Megecha Justification For Concrete Lined Canal

JUSTIFICATION FOR
CONTRACT AMENDEMENT
OF MEGECHA MSIP PHASE-
ONE
IDSAA
JAN 20, 2014

Introduction
It’s well-known that Megecha Medium Scale Irrigation Project is one of the medium scale
irrigation project implemented by Irrigation Construction & Scheme Administration Agency in
Gurage zone Cheha woreda. Metaferia Consultant Engineers entering an agreement with the
then implementing Agency undertake the detail design & feasibility study of the project in 2003
E.C with total irrigable command area of 1130 Hectare. However, after accomplishing the task &
submittal of the design document, during field level review of the proposed project by the agency
along with the consultant staffs, had identified that there was an ambiguity on the ground
elevation of survey control points (Bench Marks) used for preparing the topographic map of the
study area as well as for fixing the design level of the different hydraulic structures. Based on
this, with holding the final payment the agency had notify the consultant to remedy the identified
gap & handover the project in short period. But, the consultant had failed to correct the error and
hand over the project. The agency considering the importance of implementing the project from
different perspective, had organized teams of staffs to remedy the defect implement the project.
The staffs assigned fixing the defect identified had made the project ready for implementation in
2009 E.C., the agency considering the scope of the project and financial source availability had
then planned to implement the project in two phases with the first phase including construction
of head work & associated structures, 16.8km main canal, secondary canal & associated structure
for irrigating 311 hectare of land and the second phase including the remaining canal system and
farm structures for irrigating 800 Ha of land.
After passing the required procedures, the construction of the first phase of the project is under
construction as per the agreement signed between Irrigation Construction & Scheme
Administration Agency and Tariku G/ Meskel WWCs in 2010 GC.
The construction works include General &preparatory woks, Headwork, 16.8 km Main canal &
farm systems. Although, an agreement was signed to construct the project within one period of
time, the construction of the project has been delayed for about 4 years for non-availability of
majority of the project site due to right of way problem and other related issues. For almost two
years since the commencement of the project the only available parts of the project site is the
head work & the first 2km of the main canal reach, such a dalliance in availing most of the
project had posed a major constraint to avail the required resource on the contractor side.
Although, almost all of the project site were availed for the construction in the late 2013 E.C, the
contractor had failed to mobilize the required resource and expedite the progress of the project
for the rise in cost of the construction service and the higher inflation rate occurring in the
country. Currently, the Head work & the first 4.2km of main canal had been completed & the
overall progress rate estimated to be at 70%.
Meanwhile, during surveying and setting out works of the remaining canal route, we found that
the route of the canal pass through highly expansive black cotton soil. And also upon reviewing
the geotechnical document, the soil profile characteristics study conducted using soil samples
collected from test pits and Auger test along the route of the main canal had mentioned that the
majority of the soil type along the route of the canal is vary expansive vitric soil with increasing
thickness as the canal routes get far away from the river bank side and reaches the command
area. Although, the first design report had not proposed a lining material considering cost
limitation at the period, construction of earthen canal on such soil type may cause a major
problem on the performance of the irrigation system both in terms of hydraulic capacity and
structural stability of the canal section. As such soils have cyclic expansive and contracting
characteristics for different moisture condition, there will be high amount of water loss through
seepage along cracks formed on the soil during dry periods reducing the amount of water to be
delivered for the proposed farm area and reducing area to be irrigated. In addition side banks of
canals constructed on such soil may not be stable during wet period to maintain its shape for
increasing bulk density of the soil requiring frequent maintenance for proper operation of the
system for the intended purpose.
Since canal lining is an important future of irrigation project, for it improves the flow
characteristics and minimizes the loss of water due to seepage and helps in retention of shape of
the canal. Functions of lining, apart from seepage control and retention of shape of the canal,
may include but not be limited to, increased hydraulic efficiency, increased resistance to
erosion / abrasion, and low operation and maintenance cost.
Considering the mentioned facts during design review period by the agency staffs masonry
lining was proposed for the first 12km of the main canal reaches. However, the review miss to
consider structural stability of the lining material in relation to the behavior of the soil type and
characteristics on which the structure resides.
As it is clear that one of the most common types of problematic soils is expansive soils.
Expansive soils are a worldwide challenge. They pose problems for civil engineering in general
and for geotechnical engineering in particular. Such soils cause damage to structures founded on
them because of their potential to react to change in moisture. They undergo severe volume
changes corresponding to change in moisture content. Expansive soils swell or increase in their
volume when they imbibe water and shrink or reduce in their volume because of water. The
damage in the hydraulic canals which constructed on expansive soils are observed in the forms
of cracking in the masonry lining and their uplift. Over time and with the occurring of thaw and
freezing cycles, lining fine micro cracks are become larger and provide a situation for water
penetration and plant growth. These factors eventually lead to change of hydraulic canal
characteristics and finally its destruction.
Masonry lined canal and unreinforced concrete lined canals are the main types of sensitive &
important water conveyance structures. Whereas this type of structures are inevitably constructed
on different types of soil, investigation of geotechnical issues related to the soil and the lining
material is important for reducing associated damage to the structure.
As mentioned earlier, since the thickness of such expansive soil increase and reaches up to 2m
starting from 6km to the end of the canal route, the masonry canal proposed in design review
works better for the first 6km reaches of the canal, the remaining reaches of canal requires for
reconsideration of the structural stability of the lining material.
Based on this the agency had organized teams of staffs including geotechnical engineer to
investigate in detail the major the soil type along the route of the canal and its characteristics
affecting the structural stability of the proposed masonry canal. After field investigation of the
project the team had identified that most of the route of the canal starting from 6km up to the end
of the canal route is covered by highly expansive black cotton soil with thickness increasing
along the direction of water flow and proposed to change the limning material from masonry to
reinforced concrete for sustainable and durable operation of the conveyance system as well as
avoiding possible risks of failure associated the soil type.
Considering the proposal for changing the limning material for sustainable and durable operation
of the project on one hand and the financial constraint as well as contractual condition on the
other hand, it is necessary to amend the contract and constrict the scope of the first phase so as to
accommodate these design change.
Since such design change is major, the contract period extended for more than 4 years and
current rise in cost of construction service, it requires negotiations for the price of the proposed
items of works with contractor involved in the construction of the project. For this it is required
to know the actual financial balance of the projects and items that can be transferred to the
second phase and the change in the scope of the first phase.
Based on this the first phase of the project was intended to irrigate 311 Hectare of land using
16.8 km of main canal , but actually as there are more than 200 Hectare of land along the route of
main canal not included in the design with in these reach of the main canal suitable for
irrigation.
If after negotiating with the contractor phase one of the project is constricted to 12 km of the
main canal there is additional 103 hectares of lands from the previously designed 63 hectare and
the total irrigable area of phase one will be 166 Hectare. And the remaining command area can
be commanded with phase two of the project.
The details of the contract amendment excluding the newly proposed items of works as it
requires negotiations with the contractor and the estimated quantity and proposed design drawing
for the remaining reaches of the canal from 6km to 12km is attached bellow.
Canal section drawing
Estimated BOQ
UNI
SN ITEM DESCRIPTION T
UNIT RATE QUANTITY AMOUNT
Main Canal - Reinforced Concrete

1
Canal ( 6km-12km )
1.1 Stone and Concrete Works
150mm thick C-25 Reinforced concrete for
1.1.1 m3 4,168.80
canal bed & side walls.
1.1.2 Provide, cut and fix Zigba formwork. m2 32,400.00
Mild steel reiforcement according to the

structural drawings. Price includes
1.2
cutting, bending, placing in position and
tying wire.
(a). Ø 8mm kg 40,776.96

(b). Ø 10mm kg 21,893.86
Subtotal
Standard Division Boxes of Type -1 on
2
MC
C-25 concrete complete in all respect
2.1 including all lifts and form work & m3 142.725
reinforcement
TOTAL COST FOR CANALS
-

Megecha Justification For Concrete Lined Canal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Megecha Justification For Concrete Lined Canal

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Megecha Justification For Concrete Lined Canal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JUSTIFICATION FOR

JAN 20, 2014

Main Canal - Reinforced Concrete

1.1.2 Provide, cut and fix Zigba formwork. m2 32,400.00

Mild steel reiforcement according to the

(a). Ø 8mm kg 40,776.96

You might also like