because a natural stream has insufficient discharge
capacity to drain the area, a reconstruction of the stream channel may solve the drainage
problem.

If, however, the origin of the excess water lies in the agricultural area itself (e.g. from excess
rainfall or extra irrigation water that must be applied to satisfy the leaching requirement for
salinity control, then the installation of drainage facilities within the agricultural area should
be considered. Usually, these facilities consist of;

(i) A drainage outlet,

(ii) A main drainage canal,
(iii)Some collector drains, and
(iv) Field drains.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 16

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 13: drainage facility

The main drainage canal (ii) is often a canalized stream which runs through the lowest parts of
the agricultural area. It discharges its water via a pumping station or a tidal gate into a river, a
lake, or the sea at a suitable outlet point (i). Main drainage canals collect water from two or
more collector drains. Although collector drains (iii) preferably also run through local low
spots, their spacing is often influenced by the optimum size and shape of the area drained by
the selected field- drainage system. The layout of the collector drains, however, is still rather
flexible since the length of the field drains can be varied, and sub-collector drains can be
designed. The length and spacing of the field or lateral drains (iv) will be as uniform as is
applicable. Both collector and field drains can be open drains or pipe drains. They are
determined by a wide variety of factors such as topography, soil type, farm size, and the method
of field drainage.

1.6 Drainage system layout

Surface drainage layout
Two typical lay-outs of surface drainage systems are applied at field level:

1. The random field drainage system, and

2. The parallel field drainage system.

The random field drainage system is applied where a number of depressions are distributed at
random over a field. Often these depressions are large but shallow, and a complete land-
forming operation is not (yet) considered economically feasible. The random field drainage
system connects the depressions by means of field drains and evacuates the stagnant water into
a collector drain (Figure 14). The system is often applied in situations where farm operations

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 17

 Drainage Engineering Module

are limited (e.g. on pasture land) or where mechanization is done with small equipment. The
field drains should be shallow with gentle side slopes so that they can be crossed with farm
machinery.

Figure 14: The random field drainage system

The parallel field drainage system (Figure 15), in combination with proper land forming, is the
most effective method of surface drainage. The parallel field drains collect the surface runoff
and discharge it into the collector drain, through which the water flows towards the main
drainage system. The spacing of the field drains depends on the size of fields that can be
prepared and harvested economically, on the tolerance of crops to ponding, and on the amount
and costs of land forming. The system is applicable in flat areas with an irregular micro-
topography and where farm operations require regular shaped fields.

Figure 15: The parallel field drainage system

Sub-Surface drainage layout

Several general types of system layout or patterns may be considered depending on the
topography and nature of the subsurface drainage problem.

Random system: A random field drainage system is used where the topography is
undulating or rolling and has isolated wet areas. The main drain is generally placed in the

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 18

 Drainage Engineering Module

lowest natural depression, and smaller drains branch off to tap the wet areas. Because such
drains often become outlets for a more complete system established in the higher areas of the
field, the depth, location, and capacity of the random lines should be considered as part of a
complete drainage system. Generally, the logical location of these drains obviously fit the
topography. A random system connects scattered wet spots, often as a composite system
(Figure 16A).

Parallel system: The parallel field drainage system consists of laterals that are
perpendicular to the main drain. Variations of this system are often used with other patterns. In
many cases, the parallel system is desirable because it provides intensive drainage of a given
field or area. It can also be used in depression or low areas that can be graded before installation
of the system. A regular pattern is installed if the drainage network must be uniformly cover
the total area. Such a regular pattern can either be a parallel grid system, in which the field
drains join the collector drain at right angles (Figure 16B),

Herringbone system: The herringbone field drainage system consists of laterals that enter
the main drain at an angle, generally from both sides. If site conditions permit, this system can
be used in place of the parallel system. It can also be used where the main is located on the
major slope and the lateral grade is obtained by angling the laterals upslope. This pattern may
be used with other patterns in laying out a composite system in small or irregular areas (Figure
16C).

Figure 16: Three lay-outs for a subsurface drainage system :( A) Random system; (B) parallel
grid system, and (C) herringbone system

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 19

 Drainage Engineering Module

1.7 Importance of Drainage

Drainage is necessary for successful irrigated agriculture because it controls ponding, Water
logging and/or salinity. Drainage can be either natural or artificial. Most areas have some
natural drainage; this means that excess water flows from the farmer's fields to swamps or to
lakes and rivers. However, the natural drainage is often inadequate to remove the extra water
or salts brought in by irrigation and in such a case an artificial or man -made drainage system
is required.

1.7.1 Drainage to Control Water Ponding

To remove excess (ponding) water from the surface of the land we use surface drainage. This
is normally accomplished by shallow open field drains. In order to facilitate the flow of excess
water towards these open drains, the field is usually given an artificial slope by means of land
shaping or grading (Figure 17).

Figure 17: Surface drainage to remove excess water from the land surface
1.7.2 Drainage to Control Water logging
To remove excess water from the root zone we use subsurface drainage (Figure 18). By
subsurface drainage we control the water table, and excess water is removed from the
underground by gravity through open or pipe drains installed at depths varying from 1 to 3 m.

Figure 18: Field drains for surface drainage may be open (A) or pipe (B)

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 20

 Drainage Engineering Module

1.7.3 Drainage to Control Salinization

To remove salts from the soil, water is used as a vehicle: more irrigation water is applied to the
field than is required for crop growth. This additional water infiltrates into the soil and
percolates through the root zone. During percolation the water takes up part of the salts from
the soil and removes these through the subsurface drains (Figure 19). This process, in which
the water washes the salts out of the root zone, is called leaching.

Figure 19: Extra irrigation water is applied to remove salts from the root zone

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 21

 Drainage Engineering Module

Chapter two

2. Factors Related to Drainage

2.1 Drainage as part of an agricultural development project
Land drainage usually forms part of an agricultural development project, in which land
drainage is just one of the activities. The design of a drainage system is always a
multidisciplinary effort, bringing many disciplines together.

Soil science and agronomy are needed to assess the chemical, physical and biological soil
conditions, the effects of drainage on crop production and the relation with farm operation and
irrigation practices.

Geology and hydrology to establish the surface and subsurface water balances and the
conditions in the river catchment and aquifer.

Hydraulics to assess the flow of water under the influence of hydraulic gradients and
resistances in pipes or open drains or hydraulic conductivities in the soil.

Technology aspects related to the presence or absence of labour and machinery, the type and
quality of materials for construction, operation and maintenance.

Socioeconomic to assess the attitude and organization of the farmers, the rural laws, to calculate
the distribution of benefits and costs and the need for compensation.

And last, but not least, the environmental aspects to assess the value of the natural resources,
the ecology of the area and the side-effects of the introduction drainage.

The project area may be a single farm or it may cover tens of thousands of hectares. In these
lecture notes we concentrate on the system at farm level and only discuss some of the major
aspects of the design and construction of field drainage systems.

For the design of agricultural land drainage systems, we group all these disciplines together in
three types of input factors:

 the agricultural objectives,

 the environmental parameters and
 Engineering factors.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 22

 Drainage Engineering Module

The agricultural objectives are dealing with the benefits of the installation of a drainage
system. However, there are always side-effects which are less beneficial for the environment.

The environmental parameters are factors representing the given natural or hydrological
conditions under which the system has to function. Examples of these factors are irrigation,
rainfall, the water table, the water-transmitting properties of the soil, the natural surface or
subsurface drainage, and the topography.

The engineering factors are factors representing the technical and material components of
the drainage system, e.g. the lay-out, the longitudinal section and the cross-section of the
drains, and the type and quality of materials. Each type of drainage system has its specific
engineering factors; they are summarized in Table 1.

Figure 20: The role of agricultural, environmental, soil & hydrological and engineering
factors in the design of a drainage system

Table 1: Examples of engineering factors by types of drainage system

Type of drainage system Engineering factor

Surface drainage system Length and slope of the fields, dimensions
of beds, terraces and open drains

Subsurface drainage system Depth, spacing, and dimensions of open or

pipe drains

Tube well drainage system Depth, spacing, and dimensions of wells,

pump capacity

Main drainage system Depth, width, cross-section, and slope of

drains, spacing of the network

Establishing drainage design criteria needs a careful approach and should not be done merely
from handbooks. Because of the large variation in local conditions, the introduction of land
ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 23
 Drainage Engineering Module

drainage systems ought to be done by combining theoretical insight with local experience.
Successful development depends on the rational use of environmental resources and on
minimizing or eliminating any adverse environmental impacts by improving the planning,
design, and implementation of projects.

2.2 Agricultural Objectives of Drainage

2.2.1 Objectives and Effects

The three main objectives of drainage are: prevention or reduction of ponded and/or
waterlogged conditions, salinity control and making new land available for agriculture. The
first two objectives are aimed at conserving or improving existing agricultural areas, whereas
the third objective brings new areas into cultivation. These objectives are met through two
direct effects and a large number of indirect effects. The direct effects of installing a drainage
system land are:

 A reduction in the average amount of water stored on or in the soil, inducing drier soil
conditions and reducing water logging;
 A discharge of water through the system.

The direct effects are mainly determined by the hydrological conditions, the hydraulic
properties of the soil, and the physical characteristics of the drainage system. The direct effects
trigger a series of indirect effects. These are determined by climate, soil, crop, agricultural
practices, and the social, economic, and environmental conditions. Assessing the indirect
effects (including the extent to which the objectives are met) is therefore much more difficult,
but not less important, than assessing the direct effects. The indirect effects can be either
positive or negative. Some examples are:

 Positive effects owing to the drier soil conditions: increased aeration of the soil;
stabilized soil structure; higher availability of nitrogen in the soil; higher and more
diversified crop production; better workability of the land; earlier planting dates;
reduction of peak discharges by an increased temporary storage of water in the soil;
 Negative effects owing to the drier soil conditions: decomposition of organic matter;
soil subsidence; acidification of potential acid sulphate soils; reduced irrigation
efficiency; increased risk of drought; ecological damage;
 The indirect effects of drier soil conditions on weeds, pests, and plant diseases: these
can be both positive and negative; the net result depends on the ecological conditions;

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 24

 Drainage Engineering Module

 Positive effects owing to the discharge: removal of salts or other harmful substances
from the soil; availability of drainage water for various purposes;
 Negative effects owing to the discharge: excessive leaching of valuable nutrients from
the soil; downstream environmental damage by salty or otherwise polluted drainage
water; the presence of ditches, canals, and structures impeding accessibility and
interfering with other infra structural elements of the land.

Many of the indirect effects are mutually influenced and also exert their influence on the direct
effects. For example, as a result of drainage, the following may happen:

 More intensive agriculture increases the evapotranspiration and consequently may

reduce the discharge, unless this leads to increased irrigation intensity;
 More stable soil structure may increase the infiltration and the subsurface drain
discharge, and decrease the surface runoff.

Both of the above effects sometimes neutralize each other so that the drain discharge is not
appreciably affected. The above considerations illustrate that, in developing agricultural
drainage criteria, one needs a clear conceptual framework and a systems approach. Rules of
thumb may be useful in the initial stages of reclaiming land by drainage, but subsequently a
systematic monitoring program is required to validate or improve the criteria used with the aim,
in the future, of avoiding ineffective and inefficient drainage systems and of mitigating
negative effects.

2.3 Field drainage system and crop production

To obtain a quantitative insight into the effects of drainage on agriculture, one can do
experiments with varying drainage designs and measure the corresponding crop production.
The engineering factors mentioned in the figure depend on the type of drainage system
involved (Table 1). The effect of the engineering factors can be studied step by step (e.g. by
using a range of drain spacing), or by simply considering the "with and without" case (e.g. by
comparing the crop production in drained and undrained land as shown in Table 2).

Table 2 Annual maize production (t/ha) with and without field drainage systems for
different doses of nitrogen fertilizer

Type of drainage system N fertilizer (Kg/ha)

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 25

 Drainage Engineering Module

0 100 200
Subsurface field drainage system 3.7 5.9 7.0
Surface field drainage system 3.5 5.1 6.2
Without field drainage system 2.5 3.0 4.0

Figure 21: Illustration of a straightforward method analysis of drainage effects of agriculture

When the relationship between engineering factors and crop production (Relation A in Figure
21) is established in a certain area, it has no validity for application elsewhere, because it
depends on the area’s soil, climatic, hydrological, topographic, agronomic, and socio-economic
conditions. A more universal applicability of experiences can be promoted by introducing
additional factors into Relation A. In Figure 23, for example, the water table regime is used as
an additional intermediate factor, so that Relation A is divided into Relations B and C.

Figure 22 Example of the relation A of Figure 21 showing net benefit (b) of winter crops as
a function of drain spacing in a 60% clay soil

Relation B represents a direct effect of a drainage system; it is entirely a hydraulic function and
lends itself to the development of generalized drainage equations. These equations have more
than local value because they include parameters to represent natural conditions like recharge
and hydraulic conductivity. A difficulty is still to survey and correctly assess these parameters,
because of their wide variation in time and space. Relation C represents the indirect effects of
a drainage system. This relationship is very site-specific and is therefore not universally
applicable. A more universal applicability can be obtained by dividing Relation C into other
relationships with the help of the proper additional factors. This, however, leads to complicated
interactions and therefore constrains practical application. Hence, the establishment of

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 26

 Drainage Engineering Module

empirical relationships of the C-type remains a necessity in any region where a drainage project
is proposed.

Figure 23: Relation A of Figure 21 is divided into Relations B and C by means of the water
table regimes

2.4 Water table and Crop Production

In this section, some additional examples are given on Relation C between crop production and
the water table regime. Figure 24 shows the relationship between banana yield, plantation age,
and average depth of the water table in Surinam. For all ages, a depth of 0.8 m is a safe depth.
The banana production is reduced at depths of 0.7 m or less. The lowest yields were obtained
on plantations that were seven years old. Table 3 shows the relative yields of potatoes, onions,
maize, and carrots in dependence of the depth of the water table in a muck soil in the UK. A
depth of 0.6 m is safe for all four crops, although most crops perform slightly better when the
depth is 0.8 m or more. However, the increase in yield is so low that this probably does not
justify the extra cost of installing deeper drains.

Table 3: Relative yields (%) of crops with different depths of the watertable in a muck soil
in the UK

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 27

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 24: Relationship between banana yield, plantation age, and the average depth of the
water table in Surinam

2.5 Water table and Soil Conditions

To enable a wider application of the relationship between the depth of the water table and the
agricultural effects, we can separate Relation C, using the soil-related growth factors of the
plants as intermediate factors (Figure 25). Figure 25 also shows a separation using the soil-
related farm management factors as intermediates (Relations F and G). The management
factors have an influence on the farm management (depending on the farmer's response), which
again exerts an influence on the growth factors (Relation H), but also on the cost and effort put
into crop production (Relation I). All this may result in a profound change in the cropping
system after the introduction of drainage systems. The soil-related growth factors can be
further distinguished in soil physical, chemical, biological, and hydrological factors, which are
highly interactive (Figure 26). A disadvantage of the drainage-response model of Figures 25
and 26 is its complexity, the usual lack of data, and the difficulty of collecting the necessary
information to make it functional. In drainage design, therefore, one usually has to depend on
empirically-obtained relationships of the C-type. Nevertheless, an insight into the soil-related
growth and management factors is important, and for this reason some examples will be
discussed below.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 28

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 25: A further breakdown of Relation C of Figure 23 using soil-related growth and
management factors

Figure 26: Soil physical, chemical/biological, and hydrological interactions in Relations D

and E of Figure 25.

Soil Structure

A good soil structure favours both the soil aeration and storage of soil water, reduces impedance
to root growth, and provides stable traction for farm implements. A drainage system affects the
soil structure through its influence on the water table (Relation E; Figures 25 and 26). For
example, the percentage of large pores increases with increasing depth of the water table, and

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 29

 Drainage Engineering Module

as a result, the hydraulic conductivity increases. Thus it appears that maintaining the water
table at a depth greater exerts a beneficial influence on soil structure and structurally-
determined soil properties.

Soil Temperature

The reduced water content and the increased air content brought about by a drainage system
result in a lowering of the specific heat of the soil, because water requires five times more heat
to raise its temperature than dry soil. Consequently, waterlogged soil with about 50% moisture
requires 3 times more heat to warm up than dry soil. In addition, the cooling effect of the greater
evaporation from a wet soil delays a temperature rise. In temperate climates, both these effects
cause a delay of growth in spring. In general, it can be stated that the temperature of the soil
surface is favourably changed by a drainage system, which will promote early planting in
spring in areas with cold winters, which in turn leads to a yield increase. This chain of reactions
gives a good example of the interactions existing between Relations E, F, G, H, and I in Figures
25 and 26.

Sometimes, wet soils have a favourable effect. In hot climates, for example, a wet soil prevents
an excessive rise in soil temperature during the day, so that a lower, more favourable soil
temperature is maintained. In climates with an occasional night frost during the growing
season, wet soils are able to release more heat than dry soil and thus maintain a higher night
temperature. Studies conducted in the UK, in fields with a water table deeper than 1.0 m,
showed a 50% reduction of maize, potatoes, and peppermint due to a night frost in June,
whereas no damage was observed in fields with a water table at 0.4 m depth. This example
shows that excessive drainage should be avoided.

Soil Workability and Bearing Capacity

With an adequate drainage system, the average water content of the topsoil, even in humid
areas, will seldom rise above field capacity. This is important, because there is a narrow range
of soil-water contents for tillage operations, which for most soils is below field capacity.
Working the soil at higher water contents gives rise to mechanical difficulties and destroys the
soil structure, especially in clayey soils. Such a deteriorated soil can be very hard when dry,
and as a result of compaction (plough-sole, tractor-sole, or traffic layer) and crust formation,
both the infiltration and hydraulic conductivity are low. It is not always easy to find a good
relationship under field conditions. An example of the scatter in the relationship between the

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 30

 Drainage Engineering Module

soil-water content and the depth of the water table is shown in (Figure 27). Still, the figure
shows the expected trend that the average water content of the soil at 0.15 m depth is
considerably less with deeper water tables than with shallow ones. On the other hand, a deep
water table and an intensive subsurface drainage system are no absolute guarantees of soil-
water content below field capacity, especially not on rainy days.

Figure 27: Relation between soil water content at o.15 m depth and the water table depth
in silt loam soil in South Carolina, USA, from January to May 1970

Soil Subsidence

Newly reclaimed wetland clay soils will subside when drainage is introduced. These soils,
which are originally supersaturated with water, subside because of the loss of water. Drained
peat soils subside for two reasons. The first is physical, because the soils shrink with the loss
of water. The second is chemical, because the organic matter oxidizes and decomposes. (Figure
28) illustrates the shrinkage of peat soils in The Netherlands as a function of seasonal average
depth of the water table. When the shrinkage is used as an object factor, this average depth can
also be used as a drainage criterion.

Figure 28: Subsidence of peat soils in The Netherlands as a function of average water table depth

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 31

 Drainage Engineering Module

Nutrient Supply from the Soil

Various processes activated by bacteria, fungi, and other micro- and macro- organisms in the
soil depend on the aeration and the drainage status of the soil. Nitrogen (N) fixation and
nitrification by micro-organisms are examples of aerobic processes that are influenced by the
soil moisture content and exert an important influence on plant growth. Figure 29 shows the
combined influence of N fertilization and average depth of the water table on grassland in peat
soil in The Netherlands. With shallow water tables, a high N-dose has a considerable effect on
the yield, but when the water table is at 0.5 m or more, the effect vanishes. Also in Table 2 it
is seen that an N-dose in undrained fields leads to similar yields as in drained fields without
fertilizer application. Apparently, certain agricultural practices can compensate for the effects
of poor drainage conditions. However, contrary to the tendency shown in Figure 29, the data
of Table 2 show that the effect of fertilizing is large in the well-drained fields. The effect of
fertilizer on crop production in relation to the drainage status of the soil is apparently dependent
on local conditions. This also holds for the quality of the product.

Figure 29: Nitrogen supply, average depth of the water table, and yield of grassland in The
Netherlands

2.6 Environmental Aspects of Drainage

When we introduce a drainage system into an area, we are manipulating the environment. In
this section we briefly discuss the environmental impacts of the two direct effects of drainage
(e.g. a lower water table and an increase in discharge), they are categorized as impacts in the
project area itself and outside the project area.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 32

 Drainage Engineering Module

2.6.1 Side-effects inside the Project Area

Loss of Wetland

Wetlands are lands where saturation with water is the dominant factor determining the nature
of soil development and the types of plant and animal communities living in the soil and on its
surface. When wetlands are reclaimed, they lose their original function as lands harbouring
particular plant and animal communities. Before drainage, the agricultural value of wetlands is
generally very low. From an agricultural point of view, the loss of such poorly productive land
is easily compensated for by the greater land productivity resulting from drainage. On the other
hand, wetlands are usually of great value as wildlife habitats, flood-storage areas, groundwater-
recharge areas, siltation basins, ecological filters, and ecological and recreational areas. The
values of these functions are very difficult to estimate in monetary terms. Whether the loss of
wetland is acceptable will depend on the balance between the somewhat objectively assessable
agricultural gains that result from drainage and on the subjective value which the wetland has
as nature or a recreation area. As the latter effects cannot be expressed in monetary terms, it is
difficult to assess the costs of introducing drainage. In many developing countries, which are
striving to increase their agricultural production, the balance tips in favour of agricultural
productivity, and in many developed countries, which can afford to treasure scarce nature areas,
the balance tips towards the side of nature.

Change of the Habitat

Improving the drainage in land that is already used for crop production or grazing may appear
environmentally less damaging than converting wetlands into crop land. But, in both humid
and arid regions, improved drainage can still lead to a drastic change in habitat conditions.
Consequently, plant and animal life can be considerably affected (Table 4).

Table 4: Effect of reclamation of coastal lowlands on the fish population, in South

Kalimantan, Indonesia

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 33

 Drainage Engineering Module

Lower Water table

A direct effect of a drainage system is a lower average water table. This systematic lowering
of the water table increases agricultural production, but can also have serious side-effects on
the same agricultural production, and on nature conservation, forestry, and the landscape. One
way to reduce these negative side-effects would be not to keep the drainage base at the same
level throughout the year, but to accept higher levels in periods that are not critical for
agriculture or periods with water shortages.

Subsidence

A well-known effect of drainage is the subsidence of the land surface. Subsidence is the
downward movement of the ground surface and is caused by the consolidation of clay soils due
to lowering the water table, the irreversible subsidence of peat soils as a result of oxidation and
the compression of deep layers as a result of the extraction of water for irrigation. Subsidence
not only affects the land use; it also affects the elevation of the reclaimed area. Consequently,
it will affect the water levels in the drainage system, the possibility of drainage by gravity, and
the lift and capacity of pumping stations (Figure 30).

Soil Salinity

In irrigated agriculture, irrigation itself is the main source of salts. About one-third of the gross
area of irrigated land (270 million ha) is to some extent affected by salinity. Even if the
irrigation water is of good quality, it still brings in large amounts of salts. In arid and semi-arid
regions, irrigation can also cause secondary salinization through the capillary rise of saline
groundwater. To prevent salinization, all these salts have to be removed by the drainage water.
So drainage is the price one has to pay for sustainable agriculture in irrigated lands.

Soil Sodicity

Salty soils usually contain several types of salts, one of these is sodium. At places, where the
concentration of sodium is relatively high, a sodic soil may develop. Sodic soils are
characterized by a poor soil structure: they have a low infiltration rate and a low hydraulic
conductivity; they are poorly aerated and difficult to cultivate. Thus, sodic soils adversely affect
plant's growth. For efficient crop production, sodic soils need improvement by reducing the
amount of sodium present in the root zone. This is done in two stages: firstly, chemicals rich
in calcium, such as gypsum, are mixed with the soil. The calcium will replace the sodium.
Secondly, the replaced sodium is leached from the root zone. This procedure itself is often

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 34

 Drainage Engineering Module

problematic, because in most regions where sodic soils occur, irrigation water is scare.
Furthermore, leaching is hampered by the poor structure and the low hydraulic conductivity of
sodic soils.

Seepage

A lowered water table inside the project area can increase the seepage into the area because of
the increase in hydraulic head. If the seepage water is fresh, the only effects are higher drainage
rates and, in some cases, a lower water table upstream of the project area. If the seepage water
is brackish or saline, however, salts are brought into the area, thereby increasing the hazard of
salinization, which, in its turn, can also have effects downstream of the project area.

Erosion

Drainage can either increase or decrease erosion. A lower water table will result in a drier top
soil, which, under certain conditions, can increase wind erosion (e.g. of peat soils). On the other
hand, a subsurface drainage system can reduce surface runoff and subsequently decrease
erosion. In sloping areas (slopes > 2%), surface drainage is closely related to erosion control.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 35

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 30: The subsidence of peat soils in the western part of the Netherlands: (A) before
reclamation; (B) after reclamation by drainage, and (C) present situation where peat layers
have disappeared because of oxidation and excavation

Leaching of Nutrients, Pesticides, and Other Elements

One of the direct effects of drainage is that it introduces a discharge through the drainage
system. In this respect, water can act as a vehicle for all kinds of soluble elements that are
stored in the soil. These elements (e.g. nutrients, herbicides, pesticides, organic matter, salts,
and toxic trace elements) can be leached from the soil and can pollute the drainage effluent
(Figure 31). Sometimes this is done intentionally (e.g. to leach salts in irrigated areas), but it is
often an unintended side-effect. The effect these elements have on the environment depends,
among other things, on climatological conditions, on agricultural practices (quantity and
quality of the fertilizers and pesticides used), and on the type of soil. Sometimes, the effect
can be positive (i.e. when the losses of nutrients can be reduced), sometimes negative (i.e.
When fertilizer application is excessive). If the effects are negative, preventive measures to
reduce the flow of drainage water are often the only options because measures to treat this type
of non-point pollution are extremely costly.

Figure 31: Seasonal pattern of subsurface drainage discharge and nitrate losses via
subsurface drainage water of a farm near Bologna, Italy

Health

The drainage of agricultural land can also have an effect on the living conditions in the area.
Agricultural development projects, and especially irrigation projects, can have a negative
impact on human health if they increase the size and number of vector habitats. Sustainable
control of vector borne diseases calls for a strategy that uses the potential of environmental

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 36

 Drainage Engineering Module

measures to the full. A successful strategy incorporates three basic elements for the control of
vector-borne diseases: medical treatment, reduction of vector-human contact and reduction of
vectors. Drainage plays an important role in the last two strategies by incorporating disease-
control measures into the design, construction, and operation of a drainage scheme (Figure 32).
Measures that involve drainage aim at:

 Eliminating stagnant water by improving drainage, reducing seepage, etc.;

 Increasing water velocities in reservoirs, canals, and drains;
 Clearing vegetation from banks, canals, and drains.

Besides the positive impact that drainage has on public health, it can also have negative impacts
(e.g. the leaching of high concentrations of toxic trace elements). High concentrations of these
elements can pollute the receiving water and be a health hazard.

Figure 32: Predicted bilharzias prevalence and the proposed control measures in Dez
Irrigation Scheme, Iran
2.6.2 Side-effects outside the Project Area
Disposal of Drainage Effluent

Drainage water has to be disposed of, either by gravity flow or by pumping, via a canal or
directly into a river leading to the sea, or, more rarely, into an inland lake without an outlet. On
the way to its destination, the drainage water can influence its surroundings in various ways.
On a small scale, this can happen when one farmer drains his land and evacuates his drainage
water to the land of his downstream neighbour. On a larger scale excessive drainage water can

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 37

 Drainage Engineering Module

increase peak river flows causing inundations in the downstream parts of river catchments.
Options to minimize the disposal problem can be either to reduce the quantity of drainage water
by preventive measures or to solve or reduce the effects of the disposal of drainage water.
Preventive measures should aim at improving irrigation and drainage efficiencies.

Measures to reduce the downstream effects of the disposal of drainage effluent are:

 Improving Irrigation Efficiency: Worldwide, irrigation efficiencies varying between

10 and 80%. If irrigation efficiency can be increased, the amount of water percolating
to the groundwater will be reduced, thereby increasing the drainage efficiency.
 Improving Drainage Efficiency: Sometimes, drainage efficiency can be improved by
installing a shallower drainage system or maintaining a higher water table for part of
the year. This not only reduces water shortages but can also prevent the drainage of
deeper saline aquifers, thereby improving the quality of the drainage water. In many
countries, agricultural waste water, including drainage water from irrigated lands, can
be dumped free of any charge. By instituting a wastewater-disposal charge that is
related to the quality and quantity of the released effluent, the agricultural polluters
could pay for preventing or cleaning up the environmental damage they cause.
 Re-Use: The re-use of drainage water is practised worldwide, mostly in arid or semi-
arid regions where irrigation water is in short supply, but also in temperate regions,
where re-use is practised during the dry summer months. Re-use can be applied at farm
level, project level, and regional level. Drainage water can never be completely re-used,
however, because the salts that are imported with the irrigation water have to be
exported out of the area. It is therefore always necessary to make a water and salt
balance to calculate the long-term effects of the re-use of drainage water on soil salinity.
Re-use at farm level can be practised when the drainage water is of good quality.
Farmers can pump irrigation water directly from the open drains or use shallow wells
to pump groundwater. Re-use at project and regional level is practised when drainage
water is pumped back into the irrigation system. With this type of re-use, the drainage
water is automatically mixed with better-quality irrigation water. The quantity and
quality of both the irrigation and drainage water determine how much drainage water
can be re-used. Because this type of re-use requires high investment costs (i.e. the
construction of pumping stations) and because the effects on soil salinity are difficult
to predict, careful planning is a prerequisite.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 38

 Drainage Engineering Module

 Discharge to Surface Waters: In general, drainage water is discharged to rivers or

lakes. If this water is used again for irrigation in downstream reaches, it can also be
regarded as re-use. The natural flow in the river, both quantitatively and qualitatively,
determines how much drainage water can be discharged into it. If the receiving water
cannot cope with the amount of drainage water, a separate facility to a safe outlet,
usually the sea, has to be constructed. But even the disposal to such a "safe" outlet (the
sea) can have environmental effects. An example is the eutrophication of the North Sea
caused by the leaching of minerals from agricultural land as a result of the excessive
use of manure, fertilizers, and pesticides.
 Evaporation Ponds: If there is no safe outlet available for the drainage effluent,
evaporation ponds can be used. In such ponds, the drainage effluent evaporates from
the open water surface, leaving the salts and other soluble trace elements behind. This
results in large amounts of soluble salts and trace elements. The size of an evaporation
pond must satisfy the needs of the land area being drained, which means it must be
based on the volume of drain water and the rate of evaporation for that region.
Evaporation ponds can be natural depressions or artificial basins. Natural depressions
have the advantage that the drainage effluent can be discharged by gravity flow, and
the only construction work involved is to make earthen embankments and a spillway to
regulate the water level in the pond. Artificial basins generally need pumping facilities
to lift the drainage effluent. The disadvantages of evaporation ponds are: loss of land,
seepage, and the disposal of the remaining salts. Experience in California indicates that
the area needed for evaporation ponds comes to 10 to 14% of the land area. Seepage
from the pond to any underlying aquifer should be avoided because of the large
quantities of soluble salts and trace elements involved. Especially in coarser soils, the
ponds should be lined. Sometimes, evaporation ponds can be used to store salts during
periods with low river flow, when the disposal of the drainage effluent would create
unacceptable effects downstream. The ponds are then flushed during high river floods,
discharging the salts safely to the sea. If no periodic flushing is possible, the removal
of the salts is problematic, especially when the drainage water contains toxic trace
elements.
Seepage from Drainage Canals:

To reduce construction costs, main drains, which evacuate drainage effluent from upstream
areas, often have water levels close to the soil surface in their downstream reach. Unless

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 39

 Drainage Engineering Module

appropriate measures are taken, the productivity of land adjacent to drainage canals can be
negatively affected by (saline) seepage. As such seepage depends on the difference in
hydraulic head and on permeability, it can largely be prevented by (costly) lining or other
methods which decrease embankment permeability. The magnitude of the seepage and
eventual salinity resulting from it determines whether any preventive action needs to be
taken.

Lower upstream water table:

Lowering the water table in the project area usually leads to more seepage into the area and
also to a lowering of the water table in the area upstream of the project. In non-irrigated
areas, such a lowering of the water table can negatively affect plant growth because the
contact between the (non-saline) groundwater and the root zone is broken and this will lead
to a decrease in yield.

2.7 Soil and Hydrological Conditions of Drainage

2.7.1 Water table
The Water table is the upper boundary of the groundwater and defined as the locus of points at
which the pressure in the groundwater is equal to atmospheric pressure.

Water table is the locus of points at which the pressure in the groundwater is equal to
atmospheric pressure.

Below the water table all pores are filled with water, this is the saturated zone (Figure 33). Most
flow of groundwater towards the drains takes place in the saturated zone. Above the water
table, there is a zone where the soil's pores are filled partly with water and partly with air. This
is the unsaturated zone. Water in the unsaturated zone originates from infiltrated rain or
irrigation water and from the capillary rise of groundwater. The unsaturated zone is very
important for plant growth: this is the zone, where the water uptake by roots and the transport
of salts and fertilizers takes place. The water table fluctuates in time: after irrigation or rainfall
we see an instantaneous rise of the water table, followed by a gradual drop due to capillary rise
or flow of water towards the drainage system (Figure 33).

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 40

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 33: The water table, the saturated zone below the water table and the unsaturated
zone above the water table

Figure 34: Fluctuating water table due to recharge by irrigation (A) or rainfall (B)
2.7.2 Depth to the Water table

The depth to the water table is measured in observation wells (Figure 35). An observation
well is a small diameter pipe (Ø 125 mm), placed in the soil and perforated over at least a
length equal to the distance over which the water table is expected to fluctuate. Sometimes,
a gravel filter is placed around the pipe to facilitate the flow of water and to prevent the
clogging of the perforations by fine particles like clay and silt. In stable soils, e.g. heavy
clay soils, we can just make an auger hole in the ground and no pipe is needed. The water
table reacts to the various recharge and discharge components that characterize a
groundwater system and is therefore constantly changing. Important in any drainage
investigation are the (mean) highest and the (mean) lowest water table positions, as well as

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 41

 Drainage Engineering Module

the mean water table depth of a hydrological year. For this reason, water-level
measurements should be made at frequent intervals for at least a year. The interval between
readings should not exceed one month, but a fortnight may be better. All measurements in
the project area should, as far as possible, be made on over the shortest time span possible
to give a complete picture of the water table. If one wants to study the effect that a rainstorm
or an irrigation application has on the water table, daily or even continuous readings may
be needed. A pressure logger or an automatic recorder should then be installed in a
representative large-diameter well

Figure 35: Wells to observe the water table: (A) auger hole in a stable soil; (B) cased well in
unstable soil
2.7.3 Groundwater Quality
All groundwater contains salts in solution. The type of salts depends on the geological
environment, the source of the groundwater, and its movement. Irrigation also acts as a source
of salts in groundwater. It not only adds salts to the soil, but also dissolves salts in the root
zone. Water that has passed through the root zone of irrigated land usually contains salt
concentrations several times higher than that of the originally applied irrigation water.
Evapotranspiration tends to concentrate the salts at the surface of the land and increases the
salinity of the groundwater. Highly saline groundwater can therefore be found in arid regions
with poor natural drainage and consequently a shallow water table.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 42

 Drainage Engineering Module

The choice of a method for measuring groundwater salinity depends on the reason for making
the measurements, the size of the area - and thus the number of samples to be taken and
measured - and the time and the budget available for doing the work. Once the network of
observation wells and boreholes has been established, water samples should be taken in a
representative number of them. Sampling can often best be combined with other drainage
investigations, such as measuring hydraulic conductivity in open boreholes. The sample is then
taken after a sufficient quantity of water has been bailed out from the hole. A rapid
determination of the salinity of groundwater can be made by measuring its electrical
conductivity (EC).

Electrical conductivity (EC) is a measure of the concentration of salts, defined as the

conductance of a cubic centimetre of water at a standard temperature of 250C.

Electrical conductivity is expressed in DeciSiemens per metre (dS/m), formerly in milliohms

per centimetre (mmhos/cm). Expressing the results in terms of specific electrical conductivity
makes the determination independent of the size of the water sample. Conductivity cannot
simply be related to the total dissolved solids because groundwater contains a variety of ionic
and undissociated species. An approximate relation for most groundwater with an EC-value in
the range of 0.1 to 5 dS/m is: 1 dS/m. 640 mg/l. The EC expresses the total concentration of
soluble salts in the groundwater, but gives no information on the types of salts. Needed for this
purpose are laboratory determinations of such constituents as calcium, magnesium, sodium,
carbonate, bicarbonate, chloride, sulphate, and nitrate. Since these chemical analyses are
costly, not all the observation points need be sampled for detailed analysis. A selection of sites
should be made, based on the results of the EC measurements.

2.7.4 Drainage Surplus

For the design of a drainage system we have to know the drainage requirement or drainable
surplus, which is the amount of water that must be removed from an area within a certain period
so as to avoid an unacceptable rise in the levels of the groundwater or surface water. Removing
the drainage surplus has two advantages: it prevents water logging by artificially maintaining
a sufficiently deep water table and it removes enough water from the root zone so that any salts
brought in by irrigation cannot reach a concentration that would be harmful to crops.

Drainage surplus is the amount of water that must be removed from an area within a certain
period so as to avoid an unacceptable rise in the levels of the groundwater or surface water

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 43

 Drainage Engineering Module

Calculating the drainage requirement is a major problem in many irrigated areas. The natural
conditions in these areas are diverse, and different water resources may be involved in the
calculations. It is therefore necessary to do field work on the general features of the
groundwater regime and to study the water and salt regimes and their balances. A proper
understanding of these regimes allows the drainage engineer to predict how they will be
affected by drainage. The factors involved in calculating the drainage requirement are derived
from analysis of the overall water balance of the study area (Figure 36). Water balances are
often assessed for an average year. But water logging and salinity problems are not of the same
duration or frequency from year to year. Therefore, it is often necessary to assess the water
balances not only for an average year, but also for specific years (e.g. a very dry year or a year
with extreme rainfall) or even for specific periods (e.g. the growing season or the irrigation
season).

Figure 36: Components of the water balance in an irrigated area

2.7.5 Hydraulic Conductivity

The hydraulic conductivity (K) is a measure for the water-transmitting capacity of soils. There
are big differences between various soils (Table 5), mainly depending on the texture of the soil.
There are various methods to measure the hydraulic conductivity. It can be correlated to the
soil texture or the pore size distribution and it can be measured in the laboratory or in the field.
The best known field method is the auger-hole method (Figure 37), which works as follows: A

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 44

 Drainage Engineering Module

hole is bored into the soil with an auger to a certain depth below the water table. When the
water in the hole reaches equilibrium with the groundwater, part of it is removed. The
groundwater then begins to seep into the hole and the rate at which it rises is measured. The
hydraulic conductivity of the soil is computed with an equation describing the relationship
between the rate of rise, the groundwater conditions, and the geometry of the hole. The auger-
hole method measures the K-value mainly around the hole. It gives no information about
vertical K-values neither about K-values in deeper soil layers. The method is therefore more
useful in shallow than in deep aquifers.

Table 5: Hydraulic conductivity for some soil types

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 45

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 37: Measurement of the hydraulic conductivity by the auger-hole method

2.7.6 Drainable Pore Space

Imagine that free drainage occurs in a soil that has become saturated after a heavy rainstorm.
If the soil has large pores, these pores will release water by gravity flow. After this water release
the soil is at "field capacity", corresponding with the volumetric soil-water content at a matric
head somewhere between -100and -200 cm (2.0 < pF < 2.3). The soil-water content will further
decrease by crop transpiration and evaporation at the soil surface. The remaining soil water
redistributes by flow through capillaries and flow along the walls of empty pores. When the
matric head hm= -16000 cm (pF = 4.2), the soil is at "wilting point", because plant roots cannot
extract water from the soil when the matric head falls below this point. The soil water stored
between field capacity and wilting point is called the "available soil water" or the soil's "water-
holding capacity". When the water table is at shallow depth, the matric head at field capacity
is less well-defined, because, if the water table influences the soil-water conditions in the root
zone, free drainage will be prevented. If the water table is lowered, a certain amount of water
in the unsaturated part of the soil profile will be released by gravity flow. The "drainable pore
space", ‘’, indicates the ratio between the change in the amount of soil water and the
corresponding change in the level of the water table.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 46

 Drainage Engineering Module

Note that the drainable pore space is not a constant for the entire soil profile, but depends on
the depth of the water table.

𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒆 𝒊𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒂𝒎𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒔𝒐𝒊𝒍 𝒎𝒐𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒓𝒂𝒈𝒆

𝝁=
𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒆 𝒊𝒏 𝒘𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒕𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆 𝒅𝒆𝒑𝒕𝒉

Drainable pore space is the ratio of the change in soil-water content in the profile above
the water table to the corresponding rise/fall of the water table, in the absence of evaporation

The drainable pore space of a soil can be found by simultaneously measuring water table
fluctuations and drain discharges over a number of weeks or months. Such measurements
integrate the effect of spatial variability of other soil properties. The drainable pore space can
also be found from the pF-curve, provided this curve is determined on undisturbed soil samples.

2.7.7 Topography

Information on the topography of an area where there is a drainage problem is essential,

because the excess water has to be removed by gravity flow. The topographic map should show
all physical features, both natural and man-made, which will influence the design of the
drainage system. For the design of a field drainage system minor differences in the elevation
of the land surface are important. Good judgment is needed to determine the extent of the
topographic data needed for the design. The flatter the topography the smaller the contour
interval will be. If there are isolated critical points within the field spot elevations of these
points should be included. In addition to the contour lines, the location of open drains, bunds,
farm road, farm boundaries etc. should be shown on the map (Figure 38).

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 47

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 38: A topographic map of an irrigated area

2.7.8 Impermeable Layers

Soils are hardly ever uniform or homogeneous in the vertical direction. At some depth below
the soil surface we shall always find an impermeable layer. If this impermeable layer is deep
and the groundwater only partly fills the permeable top layer, the water table is free to rise and
fall. The groundwater is such a layer is said to be unconfined, or to be under phreatic or water
table conditions (Figure 39A)

An impermeable layer is a soil layer through which no flow occurs or, in a practical sense,
a layer through which the flow is so small that it can be neglected

Where groundwater completely fills a permeable layer that is overlain and underlain by
impermeable layers, the upper surface of the saturated zone is fixed. Groundwater in such a
layer is said to be confined, or to be under confined or artesian conditions (Figure 39B). The
water level in a well or borehole that penetrates into the permeable layer stands above the top
of that layer, or, if the artesian pressure is high, even above the land surface. Truly impermeable
layers are not common in nature; even the finest textured soil layers have a certain, though low,
permeability. Where groundwater completely fills a permeable layer that is overlain by a
poorly permeable layer and underlain by an impermeable layer, the groundwater in the
permeable layer is said to be semi-confined (Figure 39C). In the overlying, poorly permeable
layer, the groundwater is under unconfined conditions because it is free to rise and fall.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 48

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 39: Different groundwater conditions: (A) unconfined (water table, phreatic)
conditions; (B) confined (artesian) conditions; (C) semi-confined conditions

Chapter three

3. Surface drainage systems

3.1 Introduction
Drainage can be either natural or artificial. Natural drainage is often inadequate, and hence
artificial (man-made) drainage is required. There are two types of artificial drainage: surface
drainage and sub-surface drainage. Broadly speaking, surface drainage is the removal of excess

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 49

 Drainage Engineering Module

water from the surface of the land. It is the oldest drainage practice and is defined as: “The
diversion or orderly removal of excess water from the surface of the land by means of improved
natural or constructed channels, supplemented when necessary by shaping and grading of the
land surface to such channels’’.

As mentioned in previous chapter, surface drainage is applied primarily on flat lands where
slow infiltration, low permeability, or restricting layers in the profile prevent the ready
absorption of high-intensity rainfall. Therefore, this drainage system is intended to eliminate
ponding and prevent prolonged saturation by accelerating flow to an outlet without causing soil
erosion or siltation.

Two primary methods of surface drainage are land grading and field ditches. The selection of
surface drainage facilities for individual field areas depends largely on topography, soil
characteristics, crops, and availability of suitable outlets.

3.2 Components of surface drainage systems

A surface drainage system always has two components: (1) land forming, which is bedding,
land grading, or land planning, and (2) the construction of field and collector drains. The three
types of land forming are discussed first, followed by the design and construction of open
drains.

3.2.1 Land forming, land shaping and land grading

LAND FORMING

Bedding

Design considerations

To ensure good drainage in a bedding system, the beds should not be more than 10m wide.

Further, the width of the beds is governed by the following:

 The kind of crops to be grown: Field crops require narrower beds than permanent
pasture or hay crops do.
 Farming operations on beds: Ploughing, planting, and cultivating should fit the width
of a bed. Bed width should be a multiple of the effective width of farm equipment.
 Soil characteristics: Soils with low infiltration and low hydraulic conductivity require
narrower beds than soils with better characteristics.

Construction

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 50

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 40 shows how a bedding system is constructed. It often takes several years of ploughing
to obtain an adequate bedding system. During the first ploughing, care should be taken to make
beds of uniform width throughout the field and to have the field drains running in the direction
of the greatest slope. Any obstructions or low points in the field drains should be eliminated
because they will cause standing water and loss of crops. The collector drain should be laid out
in the direction of the lesser field slope, and should be properly graded towards the main
drainage system.

Figure 40 construction of bedding system

Land grading and land planning

When grading land for surface drainage, the slope does not need to be made uniform, as for
irrigation; a non-uniform slope will suffice (Figure 41).

Figure 41 Non-uniform grading for drainage comparing with uniform grading for irrigation
ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 51
 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 42: Recommended row length in relation to slope and erodibility of soils

In addition, the types of crop and how they will be grown have to be considered. Crops like
maize, potatoes, and sugar cane are grown in rows with small furrows in between. For such
crops, the length of the rows and the slopes of the field must be selected so as to avoid erosion
and overtopping of the small furrows. To prevent erosion, it is recommended that the flow
velocities in the furrows should not exceed 0.5m/s. In highly erodible soils; the row length is
limited to about [Link] erodible soils allow longer rows, up to 300m.

Figure 42 shows recommended lengths and slopes of rows (and the small field drains) in
relation to soil erodibility. The direction of the rows and furrows need not necessarily be at
right angles to the slope, but can be selected in any way that meets the above recommendations.

Small grains and hay crops are grown by broadcast sowing or in rows, but on an even surface
(i.e. no furrows). For such crops, surface drainage takes place by sheet flow. This flow is always
in the direction of the maximum slope. With sheet flow, the flow resistance is much higher
than in small furrows, and the flow velocity on the same land slope is less. Even after careful
land grading and smoothing, however, sheet flow always has a tendency to concentrate in
shallow depressions, and gullies are easily formed (Figure 43). With the transport duration for
low flow velocities in mind, it is recommended that the field length in the flow direction be
limited to 200m or less. For wet-land rice and other crops grown in basins, the surface is

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 52

 Drainage Engineering Module

levelled by earthmoving machinery (large basins) or with simple farm implements (Figure 44).
Levelled fields are surrounded by field bunds. Any excess water from basins is usually drained
through an overflow in the field bunds that spills the water directly into a field drain.

Figure 43 Sheet flow will result in erosion

Figure 44 Land levelling: final smoothing is done during the first irrigation

Land grading is essential to the development of surface irrigation systems. This practice has
been adopted in more humid regions as a method for improving surface drainage on flat lands

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 53

 Drainage Engineering Module

(Coote and Zwerman, 1970). Grading land for both surface irrigation and drainage is quite
practical and compatible.

Land forming is broader term than land grading in surface drainage, which is defined as ‘the
process of changing the natural topography so as to control the movement of water onto or
from the land surface’. It includes one or a combination of practices such as land levelling for
irrigation; land grading or shaping for irrigation, drainage and water conservation; and shallow
field ditches which can be crossed with farm machinery (Schwab et al., 2005). Land forming
also includes grading work for erosion control, for instance, contour benching or earthwork for
parallel terracing.

Land smoothing is generally referred to as the final operation of removing the minor
differences in elevations that result from the operation of scrapers or other large earth-moving
equipment.

 Note that the terms ‘land grading’, ‘land shaping’, and ‘land levelling’ are synonymous
(Schwab et al., 2005).

Figure 45 Steps in grading operations

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 54

 Drainage Engineering Module

Field drains for a surface drainage system have a different shape from field drains for
subsurface drainage. Those for surface drainage have to allow farm equipment to cross them
and should be easy to maintain with manual labour or ordinary mowers. Surface runoff reaches
the field drains by flow through row furrows or by sheet flow. In the transition zone between
drain and field, flow velocities should not induce erosion.

Field drains are thus shallow and have flat side slopes. Simple field drains are V-shaped. Their
dimensions are determined by the construction equipment, maintenance needs, and their
"cross-ability" by farm equipment. Side slopes should not be steeper than 6 to1. Nevertheless,
long field drains under conditions of high rainfall intensities, especially where field runoff from
both sides accumulates in the drain, may require a transport capacity greater than that of a
simple V-shaped channel. Without increasing the drain depth too much, its capacity can be
enlarged by constructing a flat bottom, thereby creating a shallow trapezoidal shape.

Figures 48A and B give some recommended dimensions of V-shaped and trapezoidal drains.
A variation is the W-shaped field drain, which is applicable where a farm road has to run
between the drains (Figure 48C). These drains are generally farmed through and their upper
slopes may well be planted. All field drains should be graded towards the collector drain with
grades between 0.1 and 0.3%.

Open collector drains collect water from field drains and transport it to the main drainage
system. In contrast to the field drain, the cross-section of collector drains should be designed
to meet the required discharge capacity. The hydraulic design is similar to the design of
irrigation canals.

Besides the discharge capacity, the design should take into consideration that, in some cases,
surface runoff from adjacent fields also flows directly into the field drains, which then require
a gentler side slope. When designing the system, maintenance requirements must be
considered. For example, if the collector drains are to be maintained by mowing, side slopes
should not be steeper than 3 to 1.

Attention must also be given to the transition between the field drains and the collector drains,
because differences in depth might cause erosion at those places. For low discharges, pipes are
a suitable means of protecting the transition (Figure 49). For higher discharges, open drop
structures are recommended.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 55

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 46 Construction of field drain

Open surface drains can be constructed manually or mechanically (Figure 46 &47). Care
should be taken that the spoil from the drains does not block the inflow of runoff, but is
deposited on the correct side of the ditch or is spread evenly over the adjacent fields.

Collector drains are usually constructed with different machinery than that used for field drains
(i.e. excavators instead of land planes) (Figure 47). The soil is placed near the sides of the drain.
Scrapers are needed when the excavated soil is to be transported some distance away.

Figure 47 an excavator is used to construct field drain

Construction

Land grading can be done by the farmers, although normal farm equipment, even if
mechanized, can handle small-scale grading operations or the maintenance of already
established grades. Large-scale land grading is done by contractors with conventional
earthmoving equipment or with laser-guided motorized graders.

 Grading operations involve a number of steps (Figure 45).

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 56

 Drainage Engineering Module

The first step is to prepare the site. If the land has already been cleared, the work mainly
involves removing or destroying vegetation and other obstacles, and levelling ridges or rows.
This can normally be done with farm equipment. The surface should be dry, firm, and well-
pulverized to enable the equipment to operate efficiently.

Figure 48 Types of passable fields and collector drains

Figure 49 A pipe connections between a field drain and a collector

The second step is rough grading. This can be done with various types of equipment (e.g.
dozers, motor graders, scrapers). The choice will depend on the soil conditions, the amount of
earthwork needed, the time and equipment available, the size of the fields to be graded as one
unit, and local experience.

The third step is the finished grading. On small fields, drags, harrows, and floats can be used.
These implements can be pulled by a farm tractor or by animal traction. On larger fields, a land
plane (a bottomless scraper) pulled by a farm tractor is used. For the final smoothing, several
passes are usually made at angles to one another.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 57

 Drainage Engineering Module

When extensive grading is done with heavy equipment, it is likely to cause the soil to become
compacted. This compaction should be relieved to eliminate differences in soil productivity.
Various tillage tools can be used for this work (e.g. sub-soilers, chisels, scarifiers, and rippers).

3.3 Design of surface drainage systems

Hydraulic design is similar to the design of irrigation canals. The design of drain dimensions
should be based on a peak discharge.

3.3.1 Design criteria

A drainage design criterion is a specified numerical value of one or more drainage
parameters that allow a design to be calculated with drainage equations.

Criteria for design of drainage systems are essentially the specifications for different
conditions.

Design criteria consist of two parameters:

1. The rate of water removal necessary to provide a certain degree of crop protection.

2. The optimum depth to water table.

Several factors must be considered in selection of design criteria for a particular project.

For example: Crop types (eg. Crop season drainage for aeration…), Soil types (eg. Heavy, light
soils…), Climate (eg. Humid, Temperate…), Type of drainage (eg. Pipe drains, open
ditches…), and Economic considerations

The depth of the water table is often used as a design criterion because it can be related to crop
production on the one hand, and to drain depth and spacing on the other. Since the water table
fluctuates with time, as was illustrated in Figure 50, the behaviour of the water table has to be
characterized by an appropriate index.

Various indices, based on a depth-duration-frequency analysis of the water table have been
developed. In literature, the following water table indices have been used:

1) Depth of the water table at harvest date;

2) Average depth of the water table during a season with rainfall excess;
3) Average depth of the water table during the irrigation season;

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 58

 Drainage Engineering Module

4) Frequency or number of days during the growing season with a water table shallower
than a certain reference level;
5) Sum of the Exceedance (SEx) of daily water tables over a fixed reference level at x cm
below the soil surface;
6) Time it takes for the water table to fall from a certain critically high level to a safe lower
level.

Depth of the Water table at Harvest Date

The depth of the water table at harvest date, the first index, is easily determined. Although it is
a once-only reading, it can sometimes be representative of the water table regime. Nevertheless,
literature does not provide much information on the value of this index and it will therefore not
be further discussed.

Average Depth of the Water table during a Season with Rainfall Excess.

The average depth of the water table during a season with rainfall excess, the second index, is
useful in areas with a pronounced humid period the example given in Figure 50 concerns an
area in England. It illustrates the effect of off-season drainage, because in England the growing
period is in summer whereas the data on the water table depth were collected in winter. It
appears that the depth in winter exerts a marked influence on the yield in summer, probably
because a well-drained soil warms up faster in spring than a waterlogged soil, so that crop
growth can start earlier. Also, water logging in spring may create unfavourable chemical or
physical soil conditions. In summer, there is usually no drainage problem in England because
the evapotranspiration is then much higher than in winter, and the water tables are therefore
deep (> 1 m). From the data of Figure 50, we can conclude that, if drainage could maintain the
water table in winter at an average depth of 0.50 m or more, a considerable yield benefit would
result. This depth would be a good agricultural drainage criterion for the area in which the data
were collected. The trend in the figure suggests that maintaining an average water table deeper
than 0.60 m would be excessive: the costs would be higher and there would be no additional
crop response. The data of Figure 50 also reveal that, under good agricultural conditions
(represented by the upper envelope), the permissible average depth of the water table (about
0.30 m) is shallower than the permissible depth (about 0.60 m) under poor agricultural
conditions (represented by the lower envelope). It appears that, in this example, favourable

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 59

 Drainage Engineering Module

agricultural conditions compensate for unfavourable water table depths. Further, the data show
that the relationship between crop production and depth of the water table is subject to
considerable scatter, which is logical because crop production is not determined exclusively by
the depth of the water table but by many other agricultural conditions. The data of Figure 50,
which were collected in farmers' fields, are more representative of reality than data obtained
under controlled conditions where only the drainage situation is varied and all other production
factors are kept constant

Figure 50A plot of the yield of winter wheat versus average depth of the watertable in
winter in a heavy clay soil in England

Average Depth of the Water table during the Irrigation Season

The third index is the average depth of the water table during the irrigation season. Figure 51
gives an example from the Nile Delta in Egypt. It shows that the critical value of the average
seasonal depth of the water table in irrigated cotton fields is about 0.90 m. This would be a
good field drainage criterion. The figure shows that a small majority of the data (about 60%)
are found in the range of water table depths of over 0.90 m (the safe depth). This indicates that
the yield increase of a drainage project would be less than in the example of Figure 50, where
the vast majority of the data (about 90%) are below the safe depth. Unlike Figure 51, Figure
50 makes no distinction between the breakpoints of upper and lower envelope. For the rest,
many of the conclusions drawn from Figure 50 are also applicable to Figure 51.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 60

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 51 A plot of cotton yield (lint + seed) versus average depth of the water table in
farmers’ fields in the Nile Delta, Egypt

Frequency a Water table is Shallower than a certain Reference Level

The fourth index, the frequency or number of days during the growing season with a water
table shallower than a certain reference level is shown, together with the second index, in the
example of Figure 52. It shows the production of sugar cane as a function of the average depth
of the water table during the growing season from December to June (indicated by circles), and
the number of days during which the water table is shallower than 0.5 m below the soil surface
in the same period (indicated by dots). The function shows that both indices give the same
result, because the long-term average depth and the number of extremely shallow depths are
apparently strongly correlated. This is logical because, when the average depth is great, a
shallow depth is relatively infrequent, and vice versa. Therefore, if one employs either of these
indices, the other will not provide any additional explanation of variations in yield. In this
example, it is better to use the seasonal average depth as an index because it can be determined
with a higher statistical certainty and it leads to a simpler design procedure than when the
number of exceedances of a reference level needs to be taken into account. If the yield data of
Figure 52 represent random samples from an area, the figure also shows that a large part of the
area has serious drainage problems and that, if a drainage project could ensure a seasonal
average water table depth of 0.75 m, or somewhat deeper, a large production increase could
result. This increase can be calculated from the data by a segmented linear regression analysis.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 61

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 52A plot of sugar cane yield versus the average depth of the water table and the
number of days with a water table shallower than 0.5 m during the growing season from
December to June, North- Queens land, Australia

Sum of the Exceedances

The Sum of the Exceedances (SEx) of daily water tables over a fixed reference level at x cm
below the soil surface (the fifth index) is illustrated in Figure 53. It reveals that the yield does
not respond much to the fifth index (the SEx value). Therefore, in the example given, the SEx
index has less value for the development of a drainage criterion than the second index used in
Figure 49. It appears that short-term exceedances of the water table over a shallow reference
level are not harmful for irrigated cotton. This may be explained by the fact that irrigation
supplies are usually much more regular in magnitude and time than rainfall is. In addition, the
regular irrigation may be instrumental in expelling the noxious gasses formed in the soil by the
plant roots, whereas the subsequent evaporation enhances the entry of fresh air into the soil.
Only long-term shallow depths of the water table appear to be damaging.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 62

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 53A plot of cotton yield (lint +seed) versus SE60 in farmers’ fields in the Nile Delta

Falling Water table

The sixth index is the time it takes for the water table to fall from a certain critically high level
to a safe lower level. For this index, not many examples for crop production can be found in
literature. Therefore, instead of crop yield, the workability of land was chosen as an object
factor as shown in Figure 54 This figure, like the previous ones, shows a large scatter of data.
Yet it permits the conclusion that the longest permissible time of drawdown from the soil
surface to a depth of 50 cm is about 75 hours or about 3 days. With a shorter drawdown time
(i.e. with a faster drawdown rate), the number of workable days does not increase, and its
maximum value is about 20 days a month. The drawdown rate of the water table as a criterion
index should be used with great care, because it does not specify how frequently the water table
rises to critically high levels. If not used with care, one runs the risk of developing drainage
criteria for situations that seldom occur.

Figure 54A plot of drawdown time of the water table versus number of workable days for
different drainage systems in North Carolina, USA

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 63

 Drainage Engineering Module

The length of the field drains is determined either by fixed (farm) boundaries or by a fixed
length. It is often decided to place the field drains perpendicular to the collectors. If so, it may
happen that the field drains do not run parallel to the minor infrastructure, such as irrigation
canals or farm roads. In such a case, it is advised to install the field drains at such an angle with
the collector that the number of crossings with the minor infrastructure is minimized. The
spacing of the collectors is often determined by the standard length of the field drains. The
collector alignments are further fixed by the field boundaries. The length of a collector is
restricted either by a field boundary or by the available slope. The available slope is fixed by
the shallowest permissible drain depth, the maximum water level in the main drain, and the
slope of the land surface.

3.3.2 Drainage design equations

Design discharge can be calculated using:

𝑸 = 𝑫𝒄 ∗ 𝑨 .......................................................................................................Equation 1
Where: 𝐷𝑐 = drainage coefficient,

A = area in ha,

Q = Discharge from the field

But this is not necessarily true in small irrigation schemes, especially on sloping lands (with
slopes exceeding 0.5%) then design discharge can be calculated using:

 The rational formula

 The curve number method

The rational formula

It is the easier of the two and generally gives satisfactory.

𝑪𝑰𝑨
𝑸 = 𝟑𝟔𝟎 ....................................................................................................Equation 2

Where: Q= design discharge in (m3/se)

C = runoff coefficient

I = mean rainfall intensity over a period equal to the time of concentration (mm/hr)

A = Drainage area in (ha)

The time of concentration (Tc):

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 64

 Drainage Engineering Module

It is a concept used in hydrology to measure the response of a watershed to a rainfall event. It

is defined as the time needed for water to flow from the most remote point in a watershed to
the watershed outlet.

Figure 55: Time of concentration

It can be estimated by the formula:

𝑻𝒄 = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟏𝟗𝟓 𝑲𝟎.𝟕𝟕 .........................................................................................Equation 3

Where, Tc = Time of concentration (minutes)

𝑲 = (𝑳/ √𝑺) ; .................................................................................Equation 4

𝑺 = 𝑯/𝑳=slope; ..............................................................................Equation 5
L = Maximum length of drain (m)

H = Difference in elevation over drain length (m)

Example 1:
An irrigation scheme of 100ha with sandy loam soils and a general slope of less than
5% has a main drain of 2.5km long with a difference in elevation of 10m. What
is the time of concentration?

Example 2: In example 1, the 68minutes rainfall with a return period of 5 years is

estimated at 8.5mm. What is the design discharge of the drain?

3.3.3 Hydraulic design of surface drainage

Hydraulic Design of Surface Drains and its Related Structure Construction

Field surface drain: Is a shallow graded channel with relatively flat slope, collects water
within a field.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 65

 Drainage Engineering Module

Field lateral: collect water from field drains & transport it to the main drainage system.

Field Drains: Field drains are shallow & have flat side slopes.

 Simple field drains are V -shaped.

 Dimensions of V -shaped drains, also applies to W -shaped drains.
 Field drains (which collect runoff in both directions) could have trapezoidal shape.
 Field laterals and field drains usually have a trapezoidal cross-section and
 Their cross-sections are designed to meet the required discharge capacity.
 The water level in the drain at design capacity should ideally allow free drainage of
water from the fields.

Table 6: Recommended values for the given cross-sections

Types of drain Depth (m) Recommended side Maximum side slope

slope (x:1) (x:1)
V-shaped 0.3 to 0.6 6:1 3:1
V-shaped >0.6 4:1 3:1
Trapezoidal 0.3 to 1.0 4:1 2:1
Trapezoidal >1.0 1.5:1 1:1

Surface Drainage Systems for Sloping Areas

 It is applied in sloping areas (slopes > 2 %).

 It comprises the creation of suitable conditions to regulate the overland flow before it
becomes hazardous as an erosion force.

Sloping lands are terraced for the following reasons:

 Drainage
 Erosion Control
 Water conservation

Terraces applied for the above purposes are basically of two types:

1. Cross slope drainage system

2. Standard erosion control terrace

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 66

 Drainage Engineering Module

Water Disposal in Sloping Areas

 The water must be disposed by a drainage channel which runs down slope.
 Slope is usually steep such that channels will have to be lined or fitted with drop
structures to prevent scouring.

Diversion or Interceptor Drains

 To protect flat areas from flooding, a diversion or interceptor drain can be constructed
at the foot of upland areas.
 To prevent diversion or interceptor drains from silting up, a filter strip can be
constructed on the upside of the ditch.

Drainage Canals

 Drainage canals are used to prevent damage to crops by carrying away the excess
water.

Two types of drainage canals can be visualized:

1. A canal system (steep slope land):

 Intercept, collect, carry away water from sloping land adjacent to an agricultural area.
 Most of the water in the system originates from surface run-off.
2. A Canal System (Flat slope land):
 Collect & carry water from a relatively flat agricultural area.
 The main source of water is the precipitation on the area or irrigation.

An Open Ditch Properly Designed Should Have;

 Sufficient capacity to carry the design flow.

 Water surface elevation low enough to drain the land.
 Side slopes be selected such a way that neither cave-in nor slide.
 Velocity of flow is such that it is neither scouring nor silting.

Table 7: The followings are recommended values of slope and velocity

Types of soil Max. Velocity(m/se) Types of soil Allowable slope

Sandy and sandy loam 0.75 Clay soil 1:1
Silt loam 0.90 Silt loam 1.5:1
Sandy clay loam 1.0 Sandy loam 2:1
Clay loam 1.20 Loose sandy loam 3:1
Stiff clay 1.50
Ditch cross section

 Are usually designed with trapezoidal cross section?

 Manning’s equation is used for the design

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 67

 Drainage Engineering Module

The size of ditch varies with:

 The velocity
 Quantity of water removed

Bottom Width

 For the most efficient cross section & for minimum volume of excavation, the bottom
width is determined by:

𝒃 = 𝟐 𝒅 𝒕𝒂𝒏 𝜽/𝟐 ...............................................................................................Equation 6

Where, b = bottom width (m);

d = depth (m);

θ = side slope angle

3.4 Maintenance of surface drains

Like any system, drainage systems require maintenance to perform correctly. The maintenance
required depends on the drainage system type; tile and ditch systems have different
maintenance needs.

 Developing a drainage system management plan is a good first step to ensuring that a
drainage system continues to function correctly.
 Any drainage system management plan should include good documentation maps of
the location of ditches, outlets, and buried tile and should begin with periodic
inspections of the system.
 Ditch systems should be inspected regularly for any obstructions or impedance to flow
in the ditch, bed erosion, or bank failures.
 Obstructions should be removed as they are encountered, and any bed erosion or bank
failures should be repaired and comply with design standards (note that this could
require consulting with an engineer or drainage contractor).
 Also, any junctions where two or more ditches meet should be inspected for erosion or
scour and fixed as appropriate.

Vegetation can grow rapidly in ditches, which reduces the ability of the ditch to convey water.
Mowing the bottoms of ditches is more effective than mowing the sides for water conveyance.
Similarly, ditches can fill in with sediment from surrounding fields or upslope contributing
areas, further reducing conveyance capacity.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 68

 Drainage Engineering Module

A ditch management plan should include vegetation and sediment control

measures.

 Vegetation can be controlled by mowing, pasturing of livestock, burning, applying

chemicals, or mechanical removal (scraping), although pasturing of livestock can cause
bank stability problems and using chemicals can increase off-site contamination.
 Sediment control usually involves periodic “dip-outs” (scraping) of sediments that have
accumulated in the ditch.

Grade stabilization of ditch bottoms and sides is important as well.

Over time, the ditch sidewalls, in particular, can change their slope, especially in sandier non
cohesive soils, which affects the hydraulic function of the ditch (i.e., its ability to convey
water). Grade stabilization should be employed periodically to ensure the ditch maintains its
design capacity.

The benefits derived from land grading depend on good maintenance

Unless properly maintained, ditches will rapidly lose their effectiveness owing to weed
growth and accumulation of sediments.

Tile systems and outlets should be inspected regularly as well.

Given that these systems are underground and more difficult to visually inspect, one of the best
times to assess system function is during periods of high drain flow. Verify that all tile outlets
are flowing freely and that the flow is sediment-free. Sediment in the tile flow could indicate a
failure in the tile system in the field. Any debris encountered at the outlets should be removed;
a submerged tile outlet can cause back pressure in the tile system and lead to blowouts. Walk
the field in which the tiles are installed and make sure there are no blowouts, sinkholes, or
animal burrows that could allow sediment or surface contamination to enter the tile system;
repair them as necessary. Wet spots in new locations could be an indication of a clogged or
damaged tile, and careful excavation and repair could be required. Crop growth is also a good
indicator of a well-functioning tile system in which the field should dry evenly and produce
similar yields. Changes in yield in different areas of the field could indicate a problem with the
system.
ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 69
 Drainage Engineering Module

In general maintenance includes:

 Weed control
 Although weeds must be controlled, a vegetative cover of the banks is often necessary:
 To provide stability for the side slopes of the ditch.
 Removal of soil & mud

3.5 Economics of surface drains

3.5.1 Introduction
Land drainage is generally undertaken either to bring land into production or to increase the
productivity of existing cultivable land. It represents a capital investment intended to result in
future benefits and the viability of the drainage project should be assessed like any other
investment on the basis of sound economic analysis. Economic evaluation of any
projects/schemes calls for the comparison of benefits and costs. However, which items should
be regarded as benefits and costs and how they should be valued depends at least partly on the
outcome of planning process in other strata of the economy (Smedema and Rycroft, 1983).
Thus, a proper identification of costs and benefits is the key to any economic analysis.

 The costs of a drainage project can conveniently be grouped under the following heads
(ILRI,1974):
 Initial or capital investments: Examples of capital investments are: canals, control
works, ditches, pipes, pumps, land levelling, land clearing, farm roads, reallocation of
existing structures, etc.
 Replacement investments: They are required in the future when capital goods come to
the end of their technical or economic lifetime and have to be replaced.
 Loss of existing property.
 Recurrent costs of the maintenance works.
 Recurrent costs of the operation and management of a scheme.
 Other associated costs.
 The benefits of land drainage may be divided into following two major heads:
 Tangible benefits: Examples of tangible benefits are: enhanced agricultural production,
water supply for domestic or industrial use, etc.
 Intangible benefits: Examples of intangible benefits are: improvement in local
environment, improved hygiene, better trafficability, etc.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 70

 Drainage Engineering Module

3.5.2 Computation of costs and benefits for economic analysis

[Link] Computation of discounting factor

The costs and the benefits of a land drainage project occur at different times during the project
period; the main cost occurring mostly during the construction phase and the benefits after the
project has reached maturity. Hence, there is a need for some device to bring the benefits and
costs occurring at different points of time on to a common base; otherwise no comparisons are
possible. This device is called discounting. Numerically, discounting is the inverse of charging
compound interest. It is calculated using the following equation (Finkel, 1983):

𝟏
𝑫𝑭 = ∑𝑷𝑳
𝒊=𝟏 (𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒕 ………………………………………. Equation 7

Where, DF = discounting factor, PL = life of the drainage project (years), and RI = rate of
interest

(fraction).

Example

What is the value of discounting factor (DF) for Present value of 100 Rs. With interest rate of
10% and the future value after one year (i=1year) is 110 Rs.?

Solution

1 1 1
𝐷𝐹 = ∑𝑃𝐿 𝑃𝐿
𝑖=1 (1+𝑅𝐼)𝑡  𝐷𝐹 = ∑𝑖=1 (1+0.1)1 = 1.1 = 0.909

𝑃𝑉 100
OR 𝐷𝐹 = 𝐹𝑉 = 110 = 0.909

[Link] Computation of annual repayment

The annual repayment on the initial loan at a rate of interest and over a repayment period is
calculated as (Finkel, 1983):

𝑰𝑪
𝑭=
𝑷𝑾𝑭
……………………………………………………..Equation 8
Here, PWF (present worth factor) is equal to:

[(𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝑹𝑷 −𝟏]
𝑷𝑾𝑭 =
𝑹𝑰(𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝑹𝑷
……………………………………….Equation 9

Where, F = annual repayment (Rs.), IC = initial investment (Rs.), RP = repayment period

(years), and the remaining symbols have the same meaning as defined earlier.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 71

 Drainage Engineering Module

Example

If the farmer takes a loan of 10000ETB for the construction drainage system with interest rate
of 10% for five-year period, how much will be he repay to finish his loan within five years?

Solution

𝑰𝑪 𝟏𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎
𝑭 = 𝑷𝑾𝑭  𝑭 = , but PWF is calculated by this formula
𝑷𝑾𝑭

[(𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝑹𝑷 −𝟏] [(𝟏+𝟎.𝟏)𝟓 −𝟏]

𝑷𝑾𝑭 = 𝑹𝑰(𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝑹𝑷
 𝑷𝑾𝑭 = 𝟎.𝟏(𝟏+𝟎.𝟏)𝟓
= 𝟗. 𝟖𝟑𝟐

10000
Therefor, F = = 1,017𝐸𝑇𝐵/𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
9.832

[Link] Inflation factor computation

Rate of the money can increase the future costs and benefits are increased in value to take
account of an assumed rate of inflation. Yearly inflation factor is calculated by:

𝑰𝑭 = (𝟏 + 𝑰𝑹)𝑷𝑳 ………………………………………….Equation 10
Where, IF = inflation factor, IR = inflation rate (fraction), and the remaining symbols have the
same meaning as defined earlier.

Example

If the farmer takes a loan of 10000ETB for the construction drainage system with interest rate
of 10% for ten-year life period of drainage, how much will the yearly inflation factor?

Solution

𝐈𝐅 = (𝟏 + 𝐈𝐑)𝐏𝐋  𝐈𝐅 = (𝟏 + 𝟎. 𝟏)𝟏𝟎 = 𝟐. 𝟓𝟗𝟒

3.5.3 Indices for Economic evaluation

In practice, three principal indices are used in an economic analysis:

(i) net present value (NPV),

(ii) benefit-cost ratio (B-C ratio), and
(iii) internal rate of return (IRR). A brief description about these
economic indices is given below.

[Link] Net present value (NPV)

Net Present Value (NPV) is the difference between the present value of benefits and costs. It
also known as Net Present Worth (NPW). Clearly, a positive value of NPV (or NPW) is
ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 72
 Drainage Engineering Module

desirable (Smedema and Rycroft, 1983). The formula for the computation of NPV is (ILRI,
1974; Brooks et al., 1997):

(𝑩 −𝑪 )
𝑵𝑷𝑽 = ∑𝑷𝑳 𝒊 𝒊
𝒊=𝟏 (𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒊 ……………………………………………Equation 11

Where, Bi = benefits in the ith year (Rs.), Ci = cost in the ith year (Rs.), and the remaining
symbols have the same meaning as defined earlier.

[Link] Benefit-Cost ratio (B-C ratio)

Benefit-Cost Ratio (B-C Ratio) is the present value of benefits divided by present value of
costs. For a project to be economically viable, the B-C ratio should be greater than one
(Smedema and Rycroft, 1983). The benefit-cost ratio is computed as (Brooks et al., 1997):

𝑩
∑𝑷𝑳 𝒊
𝒊=𝟏[(𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒕]
𝑩 − 𝑪 𝑹𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐 = 𝑪𝒊 ……………………………………..Equation 12
∑𝑷𝑳
𝒊=𝟏[ ]
(𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒕

[Link] Internal rate of return

Internal Rate of Return (IRR) is often used for large public projects (Smedema and Rycroft,
1983). Unlike the NPV or B-C ratio, the IRR does not use a predetermined discount rate.
Rather, IRR is the discount rate that sets the present value of benefits equal to the present value
of costs. That is (Brooks et al., 1997),

𝑩𝒊 𝑪
∑𝑷𝒍
𝒊=𝟏 = ∑𝑷𝑳 𝒊
𝒊=𝟏 (𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒊 ……………………………………………….Equation 13
(𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒊

(𝑩 −𝑪 )
Or, ∑𝑷𝑳 𝒊 𝒊
𝒊=𝟏 (𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒊 = 𝟎 ……………………………………………………….Equation 14

Example
A drainage system project in Shambu costs $100,000 initially and is expected to generate
annual benefits of $30,000 for 5 years. Assuming a 10% discount rate, what will be Net Present
Value (NPV), Benefit-Cost Ratio (B-C ratio), and Internal Rate of Return (IRR) for a drainage
system project?
Solution
1. Net Present Value (NPV):

Formula:

(𝑩 −𝑪 )
𝑵𝑷𝑽 = ∑𝑷𝑳 𝒊 𝒊
𝒊=𝟏 (𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒊

All Calculation is done in table below

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 73

 Drainage Engineering Module

Year Calculation Result

0 -$100,000 (cost) -$100,000 (cost)
1 $30,000/(1+0.10)1 $27,272.73(benefit)
2 $30,000/(1+0.10)2 $24,883.72 (benefit)
3 $30,000/(1+0.10)3 $22,621.57 (benefit)
4 $30,000/(1+0.10)4 $20,565.06 (benefit)
5 $30,000/(1+0.10)5 $18,695.51 (benefit )
𝑷𝑳
(𝑩𝒊 − 𝑪𝒊 )
𝑵𝑷𝑽 = ∑
(𝟏 + 𝑹𝑰)𝒊
𝒊=𝟏

Total NPV $14,038.59

NPV: -$100,000 + $27,272.73 + $24,883.72 + $22,621.57 + $20,565.06 + $18,695.51 =

$14,038.59

2. Benefit-Cost Ratio (B-C Ratio):

Formula: B-C Ratio = (Present Value of Benefits) / (Present Value of Costs)

𝑩𝒊
∑𝑷𝑳
𝒊=𝟏[(𝟏 + 𝑹𝑰)𝒕 ]
𝑩 − 𝑪 𝑹𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐 =
𝑪𝒊
∑𝑷𝑳
𝒊=𝟏[(𝟏 + 𝑹𝑰)𝒕 ]

Calculation:

Present Value of Benefits: $27,272.73 + $24,883.72 + $22,621.57 + $20,565.06 +

$18,695.51 = $113,038.69

Present Value of Costs: $100,000

B-C Ratio: $113,038.69 / $100,000 = 1.13

3. Internal Rate of Return (IRR):

Explanation:

IRR is the discount rate at which the NPV of the project equals zero. It's the rate of
return the project is expected to generate.

Calculation:

IRR is typically calculated using financial software or a trial-and-error approach. In this

example, we can see that the NPV is positive at a 10% discount rate. To find the IRR,
we would need to adjust the discount rate until the NPV is zero. For this example, we
can estimate that the IRR is greater than 10%.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 74

 Drainage Engineering Module

o Using a spreadsheet: You can use the IRR function in Excel or Google Sheets
to find the IRR.
o Estimating: Since the NPV is positive at 10%, and the benefits are higher than
the costs, the IRR is likely to be higher than 10%

[Link] Capital recovery factor (CRF)

A more precise method for computing the annual amortized fixed cost is to take into account
the expected service life of the project/item and the interest rate. In this method, the fixed cost
is based on the present worth multiplied by the „capital recovery factor‟. Capital Recovery
Factor (CRF) is defined as the ratio of a constant annuity to the present value of receiving that
annuity for a given time period. It is mathematically expressed as (James and Lee, 1971):

𝐢(𝟏+𝐢)𝐧
𝐂𝐑𝐅 = (𝟏+𝐢)𝐧 …………………………………………….. Equation 15
−𝟏

Where, i = rate of interest (fraction), and n = anticipated service life of the drainage project

(years)

Example problem on economic analysis of drainage projects

The following data are given for land drainage systems

 Total costs of drainage systems = 520 £/ha

 Maintenance costs of drainage systems = 5 £/ha
 Rate of interest = 10 % /year
 Repayment period = 10 years
 Inflation rate = 5 %
 Life of drainage project = 20 years
 Total benefits = 90 £/ha

Solution: the solution to the above problem is presented in table below;

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 75

 Drainage Engineering Module

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 76

 Drainage Engineering Module

Chapter Four

4. Sub-Surface Drainage Systems

4.1 Introduction
Subsurface drainage is the removal of excess water from the root zone. It is accomplished by
deep open drains or buried pipe drains. Subsurface drainage is an important conservation
practice. In subsurface drainage, field drains are used to control the depth of the water table
and the level of salinity in the root zone by evacuating excess groundwater.

Specific benefits of subsurface drainage are:

(i) Aeration of the soil for maximum development of plant roots and desirable soil
microorganisms;
(ii) Increased length of growing season because of earlier possible planting dates;
(iii)Decreased possibility of adversely affecting soil tilth through tillage at excessive soil
water levels;
(iv) Improvement of soil water conditions in relation to the operation of tillage, planting
and harvesting machines;
(v) Removal of toxic substances, such as salts, that in some soils retard plant growth; and
(vi) Greater storage capacity for water, resulting in less runoff and a lower initial water table
following rains.

Through these benefits drainage enhances farm productivity by:

a) Adding productive land without extending farm boundaries,

b) Increasing yield and quality of crops,
c) Permitting good soil management,
d) Ensuring that crops may be planted and harvested at optimum dates, and
e) Eliminating inefficient machine operation caused by small wet areas in fields.

4.2 Components of sub-surface drainage system

4.3 Types of sub surface drainage systems

If one has decided to install a subsurface drainage system, one has to make a subsequent choice
between well drainage, open drains, pipe drains, and mole drains. Well drainage and mole
drainage are applied only in very specific conditions. Also, mole drainage is mainly aimed at a

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 77

 Drainage Engineering Module

rapid removal of excess surface water, not controlling water table. Therefore, the usual choice
is between open drains and pipe drains.

This choice has to be made at two levels:

a) For field drains, and

b) For collectors

If the field drains are to be pipe drains, there are still two options for the types of collectors:

I. They can be open drains so that we have ‘a singular pipe- drain system’ or
II. They can be pipe drains so that we have ‘a composite pipe-drain system’

Open drains have the advantage that they can receive overland flow directly, but the
disadvantages often outweigh the advantages.

The main disadvantages of open drains are:

 Loss of land,
 Interference with the irrigation system,
 Splitting-up of the land into small parcels that hamper mechanized farming operations,
and
 The burden of maintenance.

Nevertheless, there are the cases where open drains are used exclusively, e.g., peat soils and
very saline land under a monoculture of rice.

Moreover, a combined system of surface and subsurface drainage may be more appropriate in
certain field situations. Salient examples are as follows:

1. A soil profile with a layer of low permeability below the root zone, but good
permeability at drain depth: this is a soil profile that can be found in alluvial soils
throughout the world. After a heavy rain, a perched water table forms in the root zone,
which cannot be lowered rapidly enough without some form of surface drainage.
Subsurface drainage subsequently lowers the water table to a normal depth. An
alternative solution could be to break up the impermeable layer by sub soiling,
especially if the impeding layer is less than about 0.3m thick.
2. Areas with deep frost penetration and snow cover during winter: when the snow melts
and the topsoil thaws, but soil at some depth is still frozen, a perched water table will
form and will damage a crop of winter grain. The same measures as in the previous
example are required here;
ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 78
 Drainage Engineering Module

3. Irrigated land in arid and semi-arid regions, where the cropping pattern includes rice in
rotation with ‘dry-foot’ crops (e.g., as in the Nile delta in Egypt): subsurface drainage
is needed for salinity control of the dry-foot crops, whereas surface drainage is needed
to evacuate the standing water from the rice fields (e.g., before harvest).
4. Areas with occasional high-intensity rainfall that causes water ponding on the land
surface, even if a subsurface drainage is present: the ponded water could be removed
by the subsurface drainage, but this may either take too long time or require very narrow
drain spacing. Under such circumstances, it would be more efficient to remove the
ponded water by surface drainage.

4.4 Design of depth and spacing of sub-surface drainage systems

4.4.1 Design criteria

The depth and spacing of field drains are usually determined with the help of drainage
equations. There are three criterions for design of sub-surface drainage:

 Agricultural requirements, i.e. the depth of the water table and the depth of the root
zone;
 Soil characteristics, i.e. the hydraulic conductivity and depth to the impermeable
layer, and the hydrological factors like the drainage surplus, and
 Engineering factors, i.e. construction methods and construction machinery.

Figure 56 Input factors for the calculation of the drain spacing

The drainage equations are based on several assumptions, thus it should be kept in mind that
all solutions are approximations; however, their accuracy is such that their application is fully
justified.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 79

 Drainage Engineering Module

Two approaches can be distinguished:

1. the steady state approach and

2. the unsteady state approach.

Steady-state Approach

Steady state equations are derived under the assumption that the recharge to the groundwater
equals the drain discharge and consequently that the water table remains in the same position.
Steady state equations can be used for areas with a humid climate and with prolonged periods
of rather uniform, medium intensity rainfall. The most well-known steady state equation is the
Hooghoudt Equation. Several other authors presented different solutions for the same flow
problem, i.e. two-dimensional flow, an evenly distributed recharge and drains not reaching an
impervious layer. As these other solutions give almost identical results as Hooghoudt, they are
not discussed.

Unsteady-state Approach

In reality the recharge to the water table varies in time and consequently the flow of
groundwater towards the drains is not steady. To describe the fluctuation of the water table as
a function of time, the unsteady state approach can be used. An example of the unsteady state
approach is the Glover-Dumm Equation which describes a falling water table after a sudden
rise of the water table due to an instantaneous recharge. This is a typical situation in irrigated
areas where the water table often rises sharply during application of irrigation water and then
recedes more slowly. We will conclude this chapter with a short comparison between the steady
state and unsteady state approach.

4.4.2 Principles of the Drainage Equations.

Both the steady state approach and the unsteady state approach are based on the same
(DupuitForchheimer) assumptions, the only difference is the uniform distribution of the
recharge, which in the unsteady state approach varies in time. The steady state theory is based
on a uniform, steady rate of recharge which will cause the water table to remain at the same
height as long as the recharge continues. Figure 57 shows two typical cross-sections of a
drainage system under these conditions. As the groundwater is under recharge from excess
rainfall, excess irrigation, or upward seepage, the water table is curved, its elevation being
highest midway between the drains. Because of the symmetry of the system, we only have to

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 80

 Drainage Engineering Module

consider one half of the figure. To describe the flow of groundwater to such a drainage system
we have to make the following assumptions:

 Two-dimensional flow. This means that the flow is considered to be identical in any
cross-section perpendicular to the drains; this is only true for infinite long drains;
 Uniform distribution of the recharge;
 Homogeneous and isotropic soils. We thus ignore any spatial variation in the hydraulic
conductivity within a soil layer, although we can treat soil profiles consisting of two or
more layers.

Most drainage equations are based on the Dupuit-Forchheimer assumptions, in which the two-
dimensional flow problem is further reduced to a one-dimensional flow by assuming parallel
and horizontal stream lines. This assumption is correct as long as the impervious subsoil is
close to the drain. The Hooghoudt Equation is based on these conditions.

Figure 57: Cross-section of open field drains (A) and pipe drains (B), showing a curved
water table under recharge from rainfall, irrigation, or upward seepage.

The Hooghoudt Equation

Consider a steady-state flow to vertically-walled open drains reaching an impervious layer

(Figure 58). According to the Dupuit-Forchheimer theory, Darcy's Equation can be applied to
describe the flow of groundwater (qx) through a vertical plane (y) at a distance (x) from the
ditch

𝒅𝒚
𝒒𝒙 = 𝒌𝒚 𝒅 ...................................................................................................Equation 16
𝒙

Where: qx = unit flow rate in the x-direction (m2/d)

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 81

 Drainage Engineering Module

Ky = hydraulic conductivity of the soil (m/d)

y = height of the water table at x (m)

𝑑𝑦
𝑑𝑥
= hydraulic gradient at x (-)

Figure 58: Flow to vertically-walled drains reaching the impervious layer

The continuity principle requires that all the water entering the soil in the surface area midway between
the drains and the vertical plane (y) at distance (x) must pass through this plane on its way to the drain.
If R is the rate of recharge per unit area, then the flow per unit time through the plane (y) is

𝟏
𝒒𝒙 = 𝑹 (𝟐 𝑳 − 𝒙) .....................................................................................................Equation 17

Where: R = rate of recharge per unit surface area (m/d)

L = drain spacing (m)

Since the flow in the two cases must be equal, we can equate the right side of Equations 7 and 8
𝑑𝑦 1
𝑘𝑦 𝑑 = 𝑅 (2 𝐿 − 𝑥) which can also be written as
𝑥

1
𝑘𝑦 𝑑𝑦= 𝑅 (2 𝐿 − 𝑥) 𝑑𝑥

The limits of integration of this differential equation are

1
For x = O  y = D and for x = 2 𝐿  y = H

Where: D = elevation of the water level in the drain (m)

H = elevation of the water table midway between the drains (m)

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 82

 Drainage Engineering Module

Integrating the differential equation and substituting the limits yields

4𝑘(𝐻 2 −𝐷2 )
𝐿2 = 𝑅

Or

𝟒𝒌(𝑯𝟐 −𝑫𝟐 )
𝒒=𝑹= ................................................................................Equation 18
𝑳𝟐

Where: q = drain discharge (m/d)

This equation, which was derived by Hooghoudt in 1936, is also known as the Donnan Equation
(Donnan 1946). Equation 18 can be rewritten as
4𝑘(𝐻+𝐷)(𝐻−𝐷)
𝑞=
𝐿2

From figure 58, it follows that H-D = h and thus H+D = 2D+h, where h is the height of the
water table above the water level in the drain. Subsequently, Equation 18 changes to

𝟖𝒌𝑫𝒉+𝟒𝒌𝒉𝟐
𝒒= ................................................................................................Equation 19
𝑳𝟐

If the water level in the drain is very low (𝑫 ≈ 𝟎), Equation 10 changes to

𝟒𝒌𝒉𝟐
𝒒= ...............................................................................................Equation 20
𝑳𝟐

 This equation describes the flow above drain level.

If the impervious layer is far below drain level (D >> h), the second term in the
enumerator of Equation 18 can be neglected, giving
𝟖𝒌𝑫𝒉
𝒒= ................................................................................................................Equation 21
𝑳𝟐

 This equation describes the flow below drain level.

These considerations lead to the conclusion that, if the soil profile consists of two layers with
different hydraulic conductivities, and if the drain level is at the interface between the soil
layers, Equation 18 can be written as

𝟖𝒌𝒃 𝑫𝒉+𝟒𝒌𝒕 𝒉𝟐
𝒒= ..................................................................................................Equation 22
𝑳𝟐

Where: Kt = hydraulic conductivity of the layer above drain level (m/d)

Kb = hydraulic conductivity of the layer below drain level (m/d)

This situation is quite common, the soil above drain level often being more permeable than
below drain level because the soil structure above drain level has been improved by:

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 83

 Drainage Engineering Module

- The periodic wetting and drying of the soil, resulting in the formation of cracks;
- The presence of roots, micro-organisms, micro-fauna, etc.

Figure 59: The concept of the equivalent depth, d, to transform a combination of

horizontal and radial flow (A) into an equivalent horizontal flow (B)

If the pipe or open drains do not reach the impervious layer, the flow lines will converge
towards the drain and will thus no longer be horizontal (Figure 59A). Consequently, the flow
lines are longer and extra head loss is required to have the same volume of water flowing into
the drains. This extra head loss results in a higher water table. To be able to use the concept of
horizontal flow, Hooghoudt (1940) introduced two simplifications (Figure 59B):

- He assumed an imaginary impervious layer above the real one, which decreases the
thickness of the layer through which the water flows towards the drains;
- He replaced the drains by imaginary ditches with their bottoms on the imaginary
impervious layer.

Under these assumptions, we can still use Equation 10 to express the flow towards the drains,
simply by replacing the actual depth to the impervious layer (D) with a smaller equivalent depth
(d). This equivalent depth (d) represents the imaginary thinner soil layer through which the
same amount of water will flow per unit time as in the actual situation. This higher flow per
unit area introduces an extra head loss, which accounts for the head loss caused by the
converging flow lines. Hence Equation 18 can be rewritten as

𝟖𝒌𝒅𝒉+𝟒𝒌𝒉𝟐
𝒒= .............................................................................................Equation 23
𝑳𝟐

The only problem that remains is to find a value for the equivalent depth. On the basis of the
method of ‘mirror images’, Hooghoudt derived a relationship between the equivalent depth (d)

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 84

 Drainage Engineering Module

and, respectively, the spacing (L), the depth to the impervious layer (D), and the radius of the
drain (ra). This relationship, which is in the form of infinite series, is rather complex.
Hooghoudt therefore prepared tables for the most common sizes of drain pipes, from which the
equivalent depth (d) can be read directly. Table 8 (for 𝑟0 = 0.1𝑚 ) is one such table.

Table 8: Values for the equivalent depth d of Hooghoudt for ro = 0.1 m, D and L in m
(Hooghoudt 1940)

1
As can be seen from this table, the value of d increases with D until𝐷 ≈ 𝐿. If the impervious
4

layer is even deeper, the equivalent depth remains approximately constant; apparently the flow
pattern is then no longer affected by the depth of the impervious layer. Since the drain spacing
L depends on the equivalent depth d, which in turn is a function of L, Equation 23 can only be
solved by iteration. As this calculation method with the use of tables is rather time-consuming,
Van Beers (1979) prepared monographs from which d can easily be read.

Nowadays, with computers readily available, the Hooghoudt approximation method of

calculating the equivalent depth can be replaced by exact solutions. A series solution developed
by Van der Molen and Wesseling (1991) is presented here. Like Hooghoudt and Dagan, they
analysed the flow problem by the method of ‘mirror images’, resulting in an exact solution for
d

𝝅𝑳
𝟖
𝒅= 𝑳 .............................................................................................Equation 24
𝒍𝒏 +𝑭(𝒙)
𝝅𝒓𝟎

𝟐𝝅𝑫
Where 𝒙 = 𝑳
...........................................................................................Equation 25

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 85

 Drainage Engineering Module

And

𝑭(𝒙) = 𝟐 ∑∞
𝒏=𝟏 𝒍𝒏𝒄𝒐𝒕𝒉(𝒏𝒙) ........................................................................Equation 26

The function F(x), which represents an infinite series of logarithms, can be modified to

𝟒𝒆−𝟐𝒏𝒙
𝑭(𝒙) = ∑∞
𝒏=𝟏 𝒏(𝟏−𝒆−𝟐𝒏𝒙 ) (𝒏 = 𝟏, 𝟑, 𝟓, … ) .........................................................Equation 27

Which converges rapidly for x > 1. For x << 1, convergence is slow, but for this case (i.e. x≤
0.5), a comparison with Dagan’s formula results in an approximation that is highly accurate

𝝅𝟐 𝒙
𝑭(𝒙) = 𝟒𝒙 + 𝒍𝒏 𝟐𝝅 ..............................................................................................Equation 28

The exact solution presented in Equations 24 to 28 can easily be used in computer

calculations. A flow chart, based on this solution, is presented in Figure 60.

Figure 60: Flow chart for the calculation of Hooghoudt’s equivalent depth

Two assumptions on which Hooghoudt based his theory have not yet been mentioned.

They are:

 The drains are running half-full;

 The drains have no entrance resistance.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 86

 Drainage Engineering Module

These assumptions imply that the entrance area, u, equals the wet perimeter of a semi- circle
(the 𝜋𝑟0in Equation 29), so that
𝒖
𝒓𝟎 = 𝝅 ...............................................................................................................Equation 29

Where 𝑟0 = the radius of the drain (m)

u = the wet perimeter (m)

For open drains, the equivalent radius (ro) can be calculated by substituting the wet perimeter
of the open drain for u in Equation 30. For pipe drains laid in trenches, the wet perimeter is
taken as

𝒖 = 𝒃 + 𝟐𝒓𝟎 ........................................................................................................Equation 30
Where: b = the width of the trench (m)

If an envelope material is used around the pipe drain (Figure 61), Equation 30 changes to

𝒖 = 𝒃 + 𝟐(𝟐𝒓𝟎 + 𝒎) ..........................................................................................Equation 31

Where: m = the height of the envelope above the drain (m)

Figure 61: Drain pipe with gravel envelope in drain trench

The second assumption (no entrance resistance) means that we are assuming an ideal drain.
This is correct as long as the hydraulic conductivity of the drain trench is at least 10 times
higher than that of the undisturbed soil outside the trench (Smedema and Rycroft 1983). If the
hydraulic conductivity is less, an envelope material can be used to decrease the entrance
resistance, so that a greater part of the total head will be available for the flow through the soil.
If it is not possible to use an envelope material, the entrance resistance should be introduced
into the equations by replacing h with (h - he), in which he is the entrance head loss in metres.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 87

 Drainage Engineering Module

To calculate the drain spacing with the Hooghoudt equation, we must have information on soil
data, agricultural design criteria and engineering factors. The required soil data include a
description of the soil profile, the depth of the impervious layer and the hydraulic conductivity.
The agricultural design criteria are translated in a permissible depth of the water table (h) and
a corresponding design discharge (q). They depend on many factors, e.g. the type of crop,
climate, etc. The ratio q/h is sometimes called the drainage criterion or drainage intensity. The
higher the q/h ratio, the more safety is built into the system to prevent high water tables. Finally,
we must know the engineering factors like the maximum drain depth (which depends on the
construction method & machinery) and the dimensions of the proposed drains (diameter of the
drainpipes or the cross-sectional area of the open drains)

The Ernst Equation

So far, we have only discussed solutions that can be applied for a homogeneous soil profile or
for a two-layered soil profile provided that the interface between the two layers coincides with
the drain level. The Ernst Equation is applicable to any type of two-layered soil profile. It has
the advantage over the Hooghoudt Equation that the interface between the two layers can be
either above or below drain level. It is especially useful when the top layer has a considerably
lower hydraulic conductivity than the bottom layer.

To obtain a generally applicable solution for soil profiles consisting of layers with different
hydraulic conductivities, Ernst (1956; 1962) divided the flow to the drains into a vertical, a
horizontal, and a radial component (Figure 62). Consequently, the total available head (h) can
be divided into a head loss caused by the vertical flow (hv), the horizontal flow (hh), and the
radial flow (hr).

𝒉 = 𝒉𝒗 + 𝒉𝒉 + 𝒉𝒓 ......................................................................................Equation 32

Vertical Flow

Vertical flow is assumed to take place in the layer between the watertable and the drain level
(Figure 62). We can obtain the head loss caused by this vertical flow by applying Darcy's Law

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 88

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 62: Geometry of two-dimensional flow towards drains, according to Ernst

ℎ
𝑞 = 𝑘𝑣 𝐷𝑣
𝑣

Or

𝑫
𝒉𝒗 = 𝒒 𝒌 𝒗 ...............................................................................................Equation 33
𝒗

Where: Dv = thickness of the layer in which vertical flow is considered (m) and Kv =
vertical hydraulic conductivity (m/d)

As the vertical hydraulic conductivity is difficult to measure under field conditions, it is often
replaced by the horizontal hydraulic conductivity, which is rather easy to measure with the
auger-hole method. In principle, this is not correct, especially not in alluvial soils where great
differences between horizontal and vertical conductivity may occur. The vertical head loss,
however, is generally small compared with the horizontal and radial head losses, so the error
introduced by replacing Kv with Kh can be neglected.

Horizontal Flow

The horizontal flow is assumed to take place below drain level (Figure 62). Analogous to
Equation 12, the horizontal head loss hh can be described by

𝑳𝟐
𝒉𝒉 = 𝒒 𝟖 ∑(𝑲𝑫)𝒉 ...............................................................................................Equation 34

Where: ∑(𝐾𝐷)ℎ = transmissivity of the soil layers through which the water flows horizontally
(m2/d)

If the impervious layer is very deep, the value of ∑(𝐾𝐷)ℎ increases to infinity and
consequently the horizontal head loss decreases to zero. To prevent this, the maximum

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 89

 Drainage Engineering Module

thickness of the soil layer below drain level through which flow is considered (∑ 𝐷ℎ ) is
1
restricted to 4 𝐿.

Radial Flow

The radial flow is also assumed to take place below drain level (Figure 62). The head loss
caused by the radial flow can be expressed as

𝑳 𝒂𝑫𝒓
𝒉𝒓 = 𝒒 𝝅𝒌 𝒍𝒏 ...........................................................................................Equation 35
𝒓 𝒖

Where: Kr = radial hydraulic conductivity (m/d)

a = geometry factor of the radial resistance (-)

Dr = thickness of the layer in which the radial flow is considered (m)

u = wet perimeter of the drain (m)

This equation has the same restriction for the depth of the impervious layer as the equation for
horizontal flow (i.e. Dr < 1/4L).

The geometry factor (a) depends on the soil profile and the position of the drain.

In a homogeneous soil profile, the geometry factor equals one; in a layered soil, the geometry
factor depends on whether the drains are in the top or bottom soil layer.

If the drains are in the bottom layer, the radial flow is assumed to be restricted to this layer, and
again a = 1.

If the drains are in the top layer, the value of “a” depends on the ratio of the hydraulic
conductivity of the bottom (Kb) and top (Kt) layer. Using the relaxation method, Ernst (1 962)
distinguished the following situations:
𝐾𝑏
 < 0.1: the bottom layer can be considered impervious and the case is reduced to
𝑘𝑡
a homogeneous soil profile and a = 1;
𝐾𝑏 𝑘𝑏 𝐷𝑏
 1 < 𝑘𝑡 < 50: “a” depends on the ratios and 𝐷𝑡 , as given in Table 9
𝑘𝑡
𝑘𝑏
 > 50: a=4
𝑘𝑡

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 90

 Drainage Engineering Module

Table 9: The geometry factor (a) obtained by the relaxation method (after Van Beers 1979)

The expressions for, respectively, the vertical flow (Equation 33), the horizontal flow (Equation
34), and the radial flow (Equation 35) can now be substituted into Equation 36

𝐷 𝐿2 𝐿 𝑎𝐷𝑟
ℎ = 𝑞 𝑘 𝑣 + 𝑞 8 ∑(𝐾𝐷)ℎ + 𝑞 𝜋𝑘 𝑙𝑛 𝑢
𝑣 𝑟

Or

𝑫 𝑳𝟐 𝑳 𝒂𝑫𝒓
𝒉 = 𝒒( 𝒌 𝒗 + 𝟖 ∑(𝑲𝑫)𝒉 + 𝝅𝒌 𝒍𝒏 )..........................................................Equation 36
𝒗 𝒓 𝒖

This equation is generally known as the Ernst Equation. If the design discharge rate (q) and the
available total hydraulic head (h) are known, this quadratic equation for the spacing (L) can be
solved directly.

Discussion of Steady-State Equations

It should be clear from the previous sections that, when we are selecting the most appropriate
steady-state equation, two important factors to be considered are the soil profile and the relative
position of the drains in that profile. In this section, we shall discuss some of the more common
field situations and select the appropriate equation for each of them. The results are summarized
in Figure 63. In all cases, the lower boundary is formed by an impervious layer.

Homogeneous Soils

For a homogeneous soil, the position of the drain determines which equation should be used:

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 91

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 63: Summary of the steady-state equations

- If the drains are placed on top of the impervious layer, we can use Equation 9 to
calculate the drain spacing;
- If the drains are in the region above the impervious layer, we can use either Hooghoudt
and the equivalent depth (Equation 23), or Ernst (Equation 36).
- The latter has the restriction that the depth of the impervious layer should not exceed
1/4L.
- For deeper impervious layers, the spacing calculated with the Ernst Equation is
generally too small. Since the drain spacing is not known beforehand, this condition
has to be checked afterwards.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 92

 Drainage Engineering Module

- For this type of soil profile, the Ernst Equation gives approximately the same result as
the Hooghoudt Equation. We therefore recommend the use of the Hooghoudt Equation
because then we do not have the restriction in depth.

Two-Layered Soil Profile

For a two-layered soil profile, we can distinguish three situations, depending on the position of
the drains:

1) The drains are at the interface of the two layers;

2) The drains are in the bottom soil layer;
3) The drains are in the top soil layer.

If the drains are located at the interface of the two layers (Situation l), we can use the
Hooghoudt Equation (Equation 23), which differentiates hydraulic conductivity above and
below drain level.

If the drains are situated either above or below the interface of the two soil layers (Situation 2
or 3), the hydraulic conductivities cannot be differentiated in the same way and we have to
apply Ernst (Equation 36).

If, however, the bottom layer has a significantly lower hydraulic conductivity than the top layer,
we can regard the bottom layer as impervious and simplify the problem to a one-layered profile
underlain by an impervious layer. In this case, we can apply Hooghoudt without introducing
large errors. Thus Ernst is used mainly for a two-layered soil profile when the top layer has a
lower hydraulic conductivity than the bottom layer (Kt < Kb).

If the drains are situated in the bottom soil layer (Situation 2 and Figure 64A), we can make
the following simplifications:

- We can neglect the vertical resistance in the bottom layer compared with the vertical
resistance in the top layer, because the hydraulic conductivity in the bottom layer is
higher than in the top layer;
- We can neglect the transmissivity of the top layer, because Kt < Kb, and in general
also Dt < Db. Thus in Equation 36,∑(KD)h, can be replaced by KbDb;
- The radial flow is restricted to the layer below drain level (Dr) and thus a = 1.

Hence Equation 36 is reduced to

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 93

 Drainage Engineering Module

𝑫𝒗 𝑳𝟐 𝑳 𝑫𝒓
𝒉 = 𝒒( + + 𝒍𝒏 ) .................................................................Equation 37
𝒌𝒕 𝟖𝒌𝒃 𝑫𝒃 𝝅𝒌𝒃 𝒖

If the drains are situated in the top layer (Situation 3 and Figure 64B):

- There is no vertical flow in the bottom layer; so Dv = h;

Figure 64: Geometry of the Ernst Equation for a two-layered soil with the drain in the
bottom layer (A) and in the top layer (B)

When considering the horizontal flow, however, we cannot neglect the transmissivity of
1
the top layer, and ∑(KD)h = KbDb + KtDt , in which 𝐷𝑡 = 𝐷𝑟 + 2 ℎ;

- The radial flow is restricted to the region in the top soil layer below drain level and the
geometry factor depends on the ratio of the hydraulic conductivity of the top and bottom layer,
in this case, Equation 36 can be reduced to

𝑫 𝑳𝟐 𝑳 𝒂𝑫𝒓
𝒉 = 𝒒 ( 𝒌𝒗 + 𝟖(𝒌 + 𝝅𝒌 𝒍𝒏 ) ........................................................Equation 38
𝒕 𝒃 𝑫𝒃 +𝒌𝒕 𝑫𝒕 ) 𝒕 𝒖

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 94

 Drainage Engineering Module

Example 4.1

In an agricultural area, high water tables occur. A subsurface drainage system is to be installed
to control the water table under the following conditions:

Agricultural drainage criteria:

- Design discharge rate is 1 mm/d;

- The depth of the water table midway between the drains is to be kept at 1.0 m below the soil
surface.

Technical Criteria:

- Drains will be installed at a depth of 2 m;

- PVC drain pipes with a radius of 0.10 m will be used.

A deep augering revealed that there is a layer of low conductivity at 6.8 m, which can be
regarded as the base of the flow region. Auger-hole measurements were made to calculate the
hydraulic conductivity of the soil above the impervious layer. Its average value was found to
be 0. 14 m/d. What will be the drain spacing?

Example 4.2

Suppose that the area will be drained by ditches instead of pipe drains. The open drains will
have a depth of 2.5 m, a bottom width of 0.5 m, and side slopes of 1: l. The design water depth
in the ditches is 0.5 m; so the water level in the drain is 2.00 m below soil surface. What will
be the drain spacing?

Example 4.3

For the same area as in Example 4.1, a more detailed soil survey revealed that the soil profile
is not homogeneous, but consists of two distinct layers: a top layer of 2.0 m with a hydraulic
conductivity of 0.06 m/d, and a bottom layer of 4.8 m with a hydraulic conductivity of 0.30
m/d

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 95

 Drainage Engineering Module

Example 4.4

An area has a soil profile consisting of two distinct layers. Pipe drains with a diameter of 0.1
m will be installed in the top layer, 1.0m above the interface between the two layers. We have
the following data:

q = 0.007m/d

h = 0.70m

Kt = 0.5m/d

Kb = 2.0m/d

Do = 1.0m

Db = 4.0m

ro = 0.05m

It is a two-layered soil profile and the drains are not installed at the interface of the layers, so
we have to apply the Ernst Equation.

Unsteady-State Equations
The steady-state approach only describes a simplified, constant relationship between the water
able and the discharge. In reality, the recharge to the water table varies with time, and
consequently the flow of groundwater towards the drains is not steady. To describe the
fluctuation of the water table as a function of time, we use the unsteady- state approach.
Unsteady-state equations are based on the differential equations for unsteady flow. Both the
unsteady-state and the steady-state approach are based on the same (Dupuit-Forchheimer)
assumptions. The only difference is the recharge, which in the unsteady-state approach varies
with time.

The Glover-Dumm Equation is used to describe a falling water table after its sudden rise due
to an instantaneous recharge. This is the typical situation in irrigated areas where the water
table often rises sharply during the application of irrigation water and then recedes more slowly.

The De Zeeuw-Hellinga Equation is used to describe a fluctuating water table. In this

approach, a non-uniform recharge is divided into shorter time periods in which the recharge to

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 96

 Drainage Engineering Module

the groundwater can be assumed to be constant. This is the typical situation for humid areas
with high-intensity rainfall concentrated in discrete storms.

The Glover-Dumm Equation

In the case of unsteady (or transient) flow, the flow is not constant, but a change with time as
water is stored in, or released from, the soil. The change in storage is reflected either in a rise
or a fall of the water table. Again the Dupuit-Forchheimer approach can be used to derive a
differential equation of unsteady flow. We consider a soil column which is bounded by the
water table at the top and by an impervious layer at the bottom. If there is no recharge to the
groundwater the change in storage in the soil profile is given by

∆𝑊 = 𝜇∆ℎ𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑦

Where

∆𝑊 = change in water storage per unit surface area over the time considered (m)

𝜇 = drainable pore space (-)

∆ℎ = change in the level of the water table over the time considered (m)

The change in storage considered over an infinitely small period of time, dt, is
𝝏𝒉
𝒅𝑾 = 𝝁 𝝏𝒕 𝒅𝒙𝒅𝒚 Equation 39

The continuity principle now requires that the total difference of outgoing minus incoming
flow in x- and y- directions equals the change in storage. Hence the continuity equation can
be written as
𝝏 𝝏𝒉 𝝏 𝝏𝒉 𝝏𝒉
−𝑲 [𝝏𝒙 (𝒉 𝝏𝒙) + 𝝏𝒚 (𝒉 𝝏𝒚)] 𝒅𝒙𝒅𝒚 = 𝝁 𝝏𝒕 𝒅𝒙𝒅𝒚 Equation 40

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 97

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 65 change in storage in soil column under a failing water table

We can simplify this equation by considering that h will be large compared with the changes
in h; so we can take h as ac constant D, being the average thickness of the water-transmitting
layer. Furthermore, as we only consider flow in one direction, equation 31 gives the following
differential equation for unsteady flow

𝝏𝟐 𝒉 𝝏𝒉
𝑲𝑫 𝝏𝒙𝟐 = 𝝁 𝝏𝒕 Equation 41

Dumm (1954) used this differential equation to describe the fall of the water table after it had
risen instantaneously to a height h0 above drain level (figure 66). His solution, which is based
on a formula developed by Glover, describes the lowering of an initially horizontal water table
as a function of time, drain spacing, and soil properties.

𝟒𝒉𝟎 𝟏 𝒏𝝅𝒙
𝒉(𝒙, 𝒕) = ∑∞
𝒏=𝟏,𝟑,𝟓 𝒆
−𝒏𝟐𝜶𝒕
𝒔𝒊𝒏 Equation 42
𝝅 𝒏 𝑳

Figure 66 Boundary conditions for the Glover-Dumm equation with an initially horizontal water table

Where
𝝅𝟐 𝑲𝒅
𝜶= Equation 43
𝝁𝑳𝟐

Where

ℎ(𝑥, 𝑡) = height of the water table at distance X at time t(m)

ho = initial height of the water table at t = 0(m)
𝛼 = reaction factor (d-1)
K = hydraulic conductivity (m/d)
d = equivalent depth of the soil layer below drain level (m)

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 98

 Drainage Engineering Module

 = drainable pore space (-)

L = drain spacing (m)
t = time after instantaneous rise of the water table (d)
we can find the height of the water table mid-way between the drains by substituting X=1/2L
in to equation 42
𝟏 𝟒 𝟏
𝒉𝒕 = 𝒉 (𝒙 = 𝟐 𝑳) = 𝝅 𝒉𝒐 ∑∞
𝒏=𝟏,𝟑,𝟓 𝒏 𝒆
−𝒏𝟐𝜶𝒕
Equation 44

Where

ht = height of the water table midway between the drains at t>0 (m)

If 𝛼𝑡 > 0.2 , the second and following terms of equation 44 are small and can be neglected. So
this equation reduces to

𝟒
𝒉𝒕 = 𝝅 𝒉𝟎 𝒆−𝜶𝒕 = 𝟏. 𝟐𝟕𝒉𝟎 𝒆−𝜶𝒕 Equation 45

If, instead of being horizontal, the initial water table has the shape of fourth degree parabola,
equation 45 becomes (Dumm 1960)

𝒉𝒕 = 𝟏. 𝟏𝟔𝒉𝟎 𝒆−𝜶𝒕 Equation 46

By substituting equation 43 in to equation 46, we find an expression for the drain spacing
𝟏 𝟏
𝑲𝒅𝒕 𝒉 −
𝟐 𝟐
𝑳 = 𝝅( ) (𝒍𝒏𝟏. 𝟏𝟔 𝟎 ) Equation 47
𝝁 𝒉𝒕

This is called the Glover-Dumm equation.

The drain discharge at any time, t, expressed per unit surface area, can be found from Darcy’s
Law
𝟐𝑲𝒅 𝒅𝒉𝒕
𝒒𝒕 = −
𝑳
[ 𝒅𝒙 ] Equation 48
𝒙=𝟎

Where

qt =drain discharge per unit surface area at t>70 (m/d)

Differentiating equation 47 with respect to x, neglecting all terms n>1, substituting x=0, and
combining with equation 48 gives

8𝐾𝑑
𝑞𝑡 = ℎ0 𝑒 −𝛼𝑡
𝐿2

Substituting equation 46 yields

𝟐𝝅𝑲𝒅
𝒒𝒕 = 𝒉𝒕 Equation 49
𝑳𝟐

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 99

 Drainage Engineering Module

This is similar to the hooghoudt Equation describing the flow below drain level (Equation 21),
except that the factor 8 is now replaced by2𝜋. Note: for the 4th degree parabola 2𝜋 becomes
6.89. it can be seen that the drain discharge, qt, is directly related to the depth of the water table,
ht. This is important when data from an experimental field are being analysed (e.g. to determine
the reaction factor). The original Glover-Dumm Equation is based on horizontal flow only and
does not take into account the radial resistance of flow towards drains that do not reach the
impervious layer. In similarity to the steady-state approach, however, by introducing
hoogoudt’s concept of the equivalent depth d into the equation 34 and 38, it does take into
account the extra resistance caused by the converging flow towards the drains.

De Zeeuw-Hellinga Equation
To simulate the drain discharge over a period with a non-uniform distribution of recharge, if
the period is divided into time intervals of equal length and the recharge in each period is
assumed to be constant, the change in drain discharge is proportional to the excess recharge (R
- q)

𝒅𝒒
= 𝜶(𝑹 − 𝒒) Equation 50
𝒅𝒕

Integration between the limits t = t: q = q, and t = t - 1: q = qt-1, results in

𝒒𝒕 = 𝒒𝒕−𝟏 𝒆−𝜶 ∆𝒕 + 𝑹∆𝒕(𝟏 − 𝒆−𝜶∆𝒕 ) Equation 51

where

∆𝑡 = t - (t - l), the time interval over which the recharge is assumed to be constant (d)

We can simulate the depth of the water table by introducing the simplified Hooghoudt
Equation, which neglects the flow above drain level (Equation 21)

𝟖𝒌𝑫𝒉
𝒒= 𝑳𝟐

By using Equation 49, we can replace the quotient𝑲𝒅

𝑳𝟐
by 𝝁𝜶
𝝅𝟐
and Equation 21 changes into

𝟖𝒌𝑫 𝟖𝝁𝜶
𝒒= 𝒉= 𝒉 ≈ 𝟎. 𝟖𝝁𝜶𝒉 Equation 52
𝑳𝟐 𝝅𝟐

Substituting the latter into Equation 51 yields

𝑅
ℎ𝑡 = ℎ𝑡−1 𝑒 −𝛼∆𝑡 + 0.8𝜇𝛼 (1 − 𝑒 −𝛼∆𝑡 )

We can use Equations 51 and 52to simulate drain discharge and water table fluctuations on the
basis of a critical distribution of rainfall intensities obtained from historical records.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 100

 Drainage Engineering Module

Application of Unsteady-State Equations

Like the steady-state equations, the unsteady-state equations require data on soil properties and
agricultural and technical design criteria. The main differences are that an additional soil
property (i.e. the drainable pore space) is required and that, instead of the q/h ratio, a water
table drawdown ratio h0/ht is required. How the Glover-Dumm Equation is applied in an
irrigated area will be explained in Example 4.5.

Example 4.5

In an irrigated area, a drainage system is needed to control the water table under the
following conditions (Figure 67):

Figure 67The calculation of drain spacing under unsteady- state conditions

Agricultural drainage criteria:

- The maximum permissible height of the water table is 1 m below the soil surface;

- Irrigation water is applied every 10 days, and the field application losses percolating to the
water table are 25 mm for each irrigation.

Technical design criteria:

- Drains are installed at a depth of 1.8 m;

- PVC drainpipes with a radius of 0. 10 m are used.

Soil data:

- The depth of the impervious layer is 9.5 m below the soil surface;

- The average hydraulic- conductivity of the soil is 1 .0 m/d, and the drainable pore space is
0.05.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 101

 Drainage Engineering Module

If we assume that the field application losses can be regarded as an instantaneous recharge, Ri
= 0.025 m, the rise of the water table is

𝑹𝒊 0.025
∆𝒉 = = = 0.5𝑚
𝝁 0.05

If we assume that, after irrigation, the water table has risen to its maximum permissible
height, we know

ℎ𝑜 = 1.8 − 1 = 0.8𝑚

The water table must be lowered by 0.5 m during the next 10 days. So

H10 = ho - ∆h = 0.8 - 0.5 = 0.3 m

Thus we have the following data

K = 1.0m/d
𝜇 = 0.05
D = 9.5-1.8 = 7.7m
r0 = 0.10m
h0 = 0.8m
h10 = 0.3m
t = 10 days

Substituting the above data into Equation 38 gives an expression for the drain Spacing L
𝟏 𝟏
𝑲𝒅𝒕 𝟐 𝒉𝟎 −𝟐
𝑳 = 𝝅( 𝝁
) (𝒍𝒏𝟏. 𝟏𝟔 𝒉𝒕
)

𝟏 𝟏
𝟏.𝟎∗𝒅∗𝟏𝟎 𝟐 𝟎.𝟖 −𝟐
𝑳 = 𝝅( 𝟎.𝟎𝟓
) (𝒍𝒏𝟏. 𝟏𝟔 𝟎.𝟑
)

𝐿 = 41.8√𝑑𝑚

As we know D and r0 we can obtain the equivalent depth d from Table 8.0 We can then find L by trial
and error:

- First estimate: L= 80m, D = 7.7m from table, we read

7
𝑑 = 4.23 + (4.49 − 4.23) = 4.41𝑚
10

𝐿 = 41.8√𝑑𝑚 = 41.8√4.41 = 88𝑚 . This is more than 80m, so the spacing is too wide.

- Second estimate: L=90m, D = 7.7m. from table, we read

7
𝑑 = 4.42 + 10 (4.72 − 4.42) = 4.63𝑚

𝐿 = 41.8√𝑑𝑚 = 41.8√4.63 = 90𝑚, 𝑠𝑜 𝑜𝑘𝑎𝑦

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 102

 Drainage Engineering Module

Example 4.6

In the area of Example 4.5, the drainage system has been installed with a drain spacing of 90
m. We now want to know how the drainage system reacts to a period with some intensive
rainstorms. The recharge to the water table following the rainfall is given in Table 8.3. If we
assume that the water table at the start of the rainy period is 0.30 m above drain level, we can
use the De Zeeuw-Hellinga Equation to calculate the fluctuations of the water table and the
corresponding discharge from the drainage system.

We have the following data:

K = 1.0m/d

𝜇 = 0.05

L = 90m

d = 4.63m

h0 = 0.30m

We can calculate the reaction factor, 𝛼, and the discharge at day 0

𝜋2 𝐾𝑑 𝜋 2 1.0∗4.63
𝛼= = = 0.113𝑑−1
𝜇𝐿2 0.05∗902

8𝐾𝑑ℎ𝑜 8∗1.0∗4.63∗0.30
𝑞0 = = = 0.001𝑚/𝑑
𝐿2 902

Table 10 water table depth and drain discharge calculations using the De Zeeuw-Hellinga Equations(Example 4.6)

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 103

 Drainage Engineering Module

It can be seen from table 10 that, for 7 days (i.e. from Day 3 to Day 10), the water table is above
its maximum permissible height (1m below soil surface or 0.80m above drain level). This is
not surprising because the total recharge after the rainstorms (69mm in 5 Days) is much more
than field application losses (25mm in 10 Days) on which the design of the drainage system
was based. If these high levels of the water table restrict plant growth, and thus crop production,
the design criteria will have to be adjusted accordingly

4.5 Drainage to control water logging

Where soils are moderately permeable and water logging is caused or worsened by a high water
table, deep open drains may be necessary. They can be constructed with a back-hoe or
excavator. Surface waters must be excluded from these drains to minimise silting. Before
construction, sample pits should be dug to determine whether the soil is permeable enough to

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 104

 Drainage Engineering Module

allow water to drain into the pits. In addition, the natural grade should be sufficient to discharge
water safely from the drains.

To remove excess water from the root zone we use subsurface drainage (Figure 68). By
subsurface drainage we control the water table, and excess water is removed from the
underground by gravity through open or pipe drains installed at depths varying from 1 to 3 m.

Figure 68 deep open drains to control water logging

4.6 Construction and maintenance of sub surface drains

Construction
Hand trenching is very seldom practiced except where trenching machinery is not available or
where machine operationis impractical due to the small size or location of the proposed project.
Both hand and machine trenching are discussed.

Drain installation by hand

The trench is usually staked at 25 to 50 foot intervals. Hubs are offset a short distance from the
centerline of the trench and driven to about the ground level. A guard stake is driven near the
hub on which is marked the station and the depth of cut from the top of the hub to the trench
bottom.

Batter boards

Batter boards are used to assist the tiler to stay on grade. Batter boards are constructed by
driving stake at the hub and one on the opposite side of the the proposed trench from the hub.
Select a covenient depth ( 5 to 6 feet) and clamp or nail a horizontal crossbar on the two stakes
at an elevation such that the top of the crossbar the distance selected above the trench bottom.
If 6 feet is selected and the cut on the hub is 3.9 feet, the top of the crossbar should be placed
2.1 feet above the top of the hub.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 105

 Drainage Engineering Module

Crossbars are set in the same manner at each hub. A chalk line or wire stretched over the top
of the bars shows the slope of the proposed trench bottom. The chalk line should be straight if
it does not includea grade break. The trencher can then measure from the chalk line to the
bottom of the excavation to see if the trench is on grade. If three batter boards are set, the grade
may be checked by sighting over the crossbars. When a grade break occurs, a target must be
set at the situation where the break is to be made and additional targets set beyond this point to
obtain the correct slope of the line of sight.

Equipment used for trenching

Most excavation is done with a tile spade. In heavy, wet, or loose soil the solid tile spade is
used, but sometimes a skeleton blade is much easier as it is lighter and the soils fall from it
easier. A round-pointed shovel is used to clean out the trench if a drain cleaner is not available.
A chalk line or wire of more than 100 feet in length, a rule, and other hand tools may be
necessary.

Excavating the trench

Trenching begins at the outlet and proceeds upslope. Two or three spadings may be necessary,
the number depends upon the depth of the trench. A trench width of 12 inches is sufficient for
4-, 5-, and 6- inch drains. Careful excavation of the top spading will prevent alignment
difficulties later as line and width of the trench are established by the first spading. An accurate
line should be stretched between the stakes to insure good alignment. The trencher faces the
outlet and space for the other spadings so the soil will not roll back into the trench. He may
cast the excavation on either or both sides of the trench.

The last spading should be to a depth 2 inches above the finish grade of the trench. The last
few inches of the soil should then be removed from the trench by a drain cleaner or round-
pointed shovel. The bottom of the trench should be shaped so that about one- fourth of the
circumfrence of the drain will be in contact with the soil. Care must be taken to smooth the
trench bottom to the exact grade. If a section of the trench is accidentally excavated below
grade, the section should be backfilled, tamped, and shaped to grade. If unstable soil is
encountered, the bottom of the trench should be firmed up with stable soil, hay, straw, sod,
gravel, or other material. Sometimes it is necessary to cradle the tile by the use of boards using
the rail and cleat method of forming the cradle.

Laying drains

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 106

 Drainage Engineering Module

The drains may be placed by the use of a hook or by hand. If the drains are slightly warped,
they should be turned so they fit tight at the top . care should be taken to see that the drains are
placed in good alignment and that the proper gap recommended in the plan is maintaned.
Kicking the drain in place may result in too small a gap. Placing the drain with the hook will
usually insure more uniform gapping. If a curve in the line is too sharp to lay the drain without
causing a wide gap, the drain may be chipped so that it will have the intended gap. A monkey
wrench or cutters may be used for this purpose. Junctions of lines are usually formed by
manufactured fittings and cutting and conreting the junction is usually not necessary. “Y”
fittings are ordinarily recommended. Research has shown that a junction at any reasonable
angle will not materially retard flow.

Blinding drains

As soon as the drains are placed and inspected, they should be secured in place by putting
friable soil around them and then blinding them with topsoil to a depth of 12 inches to preserve
the alignment. Filters should be placed before the blinding is done, provided filter material is
to be used. On steep grades or where the topsoil contains very fine sand, use heavier soil from
the sides of the trench in blinding.

Backfilling the trench

Backfiling the trench should be done at the end of each day’s work to eliminate the possibility
of damage from surface water if heavy rainfall should occur. The end of the drain should always
be blocked at the end of each day’s work to prevent the entrance of silt and debris. The
backfilling of a hand installation is frequently done by mechanicl means.

Drain installation by machine

Most drain installation is done with trenching machines which have a sighting bar to keep the
cutting shoe on grade when excavating the trench. The location and elevation of the sigthing
bar varies on different machines. The sighting machine bar may be on either side of the machine
and from 2.5 to 5.0 feet to one side of the cutting shoe or buckets. For this reason it is necessary
to know the type of machine that is to be used so the stakes can be located proberly. Agreement
should be reached with the excavating contractor as to the the way the construction stakes will
be set in order to prevent confusion.

Staking the drain

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 107

 Drainage Engineering Module

is started by placing the beginning or the 0+00 station near the outlet end of the line. This may
be at the end of the outlet pipe. Hubs should be offset the proper amount and to the correct side
of the centerline of the planned trench. They should be set evry hundred feet or less at all
changes in grade or in direction of the line. A minimum of three stakes required to sight a
grade. In case of short tangent or change in grade, it may be necessary to set hubs on the
extended tangent or extended grade inorder to provide three sighting stakes.

Alignment and Grade

Experience is desirable in the proper location of pipe drains, but there are a few general rules
(Schwab et al., 2005):

(i) Place the outlet at the best possible location;

(ii) Provide as few outlets as possible;
(iii) Layout the system with short mains and long laterals;
(iv) Use the available slope to best advantage, especially on flat land;
(v) Follow the general direction of natural water ways, particularly with mains and sub
mains on land with considerable slope;
(vi) Avoid routes that result in excessive cuts;
(vii) Avoid crossing waterways except at an angle of 45o or greater; and
(viii) Avoid soil conditions that increase installation and maintenance costs.

The classical method of marking alignment and grade is by placing stakes in the soil at both
ends of the drain line, with the top of the stakes at a fixed height above the future trench bed.
The slope of the drain line is thereby implicitly indicated. A row of boning rods is placed in
the (both vertically and horizontally) between the stakes, with an extension at the upstream end
of the drain line, where the run of the drainage machine ends (Fig.46). the boning rods are thus
in a line parallel to the trench bed, and grade control can be achieved through sighting by the
driver of the drainage machine (Fig.47). the same principle can be applied when drains are
installed manually.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 108

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 69:Staking out for grade control of drain pipeline. (Source: Cavelaars et al., 1994)

Figure 70:Grade control by the operator. (Source: Cavelaars et al., 1994)

Figure 71:Laser emitter establishes a reference plane

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 109

 Drainage Engineering Module

4.7 Economics of sub-surface drains

Three criteria can be used to assess the financial feasibility of investment on sub-surface
drainage. These were: benefit–cost ratio (B-C ratio), net present value (NPV), and internal
rate of return (IRR).

4.7.1 Net Present Value (NPV)

Net Present Value (NPV) is the difference between the present value of benefits and costs. It
also known as Net Present Worth (NPW). Clearly, a positive value of NPV (or NPW) is
desirable (Smedema and Rycroft, 1983). The formula for the computation of NPV is (ILRI,
1974; Brooks et al., 1997):

(𝑩 −𝑪 )
𝑵𝑷𝑽 = ∑𝑷𝑳 𝒊 𝒊
𝒊=𝟏 (𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒊 …………………………………………… Equation 53

Where, Bi = benefits in the ith year (Rs.), Ci = cost in the ith year (Rs.), and the remaining
symbols have the same meaning as defined earlier.

4.7.2 Benefit-Cost Ratio (B-C Ratio)

Benefit-Cost Ratio (B-C Ratio) is the present value of benefits divided by present value of
costs. For a project to be economically viable, the B-C ratio should be greater than one
(Smedema and Rycroft, 1983). The benefit-cost ratio is computed as (Brooks et al., 1997):

𝑩
∑𝑷𝑳 𝒊
𝒊=𝟏[(𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒕]
𝑩 − 𝑪 𝑹𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐 = 𝑪𝒊 ……………………………………..Equation 54
∑𝑷𝑳
𝒊=𝟏[ ]
(𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒕

4.7.3 Internal Rate of Return (IRR)

Internal Rate of Return (IRR) is often used for large public projects (Smedema and Rycroft,
1983). Unlike the NPV or B-C ratio, the IRR does not use a predetermined discount rate.
Rather, IRR is the discount rate that sets the present value of benefits equal to the present value
of costs. That is (Brooks et al., 1997),

𝑩𝒊 𝑪
∑𝑷𝒍
𝒊=𝟏 = ∑𝑷𝑳 𝒊
𝒊=𝟏 (𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒊 ……………………………………………….Equation 55
(𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒊

(𝑩 −𝑪 )
Or, ∑𝑷𝑳 𝒊 𝒊
𝒊=𝟏 (𝟏+𝑹𝑰)𝒊 = 𝟎 ……………………………………………………….Equation 56

 Note that the detail of this economic analysis is the same with economics of surface
drainage system and you can refer from chapter three

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 110

 Drainage Engineering Module

4.8 Special Drainage Situations

4.8.1 Compound drainage system (surface and sub-surface)

Compound drainage systems integrate both surface and subsurface drainage components to
manage excess water in agricultural lands more effectively. This system is particularly useful
in areas with variable topography, heavy rainfall, or poorly drained soils. The goal is to remove
surface runoff quickly while maintaining the root zone aeration by lowering the water table
using subsurface drainage. A compound system combines both surface and subsurface methods
to maximize water removal efficiency. It is most suitable for heavy soils, intensive agriculture,
or areas with fluctuating groundwater levels. The surface system removes ponded water
quickly, while subsurface drains control the water table and soil salinity.

[Link] When Combined Drainage Systems Are Needed

The necessity for combining surface and subsurface drainage systems depends on several
environmental and soil-related factors. These include:

 Intensity and duration of rainfall

 Surface storage and runoff conditions
 Soil infiltration rate
 Hydraulic conductivity of the soil
 Groundwater table depth and seasonal variations

In some cases, a subsurface drainage system alone is insufficient to remove surface water
rapidly, especially after heavy rainfall or irrigation. Subsurface systems remove water slowly
and may require closely spaced drains, which are often uneconomical. To overcome this
limitation, surface drainage is added to facilitate quicker removal of excess water from the land
surface.

[Link] Examples of Combined Drainage Systems

Some real-world examples illustrate the importance of combined systems:

In irrigated regions of arid and semi-arid climates—such as the Nile Delta in Egypt—where
crop rotation involves rice and 'dry-foot' crops like maize and cotton.

In these systems:

 Subsurface drainage is required to maintain low salinity levels for non-rice crops.
ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 111
 Drainage Engineering Module

 Surface drainage is essential for evacuating standing water from rice fields, especially
before fertilizer application or harvest.

In areas experiencing high-intensity rainfall (greater than 50 mm/day), surface water may
accumulate even in the presence of a subsurface drainage system. The subsurface drains alone
are often inadequate to remove large volumes of water quickly, either due to time constraints
or uneconomical drain spacing requirements.

In both scenarios, the solution lies in deploying surface drainage to complement subsurface
drainage, thereby ensuring faster and more cost-effective removal of excess water (the detail
about compound drainage system is discussed in chapter 1 of this module).

4.8.2 Drainage of Sloping Lands

Up to now, we have only considered drainage in flat lands. Many agricultural areas, however,
are sloping, so the question arises: ‘In how far can equations for flat lands be applied to sloping
lands?’ When a hillside is drained by a series of parallel drains, the situation is as depicted in
Figure 8.15. The highest watertable height, h, above drain level is now not midway between
the drains but is closer to the downslope drain. Schmidt and Luthin (1964) solved the hillside
seepage problem of steady vertical recharge to parallel ditches penetrating to a sloping
impervious layer. The resulting drain spacings for gently sloping areas (slope < 0.1) do not
differ much from the spacings for flat lands.

This is in agreement with the results of Bouwer (1955), who conducted a large series of tests
in sand-tank models, and numerical simulations done by Fipps and Skaggs (1989). Because the
vast majority of agricultural land will not have slopes in excess of O. 1, our conclusion is that
we can apply solutions for flat land to sloping land without any alteration as long as the slopes
are not steeper than 0.1

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 112

 Drainage Engineering Module

This conclusion implies that we assume no difference in efficiency between drains laid parallel
or perpendicular to the slope. Where the hydraulic conductivity of the soil is low, it could be
advisable to lay the drains parallel to the contour lines, hence perpendicular to the slope. As
the backfilled trenches have, and retain, a higher permeability than the original soil profile, any
surface runoff may possibly be intercepted by the trenches.

If a flat agricultural area is partly surrounded by sloping lands, the surface runoff from these
lands should be intercepted and discharged to prevent inundation of the agricultural area. The
extent to which drainage problems in the agricultural area are caused by this surface runoff
should be determined by making a water balance of the area.

Runoff from sloping lands causes two major problems in the downstream areas;

i. Rainfall causes high discharges of short duration,

ii. The surface runoff causes erosion, and the related sediment transport down the steep
gradient of the channels causes sedimentation in the flatter channel reaches.

Both problems can be eased by a combination of the following techniques:

 Planting trees and encouraging the growth of natural vegetation on steep slopes;
 Contour ploughing and terracing intermediate slopes (up to 10%). Terracing is the
levelling of the slopes along the contour lines in combination with the planting of crops;
 Encouraging the growth of crops that give a soil cover during the rainy season;
 Constructing retention reservoirs in the streams to temporarily store peak runoff

These techniques are a form of erosion control; their application greatly eases the downstream
drainage problems.

In sloping areas, the main drainage system usually will be limited to the reconstruction of
channel reaches and to the construction of energy dissipators.

Streams originating in sloping areas can be connected to a major river, lake, or sea along two
alternative routes;

I. via an interceptor canal, which channels the water around the agricultural area to a
suitable outlet, or

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 113

 Drainage Engineering Module

II. via a canalized stream through the agricultural area. The major advantage of the
interceptor canal is that peak discharges and sediments from the sloping lands do not
disturb the functioning of the drainage system in the flatter agricultural area.

It is possible to limit the required discharge capacity of a channel that transports water from
sloping lands to a suitable outlet if the channel discharges from one of the following two
structures:

 A retention reservoir that is filled by the peak stream flow, which is then released
through a bottom outlet. As a result, the discharge peak is lower, but of longer duration;
 A regulating structure that consists of a weir of limited discharge capacity in the stream
and a side weir immediately upstream of it. If the stream flow exceeds a predetermined
rate, it overtops the crest of the side weir. Most of the additional stream flow then
discharges over the side weir into an area where inundation or overland flow causes
little damage. Which of these two lay-outs (or an intermediate lay-out) is the best
solution can usually only be decided after a reconnaissance study.

4.8.3 Tube well drainage system

Tubewell drainage is a technique of controlling water table and salinity in agricultural areas. It
consists of pumping an amount of groundwater equal to the drainable surplus using a series of
wells (Fig. 72). Tubewell drainage is not new, but it has not been widely used. Early attempts
to use a series of pumped wells for land drainage and salinity control were made in U.S.A. and
the former U.S.S.R. more than half a century ago (Boehmer and Boonstra, 1994).

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 114

 Drainage Engineering Module

Figure 72:Schematic of Tubewell drainage technique: Two wells tapping an unconfined

aquifer in series. (Source: Michael et al., 2008)

A review of studies and experiences with Tubewell drainage in various countries shows that
this technique cannot simply be regarded as a substitute for the conventional technique of
subsurface drainage (Boehmer and Boonstra, 1994). The success of Tubewell drainage depends
on many factors, including the hydrogeological conditions of the area, physical properties of
the aquifer to be pumped, and the physical properties of the overlying fine-textured layers.
Another important factor is that skilled personnel are needed to operate and maintain tubewells,
and to monitor water tables and the quality of the pumped water.

Tubewells may be shallow or deep. A shallow tubewell is that which draws groundwater from
the top unconfined aquifer. The depth of such an aquifer is highly variable from one region to
another, but it usually ranges from a few metres to 30 or 60 m.

Deep tubewells are those which draw water from a deep confined aquifer or from multiple
aquifers. When the top unconfined aquifer is pumped, its effect on water table decline is clearly
visible in the upper soil layer within a short period of pumping. If deep tubewell is pumped, its
effect on water table decline in the upper soil layer will be slow and will be visible if the
pumped aquifers have hydraulic connection with the upper soil layers. If the pumped aquifer
is fully confined, pumping from it may not have any effect on the water table in the overlying
unconfined soil system. It is worth mentioning that in most cases, the planned tubewell
constructions have been for the purposes other than drainage, i.e., to supply water for irrigation,
domestic and industrial purposes.

The discharge capacity of a tubewell is governed by the aquifer properties namely,

transmissivity and storage coefficient or specific yield. The actual discharge determines the
extent of drawdown. The discharge and the aquifer properties together, govern the shape and
the spread of the cone of depression (i.e., the volume of soil being drained). The pumping
schedule, non-pumping hours and the density of tubewell network determine the residuals
drawdown after selected intervals of time and its cumulative effect over the years in a certain
region. It is theoretically possible to predict the combined effect of the above factors on the
water-table scenario of a region. However, the best method is to regularly monitor water table
in a network of observation wells over a region and analyse the data to enable proper
interpretation in terms of future possibilities of water-table rise or fall.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 115

 Drainage Engineering Module

4.8.4 Interceptor Drainage

Interceptor drains intercept (cutoff) the surface or sub-surface flow from higher reaches before
such water can encroach upon the cultivated lands and create waterlogging problem. They are
also called ‘relief drains’. They can be of open type or buried pipe type. In general, interceptor
drains are used for two different purposes (Ritzema, 1994):

a) to intercept seepage water from neighbouring irrigation canals;

b) to intercept foreign water that seeps down a hill.

The first type of interceptor drains is often installed in irrigated areas parallel to, and a short
distance away from, conveyance canals. To drain such areas, the interceptor drain is frequently
installed on both sides of the waterway. Typical interceptor drains in humid areas (Fig 72 d.)
are located above the seepage area where seepage is caused by the shallow depth or outcropping
of the impervious layer on the surface.

Figure 73: Common types of pipe drainage systems: (a) Natural or random; (b) Herringbone;
(c) Gridiron; (d) Cutoff or Interceptor (Schwab et al., 2005)

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 116

 Drainage Engineering Module

In irrigated regions, the seepage from an unlined canal, shown in Fig. 73, often causes wetness
and damage to crops below. The flow towards such a drain is similar to the flow between drains
with different water levels. If we assume that there is no recharge from precipitation, we can
use the Dupuit Equation to calculate the flow per unit length.

Figure 74: Water table drawdown from an interceptor drain below a canal. (Source: Schwab
et al., 2005)
The second type of interceptor (or hill-side) drainage is shown in Figure 74. Donnan (1959)
presented a solution for this type of drainage. He assumed a homogeneous uniform soil layer
on top of an impervious layer with a slope s.

Figure 75: Flow towards an interceptor drain through a homogenous soil overlying a
uniformly sloping layer
Without an interceptor drain, the slope of the water table will be parallel to the slope of the
impervious layer, so the amount of seepage water flowing downhill can be calculated with
Darcy’s Equation.

𝒒 = 𝑲𝑯𝒔 ………………………………………………. ………Equation 57

Where;
ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 117
 Drainage Engineering Module

q = flow rate per unit width (m2/d)

K = hydraulic conductivity of the top layer (m/d)
H = height of the water table above the impervious layer before the installation of the
interceptor drain (m)
s = slope of the impervious layer (-)
If an interceptor drain is constructed at the bottom of the hill at a height “ho” above the
impervious layer, the slope of the water table in the vicinity of the drain will no longer be
parallel to the impervious layer, but will curve towards the drain. With a coordinate system as
in Figure 72, we can assume that the slope is approximately “s + dh/dx”, so the amount of
seepage flow through a cross-section at a distance “x” uphill from the drain will be

𝒅𝒚
𝒒 = 𝑲𝒚(𝒔 + 𝒅𝒙 ……………………………………………….Equation 58

Where;

y = height of the water table above the impervious layer at distance x (m)
𝒅𝒚
= hydraulic gradient at x (-)
𝒅𝒙

Because of continuity, the flow with or without the interceptor drain must be equal, so

𝒅𝒚
𝑲𝑯𝒔 = 𝑲𝒚(𝒔 + 𝒅𝒙 ……………………………………………….Equation 59

Integrating with y = ho at x = O gives (Donnan 1959)

𝟏 𝐇−𝐡𝐨
𝐱 = 𝐬 [𝟐. 𝟑𝐇𝐥𝐨𝐠 − (𝐲 − 𝐡𝐨)] ………………………….Equation 60
𝐇−𝐲

where

x = distance uphill from the interceptor drain (m)

Equation 60 can be used to calculate the height of the watertable at any distance x uphill from
the interceptor drain. Theoretically, y = H is only reached at x = ∞.

Worked Example

An irrigation scheme (500 x 1000 m) is located in a sloping area (Figure 8.20). The deep
percolation losses are 1 mm/d. The soil consists of a permeable layer, 6 m thick and with a
hydraulic conductivity of 2.5 m/d, on top of an impervious layer with a slope of s = 0.04. To
control the watertable in the area downhill from the irrigated area at a level of 2 m below the
soil surface, an interceptor drain will be constructed. We have to calculate the required depth

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 118

 Drainage Engineering Module

and capacity of the interceptor drain, and the uphill elevation of the watertable after the
construction of the interceptor drain.

To control the watertable at 2 m below the soil surface, the height of the interceptor drain above
the impervious layer has to be

ho = 6.0 - 2.0 = 4.0m

The percolation losses result in a seepage flow, per metre width, of

𝑞𝑠 = 500𝑥0.001 = 0.5𝑚2 /𝑑

The elevation of the watertable above the impervious layer before the construction of the
interceptor drain can be calculated with Equation 57.

𝑞𝑠 0.5
𝐻= = = 5.0𝑚
𝐾𝑠 2.5𝑥0.04

Figure 76:The calculation of an interceptor drain in a sloping area: (A) before construction
and (B) after construction (Example above)

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 119

 Drainage Engineering Module

After the interceptor drain has been constructed, the seepage flow downhill from the drain will
be

𝑞𝑑 = 𝐾ℎ𝑜𝑠 = 2.5𝑥4.0𝑥0.04 = 0.4𝑚2 /𝑑

Thus the required capacity of the interceptor drain per metre length is

𝑞𝑖 = 𝑞𝑠 − 𝑞𝑑 = 0.5 − 0.4 = 0.1𝑚2 /𝑑

In other words, 20% of the percolating water will be intercepted. As the scheme is 1000 m
long, the discharge at the outlet of the interceptor drain will be

Qi = 1000x qi =1000x0.1 =100m3/d = 1.16l/s

The elevation of the watertable uphill from the interceptor drain can be described by Eq. 60

1 H−ho
x = s [2.3Hlog − (y − ho)]
H−y

1 5.0−4.0
x = 0.04 [2.3x5.0log − (y − 4.0)]
5.0−y

1.0
x = 287.5 log − 25x(y − 4.0)]
5.0−y

Thus:

y = 4.0m at x = Om
y = 4.2m at x = 23m
y = 4.4m a t x = 54m
y = 4. 6 m at x = 99m
y = 4.8m at x = 181 m
and, y = 4.9m at x = 265m

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 120

 Drainage Engineering Module

Chapter five

5. Soil Salinity
5.1 Introduction
Soil salinization generally refers to the development of salinity in non-salty soil, especially to
the development of non-saline soil into a saline soil. It involves an increase of the soluble salt
content of the soil, resulting in an increase of salt concentration of the soil solution. Soil salinity
refers to the presence of major dissolved inorganic solutes in the soil aqueous phase, which
consist of soluble and readily dissolvable salts including charged species (e.g., Na+, K+, MG+2,
Ca+2, Cl-, HCO3-, NO3-, SO4-2, and CO3-2), non-ionic solutes, and ions that combine to form ion
pairs.

The predominant mechanism causing the accumulation of salt in irrigated agricultural soils is
loss of water through evapotranspiration, leaving ever increasing concentrations of salts in the
remaining water. Effects of soil salinity are manifested in loss of stand, reduced plant growth,
reduced yields, and in severe cases, crop failure. Salinity limits water uptake by plants by
reducing the osmotic potential making it more difficult for the plant to extract water. Salinity
may also cause specific-ion toxicity or upset the nutritional balance of plants. In addition, the
salt composition of the soil water influences the composition of cations on the exchange
complex of soil particles, which influences soil permeability and tilth. Irrigated agriculture,
which accounts for 35%–40% of the world’s total food and fiber, is adversely affected by soil
salinity on roughly half of all irrigated soils (totalling about 250millionha) with over

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 121

 Drainage Engineering Module

5.2 Dissolved salt in the ground water

Dissolved salts in groundwater, also known as groundwater salinity, refer to the concentration
of soluble minerals and salts present in the water. These salts can be natural, like those from
bedrock dissolution or accumulated rainfall, or they can be introduced by human activities like
irrigation. Groundwater salinity can have significant impacts on water quality, agriculture, and
human health.

Groundwater salinity is generally of 3 types:

I. Natural/primary salinity caused as a result of dissolution of minerals (e.g. halite,
anhydrite, carbonates, gypsum, fluoride-salts, and sulphate-salts) from bedrocks or
accumulation of salts from rainfall built up over time, hence the residence time of these
may be quite long ranging from thousands to millions of years
II. Dry land/secondary salinity caused due to rising water levels which bring salt to the
surface or clearing of vegetation cause accumulation of salt in soil profile and in
groundwater. In high rainfall areas the salts are percolated down while in arid and semi-
arid regions these remain on the surface
III. Tertiary/irrigated salinity caused as a result of repeated multiple irrigation of water
where salts remain after evaporation and accumulate over time. These accumulated
salts leech down to groundwater with rainfall.

5.2.1 Sources of Dissolved Salts in Groundwater:

a) Natural Sources:

 Bedrock Dissolution: Groundwater dissolves minerals like halite, anhydrite,

gypsum, and carbonates from bedrock over time, increasing salinity.
 Salt Accumulation: Salts can accumulate in soil and groundwater, particularly
in arid and semi-arid regions, due to low rainfall and evaporation,

b) Human-Induced Sources:

 Irrigation: Irrigation can lead to increased groundwater recharge, mobilizing salts that
have naturally accumulated in the soil.
 Agricultural Practices: The use of synthetic fertilizers, manures, and wastewater
treatment can contribute to salinity in surface and groundwater.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 122

 Drainage Engineering Module

 Waterlogging: Waterlogging can bring salts to the surface, increasing soil and
groundwater salinity,
 Seawater Intrusion: In coastal areas, excessive groundwater pumping can draw
seawater into freshwater aquifers, increasing salinity.

5.3 Measuring ground water salinity

Groundwater salinity is typically measured using electrical conductivity (EC), total dissolved
solids (TDS), and sodium adsorption ratio (SAR). High EC values (above 3 dS/m) generally
indicate water unsuitable for irrigation.

Measuring Salinity:

 Electrical Conductivity (EC): EC measures the ability of water to conduct electricity,

which is related to the concentration of dissolved ions, says the Department of
Environment, Water and Natural.
 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS): TDS is the total mass of dissolved solids in a volume
of water, typically measured in parts per million (ppm)
 Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR): Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR): The sodium
content relative to calcium and magnesium content of the irrigation water controls the
rate of infiltration of water to the root zone of crops (Ayers & Westcot 1985). It has
also been elucidated further by Todd (1980) that the soil permeability gets reduced by
reaction of sodium with the soil.

5.4 Soil Salinity Test

Soil salinity can be assessed through laboratory tests that involve extracting soil solution and
measuring EC. The saturation extract method is the most common, and values above 4 dS/m
usually indicate saline soil (USDA, 2014). Salt-affected soils are generally classified as saline,
alkali or saline-alkali, based on the values of EC, ESP and pH of the soil saturation extract.

These classes are defined as follows (Bhattacharya and Michael, 2003);

I. Saline soil: ECe > 4 ds/m, ESP< 15% and pH<8.5.

II. Alkali soil: ECe < 4 ds/m, ESP>15% and pH>8.5.
III. Saline-Alkali soil: ECe> 4 ds/m, ESP> 15% and pH = 8.5 or slightly higher.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 123

 Drainage Engineering Module

The above classification of salt-affected soils help to identify whether salinity is the major
constraint to agriculture or soil alkali condition or both salinity and alkali condition which are
adversely affecting the plant growth and crop yield. Based on such understanding, appropriate
remedial measures can be selected for the reclamation of lands having above types of soils or
for the selection of crops which can survive and yield reasonably well even under such adverse
soil conditions.

In general terms, and from agricultural viewpoint, the soils of all the above classes can be
considered as chemically degraded because of poorer crop performance in such soils compared
to that in that in the normal soils (Bhattacharya and Michael, 2003).

Other types of chemically degraded soils are those which have too poor soil fertility to support
plant growth and which are polluted by human activities such as dumping of untreated
industrial and mine wastes containing toxic chemicals in streams or on the land. Nutrient
availability to the plant is dependent upon the degree of salt problem.

Usually, salt-affected soils need higher doses of fertilisers to meet the plant requirement. Plant
roots experience difficulty in extracting water from the soil if the concentration of the dissolved
salts in the soil solution is high, which raising its osmotic pressure. This is why, in highly saline
soils. Despite having adequate soil moisture, plants may show wilting symptom similar to the
situation when there is a lack of adequate soil moisture (Bhattacharya and Michael, 2003).

Intensive agriculture, supported by irrigation may also lead to chemical degradation of soil
through the depletion of nutrients and the rise of water table (waterlogging).

5.5 Salinization due to irrigation

All water for irrigation contains some salts. Most irrigation water originates as rainfall which
percolates through the soil towards the ground water and onwards towards the rivers, collecting
salts on its way. The use of groundwater for irrigation poses special problems because this
water in particular may contain a considerable salt load. This is especially true for arid climates
where groundwater is not refreshed so frequently as in humid climates due to low rainfall and
high evaporation, and hence salts tend to become more concentrated. Rivers often have a higher
salt content during low-flow seasons than during flood seasons. Also, salt conditions may also
vary along the course of a river.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 124

 Drainage Engineering Module

Every irrigation event brings a certain amount of salt into the root zone. As the water is lost by
evapotranspiration, the salts remain behind in the root zone/evaporation zone (Fig.77) where
they will accumulate as is brought in by the irrigation water (salt balance concept) unless an
equivalent amount of salt is removed from this zone. The salt uptake by crops is small, salt
removal depending almost completely on leaching by deep percolation (i.e., washing out of
salt by water percolating through the soil to the depth below the root zone). This type of
salinization is most likely to occur under conditions where the salt influx to the root zone is
high and/or the salt outflux from the root zone is low.

Figure 77:Schematic of direct salinization by irrigation. (source: Modified from Smedema

and Rycroft, 1983)
High salt influx conditions prevail when the climate is hot and dry (high irrigation water
requirements), and the water is saline. On the other hand, low salt outflux conditions prevail
when:

 The climate is hot and dry. That is, there are low rainfall and high evaporation, and hence
little excess rain goes into deep percolation.
 Minimum irrigation practices are followed, i.e., just enough water is applied to meet the
crop evapotranspiration, leaving no excess for deep percolation (i.e., under-irrigation).

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 125

 Drainage Engineering Module

 Drainage conditions are poor, which result in insufficient percolation and drainage
discharge.

5.6 Drainage for salinity control

Effective drainage systems, including surface and subsurface drainage, are critical for leaching
excess salts from the root zone. Controlled drainage combined with periodic leaching helps
manage salinity (Ritzema et al., 2006).

Drainage for salinity control refers to the method of managing soil and water to prevent the
build-up of salts in the root zone of crops. Excessive salt in the soil can reduce crop yield,
damage soil structure, and eventually make the land infertile. Proper drainage systems help
leach these salts below the root zone and out of the soil profile.

5.6.1 Types of Drainage Systems for Salinity Control

1. Surface Drainage
o Removes excess water from the surface.
o Includes shallow ditches, land levelling, and open drains.
o Helps reduce waterlogging which can lead to salinity.
2. Subsurface Drainage
o Involves the installation of underground pipes or tile drains.
o Removes water from below the root zone.
o Allows salts to be leached downward and away from crops.
o Most effective for long-term salinity control.
3. Vertical Drainage
o Uses deep wells to pump out saline groundwater.
o Reduces the water table to prevent saline water from reaching the root zone.

5.7 Land reclamation techniques for salt affected soils.

5.7.1 Types of Reclamation Techniques

1. Leaching (Washing the salts)

 Purpose: Removes soluble salts from the root zone using excess irrigation water.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 126

 Drainage Engineering Module

 Method: Apply water in excess of crop requirement so it moves down through the soil
and carries salts with it.

Formula:

𝑬𝑪𝒊𝒘
𝑳𝑭 = …………………………………..Equation 61
𝟓𝒙(𝑬𝑪𝒆 −𝑬𝑪𝒊𝒘 )

Where;

LF = Leaching Fraction (portion of irrigation water to leach salts)

ECiw = Electrical conductivity of irrigation water (dS/m)

ECe= Desired electrical conductivity of soil saturation extract (dS/m)

Example:

What is the Leaching Requirement (LR) to maintain acceptable soil salinity levels for a crop
that tolerates an electrical conductivity of the soil saturation extract (ECe) of 4 dS/m, if the
irrigation water has an electrical conductivity (ECiw) of 1 dS/m?

Given:

 ECiw (Irrigation water EC) = 1 dS/m

 ECe (Maximum acceptable soil EC for crop) = 4 dS/m

Solution:

calculate the Leaching Requirement, we use the FAO formula of equation 61:

1.0
𝐿𝐹 = 5𝑥(4−1) ≈ 0.053 =5.3%

Interpretation: The Leaching Requirement (LR) is approximately 0.053 or 5.3%.

This means that 5.3% of the total applied irrigation water must pass through the root zone
to leach excess salts and maintain suitable soil salinity for the crop.

2. Chemical Amendments (for Sodic Soils)

 Purpose: Replace sodium ions (Na⁺) on soil particles with calcium (Ca²⁺) to improve
soil structure.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 127

 Drainage Engineering Module

 Common amendments: Gypsum (CaSO₄·2H₂O), sulphuric acid, elemental sulphur.

Formula for Gypsum Requirement (GR):

𝑬𝑺𝑷𝒊 −𝑬𝑺𝑷𝒇
𝑮𝑹 = 𝒙 𝑪𝑬𝑪 𝒙 𝑩𝑫 𝒙 𝑫 𝒙 𝟏𝟎 ………………Equation 62
𝟏𝟎𝟎

Where:

ESPi = Initial Exchangeable Sodium Percentage

ESPf = Final desired ESP
CEC = Cation Exchange Capacity (meq/100g soil)
BD = Bulk density (g/cm³)
D = Depth of soil (cm)
Example
How much pure gypsum is required (in kg/ha) to reduce the Exchangeable Sodium
Percentage (ESP) of a soil from 25 to 10, given the following values:

 Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC) = 25 cmol (+)/kg

 Bulk Density (BD) = 1.3 g/cm³
 Soil depth (D) = 30 cm

Solution
To calculate the gypsum requirement (GR), we use the formula in equation 62:

𝐸𝑆𝑃𝑖 −𝐸𝑆𝑃𝑓
𝐺𝑅 = 𝑥 𝐶𝐸𝐶 𝑥 𝐵𝐷 𝑥 𝐷 𝑥 10
100

Step 1: Identify the values

 Initial ESP (ESPᵢ) = 25

 Final ESP (ESPf) = 10
 CEC = 25
 Bulk Density (BD) = 1.3
 Depth (D) = 30

Step 2: Plug the values into the formula

25−10
GR = 100
x 25 x 1.3 x 30 x 10 = 1462.5Kg/ha

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 128

 Drainage Engineering Module

The gypsum requirement is 1462.5 kg/ha of pure gypsum.

3. Biological Reclamation

 Use salt-tolerant crops (e.g., barley, ryegrass, Sesbania) to improve soil.

 Improves organic matter and helps leach salts naturally.
 Often used with other techniques.

4. Drainage Improvement

 Essential for success of other methods.

 Includes surface and subsurface drainage to remove excess water and prevent salt build-
up.

5. Mechanical Methods

 Deep plowing or sub-soiling to break hard pans and improve infiltration.

 Helps in better movement of water and salts.

Table 11:Summary Table of Methods

Technique Target Soil Main Goal Key Input

Leaching Saline Wash salts out Water
Chemical Sodic Replace sodium with Gypsum or acids
Amendment calcium
Biological All types Gradual improvement Salt-tolerant
crops
Drainage All types Prevent salt build-up Drains, ditches
Mechanical Hardpan Improve infiltration Tillage equipment
areas

5.7.2 Reclamation of Alkali Soils

Alkali soils, also called sodic soils, are characterized by high levels of exchangeable sodium
(ESP > 15), high pH (often above 8.5), and poor soil structure. The excess sodium causes soil
particles to disperse, reducing water infiltration and making the soil hard and compacted. These
conditions are harmful to plant growth.

Key Characteristics of Alkali Soils:

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 129

 Drainage Engineering Module

 High pH (> 8.5)

 High Exchangeable Sodium Percentage (ESP > 15)
 Poor physical condition and water movement
 Often white crust or black patches on soil surface

🔧 Reclamation Process

The reclamation of alkali soils involves:

1. Chemical Amendment – to replace excess sodium with calcium

2. Leaching – to wash out displaced sodium from the root zone
3. Improved Drainage – to carry leached sodium away
4. Organic Matter Addition – to improve soil structure and microbial activity

✅ Common Chemical Amendments:

 Gypsum (CaSO₄·2H₂O) – most commonly used

 Sulphur or Sulphuric acid (for calcareous soils)
 Calcium chloride (less common, expensive)

5.7.3 Reclamation of Acidic Soils

Acidic soils have a low pH (usually below 5.5), which can severely limit plant growth. These
soils often contain toxic levels of aluminium and manganese and lack essential nutrients like
calcium, magnesium, and phosphorus. Acidic soils are common in high rainfall areas where
basic nutrients are leached away over time.

Lime is the most commonly used chemical additive in acid soils to neutralize the soil acidity.
As gypsum requirement for the reclamation of alkali soil is determined on the basis of desired
replacement of sodium from the soil complex, in principle, the lime requirement is determined
based on the requirement of raising soil pH from less than 6 to a desirable higher value
(Bhattacharya and Michael, 2003).

The lime requirement for the original soil (form which the sample was taken) is read from a
ready reckoner table, which gives the lime requirement of the soil to raise its pH from the
known lower value to a desired higher value. For example, if the pH of the soil sample prepared
in the above fashion is 5.0 and it is to be raised to 6.0, the theoretical lime requirement will be

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 130

 Drainage Engineering Module

close to 20t/ha. The actual lime requirement is determined by dividing the theoretical
requirement by the purity of lime (in fraction). The calculated lime quantity is for increasing
the soil pH of the plough layer, which is generally considered as 15 cm.

From the above discussion, it is apparent that the calculated lime requirement is huge,
particularly if a greater depth of soil is considered for raising pH or if the pH is to be raised by
a greater extent. However, in practice much lesser lime application rate has been found to
achieve the goal of increasing agricultural production in acid soils.

Problems with Acidic Soils:

 Toxicity of aluminium (Al³⁺) and manganese (Mn²⁺)

 Deficiency of calcium (Ca²⁺), magnesium (Mg²⁺), and phosphorus (P)
 Poor root development and stunted plant growth
 Inhibition of beneficial microbial activity

🛠️ Reclamation Process

The goal of reclamation is to neutralize soil acidity and improve nutrient availability. This is
done primarily by adding liming materials.

✅ Common Liming Materials:

 Lime (CaCO₃) – most commonly used

 Dolomite (CaMg(CO₃)₂) – if magnesium is also deficient
 Quick lime (CaO) or slaked lime (Ca(OH)₂) – faster-acting but more caustic

🌱 How Lime Works:

Lime reacts with hydrogen (H⁺) ions and toxic aluminium in the soil, raising the pH and making
the soil more suitable for crops.

Worked Example

How much lime is required to raise the pH of a 1-hectare acidic soil plot to a suitable level,
given:

 Soil depth = 15 cm

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 131

 Drainage Engineering Module

 Bulk Density (BD) = 1.4 g/cm³

 Lime Requirement (LR) of the soil = 2 tons per hectare for every 15 cm soil depth

Solution:

Step 1: Understand the Lime Requirement

Soil testing labs determine the Lime Requirement (LR) in tons per hectare based on the
desired pH level. Here, it’s given directly as 2 tons/ha for 15 cm depth.

Step 2: Check field details

 Area = 1 hectare
 Soil depth = 15 cm
 Bulk density = 1.4 g/cm³
 LR = 2 tons/ha

Since the depth is 15 cm and matches the standard lab LR depth, no adjustments are needed.

Step 3: Calculate Lime Needed

Lime requirement is already standardized: Lime required=2 tons per hectare

You need 2 tons (2000 kg) of lime per hectare to correct the soil acidity for a 15 cm depth.

Notes on Application:

 Apply lime uniformly and mix into the topsoil (ploughing/tilling).

 Avoid over-liming; it can cause micronutrient deficiencies.
 Use dolomite if magnesium is deficient in the soil.
 Monitor soil pH 6 months after application for effectiveness.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 132

 Drainage Engineering Module

References

1. ILRI, (1994). Drainage Principles and Application, Wageningen the Netherlands,

Publication no. 16.
2. WAPCOS/LBII, Handbook of Drainage of Irrigated Areas in Indi Technical Report no
5, New Delhi.
3. Michael A.M (1979), Irrigation Theory and Practice, Vikas publishing house pvt. Ltd.
New Delhi.
4. H. P. Rit zema (Editor-in-Chief), (1994). Drainage Principles and Applications. IRLI
Publication16. ILRI, P.O. Box-45,6700 AA, Wegeningen, The Netherlands.
5. Ayers, R. S., & Westcot, D. W. (1985). Water quality for agriculture (Vol. 29). Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
6. USDA. (2014). Soil Salinity Assessment: USDA Natural Resources Conservation
Service.
7. Ritzema, H. P., Satyanarayana, T. V., Raman, S., & Boonstra, J. (2006). Subsurface
drainage to combat waterlogging and salinity in irrigated lands in India: Lessons
learned in farmers’ fields. Agricultural Water Management, 86(1-2), 153–165.

ABEBE BESHA (MSC) 133