The rectangular labyrinth emitter is taken as the study object in this article, as we added internal teeth to vortex-free and vortex areas in its lateral channel or lengthened the vertical channel, to change the channel structure. Using the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) method simulates the water flow field, to get the relationship between flow rate and pressure, and the vortexes distribution in channel. The aim of this study is to explore the reasons for the influence of structural change on hydraulic performance of the emitter through the analysis of vortex intensity and its distribution from the perspective of the vortex. The results show that the relative error of simulated results and experimental data was 1.02–2.11%. Adding internal teeth to vortex-free areas in lateral channel can improve hydraulic performance of the emitter; adding them to vortex areas can reduce it. The increase in vortex number and intensity in flow field is the internal reason for the improvement of the emitter’s hydraulic performance. The channel structure changes promote the formation of a larger velocity gradient, and the increase in the velocity gradient in flow field exacerbates vortex formation. Changing channel structure to improve the emitter’s hydraulic performance can promote an increase in the number and intensity of vortexes in the channel.

In this paper, a split-flow channel layout with one (group) inlet and two (group) outlets is adopted, based on computational fluid dynamics technology, and compared with the current commonly used channel with one (group) inlet and one (group) outlet emitter. On the premise of the same outlet spacing, the pressure–flow relationship curve and slope of the split-flow emitter were analyzed under the three channel layouts of non-return, single-sided re-entry, and bilateral re-entry, with different channel widths and lengths. When exploring the influence of the channel layout and size on the hydraulic performance of split-flow emitters, the results showed that when the split-flow emitter with a non-return channel is adopted and the hydraulic performance is not reduced, the single-side channel length is half that of the one-in-one-out emitter, meaning the channel width needs to be reduced by 15%. When the channel layout is a single-sided channel re-entry, the hydraulic performance is better than that of the one-in-one-out emitter; if the hydraulic performance of the two remains unchanged, the channel width can be increased by 10% or the single-sided channel length can be reduced by 20%. When the channel layout is a bilateral channel re-entry, the channel width can be increased by nearly 30% if the hydraulic performance of the 2 is consistent, and the single-side channel length is increased by about 50%. When the split-flow emitter adopts a non-return channel layout, the channel width needs to be reduced to ensure the hydraulic performance is consistent. If the layout of single-sided channel re-entry or bilateral channel re-entry is adopted, the hydraulic performance is better than that of the one-in-one-out emitter and the hydraulic performance of the two is consistent. Thus, the channel length can be reduced or the channel width increased, which is beneficial for improving the anti-clogging performance of the emitter.