# Can Siphoned water travel a distance of 2500 ft with a height difference of 10 ft?

I have access to lake water. My land is situated in the back of this lake. In summer, water in the lake shrinks to a distance of about 2000 to 2350 ft away from my land. My land is 10 feet above the water surface level. So I want to draw this water through a siphon. Can this work, if I dug up 10 ft depth near the land as the distance is 2000 to 2500 ft? The depth of water from the surface level of the water is around 15 ft.

## ETA:

"350 lpm is sufficient for my 15.5 Acres of lands." "I would like to use 2.5-inch pipe [ID or OD not specified by the OP]"

• So you don’t own the land connecting to the lake? Do you have the right to put a pipe / channel or whatever on that land? Jan 23 '18 at 11:16
• Sir, yes. Also I dont have the electricity. Yes, Pipe can be laid along. However, I want to adopt only free Siphoning system thro' 2 1/2" pipe. My question is, can Siphon water travel to 2500 ft distance with a height difference of 10ft? No matter however the discharge of water. 350 lpm is sufficient for my 15.5 Acres of lands. I am just planing to see that no recurring expenditure to take waters to my lands. Again, I want to make a slope the pipe to about 7 to 8ft in 1/3rd dist from lake so that i can fill water in other 2/3rds of pipe with a Valve to start the siphoning once and for all. Jan 23 '18 at 14:46
• Have you considered the size of pipe for 350lpm ? Or is that 350 litres per month.... Jan 23 '18 at 14:47
• If the land is 10' above the surface and you dig down 10' then it is not going to siphon. Jan 23 '18 at 14:51
• If you don't have electricity, I hope you have another means to pump the water. If you dig a hole deeper than the lake surface, you still need to get the water out of that hole, which requires work. The water can't be moved any higher than the lake surface without adding energy somewhere. (capillary working ignored)
– Bart
Jan 23 '18 at 16:36

As long as you can (1) set the free water surface of your destination at a lower level than the free water surface of your source, (2) use a completely sealed, air tight siphon, and (3) initially prime the system, it should work. Your source being your datum, for example, setting the depth of your destination to the same level (in this case 10 ft) will not work.

You must set the destination lower than your datum (or source), by digging a pit deeper than 10 feet, and also digging a pit depth that will be deeper than the lowest seasonal water level (including that due to your consumption). This could be, in your case, for example only, a pit that is 12 to 15 feet in depth, but you would have to determine the exact value for yourself.

In addition you should consider the water pressure that you require at the destination. The more pressure you require, the deeper your pit, relative to your water source. The difference in free water surface (from the source to the destination, in feet, for example) represents the water head and this can be converted to pressure by using such tools as are found at this website.

• Greater difference in the water surface will also make the siphon easier to start and maintain, correct? For instance, if there is only a 1ft difference, even a small amount of air getting into the line could cause the whole system to quickly empty back into the lake. Jan 23 '18 at 14:53
• @JPhi1618 Well perhaps but I think that the most difficult task is priming a siphon of 2350 ft in length. One option would be to get a flexible (hose)pipe, immerse the entire 2350 ft length in the lake until all air is removed, then anchor one end deep in the lake, put an airtight valve or clamp on the other end, and drag or unroll this end to the destination. After positioning this clamped end at the destination, providing the pit depth is correct, open the valve and the water should flow. There are other solutions, but the selection of the right siphon pipe is important in any case. Jan 23 '18 at 16:12
• The weight of the water alone in 2,350 feet of 2.5" pipe is 1,667 lbs. Then there's whatever the pipe weighs. Dragging or unrolling it could be a problem. Jan 23 '18 at 16:34
• @WayneConrad Yes indeed. That is why it will be so difficult. The OP has indicated that he wants a 2.5 inch diameter pipe; if doing this manually I would instead suggest using several smaller diameter pipes - it will be much easier to set up and will provide some redundancy. Jan 23 '18 at 16:37
• Perhaps temporary use of a generator and pump is necessary to get the pipe primed? Jan 23 '18 at 17:39

As mensioned above it works. You would need to make sure the level of discharge at your end is lower than the lowest seasonal level of the lake and also make sure it never gets submrged at your end to interrupt the flow. Both ends of the siphon need to be terminating at vertical drops.

I would use shut off valves at both ends for temporary priming and maintenace.

I recommend the inlet to source lake to terminate into a 90 degree elbo vertically submerged under the lowest seasonal level of the lake witha one way chack valve for stoping loss of prime in case the lake water recedes more.

I'm going to suggest that use of a siphon-based system is just plain unworkable here. What you need is a pipe permanently installed in or below the lake bottom, with a good filter at the inlet end, and an electric pump. Personally I'd go with a submersible pump at the inlet end (and thus a proper power cable run alongside the pipe) so that priming the system is never required. Just imagine trying to refill your 2500-foot input pipe if your shore-based pump loses its seal.

As you haven't made it clear what your pressure requirements are, and you also haven't mentioned your latitude, I'm leaving questions of the pump's pressure head and the system's survivability in winter for later.

• You have not presented proof a a siphon-based system is just plain unworkable. OP stated electric power is not an option. Jan 23 '18 at 22:54
• Sir, no power source! Generator or engine based pump may be recurring with more overheads and may not be that economical. Jan 24 '18 at 13:05
• @Paparazzi I'll stand on my years of engineering physics experience and the infamous "difference between theory and practice." The only passive water delivery systems I know of which work over those distances are the Roman aqueducts. As to electric power, I'll stand by my estimate that the cost of either a generator or a solar-panel system will be less than the cost of a robust passive siphon system, especially when maintenance is figured in. Jan 24 '18 at 15:00
• Standing on your years of experience is not presenting proof. Not my intent to ague with you. I have a degree in chemical engineer and I think it would work. I don't answer because the question is sloppy and OP will not fix it. Jan 24 '18 at 15:08
• Hi sir, Kindly get us your idea of siphoning the water with no power! When we are in need of the solution, how can we and any other show the disrespect to you Sir ? This solution or your solution is going to help thousands or even more as it involves no power other than your Idea, as thousands are watching this portal & waiting also to get the benefit I believe !! Jan 25 '18 at 7:06