Engineering and hydraulic factors affecting irrigation channels efficiency | ||
| Al-Azhar Journal of Agricultural Engineering | ||
| Volume 9, Issue 1, June 2025 PDF (1.05 M) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/azeng.2025.379234.1034 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Mohamed Hassan Elattar* 1; tamer mohamed sayed2; taha mohamed Elzanaty1 | ||
| 1Department of Water and Irrigation Systems Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Al-Azhar University, Nasr City, Cairo, Egypt. | ||
| 2Department of Water and Irrigation Systems Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Al-Azhar University, Assiut, Egypt. | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Field experiments were conducted during the summer of 2024 in the Middle Delta Gharbia Governorate in the Zifta area to study the engineering and hydraulic factors affecting Egypt's most common irrigation channel efficiency. Five channels (plain, rough, cement-lined, precast concrete, and buried pipes) were evaluated for hydraulic coefficients. Also, land saving, conveyance efficiency, and cost analysis of the type of channel irrigation compared to the channel irrigation system. The results of this study showed that the area added by buried pipes was 150 m2, representing a 100 % increase in the cultivated area. Also, using the cement-lined channel instead of the plain and rough channel led to increased agricultural areas. The area added by the cement-lined channel was 90 m2 with a percentage of 60 % added area. On the other hand, results indicated that the conveyance efficiency (C.E.) was 80.77, 78.46, 93.85, 92.31, and 99.62 % under the plain, rough, cement-lined, precast concrete channel, and buried pipes, respectively. Also, the results indicated that the total cost was 180, 200, 225, 260, and 305 LE per length meter under plain channel, rough channel, cement lined channel, precast concrete channel and buried pipes, respectively. Data of the hydraulic factors evaluation of irrigation channel showed that indicated average water depth in different types of channels (m) for plain, rough, cement lined, precast concrete and buried pipes was 0.31, 0.22, 0.52, 0.63, 0.90 m, respectively, the values of the cross-sectional area through different types of channels were 0.44, 0.25, 0.31, 0.78 and 0.03 m2 for plain, rough, cement lined, precast concrete and buried pipes, respectively, the values of discharge rates through different types of channels were 0.029, 0.028, 0.034, 0.033 and 0.036 m3/s for plain, rough, cement lined, precast concrete and buried pipes respectively, and the values of the velocity through different types of channels were 0.0828, 0.1431, 0.1157, 0.0462 and 1.1141 m/s for plain, rough, cement lined, precast concrete and buried pipes, respectively. Also, the results show that the values of the Manning coefficient through different types of channels were 0.025, 0.033, 0.014, 0.013 and 0.011 for plain, rough, cement-lined, precast concrete and buried pipes, respectively, values of the hydraulic radius through different types of channels were 0.174, 0.120, 0.190, 0.262 and 0.001 m for plain, rough, cement lined, precast concrete and buried pipes respectively, and values of the wetted perimeters through different types of channels were 1.95, 1.53, 1.64, 2.39 and 0.31 m/s for plain, rough, cement lined, precast concrete and buried pipes, respectively. Thus, predicated on these findings, the study suggests broadening the employment of irrigation channels, particularly buried pipes, in place of plain channels. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Conveyance Efficiency; Hydraulic factors; Engineering factors; Irrigation channel Efficiency; Cost | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 196 PDF Download: 61 |
||
