Table 3‑1: Furrow Lengths (m) as related to Soil, Slope, and Stream Size & Irrigation Depth

Soil type Clay Loam Sand

Max. Average irrigation depth (mm)
Furrow
stream 75 150 50 100 150 50
slope, %
size (l/s) Length of Furrow (m)
0.05 3 300 400 120 270 400 60

0.1 3 340 440 180 340 440 90

0.2 2.5 370 470 220 370 470 120

0.3 2 400 500 280 400 500 150

0.5 1.2 400 500 280 370 470 120
1 0.6 280 400 250 300 370 90
1.5 0.5 250 340 220 280 340 80
2 0.3 220 270 180 250 300 60
Source: FAO Irrigation & Drainage Manual, 2002

Table 3‑2: Practical values of max. Furrow lengths (m) for SSIP
Soil type Clay Loam Sand
Max. Average irrigation depth (mm)
Furrow
Stream 50 75 50 75 50 75
slope, %
size (l/s) Length of Furrow (m)
0 3 100 150 60 90 30 45
0.1 3 120 170 90 125 45 60
0.2 2.5 130 180 110 150 60 95
0.3 2 150 200 130 170 75 110
0.5 1.2 150 200 130 170 75 110
Source: FAO Irrigation & Drainage Manual, 2002

Table 5‑2: Working head for different canals

Working head
(mm)
Parent canal Off-taking canal
For medium & For small
large scale scale

Preferable Minimum Minimum

Main canal Secondary canal 500 300 150

Secondary canal Tertiary canal 300 150 100
Tertiary canal Field canal 150 100 100
 Sand
)
75 100 Table 6‑5: Maximum allowable Flow Velocities in Earth Canals
Soil type
90 150 Sand

120 190 Sandy loam

190 250 Clayish loam

220 280 Clay

190 250 Gravel
150 220 Rock
120 190 Source: I&D System Design Training Material, GIRDC, 2015
90 150
Maximum allowable Flow Velocities in Earth Canals
Maximum Flow Velocity (m/s)
0.3-0.7

0.5-0.7

0.6-0.9

0.9-1.5
0.9-1.5
1.2-1.8
urce: I&D System Design Training Material, GIRDC, 2015
Table 6‑1: Indicative parameters for selecting types of canal cross-section
Canal Cross-Section
Parameters
Triangular Rectangular

Preferred on steeper
Land slope Used on flatter slope
slope

Discharge For on-farm distribution For lesser discharge

Efficient since it is
Efficiency Less efficient
used as lined canal
Land take Less land take Less land take
More costly as it is
Cost Less costly
unlined

Easiness of construction Easy Relatively easy

Common for MC
Practice Not common & used for unlined canals running on hills & SC
only as lined

Table 6‑4: Manning’s coefficient of roughness

Type of lining Condition n
In perfect Order 0.01
a) Planed boards carefully laid
b) Planed boards inferior workmanship or
0.014
aged
Glazed coating of enamel
Timber c) Un-planed boards carefully laid 0.016
d) Un-planed boards inferior
0.016
workmanship or aged
0.018

a) Net cement plaster 0.013

b) Sand & cement plaster 0.015

Masonry c) Concrete, Steel troweled 0.014

d) Concrete, wood troweled 0.015
e) Brick in good condition 0.015
f) Brick in rough condition 0.017
g) Masonry in bad condition 0.02
 a) Smooth dressed ashlar 0.015
Stone Work b) Rubble set in cement 0.017
c) Fine, well packet gravel 0.02
a) Regular surface in good condition 0.02
b) In ordinary condition 0.025
c) With stones & weeds 0.03
Earth
d) In poor condition 0.035
e) Partially obstructed with debris or
0.05
weeds
a) Welded 0.013
b) Riveted 0.017
Steel
c) Slightly tuberculated 0.02

Cast Iron 0.013

Asbestos Cement 0.012
Plastic (Smooth) 0.011
Source: INCID, Pipe distribution system for irrigation, 1998

1.1.1 Manning’s
equation
sed for lined or other non-erodible canals, or canals conveying clear water. Generally it should not be used for earth canals con
……………………..……………………….……… (6-14)

Where, A is cross sectional area (m2)

R is hydraulic radius (= A/P, m)
P is wetted perimeter of cross section (m)
S = Longitudinal /friction slope of canal, S=DH /L, (%)
DH = Head difference between reference points, (m) and
L = Distance between reference points (m)
n = Roughness coefficient, with the following commonly used values:
· Concrete lined canals 0.012 – 0.015
· Masonry lined canals 0.018 – 0.022
· Earthen canals 0.025 – 0.030
· Natural rivers/drains 0.030 – 0.040
s-Section Table 6‑6: Maximum permissible velocity in earth
Clear water
Parabolic/Semi- Material
Trapezoidal f/s m/s
circular
Fine sand, colloidal 1.5 0.46
Sandy loam, non-colloidal 1.75 0.53
Commonly Used on Can be used
flatter slope anywhere Silt loam, non-colloidal 2 0.61
Alluvial silt, non-colloidal 2 0.61
Firm loam soil 2.5 0.76
Preferred for higher Preferred for
capacity higher capacity Volcanic ash 2.5 0.76
Stiff clay, highly colloidal 3.75 1.14
Less efficient as it is Alluvial silt, colloidal 3.75 1.14
The most efficient
commonly unlined Shales and hard "pans" 6 1.83
More land take Less land take Fine gravel 2.5 0.76
Less costly as it is The most costly Coarse gravel 4 1.22
unlined as it is lined Cobble and shingle 5 1.52

Relatively difficult The most difficult Source: I&D System Design Train

Commonly used for Not common for

unlined canals SSIP

Table 6‑8: Indicative canal side slope an

Canal Side
Discharge (m3/s) Slope
(1V:mH)

0.03 - 0.15 0.5

0.15 – 0.3 1
0.3 – 1.0 1
1.0 – 5.0 1.5

Source: Halcrow-GIRDC Study Report for 80,000ha Net

Table 6‑9: Recommended b/d ratios for earthen tra

(b/d)
Water Depth Remark
Ratios
1 (clay) - Topography
Small (d < 0.75 m)
2 (sand) also matters
Medium (d = 0.75- 2 (clay) -
1.50 m) 3 (sand)
Large (d > 1.50 m) >3
Source: FAO Irrigation & Drainage Man
 Table 6‑11: Indicative guidelines for bank and lining free boa
Capacity, Free board (mm)
(m3/s) Lining bank Total
0 - 0.5 50 150 200
0.5 - 1 100 300 400
1 to 10 200 500 700

Source: Halcrow-GIRDC Study Report for 80,000ha Net Ethiopian Nile Irri

Table 6‑12: Free board in lined and earthen canals

Lined Earthen
Capacity,(m3/s)
canal (m) Canal (m)

< 0.1 0.1 0.3

0.1 – 0.5 0.15 0.3
0.5 – 1.0 0.2 0.4
1.0 - 2.0 0.2 0.5
2.0 - 3.0 0.25 0.5
3.0 - 5.0 0.3 0.6
Source: Guidelines for Irrigation Systems Design in Hills and Valle

be used for earth canals conveying river water with a sediment load. The equation is:
……… (6-14)
ermissible velocity in earth canals
Clear water Water with colloidal silt
f/s m/s f/s m/s
1.5 0.46 2.5 0.76
al 1.75 0.53 2.5 0.76
2 0.61 3 0.91
2 0.61 3.5 1.07
2.5 0.76 3.5 1.07
2.5 0.76 3.5 1.07
3.75 1.14 5 1.52
3.75 1.14 5 1.52
6 1.83 6 1.83
2.5 0.76 5 1.52
4 1.22 6 1.83
5 1.52 5.5 1.68
ource: I&D System Design Training Material, GIRDC, 2015

icative canal side slope and corresponding b/d ratio

b/d ratio

1.3 – 2.2
0.8 – 1.2
1.2 – 2.5
1.6 – 3.0

Study Report for 80,000ha Net Ethiopian Nile Irrigation Project, 2010

ed b/d ratios for earthen trapezoidal canals

FAO Irrigation & Drainage Manual, 2002

or bank and lining free board

80,000ha Net Ethiopian Nile Irrigation Project, 2010

d earthen canals

ystems Design in Hills and Valleys, MoWR, Nepal, 2006