COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT METHODS FOR COMPUTING SEEPAGE LOSSES IN AN EARTHEN WATERCOURSE

SARKI A., MEMON S.Q., LEGHARI M.

Abstract
Study was conducted on an earthen water course 1R Qaiser minor near Tando Jam. Aim of study was to compare two different methods of estimation seepage one was inflow–outflow and second was ponding method. Before study soil texture of bed of watercourse was analyzed which was varying from sandy soil to sandy loam, and bed slope was calculated with Autolevel which was 0.0002. Experiment was conducted on a straight reach of water course of 600 m length. This reach was divided into five sections of 120 m each. For inflow-out flow test reach inflow and reach outflow was measured by cut-throat flume. Ponding test was conducted over short sections of 30 m each in inflow-outflow sections of 120 m. Seepage loss was calculated 0.0016 m3 per sec (LPS)/100 m by inflow-outflow test and 0.00123 m3/100 m by ponding test. Ponding test measured water losses 23% less than inflow-outflow test. Reason of this difference may be over estimation of discharge through cut throat flume and under estimation of seepage loss through ponding test due to silt deposition in the water course, and actual seepage loss could be expected some where between these two.

Key words:
seepage, inflow–outflow, cut-throat flume, Ponding

back >>


Full version of the article in the PDF file format - read here: