This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

BooksAudiobooksComicsSheet Music### Categories

### Categories

### Categories

### Publishers

Scribd Selects Books

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Audiobooks

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Comics

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Sheet Music

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Top Books

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Audiobooks

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Comics

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Sheet Music

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

P. 1

MIKE NET Methodology|Views: 80|Likes: 0

Published by greg_n5

See more

See less

https://www.scribd.com/doc/73000074/MIKE-NET-Methodology

11/17/2011

text

original

- 6.1.1History
- 6.1.2Analysis Methods
- 6.1.3Applications of MIKE NET
- 6.1.4Skeletonization
- 6.2.1Pipes
- 6.2.2 Pumps
- 6.2.3 Valves
- 6.2.4 Minor Losses
- 6.2.5 Nodes
- 6.3 Time Patterns
- 6.4 Hydraulic Simulation Model
- 6.5.1Advective Transport in Pipes
- 6.5.2Mixing at Pipe Junctions
- 6.5.3Mixing in Storage Facilities
- 6.5.4Bulk Flow Reactions
- 6.5.5Pipe Wall Reactions
- 6.5.6Lagrangian Transport Algorithm
- 6.5.7Tank Mixing Models
- 6.6.1Accuracy Concerns
- 6.6.2Reasons for Calibrating a Model
- 6.6.3Calibration Model Data Requirements
- 6.6.4Calibration Simulations
- 6.6.5Model Adjustments
- 6.7References

EPANET Program Methodology

6

Continued global growth has placed increasing demand upon existing water distribution systems. This growth has fueled the increasing need to analyze existing and design new water distribution systems. In addition, recent concern and awareness about the safety of our drinking water has raised other questions about water quality of existing and proposed municipal water distribution systems. MIKE NET can be used to simulate existing and proposed water distribution systems. It can analyze the performance of the system and can be used to design system components to meet distribution requirements. In addition, it can perform water quality modeling, determining the age of water, performing source tracking, finding the fate of a dissolved substance, or determining substance growth or decay. This chapter describes the EPANET analysis program that MIKE NET uses to perform its water distribution network analysis. The program’s theoretical basis, its capabilities, and ways of utilizing the program for analyzing water distribution networks is discussed.

6.1

Overview

The EPANET computer model used for water distribution network analysis is composed of two parts: (1) the input data file and (2) the EPANET computer program. The data file defines the characteristics of the pipes, the nodes (ends of the pipe), and the control components (such as pumps and valves) in the pipe network. The computer program solves the nonlinear energy equations and linear mass equations for pressures at nodes and flowrates in pipes.

**EPANET Input Data File
**

The EPANET input data file, created automatically by MIKE NET, includes descriptions of the physical characteristics of pipes and nodes, and the connectivity of the pipes in a pipe network system. The user can graphically layout the water distribution network, if desired. Values for the pipe network parameters are entered through easy-to-use dialog boxes. MIKE NET then creates the EPANET input data file in the format required to run the analysis. The pipe parameters include the length, inside diameter, minor loss coefficient, and roughness coefficient of the pipe. Each pipe has a defined positive flow direction and two nodes. The parameters of nodes consist of the water demand or supply, elevation, and pressure or hydraulic grade line. The hydraulic grade line (HGL) is the summation of node elevation and pressure head at the node. The control components, which usually are installed on pipes, include control valves and booster pumps. They are also part of the input data file.

6-1

MIKE NET

**EPANET Computer Program
**

The EPANET computer program was developed by the U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). The program computes the flowrates in the pipes and then HGL at the nodes. The calculation of flowrates involves several iterations because the mass and energy equations are nonlinear. The number of iterations depends on the system of network equations and the user-specified accuracy. A satisfactory solution of the flowrates must meet the specified accuracy, the law of conservation of mass and energy in the water distribution system, and any other requirements imposed by the user. The calculation of HGL requires no iteration because the network equations are linear. Once the flowrate analysis is complete, the water quality computations are then performed.

6.1.1 History

Pipe network analysis of water distribution systems has evolved from a timeconsuming process done infrequently to a quick and easy process done regularly on systems of all sizes. Pipe network analysis initially started early in 1940. Years later, two network analysis programs were introduced by Shamir and Howard (1968) and Epp and Fowler (1970). Both programs used the Newton-Raphson method to linearize the nonlinear mass and energy equations. The major differences between these two programs are: 1. The Shamir-Howard program is based on node-oriented equations, while the Epp-Fowler program is based on loop-oriented equations. The Shamir-Howard program solves for pressure, demand, and the parameters of pipes and nodes, while the Epp-Fowler program solves only for pressures and flowrates.

2.

Since then, several programs have been developed, based on improved computing techniques as well as advances in computer hardware. Recently, several computer programs running on personal computers, such as EPANET, UNWB-LOOP, WADISO, U of K KYPIPE, and WATER have been created and made available. Of the four programs, only EPANET and U of K KYPIPE can perform dynamic simulation over a extended period of time and only EPANET can perform water quality analysis. In addition, WADISO can perform optimization analysis.

6.1.2 Analysis Methods

Three types of analysis may be conducted using MIKE NET: steady state (static) analysis, extended period (dynamic) analysis, and water quality analysis. Steady state analysis is used to compute the pipe flowrates and the node HGL in a steady state pipe network system. Extended period analysis simulates the continuous flowrate and pressure changes over a period of time. Water quality analysis is used to compute the age of water, perform source tracking, calculate the fate of a dissolved substance, or determine the growth or decay of a substance. Each of these analysis types are discussed in detail in the following sections.

6-2

EPANET Program Methodology

**Steady State Hydraulics
**

The calculation of flowrates and pressures for a steady state pipe network system is called a steady state analysis. This analysis computes the pipe flowrates and the node hydraulic grade line elevations (HGL) so that the conservation of energy and mass are satisfied. The pipe network system can include pumps, check valves, and various types of control valves.

**Extended Period Hydraulics
**

An extended period (dynamic) analysis is used to analyze a pipe network for an extended period of time. The total simulation time is usually divided into several time steps. At each time step an analysis is conducted for the pipe network based on the current network parameters and the pipe flowrates calculated from the previous time step. In an extended period simulation, storage tanks and hydraulic switches are often present as part of the water distribution system. The system operating parameters at each time step depend on external conditions and the pipe flowrates from the previous time step. External conditions are operating parameters controlled by factors outside the system, such as external demand or pump power. The previous time step flowrates are also used to predict the storage tank HGL for the current time step.

**Water Quality Analysis
**

A water quality analysis can be used by operations, planning, and engineering departments to study the flow and distribution of water. Source tracking, travel time determination, water age, and concentration levels of chemical constituents and contaminants are the primary concerns addressed by water quality models. In addition, tracking paths of flow and distribution provide the engineer insight to the origin and amount of water supplied to a particular location, as well as concentration levels of chemical constituents and contaminants. Water quality models can also be used to study water retention time for reservoir operations, pipeline travel times, and the percentage of water supplied to a location from multiple sources (i.e., treatment plants, wells, and reservoirs). Additionally, water quality models can be used to develop a hydrant flushing program to reduce water stagnation at dead ends within the pipe network. And, site sampling locations, future rechlorination facility locations, cross-connection locations, and reservoir operating strategies can be designed and analyzed.

**6.1.3 Applications of MIKE NET
**

Water distribution analysis software, such as MIKE NET, is typically used for three broad areas of analysis. These areas of analysis are generally referred to as planning, design, and operation applications (AWWA Manual M32, 1989). Some examples of these applications include (1) analysis and design of booster pumps and storage tanks for municipal or rural water distribution systems, and (2) analysis and design of chlorination satellite stations.

6-3

MIKE NET

Planning

MIKE NET can be used in the planning of pipe network systems to meet forecasted demands of the next 10 years or 20 years. For example, the program can be used to develop long term capital-improvement plans for the existing pipe network system. These plans can include staging, sizing, and locating future pipe network and water chlorination facilities. The software can also be used in the development of a main rehabilitation plan or a system-improvement plan. And, a network analysis can provide suggestions and recommendations to prepare for the occurrence of any unusual events.

Design

MIKE NET can be used to design a new pipe network system or improve on the existing pipe network system. For example, the analysis conducted using MIKE NET could help users in selecting and sizing pipe network components, such as pipes, booster pumps, and pressure regulating valves. As a part of the analysis, the performance of the pipe network system can be analyzed to verify that the system satisfies fire-flow demand requirements.

Operation

The operating status of a water distribution system (e.g., the pipe flowrates and junction node pressures) can be determined by MIKE NET. The analysis can then be used to develop operational strategies based on the guidelines for maximum use of available water and efficient management of electrical energy. MIKE NET can also be used for system troubleshooting, such as finding the location of a pipe break.

6.1.4 Skeletonization

In the past, water distribution models have not included all of the pipes contained in the network system due to the fact that the numerical modeling schemes used and the memory requirements required could handle only a limited number of pipes and nodes. These limitations required skeletonization of the pipe network system, where only a subset of all the pipes contained within the network system was defined. However, these limitations have eroded over the past years as enhanced programming methods and increased computer hardware capabilities have come into being. Skeleton network models typically include only those pipes that are considered significant to the flow and distribution of water. For example, a skeleton model might only consider 12 inch and larger diameter mains. Smaller diameter mains might also be included if they supply water to a significant area or complete a loop in the network. Examples of a complete network model and an equivalent skeleton network model are shown in Figure 6.1.4.1 and Figure 6.1.4.2.

6-4

1. the displaying of results is quicker and more readable since less pipes are involved. Also. In addition.2 An equivalent skeleton water distribution network.EPANET Program Methodology Pipe Diameter 6" and smaller 8" 12" 16" Figure 6.4.4. showing those pipes that are considered significant to the flow and distribution of water for a steady state simulation A major advantage with working with a skeleton model is that they are much easier to define since there is less data involved.1 A complete water distribution network. the number of iterations required to converge to a solution is typically less as well.1. and the simulation time is shorter since not as many pipes are involved in computing a solution. showing all pipes contained within the network Pipe Diameter 6" and smaller 8" 12" 16" Figure 6. 6-5 .

skeletonization can produce results that have sufficient accuracy if the water consumption has been properly assigned to the defined nodes. control valves.2. Therefore. and reservoirs. storage tanks.MIKE NET Skeletonization. and velocities for all pipes are critical components to a water quality simulation.2. skeletonization should not be used when performing water quality modeling since the flow rates. However. can adversely affect model accuracy. besides representing the connection point between pipes. nodes. a skeleton model node might not only represent the water demand within the immediate area. if an existing calibrated model has been converted into a skeleton model. pumps. Consumers include both municipal and industrial users.1 Node-link representation of a water distribution network As shown in Figure 6. paths. however. can represent the following components in a network: • 6-6 Points of water consumption (demand nodes) . a skeleton model should not be used when performing water quality modeling. storage tanks. in other situations. For example. it may be necessary to recalibrate the new skeleton model since the nodal demands would be represented differently. links can represent the following components in a network: • • • Pipes Pumps Valves Nodes. where the nodes are connected by links. As was stated before. and external water supply at junction nodes such as groundwater wells.1.2. Figure 6. The pipe network consists of pipes. when and where to skeletonize a network must be decided upon a case by case basis. Figure 6. the modeler must decide when it is appropriate to skeletonize a network model to produce results with sufficient accuracy to meet the modeling requirements. Also. but also demand for a smaller pipe that services an area much farther away.1 illustrates a node-link representation of a simple water distribution network. Typical water supply sources include reservoirs. For steady state water distribution simulations. 6. though. For example. EPANET views the water distribution system as a network containing nodes and links.2 The Water Distribution Network A water distribution system is a pipe network which delivers water from single or multiple supply sources to consumers.

the field data on ε values (required for the Darcy-Weisbach formulation) are not as readily available as are the C values for the pipe wall roughness coefficient (used in the Hazen-Williams formulation).1) where hL q a b = = = = head loss. which must be determined empirically. When water is conveyed through the pipe. and the Chezy-Manning formula is more commonly used for open channel flow. Note that each formula uses a different pipe roughness coefficient. The head lost to friction associated with flow through a pipe can be expressed in a general fashion as: h L = aq b (6. and roughness coefficient. This friction loss is a major energy loss in pipe flow and is a function of flowrate. The Hazen-Williams formula is probably the most popular head loss equation for water distribution systems.1. ft flow.2.1 lists resistance coefficients and flow exponents for each formula. 6. although the program can also accept flow rates in gallons per minute (gpm). the Darcy-Weisbach formula. In a pipe network system.1.1 Pipes Every pipe is connected to two nodes at its ends.EPANET Program Methodology • • Points of water input (source nodes) Locations of tanks or reservoirs (storage nodes) How the EPANET program models the hydraulic behavior of each of these components is described in the following sections. MIKE NET allows the user to choose the formulation to use. 6-7 . While the Darcy-Weisbach relationship for closed-conduit flows is generally recognized as a more accurate mathematical formulation over a wider range of flow than the Hazen-Williams formulation.2 lists general ranges of these coefficients for different types of new pipe materials. pipes are the channels used to convey water from one location to another. the Darcy-Weisbach formula is more applicable to laminar flow and to fluids other than water. million gallons per day (mgd). The minor loss coefficient is due to the fittings along the pipe. The pipe roughness coefficient is associated with the pipe material and age.2. Table 6. All flow rates in this discussion will be assumed as cubic feet per second (cfs). or the Chezy-Manning formula. inside diameter. hydraulic energy is lost due to the friction between the moving water and the stationary pipe surface. The physical characteristics of a pipe include the length.2. roughness coefficient. cfs a resistance coefficient a flow exponent EPANET can use any one of three popular forms of the headloss formula shown in Equation 6. pipe length. diameter. and liters per second (L/s). and minor loss coefficient. Be aware that a pipe's roughness coefficient can change considerably with age. Table 6.1: the Hazen-Williams formula.

To define a set of parallel pipes.017 0.0. simply draw in pipes with the same starting and ending nodes.2.85 1.015 .015 0. These losses are called minor losses because their contribution to the reduction in energy is usually much smaller than frictional losses.15 ---- 0.0.66 n2 d-5.012 . or when nodal pressures fall below or above certain set-points.5 0.150 140 . 6-8 . when tank levels fall below or above certain set-points. In addition to the energy loss caused by friction between the fluid and the pipe wall. ft f = friction factor (dependent on ε. energy losses also are caused by obstructions in the pipeline.1.011 .013 . millifeet 0.0. to prevent the pipes from being drawn exactly on top of one another.0 .140 120 .33 L Flow Exponent (b) 1. see the section titled Pipe Editor in Chapter 4. which is the sum of friction loss and minor losses. However.2 Roughness coefficients for new pipe Material Cast Iron Concrete or Concrete Lined Galvanized Iron Plastic Steel Vitrified Clay Hazen-Williams C 130 . and changes in flow area.005 0.1 Pipe head loss formulas Formula Hazen-Williams Darcy-Weisbach Chezy-Manning (full pipe flow) Notes: Resistance Coefficient (a) 4.85 d-4.012 .0252 f(ε.87 L 0. d. The normal initial condition for a pipe containing a check valve or a pump is to be in open mode.2.85 2 2 C = Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient ε = Darcy-Weisbach roughness coefficient. ft Table 6. changes in flow direction.0.140 Darcy-Weisbach ε.150 110 0.015 0.0. and q) d = pipe diameter.1. The pipe will then switch to closed mode only when flow is reversed. reduces the flowrate through the pipe. They can also be made to open or close at pre-set times.d.017 0. ft L = pipe length.q) d-5 L 4.2.015 .MIKE NET Table 6. it is suggested that one of the pipes have at least one vertex (or bend point) inserted in it so that the pipes are displayed slightly separated (see Figure 6.0. For information on defining curved pipes.10 Manning’s n 0.015 Pipes can contain check valves in them that restrict flow to a specific direction. Head loss.1. Modeling Parallel Pipes MIKE NET can model parallel pipes.1).017 120 140 .72 C-1.

2) where hG = head gain. EPANET fills in the rest of the curve by assuming: 1. ft Hp = pump horsepower q = flow. The pump curve describes the additional head imparted to a fluid as a function of its flow rate through the pump. three-point pump curves. single-point pump curves. In this case the equation of the pump curve would be: 8.2 Pumps A pump is a device that raises the hydraulic head of water. EPANET represents pumps as links of negligible length with specified upstream and downstream junction nodes. multiple point pump curves.2. Constant energy pumps operate at the same horsepower or kilowatt rating over all combinations of head and flow. 2.1 Bend points are inserted to separate two parallel pipes to allow them to be selectable 6. 6-9 . and variable speed pump. a maximum flow at zero head equal to twice the design flow. a shutoff head at zero flow equal to 133% of the design head.81Hp h G = ----------------q (6. cfs A single point pump curve is defined by a single head-flow combination that represents a pump’s desired operating point. constant energy pumps. EPANET is capable of modeling several types of user defined pumps.1. Pumps are described with a pump characteristic curve.EPANET Program Methodology Figure 6.2.

EPANET creates the complete curve by connecting the points with straight line segments. Maximum Flow (flow and head at maximum flow) A multi-point pump curve is defined by providing either a pair of head-flow points or four or more such points.MIKE NET A three-point pump curve is defined by three operating points: 1. Low Flow (flow and head at low or zero flow conditions) 2. 6-10 . Design Flow (flow and head at desired operating point) 3.

the original pump curve supplied to the program has a relative speed setting of 1. 6-11 . if run at half speed. If the system conditions require that the pump produce more than its shutoff head. Controlling Pumps EPANET allows you to turn pumps on or off at pre-set times.5 and so on. the pump curve shifts as the speed of the pump changes.e. Variable speed pumps can also be considered by specifying using the Control Editor (see the section titled Control Editor in Chapter 4 for further information) that their speed setting be changed under these same types of conditions. EPANET will attempt to close off the pump and will issue a warning message.2..1 illustrates how changing a pump's speed setting affects its characteristic curve.2. If the pump speed doubles..) A pump curve must be supplied for each pump the system unless the pump is a constant energy pump. the relative setting is 0. By definition.e. then the relative setting would be 2. or when nodal pressures fall below or rise above certain set-points.= -----Q2 N2 H1 N1 -----. Figure 6. The relationships between flow (Q) and head (H) at speed N1 and N2 are: Q1 N1 -----.= -----H2 N2 2 EPANET will shut a pump down if the system demands a head higher than the first point on a curve (i. Pumping Rate Limits Flow through a pump is unidirectional (i. one flow direction only) and pumps must operate within the head and flow limits imposed by their characteristic curves. when tank levels fall below or rise above certain set-points.EPANET Program Methodology For variable speed pumps. the shutoff head.

2.MIKE NET Figure 6.1 Effect of relative speed (n) on a pump curve 6-12 .2.

2.2 MIKE NET can model both parallel pumps and pumps in series If desired.EPANET Program Methodology Modeling Pumps in Parallel and Series As shown in Figure 6. MIKE NET can model parallel pumps and pumps in series.2. To model parallel pumps. then the resultant single equivalent pump curve flow rate of 110 gpm would be available with a head of 75 ft.2.2. it is necessary to insert the pumps on the same from and to nodes.2. as shown in Figure 6. if two pumps are connected in parallel and one pump operates at a flow rate of 50 gpm with a head of 75 ft and the other pump operates at a 60 gpm with a head of 75 ft. it is necessary to insert the pumps one after the other on the same pipe. then the head values are for the individual pump curves are added together to end up with the equivalent single pump curve. To model pumps in series (where the outlet of the first pump directly discharges into the inlet of the second pump). the discharge values for the individual pump curves are added together to end up with the equivalent single pump curve. 6-13 .2. Figure 6.2. If the pumps are connected together in series. For example.3. For pumps that are in parallel. the two or more pumps can be modeled as an equivalent composite single pump that has a characteristic curve equal to the sum of the individual pump curves.

4. In 6-14 . 200 Equiv ilent P ump 150 Head (ft) 100 Pump 1 Pump 2 50 0 0 25 50 75 Discharge (gpm) 100 125 150 Figure 6.4 When modeling pumps in series. then the resultant single equivalent pump curve head of 140 ft would be available at a flow rate of 50 gpm.3 When modeling pumps in parallel.2. as shown in Figure 6.2. This is because it is much easier to control a single pump than multiple pumps simultaneously when the pumps turn on and off.2.MIKE NET 200 150 Head (ft) 100 Equiv ilent P ump 2 mp Pu p1 Pum 50 0 0 25 50 75 Discharge (gpm) 100 125 150 Figure 6.2.2. if two pumps are connected in series and one pump provides a head of 75 ft at a flow rate of 50 gpm and the other pump provides a head of 65 feet at a flow rate of 50 gpm. it is preferable to use an equivalent composite pump to represent the multiple pumps in series. an equivalent single pump curve can be determined by adding together the characteristic pump curve discharge values from the other individual pump curves Similarly. an equivalent single pump curve can be determined by adding together the characteristic pump curve head values from the other individual pump curves When modeling pumps in series.2.

Should the downstream pressure exceed the upstream pressure then the valve closes to prevent reverse flow.EPANET Program Methodology addition. Pressure Reducing Valves (PRV) Pressure reducing valves (PRV) limit the pressure on their downstream end to not exceed a pre-set value when the upstream pressure is above the setting. General Purpose Valves (GPV) 6-15 . then flow through the valve is unrestricted.2.3 Valves Aside from the valves in pipes that are either fully opened or closed (such as check valves). Throttle Control Valves (TCV) Throttle control valves (TCV) simulate a partially closed valve by adjusting the minor head loss coefficient of the valve. Flow Control Valves (FCV) Flow control valves (FCV) limit the flow through a valve to a specified amount. EPANET can also represent valves that control either the pressure or flow at specific points in a network. then flow through the valve is unrestricted. The types of valves that can be modeled are described below. Should the pressure on the downstream end exceed that on the upstream end. Pressure Breaker Valves (PBV) Pressure breaker valves (PBV) force a specified pressure loss to occur across the valve. Such valves are considered as links of negligible length with specified upstream and downstream junction nodes. Flow can be in either direction through the valve. A relationship between the degree to which the valve is closed and the resulting head loss coefficient is usually available from the valve manufacturer. the valve closes to prevent reversal of flow. Pressure Sustaining Valves (PSV) Pressure sustaining valves (PSV) try to maintain a minimum pressure on their upstream end when the downstream pressure is below that value. If the upstream pressure is below the setting. 6. If the downstream pressure is above the setting. multiple pumps in series can cause numerical disconnections in the pipe network when EPANET checks to see if the upstream grade is greater than the downstream grade plus the available pump head. The program produces a warning message if this flow cannot be maintained without having to add additional head at the valve.

6-16 .2. It provides the capability to model devices and situations with unique headloss . meters.3) where hL d K q = = = = head loss. such as reduced flow backflow prevention valves. A Headloss Curve is used to described the headloss (Y in feet or meters) through a General Purpose Valve (GPV) as a function of flow rate (X in flow units). and well drawdown behavior. ft diameter in. The importance of such losses will depend on the layout of the pipe network and the degree of accuracy required.MIKE NET A General Purpose Valve (GPV) provides the capability to model devices and situations with unique headloss . ft loss coefficients flow rate. turbines. and well drawdown behavior. such as reduced pressure backflow prevention valves.2.4 Minor Losses Minor head losses (also called local losses) can be associated with the added turbulence that occurs at bends.flow relationships.0252Kq h L = -------------------------4 d 2 (6. turbines. The valve setting is the ID of a Headloss Curve. EPANET allows each pipe and valve to have a minor loss coefficient associated with it. It computes the resulting head loss from the following formula: 0.4.flow relationships. and valves. cfs Table 6. 6. junctions.1 gives values of K for several different kinds of pipe network components.

2.∆t A (6.6 1. Junction nodes are nodes whose HGL are not yet determined and must be computed in the pipe network analysis. fully open Swing check valve. More often.8 0.5 1.1).0 2. elevation.8 0. tanks and reservoirs) are special types of nodes where a free water surface exists and the hydraulic head is simply the elevation of water above sea level. Tanks are distinguished from reservoirs by having their water surface level change as water flows into or out of them—reservoirs remain at a constant water level no matter what the flow is..0 5. because their HGL are initially defined. Two types of nodes exist in a pipe network system. Degree of freedom.2 0. storage tank or reservoir) must be connected to exactly one pipe. All nodes should have their elevation specified above sea level (i. For example.9 0.flow through branch Square entrance Exit Loss Coefficient 10..5 0. fully open Angle valve.4) 6-17 . and a junction node's degree of freedom may be greater than one. Fixed nodes are nodes whose HGL are defined.e. it is approximated using topographic maps. Water demand at a junction node is the summation of all water drawn from or added to the system at that node. In EPANET.e. Therefore. (1) fixed nodes and (2) junction nodes. EPANET models the change in water level of a storage tank with the following equation: q ∆y = --.EPANET Program Methodology Table 6.flow through run Standard tee . Any water consumption or supply rates at nodes that are not storage nodes must be known for the duration of time the network is being analyzed. fully open Short-radius elbow Medium-radius elbow Long-radius elbow 45° elbow Closed return bend Standard tee .4. a fixed node's degree of freedom is always one.0 6.6 0.2 0.. but a fixed node (i. The elevation of a node can sometimes be obtained from system maps or drawings.1 Loss coefficients for common pipe network components Component Globe valve. greater than zero) so that the contribution to hydraulic head due to elevation can be computed. A node's degree of freedom is the number of pipes that connect to that node.2. reservoirs and storage tanks are considered fixed nodes. a junction node may be connected to more than one pipe. and water demand are the three important input parameters for a node (see Figure 6. fully open Gate valve. Storage nodes (i.5 Nodes Nodes are the locations where pipes connect.4 2.2.e.

as a storage tank empties. ft flow rate into (+) or out of (-) tank.1) since a pumped groundwater well cannot be explicitly defined with EPANET. Storage nodes should not have an external water consumption or supply rate associated with them.1. Modeling Pumped Groundwater Wells The water supply to the water distribution network is furnished by reservoirs and storage tanks. sec For each storage tank. Reservoir Storage Tank Pump 11 11 111 12 12 112 21 22 22 122 31 13 113 Equivalent Pumped Groundwater Well 21 121 23 31 32 Figure 6. ft2 time interval. 6-18 . its water level lowers and it has to be refilled by pumping from either a reservoir or a groundwater well. cfs cross-sectional area of the tank. a pumped groundwater well is modeled the same as a pumped reservoir. However. the program must know the cross-sectional area as well as the minimum and maximum permissible water level. an equivalent pumped reservoir must be defined (as shown in Figure 6. as shown in Figure 6.5.5.5. therefore junction nodes are automatically inserted by MIKE NET when assigning a pump to the link attached to a reservoir or storage tank.MIKE NET where ∆y q A ∆t = = = = change in water level. such as lakes.2. rivers. Note that a pump cannot be directly attached to reservoir or storage tank. Reservoir-type storage nodes are usually used to represent external water sources.2. Reservoirs are treated as inexhaustible sources of water.1 A pumped groundwater well is modeled as a reservoir with an attached pump in EPANET In order to model a pumped groundwater well. and as such their water level never varies. or groundwater wells.2. In EPANET.

causing the water level in the tanks to differ over time thereby causing the oscillation between the tanks. At higher pumping rates.2. it is recommended that hydraulically adjacent tanks be modeled as a single composite tank with an equivalent total surface area and storage volume equal to the sum of the individual tanks. The default time period interval is one hour. if two or more storage tanks are hydraulically adjacent to each other it is possible that oscillations can occur between the tanks as the water bounces back and forth between them.5.2. the groundwater well may not be able to recharge fast enough to maintain the pumping rate specified by the defined groundwater well pump curve. if this effect is a significant factor in modeling the refilling of the storage tank. but this can be set to any desired value using the Time Editor (see the section titled Time Editor in Chapter 4 for further information). as shown in Figure 6. but that these quantities can change from one time period to another. The value of any of these quantities in a time period equals a baseline value multiplied by a time pattern Head 6-19 .5. external water supply rates. and constituent source concentrations at nodes remain constant over a fixed period of time.2 The groundwater well pump curve may need to be adjusted downward to account for groundwater well drawdown and recharge effects Modeling Hydraulically Adjacent Storage Tanks When performing an extended period simulation.3 Time Patterns EPANET assumes that water usage rates. the groundwater well pump curve may need to be adjusted downward.EPANET Program Methodology As the storage tank empties and its water level falls to a certain amount. drawdown of the water table elevation at the groundwater well can occur.2. 6. The control rules used to regulate the starting and stopping of the groundwater pump are defined within the Control Editor (see the section titled Control Editor in Chapter 4 for further information). To prevent this effect from occurring. control rules turn on the groundwater (reservoir) pump to start refilling of the storage tank.5.2. as shown in Figure 6.2. To account for this effect. Static Pum ped Discharge Figure 6. As pumping of the groundwater occurs. This fluctuation is caused by small differences in flow rates as the tanks refill individually.

4 Usage Factor 1. Let the flow-headloss relation in a pipe between nodes i and j be given as: H i – H j = h ij = r Q n ij + mQ 2 ij where H = nodal head.8 0. The value of the resistance coefficient will depend on which friction headloss formula is being used (see below).5) 6.0 0. 2 1. i = resistance coefficient. The only difference between these methods is the way in which link flows are updated after a new trial solution for nodal heads has been found.1 Time pattern for water usage The Pattern Editor is used to define the time patterns to be used in an extended period simulation.MIKE NET factor for that period. and m = minor loss coefficient.2 1. Todini and Pilati (1987) and later Salgado et al.4 1.6 1. it was chosen for use in EPANET. n = flow exponent. where each demand period is of two hours duration. For pumps.2 1 1.3. (1988) chose to call it the "Gradient Method". Figure 6. . Different patterns can be assigned to individual nodes or groups of nodes. Because Todini's approach is simpler.1illustrates a pattern of factors that might apply to daily water demands. the headloss (negative of the head gain) can be represented by a power law of the form 6-20 .3.. Q = flow rate. 0.1 Figure 6. Assume we have a pipe network with N junction nodes and NF fixed grade nodes (tanks and reservoirs).. h = headloss.7 0. See the section titled Pattern Editor in Chapter 4 for information on how to define time patterns.9 0.5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Demand Period (6. . Similar approaches have been described by Hamam and Brameller (1971) (the "Hybrid Method) and by Osiadacz (1987) (the "Newton Loop-Node Method").6 1.4 Hydraulic Simulation Model The method used in EPANET to solve the flow continuity and headloss equations that characterize the hydraulic state of the pipe network at a given point in time can be termed a hybrid node-loop approach.

7) where A = an (NxN) Jacobian matrix. flow into a node is positive. and F = an (Nx1) vector of right hand side terms. where Di is the flow demand at node i and by convention. pij = while for pumps 1 nr Qij n −1 + 2m Qij 1 P ij = -----------------------------------Q ij n – 1 2 r -----n ω - ω Each right hand side term consists of the net flow imbalance at a node plus a flow correction factor: 6-21 .9). The second set of equations that must be satisfied is flow continuity around all nodes: n ∑ Qij – Di j = 0 (6. (6. ω is a relative speed setting.8) and (6. and r and n are the pump curve coefficients. The Gradient solution method begins with an initial estimate of flows in each pipe that may not necessarily satisfy flow continuity. off-diagonal terms are: Aij = − pij where pij is the inverse derivative of the headloss in the link between nodes i and j with respect to flow. For pipes.EPANET Program Methodology hij = −ω 2 ( h0 − r (Qij / ω ) ) where h0 is the shutoff head for the pump.. For a set of known heads at the fixed grade nodes.. H = an (Nx1) vector of unknown nodal heads..6) for i = 1. N. we seek a solution for all heads Hi and flows Qij that satisfy Eqs. At each iteration of the method. new nodal heads are found by solving the matrix equation. The diagonal elements of the Jacobian matrix are: Aii = ∑ pij j while the non-zero. AH = F (6.

1981). (Qij is always positive for pumps.. (All computations are made with head in feet and flow in cfs). new flows are found from: Q i j = Qij – ( y i j – pi j ( H i – H j ) ) (6.1. 2.11) always results in flow continuity around each node after the first iteration. then Eqs. (6.8) If the sum of absolute flow changes relative to the total flow in all links is larger than some tolerance (e. where sgn(x) is 1 if x > 0 and -1 otherwise.MIKE NET Fi = ∑ Qij − Di + ∑ y ij + ∑ pif H f f j j where the last term applies to any links connecting node i to a fixed grade node f and the flow correction factor yij is: P Y ij = p ( r Q ij + m Q ij ) sgn ( Q ij ) for pipes and n 2 yij = − pijω 2 h0 − r (Qij / ω ) n ( ) for pumps.001).White equation for Re > 4.) After new heads are computed by solving Eq.10).11) are solved once again. After re-ordering the nodes to minimize the amount of fill-in for matrix A. 3. 1991): 6-22 . EPANET implements this method using the following steps: 1. a symbolic factorization is carried out so that only the non-zero elements of A need be stored and operated on in memory.000 (Bhave.10 is solved using a sparse matrix method based on node re-ordering (George and Liu. For the Darcy-Weisbach headloss equation. The linear system of equations 6. The resistance coefficient for a pipe (r) is computed as described in Table 3. (6. the flow in a pipe is chosen equal to the flow corresponding to a velocity of 1 ft/sec. 0.Poiseuille formula for Re < 2. The flow update formula (6.g. 1991): 64 f = -----Re Swamee and Jain approximation to the Colebrook .000 (Bhave.10) and (6. For the very first iteration at time 0. The flow through a conventional pump equals the design flow specified for the pump curve. the friction factor f is computed by different equations depending on the flow's Reynolds Number (Re): Hagen . An initial flow of 1 cfs is assumed for other types of pumps. For extended period simulation this re-ordering and factorization is only carried out once at the start of the analysis.

pumps are closed if the head gain is greater than the shutoff head (to prevent reverse flow). Similarly. check valves are closed if the headloss through them is negative (see below).EPANET Program Methodology f = 0.5 FB ) F A = ( Y 3 ) –2 FB = FA 2 – --------------------------. 7.032 – 3 FA + 0. Open valves are assigned an r-value by assuming the open valve acts as a smooth pipe (f = 0. r = (1/C)n. status checks are made only after convergence is achieved. 6. For links where (r+m)Q < 10-7.74 Ln 3.9 Y 3 = –0.9 2 Cubic Interpolation From Moody Diagram for 2.128 – 17 FA + 2. ( Y2 ) ( Y3 ) 0. 8.7 d Re0.74Y 2 = ---------. The pipe's headloss parameters are n = (1/γ). The computed flow through the fictitious pipe becomes the flow associated with the emitter.+ -----------3. Status checks on pumps.000 < Re < 4.7 d 4000 5. and pipes connected to full/empty tanks are made after every other iteration.7 d + Re 0.00514215 ε . Emitters at junctions are modeled as a fictitious pipe between the junction and a fictitious reservoir. The head at the fictitious reservoir is the elevation of the junction.5.74 ε where ε = pipe roughness and d = pipe diameter. flow control valves.000 (Dunlop. i.The minor loss coefficient based on velocity head (K) is converted to one based on flow (m) with the following relation: 0. Status checks on pressure control valves (PRVs and PSVs) are made after each iteration. During status checks.25 ε 5. After this. 6-23 . h = 108Q.128 + 13 FA – 2 FB X 4 = R ( 0.e. 1991): f = ( X1 + R ( X2 + R ( X3 + X4 ) ) ) Re R = -----64 X 1 = 7FA – FB X 2 = 0.02) whose length is twice the valve diameter. and m = 0 where C is the emitter's discharge coefficient and γ is its pressure exponent. check valves (CVs). When these conditions are not present.5 FB X 3 = – 0. up until the 10th iteration. Closed links are assumed to obey a linear headloss relation with a large resistance factor. A similar status check is made for links connected to empty/full tanks.9 3.+ ----------------- 0. so that p = 10-8 and y = Q.. the link is re-opened.86859 Ln ---------. p = 107 and y = Q/n. 4.02517 K m = ----------------------4 d 5.

12. 10. Throttle control valves (TCVs) are treated as pipes with r as described in item 6 above and m taken as the converted value of the valve setting (see item 4 above). 11. They are re-opened at the next status check if such conditions no longer hold.MIKE NET Such links are closed if the difference in head across the link would cause an empty tank to drain or a full tank to fill. its flow is computed by applying the current head gain to its characteristic curve.0001 cfs. 9. Simply checking if h < 0 to determine if a check valve should be closed or open was found to cause cycling between these two states in some networks due to limits on numerical precision. These valves can either be completely open. If a pump is re-opened. Status checks on PRVs and PSVs are made as described in item 7 above. The logic used to test the status of a PRV is as follows: If current status = ACTIVE then if Q < -Qtol if Hi < Hset + Hml . If the status check closes an open pump. where Hset is the pressure drop setting for the valve (in feet). 13. (6. pressure sustaining. or active at their pressure or flow setting. completely closed. PSVs. The following procedure was devised to provide a more robust test of the status of a check valve (CV): if |h| > Htol then if h > -Htol then if Q < -Qtol then else else if Q < -Qtol then else status = CLOSED status = CLOSED status = OPEN status = CLOSED status = unchanged where Htol = 0. or CV. Matrix coefficients for pressure reducing. Matrix coefficients for pressure breaker valves (PBVs) are set to the following: p = 108 and y = 108Hset.0005 ft and Qtol = 0. and FCVs) are computed after all other links have been analyzed.Htol 6-24 then new status = OPEN then new status = ACTIVE . ignoring any minor losses.Htol then new status = CLOSED then new status = OPEN else new status = ACTIVE If curent status = OPEN then if Q < -Qtol if Hi > Hset + Hml + Htol then new status = CLOSED then new status = ACTIVE else new status = OPEN If current status = CLOSED then if Hi > Hj + Htol and Hi < Hset . its flow is determined by solving Eq. and flow control valves (PRVs. If a pipe or CV is re-opened.8) for Q under the current headloss h. pipe.Htol if Hi > Hj + Htol and Hj < Hset . its flow is set to 10-6 cfs.

e. Qset is added to the flow leaving node i and entering node j. and is subtracted from Fi and added to Fj. A similar set of tests is used for PSVs. · the next time at which a rule-based control causes a status change somewhere in the network. 14. Flow through an active PRV is maintained to force continuity at its downstream node while flow through a PSV does the same at its upstream node..g. · the shortest time until a tank level reaches a point that triggers a change in status for some link (e. 16. Hi is its upstream head. FCVs. and links to tanks is made. then the valve cannot deliver the flow and it is treated as an open pipe. a convergence check is skipped on the very next iteration). the i and j subscripts are switched as are the > and < operators. the following procedure is implemented: a.. · the shortest time for a tank to fill or drain. Otherwise. 6-25 . the time step for the next solution is the minimum of: · the time until a new demand period begins. After a solution is found for the current time period. Hset is its pressure setting converted to head. · the next time until a simple timer control on a link kicks in. Coefficients for open/closed PRVs and PSVs are handled in the same way as for pipes. 17.g. Also. After initial convergence is achieved (flow convergence plus no change in status for PRVs and PSVs). the status of links controlled by pressure switches (e. a pump controlled by the pressure at a junction node) is checked. For extended period simulation (EPS). Hj is its downstream head. If any status change occurs. An equivalent assignment of coefficients is made for an active PSV except the subscript for F and A is the upstream node i. another status check on pumps. For an active PRV from node i to j: Pij = 0 Fj = Fj + 108Hset Ajj = Ajj + 108 This forces the head at the downstream node to be at the valve setting Hset.EPANET Program Methodology else new status = CLOSED where Q is the current flow through the valve. except that when testing against Hset.. 15. the iterations must continue for at least two more iterations (i. Hml is the minor loss when the valve is open (= mQ2). a final solution has been obtained. and Htol and Qtol are the same values used for check valves in item 9 above. If the head at node i is less than that at node j. CVs. opens or closes a pump) as stipulated in a simple control. For an active FCV from node i to j with flow setting Qset.

new demands are found. Source tracing is a useful tool for analyzing distribution systems drawing water from two or more different raw water supplies.11) are begun at the current set of flows. if hydraulics are updated every hour. New water entering the network from reservoirs or source nodes enters with age of zero. Its default value is 1/10 of the normal hydraulic time step (e. then rules are evaluated every 6 minutes).1 Water Age and Source Tracing Water age is the time spent by a parcel of water in the network. Internally. Internally.. Source tracing tracks over time what percent of water reaching any node in the network had its origin at a particular node.. clock time is updated. It provides a simple. rules are evaluated at a rule time step. then its actions are added to a list.4. · Over this rule time step. As this water moves through the pipe network it splits apart and blends together with parcels of varying age at pipe junctions and storage facilities. The source node can be any node in the network. (6.10) and (6. It can show to what degree water from a given source blends with that from other sources. b. EPANET provides automatic modeling of water age. non-specific measure of the overall quality of delivered drinking water. tank levels are adjusted based on the current flow solution. as are the water levels in storage tanks (based on the last set of pipe flows computed). If an action conflicts with one for the same link already on the list then the action from the rule with the higher priority stays on the list and the other is removed. and how the spatial pattern of this blending changes over time. it treats age as a reactive constituent whose growth follows zero-order kinetics with a rate constant equal to 1 (i. 6-26 . If this causes the status of one or more links to change then a new hydraulic solution is computed and the process begins anew. the latter are assumed to change in a linear fashion based on the current flow solution. and link control rules are checked to determine which links change status. EPANET provides an automatic facility for performing source tracing. c. If the priorities are the same then the original action stays on the list. the action list is cleared and the next rule time step is taken unless the normal hydraulic time step has elapsed. A new set of iterations with Eqs. The user need only specify which node is the source node. Time is advanced by the computed time step. each second the water becomes a second older). · If a rule's conditions are satisfied. EPANET treats this node as a constant source of a nonreacting constituent that enters the network with a concentration of 100.MIKE NET In computing the times based on tank levels. The activation time of rule-based controls is computed as follows: · Starting at the current time. · If no status changes were called for. if the list is not empty then the new actions are taken. including storage nodes.e.g. · After all rules are evaluated. 6.

This is a reasonable assumption for many tanks operating under fill-and-draw conditions providing that sufficient momentum flux is imparted to the inflow (Rossman and Grayman. the mixing of fluid is taken to be complete and instantaneous. 6.ext = external source flow entering the network at node k. Advective transport within a pipe is represented with the following equation: ∂C i ∂t = – ui ∂C i ∂x + r(Ci ) where Ci = concentration (mass/volume) in pipe i as a function of distance x and time t.5. Lj = length of link j. 1993.ext = concentration of the external flow entering at node k. For a specific node k one can write: ∑ jεIkQ Cj x = L j + Qk. ex C i x = 0 = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------t where i = link with flow leaving node k. The following equation expresses these phenomena: ∂ (V C ) = ∂t s s ∑ iεIsQi Ci x = L i – ∑ jεOsQj Cs + r ( Cs ) where Vs = volume in storage at time t. The following phenomenon are represented (Rossman et al. while Ci|x=L is the concentration at the end of the link ∑ jεIkQj + Qk. ui = flow velocity (length/time) in pipe i. Ik = set of links with flow into k.1 Advective Transport in Pipes A dissolved substance will travel down the length of a pipe with the same average velocity as the carrier fluid while at the same time reacting (either growing or decaying) at some given rate. 1999).5. Qk.2 Mixing at Pipe Junctions At junctions receiving inflow from two or more pipes. Cs = concentration within the storage facility. Is = set of links providing flow into the facility..EPANET Program Methodology 6.3 Mixing in Storage Facilities It is convenient to assume that the contents of storage facilities (tanks and reservoirs) are completely mixed. and Os = set of links withdrawing flow from the facility. and r = rate of reaction (mass/volume/time) as a function of concentration. and Ck. the internal concentration could be changing due to reactions. This means there is no intermixing of mass between adjacent parcels of water traveling down a pipe. 1996): 6. ex t 6. Under completely mixed conditions the concentration throughout the tank is a blend of the current contents and that of any entering water. 6-27 . Rossman and Boulos. At the same time. Qj = flow (volume/time) in link j.5 Water Quality Simulation Model The governing equations for EPANET’s water quality module are based on the principles of conservation of mass coupled with reaction kinetics. The notation Ci|x=0 represents the concentration at the start of link i. Longitudinal dispersion is usually not an important transport mechanism under most operating conditions. Thus the concentration of a substance in water leaving the junction is simply the flow-weighted sum of the concentrations from the inflowing pipes. ex t Ck.5.

n = 1): R = K b (C L − C ) This model can be applied to the growth of disinfection by-products.MIKE NET 6. Kb < 0 R = K b (C − C L )C ( n −1) where CL = the limiting concentration. When a limiting concentration exists on the ultimate growth or loss of a substance then the rate expression becomes R = K b (C L − C )C ( n −1) for n > 0. The rate of reaction can generally be described as a power function of concentration: r = kC n where k = a reaction constant and n = the reaction order. where the ultimate formation of by-product (CL) is limited by the amount of reactive precursor present. Kb > 0.5. Kb < 0. Kb > 0 for n > 0. n = 2): R = K b C (C − C L ) 6-28 . Some examples of different reaction rate expressions are: Simple First-Order Decay (CL = 0. First-Order Saturation Growth (CL > 0. Kb < 0. such as chlorine.4 Bulk Flow Reactions While a substance moves down a pipe or resides in storage it can undergo reaction with constituents in the water column. n = 1) R = K bC The decay of many substances. Second Order Decay (CL ¹ 0. can be modeled adequately as a simple first-order reaction. Two-Component. such as trihalomethanes.

In one investigation for chlorine. Kb = 1. Kb < 0. The rate of disappearance of A is proportional to the product of A and B remaining. Note that for decay reactions.32 UVA 1. shown above for a decay reaction.e. age) increases by one unit. when a negative reaction order n is specified.365 ( 100 UVA ) – --------------------------- DOC CL = 4.98UVA − 1. (For growth reactions the denominator becomes CL + C. 1998). Zero-Order growth (CL = 0. Clark (1998) has had success in applying this model to chlorine decay data that did not conform to the simple firstorder model. EPANET will utilize the Michaelis-Menton rate equation.) This rate equation is often used to describe enzyme-catalyzed reactions and microbial growth. CL must be set higher than the initial concentration present. Koechling (1998) has applied Michaelis-Menton kinetics to model chlorine decay in a number of different waters and found that both Kb and CL could be related to the water's organic content and its ultraviolet absorbance as follows: K b = – 0. respectively.1 when T1 was 20 deg. C (Koechling.EPANET Program Methodology This model assumes that substance A reacts with substance B in some unknown ratio to produce a product P. Michaelis-Menton Decay Kinetics (CL > 0. It produces first-order behavior at low concentrations and zero-order behavior at higher concentrations. The relationship between the bulk rate constant seen at one temperature (T1) to that at another temperature (T2) is often expressed using a van't Hoff . where with each unit of time the "concentration" (i.Arrehnius equation of the form: K b 2 = K b1θ T 2 −T 1 where q is a constant.0 This special case can be used to model water age. 6-29 . Note: These expressions apply only for values of Kb and CL used with MichaelisMenton kinetics. n = 0) R = 1. depending on whether either component A or B is in excess.91DOC where UVA = ultraviolet absorbance at 254 nm (1/cm) and DOC = dissolved organic carbon concentration (mg/L). CL can be either positive or negative. q was estimated to be 1. n < 0): b R = ---------------- K C CL – C As a special case..

For first-order kinetics. k f C )(2 / R ) where kw now has units of mass/area/time. 1994). The amount of wall area available for reaction and the rate of mass transfer between the bulk fluid and the wall will also influence the overall rate of this reaction. the average Sherwood number along the length of a pipe can be expressed as Sh = 3.88 Sc1/ 3 6-30 . The latter factor can be represented by a mass transfer coefficient whose value depends on the molecular diffusivity of the reactive species and on the Reynolds number of the flow (Rossman et. In fully developed laminar flow.04[(d / L) Re Sc ] in which Re = Reynolds number and Sc = Schmidt number (kinematic viscosity of water divided by the diffusivity of the chemical) (Edwards et. For zero-order kinetics the reaction rate cannot be any higher than the rate of mass transfer. For turbulent flow the empirical correlation of Notter and Sleicher (1971) can be used: Sh = 0. Mass transfer coefficients are usually expressed in terms of a dimensionless Sherwood number (Sh): k f = Sh D d in which D = the molecular diffusivity of the species being transported (length2/time) and d = pipe diameter. dissolved substances can be transported to the pipe wall and react with material such as corrosion products or biofilm that are on or close to the wall.5. and R = pipe radius.MIKE NET 6. which for a pipe equals 2 divided by the radius. al.0149 Re 0. kf = mass transfer coefficient (length/time).al. The surface area per unit volume. the rate of a pipe wall reaction can be expressed as: w f r = ------------------------- 2k k C R ( kw + kf ) where kw = wall reaction rate constant (length/time).5 Pipe Wall Reactions While flowing through pipes.65 + 0. so r = MIN (k w . 1976). determines the former factor.0668(d / L) Re Sc 2/3 1 + 0.

The water from the leading segments of pipes with flow into each junction is blended together to compute a new water quality value at the junction. If the difference in quality is below the tolerance then the size of the current last segment in the outflow pipe is simply increased by the volume flowing into the pipe over the time step. The segment's water quality equals the new quality value computed for the node. Initially each pipe in the network consists of a single segment whose quality equals the initial quality assigned to the downstream node. If this volume exceeds that of the segment then the segment is destroyed and the next one in line behind it begins to contribute its volume. Contributions from outside sources are added to the quality values at the junctions. minutes rather than hours) to accommodate the short times of travel that can occur within pipes. The segment volume equals the product of the pipe flow and the time step. 2. As time progresses. New segments are created in pipes with flow out of each junction. Step 4 is only carried out if the new node quality differs by a user-specified tolerance from that of the last segment in the outflow pipe. The following steps occur at the end of each such time step: 1. The volume contributed from each segment equals the product of its pipe's flow rate and the time step.g. At the start of the next hydraulic time step the order of segments in any links that experience a flow reversal is switched. The quality in storage tanks is updated depending on the method used to model mixing in the tank (see below). The size of the segments in between these remains unchanged. To cut down on the number of segments. 6-31 . The water quality in each segment is updated to reflect any reaction that may have occurred over the time step. reservoir. 3.5.EPANET Program Methodology 6. and tank. This process is then repeated for the next water-quality time step. 4. the size of the most upstream segment in a pipe increases as water enters the pipe while an equal loss in size of the most downstream segment occurs as water leaves the link. 1987). These water quality time steps are typically much shorter than the hydraulic time step (e.6 Lagrangian Transport Algorithm EPANET's water quality simulator uses a Lagrangian time-based approach to track the fate of discrete parcels of water as they move along pipes and mix together at junctions between fixed-length time steps (Liou and Kroon..

7 Tank Mixing Models EPANET can use four different types of models to characterize mixing within storage tanks: Complete Mixing. Two-Compartment Mixing.1 Behavior of Segments in the Lagrangian Solution Method 6.MIKE NET Figure 6. Different models can be used with different tanks within a network.5. Complete Mixing assumes that all water that enters the tank is instantaneously and completely mixed with the water already in the tank.5. First In First Out (FIFO) Plug Flow and Last In Fist Out (LIFO) Plug Flow. 6-32 .6.

The first compartment is capable of simulating short circuiting between inflow and outflow. then it sends the overflow water to the second compartment where it completely mixes with the water stored there.1 Complete mixed tank mixing model schematic It is the simplest mixing behavior to assume. FIFO Plug Flow assumes that there is no mixing during the residence time of the water in the tank. If this compartment is full. 6-33 . while the second compartment represents dead zones. When water leaves the tank.7.2 Two compartment tank mixing model schematic The inlet/outlet pipes of the tank are assumed to be in the first compartment. which is the fraction of the volume of the tank to be dedicated to the first compartment. Figure 6.5. which if full.EPANET Program Methodology Figure 6. and seems to apply well to a large number of facilities that operate in a fill and draw fashion. receives an equal volume of water from the second compartment to make up the difference. requires no extra parameters to describe it.5. The user must define a single parameter. Two-Compartment Mixing divides the available storage volume into two compartments.7. New water that enters the tank is mixed with the first compartment. it exits from the first compartment.

MIKE NET Figure 6.5. This involves making minor adjustments to the input data so that the model accurately simulates both the pressure and flow rates in the system.7.3 FIFO tank mixing model schematic Water parcels move through the tank in a segregated fashion. where the first parcel to enter the tank is also the first to leave. the parcels stack up one on top of another. the first parcel to enter the tank is also the last to leave. in contrast to the FIFO Plug Flow model.4 LIFO tank mixing model schematic However. There are no additional parameters to describe in this model. It requires no additional parameters be provided 6. In this fashion. where water enters and leaves from the bottom.7.6 Model Calibration Once a water distribution model has been developed. since pressure and flow 6-34 . Figure 6. Physically speaking. it must be calibrated so that it accurately represents the actual working real-life water distribution network under a variety of conditions. Physically speaking this type of model might apply to a tall narrow standpipe with an inflow/outflow pipe at the bottom and a low momentum inflow.5. Note that both the pressure and flow rates need to be matched together. LIFO Plug Flow assumes that there is no mixing between parcels of water that enter the tank. this model best represents baffled tanks with constant inflow and outflow.

Percent Pressure Differential Method A more precise determination of accuracy is to look at the pressure differential as a percentage. since the main point is to establish a common unit of measure to determine the degree of accuracy reached when calibrating a model. at a base pressure of 100 psi a 4 psi pressure differential between simulated and actual pressures represents a 4 percent differential. 6. For smaller network systems. Pressure Differential Method The simplest and easiest method in determining how accurate a simulated network model is to the actual network is to look at the maximum pressure differential between simulated and actual node pressures. For example. However. it is better to look at the percent differential in head loss rather than the actual head loss values. the model is generally considered calibrated if the pressure difference between the simulated and actual node pressures is within 5 to 10 psi of each other. matching only pressures or flow rates is not sufficient enough. For example. Generally there are three types of measurements used to determine the degree of accuracy reached when calibrating a model. Head Loss Differential Method The most precise determination of accuracy is to examine the difference in pipe head loss between simulated and actual. Therefore. from a practical standpoint the pressure differential method and the percent pressure differential method are far easier to use and understand. During the calibration process there should be a point where the modeler has decided that enough time has been spent on calibrating the model to the actual network and he should move on to analyzing the pipe network system. Therefore. this pressure differential would likely be considered too high. but at a base pressure of 40 psi this represents a 10 percent differential. Although the head loss method is better than the other methods in determining accuracy. with maybe a 100 or less nodes. looking at the pressure differential as a percentage is a more precise measure of accuracy.1 Accuracy Concerns The computed pressure and measured field (actual) pressure will not exactly match for every node contained within the network system—there will be differences within the system. This section discusses the concepts and steps involved in calibrating a water distribution model. such as a time range for the maximum day—not just the maximum and minimum hour for the maximum day. any of these methods can be used. ideally the model should be calibrated over an extended period of time. 6-35 . Also. in a large system of several hundred or thousands of nodes. Therefore. Head loss is more sensitive to calibration errors than pressure.EPANET Program Methodology rates are dependent upon each other. the maximum amount of these differences needs to be considered when performing a model calibration. As was discussed previously.6.

establish understanding of the system operation. . and uncover errors with the system. sets a benchmark.6. can be used to predict potential problems.6. A calibrated model establishes model credibility.2 Reasons for Calibrating a Model Calibration is an important process that should be performed.

modified models can be compared. demand patterns. and some data is assumed (e.6. Pressure and flow rates computed by this model become the benchmark from which pressure and flow rates computed by subsequent. length. the engineer gains valuable insight and knowledge of the network system. by collecting and analyzing data used to define the model and studying the existing network system. such as consumption. etc. use of an uncalibrated model is not good engineering practice. credibility of the model is established. discharge pressures. consumption rates. Understand System Operations In the process of calibrating a model.EPANET Program Methodology Model Credibility Through the process of calibrating a model. On the other hand.). by analyzing the system operation. a calibrated model is known to simulate a network system for a range of operating conditions. The differences between the two models can then be used to analyze the changes brought about in the modified system. These changes can then be compared with the benchmark calibrated model to see what changes in pressure and flow rates have occurred. might include additional valves or pumps to increase the number of pressure zones in a system. pump rates. A modified model. since it will most likely lead to inaccurate model results and poor engineering decisions based upon these results. Many times during the process of calibrating a model. Uncover Errors Calibration requires collecting data about the system. is measured but sometimes also assumed.. for example. questionable model results are investigated.g. it can be used as a benchmark. some data is variable with time (e.g. pipe diameter.. with additional field data being collected and analyzed.3 Calibration Model Data Requirements The data requirements for performing a model calibration is made up with the fact that some data is fixed and unchanging (e. etc. predictive tool. pipe roughness values.). The engineer needs to simulate many of the same system settings and operations that a network operator makes in order to calibrate the model to the actual operation of the network system. The data and modeling assumptions of an uncalibrated model are unlikely to match the actual system. Incorrect pipe diameters may be determined. reservoir elevations.). or even incorrectly closed valves discovered. 6-37 . Benchmark Once a network model has been calibrated to a known range of operating conditions. Its input data has been examined and adjusted to insure that the model can be used as an accurate. Some data.. Predict Potential Problems A calibrated model can be used to predict any potential problems due to changes in the system operation.g. Hence. possible improvements to system operation may be determined. 6. Inconsistencies between the modeled results and the actual field conditions are examined. In addition. etc.

calibrating to the maximum hour requires data for only one time period. it is important to decide whether a steady state or an extended period calibration simulation is to be performed. Complexity of the network system determines the degree of difficulty in calibrating the model. and reservoirs should be identified. For example. tanks. the minimum hour can be calibrated. Therefore.. valves.e. whereas an extended period simulation is needed to calibrate a maximum day demand or when performing water quality modeling. Even though the maximum hour is typically of primary interest. Then. including nodal elevations. The availability of data is also a limiting factor. But. pressure zones. Variable data is more difficult to obtain and measure. first calibrate the model for the maximum hour. but generally can be gathered from SCADA (Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition) system information or manual chart and graph systems. Calibration should also be performed for the minimum hour of the maximum day. data would be required for two time periods. Extending the calibration process to an extended period simulation for the maximum day increases the data requirements to 24 time periods. for example. and demand patterns there are. valves. and other important information. What can be done to simplify the calibration process is to approach the calibration process incrementally. it may only be possible to gather this data for a single time period (i. To elaborate. pumps. Data Acquisition Calibration data should be compiled and organized so that it can be used in an efficient manner. and can usually be accomplished with a reasonable degree of accuracy—even for large network systems. the more difficult the calibration process is and the less accurate the calibrated model will be. Once both of these simulations have been calibrated. 6-38 . a map of the network system is essential to properly calibrate the system. Knowledge learned in calibrating the maximum hour can be used to speed-up the calibration process for the minimum hour.MIKE NET Fixed data is easily obtained or measured. A steady state simulation is used to calibrate the maximum (peak) hour demand. SCADA data and graphs are useful since they contain data that will be referenced when developing the calibrated model. values for the entire day are also important since they provide an overall understanding of the operation of the network system. maximum hour). for a large system. This task is easily performed on a small system. And. reservoirs. allows the user to compare the discharge pressure value at a particular location on the system during the day with the maximum hour value. The more pipes. tanks. although it would be ideal to gather this information in order to perform an extended period simulation. This will provide a good understanding of the network system. pressure zone boundaries. In addition. All pipes. it is extremely difficult to do for a large network system. Simulation Type Considerations Before collecting the data. pumps. calibration of the maximum day extended period simulation can be performed if time permits and the data is readily available. This information.

changes to the model are less extensive and are easier to implement in order to get the model back in tune with the actual network system. by discussing and reviewing this information with system operators. under what conditions do system operators turn on a pump. Next. Also. See the section titled Distributed Demands in Chapter 4 for more information on computing distributed demands. And. Discussions with system operators should be performed to determine the operational rules and strategy behind how specific operations are performed. the network model can be constructed. close a control valve. Many experts feel that calibration should be performed on an annual basis.EPANET Program Methodology Operational Review Operational rules must be determined for the network system for all major system components. a good working relationship is generally established between the modeler and the operators. 6. network configuration. Recalibration Frequency Whenever changes occur in the water distribution network. if the system changes are rather insignificant. valves. a network simulation can be performed with EPANET. In practice this means that the model should be recalibrated whenever major new facilities are added to the network system. or operational procedures change significantly. the degree of accuracy for the calibrated model is reduced. In addition. operational data must be defined for all pumps. recalibration may be necessary every few years. a new record for maximum hour is set. or increases in water consumption. regardless of what changes have occurred to the network system. then the recalibration process can be quickly and easily performed. It is important that the network model accurately represents the physical layout of the system. For example.6. Pipes and nodes must be accurately located in the model. Finally. such as operational changes. the modeler and operators can teach each other about the system. Initial Simulation 6-39 . or are some facilities off-line for maintenance repair? An operational review is essential in order to accurately calibrate the model and to make recommendations to improve system operation. Pipe roughness values should be estimated—based upon the age of the pipe. storage tanks. MIKE NET provides a method of globally applying the total network demand to each of the individual network nodes using the Distributed Demand dialog box. The modeler can then use this information toward planning and improving the water distribution system so that the operators can then more easily manage the system. and reservoirs.4 Calibration Simulations Once all of the necessary data has been gathered. Therefore. the model will need to be recalibrated. If these changes are severe enough. By updating the model calibration annually. consumption values must be defined at the nodes. or adjust a pressure-regulating valve? Is water pressure at particular key locations in the network act as a flag to turn on a particular pump? Are pumping schedules ever changed to try to minimize power costs? Are all facilities currently available for use. Many times the primary reason to recalibrate the system is so that knowledge learned about the network can be used to improve the system operation. And. To save time initially.

and then working downward to a more detailed examination of values on a more localized level. A table of actual flow rates and pressures should be prepared at key locations in the system so that comparisons with the computed analysis results can be quickly performed.4. Comparing Model Output After the initial analysis output has been checked and verified. At this stage of the network calibration. a single value pump definition could be used rather than a pump curve for each of the pumps defined in the network. 6-40 . exact operational data is not required.2 illustrate a comparison of flow rates and pressures between actual field measurements and computed values. the modeled results can then be compared with actual measured field values.1 Comparison of actual field flow rates and computed flow rates Location Actual Pipe ID 346 Actual Flow Rate (mgd) 32 Computed Pipe ID 597 Computed Flow Rate (mgd) 34 Actual Difference (mgd) +6 Percent Difference (%) +2 University Avenue @ Hilldale Shopping Center East Johnson at State Capitol Building Middleton Heights Pump Station 1067 42 234 40 -2 -5 2734 11 112 12 +1 +8 Table 6. flow rates and discharge pressures at pump stations should be examined. When performing comparisons.5 Model Adjustments Once the differences between the computed and actual measured values can be determined. Table 6. a balanced run can be produced so that the pipe network and operational input data can be checked.6. rather than to a tenth of a foot. The computed and actual flow rates from these supply points should be compared.4. a reservoir elevation could be entered as rounded to the nearest whole number elevation. For example. Similarly.6. differences in flow rates and pressures should be examined.2 Comparison of actual field pressures and computed pressures Location Actual Node ID 2934 Actual Pressure (psi) 55 Computed Node ID 132 Computed Pressure (psi) 60 Actual Difference (psi) +5 Percent Difference (%) +8 Pump station discharge pressure at 6300 University Avenue Pressure regulating valve downstream pressure at 6612 Mineral Point Road Control valve downstream pressure at State Capitol Building 1367 59 253 56 -3 -5 4589 87 306 90 +3 +3 Note that the comparison process is best handled by comparing values on a broad scale. Table 6. adjustments to the model data can be performed to make the computed results match more closely to that of the actual data.4.1 and Table 6.6. For example. 6.6. This simulation may be simplified by using single operational values rather than complete operational data.6.4. Continue this narrowing of scope as the calibration process progresses. examine the flow rates at the network supply points first. As long as the simplified data is generally accurate.MIKE NET An initial simulation is performed to simply determine what the resulting pressures and flow rates are in the pipe network. Next.

6. a system-wide consumption value is known to reasonable accuracy due to pumping records. However.5. Therefore. For example.1 allows you to quickly determine the cause for these differences—allowing you to adjust the model input to more closely match the measured values. 6-41 . Operational Data Adjustments Possible operational data adjustments to increase or decrease flow might include raising or lowering of reservoir elevations. pipe diameters or lengths could be defined in error. These input data adjustments are discussed in the following sections.EPANET Program Methodology The computed flow rates and pressures may be lower or higher from the measured values.1 Causes for differences between computed and measured flow rates and pressures Network Parameter Computed Flow Rate and Pressure Too Low Computed Flow Rate and Pressure Too High Total System Demand Pipe Roughness Pump Lifts Pressure Regulating Valve Settings Reservoir Elevation Settings Flow Control Valves Individual Nodal Demand High Low Low Low Low Not opened enough High Low High High High High Opened too much Low In adjusting the model input data.6. or increasing or decreasing pump lifts. there are four areas where adjustments can be considered. a redistribution of nodal consumption may need to be performed. Network Data Adjustments There always exists the chance of input errors when defining a network model. Therefore. if the original operational data has been collected to a reasonable degree of accuracy. Consumption Data Adjustments Generally. it is important to check over the defined network input data to make certain errors were not made. the distribution of this consumption may not be known to the same degree of accuracy. However.5. minor adjustments can be made to this data since there is always some degree of uncertainty. perhaps a pressure regulating valve was missed in the initial model definition. Or. However. Table 6. Table 6. then major adjustments may not be valid.

Bhave. September. 1989. pp. 1995. Babbitt. pp. 35-41.. 85. No. Therefore. Plumbing. P. a new computational analysis must be performed and the computed results compared again with the actual measured results. American Water Works Association. First Edition. 1993. pp. F. pp.. pp. January-March. P. M. T. 120-136. For more complicated network systems. pipe roughness values should be adjusted after the previously identified adjustments have been performed. pp. pp. 6-42 . 331-333. New York. 1990.. Journal of Indian Water Works Association. Journal of American Water Works Association. Bishop. 1. P. Journal of Environmental Engineering. Calibrating Water Distribution Network Models.. T.. For a small network system with fairly reliable input data. R... and Boulos. Inc.7 References Altman. and Markland. Vol. 4. New York. Number of Simulation Iterations After performing these input data adjustments. K. Unknown Pipe Characteristics in Hardy Cross Method of Network Analysis. Cornwell. February. Distribution Network Analysis for Water Utilities. but this is typically for a single pipe.. 114.. E. 133-135. Barlow.. D. Rules for Solvability of Pipe Networks. 1990. CO. 1995. 7-10. Improving the Disinfection Detention Time of a Water Plant Clearwell. a calibrated model may require more than 100 iterations. 6. B. and Boulos. E. Bhave. R. M.. 5. and Jamison. 1991 Bhave. Therefore there exists a great deal of uncertainty in the assigned pipe roughness values. Altman. 427-431 AWWA Manual M32. a calibrated model might be achieved within 10 or fewer iterations. On Solving Flow Constrained Networks: The Inverse Problem. Journal of Indian Water Works Association. F. Numerous iterations may be necessary until the desired degree of accuracy is achieved. Analysis of Flow in Water Distribution Networks. NY.. Convergence of Newton Method in Nonlinear Network Analysis. Bhave. 1988. Sometimes pump tests are conducted to more accurately estimate pipe roughness. Journal Hydraulic Engineering ASCE. M. 1960. Converting the Hazen-Williams Equation to the Colebrook Function. R. J. Vol. Vol. Water Power & Dam Construction. R. April-June.. 68-75. Morgan. Denver. 21. P. F. No. NY. H. No. P. Journal Mathematical and Computer Modeling. P. 3. Technomic Publishing Co. 1975.MIKE NET Pipe Roughness Adjustments Pipe roughness values are typically estimated based upon material type and age. 121. J.. McGraw-Hill. No. Third Edition.. Vol.

L. W. A Comparison of Methods for Modeling Water Quality in Distribution Systems. 153-160. and Altman. F.. A. F. 1.EPANET Program Methodology Boulos. 1993.... F. Applied Hydrology.. P. and Design of Water Distribution Systems. 17. L. Bowcock. Journal Applied Mathematical Modelling.. Jarrige. pp. T. Computer Modelling of Water Quality in Large Multiple Source Networks. and Vasconcelos. 459-486.. J. Chow. D. American Water Works Association. 1995. T.. 1995. 1990. Edinburgh. An Event-Driven Method for Modeling Contaminant Propagation in Water Networks. Boulos. F. P. P. Explicit Calculation of Pipe-Network Parameters. Boulos. Altman. C. Journal Applied Mathematical Modelling. E. F. and Sadhal. and Collevati. 1329-1344. F. 1994. J. Maidmant. P.. 116. T. NY. P. Dhingra. and Collevati.. pp. Jarrige. P. 1988.. Inc. P. A. Boulos. Journal Civil Engineering Systems. F. Vol. T. 523-541. Boulos. 380-387. Altman.. and Liou. 6-43 .. P.. A Graph-Theoretic Approach to Explicit Nonlinear Pipe Network Optimization. P.. Discrete Simulation Approach for Network Water Quality Models. and Wood. F.. 84-92. 8. Rossman..121 No. Boulos. 1991.. and Ormsbee. 1991. F. T. Vol. Altman. Vol. Vol. Journal Water Resources Planning and Management ASCE. pp. McGraw-Hill. and Collevati.. 11. Vol. and Altman. F. P. 1993. Boulos. J. pp. 17. Scotland. Denver. J. Boulos. pp. 2nd BHR International Conference on Water Pipeline Systems. A.. T. P. Analysis.. July. 15. V. 405-423. No. F. F. R. Boulos.. pp. K.. 16. F. Boulos. Explicit Network Calibration for Multiple Loading Conditions. An Explicit Algorithm for Calculating Operating Parameters for Water Networks. Boulos. On the Solvability of Water Distribution Networks with Unknown Pipe Characteristics. August. September. Journal Hydraulic Engineering ASCE.. Vol. Journal Civil Engineering System. F. 187-206. K.. 1991.. NY. Journal Applied Mathematical Modelling. 1994. Miller ed.. T. 49-60. and Altman.. 439-445. Vol. T. Altman. pp.. pp. P. pp. pp. pp. A. 1993. 437-443. T. Journal Applied Mathematical Modelling.. S. New York. Proceedings of the AWWA 1994 Annual Conference and Exposition.. Journal Applied Mathematical Modelling. D. Altman. pp. F. P. P. P... 10. L. An Explicit Approach for Modelling Closed Pipes in Water Networks. R. and Mays.. J.. Vol. Cesario... Modeling. 115-122. 8. An Explicit Algorithm for Modeling Distribution System Water Quality with Applications. D. Vol. Journal Civil Engineering Systems. L. D.. and Wood. S. 18. A.. Explicit Calculation of Water Quality Prameters in Pipe Distribution Networks. Colorado. New York. 1992. Vol. Boulos.. W.

M.Two Methods That Work. The Computer Journal. K.. 1980. Cole. W. New Jersey. Vol. 107. Managing Water Quality in Distribution Systems: Simulating TTHM and Chlorine Residual Propagation. Leak Detection -. L. New York. No. R. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers. Gofman. D. R. E. J. 4. J.. The Computer Journal. Transfer Processes. pp. V. C. Vol. 1994.. L. 96. Englewood Cliffs. New York... pp. 8. Rossman. Journal of American Water Works Association. Cross. April. Tull. Fletcher. and Colye. F. A. and Schnabel. Vol.. 67-75.. 1047-1060. 43. G. Cambridge. and Mills.. M. George. M. University of Illinois Engineering Experimental Station. F. pp. J. J. September. A. M. NY. Introduction to Algorithms. The MIT Press. Journal Water SRT-AQUA. Denny.. and Reid. Journal of the International Water and Environmental Management. Journal of the Hydraulics Division. Vol. A. A. T. B.. R. 46-53. Function Minimization by Conjugate Gradients. Analysis of Flow in Networks of Conduits or Conductors. and Reeves. Computer Solution of Large Sparse Positive Definite Systems.. No. Erisman. R. Prentice-Hall. New Jersey. S. E. Function Minimization without Evaluating Derivatives -A Review. ASCE.. 76-83.. 82. and Liu. 182-191. No.. AWWA Seminar on Operational Techniques for Distribution Systems. A. Direct Methods for Sparse Matrices.MIKE NET Clark. Measuring and Modeling Variations in Distribution System Water Quality.. Inc.. G. HY9. R. pp. Field-Testing Distribution Water Quality Models. Vol. Vasconcelos. G.. A. California. R. E. M. G. Vol. NY. pp.. 1983. Fawell. Loop Equations with Unknown Pipe Characteristics. and Hess. 7. Goodrich. McGraw-Hill.. UK Drinking Water: A European Comparison... A. R. Clark. C. J.. and Boulos. No. Urbana. 1990. K. Duff. Smalley. pp. R.. A. 1964. 43-56.. and Rodeh.. 1976. 83. E.... A. pp. and Fowler. Prentice-Hall. Inc. Oxford University Press. R. 33-41. 1970. 1994. MA. 286. 8. 1936. Illinois. H. Deininger. July. Dennis. 1992. Bulletin No. J. 6-44 .. 1981. M.. Los Angeles... Grayman. R.. Journal of the Hydraulics Division. Vol. Efficient Code for steady state Flows in Networks.. Numerical Methods for Unconstrained Optimization and NonLinear Equations. 1965. Fletcher. M. D. 7. Edwards. J. P. Epp.. Vol. Journal of American Water Works Association. 1981. B. Englewood Cliffs. J. Clark.. February. K. pp. F. No. J. Goodrich. 1990. Cormen. 149-154. I. 1991.. and Miller. HY1. and Rivest. January.. 8. Leiserson. H.

pp. NonLinear Flow Analysis in Pipe Networks.. Proceedings IEE. UK. H. Optimization Model for Water Distribution System Design. London. 10. Nayyar.. Inc.. 1992.. No. B. L. W. Standard Plumping Engineering Design. R. 1991. 1989. 1986. M. Iterative Solution of Non-Linear Equations in Several Variables.. Inc.. ASCE. Journal of the Hydraulics Division. 1983.5. 1989. and Wood. McGraw-Hill. NY. Jeppson. 114. 115. Ormsbee. W. E. Gupta. 1948. HY11. E & F Spon Ltd. pp. 1401-1418 Lemieux.. McGraw-Hill. and Brameller. Piping Handbook. 1988. December. 1993. 12. J. pp. A. Civil Engineering Reference Manual. Methods for Analyzing Pipe Networks. M. Water Distribution Systems: A Troubleshooting Manual. M.. New York.. L.. Nielsen. NY. Y. S. New York. NY. Housing and Home Finance Agency. Michigan.. Professional Publications. 7. 98. L. Inc.. pp. 1607-1612. Vol. Ohtmer.. November. 1989. R.. P. Lansey. Lindeburg. No. W. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management. Ortega. Vol. and Rheinbolt. Inc. Osiadacz. M. W. No. 112. Prentice Hall. Belmont. February. May. 1195-1207. D. 67-77. Sixth Edition. 5th Printing. and Mays. 85. Hydrology and Hydraulic Systems. 295-311. 139-157. pp. J. O. Simulation and Analysis of Gas Networks. 11. R. No. M. 115. 1971. E. 1981. and Males. Modeling Distribution-System water Quality Dynamic Approach. Vol. Vol. Nielsen. 6-45 . February. Using Computer Models to Determine the Effect of Storage on Water Quality. Efficient Algorithms for Distribution Networks. Vol. and Clark. Vol. M.. 19. Hybrid Method for the Solution of Piping Networks. F. 3.. M. Journal of the Hydraulic Engineering. Male. L. pp.. Analysis of Flow in Pipe Networks. T. 118. pp. Grayman. Lewis Publishers.. 373-392. 1972.3. The Uniform Plumbing Code for Housing. Ann Arbor Science.. Hamam. pp. M... New York. Hydraulic Design Algorithms for Pipe Networks. No.. C. 1970. K. S. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering. No. 1963. Ann Arbor. 43-56.. and Walski. Journal of the Hydraulic Engineering. CA.. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering. Section 8. J. A. J. 1992. October. 1991. Journal of American Water Works Association. Vol.. M.. Academic Press. W. W. M. Clark. Sixth Edition.EPANET Program Methodology Grayman. R. R. R. Vol.

M. and Flannery. 5.. September/October. Shamir. pp 137-146. F. Cincinnati. pp. Proceeding of the International Conference on Computer Applications for Water Supply and Distribution. Fluid Mechanics. McGraw-Hill.. W. Industrial Press. L. Leicester Polytechnic. Numerical Recipes in C. Vol. January. 1968.. Journal Water Resources Planning and Management ASCE. F. Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory. 219-234. NY. New York. H. H. Lectures presented at Water Distribution System Analysis and Design Workshops at the University of Wisconsin. Rossman. and Boulos. 155-162.. Richardson is with Black & Veatch Consulting Engineers at Kansas City. K.. W. M. Proceedings of American Water Works Association 1993 Annual Conference. Rossman. Third Edition. A. Clark. 1992. McGraw-Hill. L. 1991.Extension. I.MIKE NET Osiadacz. An Efficient Method for Finding the Minimum of a Function of Several Variables without Calculating Derivatives. J.. Estimating Water Storage Requirements. HY1. A. Journal of the Hydraulic Division. University of Wisconsin-Madison CEE 325 class handout. Vol. Vetterling. 803-820. 120. D. 119. Missouri.. S. B. A.. Shames. Vol. A. summer semester. Vol. Modeling Chlorine Residuals in Drinking-Water Distribution Systems. Optimization Theory with Application. 6-46 . D. P... Powell.. July. T. and Pilati. and Grayman. Ohio. Rossman. and Altman.. Seventh Edition. Rossman. 1992. Wiley. Book Division. A. EPANET Users Manual. 505-517. L. pp. New York. A.. U. 1979. L. EPA-600/R-94/057. Inc. September 8-10. 1972. L. Todini. Environmental Protection Agency. A. NY. D. Boulos.. Pierre. EPANET -An Advanced Water Quality Modeling Package for Distribution System. P. 122. Gulf Publishing Company.. E. pp. Inc. Houston. Alan K. The Computer Journal. UK. 1987.. New York. 1994. Vol. L. Inc. TX. New York. 1969. Journal Environmental Engineering ASCE. M. B. Numerical Methods for Modeling Water Quality in Distribution Systems: A Comparison. pp. and Howard. W. A. NY. 1987. Teukolsky. Richardson. No. Schweitzer. 2. 4. 1964.. T.. NY. Rossman.. R. S. No. A Gradient Method for the Analysis of Pipe Networks. Handbook of Valves... Mechanics of Fluids. D.. ASCE.. 94. E. Simulation and Analysis of Gas Networks.. P. 1994. Streeter.. No. A. Second Edition. J. V. No. 7. P.. and Wylie. Water Distribution Systems Analysis.. Press. Discrete Volume-Element Method for Network Water-Quality Models. 1996. A. 1993. Journal Water Resources Planning and Management ASCE.. Cambridge University..

and Giles. 1990. J. Pt. S. Warring.. September.. E. J. pp. 1993. Walski. A. College of Engineering. HY7. Trade & Technical Press Ltd. The Mesh Method in Gas Network Analysis. Vol. A. 1972. Webler. O. K. R. J. WR28-2-900-190. Warga.. Reliability of Algorithms for Pipe Network Analysis. 293-296. Paper No. Vol. 5. D. ASCE. 1986. 1981. 1991. C. Van Nostrand Rheinhold Company. Inc. G.. TN.. 1157-1170. 1145-1161. pp.. 293-297. November. and Charles. Review of Pipe Network Analysis. Wood. 1991.. 54-43-4. No. NY. Exposure to Tetrachloroethylene via Contaminated Drinking Water Pipes in Massachusetts: A Predictive Model. Piping and Pipelines. Analysis of Water Distribution Systems.. 127. W. J. 48. September. 1954. Determination of steady state Flows and Currents in a Network. Journal of the Hydraulic Division. Water Distribution Systems: Simulation and Sizing. D. D. Report No. W. pp. T.. Gas Journal. Vol. Vol.. Journal of the Hydraulics Division. Wood. Hydraulic Network Analysis Using Linear Theory. Wunderlich.. and Brown. First Edition. 10. I. J. Inc. pp. J.. KY.. 1967. July. 1982... ASCE. Norris. KY. J. November. The Computer Journal. September/October. pp.EPANET Program Methodology Travers.. O. 6-47 . New York. 1967. Lexington. M. Wood. 98. 5. 1984. Minimizing a Function without Calculating Derivative. October. 167-177.. University of Kentucky. M. Research Report No.. 1981. University of Kentucky. Comprehensive Computer Modeling of Pipe Distribution Networks. Lexington. H. Proceedings of Instrument Society of America. T. Vol. No. D.. J. Tennessee Valley Authority.. Civil Engineering Software Center. T. Wood. Zangwill. and Sjostrom. Lewis Publishers. Walski. Handbook of Valves. 107. KYPIPE Manual. and Rayes. 9. W. Gessler. England.. Algorithms for Pipe Network Analysis and Their Reliability. H.

51351_21541.pdf

Erico 15 - Pipe Hanger & Support

TS211BI

Stormwater Manual

Stormwater Drainage Design Standard

Standard Clevis Hanger

Sample Complaint Letter

Erico 15 - Pipe Hanger & Support

Drains Guide Part 1 - Standard Hydraulic Model

CMU Catalog

Beam

30482980 Storm Water Drainage System

13 a2012 Aut-hbs Rop Ballot

TS211BI

RD Cvr-21

15060S03

Design Manual Hydraulic

deq-wb-nps-cab_250605_7(1)

Catch Basins

51351_21541

Copy of Hydro-pneumatic

Ww Lifting Stations

Pump Drain Lift

c-7

- Read and print without ads
- Download to keep your version
- Edit, email or read offline

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

CANCEL

OK

You've been reading!

NO, THANKS

OK

scribd

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->