TEKNIK DRAINASI HandOut-ENG

DRAINAGE ENGINEERING
By: Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA

1.Introduction
a. Terminology
b. Meaning in indonesian
c. Characteristic of inundation
d. Drainage and irrigation
e. Change of land use
2.Occurrence of inundation
a. Impervious area increases
b. Vegetation coverage decreases
c. Sponge system disappears
All of above problems occur as a consequence of the
urbanization
Lecture hand out of Drainage Engineering by Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE DEA 1/39
Fig. 1. Diagram of water resources devastate as a result of
urbanization (Prince, 2000, lecture note).
Hand-out of Drainage Engineering Lecture, Departement of Civil Engineering and Environment, Gadjah Mada University 2/39
URBANIZATION
BUILDING
DENSITY
INCREASES

DRAINAGE SYSTEM
MODIFIED

DRAINAGE SYSTEM
MODIFIED

IMPERVIOUS
AREA
INCREASES
URBAN CLIMATE
CHANGES
RUNOFF
VOLUME
INCREASES
FLOW
VELOCITY
INCREASES
PEAK RUNOFF
RATE
INCREASES
LAG TIME &
TIME BASE
REDUCE
FLOOD CONTROL
PROBLEMS
POPULATION DENSITY
INCREASES
WATERBORNE
WASTE INCREASES
WATER DEMAND
RISES
WATER
RESOURCES
PROBLEMS
GROUNDWATER
RECHARGE REDUCE
STORMWATER
QUALITY
DETERIORATES
BASEFLOW
REDUCES
RECEIVING WATER
QUALITY
DETERIORATES
POLLUTION
CONTROL
PROBLEMS
Fig 2. Diagram of water resources devastate as a result of
urbanization and alternative of solution (Sunjoto, 2005)
URBANIZATIO
N
BUILDING
DENSITY
INCREASES

DRAINAGE SYSTEM
MODIFIED

IMPERVIOUS AREA
INCREASES
URBAN
CLIMATE
CHANGES
RUNOFF
VOLUME
INCREASES
FLOW
VELOCITY
INCREASES
PEAK RUNOFF
RATE
INCREASES
LAG TIME &
TIME BASE
REDUCE
FLOOD
CONTROL
PROBLEMS
CHANNEL SYSTEM
(Conventional Mazhab)
POPULATION
DENSITY
INCREASES
WATERBORNE
WASTE
INCREASES
WATER DEMAND
RISES
WATER
RESOURCES
PROBLEMS
GROUNDWATER
RECHARGE REDUCE
STORMWATER
QUALITY
DETERIORATES
BASEFLOW
REDUCES
RECEIVING WATER
QUALITY
DETERIORATES
POLLUTION
CONTROL
PROBLEMS
RECHARGE WELL
SYSTEM
(Pro Water Mazhab)
GROUNDWATE
R
CONTROL
PROBLEMS
3. Mazhab in drainage science
a. Conventional Mazhab
Conventional Mazhab in drainage engineering is a drainage
system which allow water flows to the trench, drainage
canal, river and then to the sea. By this system the
surface ground will have not inundation anymore but this
system creates neglected water which ought to be a
storage of groundwater. The consequence of this mazhab
will cause increasing of peak hydrograph of flood in the
downstream.
b. Pro Water Mazhab
Base of thinking, Sunjoto (1989):
When domestic water consumption 100 l/cpt/d, as
average computation from urban domestic water
consumption is 200 l/s/cpt/d and rural domestic
water consumption is 60 l/cpt/d and the comparison
of urban area is 30 % with rural area is 70 %.
Impervious area consumption is 30 m
2
/cpt (in the
developed country?)
Data (real):
Depth of precipitation 2,580 mm/y
Evaporation-transpiration 1,250 mm/y
Domestic water consumption 100 l/cpt/d
Impervious area consumption 30 m
2
/cpt
Coefficient of roof runoff 0.95
Population (model) 1,000,000 cpt
a. Total domestic water consumption
Volume = 365 x 0.10 x 1,000,000 =
36.50,10
6
m
3
/y
b. Total neglected water
Volume = 0,95x30x(2.58-1.25)x1,000,000 =
37.90,10
6
m
3
/y
Volume of total neglected water as a result of conventional
drainage system is equal to the volume of Total domestic
water consumption.
4. Conventional Mazhab
a. Inundation
Location
Area
Duration
Frequency
Depth
Lost
b. Topography
Direction of flow
Hydraulic aspect
Location of flow
Direction of groundwater flow
c. Land use
Building coverage ratio/BCR compare to Benefit Cost
Ratio
Border of land
Possession
Value of assets
d. Soils
Characteristic
Strength
Permeability (SD)
e. Master plan/Regional space planning RTRW
In accordance with planning
f. Infrastructure and utility
Making use of existing structure
g. Demography
Density in accordance with C = coefficient of runoff
h. Institution
Operation & Maintenance
i. Legal aspect
Implementation in accordance with regulation
j. Community perception
Participation of population
k. Social and economic aspect
Class of construction
l. Sanitary
Design aspect
m. Available material
Choice of construction
n. Hydrology
Time of concentration of precipitation
Dominant duration of Precipitation
o. Cost
Priority scale
Keyword: time of concentration
5. Mazhab Pro Water
Benefit recharge system
1. Physical benefit
a. Decreasing of hydrograph peak
> Retarding basin
b. Reduction of network dimension
Dimension of drainage network can be reduced
Can be designed without drainage network canal
Public street can be enlarged
c. Prevention of local flood
Low elevation ground surface have not enough
slope to allow water flow, water should be
infiltrated on the recharge well
d. Decreasing of waste concentration
Due to fresh water increases ground water
storage will increases to and concentration of
waste water will decreases as formula:
p s
p p s s
Q Q
C Q C Q
C
+
+
(1)
For the region with brackish water, recharge well
will be very useful to increase quality of water
e. To keep elevation of groundwater surface
1). To keep stable elevation of groundwater
surface > Conversion from dense forest to
housing
A c
b
Fig 3. Land conversion from forest to housing
2). Bring back to original position the elevation of
groundwater surface > Conversion from critical
land use to housing
c
a b
Fig 4. Land conversion from critical land use to housing
When recharge well is not implemented > b
When recharge well is implemented > c
All build and improve the environment at once
f. Preventing of sea water intrusion
Badon Ghyben (1888) & Herzberg (1901) had
developed water balance theory between fresh
water and sea (saline) water in the circular sandy
island as follows:
P r e c i p i t a t i o n
Ground surface
Groundwater surface

h Sea level
h
f
h
s
Fresh water (f)

A Border of saline water
and fresh water
Saline water (s)
Fig 5. Scheme of island cross section with homogeneous and
isotropics soils
Point A laid in the surface border between sea water (s)
and fresh water (f)
Hydrostatic head in point A is P
A
:
From point of view sea water:
s s
A
gh p
(2)
From point of view fresh water:
f f A
gh p
(3)
Eqn (1) = (2) so:
f f
s s
gh gh
>
f
s
s
h
f
h

,
_
1
f
s
s s
f
h h h

>

,
_

f
f
s
s
h h

(4)
Usually, the characteristic of sea and fresh water are::
Sea water
s
= 1,025 t/m
3

} -> (4) so h = 1/40 h
s
Fresh water
f
= 1,000 t/m
3
The conclusion is when the elevation of groundwater
decreases 1 unit as a result the border of sea water and
fresh water below will go up 40 units, and on the contrary
when the elevation of groundwater increases 1 unit as a
result the border of sea water and fresh water below will
go down 40 units
g. Preventing of land subsidence and sinkhole
The consequence of groundwater exploitation
without equal conservation, water will disappear from void
of soil and due to pressure of dead weight and soil will be
compressed and land subsidence will occur.
h. Water conservation
Depth of precipitation = 2.58 m/y
Evaporation-transpiration 40 % x 1.25=0.50 m/y
(recharge system)
Roof consumption = 30 m
2
/cpt
Population in year 2000 =128,450,000 cpt
Water consumption = 523,5 m
3
/cpt/y
Volume of water conserves by recharge system:
Vol = ( 2.58 0.50 ) m x 30 m
2
x 70 % x 128,450,000 =
5,610,10
6
m
3
/th (5.61 B)
Dependable flow for island of Jawa:
Without recharge system= 43,952 10
6
m3/th (see table)
With recharge system = ( 43,952 + 5,610 ) ,10
6
m
3
/th
= 49,562 m
3
/th
Water available = 49,562,10
6
/ 128,450,000 =
385,85 m
3
/kpt/th.
Water balance = 523,5 / 385,85 x 100 % = 135,67 %
So the contribution of recharge system to decrease water
deficit in the island of Jawa and Madura is:
152.98 135.68 = 17.30 %
Other technique should be implemented like forestation
etc, to improve water balance in those islands.
Table 1. Available water in island of Jawa and Madura.
No Island LD CH ET CHE APT AM JP AT
- - m
2
m/y m/y m/y m
3
/y m
3
/y cpt m
3
/cpt/y
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
-

- - - - 3-4 2x5 25-35%
x 6
- 7:8
1 Jawa &
Madura
(1985)
132.187
x10
6
2,58 1,25 1,33 175.809
x10
6
43.952
x10
6
91,269
x10
6
481,57
2 Jawa &
Madura
(1993)
132.187
x10
6
2,58 1,25 1,33 175.809
x10
6
43.952
x10
6
109,443
x10
6
401,30
3 Jawa &
Madura
(2000)
132.187
x10
6
2,58 1,25 1,33 175.809
x10
6
43.952
x10
6
128,292
x10
6
342,2
Source: Direktorat Bina Program Pengairan Departemen Pekerjaan Umum (1984)
2. Social and cultural aspect
a. Perpetuation of traditional technique
b. Principle developing of others prosperity
c. Preventing social unrest
1). Flooding in downstream area
2). Housing yard without outlet
3). Increasing of social confidence
Dimension of Recharge Well
1). Department of Public Work (1990)
a). Well with pervious wall
Volume of water flow to the well Vol
i
= A I T
Volume of water out through base Vol
od
= A
s
T K
Volume of water out through pervious wall Vol
os
= P H T K
Storage volume = As H
Water balance on the well will be:
,
_
os od Vol Vol Vol Vol i t

PHTK TK A AIT H A s s
TK A AIT PKT A H s s +
,
_
So:
PKT A
KT A AIT
H
S
s
+
(5)
b). Well with impervious wall
When the wall of well is impervious, volume of water
out through pervious wall equal to nil (P H T K = 0) and
formula becomes:
s
s
A
KT A AIT
H

(6)
where:
H : depth of water on the well (m)
I : precipitation intensity (m/h)
A : area of roof (m
2
)
A
s
: cross section oh well (m
2
)
P : perimeter of well (m)
K : coefficient of permeability of soils (m/h)
T : duration of precipitation (j)
2). ITB (1990)
Follow the principle of V. Breen that angka
precipitation distribution is 90 % and principle of Horton
that natural infiltration is 30 % to runoff HMTL-ITB
developed formula:
4 / 1000
6 / / 179 4 / 9 . 0 7 . 0
2
2 24
d
p d R A
H
j
'
,
_
,
_
(7)
where:
H : depth of water on the well (m)
A : area of roof (m
2
)
d : well diameter (0,80 s/d 1,40 m)
p : factor of percolation (mnt/cm)
R
24j
: highest precipitation in 24 hours (mm/d)
0,70: runoff should be infiltrated (Horton)
0,90: anka precipitation distribution (V. Breen)
1/6 : conversion factor from 24 hours to 4 hours (V.
Breen)
Fig 6. Scheme of water balance on the ground surface
Dimension conversion of parameters
Precipitation Evapotranspiration
Runoff
Infiltration
a). Factor of percolation to Coefficient of permeability
,
_
,
_
h m K
cm mnt p
/
60 . 0
/
(8)
These formula above means that to find p in
mnt/cm, found from 0,60 divided by value of K in
m/h.
b). Daily depth of precipitation to Intensity of
precipitation
(1). Mononobe
I = {( R/24 )( 24/t
c
)
2/3
(9)
where :
R : highest precipitation in 24 hours (mm)
t
c
: time travel (h)
I : intensity of precipitation (mm/h)
(2). Hasper (1951)
(a). When duration of precipitation < 2 hours
'
,
_
,
_
+
j j
R
T
T I R
24
2
24
260
60
120
0008 . 0 60 06 . 0 /
(10)
(b). When duration of precipitation 2 < T < 19
hours
R
24j
/ I = 0.06 ( T + 60 ) (11)
where:
R
24j
: highest precipitation in 24 hours ( mm/d)
I : intensity of precipitation (m
3
/s/km
2
)
T : duration of precipitation (mnt)
Note:
,
_
,
_
h m I km s m I /
36
000 . 10
/ /
2 3
(12)
This formula above means that to find I in
m
3
/s/km
2
, found from 10,000 divided by 36 multiply
by value of I in m/h
Due to formula Hasper was developed base on the
research in Jakarta and Mononobe in Japan so formula of
Hasper is more preferable for the implementation in
Indonesia.
3). Sunjoto (1988)
a. To get coefficient of permeability.
Forchheimer (1930) had developed a field test to find
coefficient of permeability of soils by one bore hole. Bore
hole with casing was filled by water instantly, and be
measured the difference of height of water in certain
different period by the principle as follows:
a. Outflow discharge equal to shape factor multiply by
coefficient of permeability multiply by depth of
water (Q = FKH).
b. Outflow discharge from the bore hole is equal to
cross section of casing multiply by thickness of
water on bore hole divided in certain period
(Q = As x H / T).
t
h
dt
dh
t1
t2 h2
h1
Qi = 0
Qo = F K h
Fig 7. Scheme of water balance on bore hole
FKh dQo
(13)
dt
dh
As dQo (14)
where:
Qi : inflow discharge (Qi = 0)
Qo : outflow discharge
As : cross section area of casing
H : depth of water
T : duration of flow
F : shape factor of casing
K : coefficient of permeability
and Eqn (13) = Eqn (14) so:
FKh
dt
dh
As
Note:
x
x
dx
ln
;
x dx

( ) 1 2
1
2
ln t t FK
h
h
As
, when A
s
= R
2
so:
1
2
1 2
ln
2
h
h
t t F
R
K
,
_

(15)
where:
K : coefficient of permeability (m/s)
R : radius of casing (m)
F : shape factor (m) {F = 4R (Forchheimer, 1930)}
t
1
: starting time of measurement (s)
t
2
: final time of measurement (s)
h
1
: starting water depth of measurement (m)
h
2
: final water depth of measurement (m)
b. Depth of water on well
Sunjoto (1988) had developed formula analytically by
the principle:
1). Inflow discharge to the well is constant and different
to nil. This assumption is in accordance with real
condition is that as long as duration of precipitation
will create the discharge flow to the well from a roof.
2). Outflow discharge from the well equal to shape factor
of well multiplies by permeability of soil and depth of
water on the well (Forhheimer, 1930, and Q = FKH)
.
t
h
dt
dh
h1
h2
t1
t2
X
Y
Qi = Q
Qo = F K h
H
Fig 8. Scheme of water balance on recharge well
3). Formula development
Those two above Sunjotos principles can be written as
follows:
Asdh dVolt (16)
( ) ( )dt FKh Q dt Qo Q dVolt
(17)
Where:
As : is cross section area of well
Volt : volume of storage
h : depth of water
t : duration of flow
Q : inflow discharge
Qo : outflow discharge
F : shape factor of well
K : coefficient of permeability
and equation Eqn (16) = Eqn (17) so:
( )dt FKH Q Asdh

FKh Q
Asdh
dt

FK
FK
Solution by integration and when 0 dc :

Note:
x dx
; x
x
dx
ln
so:
When t
2
- t
1
= T so:
Note:
,
_
b a b a / ln ln ln
The beginning of flow when t
1
= 0 and h
1
= 0 , and can be
written t
2
-t
1
= T and h
2
-h
1
= H so the equation becomes:

Note:
x x ln exp
when As = R
2
so:
'
,
_

2
exp 1
R
FKT
FK
Q
H
(18)
dengan:
H : depth of water (m)
F : shape factor of well (m)
K : coefficient of permeability (m/h)
T : dominant duration of precipitation (h)
R : radius of well (m)
Q : inflow discharge (m
3
/h)
C : coefficient of roof runoff (-)
I : intensity of precipitation (m/h)
A : roof area (m
2
)
Inflow discharge from the roof or other impervious layer
can be computed by Rational Method and Q = C I A
Draw:
Relationship between H and T, with another parameters
are constant
Parameter of formula:
Coefficient of roof runoff
Intensity of precipitation
Area of roof
Precipitation dominant duration
Shape factor of well (F)
The value of shape factor was developed for the first
time by Forchheimer (1930) when he try to find the value
of coefficient of permeability of soils whit field test by
one bore hole (Usually the test carried out by two holes
like Theme etc.)
Then Forchheimer was followed by other researchers:
(1). With formulation method:
Samsioe (1931), Harza (1935) , Dachler (1936), Taylor
(1948), Hvorslev (1951), Aravin (1965), Sunjoto (1989
-2002).
(2). With graphical method:
Luthian J.N., Kirkham D. (1949), Hvorslev (1951), Smiles
& Youngs (1965), Wilkinson W.B. (1968), Raymond G.P.,
Azzouz M.M. (1969), Al-Dhahir & Morgenstern (1969),
Olson & Daniel (1981)
Fig 9. Curve of shape factor of well by some researcher
R e c o m m e n d e d C u r v e
0 2 4 6 8 1 0
2 8
2 4
2 0
1 6
1 2
8
4
0
1 . W i l k i n s o n ( 1 9 6 8 )
2 . A l - D h a h i r & M o r g e n s t e r n ( 1 9 6 9 )
3 . H v o r s l e v ( 1 9 5 1 )
4 . L u t h i a n & ( 1 9 4 9 )
5 . R a y m o n d & ( 1 9 6 9 )
6 . S m i l e s & Y o u n g s ( 1 9 6 5 )
K i r k h a m
A z z o u z
N O T E :
S
h
a
p
e

F
a
c
t
o
r

F
L / D
B y O l s o n & D a n i e l ( 1 9 8 1 )
S u n j o t o
C a s e 6 b
S u n j o t o
C a s e 5 b
1
2
3
5
4
6
Table 2. Shape factor of well
No Condition Shape factor of well (F) References
F when
R = 1;
L = 0;
H = 0
1
( ) ( )
,
_
+ + + 1 / 2 / 2 2 ln
2
2
R L R R L
L
Sunjoto (1989) 0
2a
4 R
Samsioe (1931)
Dachler (1936)
Aravin (1965)
12,566
2b
18 R Sunjoto (2002) 18,000
3a
2 R
Samsioe (1931)
Dachler (1936)
Aravin (1965)
6,283
3b
4 R
Forchheimer
(1930)
Dachler (1936)
Aravin (1965)
4,000
4a
2
R Sunjoto (2002) 9,870
4b
5.5 R
Harza (1935)
Taylor (1948)
Hvorslev (1951)
5,500
4b
2

R Sunjoto (2002) 6,283
5a
( ) ( )
,
_
+ + +
+
1 / / 2 ln
2 ln 2
2
2
R L R R L
R L
Sunjoto (2002) 6,227
5b
( )
,
_
+ + 1 / / ln
2
2
R L R L
L
Dachler (1936) 0/0
5b
( ) ( )
,
_
+ + +
+
1 / / 2 ln
2 ln 2 2
2
R L R R L
R L
Sunjoto (2002) 3,964
6a
( ) ( )
,
_
+ + +
+
1 2 / 2 / 2 ln
2 ln 2
2
2
R L R R L
R L
Sunjoto (2002) 9,870
6b
( )
,
_
+ + 1 2 / 2 / ln
2
2
R L R L
L
Dachler (1936) 0/0

6b
( ) ( )
,
_
+ + +
+
1 2 / 2 / 2 ln
2 ln 2 2
2
R L R R L
R L
Sunjoto (2002) 6,283
7a
( ) ( )
,
_
+ + +
+
1 3 / 3 / 2 ln
2 ln 2
2
2
R H R R H
R H
Sunjoto (2002) 13,392
7b
( ) ( )
,
_
+ + +
+
1 3 / 3 / 2 ln
2 ln 2 2
2
R H R R H
R H
Sunjoto (2002) 8,525
Table 3. Comparison of condition 3b and 5b.
3b
4 R
Forchheimer
(1930)
Dachler (1936)
Aravin (1965)
4,000
5b
( )
,
_
+ + 1 / / ln
2
2
R L R L
L
Dachler (1936) 0/0
5b
( ) ( )
,
_
+ + +
+
1 / / 2 ln
2 ln 2 2
2
R L R R L
R L
Sunjoto (2002) 3,964
Table 4. Comparison of condition 4b and 6b.
4b
5.5 R
Harza (1935)
Taylor (1948)
Hvorslev (1951)
5,500
4b
2

R Sunjoto (2002) 6,283
6b
( )
,
_
+ + 1 2 / 2 / ln
2
2
R L R L
L
Dachler (1936) 0/0

6b
( ) ( )
,
_
+ + +
+
1 2 / 2 / 2 ln
2 ln 2 2
2
R L R R L
R L
Sunjoto (2002) 6,283
Table 5. Value of well shape factor in relationship between ratio of
pervious wall length to radius of well, in condition 5b.
DACHLER (1936) SUNJOTO (2002)
L
R

'
+
,
_
1 ln
2
2
5
R
L
R
L
L
F b

( )
'
+
,
_
+
+
+
1
2
ln
2 ln 2
2
5
R
L
R
R L
R L
F b

F
%
0 0/0 3,964 ?
0,000001
6,283 3,964 -
36,909
0,0001 6,283 3,965 -
36,893
0,001 6,283 3,969 -
36,829
0,01 6,283 4,009 -36,192
0,5 6,529 5,830 -10,706
0,964 7,079 7,079 0
1 7,129 7,165 0.504
5 13,586 14,348 5,608
10 20,956 21,720 3,645
25 40,149 40,853 1,753
50 68,217 68,867 0,952
100 118,588 119,186 0,504
1000 826,637 827,101 0,056
10000 6.344,417 6.344,793 0,005
100000
0
433.064,548 433.064,818 0,0000
6
Note: This values are computed when L = variable and R = 1.
Table 6. Value of well shape factor in relationship between ratio of
pervious wall length to radius of well, in condition 6b.
DACHLER (1936) SUNJOTO (2002)
L
R
'
+
,
_
1
2 2
ln
2
2
5
R
L
R
L
L
F b

( )
'
+
,
_
+
+
+
1
2 2
2
ln
2 ln 2
2
6
R
L
R
R L
R L
F b

F
%
0 0/0 6,283 ?
0,0000
01
12,566 6,283 -
50,000
0,0001 12,566 6,284 -
49,992
0,001 12,566 6,290 -
49,944
0,01 12,566 6,351 -
48,026
0,5 12,695 9,092 -28,381
1 13,057 11,054 -15,340
2,713 15,323 15,323 0
5 19,072 19,618 2,862
10 27,171 27,915 2,738
25 48,775 49,525 1,537
50 80,298 81,001 0,867
100 136,435 137,084 0,475
1000 909,584 910,083 0,054
10000 6.821,882 6.822,281 0,005
100000
0
454.792,118 454.792,400 0,0000
6
Note: This values are computed when L = variable and R = 1.
Roof with gutter
Roof without gutter
Fig 10. Scheme figure of recharge well
Hand-out of Drainage Engineering Lecture, Departement of Civil Engineering and Environment, Gadjah Mada University
33/39
5. Infiltration water on the canal
Water losses : consist of evaporation and
infiltration.
Infiltration on the canal inflicts a loss upon point of
view of irrigation engineering but a benefit from
point of view water resources conservation
engineering.
Volume of infiltration of canal can be found by:
a. Direct measurement of drawdown in certain
period on the section of canal which be closed up
in the upstream and downstream.
b. Real time measurement of different discharge on
the two sections of canal.
c. Computed by formulas:
Moritz (1913) > empirical method
Bouwer (1956) > semi graphical method
Sunjoto (2007) > analytical method
34/39
1). Moritz (1913)
Moritz formula (1913) is a semi empirical method which
water losses depend on layer of the canal, discharge,
velocity of flow, depth of canal, base width and slope of
canal. All of data can be measured in the field directly
except the layer of canal can be found from Table 7., and
the equation as follows:
( )
( )
5 . 0
5 . 0
5 . 0
5 . 0
1 2
0116 . 0
2
1
1
1
1
1
]
1
'
,
_
+
+
+ +
Z N
Z Z
Z N
V
Q
C S (19)
where:
S : water losses in the canal (m
3
/s/km)
C : daily water losses (m/day) Table 2.
Q : discharge of canal (m
3
/s)
V : flow velocity (m/s)
N : ratio between base width to depth of water
Z : slope of bank (Z = h when v = 1)
Table 7. Value of C for the base layer of canal (Moritz, 1913)
35/39
Soils C (m/d)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Concrete
Cement gravel with hardpan sandy loam
Clay and clay loam
Sandy loam
Volcanic ash
Volcanic ash and fine sand
Volcanic ash, sand and clay
Sand and gravel
Sand loam with gravel
0.02
0.10
0.12
0.20
0.21
0.30
0.37
0.51
0.67
2. Bouwer (1965)
Bouwer had developed formula and graph which was
derived empirically by the test of analog electric in the
three conditions to compute volume of water losses by
infiltration for the each meter of length of canal.
q = (I
s
/ K). k . W
s
(20)
where :
q : water losses (m
3
/m/h)
Is/K : value from the graph (Figure 2)
k : coefficient of permeability of soil (m/h)
Ws : width of water surface (m)
36/39
1
1
0,25
0,5
Condition A
Condition A
Condition B
Cur ve par amet e r
D
w
/W
b
I/K
s
Dp/ Wb f or cond. A
Di /Wb f or c ond. B
2
2
3
3
5
5
3
2
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Condition A
Seepage flow
Dw
K
L
Dp
Wb
Ws
Hw
Permeable
Condition B
Seepage flow
Dw
K
L
Di
Wb
Ws
Hw
Impermeable
Condition A
Dw
K Dp
Wb
Ws
Hw
Permeable
Fig 11. The three conditions of flow (Bouwer, 1965)
Fig 12. Value of Is/K (Bouwer, 1965)
37/39
3. Sunjoto (2007)
a. Canal with pervious layer or natural soil
'
,
_
+
+
+
+
+ +
+
1
2 2
2
ln
4
2
s b
w
s b
s b w
s b w
W W
H
W W
W W H
W W KH
q
(21)
Ws
Hw

Wb
Fig 13. Scheme of canal cross section with pervious layer
b. Canal with side linning
b w W KH q 2 4
(22)
Hw
Wb
Fig 14. Scheme of canal cross section with linning
38/39
where:
q : water losses (m
3
/s/m)
Hw : depth of canal (m)
K : coefficient of permeability of soil (m/s)
Wb : width of base canal (m)
Ws : width of water surface (m)
39/39

TEKNIK DRAINASI HandOut-ENG

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

TEKNIK DRAINASI HandOut-ENG

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

DRAINAGE ENGINEERING

By: Dr.Ir. Sunjoto Dip.HE, DEA

os od Vol Vol Vol Vol i t

Solution by integration and when 0 dc :

Potrebbero piacerti anche