System conveyance efficiency of the canals is highly important in planning new irrigation development schemes. Enhancing the efficiencies directly influences sustainable agricultural practices. This study, conducted in 2022–2023, assessed conveyance losses in three major irrigation schemes in Sri Lanka: Maduru Oya, Hurulu Wewa, and Minipe Left Bank Canal. The research aimed to quantify current conveyance losses and identify factors influencing efficiency to inform rehabilitation efforts. Field measurements were taken using the float method to determine flow rates at multiple points along selected canals. Conveyance losses were calculated as the percentage difference in flow between measurement points. Results showed significant variations in losses across the three systems: Maduru Oya averaged 27.8% (standard deviation (SD) = 6.03%), Hurulu Wewa 26.5% (SD = 20.4%), and Minipe Left Bank Canal 33.1% (SD = 15.4%) for the D47 canal and 27.7% (SD = 23.7%) for the D32 canal. Factors observed to influence conveyance losses included canal lining condition, soil texture, and topographical features such as elevation differences between drainage and field canals. The study concludes that targeted rehabilitation efforts, particularly increased lining in high-loss areas and improved maintenance in tail-end sections, could substantially improve system efficiency. These findings provide crucial data for irrigation planners and policymakers in Sri Lankan agriculture.

  • This paper presents the findings of the field investigation carried out to enhance irrigation efficiencies.

  • Field studies were conducted to assess the current conveyance losses in several distributary and field canals in pilot demonstration areas (PDA) in the three schemes.

  • Higher losses were observed in the Minipe left bank (LB), whereas the lowest loss was seen in the Hurulu Wewa irrigation scheme.

Water is a critical resource for sustaining life on Earth, playing an essential role in ecosystems, agriculture, industry, and energy production (De Fraiture et al. 2010; Cosgrove & Loucks 2015; Usman & Radulescu 2022). In agriculture, water is particularly crucial for irrigation, where it directly influences crop growth and yield (Malakar et al. 2019). As the global population increases, the need for efficient water resource management in irrigation becomes paramount to ensure food security and sustainable agricultural productivity (Zarghaami 2006). Modern irrigation systems aim to optimize water use efficiency, reduce the impact of droughts, and enhance livelihood support, especially in regions reliant on agriculture. However, the sustainability of these systems heavily depends on conveyance efficiencies – the proportion of water delivered to the crops compared to the amount released from the source (Stout 1999).

Surface irrigation systems, which are common in many parts of the world, often suffer from low conveyance efficiencies, with significant water losses due to seepage, deep percolation, and surface runoff. Studies suggest that approximately 60% of water can be lost during distribution at the field level (Evans & Sadler 2008; Ali 2010; De Pascale et al. 2011). Large-scale irrigation systems, such as those in Sri Lanka, often experience these losses, which may be irrecoverable when water escapes the system and enters natural drainage ways or percolates beyond the root zone (Gleick 2003; Meijer et al. 2006). Factors like over-irrigation, poor canal management, and soil porosity significantly affect irrigation efficiency at various stages of water conveyance (Kumar et al. 2008).

Water conservation and optimal use are achieved through efficient conveyance, which also minimizes the negative environmental effects of excessive water withdrawals and lowers energy consumption through water conservation (Hamdy et al. 2003). A number of practices have been used to improve the efficiency of irrigation conveyance systems. These practices include the use of innovative irrigation techniques like lined canals and water management strategies designed to minimize seepage and evaporation losses, the application of precision agriculture technologies for optimal water delivery, and the integration of data analytics and remote sensing for monitoring and management in real-time (Rezapour Tabari et al. 2014; Adeyemi et al. 2017; Calera et al. 2017; Ashour et al. 2023). Rehabilitation and modernization of ageing canal networks, the implementation of water-saving techniques, and institutional reforms to improve governance and water allocation are widely used in south Asian countries due to their high agricultural populations (Sathre et al. 2022). Adopting these strategies not only boosts agricultural productivity but also promotes sustainable water management, climate resilience, and socioeconomic development in both the global and South Asian contexts (Cai et al. 2015).

Rapid population growth in the 20th century in Sri Lanka caused severe stress on food production. Therefore, the irrigatable areas are significantly increased (Marambe et al. 2017). Higher emphasis was shown on expanding irrigable rice areas since irrigated paddy gives a higher assurance of rice production. During that period, new irrigation areas were developed such as Mahaweli, Walawe, and Kirindi Oya river basins while existing irrigation areas such as Parakrama Samudra and Kantale were also rehabilitated and renovated. Interestingly, the irrigation distribution canal network consisting of main, distributary, and field canals of almost all these irrigation areas are made of earthen canals with earthen lining except for a few trans-basin canals which consist of concrete lining (Wijesekara 2011; El-Molla & El-Molla 2021).

Various technological approaches have been adopted to increase the system efficiencies, including concrete lining, rotational irrigation, and crop diversification. Greater emphasis was laid on reducing water losses that would result in increased irrigation efficiencies. However, limited research has been conducted on system irrigation efficiencies in the context of Sri Lanka (Gnanadasa 2010). At present, irrigation authorities use a standard set of guidelines for irrigation efficiencies as documented by Ponrajah (1989). These guidelines are given in general terms to obtain an approximate judgment of the irrigation needs of paddy cultivation during a dry period. It does not give an indication of the boundary conditions such as the efficiency value when conveying under saturated conditions or under various soil physical conditions. Therefore, when the canals are planned, the cost estimates are done assuming the soil characteristics are uniform throughout the canal trace (Swamee et al. 2000; Haymale et al. 2020).

On the contrary, the porosity of the soil differs frequently with varying textural characteristics; thus, it requires adopting different lining methods (Yao et al. 2012; Han et al. 2020). This is important in a situation where funds are limited for irrigation projects in most of the developing countries. The decision has to be made for the choice between full or partial concrete and earthen lining or piped conveyance based on the available funds. Therefore, in situ investigation of water losses along the canal due to soil textural variations may help in planning the lining of canals. The earthen lining is usually preferred for a clayey texture whereas concrete lining would be required for a sandy porous texture (Martin 1980; Zhang et al. 2017). Therefore, the lining material can be decided as required on location. This is important in the context of the cost evaluation since it would reduce unnecessary expenditure (Radcliffe et al. 2002).

Therefore, this study was conducted to ascertain whether there is a deviation of irrigation efficiencies from the guidelines given by Ponrajah (1989) and whether there are differences in water loss rates along the same canal owing to soil textural differences. Ponrajah's guidelines emphasize minimizing water losses and optimizing irrigation efficiencies, which he defined as typically ranging between 60 and 80% in tropical regions like Sri Lanka. These recommendations include best practices for canal design, such as proper dimensions, slope, and lining material, and highlight the impact of soil texture on water loss rates, with clay soils reducing seepage and sandy soils increasing it. This study is the first since 1989 to evaluate irrigation efficiencies in distributary and field canals in Sri Lanka and aims to reassess and potentially revise these standards to address modern challenges. By estimating conveyance losses, the research offers insights into deviations from established guidelines, thereby advancing sustainable water management and providing practical recommendations for future canal planning and rehabilitation.

Study area

This study focuses on three major irrigation projects: the Maduru Oya irrigation area (Mahaweli System B – a modern major irrigation reservoir system), the Hurulu Wewa major irrigation area (an ancient major irrigation reservoir), and the Minipe Left Bank Canal (an ancient major irrigation diversion anicut) in Sri Lanka. These three Pilot Demonstration Areas (PDAs) are under the Improving System Efficiencies and Water Productivity Project of the Mahaweli Water Security Investment Program, as illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1

Map of the three major irrigation projects.

Figure 1

Map of the three major irrigation projects.

Close modal

Maduru Oya irrigation area

Maduru Oya irrigation area is commonly known as the Mahaweli System B. The study area for this section was in Dimbulagala Wajirawewa D6/104, 7° 51′ 59.99″ N; 81° 06′ 60.00″ E, in the Polonnaruwa district of Sri Lanka. Maduru oya Left Bank System is located in the Administrative Districts of Polonnaruwa and Batticaloa of Sri Lanka with a gross land extent of 94,225 ha. The area is occupied by 32,545 families (19,254 farmer families and 13,291 non-farmer families) with a total population of 125,184. The extent developed under System B is 40,065 ha. The main water sources for System B are the Maduru Oya Left Bank Main Canal and Pimburaththewa Main Canal. Figure 2(a) depicts the location map of the study area while Figure 2(b) showcases the selected canal locations for measurements of conveyance losses.
Figure 2

(a) Maduru oya Left Bank system; (b) selected canal locations – Wajira wewa D6/104 canal.

Figure 2

(a) Maduru oya Left Bank system; (b) selected canal locations – Wajira wewa D6/104 canal.

Close modal

Huruluwewa irrigation system

Part II of the study was conducted in the command area of Huruluwewa Irrigation System Left Bank Canal D3, 8° 13′ 0″ N’; 80° 43′ 0″ E’, in the Anuradhapura district, Sri Lanka. The irrigation scheme is located in Galenbindunuwewa DS Division in the Anuradhapura District of North Central Province (refer to Figure 3(a)). The 33 km long Huruluwewa feeder canal was constructed under the Mahaweli Development Project to feed the Huruluwewa tank, which was initially constructed by King Mahasen (325–352 AD). The Huruluwewa irrigation system has been functioning since 1953 and was rehabilitated in 1989 by the Major Irrigation Rehabilitation Project. In addition, the strengthening of the dam was undertaken by the Dam Safety and Water Resources Management Project during the 2013–2014 period. The active storage capacity of the Huruluwewa reservoir is 65.4 MCM and the total planned/designed irrigable service area is 4,209 ha (Abeysekara et al. 2015; Berundharshani & Munasinghe 2015).
Figure 3

(a) Huruluwewa Irrigation System; (b) selected canal locations for Huruluwewa LB D 3 canal.

Figure 3

(a) Huruluwewa Irrigation System; (b) selected canal locations for Huruluwewa LB D 3 canal.

Close modal

The main canals leading from the sluices are unlined. Left Bank Main Canal consists of nine distributary canals and 21 field canals while Right Bank Main Canal consists of two branch canals, eight distributary canals, and 25 field canals. Figure 3(b) depicts the selected locations for the study.

Minipe LB Canal

Part III of the study was conducted in the command area of Minipe Irrigation System LB Canal D 32 and D 47 in Stage II and Stage III (N 7° 32′ 12.794″; E 80° 54′ 46.797″), in the Matale district, Sri Lanka. The study area is located in the Hettipola DS Division of the Matale District of Central Province. The selected canals are shown in the issue tree of the D47 canal, as given in Figure 4(a). In addition, Figure 4(b) indicates the selected field canals for conveyance loss measurements. In addition to the pilot demonstration area of the Minipe LB canal, the D32 canal in Stage II was selected for the conveyance loss measurements at the end of the Yala 2021 season as a sample test.
Figure 4

(a) Base map of Minipe LB stage III; (b) selected field canals D47.

Figure 4

(a) Base map of Minipe LB stage III; (b) selected field canals D47.

Close modal

Methodology

Figure 5 showcases the overall methodology of the research work which was carried out in this study.
Figure 5

Overall methodology.

Figure 5

Overall methodology.

Close modal

A field reconnaissance survey was carried out to select suitable watercourses for study, observe field conditions with regards to usage of equipment for flow measurements and implementation methods, inspection path availability, and analyze the impacts of waterlogging in the study area.

Site selection

In this study, the mentioned locations were used as head, middle, and tail sections of all three field canals of all three locations. Field tests were carried out to select suitable watercourses for study, to observe the field conditions by considering the equipment needed to measure the infiltrated depths, to find the availability to inspect the location, and to analyze the impacts of waterlogging in the study area. However, field testing was delayed in water issuing for the Maha season (2022/2023) because of issues that occurred in fertilizer. In that case, tests were done only in a few selected canals of PDAs. Furthermore, during the data acquisition process, factors such as flow turbidity deteriorated and non-geometric sections, sedimentation, and vegetation in the watercourses affected the results of some of the field canals as a result, some of the points in the head, middle, and tail at these canals were omitted and locations free of difficulties when measuring losses were considered in analyzing data.

Data collection

GIS data collection

On-site coordinates of watercourses and reference points were collected using the global positioning system. The collected coordinates were then validated through Google Earth Pro Software. The validated image file was further processed in ArcGIS software to digitize and map the spatial data.

Soil type classification and infiltration

The field surveys were designed to check the accuracy of the secondary data and to collect the primary data by filling in the data gaps. The field data were used directly in this study. Due to the lack of high-resolution soil maps at the pilot level, there was a need to conduct the soil survey manually. Soil sampling was carried out using soil augers and the relevant soil types, texture, and drainage were identified with geo-tagged sampling locations. This soil survey is suitable to conduct immediately after the harvesting since the fields are clean-weeded and also the soil condition is in ideal semi-dry status to the auger. Canal water flow measurements that help to ascertain system efficiencies need to be conducted when the soil profile is saturated and in an equilibrium state.

Infiltration rate, a crucial parameter for understanding water movement within soil profiles, was assessed to complement the soil survey conducted in the study area. Drawing insights from Mohammed & Sayl (2021), a GIS-based multicriteria decision approach was adopted to analyze groundwater potential zones in the Western Desert of Iraq. This methodology, integrating various factors influencing groundwater occurrence, offers valuable insights into soil characteristics and their implications for infiltration rates. By leveraging this approach, the study gained a deeper understanding of soil permeability and its impact on water infiltration, aiding in the assessment of water management strategies and agricultural practices within the region.

Discharge measurements

Conveyance losses were determined by measuring the discharge at different locations of the canals. Some measuring gauges have already been fixed in certain canals for the purpose of measuring outflow/discharge, but there are no such gauges installed downstream to measure the conveyance losses between these gauges. Therefore, the float method was used for measuring the discharge between these points along the canal (refer to Figure 6). The float method is a quick, simple, and indirect method of measuring discharges in canals. The velocity of the canal flow is determined in a selected straight section with an approximately uniform cross-sectional area of about 10 m in length of the canal by measuring the time it takes for a floating object to travel a specified distance downstream. Knowing the cross-sectional area of the two ends, the discharge can be computed. This method was selected because it can be replicated by farmers themselves to estimate the water being delivered to the canal (Comina et al. 2013).
Figure 6

Conveyance loss measurements in D32/Minipe LB canal.

Figure 6

Conveyance loss measurements in D32/Minipe LB canal.

Close modal

However, during the data acquisition process, factors such as flow turbidity, deteriorated/non-geometric sections, sedimentation, and vegetation in the watercourses provided obstacles in the flow measurement process. As a result, some of the measured/recorded data were omitted and channel sections free of obstacles were included in the result analysis phase.

Conveyance efficiency

The conveyance losses in an irrigation system occur due to seepage, percolation, leakages at structures in the canals, and poor maintenance. Conveyance efficiency is the ratio of the amount of water supplied at the farm level to the amount of water released from the reservoir or any control gate. Hence in order to compute the conveyance efficiency, it is required to find the conveyance loss of the canal system. Conveyance losses are affected by a number of factors such as depth of water, quality of canal lining, canal dimensions, bed slope, volume of sediment, age of canal, volume of flow, velocity of flow, and the quality of operations and maintenance of water canals (Mohammadi et al. 2019; Syed et al. 2021). Conveyance efficiencies in this study were computed by subtracting obtained conveyance losses at each reference point from 100 (Shah et al. 2021). In addition, evaporation losses were not considered due to insignificant numbers compared with conveyance losses and infiltration losses.

Conveyance losses at Maduru Oya

Flow measurements were carried out in four field canals for the estimation of conveyance losses. The selected canals are FC 64, FC 70, and SFC1/FC67 from the right bank and FC 63 in the left bank area, as shown in Figure 2(b). In each canal, the discharges were taken at three locations: head, middle, and tail end of the canal. Table 1 gives the conveyance losses in each segment of the selected canals and the lined lengths.

Table 1

Conveyance losses in selected canals in Maduru Oya Wajira Wewa D6/104

CanalSegmentLength (m)Conveyance loss (%)Lined lengths (m)Lined length (%)Soil typeInfiltration rate (mm/h)
FC 64 140 20 112 80 Clay 1–5 
 156 28 110 71 Clay 1–5 
FC 70 487 22 350 72 Gravelly clay 30 
 300 38 160 53 Clayey gravel 20–30 
FC 67 106 29 50 47 Sandy clay 20–30 
 244 30 200 82 Clay 1–5 
FC 63 314 23 25 Clay 1–5 
 290 33 100 34 Clay 1–5 
Total  2,037  1,107    
Average   27.8  54.3   
Standard deviation   6.03     
CanalSegmentLength (m)Conveyance loss (%)Lined lengths (m)Lined length (%)Soil typeInfiltration rate (mm/h)
FC 64 140 20 112 80 Clay 1–5 
 156 28 110 71 Clay 1–5 
FC 70 487 22 350 72 Gravelly clay 30 
 300 38 160 53 Clayey gravel 20–30 
FC 67 106 29 50 47 Sandy clay 20–30 
 244 30 200 82 Clay 1–5 
FC 63 314 23 25 Clay 1–5 
 290 33 100 34 Clay 1–5 
Total  2,037  1,107    
Average   27.8  54.3   
Standard deviation   6.03     

The lowest conveyance loss of 20% is in the upper segment of the FC64 field canal which has the highest lining length of 80%. In this canal segment, the lining has been constructed in short stretches at several locations having unlined sections in between lined sections. The highest conveyance loss of 38% is from the tail end of FC70 which has a 53% lined length. It was observed at the field that the soil texture of the command area under FC 70 tail end is clayey sand which is a likely reason for high conveyance loss. All the selected canals have concrete lining sections, but some canals show high conveyance losses in spite of having a high percentage of lining lengths. For example, in segment 2 of FC67, the conveyance loss is 30% whereas the lining length percentage is 82%. This section of the canal is very close to one of the main drainage canals and it was observed that the level difference between the field canal and the drainage canal is considerably high which likely could have contributed to high conveyance losses in the tail end of FC 67. Figure 7(a) shows the conveyance losses in the segments of the selected canals. In all canals except FC 67, the conveyance loss in the tail end of the canals is higher than that of the head end of the canals.
Figure 7

(a) Segment-wise conveyance losses in the selected canals Wajira Wewa D6/104; (b) histogram of conveyance loss in selected field canals of Maduru Oya Wajira Wewa D6/104.

Figure 7

(a) Segment-wise conveyance losses in the selected canals Wajira Wewa D6/104; (b) histogram of conveyance loss in selected field canals of Maduru Oya Wajira Wewa D6/104.

Close modal

The high conveyance losses in the Maduru Oya scheme, averaging 28%, can be attributed to a complex interplay of factors. Despite the partial lining of canals, losses remain significant due to varying soil compositions, with sandy and gravelly soils contributing to higher infiltration rates. The effectiveness of canal lining is questionable in some sections, suggesting potential issues with lining quality or maintenance. Topographical factors, such as proximity to drainage canals and elevation differences, exacerbate seepage in certain areas. Additionally, the inconsistent relationship between lining percentage and losses indicates that other factors like groundwater interactions, canal design, and construction quality play crucial roles. These multiple variables contribute to the overall high conveyance losses observed in the system, highlighting the need for a comprehensive approach to improve irrigation efficiency.

The conveyance losses computed for the above canals were further analyzed using a histogram to obtain an average conveyance loss (refer to Figure 7(b)). A weighted average was computed for the pilot demonstration area of the Maduru Oya scheme. An average value of 28% was obtained and this value is relatively higher for partly lined canals.

Conveyance losses at Huruluwewa LB D3 canal

Flow measurements were taken only at two locations of FC1 to cover one segment in the middle section of the canal as the head end. The tail-end canal sections were unable to be accessed as the operation and maintenance road was covered with vegetation. Table 2 gives the details of conveyance loss measurement segments and the conveyance losses in each segment. Very high losses are shown at the tail end of FC3 and FC7, whereas very low conveyance losses can be seen in the D3 canal at the initial and middle reaches. Overall, conveyance loss in the D3 canal is comparatively low due to its topography, where the canal has a deep-cut section that minimizes seepage.

Table 2

Conveyance losses in selected canals in PDA of Huruluwewa LB D3 Canal

CanalSegmentLength (m)Conveyance loss (%)Lined lengths (m)Lined length (%)Soil typeInfiltration rate (mm/h)
D3 3,700 9.8 327 Clay 1–5 
  13.1 383 10 Clay 1–5 
  9.2 372 10 Clay 1–5 
  18.7 323 Clay 1–5 
FC 1 918 18.5 500 54 Clay 1–5 
FC 3 621 35 286 46 Gravely clay 30 
  60 335 54 Gravely clay 30 
FC 7 706 14 249 35 Clay 1–5 
  60 457 65 Clay 1–5 
Total  5,945  3,232    
Average   26.5  32.4   
Standard deviation   20.4     
CanalSegmentLength (m)Conveyance loss (%)Lined lengths (m)Lined length (%)Soil typeInfiltration rate (mm/h)
D3 3,700 9.8 327 Clay 1–5 
  13.1 383 10 Clay 1–5 
  9.2 372 10 Clay 1–5 
  18.7 323 Clay 1–5 
FC 1 918 18.5 500 54 Clay 1–5 
FC 3 621 35 286 46 Gravely clay 30 
  60 335 54 Gravely clay 30 
FC 7 706 14 249 35 Clay 1–5 
  60 457 65 Clay 1–5 
Total  5,945  3,232    
Average   26.5  32.4   
Standard deviation   20.4     

The conveyance losses in the Huruluwewa LB D3 canal system exhibit significant variability, ranging from very low losses in the D3 canal to extremely high losses in the tail ends of FC3 and FC7.

This variation can be attributed to factors such as soil composition (high losses in some field canals of FC3 and FC7 values such as up to 60%), likely gravelly clay with higher infiltration rates, and potentially inadequate or deteriorating lining. The overall average conveyance loss of 26.5% (or 16.9% excluding extreme values) indicates a system with moderate efficiency, influenced by varying canal conditions. The high standard deviation (20.4%) further underscores the system's inconsistency, pointing to the need for targeted improvements in high-loss areas.

Figures 8(a) and 8(b) give a graphical illustration of segment-wise conveyance losses. An average value for conveyance loss in the PDA was computed with a weighted average using a histogram. With the two extreme values of 60% loss, the average conveyance loss comes to 26.5% and without the two extreme values, the loss will be 16.9%.
Figure 8

(a) Segmental conveyance losses of PDA of Huruluwewa LB D3 canal; (b) histogram of conveyance losses in PDA of Huruluwewa LB D3 canal.

Figure 8

(a) Segmental conveyance losses of PDA of Huruluwewa LB D3 canal; (b) histogram of conveyance losses in PDA of Huruluwewa LB D3 canal.

Close modal

Conveyance losses at selected canals in PDA of Minipe LB D 47 (Stage III) and D 32 canals (Stage II)

Table 3 presents the details of conveyance loss measurement segments and the conveyance losses in each segment for the Minipe D47 canal. The lowest conveyance loss percentage of 12.7% was in segment 2 of the D47 canal whereas the highest loss percentage of 56.8% was at the tail end of the D47/LB canal. It can be seen from the results that conveyance loss in the tail end of each canal is higher than the head end losses. The lowest average percolation loss was observed at the Mailapitiya canal whereas the highest was in the D47/LB canal.

Table 3

Conveyance loss computations in D47 canal

CanalSegmentLength (m)Conveyance loss (%)Lined lengths (m)Lined length (%)Soil typeInfiltration rate (mm/h)
D47 524.5 37.9 228 43 Sandy clay 20–30 
 544.7 12.7 69 13 Sandy clay 20–30 
 569.8 32.2   Sandy clay 20–30 
 410.6 49.6   Sandy clay 20–30 
Total  2049.6  297    
Average   33.1  28   
Standard deviation   15.4     
CanalSegmentLength (m)Conveyance loss (%)Lined lengths (m)Lined length (%)Soil typeInfiltration rate (mm/h)
D47 524.5 37.9 228 43 Sandy clay 20–30 
 544.7 12.7 69 13 Sandy clay 20–30 
 569.8 32.2   Sandy clay 20–30 
 410.6 49.6   Sandy clay 20–30 
Total  2049.6  297    
Average   33.1  28   
Standard deviation   15.4     

The Minipe D47 canal system shows considerable variation in losses, with an average of 33.1% and a high standard deviation of 15.4%. Losses range from 12.7% in segment 2 to 56.8% at the D47/LB tail end. The consistent pattern of higher losses at canal tail ends suggests cumulative effects of seepage and potentially reduced maintenance in these areas. The predominant sandy clay soil, with its high-infiltration rate (20–30 mm/h), significantly contributes to losses. Limited canal lining (28% of total length) is insufficient to control seepage, particularly in high-infiltration areas. Histogram analysis shows most values fall between 29 and 43%, with an overall average of 34.4%, indicating moderately high losses. This highlights the need for targeted interventions, such as increased lining, improved maintenance, and possible redesign of high-loss sections.

The graphical view of conveyance loss in four selected canal sections is shown in Figure 9(a). Additionally, Figure 9(b) presents a histogram of loss records, showing six values in the 29–43% range and an overall average of 34.4%.
Figure 9

(a) Segment-wise conveyance loss percentages in PDA – Minipe; (b) histogram of conveyance loss in D47 – Minipe Left Bank canal.

Figure 9

(a) Segment-wise conveyance loss percentages in PDA – Minipe; (b) histogram of conveyance loss in D47 – Minipe Left Bank canal.

Close modal
Table 4 presents conveyance loss measurements for the D32/Stage II segment in the Minipe LB Canal. Losses range from 14.3% in segment 1 (between points A and B) to 55.1% in the last segment. The middle section, with 36% of its length lined, had the lowest loss percentage. A graphical representation is provided in Figure 10.
Table 4

Conveyance loss computations for D32 canal – Minipe stage II

CanalSegmentLength (m)Conveyance loss (%)Lined lengths (m)Lined length (%)Soil typeInfiltration rate (mm/h)
D32 1,295 14.3 373 29 Sandy clay 20–30 
 439 13.8 157 36 Sandy clay 20–30 
 569.8 55.1   Sandy clay 20–30 
Total  2303.8  530    
Average   27.7  32.5   
Standard deviation   23.7     
CanalSegmentLength (m)Conveyance loss (%)Lined lengths (m)Lined length (%)Soil typeInfiltration rate (mm/h)
D32 1,295 14.3 373 29 Sandy clay 20–30 
 439 13.8 157 36 Sandy clay 20–30 
 569.8 55.1   Sandy clay 20–30 
Total  2303.8  530    
Average   27.7  32.5   
Standard deviation   23.7     
Figure 10

Conveyance loss histogram for D32 Canal-Minipe LB main canal.

Figure 10

Conveyance loss histogram for D32 Canal-Minipe LB main canal.

Close modal

The conveyance losses in the Minipe D32 canal (Stage II) exhibit significant variability, with an average loss of 27.7% and a high standard deviation of 23.7%. Losses are lowest in segments with higher lining (14.3 and 13.8% in segments 1 and 2) and highest in unlined sections (55.1% in segment 3). The sandy clay soil type contributes to seepage, but the effectiveness of lining in segment 2 (highest lined percentage about 36%) demonstrates its importance in loss reduction. The stark increase in losses in unlined sections emphasizes the need for targeted infrastructure improvements and policy changes to promote water conservation and irrigation efficiency.

Assessing the conveyance losses is always important to enhance the efficiency of the irrigation systems. This is important in the areas where the irrigation is done mainly using surface water. Enhancing the efficiency of the irrigation systems while minimizing the losses paves the path to achieving sustainable development goals (2, 12, and 13). Sri Lanka, in its post-COVID-19 development, is facing some economic issues which led the country to the international economic standards. This has adversely impacted the country wise food production eventually leading to the malnutrition of a significant population. Considering all these ongoing issues, the research presented here showcases some significant improvements that we can incorporate into the food security of the country.

On the other hand, most of the farmers of Sri Lanka do not give value to the irrigation water since it was given free of charge. Therefore, the losses are kept at a very high level. The findings of this research can be used to improve the water management sector and then ultimately to develop a country-wide water management policy.

This study assessed actual conveyance losses in three major irrigation schemes in Sri Lanka: Maduru Oya, Hurulu Wewa, and Minipe Left Bank Canal. The research revealed significant variations in losses, ranging from 20 to 38% at Maduru Oya, 9.2–60% at Hurulu Wewa, and 12.7–55.1% at Minipe. The average losses at Maduru Oya were 27.8% (SD = 6.03%), Hurulu Wewa were 26.5% (SD = 20.4%), the D47 canal was 33.1% (SD = 15.4%), and the D32 canal at Minipe Left Bank was 27.7% (SD = 23.7%). It is noteworthy that tail-end parts continuously showed larger losses, frequently up to 60%, which had a major effect on the overall efficiency of the system. The state of the canal lining, the texture of the soil (especially sandy soils), and topographical characteristics like the elevation disparities between drainage and field canals were important factors affecting these losses.

Based on these findings, the study recommends several strategies to improve irrigation efficiency:

  • Canal lining and structural improvements: Conduct soil surveys and prioritize lining in porous soil areas, using partial lining where cost-effective. Retrofit or replace malfunctioning structures, install flow control systems, and consider pipelines for high-loss sections.

  • Maintenance strategies: Develop tailored maintenance plans with more frequent schedules for high-loss areas and train local water user associations.

  • Water management: Introduce rotational water supply schedules, promote water-saving techniques like alternate wetting and drying for paddy, and encourage crop diversification.

  • Technology integration: Utilize IoT sensors for real-time monitoring, GIS for large-scale assessments, and a centralized database to track water efficiency.

  • Awareness and policy reforms: Provide training for officials and farmers on water conservation, update irrigation guidelines, introduce water pricing, and incentivize efficient irrigation schemes.

  • Research and innovation: Explore cost-effective lining materials, and nature-based seepage reduction solutions, and test advanced irrigation technologies.

  • Watershed management: Implement integrated water management plans, promote reforestation and soil conservation, and engage stakeholders in better water governance.

  • Monitoring and evaluation: Standardize efficiency assessments, conduct annual reviews, and use data-driven decision-making for resource allocation.

These targeted interventions aim to enhance water conservation, reduce conveyance losses, and ensure sustainable irrigation practices for Sri Lanka's agricultural sector.

The authors would like to sincerely thank the Mahaweli Water Security Investment Program Sri Lanka for their support in gathering data for this study.

This research received no external funding.

All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.

The authors declare there is no conflict.

Abeysekara
M. G. D.
,
Munasinghe
D. S.
&
Weerahewa
J.
(
2015
)
An assessment of returns to irrigation infrastructure investment: hurulu wewa
,
Proceedings of the 6th National Building Research Organisation (NBRO) Symposium 2015 on Innovations for Resilient Environment
.
Colombo, Sri Lanka
, pp.
1
6
.
Adeyemi
O.
,
Grove
I.
,
Peets
S.
&
Norton
T.
(
2017
)
Advanced monitoring and management systems for improving sustainability in precision irrigation
,
Sustainability
,
9
(
3
),
353
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su9030353
.
Ali
M. H.
, (
2010
)
Water conveyance loss and designing conveyance system
. In:
Ali
M. H.
(ed.)
Practices of Irrigation & on-Farm Water Management: Volume 2
, New York: Springer, pp.
1
34
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7637-6_1
.
Ashour
M. A.
,
Abdel Nasser
M. S.
&
Abu-Zaid
T. S.
(
2023
)
Field study to evaluate water loss in the irrigation canals of middle Egypt: a case study of the al Maanna canal and its branches, Assiut Governorate
,
Limnological Review
,
23
(
2
),
70
92
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/limnolrev23020005
.
Berundharshani
T.
&
Munasinghe
D. S.
(
2015, December
).
Drought resilient farming system through crop diversification: the case of Huruluwewa
,
Proceedings of the 6th National Building Research Organisation (NBRO) Symposium 2015 on Innovation for Resilient Environment
.
Colombo, Sri Lanka
,
December 22, 2015
, pp.
35
40
.
Cai
X.
,
Zhang
X.
,
Noël
P. H.
&
Shafiee-Jood
M.
(
2015
)
Impacts of climate change on agricultural water management: a review
,
WIRES Water
,
2
(
5
),
439
455
.
https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1089
.
Calera
A.
,
Campos
I.
,
Osann
A.
,
D'Urso
G.
&
Menenti
M.
(
2017
)
Remote sensing for crop water management: from ET modeling to services for the end users
,
Sensors
,
17
(
5
),
1104
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s17051104
.
Comina
C.
,
Lasagna
M.
,
De Luca
D. A.
&
Sambuelli
L.
(
2013
)
Discharge measurement with salt dilution method in irrigation canals: direct sampling and geophysical controls
,
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions
,
10
(
8
),
10035
10060
.
https://doi.org/10.5194/hessd-10-10035-2013
.
Cosgrove
W. J.
&
Loucks
D. P.
(
2015
)
Water management: current and future challenges and research directions
,
Water Resources Research
,
51
(
6
),
4823
4839
.
doi:10.1002/2014wr016869
.
de Fraiture
C.
,
Molden
D.
&
Wichelns
D.
(
2010
)
Investing in water for food, ecosystems, and livelihoods: an overview of the comprehensive assessment of water management in agriculture
,
Agricultural Water Management
,
97
(
4
),
495
501
.
doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2009.08.015
.
De Pascale
S.
,
Costa
L. D.
,
Vallone
S.
,
Barbieri
G.
&
Maggio
A.
(
2011
)
Increasing water use efficiency in vegetable crop production: from plant to irrigation systems efficiency
,
HortTechnology
,
21
(
3
),
301
308
.
doi:10.21273/horttech.21.3.301
.
El-Molla
D. A.
&
El-Molla
M. A.
(
2021
)
Reducing the conveyance losses in trapezoidal canals using compacted earth lining
,
Ain Shams Engineering Journal
,
12
(
3
),
2453
2463
.
Evans
R. G.
&
Sadler
E. J.
(
2008
)
Methods and technologies to improve efficiency of water use
,
Water Resources Research
,
44
(
7
),
1
15
.
doi:10.1029/2007wr006200
.
Gleick
P. H.
(
2003
)
Water use
,
Annual Review of Environment and Resources
,
28
(
1
),
275
314
.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.28.040202.122849
.
Gnanadasa
W. G.
(
2010
)
The importance of seasonal planning for irrigation water productivity: inginimitiya experience
,
Proceedings of the National Conference on Water, Food Security, and Climate Change in Sri Lanka
.
BMICH, Colombo
,
June 9–11, 2009
,
Vol. 1
, p.
75
.
Hamdy
A.
,
Ragab
R.
&
Scarascia-Mugnozza
E.
(
2003
)
Coping with water scarcity: water saving and increasing water productivity
,
Irrigation and Drainage
,
52
(
1
),
3
20
.
doi:10.1002/ird.73
.
Han
X.
,
Wang
X.
,
Zhu
Y.
,
Huang
J.
,
Yang
L.
,
Chang
Z.
&
Fu
F.
(
2020
)
An experimental study on concrete and geomembrane lining effects on canal seepage areas
,
Water
,
12
(
9
),
2343
.
Haymale
H. K.
,
Njau
K. N.
&
Kahimba
F. C.
(
2020
)
Estimating conveyance efficiency and maize productivity of traditional irrigation systems in USA river catchment Tanzania
,
International Journal of Agronomy
,
2020
(
1
),
1
11
.
Kumar
M. D.
,
Turral
H.
,
Sharma
B.
,
Amarasinghe
U.
&
Singh
O. P.
(
2008
)
Water saving and yield enhancing micro irrigation technologies in India: when and where can they become best bet technologies
,
Managing Water in the Face of Growing Scarcity, Inequity and Declining Returns: Exploring Fresh Approaches
,
1
,
1
36
.
Malakar
A.
,
Snow
D. D.
&
Ray
C.
(
2019
)
Irrigation water quality – a contemporary perspective
,
Water
,
11
(
7
),
1482
.
doi:10.3390/w11071482
.
Marambe
B.
,
Silva
P.
&
Athauda
S.
(
2017
)
Agriculture and rural development under central government and provincial council setup in Sri Lanka
. In: Cooray, N. & Abeyratne, S. (eds).
Decentralization and Development of Sri Lanka Within a Unitary State
, Singapore: Springer, pp.
111
145
.
Martin
Q. W.
(
1980
)
Optimal design of water conveyance systems
,
Journal of the Hydraulics Division
,
106
(
9
),
1415
1433
.
doi:10.1061/jyceaj.0005502
.
Meijer
K.
,
Boelee
E.
,
Augustijn
D.
&
van Molen
I.
(
2006
)
Impacts of concrete lining of irrigation canals on availability of water for domestic use in southern Sri Lanka
,
Agricultural Water Management
,
83
(
3
),
243
251
.
doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2005.12.007
.
Mohammed
O. A.
&
Sayl
K. N.
(
2021
)
A GIS-based multicriteria decision for groundwater potential zone in the west desert of Iraq
,
IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
,
856
(
1
),
012049
.
doi:10.1088/1755-1315/856/1/012049
.
Ponrajah
A. J. P.
(
1989
)
Technical Guidelines for Irrigation Works
.
Sri Lanka
:
Department of Irrigation
.
Radcliffe
D. E.
,
Rasmussen
T. C.
&
Warrick
A. W.
(
2002
)
Soil water movement
. In: Warwick, A. W. (ed.).
Soil Physics Companion
. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp.
85
126
.
Rezapour Tabari
M. M.
,
Tavakoli
S.
&
Mazak Mari
M.
(
2014
)
Optimal design of concrete canal section for minimizing costs of water loss, lining and earthworks
,
Water Resources Management
,
28
(
10
),
3019
3034
.
doi:10.1007/s11269-014-0652-9
.
Sathre
R.
,
Antharam
S. M.
&
Catena
M.
(
2022
)
Water security in south Asian cities: a review of challenges and opportunities
,
CivilEng
,
3
(
4
),
873
894
.
doi:10.3390/civileng3040050
.
Shah
S. A.
,
Kiran
M.
&
Khurshid
T.
(
2021
)
Seepage losses measurement of desert minor and development of gauge-discharge rating curve: a case study in District Ghotki, Sindh
,
World Academics Journal of Engineering Sciences
,
8
(
1
),
13
22
.
Stout
B. A.
(
1999
)
CIGR Handbook of Agricultural Engineering
, Vol.
1
.
St. Joseph (MI)
:
American Society of Agricultural Engineers
.
Swamee
P. K.
,
Mishra
G. C.
&
Chahar
B. R.
(
2000
)
Comprehensive design of minimum cost irrigation canal sections
,
Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering
,
126
(
5
),
322
327
.
doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9437(2000)126:5(322)
.
Syed
N. S. B.
,
Shuqi
Z.
,
Babar
M. M.
&
Soothar
R. K.
(
2021
)
Analysis of conveyance losses from tertiary irrigation network
,
Civil Engineering Journal
,
7
(
10
),
1731
1740
.
Yao
L.
,
Feng
S.
,
Mao
X.
,
Huo
Z.
,
Kang
S.
&
Barry
D. A.
(
2012
)
Coupled effects of canal lining and multi-layered soil structure on canal seepage and soil water dynamics
,
Journal of Hydrology
,
430–431
,
91
102
.
doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.02.004
.
Zarghaami
M.
(
2006
)
Integrated water resources management in Polrud irrigation system
,
Water Resources Management
,
20
(
2
),
215
225
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-006-8048-0
.
Zhang
Q.
,
Chai
J.
,
Xu
Z.
&
Qin
Y.
(
2017
)
Investigation of irrigation canal seepage losses through use of four different methods in Hetao irrigation district, China
,
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
,
22
(
3
),
1
11
.
doi:10.1061/(asce)he.1943-5584.0001470
.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY 4.0), which permits copying, adaptation and redistribution, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).