2
WHAT IS RAIN WATER HARVESTING (RWH) ?
 Collection of rain water and its recycling for productive use
(Siegert, 1994)
 The collected rainwater may be stored, utilised in different
ways or directly used for recharge purposes

3
NECESSITY OF WATER HARVESTING ?
 Uneven distribution of rainfall
 Occurrence of draughts
 Increase in global temperature and population growth
 Scarcity of potable water
 Gradual falling of water levels
 Imbalance of salinity in the coastal area
 Soil erosion resulting from the unchecked runoff
 Health hazards due to consumption of polluted water
 In 20th century the worlds’ population becomes tripled and utilization of water has
multiplied six fold
 It may be happened in next future, the world war may be fought for sharing of water
resources among various countries due to water shortage
 About one-third (33%) of the world’s population is currently afflicted with moderate
to severe water stress (CFA, 1997).
 If the present trend till continues, approximately two-thirds (66%) of the world
population (About 5.5 billion people) will be facing water stress up to the year of 2025
(Kuylenstierna et al., 1997).

NECESSITY OF WATER HARVESTING ?
 The per capita land availability is in reducing
trend and it is estimated that only 0.1 hectare
per capita land will be available by the end of
2025 (Sarangi et al., 2005)
 Imbalance between demand and supply of
water
 Due to rapid urbanization, infiltration of
rainwater into subsoil has decreased drastically
and recharging of groundwater has diminished
DAILY WATER REQUIREMENT OF WATER FOR A
PERSON
Sr. No Domestic activities
Water requirement
(lpd/pesron)
1 Drinking 3
2 Cooking 4
3 Bathing 20
4 Flushing 40
5 Cloth washing 25
6 Utensils washing 20
7 Gardening 23
TOTAL 135
Source: Soil and Water Conservation Engineering 5th edition by R. Suresh 4

5
Water budget
200, 50%
135, 34%
65, 16%
Statistics on
Water Budget
Evapo-transpiration, Mha-
m
Available on the surface,
Mha-m
Joins groundwater through
percolation, Mha-m
Source: The Economist, May 2010

6
Source : https://www.adriindia.org/adri/india_water_facts
Asian Development Research Institute (ADRI)
Rainfall scenario since 2000 to 2014

7Source : Reddy, C. S. et al 2015
Annual mean distribution
of rainfall in India (2013-
14)
 Average annual rainfall of India is 118 cm and global
average annual average rainfall is 80 cm
 Average annual rainfall varies from 10 cm in Rajasthan
(Western desert region) to 1100 cm in Mausingram,
Meghalya (N-E region) (Sharma and Paul, 1998)
 2.5 % of total available fresh water
 90 % drinking water supply and 67 % irrigation water
supply depends on groundwater
 Few heavy rainfall spells contribute about 90 % of total
rainfall
 More than 50 % rain occurs within 15 days and less than
100 hours in a year
 More than 80 % of seasonal rainfall is produced by 10 –
20 % rain events
FACTS

8
Per Capita Water Availability
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
1951 1991 2001 2025 2050
5177
2209
1820
1341 1140
cubicmetreperyear
Source: FAO, 2008

9Source : Report of Central Ground Water Board (2014)
http://cgwb.gov.in/
Fluctuation of ground water level

10SOURCE: Fourteen years of arid zone research (1959-1973) (CAZRI)
Regions Rainfall zone
Arid Region < 400 mm
Semi-Arid Region 400-600 mm
Dry Sub-Humid Region 600-900 mm
Humid Region > 900 mm
Arid and semi-
arid areal
distribution of
India

11
ADVANTAGES OF RAIN WATER HARVESTING
 Provision of supplemental water
 Increasing soil moisture level
 Increase ground water table
 Availability of clean and free source of water
 It lowers the water supply cost
 Important back-up source of water for in case of emergencies
 Simple technologies that are inexpensive and easy to maintain

SELECTION OF WATER HARVESTING SITE
 Side slopes of the structure
 Seepage losses from the structure
 Soil type
 Ground slope
 Soil depth
 Soil fertility
 Infiltration rate
 Cost of construction
 Utility of structures
 Life of structures
 Readily availability of materials
 Annual average rainfall
 Weather type
 Type of vegetation 12
The suitability of site selection for RWH structure is primarily depends on following
factors;

13
Suitable side slopes for different soils
Soil type Slope (H:V)
Clay 1:1 to 2:1
Clay loam 1.5:1to 2:1
Sandy loam 2:1to 2.5:1
Sandy 3:1
(Source: Engineering Hydrology by K Subramanya 4th edition)
Seepage losses in different soils
Soil type
Water loss through
seepage
(Cumec/million m2)
Drop in depth per
day (cm)
Heavy clay loam 1.21 10.36
Medium clay loam 1.96 16.84
Sandy clay loam 2.86 24.61
Sandy loam 5.12 44.03
Loose sandy soil 6.03 51.80
Porous gravelly soil 10.54 90.65
(Source: Agritech.tnau.ac.in)
General criteria for the selection of Rainwater
Harvesting Structures (RWH) sites
Soil textures Medium textured soils
(Loamy soils)
Ground slope < 5 %
Soil depth 2 m or more
Soil fertility Good fertile soil
Infiltration rate, mm/h Loam (12.5) and infiltration
rate < rainfall intensity
Source: Soil and water conservation engineering by R. Suresh 5th edition

14
DESIGN CRITERIA FOR THE WATER HARVESTING STRUCTURES
Peak runoff
calculation (Qpeak)
Storage capacity
calculation
Design of
spillways

Peak runoff calculation (Qpeak)
RATIONAL METHOD
𝐐 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 =
𝐂𝐈𝐀
𝟑𝟔𝟎
Where, Qpeak Peak runoff rate, m3/s
I
Rainfall intensity for the duration equal to time of
concentration, mm/h
A Watershed area, ha
DICKENS FORMULA
𝐐 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 = 𝐂 × 𝐀
𝟑
𝟒 For Indian condition
Where, 𝑄 𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑘 Maximum runoff,
m
s
3
A Catchment area, km2
C Dickens constant (6 – 30)
RYVES FORMULA
𝐐 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 = 𝐂 × 𝐀
𝟐
𝟑
For Tamilnadu, Karnataka and
Andhrapradehs
Where, Qpeak Maximum runoff,
m
s
3
C Ryves constant
6.8 for 80 km2
areas
8.5 for 80 -160 km2
areas
MAYERS FORMULA
𝐐 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 =175 × 𝐀
𝑚
𝑠
3
A Catchment area, 𝑘𝑚2
15
Source : Soil and Water Conservation Engineering by R. Suresh 5th edition and
Hydrology Principles, Analysis and Design by H M Raghunath 3rd edition

16
INGLISH FORMULA
𝐐 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 =
𝟏𝟐𝟒 × 𝐀
𝐀 + 𝟏𝟎. 𝟒
For western ghat in Maharashtra
m
s
3
Source : Soil and Water Conservation Engineering by R. Suresh 5th edition and
Hydrology Principles, Analysis and Design by H M Raghunath 3rd edition

17
SCS-CN METHOD
S =
25400
CN
− 254
𝑸 =
(𝐏 − 𝟎. 𝟐𝐒) 𝟐
𝐏 + 𝟎. 𝟖𝐒
Standard equation (For small size catchment and P > 0.2s)
𝑸 =
(𝐏 − 𝟎. 𝟏𝐒) 𝟐
𝐏 + 𝟎. 𝟗𝐒
Black soil
For Indian condition
𝑸 =
(𝐏 − 𝟎. 𝟏𝐒) 𝟐
𝐏 + 𝟎. 𝟗𝐒
For all soil
Where, P = Precipitation, Q = Runoff, S = Surface retention and CN = Curve
number
Source : Engineering Hydrology by K Subramanya and Handbook of Hydrology by Ministry of Agriculture

18
RUNOFF COEFFICIENT METHOD
𝐐 = K × P
Where, Q Runoff depth, cm
K Runoff coefficient
P Rainfall depth, cm
KHOSLAS’ FORMULA
𝐐 = 𝐏 −
𝐓 − 𝟑𝟐
𝟑. 𝟕𝟒
Where, Q Runoff depth, cm
P Rainfall depth, cm
T Average temperature, ⁰F
Source : Engineering Hydrology by K Subramanya and Handbook of Hydrology by Ministry of Agriculture

Rectangular
shape
Circular
shape
19
Storage capacity calculation

Trapezoidal
shape
20
Storage capacity calculation

21
1. Emergency spillway: It is used as a safeguard from overtopping when inflow is higher than the
designed values.
2. Mechanical spillway: It is used for letting out the excess water from the pond and also as an
outlet for taking out the water for irrigation.
 Dimensions of the spillway are designed based on the runoff rate and is given by Francis formula;
𝑄 = 𝐶 × 𝐿 × 𝐻 𝑚
C Discharge coefficient
H Head at crest, cm
L Length of crest
m Exponent
Weir type Value of C Value of m
Triangular (V-notch) 0.0138 2.5
Rectangular 0.0184 1.5
Trapezoidal 0.0186 1.5
Source : Irrigation Theory and Practice by A. M. Michale 2nd edition.
Design of spillways

22
CATCHMENT AND CULTIVATED AREA
Harvesting
structure
Catchment area
Cultivated area
Rainfall
Rainfall
Rainfall
Catchment area : it is an area bounded by
ridge line and draining through single outlet
Command area : it is an area which is
irrigated by any reservoir i. e. dam, pond,
lake, harvesting structure etc.
Cultivated area : it is an actual area which is
irrigated by any reservoir

23
CALCULATION OF CATCHMENT AND CULTIVATED AREA
Amount of water harvested = Catchment area × Design rainfall × Runoff coefficient × Efficiency factor
Need of water harvest = Cultivated area × (Crop water requirement – Design rainfall )
Catchment area
Cultivated area
=
Crop water requirement –Design rainfall
Design rainfall × Runoff coefficient × Efficiency factor
Design rainfall : Rainfall of a specified probability
Runoff coefficient : it is the ratio of runoff to the rainfall (0 – 1.0)
Efficiency factor : it depends on percolation losses, evaporation and uneven distribution of water (0.5-0.75)

24
CALCULATION OF CATCHMENT AND CULTIVATED AREA
Climate : Arid
Crop : Sorghum
Crop water requirement of millet in entire season = 525 mm
Design rainfall during growing season = 275 mm (at 67 %
probability)
Runoff coefficient = 0.45
Efficiency factor = 0.35
Catchment area
Cultivated area
=
Crop water requirement –Design rainfall
Design rainfall × Runoff coefficient × Efficiency factor
Catchment area
Cultivated area
=
525– 2𝟕𝟓
275 × 0.45 × 0.𝟑𝟓
=
𝟐𝟓𝟎
𝟒𝟑. 𝟑
= 𝟓. 𝟖 =
𝟓. 𝟖
𝟏
Harvesting
structure
Catchment area = 5.8 ha
Cultivated area = 1 ha

25
Farm Pond
It is a small tank or reservoir type
constructions which is used to store
the water from catchment area and
recycle use of that water for
beneficial purposes
Components
1. Storage area
2. Earthen embankment
3. Mechanical spillway
4. Emergency spillway

26
Farm Pond
Design
1.Site selection
1.Storage capacity
Spillway design

27
Farm Pond
Site selection
Availability of sufficient runoff volume
Transportation distance must be nearest
Easily water conveyance for irrigation and other purposes
Away from sewage lines and mining areas
Valley area is considered as best area
Minimum earthwork
Easily availability of local materials
Soil type must be loamy and non-toxic as well as non-saline

28
Farm Pond
Storage capacity
 It is determined by using contour map of the watershed
 Trapezoidal and Simson’s (Prismodial) formula are used to
compute the capacity
𝑽 =
𝑯
𝟑
(𝟐 × 𝑨 𝒐𝒅𝒅 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒐𝒖𝒓) + 𝟒 × 𝑨 𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒏 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒐𝒖𝒓 + (𝑨 𝒇𝒊𝒓𝒔𝒕 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒐𝒖𝒓 + 𝑨𝒍𝒂𝒔𝒕 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒐𝒖𝒓)
Simson’s
(Prismodial)
formula
Trapezoidal
formula
𝑽 = 𝑯 ×
𝑨 𝟏 + 𝑨 𝟐
𝟐
+ 𝑨𝒓𝒆𝒂 𝒐𝒇 𝒓𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔
Source : Soil and Water Conservation Engineering by Dr. R. Suresh 5th edition

Farm Pond
Contour
number
Contour
value, m
Area
enclosed, km2
1 300 220
2 301 250
3 302 320
4 303 370
5 304 450
6 305 530
7 306 600
Contour
value, m
Area
enclosed, km2
300 220
301 250
302 320
303 370
304 450
305 530
306 600
29
Assign the contour number
Trapezoidal formula Simson’s (Prismodial) formula
𝑽
= 𝑯 ×
𝑨 𝟏 + 𝑨 𝟐
𝟐
+ 𝑨𝒓𝒆𝒂 𝒐𝒇 𝒓𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔 =
𝑯
𝟑
(𝟐 × 𝑨 𝒐𝒅𝒅 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒐𝒖𝒓) + 𝟒 × 𝑨 𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒏 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒐𝒖𝒓 + (𝑨 𝒇𝒊𝒓𝒔𝒕 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒐𝒖𝒓
= 𝟏 ×
𝟐𝟐𝟎 + 𝟔𝟎𝟎
𝟐
+ 𝟐𝟓𝟎 + 𝟑𝟐𝟎 + 𝟑𝟕𝟎 + 𝟒𝟓𝟎 + 𝟓𝟑𝟎 =
𝟏
𝟑
(𝟐 × (𝟑𝟐𝟎 + 𝟒𝟓𝟎)) + 𝟒 × (𝟐𝟓𝟎 + 𝟑𝟕𝟎 + 𝟓𝟑𝟎) + (𝟐𝟐𝟎 + 𝟔𝟎𝟎)
= 𝟐𝟑𝟑𝟎𝒎 𝟑
= 𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟎𝒎 𝟑

30
Farm Pond
Spillway design
 A rectangular weir having a head of 12 cm and
discharging 34.4 lit/sec of water. Calculate the
length of the weir.
𝑄 = 𝐶 × 𝐿 × 𝐻 𝑚
C Discharge coefficient
H Head at crest, cm
L Length of crest
m Exponent
Weir type Value of C Value of m
Triangular (V-notch) 0.0138 2.5
Rectangular 0.0184 1.5
Trapezoidal 0.0186 1.5
Q = 𝐶 × 𝐿 × 𝐻 𝑚
34.4 = 0.0184 × 𝐿 × 121.5
L = 45 cm

31
Amba Township,
Gandhinagar, Gujarat,
India
Amba Township,
Gandhinagar
CASE
STUDY

32
Entities Description
Population of township 1000
Area of township 100 acres
Area of study sector-3 (A, B)
Occupied area
Buildings (1RK,
1BHK, 2BHK, 3BHK)
gym, and library etc.
Average annual rainfall 740.3 mm
Maximum and
minimum temp.
45⁰ and 10⁰ C
Total Terrace Area of Sector-3(A, B) 22011 m2
Total Road Area of Sector-3(A, B) 8000 m2
Total Landscape Area of Sector-3(A, B) 14011 m2
Total Area of Sector-3(A, B) 44022 m2
Total area of roof top of all buildings 22011 m2
Sr. No Year Population
1 2009 150
2 2010 250
3 2011 450
4 2012 700
5 2013 1000
Source : Source:-Amba Township Pvt Ltd Maintenance office and Hydromet Division, New Delhi Indian Meteorological Department
CASE
STUDY

34
CASE
STUDY
Water demand of population
Total water demand for one person (IS 1172: 1993) 135 lit/day
Total water demand 135 × 1000
Annually total water demand
365 × 135 × 1000
4, 92, 75, 000 lit
49,275 m3
Rain water Harvested through Terrace
Total Terrace Area of Sector-3 (A, B) = 22011 m2
Average Annual Rainfall (R) = 740.3 mm
Runoff co-efficient for a flat terrace
(C)
= 0.60
Annual water harvesting through
terrace
= A × R × C
= 22011 × 0.740 × 0.60
= 9,772.884 m3
Rain water Harvested through Surface Drainage
Total Road Area of Sector-3(A, B) = 22011 m2
Average Annual Rainfall (R) = 740.3 mm
Runoff coefficient for a R.C.C road
(C)
= 0.82
Annual water harvesting through
terrace
= A × R × C
= 8000 × 0.740 × 0.82
= 4,854.400 m3
14,627.284 m3
Harvesting of water is 29.68% of total demand

Specifications for different water harvesting structures
Type of structure Applications Required site condition Dimensional parameters
Percolation pond
1. Recharge to aquifer and
surface storage for
restricted period
2. Limited use for irrigation,
livestock and domestic
purposes
1. High Permeability
2. Presence of intersecting
fractures
1. 3–5 m height of earthen
bund
2. 5000–10000 m3 effective
storage
3. Spillway provision
4. Silt trap barrier
35
 It is an artificially created surface water body
used to recharge the ground water mainly

Check dam
1. Surface storage
2. Irrigation purpose
3. Domestic purpose
1. Straight stream channel
with level banks
2. Adequate catchment
3. Rocky riverbed
1. 2–4 m height of masonry
structure
2. 5000–7000m3 effective
storage
3. Treatment to foundation
for leakage/seepage
4. Overflow provisions 36
 It is constructed across bigger streams and in areas
having gentle slopes

Farm pond
1. Livestock storage
2. Restricted irrigation
1. Narrow elongated
depression with gentle
slope and small
catchment area
1. 1–2 m height of earthen
embankment
2. 2000–5000 m3 storage
3. Shallow foundation
37
 Farm ponds are small water
bodies formed either by the
construction of a small dam or
embankment across a waterway
or by excavating or dug out
Farm ponds in hilly areas

Subsurface dyke
1. To check the base flow
in river
2. Reduce evaporation
losses
3. For domestic needs
1. Straight and wide river
with 2–3 m thick sandy-
gravely bed material
1. 2–3m deep trapezoidal
foundation
2. 2000–5000 m3 storage
38
 It is built in an aquifer with the
intention of obstructing the
natural flow of groundwater

Dug well
1. Groundwater harvesting
2. Domestic and livestock
purposes
1. Porous and permeable
rocks
2. High fracture density
1. 10–12m diameter
2. 18–20m deep
3. Lateral drilling for
augmenting the well yield39
 It is the hole in the ground dug by
shovel or backhoe

 GIS tool is used to store, analyse and integrate spatial
and attribute information pertaining to runoff, slope,
drainage and fracture
 Factors such as watershed area, slope, land use, runoff
coefficient are considered as criteria in selecting suitable
sites for WHS (Padmavaty et al 1993; IMSD 1995; El-
Awar et al 2000; Rao and Satish Kumar 2004; De Winnar
et al 2007).
 The runoff computed by SCS-CN method which is a
function of runoff potential, precipitation and curve
number (CN)
 IMSD, FAO specifications are used for selection of water
harvesting/recharging structures
 Using overlay and decision tree concepts in GIS,
potential water harvesting sites are identified
 Identified sites are then investigated by field visit
SCS-CN and GIS-based approach for identifying
potential water harvesting sites
40

41

42
SCS-CN METHOD
S =
25400
CN
− 254
(𝐏 − 𝟎. 𝟐𝐒) 𝟐
𝐏 + 𝟎. 𝟖𝐒
Standard equation (For small size catchment and P > 0.2s)
(𝐏 − 𝟎. 𝟏𝐒) 𝟐
𝐏 + 𝟎. 𝟗𝐒
Black soil
For Indian condition
(𝐏 − 𝟎. 𝟏𝐒) 𝟐
𝐏 + 𝟎. 𝟗𝐒
For all soil
Where, P = Precipitation, Q = Runoff, S = Surface retention and CN = Curve
number

43
 The curve number (CN) which is dimensionless number and ranging from 0 to 100 is
determined based on land-cover, HSG, and AMC
 Hydrologic soil group (HSG) is expressed in terms of four groups (A, B, C and D),
according to the soil’s infiltration rate
 AMC is expressed in three levels (I, II and III), according to rainfall limits for
dormant and growing seasons
 Weighted curve number when area of watershed is more than 15 km2
 Slope classification
 Evaporation losses
 Seepage losses
 Permeability or Hydraulic conductivity

SCS-CNandGIS-basedapproachfor
identifyingpotentialwaterharvestingsites
44
Curve number for different HSG
Weighted CN formula
Classification of HSG
Source : Ministry of Agriculture , Govt. of India, Handbook of
Hydrology, New Delhi, 1972.

45
Lineament : It is a linear feature in a landscape which is an
expression of an underlying geological structure
such as a fault
Land use : It can be defined as the management and
modification of natural environment into arable
fields, pastures etc.
Hydrologic soil group (HSG) : It is expressed according to the
soil’s infiltration rate
Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission (SRTM) : It is used to
derive the slope map.
Classification of slope
Per cent
slope
Description
0 – 2 Nearly level
3 - 6 Gently sloping
7 - 12 Moderately sloping
13 – 18 Strongly sloping
19 – 25 Moderately steep
26 - 35 Steep
> 35 Very steep
Source : Soil and Water Conservation Engineering by Dr. R. Suresh 5th
edition

Evaporation losses (E) from structure
(Lund 2006).
𝑬 = 𝒆𝒂𝒃
𝟑𝑺
𝒂𝒃
𝟐
𝟑
Where, E Evaporative loss
a and
b
Side and longitudinal
valley slopes
e Actual evaporation
S Storage volume
Seepage losses (D) from structure (Lund 2006).
𝑫 = 𝒅
𝟑𝑺
𝒂𝒃
𝟏
𝟑
Where, D Seepage loss
a and b
Side and longitudinal
valley slopes
e Actual evaporation
S Storage volume
 In case of surface water storage structures, 20–35% net loss of water
(due to seepage and evaporation) is considered as normal (Dahiwalkar
and Singh 2006)
Permeability (k) of the structure materials
(Lee and Farmer 1990).
𝒌 =
𝜸 𝒘
𝝁
× 𝟐 ×
𝒆 𝟑
𝟏𝟐𝑺
Where, k Permeability
𝛾 𝑤 Density of water
𝜇 Viscosity of water 46

SCS-CNandGIS-basedapproachfor
identifyingpotentialwaterharvestingsites
47
Site selection criteria for water harvesting structures
Bore wells
Runoff coefficient < 40%
Land use Crop land or fallow land
slope 0–10%
Intersect of lineament Major lineament intersects
Dug-cum-bore wells
Land use Crop land or fallow or waste land
slope 0–5%
Intersect of lineament Minor and major lineament intersects
Dug well
Land use Crop land or fallow or waste land
slope 0–3%
Intersect of lineament Minor lineament intersects

48
Site selection criteria for water harvesting/recharging structures
Structure
MWL*
(m)
Slope
(%)
Permeability
Runoff
coeff.
Stream
order
Watershed
area (104)
m2 or
hectare
Storage loss
Farm ponds 2–2.5 0–5 Low Medium/high 1 1–2 Moderate–low
Check dams 4–5 < 15 Low Medium/high 1–4 25 Low
Subsurface dykes - 0–3 High Medium/low > 4 > 50 Low
Percolation ponds 6–7 < 10 High Low 1–4 25–40 Moderate–high
*MWL – Maximum water level

49
Identification of potential water harvesting sites in the Kali
Watershed, Mahi River Basin, India through RS & GIS based
approach
Location Godhra, Gujarat, India
Area 200 km2
Average
annual
rainfall
900 mm
Climate semi-arid
Minimum and
Maximum
temperature
10⁰ C and 40⁰ C
Soil type
Sandy loam
Loam
Clay loam
Weather
Hot weather March to June
Rainy season July to September
Winter season
October to
February
satellite images, digital elevation
model, soil map and rainfall
Land use
maps
RS-LISS-III
Digital
elevation
model
(DEM)
Shuttle Radar
Topographic Mission
(SRTM)
Runoff
estimation
SCS-CN method
(NEH 1985)

Hydraulic Soil Group (HSG)
A 2.9 km2
B 21.5 km2
C 87.3 km2
D 88.1 km2
Total 200 km2
Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) map Lineament map 50
approach

Drainage network map 51Slope map
approach
85% of total area
is vary from very
gentle and
moderately
sloping classes

Identification of potential water harvesting sites in
the Kali Watershed, Mahi River Basin, India
through RS & GIS based approach
Land cover map Runoff coefficient map 52
Hydraulic Soil Group (HSG)
Open forest 29.6 km2
Irrigated 38.4 km2
Fallow/scrub 89.8 km2
Barren land 38.0 km2
Water bodies 2.3 km2
Sand 1.8 km2
Total 200 km2

Identification of potential water harvesting sites in
the Kali Watershed, Mahi River Basin, India
through RS & GIS based approach
53
 In 75 % of cases the derived sites fall
within 15 m distance of field identified
sites
 In 25 % of cases, the suitable sites were
within 35 m distance.
 The accuracy of estimation was higher
(87 %) in case of farm ponds
Map of identified site for RWH structure

54
1. Direct Surface Spreading Techniques
I. Ditch and furrow system
II. Flooding
III. Over irrigation
IV. Recharge basin
V. Runoff conservation structures
VI. Stream modification
A. Bench terracing
B. Contour bund
C. Contour Trenching
D. Gully plugs
E. Nala bund
F. Percolation bund
2. Direct Sub-surface Techniques
I. Connector wells
II. Gravity head recharge wells
III. Injection wells
IV. Recharge pits
V. Recharge shafts
3. Indirect Techniques
I. Induced recharge
A. Pumping wells
B. Collector wells
C. Infiltration galleries
II. Aquifer modification
A. Bore blasting
B. Hydro-fracturing
C. Jacket well
III. Ground water conservation structures
A. Dams and bandharas
Ground water recharge techniques
Source : Water Wells and Pumps book by A M Michale, S D Khepar and S K
Sondhi 2nd edition

55
Ditch and furrow system Floodingsystem

57
Gravity head recharge wells Injection wells
Recharge pit Recharge shaft
Dug well recharge
Induced recharge Infiltration gallery

58
Bore blasting method
Hydro-fracturing method Jacket well techniques
Dams Bandharas

59Source : Technical bulletin 2012 published by Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Hyderabad (CRIDA).
Construction cost of the different capacities of the lined farm
ponds

Comparison on cost effectiveness of designed low
cost water harvesting structures
Heights
(m)
Dry stone masonry
type WHS
Cement masonry
on upstream type
WHS
Masonry Anicut
Total
cost
(Rs.)
Cost/m
(Rs.)
Total
cost
(Rs.)
Cost/m
(Rs.)
Total
cost
(Rs.)
Cost/m
(Rs.)
1.0 10,400 416 19,825 793 85,000 3,400
2.0 25,750 1,030 48,000 1,920 155,000 6,200
2.5 35,500 1,420 67,550 2,702 210,000 8,400
(Source: M D Jha et al 2004)
Masonry anicut
60

61
 Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR)
 Navinchandra Mafatlal Sadguru Water Development Foundation, Dahod
 JAL BHAGIRATHI FOUNDATION, JAIPUR
 Development of Humane Action (DHAN) Foundation, Madurai
 Jal Swaraj, New Delhi
 Jal Bhagirathi Foundation, Rajasthan
 NEER Foundation

REFERENCES
Ammar, A., Riksen, M., Ouessar, M., & Ritsema, C. (2016). Identification of suitable sites for rainwater harvesting
structures in arid and semi-arid regions: A review. International Soil and Water Conservation Research, 4(2), 108-120.
Durga Rao, K. H. V., & Bhaumik, M. K. (2003). Spatial expert support system in selecting suitable sites for water
harvesting structures—a case study of song watershed, Uttaranchal, India. Geocarto International, 18(4), 43-
50.
Jasrotia, A. S., Majhi, A., & Singh, S. (2009). Water balance approach for rainwater harvesting using remote sensing
and GIS techniques, Jammu Himalaya, India. Water resources management, 23(14), 3035-3055.
Kuylenstierna, J. L., Björklund, G., & Najlis, P. (1997). Sustainable water future with global implications: everyone's
responsibility. In Natural Resources Forum 21 (3) pp. 181-190).
Lee, C. H., & Farmer, I. W. (1990). A simple method of estimating rock mass porosity and permeability. International
Journal of Mining and Geological Engineering, 8(1), 57-65.
Lund, J. R. (2006). Drought storage allocation rules for surface reservoir systems. Journal of water resources planning
and management, 132(5), 395-397.
Machiwal, D., Jha, M. K., Singh, P. K., Mahnot, S. C., & Gupta, A. (2004). Planning and design of cost-effective water
harvesting structures for efficient utilization of scarce water resources in semi-arid regions of Rajasthan,
India. Water Resources Management, 18(3), 219-235.
62

REFERENCES
63
Pandey, A., Chowdary, V. M., Mal, B. C., & Dabral, P. P. (2011). Remote sensing and GIS for identification of suitable
sites for soil and water conservation structures. Land Degradation & Development, 22(3), 359-372.
Patel, D. P., Dholakia, M. B., Naresh, N., & Srivastava, P. K. (2012). Water harvesting structure positioning by using
geo-visualization concept and prioritization of mini-watersheds through morphometric analysis in the Lower
Tapi Basin. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 40(2), 299-312.
Ramakrishnan, D., Bandyopadhyay, A., & Kusuma, K. N. (2009). SCS-CN and GIS-based approach for identifying
potential water harvesting sites in the Kali Watershed, Mahi River Basin, India. Journal of earth system
science, 118(4), 355-368.
Ramakrishnan, D., Durga Rao, K. H. V., & Tiwari, K. C. (2008). Delineation of potential sites for water harvesting
structures through remote sensing and GIS techniques: a case study of Kali watershed, Gujarat,
India. Geocarto International, 23(2), 95-108.
Report on fourteen years of arid zone research (1959-1973). Central Arid Zone Research (CAZRI) jodhpur.
Sarangi, A., Singh, D. K., Bhattacharya, A. K., & Sarkar, T. K. (2005). India’s Water Future-A Glimpse on its
Sustainability. In Proceedings of National Conference on Watershed Management of Sustainable Production
Livelihood and Environmental Security-Issues and options (WAMSP) held at GB Pant University of
Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, Uttaranchal from May (19-21).
Singh, J. P., Singh, D., & Litoria, P. K. (2009). Selection of suitable sites for water harvesting structures in Soankhad
watershed, Punjab using remote sensing and geographical information system (RS&GIS) approach—A case
study. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 37(1), 21-35.

LINKS
 http://cgwb.gov.in/Ground-Water/GW%20LEVEL%20Scenario%20November%202014.pdf
 http://www.cazri.res.in/publications/KrishiKosh/4 (FOURTEEN%20YEARS%20OF%20ARID%20ZONE%20RESARCH).pdf
 http://agritech.tnau.ac.in/
 http://www.fao.org/tempref/FI/CDrom/FAO_Training/FAO_Training/General/x6708e/x6708e08.htm
 https://www.adriindia.org/adri/india_water_facts
 http://cgwb.gov.in/
 http://agritech.tnau.ac.in/agriculture/agri_majorareas_dryland_enggmeasures_farm_ponds.html
 https://www.indiawaterportal.org/
 http://www.allegianceindia.in/
 https://www.adriindia.org/
 http://www.fao.org/3/U3160E/u3160e03.htm#TopOfPage
 www.crida.in
 http://ecoursesonline.iasri.res.in/mod/page/view.php?id=97671
64

Site Selection Factors for Rainwater Harvesting Structures

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Site Selection Factors for Rainwater Harvesting Structures

Similar to Site Selection Factors for Rainwater Harvesting Structures (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Site Selection Factors for Rainwater Harvesting Structures