HecRas - Ta405 Maliana Design Report - Intake. Etc PDF

REPUBLICA DEMOCRACIA DE TIMOR LESTE
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY

AND FISHERIES
THE AGRICULTURAL REHABILITATION PROJECT

EAST TIMOR HEAVILY DAMAGED SCHEMES ARP II
REHABILITATION OF MALIANA
IRRIGATION SCHEME
DESIGN REPORT
MAIN REPORT
February 2003
1. Introduction
1.
1.1.
INTRODUCTION
THE MALIANA IRRIGATION SCHEME
Maliana I irrigation scheme is located in the western part of East Timor towards the border with
Indonesia and abstracts water from the Bulobo River (see Figure 1.1). The irrigation area is located
just outside the east end of the town of Maliana and covers the area north of the highway. About
900 ha of paddy land has been developed for cultivation and a potential of another 1,100 ha which
currently is dry land may be available for rice cultivation.
Maliana I weir was built during the Portuguese administration in the 1970s. As constructed by the
Portugese, the crest level of the weir is the same as the invert level at the canal intake. For
diversion, especially during the drier months, it is necessary to construct a raised flume in the
riverbed from gabions and gravels to divert water into the intake and canal.
Some rehabilitation work including a concrete capping of the weir was carried out during the
Indonesian administration. The concrete capping however has deteriorated resulting in a major
portion of the river flow spilling across the damaged weir crest.
The present irrigation scheme consists of a short left bank main canal (about 0.6 km long) and two
secondary canals (see Figure 1.2). The canals are heavily silted causing disruption to flows.
Distribution of water is haphazard by using stop logs at structures since there are no control gates at
division structures nor offtakes.
1.2.
REHABILITATION OPTIONS
For rehabilitation of the headworks the following options were investigated and costed during the
feasibility stage (see Reference 5):
Free intakes
Pumping
Fixed weir.
Options for the fixed weir included:
rehabilitation of the existing weir
rehabilitation of the existing weir and construction of a low new weir near the upstream end
of the existing approach walls. Rehabilitating the new weir only will not provide sufficient
height for a gated intake and sluice. Earthworks will still be required to channel water into
the existing intake
demolition of the existing weir and construction of a new weir with gated intake and sluice.
The Option adopted for the rehabilitation of the facilities at Maliana is the rehabilitation of the
existing weir, intake and canals and construction of an extension to the Ramaskora secondary canal.
Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Main Design Report (53205.21)
Version: Final May 2003

1-1
1. Introduction
1.3.
SCOPE OF REPORT
This report:
describes the condition of the existing irrigation scheme
describes the rehabilitation works to be undertaken
records the design criteria, assumptions and method of analysis adopted in determining the
arrangement, dimensions and details of the structures as shown on the tender drawings
clarifies some of the procedures to be followed during construction
gives the basis of calculating the quantities for the Bill of Quantities
describes the costing methods and data used in preparing the cost estimate.
The scope of the design work includes:
topographic and engineering surveys to examine the physical condition of the existing canals
and structures including headworks
check of the hydraulic capacity of existing canals and structures
design of rehabilitation works for the existing weir and intake and canals and associated
structures
preparation of design drawings and tender documents
preparation of cost estimates
input to O&M Plan.


1-2
2. Scope of Work
2.
2.1.
SCOPE OF WORK
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
The river diversion works are required to divert 1.62 m3/s and to bypass a flood with a peak inflow
of 310 m3/s.
2.2.
THE WORKS
Principle items of work include:
raising of the crest of the existing weir by 0.7 m by anchoring a capping of concrete with steel
plate amouring to the crest and downstream face of the existing weir
backfilling of existing cavities in the downstream face of the existing weir with concrete and
pressure grouting of the joints between the existing and new concrete
construction of an anchored steel armoured reinforced concrete deflector at the downstream

toe of the existing weir
grouting of the foundations of the existing weir by drilling grout holes through the weir from
the weir crest
raising of the right and left abutment training walls upstream of the crest with reinforced
concrete
repair and steel armouring of the damaged lower section of the right abutment training wall
downstream of the weir crest
provision and installation of new gates for the sluice outlet and the canal intake
provision of timber stoplogs at the sluice outlet and canal intake
concrete repairs to the remaining existing intake, sedimentation basin and flushing channel
desilting of the existing canal system
repairs to the existing canal lining and canal structures
repairs or replacement where directed of existing canal gates and painting of gates
supply and installation of steel slide gates at the division structure of Maliana Main canal
supply and installation of steel slide gates at all offtake structures
construction of the extension of the Ramaskora secondary canal and end structure
construction of a new WUA meeting room *
construction of a gatekeepers hut.*


2-1
2. Scope of Work
Work items denoted with an asterix (*) are not included in the Main Contract. Contractor is advised
to provide costing for these in the Bid. Execution of the work will be subject to Project Managers
approval. Project Manager will be responsible for site location and land acquisition.


2-2
3. Hydrological Studies
3.
3.1.
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
INTRODUCTION
A summary is given in this section of the hydrological studies and crop water requirement estimates
that have been carried out for the Maliana I Irrigation Scheme.
For further information and the methodology reference should be made to Annex A Hydrological
Studies Report.
3.2.
DATA AVAILABILITY
3.2.1.
Agro-climatic data
The Agro-climatic data such as evaporation, temperature and relative humidity for this area were
collected at Maliana climatic station for the period 1952 to 1974.
3.2.2.
Rainfall Data
Rainfall data from stations located within the Bulobo River catchment and stations located within or
nearby the irrigation command areas were used, including Maliana, and Bobonaro.
3.2.3.
Streamflow records
No streamflow records were available in the Bulobo River basin.

3.3.
CLIMATE
3.3.1.
General
The climate of Bulobo River basin is characterised by its monsoonal type climate with 6 months of
wet season. In general, the climate of the study area is divided in two distinct seasons:
Wet season from November to April this is the warmer and rainier season, during this
period heavy rains occurs, the wettest month is January.
The dry season from June to October this is the cooler and drier season. August and
September is generally the driest month.
3.3.2.
Rainfall
The rainfall pattern in the Maliana region shows a mono-modal type of rainfall pattern with
6 months of wet season with one rainfall peak normally between December-February. The mean
annual catchment rainfall in this region is in the range of 1900-2100.


3-1
Table 3.1 Monthly Rainfall Data

Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual
3.3.3.
Rainfall (mm)
Bobonaro
Maliana
426
380
337
362
305
312
147
120
115
100
55
43
32
12
19
12
20
13
80
78
237
208
368
305
2142
1943
Temperatures
The average air temperature in Maliana ranges between 25C and 25.8C.
3.3.4.
Evaporation
The Maliana I irrigation scheme represented by Maliana station has an estimated annual
evapotranspiration of 1500 mm.
3.3.5.
Relative Humidity
The monthly relative humidity in the Bulobo River basin is in the range of 58% to 85%.
3.4.
AGRO-CLIMATIC CLASSIFICATION
The Maliana I scheme is located in Class B region, the average annual rainfall is about 1950 mm in
the irrigation area, with the wet month period from 6 8 months. This scheme may rely on rainfall
for the first cropping period if sustainable rain falls during the land preparation month (December),
but it will need additional water for the second paddy cropping period and the third cropping period
(other crops).
3.5.
WATER AVAILABILITY & WATER REQUIREMENTS
Table 3.2 summarises the streamflow estimates for Maliana I scheme including the monthly
average, maximum, minimum and 1 in 5 year reliable low-flows.


3-2
Table 3.2 Monthly Streamflow Estimates

Item
Mean
Max.
Min.
1:5 yr D
Jan
2.0
4.6
0.4
0.9
Feb
2.5
5.6
0.8
1.4
Mar
2.2
4.5
0.7
1.4
Apr
1.7
3.7
0.6
1.3
May
1.1
1.9
0.4
0.9
Streamflow in m3/s
Jun
Jul
Aug
0.9
0.6
0.4
1.4
1.1
0.8
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.7
0.5
0.3
Sep
0.3
0.6
0.1
0.2
Oct
0.2
0.5
0.1
0.2
Nov
0.7
1.4
0.2
0.3
Dec
1.2
3.0
0.3
0.7
Mean
1.2
1.7
0.5
0.9
1:5 yr D = 80% persistence flows
3.6.
WATER REQUIREMENT
The irrigation area under this scheme consists of well defined areas with a total potential developed
paddy area of 900 ha. To achieve three crops per year of paddy - paddy and other crops (p-p-o) in
this scheme, the adopted land preparation schedule was as follows:
the first paddy crop in December

the second paddy crop in April, and
other crops (mix of maize and soybean) in August.
Table 3.3 presents the half monthly and the maximum water requirements for this irrigation scheme
computed for the potential developed paddy area of 900 ha. The water balance to maximize the
available land to be irrigated was computed relaxing the low-flow reliability from 1 in 5 years to 1
in 2 years as indicated in Table 3.4. The maximum water requirement estimates in the last column
of the table below indicates the required maximum irrigation canal capacity for their respective
irrigated areas and reliabilities.
Table 3.3 Maliana I Irrigation Water Requirements for 900 ha
Relia.Irrigated Area
Irrigation Water Requirements (m3/s)
Max
(yrs)
(ha) ** Jan1Jan2Feb1 Feb2 Mar1Mar2Apr1Apr2May1 May2 Jun1Jun2 Jul1 Jul2Aug1 Aug2 Sep1 Sep2 Oct1 Oct2 Nov1 Nov2 Dec1 Dec2(m3/s)
1:5 500-400-150 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.14 0.00 - 0.80 0.80 0.34 0.61 0.44 0.71 0.51 - 0.13 0.14 0.17 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.03 - 0.71 0.71 0.80
1:3 600-480-180 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.17 0.00 - 0.96 0.96 0.41 0.73 0.53 0.85 0.23 - 0.16 0.17 0.21 0.22 0.20 0.18 0.03 - 0.85 0.85 0.96
1:2 750-480-210 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.22 0.00 - 0.96 0.96 0.41 0.73 0.53 0.85 0.27 - 0.18 0.20 0.24 0.26 0.23 0.21 0.04 - 1.07 1.07 1.07
** paddy-paddy-others
The maximum diversion requirement would be associated with the land preparation and the first
month of the second paddy crop especially when effective rainfall becomes insignificant and water
available drops substantially. The net diversion requirement (NDR) is in the range of 0.29 lit/s/ha
to 2.11 lit/s/ha.
3.7.
WATER BALANCE
The water balance computations for this scheme was carried out independently to other schemes
that may exist upstream or downstream of the studied schemes. However, general inquiries to the
Irrigation Department Officers indicated that there are no any significant water abstraction points
upstream of the Maliana I irrigation scheme. Therefore the estimated available river flows at the
irrigation intake will be fully available for the Maliana I irrigation scheme.


3-3
The water balance computations for this scheme together with water requirement calculations are
shown in Appendix B of Volume I Hydrological Investigations Report.
The water balance calculation for this scheme shows that there is insufficient reliable low-flow to
irrigate three crops per year of existing 900 ha. The system reliability was then relaxed in order to
maximise the available land for rise production when sufficiency water is available. Table 3.4
shows the cropping intensity of the Maliana I irrigation scheme from 1 in 5 year to 1 in 2 year
reliable low-flows.
Table 3.4 Cropping Intensity Maliana I Irrigation Scheme
Low-Flow Developed Cropping
Reliability
Area
Pattern
(years)
(ha)
**
1 in 5
900
p-p-o
1 in 3
900
p-p-o
1 in 2
900
p-p-o
Cropping Intensity (ha)

1st crop
2nd crop
3rd crop
(ha)
(ha)
(ha)
500
400
150
600
480
180
750
480
210
Cropping
Intensity
117%
140%
160%
** p = paddy, o = others (Maize, soybean)
3.8.
FLOOD STUDIES
3.8.1.
Design Flood Peak Estimates
Table 3.5 shows the flood peak estimates at Maliana I irrigation intake.
Table 3.5 Design Flood Peak Estimates with RSWM
River/Location
Bulobo at Maliana I Intake
3.9.
2-yr 5-yr
135 175
10-yr
200
20-yr
230
50-yr
275
100-yr
310
1000-yr
430
HISTORICAL FLOODS
The largest floods recorded at the weir site, based on flood marks, is given in Table 3.6.
Table 3.6 Historical Floods
Location
Maliana I Weir
3.10.
Flood Peak(m3/s)
132
SEDIMENTATION
Due to the small storage at the weir site and the large sediment loads it has been assumed in the
design that sediment will build up to the crest level of the weir in a relatively short time.
3.11.
RIVER RATING CURVES
River rating curves have been developed at the intake site and are included in Section 7 river
morphology.


3-4
4. Geotechnical Investigations
4.
4.1.
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
SCOPE OF INVESTIGATIONS
The investigations comprised an initial walk over survey and production of a site geomorphological
map presenting the river channel, banks, topographic features and the extent of alluvial deposits.
General locations of structures existing at the time of the site visits are also shown. Figure 4.1
shows the geomorphological map of the headwork area.
4.2.
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Table 4.1 presents a summary of the laboratory test data for this site. The full test data is presented
in Annex B, Appendix B-A and B.
Table 4.1 Summary of test data for Maliana 1
Test Result
Depth
Grading:
% Gravel
% Sand
% Silt + Clay
Coefficient of uniformity,
CU=d60/d10
Coefficient of concavity,
CC=d230/ d60 x d10
USC
Pit #1
Surface
Pit#2
Surface
58.0
34.6
7.4
4.1/0.19 = 21.58
68.0
26.6
5.4
10.0/0.24 = 41.7
1.2/0.78 = 1.55
3.1/2.4 = 1.27
GW, sandy
gravel
GW, sandy
gravel
The samples from the near surface hand dug pits are well graded sandy gravel, with minimal fines.
It should be noted that the material tested is from deposits that also contain boulders up to 4 m in
the channel bed and some much larger non-bed load boulders to tens of metres in size.
4.3.
GENERAL DESIGN PARAMETERS
The design parameters are based on geotechnical assessment of field and laboratory data obtained at
the time of the site investigations.
4.3.1.
Particle size and grading curves
The river bed and bank material forming the foundations for the majority of the planned structures
are predominantly granular, ranging from sandy gravel to bouldery gravel and boulders. There are
also large accumulations of boulder beds up to 10 m in size in the river bed, with a predominant
range of 0.5 to 4.0 m.
In the river banks there are gravely silty sand to sandy silt beds that, on the right bank of the river,
upstream of the weir form the toe of creeping slide masses.


4-1
4.3.2.
Material density
The alluvial beds are loose from 0 to 1.0m depth. Below 1.0m they become loose to medium dense.
4.3.3.
In-situ permeability
There were no field measurements due to the extreme range of material sizes up to 10m boulder
size. Bases on an empirical approach the in situ permeabilities are expected to range between 1 x
10-1 and 1 x 10-2 m/sec. Localised silty to clayey beds may have permeabilities ranging between 1 x
10-4 to 1 x 10-6 m/sec.
4.3.4.
Shear strength
The assessed shear strength is empirical, based on mechanical properties of the materials.
4.3.5.
Gravels: c = 0 kPa, phi = 40 deg

Fine units: c = 10 kPa, phi = 30 deg
Compressive strength of fine units: <50 kPa
Undrained shear strength of fine units: <25 kPa
Assessed allowable bearing pressures for in situ gravels, with full scour protection: 150 kPa.
Potential for scour
The material has a mean diameter of 40 mm and is subject to scour. At a flood discharge of
310 m3/sec the scour depth is taken as 2.5 m below water level.
4.3.6.
Potential for piping
Piping failure may occur where there is excessive hydraulic gradient of the seepage flow under the
base of the weir floor. This exit gradient is in the range of 1:4 to 1:5 for the sandy gravel material
likely to be encountered at the foundation level.
4.3.7.
Filter design grading
The filter bed beneath the weir aprons is designed to protect the foundation from scour and to
prevent a build up of pore pressures causing uplift. The recommended grading is as follows:
Nominal diameter mm
75
20
5
0.5
0.075 (75 um)
4.4.
SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS
4.4.1.
Horizontal and vertical accelerations
% passing
100
85
50
15
05
The site is located in Seismic Hazard Zone 2 according to the Indonesian Meteorological and
Geophysical Institute. For this zone a low frequency seismic loading on soft ground will have a


4-2
basic seismic coefficient (C) of 0.08. For the proposed structures an appropriate design horizontal
acceleration is 0.19 g and the vertical component would be 0.12 g.
4.4.2.
Liquefaction potential
The factors contributing to liquefaction under seismic loading are:
Particle Size
Groundwater levels
Relative density
Confining pressure
Intensity of ground acceleration
Duration of seismic event
Age of soil.
The bed and foundation material ranges from silty sand to bouldery sandy gravel. Sand +silt contents
range from 20% to about 35%. Groundwater levels are high and the relative density is likely to have
a density index of <60%. Consolidation is minimal in these recent deposits and overburden pressures
are low.
Based on these considerations the site is expected to have a moderate risk of liquefaction.
4.5.
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
4.5.1.
Concrete aggregate
Material suitable for concrete aggregate is available from the alluvial bed materials in the Bulobo
River, both upstream and downstream of the Maliana 1 intake structures.
a.
Alkali reactivity
The material is assessed to have a generally a low alkali reactivity. However tests from other
sites indicate the potentially for slightly higher than acceptable chloride ion content in the
aggregate.
This may be remedied by the addition of fly ash and the selection of more durable
components of the gravel. Further testing of specific borrow sites is recommended to clearly
define the extent of the potential for deleterious materials.
Hand sorting may be necessary if there are high proportions of green sepentinite, chert and
volcanic glass are encountered. From observations at the site it was found that a high
proportion of the rock types in the gravel are limestone, indurated siltstone and mudstone and
basic volcanic rocks.
b.
Particle size
Natural materials have maximum sizes to 10m, but there are zones and shoals of finer
accumulations that with mechanical sizing an aggregate of maximum 75 mm could readily be
obtained. Crushing and screening should provide a product of suitable size.


4-3
c.
Specific gravity
The specific gravity is estimated to be 2.7.

d.
Water absorption
The water absorption is estimated to be 2%.

4.5.2.
Stone for masonry works
Suitable stone for masonry is available after careful selection from the river bed. This material will
require hand sorting to select the more durable material. Such material should be fresh rock, of
high strength and uniform in structure. Material that is laminated or fissile should be avoided. The
preferable material is limestone, indurated siltstone, indurated mudstone or basalt/dolerite.
4.5.3.
Stone for gabions
The selection of suitable stone for gabions is similar to that for selecting masonry stone. The
critical factor is that the ideal fragment size is in the range of 120 mm to 200 mm. Ideally
fragments with at least one flat face are better suited for placing on the sides of gabion baskets.
Such material can be selected from the river bed gravel and cobbles in the Bulobo River.
4.5.4.
Impervious backfill
Impervious backfill is of limited extent, but can be sourced as follows:
from paddy fields and surrounding areas. Local rice farmers may be able to assist in locating
such material
from ridges above Maliana Town.
This material should have the following properties:
greater than 25% passing 75 microns

greater than 10% plasticity index
between 25% and 50% liquid limit.
Appropriate compaction specifications should be followed in order to achieve required density and
permeability levels.
4.5.5.
Free draining backfill
This material should be available from similar sources to masonry and gabion stone. With
appropriate mechanical sizing a free draining backfill with a maximum particle size of 75 mm and a
maximum of 5% passing 75 microns should be available.


4-4
4.5.6.
Riprap
There are numerous cobble to boulder sized fragments at the river bed. Most rocks over 500 mm
are highly durable provided they are sourced from the mid stream sections of the river. Boulders
lying adjacent to the banks or embedded in the banks may not be suitable as they originate from
local landslides and have not been transported downriver.
4.5.7.
Gravel bedding
Appropriately graded gravel bedding should have a sufficient range of particle sizes to enable
adequate compaction. Such material should have the following properties:
between 10% and 15% passing 75 microns

between 6% and 10% plasticity index
between 20% and 35% liquid limit.
The maximum particle size should be 75 mm.

4.5.8.
Selected boulders for scour protection
The selection process for these materials is similar to that for selecting rip rap. The main difference
is that the boulders will likely be larger than 1.0 m in size.
4.5.9.
Roadway surfacing
Suitable pavement materials can be sourced from the same locations as bedding gravels, free
draining backfill. This material should comply with specifications for the appropriate grade of rural
road for East Timor.
Essentially the rural road will likely have the following pavement:
Basecourse: CBR 50%, 150 mm thick

Sub-Base: CBR 40%, 250 mm thick
Subgrade: allow a 5% natural CBR.
The basecourse should have a maximum particle size of 40 mm and the sub base a maximum
particle size of 75 mm.
4.5.10.
Borrow areas
The most appropriate and practical borrow area is from the stream bed of the Bulobo River within
1 km both upstream and downstream of the weir/intake site. Sourcing the appropriate grade of rock
for gabions, rip rap and boulders for scour protection can be done further away. Truck access is
possible to a bridge site 3 km upstream of the weir and from a village track near the weir intake.
Other borrow sites have not been specifically defined but should be made know by the local people,
especially sources of clay for impervious fill.


4-5
5. Topographic Survey
5.
5.1.
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS
The Maliana 1 scheme is covered by the 1:25000 and 1:50000 topographic maps. All plan
distances and elevations are in metres. Contour intervals are 12.5 m on both the 1:25000 and the
1:50000 maps.
Details of the topographic survey maps obtained are:
Projection:
Grid Systems:
Horizontal Datum:
Vertical Datum:
Unit of height:
Contour interval:
Transverse Mercator
Geographical and Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM)
World Geodetic System 84 (WGS 84)
Sea level at Kapang
Metre
12.5 metres
Tables 5.1 and 5.2 are the map index for the various sites.
Table 5.1 Index of 1:25000 Scale Maps
Project
Area
Maliano
Maliana
Map Number
2407 - 212
Table 5.2 Index of 1:50000 Scale Maps

Project
Maliana
5.2.
FIELD SURVEY
5.2.1.
Scope of Work
Area
Atabai
Map Number
2407 - 21
Field surveys have been undertaken at the site. The survey involved:
establishing survey control to an acceptable datum level using GPS
undertaking headworks engineering survey and sketching and photographing existing features
undertaking canal structures engineering survey and sketching and photographing existing
features
surveying of canal cross sections at 100 m intervals
picking up the canal invert at 50 m intermediate intervals
collecting several spot levels in the irrigation area
preparation of a digital terrain model (DTM) of the structures and canals.


5-1
5. Topographic Survey
5.2.2.
Grid System and Datum for Elevations
In the absence of local national datum control points an arbitrary datum utilising GPS data has been
assigned as given in Table 5.3.
Table 5.3 GPS Control Points
Structure
Intake
End
of
Ritabau
Secondary Canal
Easting (m)
45624
43799
Northing (m)
5633
8188
Elevation (m)
255
The datum for elevation is based on readings obtained from the GPS and spot levels given on the
25000 scale topographical maps. The datum adopted for the elevations is taken as EL 255 m on the
left training wall next to the sluice gate structure.
The datum points for setting out of the headworks are shown on the drawings and consists of points
located on the existing structures.
5.2.3.
Output
The following drawings were prepared and are contained in Volume III of the specifications:
longitudinal and cross sections of the primary canals

longitudinal and cross sections of the secondary canals
drawings showing the geometry of the existing headwork and canal structures.
See Figures 5.1 and 5.2 for typical details.

5.3.
RIVER SURVEY
A grid of spot levels were taken across the river bed for a distance of 300 m upstream of the
Maliana weir (see Figure 5.3).


5-2
6. Environmental Studies
6.
6.1.
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
PROVISIONS IN TENDER DOCUMENTS
Environmental considerations during construction have been included in the Tender documents
both in the General and Technical Specifications. These include specific requirements in respect to
Environmental Management as well as the inclusion of technical requirements in respect to site
clearing, excavation, drainage and reinstatement. The requirement for the Contractor to agree to an
Environmental Management Procedure and to instruct all his workers has also been included.
6.2.
ACCESS TO THE SITE
The weir site cannot be accessed at present by vehicles. In addition to the limitation of a wide
enough path along the canal, one restriction is the narrow bridge across the flume. If an alternative
vehicular access is planned, the Contractor should ensure that all environmental protection
measures are undertaken in its planning and construction. The Contractor should maintain the
access road at all times.
6.3.
MATTERS TO BE ADDRESSED DURING CONSTRUCTION
6.3.1.
Construction Camp and Utility Services
If the construction camp was located near the intake, the Contractor is required to ensure that
pollution from camp activities does not enter the river. If water is to be drawn from the river for
construction camp requirements, the Contractor should apply for a permit from the Project
Manager. Provision should be made to properly dispose of sewage from the camp (such as in a
septic pit). Drainage from the camp site will not be directly discharged to the river, but will be
routed via silt traps. Oils and other material will be collected and disposed of in an environmentally
friendly manner.
6.3.2.
Damage to Flora and Fauna
Construction will be carried out in existing sites (weir and irrigation canals). Though there are no
large areas of native trees and wild life in the area, the Contractor should ensure that preservation of
tress and bushes is a priority. Also, wild life, if encountered should be preserved.
Water Pollution
6.3.3.
Rehabilitation of the Weir
The proposed rehabilitation of the weir will require the weir to be closed off for a long period. The
Contractor should therefore ensure that an alternative facility (such as a gabion/boulder weir
upstream of the weir) is in place to ensure the supply of irrigation water to the scheme.
6.3.4.
Rehabilitation Work on the Canals and Structures
Ramaskora and Ritabau Secondary canals traverse through heavily populated areas. There are
dwellings along the canals. The Contractor should ensure that access to dwellings is not disrupted
and in general, the communitys daily activities are not overly disrupted. All excavated material


6-1
6. Environmental Studies
should be carted away and disposed in a proper manner.

6.3.5.
Disposal of Sediment Excavated from the Canals
Sites for the disposal of sediments removed from the canals will be agreed with the Project
Manager who will consult with the local population. Because of the irrigation scheme location
within the town, much of the excavated material would need to be deposited outside the town area.
Sediment from the canals will, in most instances, contain water and therefore it is necessary to
provide proper drainage during and after disposal. The Contractor will ensure that proper drainage
facilities will be placed in the disposal areas.
6.3.6.
Noise and Air Pollution
The area along the Ritabau and Ramaskora Secondary canals are heavily populated. The Contractor
should ensure that noise and air pollution is kept at acceptable levels at all times. Consultation and
agreement with the community about the operation of the machinery should be maintained at all
times.
6.3.7.
Function of the Irrigation System
The irrigation system is a functioning system currently being used by the community for
agricultural activities. It is essential therefore to maintain its function during construction work. The
Contractor therefore should carefully plan work activities so that construction work does not totally
disrupt the communitys livelihood. The planning of canal closure for work in the canals and canal
structures is very important.
6.3.8.
Fencing
Temporary fences will be erected to prevent unauthorised access to the construction site. The areas
for temporary fencing will be clearly marked at the commencement of construction so that these
fences can be erected before major site works commences.
6.3.9.
Borrow Pits
Borrow pits for earthfill will be excavated below the level of the surrounding ground. Upon
completion of construction these areas will tend to form ponds. It is important that the edges and
margins for these are graded back to a slope no steeper than 3 horizontal to 1 vertical.


6-2
7. River Morphology
7.
7.1.
RIVER MORPHOLOGY
WEIR AND THE INTAKE STRUCTURE
The original structure is reported to be completed in mid to late 1960s. As one would expect for a
mobile bed river like Bulobo River, the bed upstream of the weir would have aggraded up to the
weir crest level within a few years of its construction. This aggradation possibly necessitated the
raising of the weir crest which was done in early 1980s by about 0.75 m.
Most of the raised crest has been taken out by for flowing debris leaving about 8 m of it intact on
the right side of this 27.5 m long weir. Damage to the raised part has not significantly hampered the
intake during low flow as it is directed to the intake structure through a low flow channel with
boulders and gabions forming its sides.
The intake structure is in good shape. The settling basin has some gravel deposits in its lowvelocity regions. There is no evidence at site of de-sedimentation of the basin. Any how, either the
sediment induction to the settling basin is not high or the sediment flushing arrangement has
performed efficiently. In either case, it does not take more than occasional flushing and/or rare desedimentation to keep the intake structure fully functional.
7.2.
GEOMORPHIC FACTORS
This section presents a description of geomorphic factors with a bearing on the stream stability.
Visual observation is the primary basis of this initial assessment.
7.2.1.
Valley Setting and Stream Form
The existing valley relief of about 100 m indicates a generally hilly surrounding terrain. Hills on
either side of the river provide for a well defined river channel. There is an exposure of the shaly
clay about 250 m upstream of the river on its right bank. Other than this softer spot, the rest of the
river bank upstream as well as downstream of the weir is quite stable.
Maliana Wier is situated between two major stream junctions of Bulobo River. The river
approaches the weir through a straight channel in about 200 m length with a bend starting just
upstream of it. Degree of sinuosity is less than 1.25, so the stream in the vicinity of the weir should
be regarded as sinuous which would place it somewhere between a straight to a meandering
channel.
About 200 m upstream of the weir the river is locally anabranched around a well developed and
vegetated island. The right branch impinges upon steep slopes of erodible shaly clay matrix. There
are no sizeable bars in the river channel in the vicinity of the weir. However, further downstream of
the weir, especially below its confluence with the Mota Gelesu, the river gradually takes on a
braided form. One obvious conclusion is that the transport ability of the flow decreases
substantially after it passes through the fall in the river bed created by the weir.


7-1
7. River Morphology
7.2.2.
Stream Size and Width Variability
The Bulobo River at Maliana I weir site is 35 to 50 m wide which makes it a medium sized river
(HEC 20, 1995). Width variation upstream of the weir is insignificant except for the segment with
an island. On the downstream side the river width in the vicinity of the weir structure can be
regarded as uniform as well. Width in braided downstream reaches is rather excessive, but for the
purpose of this assessment the river width in the vicinity of weir can be regarded as uniform.
7.2.3.
Apparent Incision
Continuous sedimentation has raised the upstream river bed to the weir level reducing the banks
height to less than one meter. There are no signs of incision, still the river channel is laterally stable
because of hills on either side. On the downstream side, the banks are a little higher without any
evidence of incision.
7.2.4.
Bed and Bank Material
The bed material is predominantly cobble with sizes ranging from gravel to boulder range. The
matrix is medium to coarse sand.
There are fairly large sized boulders in the river bed. The most frequent size is about 0.5 m which
can be classified as small size boulders. Grain size frequency distribution of a collected sample is
presented in Figure 7.1. A conspicuous observation is the presence of more and larger boulders
just downstream of the weir compared with its upstream region indicating a lower transport
capability of the downstream segment.
Figure 7.1: Bulobo River Bed Material Representative
Grain Size Distribution
Frequency
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
300399
400499
500599
600699
700799
800899
900999
10001999
>2000
Material Size (mm)
The banks consist of composite and stratified material of various sizes and permeability. The banks
are moderately erodible with considerable resistance to surface erosion.
Shaly clay surrounding the right bank of the channel around the existing island about 200 m
upstream of the weir is highly erodible. There is a possibility of the river channel shifting further to
the right. The island may advance further to the right in that case. The river bank may eventually
attain a level of lateral stability after some erosion of the shaly clay matrix. The river bank
elsewhere in the vicinity of the weir poses no threat to the lateral stability of the channel.


7-2
7. River Morphology
7.2.5.
Channel Boundaries and Vegetation
In its current state of sedimentation, the channel boundary is essentially alluvial. Presence of
bedrock below the sediment deposits is subject to verification through geotechnical investigations.
However, the alluvium apparently contains sizeable quantities of cobles and boulders resistant to
erosion and scour. The channel boundaries do show considerable vegetation making the exposed
surface less susceptible to erosion.
The steep gradient of the river bed and the sizes of transported sediment are not conducive to
formation of flood plains. Foothills on the left side of the upstream river segment do have a
floodplain most likely generated by the weir.
7.3.
HYDRAULIC FACTORS
HEC-RAS was used to compute 1-D flow field in vicinity of the weir. The output was used to
assess the hydraulic impact on river stability and also to identify specific needs for river protection
works. Two hydraulic factors namely, the flow habit and the scour conditions are included in
hydraulic factors for the purpose of this assessment.
7.3.1.
Flow Habit
Bulobo River is a perennial stream. The catchment area at the weir site is 19.8 km2 with steep bed
slope. The bed slope of the river segment just upstream of the weir is 0.0116. The time of
concentration is about one hour. The size of catchment area, the channel slope and the time of
concentration all point to flashy floods. The flow habit of the stream at Maliana-I should be
classified as perennial but flashy.
Average monthly flows from January to June range from 1 to 2.5 m3/s. In low flow season the
average monthly flows vary from 0.25 to 0.75 m3/s. Monthly runoff variability is presented in
Figure 7.2.
Figure 7.2: Bulobo River at Maliana I
Monthly Runoff Variability
Streamflow (m3/s)
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Mean

Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Min

7-3
7. River Morphology
High flow was estimated from high water marks on the wing walls. Use of the weir formula
yielded a discharge of 140 m3/s from the high flow marks 1.1 m above the raised crest level.
According to the information given by locals at the site, the highest observed flood levels touched
the top of the wing wall, which corresponds to a discharge of 250 m3/s.
7.3.2.
Scour Conditions
There are signs of scour in the presently aggraded river bed on upstream and downstream of the
weir. One would expect at least temporary scour during floods in the river bed segment just
downstream of the weir. Judging from the current state of the weir structure, such a scour has had a
moderate detrimental effect on it.
There is about one metre deep pit in the alluvial deposit below the weir situated in the path of low
flow spilling over the weir. The weir toe is undercut, possibly by the scouring action of eddies, in a
length of about 2 m. A similar but smaller undercut can be seen below the right downstream wing
wall. Both damages are easily repairable. The repairs should be undertaken soon to arrest the
growth of the undercuts.
7.3.3.
Inception of Motion Analysis
HEC-RAS output was used with Meyer-Peter and Muller relation (HEC 20 SI, 1995) to determine
sediment sizes at the state of impending motion. The results are presented in Figure 7.3.
Relative transport capacity of one upstream and the other downstream section was compared in
terms of their ability of move bed sediment. A section 125 m upstream of the weir and another at
58 m downstream of the weir were used for this purpose.
Bulobo River at 125 m upstream of the weir has a slightly higher capacity to move bed sediment
compared with the downstream segment. The upstream reach can move small size boulders even
with its bank-full discharge which is close to a 2-year flood event. The largest size set in motion by
a 100-year event is still in the small boulder range (250 mm-500 mm).
An increase in the weir height of 0.7 m is proposed for Maliana I Scheme. As indicated by
Figure 7.3, the proposed raising will impact the movement of bed sediment in its vicinity.
However, the impact about 125 upstream and farther is negligible. It is because the flow remains
supercritical with the considered weir height in this segment of the river and is not influenced by the
downstream control.
As indicated in Figure 7.1, the most frequent size of the bed material is 500 mm to 600 mm (small
to medium boulders). Figure 7.3 shows that the floods generally move sizes smaller than this in
proximity of the weir. The Bulobo River just upstream of the weir bed can be regarded as partly
mobile during common floods.
The repairs pointed out earlier needs to be carried out. As for the scour potential, the structure can
be regarded safe against scour as it has withstood the test of time.


7-4
7. River Morphology
Sediment at
Inception of Motion
(mm)
Weir Impact on Upstream

400
300
200
100
0
2-Yr
5-Yr
10-Yr
20-Yr
50-Yr
100-Yr
Flood Event (ARI)

15 m Upstream of the Weir Location-w ithout Raising
15 m Upstream of Weir Location- Weir Raised by 0.75 m
ARI
Discharge
(m 3/s)
135
175
200
230
275
310
2-Yr
5-Yr
10-Yr
20-Yr
50-Yr
100-Yr
Sediment Grade Scale

Size (mm)
0.063 - 2.0
2.0 - 64
64 - 255
250 - 4000
Type
Sand
Gravel
Cobbles
Boulders
Figure 7.3 : Bulobo River at Maliana I Inception of Motion Analysis
7.4.
ASSESSMENT OF THE FLOOD LEVELS
Water surface elevations at a point 125 m upstream of the weir, without and with raising of Maliana
Weir are presented in Table 7.1. The proposed raising does not have an impact on the upstream
water elevations at a distance 125 m from the weir. It is due to the supercritical flow at his location
which is not influenced by the extent of raising.
Table 7.1 Impact of Raising Maliana Weir on WS Elevation
(at 125 m Upstream with Crest El = 253.70 m
Return Period
(Years)
Discharge
(m3/s)
2
5
10
20
50
100
135
175
200
230
275
310
WS EL (m)
Without Raising of
With Raising of
Weir Crest
Weir Crest
257.10
257.10
257.35
257.35
257.50
257.50
257.70
257.70
258.90
258.90
258.10
258.10
Increase in WS El
(m)
0
0
0
0
0
0
While the proposed raising of the weir will raise the water surface level by about 1.0 m at the weir
location, reaches 125 m upstream as well as the downstream reaches can be considered to be free of
adverse effects of the water elevation due to the increase in weir height. Water surface profiles are
presented in Figures 7.4 and 7.5.


7-5
7. River Morphology
259
Legend
WS 100-Yr
WS 50-Yr
WS 20-Yr
257
WS 10-Yr
WS 5-Yr
WS 2-Yr
Ground
255
Elevation
(m)
253
251
103.2*
72.2*
56.5
249
20
40
60
118.7
87.7*
80
100
182.1
120
140
160
180
Main Channel Distance (m)
Figure 7.4 : Bulobo River at Maliana I Water Surface Profiles without Raising of Weir Crest
258.5
Legend
WS 20-Yr
WS 10-Yr
WS 5-Yr
256.0
WS 100-Yr
WS 50-Yr
WS 2-Yr
Ground
254.5
Elevation (m)
252.5
250.5
104.025*
74.675*
56.5
248.5
0
89.35*
58.5
50
100
182.1
118.7
150
200
Main Channel Distance (m)
Figure 7.5 : Bulobo River at Maliana I Water Surface Profiles with Raising of Weir Crest


7-6
7. River Morphology
7.5.
RATING CURVES
Rating curves were produced from the HEC-RAS model for Bulobo River at Maliana I. The curves
are presented in Figures 7.6 and 7.7.
a-Maliana I Intake - Rating Curve without Raising of Weir Crest at RS 72.2 (Weir RS 58.5)
257.0
Legend
W.S. Elev
256.5
256.0
W.S. Elev (m)
255.5
255.0
254.5
254.00
253.5
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Q Total (m3/s)
Figure 7.6
b-Maliana I Intake - Rating Curve with Raising of Weir Crest (Weir RS 58.5)
258.0
Legend
W.S. Elev
257.5
257.0
256.5
W.S. Elev (m)
256.0
255.5
255.0
254.5
254.0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Q Total (m3/s)
Figure 7.7


7-7
7. River Morphology
7.6.
ASSESSMENT OF THE STREAM STABILITY
Lateral stability of the river upstream of the weir can be rated as good except for the right bank of a
short anabranched segment where a mass of shaly clay is exposed to erosion if the river branch
shifts further to the right. A conclusive prediction of the extent of this shift is not possible. A
gabion wall along the right bank would provide effective check to the bank advancement in that
direction. Concrete wing walls on either side of the river are adequate and there is no need to
improve the upstream river training arrangements.
The river has a good lateral stability downstream of the weir as well. There is no need to extend the
existing river training arrangement other than repairs to the structures point out in Section 7.3.3b.
The upstream vertical stability is good. If the crest is not raised above the originally constructed
level the upstream bed is likely to remain at current level. The same applies to the downstream bed
level. However, the downstream bed may see a slow rise depending upon the sediment influx from
upstream. Functioning of the intake or stability of the banks are not likely to be affected by this
change.
7.7.
RIVER TRAINING AND PROTECTION WORKS
There is no particular need for river training at the intake. The existing damages to the structure
(Section 4.5.3b) require immediate repair.
The right channel around the upstream island should be checked against possible advancement to
the shaley clay. A gabion wall along the water edge in the segment in front of the shaly clay mass
would be an appropriate treatment.
Figure 7.8 shows the proposed river training and protection works.
The segment just downstream of the weir shows no signs of objectionable scour other than the
undercut in the weir. While repairing the undercut the downstream floor should be examined for
any other damage. Generally, one can conclude that the weir structure has successfully withstood
the scouring action of the flow and it expected to maintain its behaviour in future.


7-8
8. Irrigation System Planning
8.
8.1.
IRRIGATION SYSTEM PLANNING
LOCATION
Maliana I irrigation scheme is located in the District of Bobonaro. The irrigation area lies on the
western perimeter of Maliana town and occupies an area north of the main road Batugede-Maliana
between the Bulobo River and the Sosso River.
8.2.
IRRIGATION SCHEME
Maliana I irrigation scheme consists of a fixed weir built in early 1970s during the Portuguese
administration, a left bank intake structure and a system of canals which include a main canal and
two secondary canals. Figure 8.1 presents the layout of the irrigation scheme. The irrigation area
borders the main road on the south and covers a distance of about 4 km northwards. Figure 8.2 is a
schematic of the irrigation scheme. Figure 8.3 presents the irrigation water distribution schematic
and Figures 8.5 to 8.10 present details of the existing structures.
8.3.
IRRIGATION AREA
Review of the 1:25,000 topographic maps, site reconnaissance visits and locating boundaries of
existing paddies by hand held GPS shows that a total of about 900 ha has already been developed
under this scheme for paddy cultivation. Figure 8.1 presents the layout of the irrigation and
potential areas. The presently undeveloped area surrounding the paddy area has an additional
potential of about 1100 ha for irrigated paddy cultivation if other conditions such as water
availability, land tenure issue are met.
The existing irrigation canals cover only a part of the developed paddy area. While the eastern part
of the irrigation area is well covered by the right secondary canal, a large area to the north on the
western part of the scheme does not receive irrigation water (irrigation canal does not extend into
this area and also, as shown in the hydrology analysis, water supply from the intake is not
adequate). Much of this area is under rainfed agriculture.
8.4.
DIVERSION STRUCTURE AND INTAKE
The original fixed weir, 27.5 m long and approximately 4 m high, is a mass concrete structure
across the Bulobo River. Intake facilities include a guide wall to divert water into the intake, a
short settling basin, flushing sluice and control gates for discharging water into the Main Canal.
Rehabilitation work was carried out in the 1980s and 1990s to improve the canals and to raise the
weir crest. The diversion structure is located in a steep reach of the mountainous Bulobo River.
Figure 8.4 shows the arrangement of the existing weir and intake.
The infrastructure at the intake is in reasonably good condition. The main weir and all of the left
bank intake structure is of good quality mass concrete. The weir crest has been worn down in
places because of abrasion in flood events. The rehabilitation works by the Indonesians included
the placement of a mass concrete capping layer to the original weir crest (approx depth 0.5-0.7 m).
Subsequent floods have damaged this capping layer in the middle sections of the weir length. The
weir is most likely placed on a foundation of large boulders and does not have upstream or
downstream aprons. Energy dissipation is in a plunge pool, which has created a large scour hole

8-1
under the existing weir structure.

The sluice gate is in operating condition, but leaks. The wood panels will need to be replaced and
the seals checked. The scour hole downstream of the sluice gate has been recently repaired, but
appears to need topping up with good concrete. The handle and parts of the gear of the intake gate
has been found in the vicinity of the structure. Missing gear parts will need to be replaced.
More information on the diversion structure, the proposed measures to protect it from damage
which may occur due the cavity and other rehabilitation works is presented in other sections of this
report.
8.5.
MAIN CANAL AND STRUCTURES
The main canal more or less follows the 250 m contour westwards from the intake for a length of
about 600 m before crossing the Baipelu stream (branch of the Bulobo river) in an aqueduct. The
aqueduct is a steel section attached to the steel bridge with a wooden walkway over the top. Except
for a few damaged/broken slats, the aqueduct structure appears to be in good condition. The main
canal follows a short distance beyond the aqueduct outlet and terminates in a division structure.
The main canal generally has a trapezoidal cross section and is constructed of masonry. Judging by
the rounded shape of the rock in the initial reach of the canal, the masonry work consists of river
rock/boulders. The canal in general is in good condition except for heavy siltation and the growth
of grass and vegetation. A narrow path on the right bank of the canal provides an access path along
the canal to the headworks. This clearly is not adequate if the system was to be efficiently operated
and maintained. The first 300 m or so of the Main Canal acts as a secondary siltation basin with a
flushing sluice located at the downstream end.
There are 6 structures on the main canal between the intake and the division structure, including the
division structure. These structures were found to be generally in good condition requiring minor
repair of masonry work. Most of the gates are in good operating condition requiring minor repairs
to gate stems and/or painting.
Salient features of the existing scheme are presented below:
Functional
Area (ha)
Potential
Area (ha)
900
2000
Length of
Main Canal
(km)
1.0
Total length of
Secondary Canals
(km)
4.5
No. of exist.
offtakes
No. of new
offtakes
No. of
Aqueducts
No. of
Chutes
No. of foot
bridges
11
Figure 8.2 presents a schematic of the irrigation scheme showing canals and structures. Details of
the canal structures are as follows:
BM 1
Measuring structure
This is a broad crested weir about 200 m downstream of the intake gates. There is no drop across
the structure due to siltation of the canal downstream. Furthermore, water levels cannot be
measured due to the absence of a staff gauge.


8-2
BM 2
Flushing sluice
This structure, consisting of 2 gates, enables the periodic flushing of sediment from the Main Canal.
The structure is in good condition requiring minor masonry work (such as pointing). Gear for the
lifting mechanism of one gate will need to be replaced.
BM 3
Aqueduct
The aqueduct is a steel U-section which forms a part of the steel bridge. The structure is in good
condition.
BM 5 & 6 Drop structures
The two structures are in good condition. Minor masonry repair work is proposed.
BM 7
Division structure
The division structure is a masonry structure where the left and right secondary canals start. The
right secondary canal is named Ritabau Secondary Canal. The left secondary canal is named
Ramaskora Secondary Canal. The structure itself is in good condition requiring minor masonry
repair work, but lacks control gates. The proposal includes the installation of gates and lifting
mechanism.
The proposed rehabilitation measures for the Maliana Main Canal includes:
desilting of Main Canal
repair of scour hole downstream of the sluice gate
repair of leaking sluice gate
minor masonry repair work of walls and slabs (mainly pointing)
repair/replace canal intake gate gear
painting of intake gates
provision of drainage chute over canal about 100 downstream of intake gate
provision of staff gauge at measuring structure 200 m downstream of intake gate
provision of offtake at 450 m downstream of the intake gate (presently an illegal offtake with
no offtake gate)
minor masonry repairs at drop structures BM 5 & 6
construction of a rectangular masonry section for about 200 m of canal between BM 6 and
BM 7 where the existing canal runs in a deep cut in an earth canal.


8-3
provision of offtake gate to replace existing illegal (open) offtake at about 800 m downstream
of intake gate
provision of 1.5 m wide inspection path along the right bank of the canal (current path is a
variable width between 0.8-1 m). This will provide motorcycle access for inspection,
operation and minor maintenance
provision of gates at the division structure and minor masonry repair work.
8.6.
SECONDARY CANALS AND CANAL STRUCTURES
The bifurcation structure, which is located on the Main Canal at about 1.3 km from the intake, is the
starting point for the left (Ramaskora Secondary canal) and right secondary (Ritabau secondary
canal) canals. Ramaskora Secondary canal traverses through the built up area of the west end of the
town for a length of about 1.5 km. This canal has a few drop structures and footbridges. Some
recent masonry work by the District irrigation office has rehabilitated some structures. However,
some of the structures are of rudimentary construction. The canal is generally in good condition
requiring minor masonry/earth work.
The right secondary canal (Ritabau Secondary canal) follows a northwesterly direction through the
existing paddies for a distance of about 1.8 km. Left and right offtakes provide irrigation water to
the tertiary blocks. The canal is for most of its length of masonry construction requiring minor
masonry repair work. As with the left canal, the structures are of rudimentary construction.
Following is a description of the structures on the secondary canals.
8.6.1.
Ritabau Secondary Canal
The canal in most of its length is masonry paved and in good condition requiring minor masonry
repair work. Figure 8.5 & Figure 8.10 present details of some canal structures.
Offtakes BRi 1, BRi 2, BRi 9, BRi 11, BRi 14 and BRi 16 are all masonry structures with no control
gates. These require minor masonry repair work. All structures will be fitted with slide gates for
water control.
Drop Structures BRi 4, BRi 5, BRi 7, BRi 8, BRi 10, BRi 12 and BRi 15 are also masonry structures.
Rehabilitation work will include minor masonry repair work to patch broken areas.
There is an illegal offtake just downstream of BRi 1. It is necessary to provide an offtake structure
with a slide gate to feed the right side paddy fields.
There are two free offtakes near the downstream end of the chute at BRi 3. Water supply to the
paddies from these offtakes is disrupted due to the high flow velocity in the chute. The proposal is
to introduce a low step on the bed towards the bottom end of the chute and provide left and right
offtakes with slide gates to supply the paddy areas.
The illegal offtake downstream of the chute will also need an offtake and a slide gate.
The end structure at BRi 16 will also be fitted with control gates for water delivery.


8-4
8.6.2.
Ramaskora Secondary Canal
The existing canal is masonry paved along most of its length requiring minor masonry repair work.
Representative canal structures are presented on Figures 8.5 to Figure 8.10.
The illegal offtake close to the town bridge taking water from a hole in the bottom of the canal will
need to be replaced by an offtake with a slide gate on the right side.
Offtakes BRa 3, BRa 5, BRa 8 and BRa 9 are all without gates. The rehabilitation measures will
include masonry repair work and slide gates for water control.
The area north of the present end structure BRa 9 is currently not served by the irrigation system.
This area relies on rainfed agriculture and any excess water from BRa 9, which then finds its way
along the drainage channel running along the village road. An improvement for this condition may
be achieved by improving the drainage channel (cleaning of debris and profiling) and the provision
of an offtake about 1.5 km downstream of BRa 9. Though this area will not be an integral part of
the scheme, the area can benefit from supplementary flows during large flows in the river.
8.7.
DETERMINATION OF TERTIARY AREAS
A large part of the irrigation area is not covered by tertiary offtakes. The area closest to the town
along Ramaskora and Ritabau Secondary canals is well covered by ungated offtakes. Almost all the
offtakes do not have gates for water control. Most likely water does not reach the area on the
northern end of Ramaskora Secondary canal and this may be the reason that the canal system has
not reached this far. However, the extension of the canal and the provision of an offtake with contol
gates will benefit this area during times when there is excess water from the system. This has been
taken into consideration in the design.
The tertiary areas assigned to the existing offtakes are estimated from information collected during
the field investigations, the walk through, meetings with the farmers and GPS readings. Several
illegal offtakes were found which will be incorporated in to the design as offtakes fitted with gates.
Large scale topographic maps and/or tertiary block maps were not available to the Consultant.
These would have defined the tertiary areas related to the tertiary offtakes. In estimating the tertiary
areas, the Consultant used information from local farmers to define boundaries, field conditions
observed during site visits to the tertiary areas and spot levels obtained during the topographic
survey. The approximate areas of the tertiary blocks are shown on Figure 8.1. These areas were
then used to work out the tertiary head discharges and canal discharges as presented in Figure 8.3.


8-5
9. Hydraulic Design of Irrigation System
9.
9.1.
HYDRAULIC DESIGN OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM
BACKGROUND
One of the major tasks for irrigation rehabilitation is the checking of the hydraulic performance of
the canals and structures. This design check would have been made easier if the original drawings
and design notes were available. Since this was not the case, the Consultant carried out a survey of
the canals and structures to establish the existing geometry and condition of the canals and
structures. This information provided the basis for the hydraulic check of the existing canal
network and any adjustments required.
Maliana I Irrigation Scheme consists of the 1.5 km long Maliana I Main Canal, the 1.62 km long
Ramaskora Secondary Canal and the 2.95 km long Ritabau Secondary Canal. Proposed
rehabilitation works include the extension of an unlined canal at the end of Ramaskora Secondary
Canal, desilting of the main and secondary canals, reshaping/reprofiling of canals, repair of existing
structures and the provision of additional structures to convey design discharges to tertiary area and
gates at all turnouts.
In addition to the above mentioned rehabilitation work, the following additional modifications,
resulting from field inspections, were incorporated in the rehabilitation work:
Provision of turnout structures with gates at four illegal offtakes.
Modification of the two turnout structures located towards the bottom of the chute of the
Ritabau secondary canal at chainages 0.705 km and 0.720 km. These turnouts are unable to
convey water efficiently due to the steepness of the chute. A drop structure with gates is
proposed.
9.2.
DESIGN APPROACH
Due to non-availability of previous design information, the study was carried out in two phases. In
the first phase the hydraulic performance of the existing irrigation system was assessed. The need
for the rehabilitation of existing works and for new works was then identified and the model rerun.
The HEC-RAS 3.0 model was used for both phases.
9.3.
HEC-RAS MODEL
A mathematical modelling package HEC-RAS 3.0 was used to compute one dimensional flow
regime in canals and the model output used to assess the hydraulic performance of the canals and
structures. HEC-RAS mathematical model was developed at the US Army Corps of Engineers
Hydrologic Centre and has the ability to simulate steady and unsteady state flow conditions in
canals having structures such as bridges, culverts, drop structures, levees, lateral weir and gates.
The model is also capable of simulating split types of flow conditions in canals. In general the flow
regime in irrigation canals is steady, split type and have all the structure types indicated above.
Therefore the HEC-RAS model is considered as the most appropriate type of mathematical model
for the hydraulic analysis of the irrigation network.


9-1
The surveyed cross sections and longitudinal sections were used to represent the existing canal
network. The majority of canals have a trapezoidal shape and are constructed of masonry. The
initial assessment was carried out with the existing bed gradients obtained from the surveyed
longitudinal sections. The split type flow condition was used to determine the capacities of existing
canals. Each section of the canal network was tested for the design flows required to be conveyed
through that section. This was done by using the flow splits condition in the canal network. Most
of the existing turnout structures (division structures) were used for the above purpose. New
secondary turnout locations were identified for the canal sections that did not have turnout
structures.
A schematic diagram of the HEC-RAS model is shown in Figure 9.1. The HEC-RAS model was
run with the design flow rates and the results were checked to ensure that the canal sections were
adequate to convey the design discharges in those respective sections. A cross section plot with the
predicted water levels was checked in the geometric editor of the program. Inadequate sections and
sections showing less freeboard were identified for modification. The HEC-RAS profile editor is
used to determine the irregular bed gradients.
The HEC-RAS output was then used to determine the structure performance and canal capacities.
The HEC-RAS cross section editor was then used to check the adequacy of each canal section for
design flow rates. Sections with inadequate canal dimensions were then identified and these
sections were modified to provide better hydraulic performance.
9.4.
ASSESSMENT OF NETWORK
The HEC-RAS output for the existing canal system with sections identified with inadequate canal
capacity is presented in Table C1 (Appendix C) and shown on Figures 9.2a and 9.2b.
In the preliminary assessment it was found that the rectangular section at Chainage 340.45 and the
aqueduct at Chainage 660 were adequate to convey the design discharge of 1.61 m3/s. The two
turnouts on the chute of the Ritabau secondary canal do not function effectively due to insufficient
hydraulic head caused by the supercritical flow in the chute. This necessitated a readjustment of the
vertical canal geometry between chainage 0.69 km and 0.737 km. A low step to provide the
required water level is incorporated into the chute and a left and right offtake with slide gates is
proposed. Most of the canals in Maliana I are heavily silted up. Debris and vegetation further
hamper flow in the canals. Under present conditions with silted up canals, much of the lengths are
not adequate for the required design discharge. Table C2 (Appendix C) presents the proposed canal
profile and structure invert levels using the HEC-RAS run for the existing condition.
The original canal dimensions and canal bed slope were interpreted from the survey information
and used in the hydraulic calculations using HEC-RAS. New canal sections and invert levels were
incorporated into the HEC-RAS model. The model was then run with the proposed design flows.
The output is presented in Table C3 (Appendix C).
A water surface profile for the new canal geometry is shown in Figures 9.3a and 9.3b. Apart from
the two turnouts on the chute of the Ritabau secondary canal, all other turnout structures are
adequate to convey design flows at full supply levels.


9-2
a
Ca n
l 2B
Canal2B_3
Sec_Can1
C2B&SC
Can2B_2
C2A_Sec10
C2BD/S6&Sec1
l
Ca n a
2A
Canal2B_1
C2B-Sec9
C2B&Sec9
Can2A_5
l 2A
na
C2A_Sec8
C2AD/S4&sec8
Ca
n
al
Ca
C1D/S
Can2A_4
Canal1_Extention
SudoSec
C1_D/S4&NExt
Can1_D/S5
C1&Sec4
C1_Sec4
Can1_D/S4
Can1_Sec3
C1&Sec3
c2Ad/s2&Sec7
C2A_Sec7
Can2A_3
Ca
n
Can2A_2
Ca
al
1
MC1_Sec1
C1_Sec1
C2AD/SSec6
Can2_Sec6
Can1_D/S2
Can1_Sec2
C1D/S2&Sec2
Can2A_1
Can2_Sec5
C2&C2A
Canal1_D/S1
C1&C2
an a l
al 1
Can1_D/S3
Canal1_U/S
Figure 9.1 : Maliana Irrigation System HEC RAS Schematic


9-3
Maliana 1 Irrigation System Water Surface Profiles for Existing Canal Condition
Maliana_Distribution_02_01_03
Geom: Maliana_Design_Distribution_1
Canal1_Extention
CC
aa
nn
11
__
DD
/ /
SS
54
260
Can1_D/S3
Plan: Plan 03
Flow: Maliana design Flows
Can1_D/S2
C
a
n
a
l
1
_
D
/
S
1
250
Canal1_U/S
Legend
EG PF 1
WS PF 1
Crit PF 1
Ground
Elevation (m)
240
230
220
210
200
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
Main Channel Distance (Reverse Order) (m)
Figure 9.2a : Maliana Main and Ritabau Secondary Canals

Geom: Maliana_Existing_Distribution_1
C
250 a
n
a
l
2
B
245 _
3
Can2A_2
Can2B_2
C
a
n
2
A
_
1
C
1
D
/
S
Plan: Plan 04
Can2A_5
Canal2B_1
C
a
n
2
A
_
3
Can2A_4
Legend
EG PF 1
WS PF 1
Crit PF 1
Ground
240
Elevation (m)
235
230
225
220
215
210
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Figure 9.2b : Maliana Main and Ramaskora Secondary Canals


9-4
Estimated Water Surface Profiles from HEC-RAS Model for Modified Maliana 1 Canal
Canal1_Extention
CC
aa
nn
11
__
DD
/ /
SS
54
260
Can1_D/S3
Plan: Plan 05
Can1_D/S2
C
a
n
a
l
1
_
D
/
S
1
250
Canal1_U/S
Legend
EG PF 1
WS PF 1
Crit PF 1
Ground
Elevation (m)
240
230
220
210
200
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
Figure 9.3a : Maliana Main and Ritabau Secondary Canals

C
250 a
n
a
l
2
B
245 _
3
Can2A_2
Can2B_2
C
a
n
2
A
_
1
C
1
D
/
S
Plan: Plan 05
Can2A_5
Canal2B_1
Can2A_4
C
a
n
2
A
_
3
Legend
EG PF 1
WS PF 1
Crit PF 1
Ground
240
Elevation (m)
235
230
225
220
215
210
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Figure 9.3b : Maliana Main and Ramaskora Secondary Canals


9-5
10. General Design Criteria
10. GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA

10.1.
GENERAL
The following design criteria and formula have been used in the tender design of the various
structures. Calculations based on this criteria are given in sections 11 to 13 and 15 and the
Appendices of this report.
10.2.
ENTRANCE LOSSES TO INTAKES
10.2.1.
Change of direction
The entrance loss due to a change of direction of flow (intake at an angle with the main stream)
is:
h
V2/2g - V02/2g
=
=
=
=
=
velocity through intake (m/s)

velocity of main stream at the inlet (m/s)
coefficient to allow for change in direction of flow
0.4 for equal to 90 degrees
0.8 for equal to 30 degrees
Equation 10.1
where:
V
V0
10.2.2.
Ht
Trashrack losses
=
x (s/b)1.33 x sin x V2/2g
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
headloss (m)
velocity through intake (m/s)
shape factor
2.4 for rectangular bars
1.8 for round bars
thickness of bars (m)
clear distance between bars (m)
angle of inclination from horizontal
Equation 10.2
where:
Ht
V
s
b
10.2.3.
H
Transition losses
=
U x (V22 V21)/2g
=
=
headloss (m)
velocity in structure (m/s)
Equation 10.3
where:
H
V2


10-1
V1
U
10.3.
=
=
=
=
velocity in canal (m/s)

entrance or exit loss coefficient
0.25 for entrance losses for standard canal transitions
0.50 for exit loss coefficient for standard canal transitions
FLOW IN CONVEYANCE STRUCTURES
The discharge capacity of flumes and canals has been calculated from Mannings formula:
Q
(A x R0.67 x S0.5)/n
=
=
=
=
=
discharge (m3/s)
Area (m2)
hydraulic radius (m)
slope of water surface
Mannings n
Equation 10.4
where:
Q
A
R
S
n
The value of Mannings n used is given in Table 10.1.

Table 10.1 Mannings n
Type of surface
Concrete
Masonry on sides
Earth, gravel
10.4.
Value of n
0.012
0.015
0.030
WIDTH OF WEIRS
For stability of riverbeds in alluvial rivers:

W
4.825 Q0.5
Pw
=
=
=
Laceys regime width (m)

wetted perimeter (m)
total discharge (m3/s)
Equation 10.5
where:
W
Pw
Q
For rivers flowing within well designed banks a waterway width of 0.7W is acceptable.
10.5.
CAPACITY OF SLUICEWAYS
Recommended capacities of sluiceways are:
20% of maximum flood discharge

twice the capacity of the canal intake.


10-2
10.6.
DISCHARGE OVER WEIRS

Q
C x L x H1.5
=
=
=
=
=
discharge (m3/s)
discharge coefficient
1.7 for broad crested weirs
effective length of weir (m)
head above weir crest including velocity head (m)
Equation 10.6
where:
Q
C
L
H
10.7.
HYDRAULICS OF STILLING BASINS
10.7.1.
Froude Number
Fr
V/((g x D)0.5)
=
=
=
=
Froude number
mean velocity of flow (m/s)
acceleration of gravity (m/s/s)
depth of flow (m)
Equation 10.7
where:
Fr
V
g
D
10.7.2.
Y2
Conjugate Depth
=
Y1/2 x ((1 + 8 Fr2)0.5 1)
=
=
=
conjugate depth (m)

upstream depth (m)
Froude number
Equation 10.8
where:
Y2
Y1
Fr
10.7.3.
Minimum tailwater depth
Tailwater depth
1.1 x Y2 (m)
Equation 10.9
where:
Y2
conjugate depth (m)


10-3
10.7.4.
Basin length
Length of basins for Froude Numbers between 2.5 and 4.5:

L
2 x Y1 x ((1 + 8 Fr2)0.5 1)
=
=
=
conjugate depth (m)

upstream depth (m)
Froude number
Equation 10.10
where:
Y2
Yi
Fr
10.8.
UPLIFT
10.8.1.
Uplift pressure under floor
H (H/L) x L1
Equation 10.11
=
=
=
=
uplift pressure (m)

difference in water levels upstream and downstream of the weir (m)
total creep length (m)
creep length at point 1 (m)
where:
P
H
L
L1
10.8.2.
T
Thickness of floor
=
c x P/(G-1)
=
=
=
=
factor of safety against uplift = 1.20

required thickness of floor (m)
uplift pressure under floor (m)
specific gravity of concrete (t/m3)
Equation 10.12
where:
C
T
P
G
10.9.
HYDRAULIC GRADIENTS
10.9.1.
Blighs creep theory
Hg
H/L
Equation 10.13
=
=
=
=
=
hydraulic gradient
seepage head (m)
difference in water levels upstream and downstream of the weir
the total creep length = 2d1 + b + 2d2 (m)
depth of upstream cutoff (m)
where:
Hg
H
L
D1


10-4
D2
B
=
=
depth of downstream cutoff (m)

horizontal floor length between cutoffs (m)
Allowable hydraulic gradients for various materials are given in Table 10.2.
Table 10.2 Allowable Hydraulic Gradients
Type of foundation
Light sand and mud
Fine micaceous sand
Course grained sand
Sand mixed with boulders and shingles
10.9.2.
C
Allowable
Hydraulic Gradient
1 in 8
1 in 15
1 in 12
1 in 9 to 1 in 5
Lanes weighted creep theory

=
<
Lw/H
Equation 10.14
=
=
=
=
=
empirical coefficient depending on soil conditions

Weighted creep length (m)
N/3 + V
the sum of the lengths of horizontal and less than 45 degree slopes (m)
the sum of the lengths of vertical and slopes of greater than 45 degree slopes (m)
where:
C
Lw
N
V
Allowable values of C for various materials are given in Table 10.3.

Table 10.3 Allowable C Values
Type of Soil
Very fine sand or silt
Fine sand
Medium sand
Coarse sand
Fine gravel
Medium gravel
Coarse gravel including cobbles
Boulders with some cobbles and gravel
Soft clay
Medium clay
Hard clay
Very hard clay or hardpan

Value of C
8.5
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
3.0
1.8
1.8
1.6

10-5
10.9.3.
Khosla
Khosla, Bose and Taylor (1954) actual exit gradient (with one end cut-off pile):
=
Hs/d20.5
Ge
H
=
=
=
=
exit gradient
difference in water levels upstream and downstream of the weir (m)
Pi
=
3.14
0.5 x (1 + (1 + 2)0.5)
Equation 10.16
b/d2
Ge
Equation 10.15
where:
and
Equation 10.17
Table 10.4 Safety factors for exit gradients
Type of soil
Coarse sand
Fine sand
Safety factor
5 to 6
6 to 7
Permissible exit gradients for gravels of 1 in 6 has been adopted for gravels.
The design condition must assume the worst possible loading condition ie when no flow exists over
the weir crest and the downstream stilling basin is dry.
10.10.
SCOUR DEPTHS
Scour depth calculations were made during the morphology investigations using various methods to
estimate the depth of scour.
Following the recommendations of Farraday and Charlton (1983), the potential depth of scour
adjacent to an abutment is 1.5 to 2 times the depth to average bed level for flow parallel to the bank,
increasing to 2.25 times this depth for flow impinging at 90 degrees to the bank.
10.10.1.
Rs
Regime Scour Depths

=
0.475x(Q/f) 0.33
=
=
=
=
=
Regime scour depth (m)

maximum flood discharge (m3/s)
Laceys silt factor
1.75xd0.5
mean diameter of the bed material
Equation 10.18
where:
Rs
Q
f
d


10-6
If the actual waterway provided is less than the regime width:

Rs
1.35x(q2/f)0.33
=
=
=
Scour depth (m)

discharge per unit width of channel (m3/s/m)
Laceys silt factor
Equation 10.19
where:
Rs
q
f
Maximum probable scour depth factors:
downstream of stilling basin and concrete blocks = 2.0

straight reaches of guide banks = 1.5
Table 10.5 Scour Depth Factors
Location
Upstream
Downstream of floor and concrete blocks
Noses of guide banks
Transition from nose to straight portion
Straight reaches of guide banks
Minimum
1.25
1.75
2.00
1.25
1.25
10.11.
PROTECTION AGAINST SCOUR AND PIPING
10.11.1.
Concrete aprons and inverted filter
Maximum
1.75
2.25
2.50
1.75
1.75
Mean
1.50
2.00
2.25
1.50
1.50
Figure 10.1 refers.

The aprons are plain concrete blocks 1 m x 1.5 m x 0.75 m deep. The apron directly downstream of
weirs is laid with 70-100 mm open joints filled with spawls (broken stones), so that uplift pressure
is relieved. An inverted filter of well-graded gravel and sand is placed under the concrete apron in
order to prevent loss of soil through the joints.
lb
1.5 x d2
=
=
length of concrete apron (m)

potential depth of scour (m)
Equation 10.20
where:
lb
d2


10-7
10.11.2.
Launching apron D/S of weir
Figure 10.1 refers.

la
2.5 x d2
length of launching apron (m)
Equation 10.21
where:
la
Volume of apron/m run = 3d2

10.11.3.
Equation 10.22
Launching apron on guide banks
Figure 10.2 refers.

la
1.5 x D
=
=
length of launching apron (m)

depth of scour (m)
Equation 10.23
where:
la
D
Volume of apron/m run = 2.25 D

10.11.4.
D
Equation 10.24
Minimum stone size

=
k V2/2g?
=
=
=
=
=
=
minimum stone size (m)

1 for calm flow
1.4 for highly turbulent flow
mean velocity of flow (m/s)
acceleration due to gravity = 9.81 m/s/s
buoyant unit weight of boulder = 1.6
Equation 10.25
where:
D
K
V
G
?
10.12.
SLUICING
Size of gravel entering through the debris barrier will be limited to 100 mm.
Using equation 10.25:
V
(D x 2 x g x ? x k)0.5

Equation 10.26

10-8
10.13.
CANAL VELOCITIES
Minimum velocity to prevent saltation = 0.5 m/s

Maximum velocity to avoid erosion = 0.7 m
10.14.
DROP STRUCTURES
The choice of type of drop structure has been based on the following criteria in accordance with
common practice:
Vertical drop structures:
0<h<=1.0 m
Inclined drop:
1.0<h<=4.5 m
Design of stilling basin is based on Equations 10.7 to 10.11.

10.15.
SYPHONS
Flow velocity = 1.5 m/s or twice canal velocity.

To prevent floating trash from entering the syphon provision is made of trashracks at the syphon
entrance.
10.16.
STABILITY OF STRUCTURES
10.16.1.
Overturning
Fo
Mo/Mr
Equation 10.27
where:
FO =
MO =
MR =
10.16.2.
factor of safety against overturning

sum of overturning moments
sum of restoring moments
Sliding
a.
Sliding factor
Fss
H/V
Equation 10.28
where:
Fss
H
V
=
=
=
sliding factor of safety

sum of horizontal load components
sum of vertical loads


10-9
b.
Shear friction factor
FSF
(cA + Vtan)/H
Equation 10.29
where:
FSF
C
A
V
10.16.3.
Fsf
=
=
=
=
=
shear friction factor

effective cohesion of foundation material
area of base
sum of all vertical forces
effective friction angle of foundation material
Floatation
=
total mass/total uplift = ? V/? U - 1.2 minimum
Equation 10.30
where:
?V =
?U =
10.16.4.
Vertical mass of structure

Uplift under base of structure
Required safety factors
The minimum factors of safety to be achieved in each case against sliding, overturning and uplift
are:
Load Cases
Usual
Floods
Seismic
10.16.5.
Sliding
3.00
2.00
1.30
Overturning
2.00
1.50
1.30
Uplift
1.20
1.10
1.10
Foundation bearing pressures
Fmax =
P/A(1+6e/B)
Equation 10.31
Fmin =
P/A(1-6e/B)
Equation 10.32
where:
Fmax =
Fmin =
B
=
maximum bearing pressure

minimum bearing pressure
Length of base of structure
For normal loading conditions, the pressure on the foundations shall remain positive (compressive)
over the full area of the base (resultant within the middle third.


10-10
The maximum foundation bearing pressures shall not exceed the following:
normal loadings
extreme loadings
1.00 F
1.25 F
where:
F
the allowable bearing pressure of the foundation
Allowable bearing pressures for in-situ gravels has been estimated to be 150 kPa.
10.17.
EARTH PRESSURES
Active Pressure:
Ka
(1 sin )/(1 + sin )
Equation 10.33
1 sin F
Equation 10.34
(1 + sin F )/(1 sin F )
Equation 10.35
internal friction angle
At Rest Pressure:
Kp
Passive Pressure:
Kp
where:
F
10.18.
SEISMIC LOADING
Inertia force applies during earthquake events:

F
ma
=
=
=
=
=
W/g = mass of soil and wall involved

weight of rankine wedge
acceleration
0.15 g for horizontal accelerations
0.10 g for vertical accelerations
Equation 10.36
where:
m
W
a
Force is applied at 0.5H where H is height of wall.


10-11
10.19.
REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN
10.19.1.
Concrete strength
Characteristic strength of all structural concrete at 28 days = 25 MPa.

10.19.2.
Reinforcing Bar
Tensile Requirement
Minimum
Minimum Yield
Minimum
Tensile
Strength (MPa)
elongation (%)
Strength (MPa)
400
570
16
Grade
40
10.19.3.
Bending requirement
Bending angle
Bending
diameter
180
5xd
Minimum Reinforcement Requirements
Minimum reinforcement (mm) = 0.006bD

=
Equation 10.37
003bD in each face
where:
b
D
=
=
the width of the cross section (mm)

the overall depth of the cross section in the plane of bending (mm)
In reinforced sections thicker than 500 mm the shrinkage and temperature reinforcement provided is
equal to that required for a 500 mm thick section.
10.19.4.
Splice and Anchorage Lengths
For 25 MPa concrete with clear distance between adjacent bars and a minimum cover to
reinforcement of 60 mm the development and lap-splice lengths are given in Table 10.6.
Table 10.6 Development and lap-splice lengths
Bar size
Y12
Y16
Y20
Y24
Y28
Y32
Y36
10.19.5.
Development & Lapsplice length

(mm)
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Cover to Reinforcement
In all sections the minimum clear cover for reinforcement is 75 mm.


10-12
10.19.6.
Design for bending
Mu/bd2 = f x fc x q x (1 q/1.7)
Equation 10.38
where:
Mu
B
D
F
fc
q
fsy
10.19.7.
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
the ultimate strength in bending

width of cross section
effective depth of cross section
strength reduction factor
characteristic compressive cylinder strength of concrete at 28 days
Ast x fsy/b x d x fc
yield strength of reinforcing steel
Design for shear
Vuc =
d0 (Ast x Fc/bv x do)0.333
Equation 10.39
where:
Vuc
d0
Ast
Fc
=
=
=
=
=
Ultimate shear strength of beam/slab

1.1 x (1.6 d0/1000)>=1.1
distance to tensile reinforcement
cross sectional area of reinforcement
characteristic compressive strength of concrete at 28 days
If V < = 0.5 x f x Vu.min no shear reinforcement is required
Equation 10.40
where:
V =
F
=
Vu.min =
10.19.8.
design shear force

strength reduction factor = 0.7
ultimate shear strength of beam/slab with minimum reinforcement
Design of Gate Hoist Deck
The deck has been designed for:

1.
2.
3.
self weight at 23.5 kN/m3

live load of 5 kN/m2
gate loads calculated from W = 9.81 x A x P x + G
Equation 10.41
where:
W
A
P
=
=
=
=
=
concentrated gate load

area of the gate opening
depth of water above the gate invert
coefficient of friction between gate and frame
0.7 just before movent starts


10-13
=
=
0.3 once gate is moving

weight of gate including hoist stem
The maximum value of W is 140 kN.

10.19.9.
Weather Canopies
The weather canopies protect the gate hoist and control equipment from the elements.
10.20.
FOUNDATION MATERIAL PROPERTIES
10.20.1.
Coarse gravels (Material 1)
Cohesion c = 0 kPa
Angle of friction = 40 degrees
Unit weight = 18 kN/m3
10.20.2.
Fine gravels, sand, clay (Material 2)
Cohesion c = 10 kPa
Angle of friction = 30 degrees
Unit weight = 18 kN/m3


10-14
11. Design of Weir Rehabilitation Works
11. DESIGN OF WEIR REHABILITATION WORKS

11.1.
REHABILITATION WORKS
The minimum rehabilitation works required are considered to be:
repair of the damage to the existing weir. The weir crest is to be raised above the original
(Portugese) level to improve the intake hydraulics
replace the sluice and canal intake gates
repair the eroded invert to the gravel sluice.
Temporary river diversion works will still be required with this arrangement as there is insufficient
height to provide a gate and sluice structure and gravel will build up to the raised crest level of the
weir over a period of time. Deepening of the canal intake and the canal invert is not feasible as the
fall in the canal is small between the intake and a major aqueduct.
Principle items of work include:
raising of the crest of the existing weir by 0.7 m by anchoring a capping of concrete with steel
plate armouring to the crest and downstream face of the existing weir
backfilling of existing cavities in the downstream face of the existing weir with concrete and
pressure grouting of the joints between the existing and new concrete
construction of an anchored steel armoured reinforced concrete deflector at the downstream

toe of the existing weir
grouting of the foundations of the existing weir by drilling grout holes through the weir from
the weir crest
raising of the right and left abutment training walls upstream of the crest with reinforced
concrete
repair and steel armouring of the damaged lower section of the right abutment training wall
downstream of the weir crest
provision and installation of new gates for the sluice outlet and the canal intake
provision of timber stoplogs at the sluice outlet and canal intake
concrete repairs to the remaining existing intake, sedimentation basin and flushing channel.
Figures 2.1, 11.1, 11.2 and 11.3 show the general arrangement of the new headworks and details of
the weir, intake and flood protection works respectively.


11-1
11.2.
EXISTING WORKS
The quality of construction of the existing works appears reasonable and will be strengthened in
critical areas to ensure its stability.
11.3.
FOUNDATIONS
The scoured area underneath of the existing downstream face of the weir indicated loose granular
deposits between large boulders. The foundation of the rehabilitation works at the downstream toe
of the weir is to be keyed in between the boulders and anchored to the boulders. These boulders are
well anchored due to their size of greater than 5 m.
The riverbed contains many large boulders up to 4 to 5 m across. As there has only been fairly
minor scouring downstream of the weir since it was built scouring is evidently limited by the
presence of the large boulders in the riverbed.
The intake area is in close proximity to other very large boulders, up to 35 m in size. These
boulders provide an effective stable abutment.
Verification of the foundation conditions will be required early in the construction period. After
diversion of the river loose material (sand and gravel) should be excavated downstream of the weir
toe to the end of the training walls to enable inspection by the Project Manager.
11.4.
DIVERSION REQUIREMENT
The river diversion works are required to divert a maximum flow of 1.62 m3/s. The hydraulic
analysis of the irrigation canal network calculated the water surface in the canal immediately
downstream of the intake to be El 254.4 m for this flow.
11.5.
DESIGN FLOOD
The weir is designed to safely pass the 1 in 100 year return period flood. The intake gate facilitates
the prevention of water from such a flood entering the canal system.
To minimize the damage occurring if a flood larger than the 1 in 100 return period flood occurs the
top of the weir abutments have been set above the 1 in 1000 return period flood level.
Table 11.1 Design Floods
Return period (years)
Flow (m3/s)
11.6.
100
310
1000
430
LOCATION OF WEIR
The river morphology study concluded that the river stability at the existing site is good,
particularly if riverbank protection works are carried out at the bend 200 m upstream of the weir.


11-2
11.7.
CREST WIDTH
The width of the existing weir is similar to the width of the existing riverbed of 27.5 m.
11.8.
CREST ELEVATION
From the irrigation hydraulic design studies for a design discharge of 1.62 m3/s and a canal invert
level of 253.73 m the water level at the canal intake has been calculated to be EL 254.26 m. This
study calculated the water level at the intake upstream of the weir to be EL 254.4 m (results of this
study are presented in Appendix C Table C.3.
A crest level of El 254.4 m has been adopted which allows for a head loss through the approach
channel and intake of up to 0.14 m.
11.9.
FLOOD LEVELS AND VELOCITIES
HEC-RAS studies were carried out to determine water levels upstream and downstream of the weir
for various return period floods. The flood levels and velocities are shown in Tables 11.2 to 11.5.
The output from the computer program is included as Appendix D.1.
Table 11.2 Flood Levels with raised crest
(crest level EL 254.4 m)
Historical
2
5
10
20
50
100
1000
132
135
175
200
230
275
310
430
At weir
255.73
255.74
256.00
256.15
256.32
256.57
256.75
257.32
52 m upstream
256.49
256.50
256.63
256.72
256.81
256.95
257.06
257.38
Table 11.3 Flood Levels with original crest

Historical
2
5
10
20
50
100
1000
132
135
175
200
230
275
310
430

At weir
255.03
255.04
255.30
255.45
255.62
255.87
256.05
256.62
52 m upstream
256.49
256.50
256.63
256.72
256.81
256.95
257.08
257.38

11-3
Table 11.4 Velocities (m/s) with raised crest

Chainage
52 m U/S
weir
At toe of
crest
Historical
2
5
10
20
50
100
1000
4.08
4.13
4.72
5.01
5.32
5.73
6.01
6.82
9.59
9.62
10.00
10.19
10.39
10.65
10.83
10.35
At D/S end of
D/S training
walls
4.90
4.97
5.78
6.21
6.66
7.24
7.63
8.67
Table 11.5 Velocities (m/s) with original crest

11.10.
Chainage
52 m U/S
weir
At toe of
crest
Historical
2
5
10
20
50
100
1000
4.69
4.73
5.14
5.37
5.63
5.98
6.23
6.94
9.02
9.05
9.41
9.61
0.81
10.07
10.25
10.76
At D/S end of
D/S training
walls
4.67
4.74
5.51
5.92
6.35
6.89
7.26
8.24
STILLING BASIN
Originally it was planned to construct a stilling basin at the toe of the crest. However, a deep
excavation mainly in rock would be required to accommodate the stilling basin. The sill level for a
USBR type stilling basin would be EL 47.50 m. Table 11.6 shows the hydraulic calculations
performed for the design of such a stilling basin.
Table 11.6 Hydraulics of Stilling Basin
V1
Y1
Discharge
(1)
(1)
(m3/s)
(m/s)
(m)
135
10.00
0.49
175
10.23
0.62
200
10.42
0.71
230
10.63
0.80
275
10.89
0.94
310
11.07
1.04
430
11.58
1.41
(1) obtained from HEC-RAS studies

Froude
Number
Conjugate
Depth
(Eq. 10.7)
(Eq. 10.8)
(m)
2.93
3.35
3.56
3.83
4.21
4.51
5.28
4.56
4.14
3.87
3.71
3.50
3.42
2.97
Tailwater
Depth
Required
(Eq. 10.9)
(m)
3.22
3.68
3.91
4.22
4.63
4.96
5.80
Calculated
Tailwater
Depth
(m)
3.84
4.10
4.25
4.42
4.66
4.85
5.42

11-4
Table 11.6 Stilling Basin Hydraulics (continued)

Discharge
(m3/s)
135
175
200
230
275
310
430
Length of jump
(m)
(Eq. 10.10)
11.71
13.38
14.22
15.33
16.83
18.05
21.10
With the weir founded on large boulders and the presence of large boulders directly downstream of
the weir it was decided to adopt an alternative design. A flip bucket with a small exit angle has
been provided at the downstream toe to deflect water away from the toe of the weir and to direct the
flow slightly upwards.
Treatment downstream of the flip bucket will need to be directed during construction when the
geological conditions are fully exposed. It is envisaged that treatment will consist of excavating
pockets of gravel and sand between large boulders and backfilling with concrete. Some anchoring
of boulders with anchor bars and some grouting may be necessary.
11.11.
EXIT GRADIENTS
11.11.1.
Bligh
Hydraulic gradient across the weir floor according to Blighs theory is 0.25 or 1 in 4 (Eq. 10.13).
The allowable gradient for sand mixed with boulders is 1 in 9 to 1 in 5. The length of floor is only
suitable for a foundation consisting mainly of boulders.
11.11.2.
Lane
Applying Lanes theory the weighted creep length is 4 + 16/3 = 9.33 m.

C is 9.33/4 = 2.33 (Eq. 10.14). For boulders with some cobbles and gravels the allowable value of
C is 2.5.
11.11.3.
Khosla
Table 11.7 Exit Gradient by Khoslas Method
Feature
Upstream water level
Downstream water level
H
d1
d2
L
B
Data
254.4 m
250.0 m
4.50 m
0m
2m
15 m
19 m

Formula
Calculation
Result
2.0

11-5

Feature
Data
Ge
Formula
Eq. 10.17
Eq. 10.16
Eq. 10.15
Calculation
19/2
0.5 x (1 +(1 + 9.52)0.5
4.5/3.14 x 1.5 x 5.270.5
Result
9.5
5.27
0.416
(1 in 2.4)
Exit gradient is 1 in 2.4 which provides only for a foundation of boulders, gravels and course sand.
11.11.4.
Summary
The length of weir floor is only adequate to prevent piping for the conditions at Maliana if it
consists mainly of boulders, gravel and course sand.
Due to the relatively high exit gradient the weir foundations will be grouted to reduce seepage and
the exit gradient and fill any unexposed cavities below the weir.
11.12.
SCOUR DEPTHS
The riverbed contains many large boulders up to 4 to 5 m across. As there has only been fairly
minor scouring downstream of the weir since it was built scouring is evidently limited by the
presence of the large boulders in the riverbed.
Hence no scour calculations have been performed.
11.13.
STABILITY CALCULATIONS FOR WEIR
The structural stability of the original weir with crest level at EL 253.7 m and for the weir with a
raised crest level to EL 254.4 was evaluated using the computer program CADAM (reference 9).
As the depth to foundation is not exactly known stability analyses were performed for foundation
levels at EL 249.7 m and EL 248.7 m.
11.13.1.
Foundations
For the stability analysis it was assumed the weir is founded on river gravels with an angle of
internal friction of 40 degrees. The weir is in fact founded on a mixture of river gravels and large
boulders (5 m diameter or greater).
11.13.2.
a.
Loads
Dead Loads
Load 1
Load 2
self weight of concrete

2.4 tonne/m3
self weight of silt on U/S face
1.8 tonne/m3
Horizontal pressure from silt on upstream face at rest condition


11-6
b.
Water levels
Load 3
(low flows in river)

U/S
D/S
to top of crest (EL 253.7 & EL 254.4)

riverbed level (EL 249.7)
Load 4 (1 in 100 year flood)

For original weir
U/S
D/S
El 256.05
El 251.10
For weir with raised crest
c.
a.
EL 256.75
EL 251.04
Horizontal
Vertical
0.19 g
0.12 g
Seismic
Load 5
11.13.3.
U/S
D/S
Load combinations
Construction/maintenance
Loads 1 + 2 + 3
b.
Floods
Load cases 1 + 2 + 4
c.
Seismic
Load cases 1 + 2 + 3 + 5
11.13.4.
Results
The results of the two analyses are tabulated in Table 11.8. The output from the computer program
is included as Appendix D.2 (Equations 10.27 to 10.32 refer).
The original weir has acceptable factors of safety for all conditions.
The raised weir is stable under all conditions but the factor of safety against sliding is lower than
normally accepted. The factor of safety against sliding is 1.6 in extreme flood conditions. Usually
a factor of safety of 2.0 is required.


11-7
This lower factor of safety is considered acceptable as the weir is generally located on large
boulders which will provide some cohesion along the base joint which will improve the resistance
against sliding considerably. Also the anchored flip bucket at the toe will add to the sliding
resistance of the weir.
Table 11.8 Results of Stability Calculations for Weir at Base
Load Case
Usual
Flood
Seismic
Feature
Sliding
Overturning:
Uplifting
Max. bearing pressure
Min bearing pressure
Sliding
Overturning:
Uplifting
Sliding
Overturning:
Uplifting
11.14.
Original weir
Foundation
Foundation
Level
Level
EL 249.7
EL 248.7
3.393
3.290
2.471
2.381
2.930
2.780
69 kPa
62 kPa
52 kPa
48 kPa
1.913
1.911
1.847
1.795
2.173
2.092
59 kPa
52 kPa
56 kPa
52 kPa
1.404
1.359
1.722
1.673
2.126
2.044
37 kPa
32 kPa
61 kPa
56 kPa
C = 0 kPa;
Raised weir
Foundation Foundation
Level
Level
EL 249.7
EL 248.7
3.012
2.838
2.479
2.302
3.104
2.707
58 kPa
69 kPa
45 kPa
49 kPa
1.604
1.691
1.773
1.762
2.146
2.076
46 kPa
55 kPa
48 kPa
55 kPa
1.356
1.243
1.726
1.630
2.219
2.002
30 kPa
34 kPa
53 kPa
59 kPa
Required
F of S
3.000
2.000
1.200
150 kPa
150 kPa
2.000
1.500
1.100
150 kPa
150 kPa
1.300
1.100
1.100
150 kPa
150 kPa
F = 40 degrees (gravels)
FILLING OF CAVITIES
The cavities under the weir will be cleaned out and backfilled with concrete. The joint between the
new and existing concrete is to be backfilled grouted to ensure no crack forms along the joint
between the two concretes.
Grouting between the original and new concrete is not to be carried out after the concrete has
cooled to the surrounding temperature.
11.15.
STEEL ARMOURING
Steel lining has been provided where erosion of the concrete is anticipated i.e. on the downstream
face of the weir and on the flip bucket. The backfill concrete under the steel lining is anchored to
the existing concrete by reinforcing bars grouted into holes drilled into the existing concrete. The
steel armouring is in turn anchored into the backfill concrete by reinforcing bars welded to the steel
plate.
All spaces between the concrete and steel plate armouring remaining unfilled after placement of the
concrete is to be backfilled grouted. The grouting is to be performed after the concrete has cooled
and obtained sufficient strength to resist the grouting pressures. The injection of the grout is be
done at a pressure not exceeding 200 kPa.


11-8
The grout will be injected through holes at the location of the grout holes provided in the steel plate
armouring. At any other point where inspection indicates that a cavity exists between the steel plate
armouring and the concrete, drilling and tapping of the liners will be done to provide additional
grouting points unless an external system of grouting has been approved.
After completion of the backfill grouting, the grout holes are to be sealed off with threaded steel
plugs and a sealing compound.
To minimise the amount of drilling of the steel liners, the Contractor may propose an extended
system of grout pipes for the purpose of grouting cavities that exist between the steel plate
armouring and the concrete.


11-9
12. Design of New Canal Structures
12. DESIGN OF NEW CANAL STRUCTURES

12.1.
LOCATION OF NEW STRUCTURES
A summary of the new structures required is shown in Table 12.1.

Table 12.1 Location of New Structures
Maliana 1 main
canal
Structure
BM2
Chainage
100
340
Ch 450
Ch 800
Ch 0 to Ch 1529
Ritabau
Ramaskora
Downstream of Bri 1
Bri 3
Downstream of Bri3
Between Bra 5 and Bra 6
Ch 700
1.5 km downstream of Bra 9
12.2.
Type of Structure
Drainage chute
New lifting mechanism for
gate
New Offtake
New Offtake
1.5 m wide inspection path
New Offtake
New Drop structure
New left and right Offtakes
200 m of masonry U-shaped
channel
New offtake
REHABILITATION OF CANAL LINING
It has been estimated that 10% of the length of the main and secondary canals lining will need
rehabilitation. Thickness of new masonry lining is 300 mm.
12.3.
DESILTING OF CANALS
The quantity of silt to be removed from the canal has been estimated from the survey data.
12.4.
NEW CANAL LINING
A 200 m long section between BM 5 and BM 6 is to be masonry lined. The lining will be U-shaped
and 300 mm thick.
12.5.
DROP STRUCTURES
A new simplified drop structure is to provided at BRi 3 at the bottom end of the chute together with
left and right offtake structures. Standard details for drop structures are given in Figures 12.2 and
12.3.
12.6.
GATES FOR OFFTAKES
Details of gates for rehabilitated and new offtake structures are given in Table 12.2. Standard
details for new offtakes are shown on Figure 12.1.


12-1
Table 12.2 Details of Gates for Offtakes

Structure
Chainage Capacity Depth of water
Main canal
BM2
412
1.07
Illegal offtake
450
0.007
1.30
Illegal offtake
800
0.36
BM7 - right
1529
0.412
0.76
BM7 - left
1529
1.04
0.44
Ritabau secondary canal
BRi 1
5
0.004
0.48
D/S of BRi 1
0.48
BRi 2
135
0.009
0.40
BRi 3 - right
700
0.015
0.24
BRi 3 - left
700
0.015
0.24
BRi 9
466
0.051
BRi 11
700
0.051
BRi 13
810
BRi 14 - right
871
0.044
0.14
BRi 14 - left
871
0.14
BRi 16 - right
930
0.008
BRi 16 - left
0.102
Ramaskora secondary canal
BRa 3
1883
0.004
0.46
Bra 5
1996
0.058
0.58
1996
0.058
0.58
Bra 8
2237
0.073
0.33
Bra 9
2260
0.17
0.31
Bra 10
0.214
0.41`
0.204
0.41
12.7.
Number of gates
Width Height
1
1
1
1
2
1.00
0.30
0.30
1.00
0.75
1.40
0.50
0.50
0.90
0.60
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
0.60
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.60
0.60
0.50
0.40
1
1
0.40
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.3 0
0.50
0.50
0.30
0.25
0.85
0.50
0.45
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
0.45
0.65
0.70
0.45
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.60
0.60
DROP STRUCTURES
Table F.1 (Appendix F) presents the hydraulic calculations for the inclined drop structure - BRi 3
at chainage 700 on the Ritabau secondary canal. Figure 10.4 shows the symbols for the
dimensions. Table 12.6 gives the relevant levels for the new structures and Table 12.7 the
dimensions.
12.8.
FOOTBRIDGES
Standard details are shown on Figure 12.4. They will be located as directed by the Project
Manager if any are required. An item has been included in the Bill of Quantities for footbridges.
12.9.
BATHING STEPS
Standard details are shown on Figure 12.5. They will be located as directed by the Project
Manager. An item has been included in the Bill of Quantities for bathing steps.


12-2
12.10.
CANAL DISTANCE MARKERS
Canal distance markers will be located at 500 m intervals commencing at the canal intake structure.
12.11.
STAFF GAUGES
Staff gauges will be located at each division structure and offtake.


12-3
13. Gates
13. GATES
13.1.
GATE TYPES
Two types of gates have been specified for the project. Type 1 gates have been specified for the
headworks and type 2 gates for the canal turnout structures.
Type 1 gates are high quality gates with stainless steel guide slots and low friction bearing and
sealing strips to facilitate sliding and sealing. This type of gate is considered essential for the
headwork structures. Type 2 gate is similar to the type of gates presently used on the existing
irrigation structures.
Figures 13.1 and 13.2 present the typical details for gate types 1 and 2 respectively.
13.2.
SCOPE OF WORK
The Contractor is to design, manufacture, test in factory, deliver to site, install (including minor
civil works), and testing at site, and maintain during the defects liability the following:
steel slide gates, guide frames, gate stems, manually operated geared actuators and supporting
steelwork for installation in the sluice, irrigation intake structures and the canal structures
stoplogs, comprising stacking timber logs suitable for manual handling by block and tackle
equipment, and for dewatering isolation duty for operating gates in either the flume, sluice,
irrigation intake structure and canal structures.
The works includes the supply of documentation, spare parts, maintenance tools, equipment, and
instruction to the Employers operating and maintenance staff.
13.3.
SLUICE AND INTAKE GATES
13.3.1.
Installation and Operation
The arrangement of the gates is shown in Figure 13.1.

The gates open and close within formed stainless steel guide slots with associated seal plates, and
have low friction bearing and sealing strips fitted to facilitate sliding and sealing. The gates are
required to open and close under full supply head and full flow conditions, and to be suitable for
operation at part openings for prolonged periods of time.
Manually operated geared hoist units are installed on the hoist deck. These gates will be operated
as required to sluice gravel and control inflow into the irrigation canal.
The timber stoplogs are suitable for infrequent installation in the upstream concrete slots for
maintenance isolation duty for dewatering of the outlet structure gates. The stoplogs will be
manually handled and stacked in the slots to seal against upstream pond level using hooks.


13-1
13. Gates
13.3.2.
Site Survey, Design Data and Loadings
Original design data, levels and dimensions for each structure, plus required changes to gate
openings are shown on the Schedule included on the Typical General Arrangement Drawings. The
Contractor is to verify the relevant as-constructed Outlet Structure dimensions needed to complete
the design and manufacture of the gate units.
Bidders are required to offer a gate design arrangement similar to that shown on the drawings.
Alternate design options may also be offered with appropriate sketch details, and alternative prices
quoted.
Maximum water head on the gate for design purposes is the difference between Maximum Flood
Level (MFL) and Gate Sill Level.
In design of the gate stem and actuator, the Contractor is to consider the following loads and design
criteria:
dead weight of gate and stem
maximum water and gravel load on the gate and resultant frictional forces on the gate during
raising and lowering
nominal gate hydraulic down pull forces when raising or lowering into flow conditions
gate stem screw thread frictional forces
compressive buckling forces in the gate stem during gate lowering into flow conditions.
A minimum 50% margin is to be allowed on the maximum calculated hoist loadings for design of
the hoist rod and selection of the actuator.
13.3.3.
Slide Gate Design and Construction
Figure 13.1 shows the general detail of a typical gate and frame for installation in the sluice and
intake structures. The detail shown on this drawing gives an indication of the standard and quality
required in the design and construction of the gate assemblies.
The Contractor is to submit dimensioned design assembly drawings plus supporting calculations for
key components for approval.
Gates are to be of welded steel construction comprising a skin plate on the upstream side, and
integral load bearing beams and stiffeners on the downstream side. The skin plate is to be of
minimum thickness 8 mm.
The water load on the gate will be transferred to the guide frame via full-length bearing and sealing
strips fitted to the gate vertical side members. The projecting edges of the bearing strips are to
contact/rub on the slot liner inner metalwork to keep the gate centred in the guide slots.


13-2
13. Gates
Bearing and primary side sealing strips are to be of a suitable low friction, abrasive resistant
composite material similar to Solidur 1000, an ultra high molecular weight polyethylene.
The bottom section of the gates are to be profiled to minimize the likelihood of debris being trapped
under the gate, and to minimize hydraulically induced vibrations when operating at part openings.
Rectangular section rubber clamped to the bottom edge of the gate provides a bottom water seal at
the closed position. Bottom seal rubber is to have a Shore hardness between 65 and 70.
Flat rubber strips are to be clamped to the sides of the gates to form secondary flexible flap seals to
seal against the embedded upstream stainless steel seal plates.
The gate stem is connected to the stiffened top member of the gate via a removable pin. The precise
location of this connection point is to be at the centre of gravity of the gate, and will be determined
by hanging the fabricated gate in a truly vertical position during works tests.
13.3.4.
Gate Guide Frame
Gate framing metalwork houses and guides the gate during opening, closing and sealing operations.
The gate slot liner and upstream seal stainless steel plate is to be formed in the works to the required
profile and installed on site during the primary concrete pour. Suitable anchoring metalwork for
support of the liner during embedment and subsequent operational duty is to be provided. The slot
liner installation and its mountings are to be designed to take the full water load on the gate and
transfer this to the surrounding concrete structure. The stainless steel surfaces provide corrosion
free surfaces for the gate bearing strip and upstream seals to operate against.
An embedded structural steel section member with appropriate anchor bars, will form the bottom
gate support and seal plate as shown on the drawings.
Installation facilities are to be provided for adjusting, aligning and firmly securing the frame during
subsequent grouting. Grouting shall provide an effective water seal between upstream and
downstream conduits.
13.3.5.
Gate Actuator and Stem
To raise and lower the gate, an extended stem connected to the gate, with screw thread and geared
manual hoist unit supported on the overhead superstructure is to be provided. Figure 13.3 shows
details of a typical geared actuator.
Gate raising and lowering loads are to be calculated according to specified design criteria, and the
gate stem sized to handle the tension and compressive loads. The stem can be laterally supported if
necessary with mid span collars mounted off the structure at appropriate positions. Stem thread
efficiency is to be taken into account as per the actuator suppliers recommendations, in selecting
the thread form and the engaging collar. A screw lead approaching 1/3 of the stem diameter is
preferred.


13-3
13. Gates
Particular mechanical features required in the geared hoist units include:
stem nut/collar is to be removable and of a hard wearing bronze or other material

compatible with the gate stem material
the mechanism is to have a self-locking characteristic
lubrication is to be suitable for year round operation and ambient conditions on site
the lockable manual handwheel/lever is to be capable of operating the gates under all raising
and lowering conditions with a hand-operating force not exceeding 300 Newtons.
13.3.6.
Supporting Steelwork
In addition to the gate guide frames, steelwork is to be provided for supporting the geared hoist unit
on the hoist deck. Supporting steelwork is to be designed to handle all forces and loads associated
with gate operation, without undue deflection.
Lateral support collars are to be provided along the extended gate stem if necessary to provide the
necessary compressive strength and gate pushdown ability required during gate closure.
13.4.
STOPLOGS
13.4.1.
Installation and Operation
Stoplogs shall be installed and removed under static no-flow conditions.

13.4.2.
Design Data and Loadings
The Contractor shall size the timber stoplog sections to suit the limiting dimensions and levels
shown on the general arrangement drawing.
Maximum water head on the stoplogs for design purposes shall be taken as the difference between
Maximum Flood Level and Gate Sill Level.
In design and sizing of the stoplogs, the Contractor shall consider the following loads and design
criteria:
maximum water load on the static stoplogs.
13.4.3.
Stoplog Handling Equipment
A hook type arrangement is to be provided for removing the stoplogs.

13.5.
TYPE 2 GATES
Details for type 2 gates are shown on Figure 13.2.


13-4
13. Gates
Materials used in the construction of the type 2 gates and appurtenance are to be shown on the
approved Drawings and conform to the following specifications:
a.
The cast iron gate seat, hand wheel, hand cover and base plates, and stem bracket will
be made of cast iron conforming to ASTM A 126, grade B.
b.
The steel gate seat, guide frame, and frame filler will be made of steel conforming to
ASTM A 36, Grade B or JIS G3101, Class 2.
c.
The lifting nut will be made of bronze conforming to ASTM B 147, Alloy 8A.
d.
The stem bushing will be made of bronze conforming to ASTM B21, Alloy B.
e.
The bolt and nut will be made of steel conforming to ASTM A307, Grade B and will be
galvanised.
f.
All ferrous surfaces will be cleaned of rust, scale and grease and applied two coats of
coal-tar epoxy applied at the place of manufacture.


13-5
14. Agriculture Support Facilities
14. AGRICULTURE SUPPORT FACILITIES

14.1.
WUA MEETING ROOM BUILDING
The WUA meeting room building includes a meeting room, kitchen and toilet. It is of standard
construction with brick walls, a concrete floor slab, timber roof trusses and corrugated steel roof.
Figure 14.1 presents details of the building.
14.2.
GATE KEEPERS HUT
The gatekeepers building includes an office/rest room and toilet. It is of standard construction with
brick walls, a concrete floor slab, timber roof trusses and corrugated steel roof.
Figure 14.2 presents details of the building.


14-1
15. Costing
15. COSTING
15.1.
INTRODUCTION
Following the tender design and preparation of tender drawings, a schedule of quantities for the
items of work was prepared. A capital cost estimate was then developed.
15.2.
CAPITAL COSTS
15.2.1.
Unit Costs for Similar Projects
Indicative unit cost rates were obtained by reference to the Consultants cost data base for similar
projects bid in South East Asia and Southern Africa. These were reviewed in the light of
comparable rates bid for projects in East Timor, particularly the small irrigation project. All rates
are mid 2002 prices.
These unit rates do not include establishment, engineering and administration costs.
Assumptions made in selecting the appropriate unit rates include:
stone for masonry work, gabions, backfill, filters, drainage blankets, riprap and bedding will
be obtained by processing the river gravels at the site
the contractor will set up his own concrete batching plant. Concrete aggregates will be
obtained by processing local river gravels.
15.2.2.
Adopted Unit Rates
The unit rates for major items for similar projects are given in Table 15.1.
Table 15.1 Unit Rates (USD)
Spec.
Clause
Item
Unit
Rates from
Consultants
Data Base
ARP1 bid (medium

scale) rates
Phase 1
TS3.1
TS3.2 & TS3.3
TS3.4
TS3.5
TS3.6 & TS3.7
TS3.6
TS3.6
Section 3 Excavation
Removal of existing structures
Clearing and grubbing
Stripping
Stockpiling of topsoil
Excavation
Desilting of existing canals
Excavation for new canals
m3
ha
m2
m3
m3
m3
m3
40
1600
1
2
7.5
3
5
TS4.2
TS4.6
TS4.7
Section 4 Protection and Support of

Excavation
Grouted bars
Stone pitching
Gabions and mattresses
m
m2
m3
20
50
40

Phase 2
50
5500
8.25
4 to 8
7.18
3 to 6
29
50 to 67

15-1
15. Costing
Spec.
Clause
Item
Unit
Rates from
Consultants
Data Base
TS4.8
TS4.8.2.a
TS4.8.2.b
TS4.8.2.f
TS4.9
Soil conservation measures

Placing of topsoil
Fertilising of areas for grassing
Grassing by sodding
Filter fabric
m2
m2
m2
m2
2.4
TS5.2
TS5.2
TS5.3
TS5.4
TS5.5
TS5.6
TS5.7
Section 5 - Earthworks
Compacting excavated material
Random fill
Free draining backfill
Impervious fill
Gravel fill
River boulder apron
Road pavement
m3
m3
m3
m3
m3
m3
m3
2
4
10
8
10
10
10
TS3.6
TS6.3.2
TS6.3.4
TS6.5
TS6.6
Section 6 Drainage
Excavation
Half round concrete pipe lining
Stone pitching
Dia. 600 mm reinforced concrete pipes
Sub-soil drains
m3
m
m3
m
m
5
70
50
86
12
TS7.1.1
TS7.1.2
TS7.1.4
TS7.2
TS7.3
TS7.5
Section 7 Drilling and Grouting

Setup for Drilling and grouting
Drilling grout holes in foundations
Casing holes
Core drilling NMLC holes
Grouting
Pipes, fittings and outlets for grouting
Set-up
m
m
m
m3
kg
100
60
40
200
550
3
2
3.5
ARP1 bid (medium

scale) rates
1.5 to 7
18.6
2.5 to 26
1000 to
2000
1000 to
2000
m
m2
18
22
TS9.26
Section 9 Concrete Construction

PVC waterstops
Bituminous fibre sheet in expansion
joints
Reinforcing bars
tonne
1000
910
TS9.26
Reinforcing mesh
tonne
1200
1400
Section 11 Concrete in Structures

Concrete in cutoffs
Blinding concrete
Concrete in floor slabs
Concrete in walls
Concrete in block aprons
Miscellaneous concrete
m3
m3
m3
m3
m3
m3
150
100
100
150
100
100
91
91
Section 12 Canal Lining and

Structures
In-situ concrete lining
Ferrocement
Stone masonry lining
Rehabilitation of masonry lining in
m3
m3
100
100
m3
40
TS9.15
TS9.20
TS11.1
TS12.4
TS12.5
TS12.7

150
150
91

15-2
15. Costing
Spec.
Clause
TS12.8
TS13.1
TS13.9
TS13.10
TS13.11
TS13.14
TS13.15
TS13.16
Item
existing canals
New masonry lining
Stone masonry structures
Section 13 Steelwork and
Metalwork
Structural steelwork
Anchor bolts
Handrails
Pipes
Fences (intake)
Miscellaneous embedded metalwork
Miscellaneous
non-embedded
metalwork
TS15.1
Section 15 Buildings
WUA meeting room
TS15.1
TS15.2
TS15.2
TS15.2
TS15.4
TS15.14
Bagged grain storage shed

Steel cladding in walls
Steel cladding in roof
Roof ventilator
Louvres
Roller door
TS15.1
TS15.1
Grain drying area

Gate Keepers Hut
TS16.5
TS16.5
TS16.5
Unit
Rates from
Consultants
Data Base
m3
m3
40
50
tonne
kg
m
kg
m
kg
kg
2730
5.04
59
5.04
28.6
4.1
5.04
m2
L.S.
m2
m2
m2
m2
m2
each
350
62
62
45 to 78
45 to 78
23832
252
19.6
19.6
66
106
1294
m2
L.S.
504
Section 16 Gates and stoplogs

Gates Type 1
1.1 m high x 1.5 m wide
gate
gate
gate
gate
gate
5000
6000
6500
6000
8000
Stoplogs
1.1 m high x 2 m wide
1.5m high x 1.5 m wide
set
set
set
set
set
set
set
set
set
2000
2000
2000
2000
2500
3000
3400
3700
4000
Gates Type 2
gate
gate
gate
gate
gate
1250
1500
1750
2000
2250

ARP1 bid (medium

scale) rates
10600

15-3
15. Costing

gate
gate
gate
gate
gate
gate
gate
gate
gate
Rates from
Consultants
Data Base
2500
2750
3000
2750
3500
3000
3250
3500
3750
Rehabilitation of gates
canal offtake gates
gate
gate
gate
gate
2000
2000
1000
500
Section
17
Miscellaneous
Construction
Canal distance markers
Staff gauges
No
No
100
150
Spec.
Clause
TS16
TS17.1
TS17.2
Item
Unit
Item
Unit
Establishment and Maintenance

Excavation in river gravels
Random fill
Impervious fill
Riprap
Stone pitching
Masonry lining
Masonry in structures
Reinforcing bars
Reinforcing mesh
Concrete in floor slabs
Concrete in walls
Steelwork
%
m3
m3
m3
m3
m3
m3
m3
t
t
m3
m3
t
15.2.3.
Rates from MAFF for

ARP I Medium
Schemes
ARP1 bid (medium

scale) rates
2460
3060
Rates from
Consultants Data Base
20
7.5
6.0
8.0
10.0
40.0
40.0
50.0
1000
1200
100
150
2500
Quantities
Quantities were calculated from the tender drawings. Appendix F contains the basis of estimate
which gives the method for calculation of the quantities.
15.2.4.
General/Establishment Costs
An allowance of 20% has been included to cover the general and establishment items such as:
Establishment and administration general

Performance bonds


15-4
15. Costing
Insurances
Maintenance of access roads
Provision and maintenance of camps
Provision and maintenance of site offices for MAFF and the project manager
Installation of water supply and sewerage systems
Collection and disposal of garbage
Provision and maintenance of transport for the project managers staff
Provision and maintenance of crushing plant and concrete batch plant
Provision of standards
Provision of laboratory testing equipment and consumables.
15.2.5.
Engineering Costs
It has been assumed that an engineering consultant will be engaged to assist MAFF with the
detailed engineering, investigation, design, contract supervision and administration.
A nominal figure of 10% of contract costs has been allowed for the engineering costs associated
with the project.
15.2.6.
Government Administration
The MAFF would be involved in co-ordination, liaison and administration work in order to expedite
the project. This includes loan negotiations, financing, preselection of tenderers, resolution of
tenders, etc.
A nominal figure of 2% on all contract costs was adopted for these services.
15.2.7.
Compensation and Resettlement Costs
There will be no people displaced from the reservoir area or the area to be used for irrigation.
A provisional amount of 10,000 USD has been allowed for in the estimate of capital costs for
compensation for land.
15.2.8.
Contingency
The cost estimates were prepared on the basis of the information available from the investigation
work and tender designs.
A contingency of 10% on the estimates was adopted to make allowance for changes in item
quantities during construction.
15.2.9.
Interest during Construction
No amount has been included to cover interest charges on funds borrowed during the period of
construction. The actual figure to cover interest during construction will depend on the financial
arrangements adopted.


15-5
15. Costing
15.2.10.
Value added Tax (VAT)
No value added tax has been included.

15.3.
CAPITAL COSTS ESTIMATE
The cost estimate calculations are given in Appendix G. A summary of the costs of the arrangement
presented as the tender design is given in Tables 15.2.
Table 15.2 Capital Costs Estimate
Feature
Headworks rehabilitation of weir and intake
677,922
Canals and canal structures
266,829
Agricultural support facilities WUA building

and Gate Keepers hut
Sub-total
976,626
Establishment 20%
195,325
Engineering and Administration 12%
117,195
Contingency 10%
Total Cost US$
15.4.
Amount US$
31,875
97,663
1,386,809
ANNUAL FINANCE REQUIREMENTS
It has been assumed that the rehabilitation work of the weir and the canal network will take one
year. It should be noted that no allowance has been made for future escalation, import duties, or for
interest during construction.


15-6
16. Tender Documentation
16. TENDER DOCUMENTATION

16.1.
CODES AND STANDARDS
As discussed with officers from the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Australian standards are
acceptable but it is preferably if the Consultant standardises on standards used previously by others.
A brief review of the specification prepared for other projects indicates that mainly American
standards have been specified and the design prepared to American Codes. A list of the standard
agencies and organisations referred to in these specifications is given below:
16.2.
AASHTO
ACI
AISC
ANSI
ASTM
AWS
CRSI
NEC
CSA
PCI
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

American Concrete Institute
American Institute of Steel Construction
American National Standard Institute
American Society for Testing and Materials
American Welding Society, Inc.
Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute
National Electrical Code
Canadian Standards Association
Portland Cement Institute
TENDER DOCUMENTATION
As requested in the TOR the consultant has prepared bid documents for Limited International
Competitive Bidding (LICB) using IDA standard documents as per the procurement guidelines of
the World Bank.
As the cost of the works will be less than US$ 10 million the standard bidding documents for
smaller contractsvalued at generally less than US$10 millionby international competitive
bidding (ICB) have been used. These may also be adapted to local competitive bidding (LCB).
However, substantive changes to adapt to NCB are generally necessary in the Instructions to
Bidders and the Conditions of Contract.
The contract is a schedule of rates contract.
16.3.
TENDER DRAWINGS
Sufficient detail has been shown on the tender drawings to indicate to the contractor the work he
will be required to perform and to calculate the quantities.
It will be necessary to issue further drawings at the beginning of construction. Some revisions may
be required to the tender drawings as additional survey data becomes available from the contractor.
The Contractor is required to prepare construction and shop drawings. These drawings include
setting out drawings, reinforcement bar schedules, formwork details and metalwork fabrication
details.
Rehabilitation of Caraulun Irrigation Scheme


16-1
16.4.
AS-BUILT DRAWINGS
The Contractor is required to produce works-asexecuted drawings for record drawing purposes.
16.5.
BILL OF QUANTITIES
The Bill of Quantities for the project is presented in Appendix H.
Rehabilitation of Caraulun Irrigation Scheme


16-2

Version: Draft February 2003

16-1
17. References
17. REFERENCES
1.
SNC Lavalin International. Feasibility and Engineering Study in Respect of Rehabilitation of

Identified Irrigation Schemes in East Timor.
2.
SMEC. Technical Proposal for Feasibility Study of Secial Up, Uatulari, Maliana 1 and
Caraulan Irrigation Schemes in east Timor. March 2002.
3.
The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries. Technical Audit Report of Investigations in

Irrigation and Roads under the Agricultural rehabilitation Project Phase 1. June 22, 2002.
4.
SMEC. Inception report for Feasibility Study of Secial Up, Uatulari, Maliana 1 and Caraulan
Irrigation Schemes in east Timor. August 2002.
5.
SMEC. Feasibility Study Report. Feasibility Study of Seical Up, Maliana 1, Uatolari 1 and
Caraulun Irrigation Schemes. December 2002.
6.
Novak P, Moffat A, Nalluri C, Narayanan R. Hydraulic Structures. Second Edition. 1996.
7.
USBR. Design of Small Canal Structures. 1974.
8.
Ahmad N. Design of Weirs, Barrages and Canal intakes. UNDP Technical Manual No. 2.
(Hydraulic Structures).
9.
Leclerc M, Leger P and Tinawi R. CADAM Users manual. April 2001.


17-1
Contents
CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF APPENDICES
1.
THE MALIANA IRRIGATION SCHEME ...........................................................1-1

REHABILITATION OPTIONS ............................................................................1-1
SCOPE OF REPORT ............................................................................................1-2
DESIGN REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................2-1
THE WORKS........................................................................................................2-1
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES ...............................................................................3-1

3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
3.5.
3.6.
3.7.
3.8.
3.9.
3.10.
3.11.
4.
xiii
SCOPE OF WORK.................................................................................................2-1
2.1.
2.2.
3.
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................1-1
1.1.
1.2.
1.3.
2.
viii
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................3-1
DATA AVAILABILITY.......................................................................................3-1
3.2.1.
Agro-climatic data.................................................................................3-1
3.2.2.
Rainfall Data.........................................................................................3-1
3.2.3.
Streamflow records ...............................................................................3-1
CLIMATE.............................................................................................................3-1
3.3.1.
General..................................................................................................3-1
3.3.2.
Rainfall .................................................................................................3-1
3.3.3.
Temperatures ........................................................................................3-2
3.3.4.
Evaporation...........................................................................................3-2
3.3.5.
Relative Humidity.................................................................................3-2
AGRO-CLIMATIC CLASSIFICATION ...............................................................3-2
WATER AVAILABILITY & WATER REQUIREMENTS...................................3-2
WATER REQUIREMENT....................................................................................3-3
WATER BALANCE .............................................................................................3-3
FLOOD STUDIES ................................................................................................3-4
3.8.1.
Design Flood Peak Estimates ................................................................3-4
HISTORICAL FLOODS .......................................................................................3-4
SEDIMENTATION ..............................................................................................3-4
RIVER RATING CURVES...................................................................................3-4
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS...............................................................4-1
4.1.
4.2.
4.3.
SCOPE OF INVESTIGATIONS ...........................................................................4-1

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS .............................................4-1
GENERAL DESIGN PARAMETERS...................................................................4-1
4.3.1.
Particle size and grading curves.............................................................4-1
4.3.2.
Material density.....................................................................................4-2

Design Report (53205.20)

ii
Contents
Page
4.4.
4.5.
5.
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY ...................................................................................5-1

5.1.
5.2.
5.3.
6.
TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS........................................................................................5-1
FIELD SURVEY...................................................................................................5-1
5.2.1.
Scope of Work ......................................................................................5-1
5.2.2.
Grid System and Datum for Elevations..................................................5-2
5.2.3.
Output...................................................................................................5-2
RIVER SURVEY ..................................................................................................5-2
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES.............................................................................6-1
6.1.
6.2.
6.3.
6.4.
7.
4.3.3.
In-situ permeability ...............................................................................4-2
4.3.4.
Shear strength .......................................................................................4-2
4.3.5.
Potential for scour .................................................................................4-2
4.3.6.
Potential for piping................................................................................4-2
4.3.7.
Filter design grading..............................................................................4-2
SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS .....................................................................4-2
4.4.1.
Horizontal and vertical accelerations .....................................................4-2
4.4.2.
Liquefaction potential............................................................................4-3
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS .........................................................................4-3
4.5.1.
Concrete aggregate................................................................................4-3
4.5.2.
Stone for masonry works.......................................................................4-4
4.5.3.
Stone for gabions ..................................................................................4-4
4.5.4.
Impervious backfill ...............................................................................4-4
4.5.5.
Free draining backfill ............................................................................4-4
4.5.6.
Riprap ...................................................................................................4-5
4.5.7.
Gravel bedding......................................................................................4-5
4.5.8.
Selected boulders for scour protection...................................................4-5
4.5.9.
Roadway surfacing................................................................................4-5
4.5.10.
Borrow areas.........................................................................................4-5
GENERAL ............................................................................................................6-1
RIVER TRAINING WORKS ................................................................................6-1
PROVISIONS IN TENDER DOCUMENTS .........................................................6-1
6.3.1.
Flora .....................................................................................................6-1
6.3.2.
Fauna ....................................................................................................6-1
6.3.3.
Fencing .................................................................................................6-1
MATTERS TO BE ADDRESSED DURING CONSTRUCTION..........................6-1
6.4.1.
Disposal Areas ......................................................................................6-1
6.4.2.
Borrow Pits ...........................................................................................6-2
6.4.3.
Disposal of construction debris and office and domestic refuse..............6-2
6.4.4.
Fencing .................................................................................................6-2
RIVER MORPHOLOGY.......................................................................................7-1
7.1.
7.2.
WEIR AND THE INTAKE STRUCTURE............................................................7-1

GEOMORPHIC FACTORS ..................................................................................7-1
7.2.1.
Valley Setting and Stream Form............................................................7-1
7.2.2.
Stream Size and Width Variability.........................................................7-2


iii
Contents
Page
7.3.
7.4.
7.5.
7.6.
7.7.
8.
IRRIGATION SYSTEM PLANNING...................................................................8-1

8.1.
8.2.
8.3.
8.4.
8.5.
8.6.
8.7.
9.
7.2.3.
Apparent Incision..................................................................................7-2
7.2.4.
Bed and Bank Material..........................................................................7-2
7.2.5.
Channel Boundaries and Vegetation......................................................7-3
HYDRAULIC FACTORS .....................................................................................7-3
7.3.1.
Flow Habit ............................................................................................7-3
7.3.2.
Scour Conditions...................................................................................7-4
7.3.3.
Inception of Motion Analysis ................................................................7-4
ASSESSMENT OF THE FLOOD LEVELS ..........................................................7-5
RATING CURVES ...............................................................................................7-7
ASSESSMENT OF THE STREAM STABILITY..................................................7-8
RIVER TRAINING AND PROTECTION WORKS..............................................7-8
LOCATION ..........................................................................................................8-1
IRRIGATION SCHEME .......................................................................................8-1
IRRIGATION AREA ............................................................................................8-1
DIVERSION STRUCTURE AND INTAKE .........................................................8-1
MAIN CANAL AND STRUCTURES...................................................................8-2
SECONDARY CANALS AND CANAL STRUCTURES .....................................8-4
8.6.1.
Ritabau Secondary Canal.......................................................................8-4
8.6.2.
Ramaskora Secondary Canal .................................................................8-5
DETERMINATION OF TERTIARY AREAS.......................................................8-5
HYDRAULIC DESIGN OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM .........................................9-1

9.1.
9.2.
9.3.
9.4.
BACKGROUND...................................................................................................9-1
DESIGN APPROACH ..........................................................................................9-1
HEC-RAS MODEL...............................................................................................9-1
ASSESSMENT OF NETWORK ...........................................................................9-2
10. GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA ........................................................................10-1

10.1.
10.2.
10.3.
10.4.
10.5.
10.6.
10.7.
10.8.
GENERAL ..........................................................................................................10-1
ENTRANCE LOSSES TO INTAKES .................................................................10-1
10.2.1.
Change of direction.............................................................................10-1
10.2.2.
Trashrack losses ..................................................................................10-1
10.2.3.
Transition losses..................................................................................10-1
FLOW IN CONVEYANCE STRUCTURES .......................................................10-2
WIDTH OF WEIRS ............................................................................................10-2
CAPACITY OF SLUICEWAYS .........................................................................10-2
DISCHARGE OVER WEIRS..............................................................................10-3
HYDRAULICS OF STILLING BASINS ............................................................10-3
10.7.1.
Froude Number ...................................................................................10-3
10.7.2.
Conjugate Depth .................................................................................10-3
10.7.3.
Minimum tailwater depth ....................................................................10-3
10.7.4.
Basin length ........................................................................................10-4
UPLIFT ...............................................................................................................10-4
10.8.1.
Uplift pressure under floor ..................................................................10-4
10.8.2.
Thickness of floor ...............................................................................10-4


iv
Contents
Page
10.9.
10.10.
10.11.
10.12.
10.13.
10.14.
10.15.
10.16.
10.17.
10.18.
10.19.
10.20.
HYDRAULIC GRADIENTS ..............................................................................10-4

10.9.1.
Blighs creep theory ............................................................................10-4
10.9.2.
Lanes weighted creep theory..............................................................10-5
10.9.3.
Khosla.................................................................................................10-6
SCOUR DEPTHS................................................................................................10-6
10.10.1. Regime Scour Depths..........................................................................10-6
PROTECTION AGAINST SCOUR AND PIPING..............................................10-7
10.11.1. Concrete aprons and inverted filter ......................................................10-7
10.11.2. Launching apron D/S of weir...............................................................10-8
10.11.3. Launching apron on guide banks .........................................................10-8
10.11.4. Minimum stone size ............................................................................10-8
SLUICING ..........................................................................................................10-8
CANAL VELOCITIES .......................................................................................10-9
DROP STRUCTURES ........................................................................................10-9
SYPHONS ..........................................................................................................10-9
STABILITY OF STRUCTURES.........................................................................10-9
10.16.1. Overturning.........................................................................................10-9
10.16.2. Sliding.................................................................................................10-9
10.16.3. Floatation.......................................................................................... 10-10
10.16.4. Required safety factors...................................................................... 10-10
10.16.5. Foundation bearing pressures ............................................................ 10-10
EARTH PRESSURES ....................................................................................... 10-11
SEISMIC LOADING ........................................................................................ 10-11
REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN ............................................................. 10-12
10.19.1. Concrete strength .............................................................................. 10-12
10.19.2. Reinforcing Bar................................................................................. 10-12
10.19.3. Minimum Reinforcement Requirements............................................ 10-12
10.19.4. Splice and Anchorage Lengths .......................................................... 10-12
10.19.5. Cover to Reinforcement .................................................................... 10-12
10.19.6. Design for bending............................................................................ 10-13
10.19.7. Design for shear ................................................................................ 10-13
10.19.8. Design of Gate Hoist Deck................................................................ 10-13
10.19.9. Weather Canopies ............................................................................. 10-14
FOUNDATION MATERIAL PROPERTIES .................................................... 10-14
10.20.1. Coarse gravels (Material 1) ............................................................... 10-14
10.20.2. Fine gravels, sand, clay (Material 2).................................................. 10-14
11. DESIGN OF WEIR REHABILITATION WORKS ...........................................11-1

11.1.
11.2.
11.3.
11.4.
11.5.
11.6.
11.7.
11.8.
REHABILITATIONWORKS..............................................................................11-1
EXISTING WORKS ...........................................................................................11-2
FOUNDATIONS.................................................................................................11-2
DIVERSION REQUIREMENT...........................................................................11-2
DESIGN FLOOD ................................................................................................11-2
LOCATION OF WEIR........................................................................................11-2
CREST WIDTH ..................................................................................................11-3
CREST ELEVATION .........................................................................................11-3


v
Contents
Page
11.9.
11.10.
11.11.
11.12.
11.13.
11.14.
11.15.
FLOOD LEVELS AND VELOCITIES ...............................................................11-3

STILLING BASIN ..............................................................................................11-4
EXIT GRADIENTS ............................................................................................11-5
11.11.1. Bligh ...................................................................................................11-5
11.11.2. Lane ....................................................................................................11-5
11.11.3. Khosla.................................................................................................11-5
11.11.4. Summary.............................................................................................11-6
SCOUR DEPTHS................................................................................................11-6
STABILITY CALCULATIONS FOR WEIR ......................................................11-6
11.13.1 Foundations.........................................................................................11-6
11.13.2. Loads ..................................................................................................11-6
11.13.3. Load combinations ..............................................................................11-7
11.13.4. Results ................................................................................................11-7
FILLING OF CAVITIES.....................................................................................11-8
STEEL ARMOURING........................................................................................11-8
12. DESIGN OF NEW CANAL STRUCTURES ......................................................12-1

12.1.
12.2.
12.3.
12.4.
12.5.
12.6.
12.7.
12.8.
12.9.
12.10.
12.11.
LOCATION OF NEW STRUCTURES ...............................................................12-1

REHABILITATION OF CANAL LINING .........................................................12-1
DESILTING OF CANALS..................................................................................12-1
NEW CANAL LINING.......................................................................................12-1
DROP STRUCTURES ........................................................................................12-1
GATES FOR OFFTAKES...................................................................................12-1
DROP STRUCTURES ........................................................................................12-2
FOOTBRIDGES .................................................................................................12-2
BATHING STEPS ..............................................................................................12-2
CANAL DISTANCE MARKERS .......................................................................12-3
STAFF GAUGES................................................................................................12-3
13. GATES ..................................................................................................................13-1

13.1.
13.2.
13.3.
13.4.
13.5.
GATE TYPES.....................................................................................................13-1
SCOPE OF WORK .............................................................................................13-1
SLUICE AND INTAKE GATES.........................................................................13-1
13.3.1.
Installation and Operation ...................................................................13-1
13.3.2.
Site Survey, Design Data and Loadings...............................................13-2
13.3.3.
Slide Gate Design and Construction ....................................................13-2
13.3.4.
Gate Guide Frame ...............................................................................13-3
13.3.5.
Gate Actuator and Stem.......................................................................13-3
13.3.6.
Supporting Steelwork..........................................................................13-4
STOPLOGS ........................................................................................................13-4
13.4.1.
Installation and Operation ...................................................................13-4
13.4.2.
Design Data and Loadings...................................................................13-4
13.4.3.
Stoplog Handling Equipment ..............................................................13-4
TYPE 2 GATES ..................................................................................................13-4


vi
Contents
Page
14. AGRICULTURE SUPPORT FACILITIES ........................................................14-1

14.1.
14.2.
14.3.
14.4.
14.5.
BAGGED GRAIN STORAGE SHED .................................................................14-1

STRUCTURAL DESIGN....................................................................................14-1
14.2.1.
Loads ..................................................................................................14-1
14.2.2.
Live loads ...........................................................................................14-1
14.2.3.
Wind loads ..........................................................................................14-1
14.2.4.
Earthquake loads .................................................................................14-1
14.2.5.
Structural Design.................................................................................14-2
14.2.6.
Ventilation ..........................................................................................14-2
GRAIN DRYING AREA ....................................................................................14-2
WUA MEETING ROOM BUILDING ................................................................14-2
GATE KEEPERS HUT......................................................................................14-3
15. COSTING..............................................................................................................15-1
15.1.
15.2.
15.3.
15.4.
INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................15-1
CAPITAL COSTS...............................................................................................15-1
15.2.1.
Unit Costs for Similar Projects ............................................................15-1
15.2.2.
Adopted Unit Rates .............................................................................15-1
15.2.3.
Quantities............................................................................................15-2
15.2.4.
General/Establishment Costs...............................................................15-2
15.2.5.
Engineering Costs ...............................................................................15-2
15.2.6.
Government Administration ................................................................15-2
15.2.7.
Compensation and Resettlement Costs ................................................15-2
15.2.8.
Contingency........................................................................................15-2
15.2.9.
Interest during Construction ................................................................15-3
15.2.10. Value added Tax (VAT)......................................................................15-3
CAPITAL COSTS ESTIMATE...........................................................................15-3
ANNUAL FINANCE REQUIREMENTS ...........................................................15-3
16. TENDER DOCUMENTATION...........................................................................16-1

16.1.
16.2.
16.3.
16.4.
16.5.
CODES AND STANDARDS ..............................................................................16-1

TENDER DOCUMENTATION ..........................................................................16-1
TENDER DRAWINGS .......................................................................................16-1
AS-BUILT DRAWINGS.....................................................................................16-2
BILL OF QUANTITIES......................................................................................16-2
17. REFERENCES .....................................................................................................17-1


vii
Contents
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Title
Page
3.1
Monthly Rainfall Data
3-2
3.2
Monthly Streamflow Estimates
3-3
3.3
Maliana I Irrigation Water Requirements for 900 ha
3-3
3.4
Cropping Intensity Maliana I Irrigation Scheme
3-4
3.5
Design Flood Peak Estimates with RSWM
3-4
3.6
Historical Floods
3-4
4.1
Summary of test data for Maliana I
4-1
5.1
Index of 1:25000 Scale Maps
5-1
5.2
Index of 1:50000 Scale Maps
5-1
5.3
GPS Control Points
5-2
7.1
Impact of Raising Maliana Weir on WS Elevation
7-5
10.1
Mannings n
10-2
10.2
Allowable Hydraulic Gradients
10-5
10.3
Allowable C Values
10-5
10.4
Safety factors for exit gradients
10-6
10.5
Scour Depth Factors
10-7
10.6
Development and lap-splice lengths
11.1
Design Floods
11-2
11.2
Flood Levels with raised crest
11-3
11.3
Flood Levels with original crest
11-3
11.4
Velocities (m/s) with raised crest
11-4
11.5
Velocities (m/s) with original crest
11-4
Table
Title
Page

10-12

viii
Contents
11.6
Hydraulics of Stilling Basin
11-4
11.7
Exit Gradient by Khoslas Method
11-5
11.8
Results of Stability Calculations for Weir at Base
11-8
12.1
Location of New Structures
12-1
12.2
Details of Gates for Offtakes
12-2
15.1
Unit Rates from Consultants Database (USD)
15-1
15.2
Capital Cost Estimates Flume Alternative
15-3


ix
Contents
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Title
Page
1.1
Location Maps
1.2
Irrigation Scheme General Arrangement
2.1
Headworks General Arrangement
4.1
Maliana I Irrigation Scheme - Geomorphological Map
5.1
Survey for Canals Typical Plan and Longitudinal Section
5.2
Survey for Canals Typical Cross Sections
7.1
Bulobo River Bed Material Representative Grain Size Distribution
7-2
7.2
Bulobo River at Maliana I Monthly Runoff Variability
7-3
7.3
Bulobo River at Maliana I Inception of Motion Analysis
7-5
7.4
Bulobo River at Maliana I Water Surface Profiles without Raising of

Weir Crest
7-6
Bulobo River at Maliana I Water Surface Profiles with Raising of

Weir Crest
7-6
7.6
Maliana I Intake Rating Curve without Raising of Weir Crest
7-7
7.7
Maliana I Intake Rating Curve with Raising of Weir Crest
7-7
8.1
Irrigation Areas
8.2
Irrigation Scheme Schematic
8.3
Existing Headworks General Arrangement
8.4
Existing Headworks Weir and Intake Details
8.5
Existing Canal Structures Sheet 1
8.6
8.7
8.8
7.5
Figure
Title
Page
x
Contents
8.9
Required Canal Capacities
9.1
Maliana Irrigation System HEC RAS Schematic
9-3
9.2
Malania I Irrigation System Water Surface Profiles for Existing Canal

Condition
9-4
9.2a
Maliana Main and Ritabau Secondary Canals
9-4
9.2b
Maliana Main and Ramaskora Secondary Canals
9-4
9.3
Estimated Water Surface Profiles from HEC-RAS Model for Modified

Maliana I Canal
9-5
9.3a
Maliana Main and Ritabau Secondary Canals
9-5
9.3b
Maliana Main and Ramaskora Secondary Canals
9-5
10.1
Apron protection downstream of weirs
10.2
Design criteria for launching aprons
10.3
Symbols of Dimensions for Vertical Drops
10.4
Dimensions for Inclined Drops
11.1
Headworks Weir and Intake Details Sheet 1
11.2
Headworks Weir and Intake Details Sheet 2
11.3
Headworks River Protection Works
12.1
Offtakes
12.2
Drop Structures Type 1
12.3
Drop Structures Type 2
12.4
Footbridges
12.5
Washing Steps
13.1
Gates Type 1
13.2
Gates Type 2
13.3
Figure
Typical Geared Actuator

Title
Page
xi
Contents
14.1
Bagged Grain Storage Shed General Arrangement
14.2
Bagged Grain Storage Shed Details Sheet 1
14.3
Bagged Grain Storage Shed Details Sheet 2
14.4
Grain Drying Area
14.5
WUA Meeting Room Building
14.6
Gatekeepers Hut


xii
Contents
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
Title
List of Drawings
River Morphology Calculations
Hydraulic analysis of irrigation network

C.1
Water surface elevations with existing canal geometry
C.2
Revised canal design levels
C.3
Water surface elevations with modified canal geometry
Design Calculations for Weir

D.1
River Hydraulic studies
D.2
Stability calculations for weir
Design Calculations for Irrigation Structures

E.1
Hydraulic Design of drop structures
Basis of Quantities
Cost Estimate
Bill of Quantities


xiii

HecRas - Ta405 Maliana Design Report - Intake. Etc PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

HecRas - Ta405 Maliana Design Report - Intake. Etc PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

REPUBLICA DEMOCRACIA DE TIMOR LESTE

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY

THE AGRICULTURAL REHABILITATION PROJECT

THE MALIANA IRRIGATION SCHEME

Options for the fixed weir included:

rehabilitation of the existing weir

Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Version: Final May 2003

describes the condition of the existing irrigation scheme

describes the rehabilitation works to be undertaken

clarifies some of the procedures to be followed during construction

The scope of the design work includes:

check of the hydraulic capacity of existing canals and structures

preparation of design drawings and tender documents

preparation of cost estimates

input to O&M Plan.

Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Version: Final May 2003

Principle items of work include:

construction of an anchored steel armoured reinforced concrete deflector at the downstream

provision of timber stoplogs at the sluice outlet and canal intake

desilting of the existing canal system

repairs to the existing canal lining and canal structures

supply and installation of steel slide gates at all offtake structures

construction of a new WUA meeting room *

construction of a gatekeepers hut.*

Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Version: Final May 2003

Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Version: Final May 2003

No streamflow records were available in the Bulobo River basin.

Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Version: Final May 2003

Table 3.1 Monthly Rainfall Data

WATER AVAILABILITY & WATER REQUIREMENTS

Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Version: Final May 2003

Table 3.2 Monthly Streamflow Estimates

1:5 yr D = 80% persistence flows

the first paddy crop in December

Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Version: Final May 2003

Cropping Intensity (ha)

** p = paddy, o = others (Maize, soybean)

Design Flood Peak Estimates

RIVER RATING CURVES

Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Version: Final May 2003

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

GENERAL DESIGN PARAMETERS

Particle size and grading curves

Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Version: Final May 2003

Gravels: c = 0 kPa, phi = 40 deg

Potential for piping

Filter design grading

SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS

Horizontal and vertical accelerations

Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Version: Final May 2003

The factors contributing to liquefaction under seismic loading are:

Rehabilitation of Maliana I Irrigation Scheme

Version: Final May 2003