44 views

Uploaded by Hernán Benites

- Jdhdhdjrn
- Construction Schedule
- Solution Manual for Advanced Thermodynamics for Engineers – 2nd Edition - Desmond E. Winterbone
- Microsoft Word - Design Considerations for Selection
- Chapter 11
- framcos9
- MAE 2314 Wimberly Fall 2010
- DJB - FAQ
- Construction Schedule
- 7-TipsandTraps-upd.pdf
- Quantities of Waste Water Treatment
- IJETR031241
- 75525OP8136+-+Trade+Waste+Policy
- Chapter8 Particle Techn IMP
- Dialysis-of-sewage-water.pdf
- Che Syllabi
- FM-01,L#11
- 10-322
- case_c3.2
- Manhole Sizing Recommendations

You are on page 1of 10

Dynamic modeling technique of interaction between pressure and gravity sewer systems

Ming Jin, Ph.D1*, Tom Walski, Ph.D2

2

Advisory Software Architect, Bentley Systems, Inc. 27 Siemon Co. Drive, Watertown, CT 06795, U.S.A. Senior Advisory Product Manager, Bentley Systems, Inc. 27 Siemon Co. Drive, Watertown, CT 06795, U.S.A. *Corresponding author, e-mail Ming.Jin@bentley.com

ABSTRACT

This study focuses on the development of a sophisticated pressure solver within the sewer network unsteady flow dynamic numerical solution engine. The pump characteristic curve and the pressure network system response curve which can be affected by the dynamic hydraulic properties from feeding and receiving gravity systems are considered dynamically so that the accurate pump operating point can be found and used for the system modeling of the interaction between the pressure system and the gravity system. The study compares the results from a few existing dynamic models to show that the new manifold pumping pressure network algorithm provides improved accuracy and robustness.

KEYWORDS

Urban drainage; Sewer network; Dynamic model; Numerical schemes; Pumps; SewerGEMS, Force mains

INTRODUCTION

Wastewater and stormwater hydraulic modelling has increasingly played important role in the water resources and environmental engineering projects and the hydraulic dynamic numerical models are becoming very powerful analysis tools in these engineering modelling studies. Dynamic modeling of sewer and storm systems often involves interaction between gravity sub-networks and pressure force main sub-networks, and the pressure sub-networks typically involve manifold pumping (i.e. more than one pump discharging into a common line). There are two overall approaches to solving pressure pipes in a dynamic wave engine (1. use of Preissmann slot to account for full pipe flow or 2. use of a pressure solver for full pipes). Typical gravity network dynamic solvers (e.g. US EPA SWMM, 2008) use a numerical solution algorithm, either explicit or implicit, to solve the St. Venant unsteady flow equations. However some dynamic sewer models utilizes pressure engine to get accurate solutions (Jin and Fread, 1997; Walski et al., 2005) This study focuses on the development of a modification of the dynamic wave solver within the sewer dynamic engine to solve pressurized pipes, the pump head characteristic curve and the pressure network system response (system head) curve which can also be

11th International Conference on Urban Drainage, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 2008 affected by the feeding and receiving gravity system is considered dynamically so that the accurate pump operating point is found and used for the system modeling of the interaction between the pressure system and the gravity system. The study compares the results from a few existing dynamic models to show that the new manifold pumping pressure network algorithm provides improved accuracy and robustness.

MODEL FORMULATION

Very often a network involves pumps and pressure force main sub-networks and to model such gravity-pressure combined system requires hydraulic models to not only simulate the system dynamic behaviour of both gravity subsystem and pressure subsystem and the hydraulic interactions between gravity and pressure sub-systems. Figure 1 shows a schematic use case of sewer system in which a gravity drainage subsystem collects wastewater or storm water and the water is route into downstream storage facility (wet well), the water is lifted by pump(s) through a force main subsystem and then discharged into further downstream gravity outlet or another gravity sub network.

From hydraulic dynamic modelling point of view, the governing hydraulics for the gravity and pressure sub networks is different, the gravity sub-network is governed by open channel hydraulics while the pressure sub-network is governed by pressure closed conduit hydraulics and the pump hydraulics and pumps play important role in the sub-network hydraulic behaviour. In order to provide reliable numerical modelling solution for sewer or storm network involving pumps and force mains, a sewer dynamic hydraulic model has to be comprehensive and sophisticated to be able to simulate these two different hydraulics features. Gravity Hydraulic Solver For the gravity sub-network, a one-dimensional hydrodynamic numerical model was developed and implemented (Jin etc. 2002). The numerical model uses an implicit four-point, finite-difference solution technique to solve the one-dimensional Saint-Venant equations. Advanced numerical techniques, such as Local Partial Inertial modification (LPI) for subcritical, supercritical, and transitional flows (Jin & Fread, 2000), and relaxation for gravity sewer networks, are used to achieve computational performance and robustness as required for practical use in modeling any complicated sewer or storm network. 2 Dynamic modeling technique of interaction between pressure and gravity sewer systems

11th International Conference on Urban Drainage, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 2008 The one-dimensional Saint-Venant equations used in the gravity hydraulic solver in the sewer network model are:

Q (A + A0 ) + -q=0 x t

2 Q ( Q /A) y + + gA( S0 + S f + Si ) + L = 0 t x x

(1)

(2)

in which t is time, x is distance along the longitudinal axis of the waterway, y is the flowdepth, A is the active cross-sectional area of flow, A0 is the inactive (off-channel storage) cross-sectional area of flow, q is the lateral inflow or outflow, is the coefficient for nonuniform velocity distribution within the cross section, g is the gravity constant, S0 is the sewer or channel slope, Sf is the friction slope due to boundary turbulent shear stress and determined by Mannings equation or other friction equations, Si is the slope due to severe local expansion-contraction effects (large eddy loss), and L is the momentum effect of lateral flow. Although these equations were originally developed for gradually varying open channel flows, they can also be applied to gravity and pressure flows in closed conduits in a sewer pipe network. In the case of pressure (surcharged) flows in a sewer conduit, the Preissmann hypothetical open-slot method is used so that Equations 1 and 2 are still applicable. The one-dimensional hydrodynamic unsteady equations are solved by an implicit fourpoint, finite-difference solution scheme with Newton-Raphson iteration technique, an extended relaxation technique is used for network junctions, a LPI technique is used for robust solution on subcritical and supercritical mixed flows. Various internal and external boundary conditions are used to simulated complicated hydraulic controls and outlet structures commonly used in a sewer or storm drainage system. Pressure Hydraulic Solver As an integrated part of the numerical sewer modelling engine, a pressure hydraulic solver is developed for the pump(s) and the pressure (force main) sub network(s). The gravity and pressure hydraulic solvers are solved simultaneously within every time step so that the dynamic hydraulic interactions (inflow to the wet well and backwater effect from downstream gravity system) between the gravity sub network and pressure sub network are fully considered in the integrated numerical engine. Figure 2 shows a schematic use case of a pumping and force main pressure subsystem. The layout of a sewer or storm water pump force main system is typically connected to wet well(s) which is a downstream point of the upstream gravity subsystem. Typical pumps are manifold dynamic-head-dependent pumps in which the pump discharge is a function of the dynamic head characterized by the pump curve. The challenges to accurately simulate the pump-force-main subsystem (Walski et al. 2004) are: Each pump can have its own pump curve

11th International Conference on Urban Drainage, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 2008 Each pump can have its own control schemes The dynamic head of each pump is affected by the system response so that it is also affected by other pumps behaviour Each pump therefore has its own operating point The whole system outflow is therefore very dynamic and dependent of every pump There are interactions with upstream and downstream gravity element hydraulic conditions as well

In order to model these complex scenarios with robustness and accuracy, an iterative relaxation technique is developed. At each time step t during the dynamic computation, all pump outflows, Q1(t), Q2(t) and Q3(t) as shown in Figure 2, are simultaneously iterated in a relaxation way until they converge to a stable value for every pump:

Q(t )i

k +1

= (1 )Q(t )i + Q(t )i

*

(3)

in which i represents the outflow from the pump i, k+1 represents an updated value for the next iteration, and * represents a value determined from the pump curve and current system hydraulic conditions under current k iteration, i.e., the flow value for Q(t)i* is determined using the head difference across the pump from the previous iteration and the pump head characteristic curve. The hydraulic conditions are obtained by solving the force main pipes using current pump outflows, is a relaxation factor (0<<1.0) and =0.8 is found to provide robust and fast converging results.

TEST RESULTS

Extensive tests have been done to test the gravity-pressure integrated sewer dynamic modeling model. The model has been implemented as the primary computation engine in SewerGEMS, Bentley Systems multi-platform (Stand-alone, ArcGIS, MicroStation, AutoCAD) fully dynamic sanitary and combined sewer modeling solution tool. SewerGEMS is an integrated solution for wide range of engineering tasks from urban sewer planning to overflow remediation analysis, to optimized Best Management Practices designs. One of the benchmark tests is reported herein. 4

Dynamic modeling technique of interaction between pressure and gravity sewer systems

11th International Conference on Urban Drainage, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 2008 In order to evaluate the models accuracy, robustness and performance for the benchmark test data, two other models are also been run and the results from these three models are compared. The two other models are: A water distribution force main system computational engine used in WaterGEMS, Bentley Systems water distribution solution tool. The engine has been evolved from improvements of the US EPA EPANET engine (Rossman 2000). The test data is designed so that the pressure sub-network is independent of the gravity sub-system effects such as backwater therefore the pressure subsystem can be also modeled by the water distribution pressure engine and its results is considered to be most accurate and reliable. The US EPA SWMM (Rossman, 2007) dynamic sewer model, the computation engine in the SWMM model is also based on the one dimensional hydrodynamic unsteady flow equations and has been constantly improved during years of development efforts by EPA.

Figure 3 shows the schematic of the test gravity-pressure sewer network, there are three gravity sub-networks and one pressure force main sub-network. In the pressure system there are three pump stations (and wet wells) with each having a single pump.

11th International Conference on Urban Drainage, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 2008 All these three pumps are of inline-head-flow type (TYPE 3 pump in SWMM and Multi Point Pump in WaterGEMS); Figure 4 shows the dynamic pump curve used.

In this scenario only one pump, PMP-1 in the system, is actively in operation so that the force main and pump system is a simple one-branch pressure network.

Dynamic modeling technique of interaction between pressure and gravity sewer systems

Some computational results from the model are shown in Figs 5 and 6; the results from both SWMM and WaterGEMS models are also shown in these figures. It can be seen that the results from these three models are in agreement for this simplest scenario while the SWMM model produced some minor instabilities.

11th International Conference on Urban Drainage, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 2008 In the calculations reported in Figs 5 and 6, the SewerGEMS DW (Dynamic Wave) engine and WaterGEMS pressure engine use a time step of 0.01 hour (36 seconds), the SWMM engine has to use much smaller time step to reach an acceptable stable solution therefore a time step of 1 second is used (only in SWMM) to achieve the results shown in Figs 5 and 6. Because the DW engine is an implicitly-scheme based numerical solver it remains robust even with larger time steps, the computation sensitivities in time steps between DW and SWMM engine can be seen from Figure 7 by comparing with the results in Figure 5 (36 vs. 180 for DW and 1 vs. 30 for SWMM in the time steps used).

In this scenario the two pumps in the system, PMP-1 and PMP-2, are actively in operation, the computed flows at the outlet pipe, P-4, from the three models are shown in Figure 8, it can be seen that the result from the SWMM model starts to differ significantly when the multiple pumps are involved in the simulation while other two models provide consistent results.

Dynamic modeling technique of interaction between pressure and gravity sewer systems

In this scenario all three pumps are actively in operation and the results from the three models are shown in Figure 9. The results from SewerGEMS DW engine are very close to those from the WaterGEMS pressure engine and the results of SWMM model can be seen to be not stable and reliable for this multiple pumping scenario.

CONCLUSIONS

Hydrodynamic modeling of sewer networks typically involves pumping and pressure force main sub network(s), it is very important that a hydrodynamic numerical model provides robust and reliable numerical schemes to solver gravity and pressure combined system. This study developed a practical integrated solution to solve the problem; the numerical model developed in this study combines following modeling techniques to dynamically solve the gravity-pressure combined system: An implicit four-point, finite-difference solution technique to solve the onedimensional Saint-Venant equations for all gravity sub networks An relaxation type iteration method to solve the pump equations and pressure force mains using pressure pipe hydraulics 9

11th International Conference on Urban Drainage, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 2008 The two numerical solvers are dynamically solved at every time step for the whole sewer system so that the hydraulic interactions between the gravity sub network(s) and pressure force main sub network(s) are fully considered

Extensive tests have shown that the integrated hydrodynamic sewer model can provide robust and reliable solutions for modeling sewer systems.

REFERENCES

Jin, M & Fread, D. L. (1997), Dynamic flood routing with explicit and implicit numerical solution schemes, Journal of Hydraulic Eng., ASCE, 123(3), 166-173. Jin, M & Fread, D. L. (2000), Discussion on the Application of Relaxation Scheme to Wave-Propagation Simulation in Open-Cannel Networks, Journal of Hydraulic Eng., ASCE, 126(1), 89-91. Jin, M, Coran, S & Cook, J (2002), New One-Dimensional Implicit Numerical Dynamic Sewer and Storm Model, In: Strecker E.W. and Huber W.C. (eds.): Global solutions for urban drainage. Proc. 9th Int. Conf. on Urban Drainage, Portland, Oregon, 8-13 September 2002. CD-ROM, ASCE Publications, Reston, VA Rossman, L.A. (2000), EPANET 2 Users Manual, US EPA pub: EPA/600/R-00/0570, RMRL, Cincinnati, Oh. Rossman, L.A. (2007), Storm Water Management Model Users Manual Version 5.0, US EPA pub: EPA/600/R-05/040, Revised 2007 RMRL, Cincinnati, Oh Walski, T.M., Chase D.V., Savic D., Grayman W.M., Beckwith S., Koelle E., (2004), Advanced Water Distribution Modeling and Management, Bentley Institute Press Walski, T.M., Barnard T.E., Merritt L.B., Harold E., Walker N., Whitman B.E., (2005), Wastewater Collection System Modelling and Design, Bentley Institute Press

10 systems

- JdhdhdjrnUploaded byRahul Jha
- Construction ScheduleUploaded bygroup2sd1314
- Solution Manual for Advanced Thermodynamics for Engineers – 2nd Edition - Desmond E. WinterboneUploaded byAfshar Arabi
- Microsoft Word - Design Considerations for SelectionUploaded byMichael Shelton
- Chapter 11Uploaded byephrem
- framcos9Uploaded bySimon-Nicolas Roth
- MAE 2314 Wimberly Fall 2010Uploaded byGerald817
- DJB - FAQUploaded byMohitSanger
- Construction ScheduleUploaded bygroup2sd1314
- 7-TipsandTraps-upd.pdfUploaded byrodstring
- Quantities of Waste Water TreatmentUploaded byizuanie
- IJETR031241Uploaded byerpublication
- 75525OP8136+-+Trade+Waste+PolicyUploaded byadalcayde2514
- Chapter8 Particle Techn IMPUploaded byShitu Manian
- Dialysis-of-sewage-water.pdfUploaded byGaley wangchuk
- Che SyllabiUploaded byAbdullah Salem
- FM-01,L#11Uploaded byAns ahmed
- 10-322Uploaded bySteven Bunker
- case_c3.2Uploaded byMarco Aurélio Leonel Matunaga
- Manhole Sizing RecommendationsUploaded bys_omeone4us
- Related StudiesUploaded byJohn Darwin Sabio
- 493318_TRN_2007_CG_CFW2aUploaded byRene D. Arrieta
- numerical solution to bubbly flowUploaded byابراهيم اسامه
- Solutions to the advanced transport phenomenaUploaded byMeera Patel
- 6_1.pdfUploaded bykiranran99
- Article 2Uploaded byAmir Sadour Gutiérrez
- Research on permeable pipesUploaded bysg6466
- reynold's experimentUploaded byMonique Irish Mendoza
- Part 4 Diffusivity Equation Line Source Radial Flow Radius InvestUploaded byChai Cws
- PhD ThesisUploaded byosoreneg

- Electro Bomb a Auto Ce b AnteUploaded byHernán Benites
- 014300-001Uploaded byHernán Benites
- PRM1-01Uploaded byHernán Benites
- Manual Basico de Sistemas Contra IncendiosUploaded byOscar Gonzalez Reyes
- 2_vertederosUploaded byMarvin Clay Alvarez Morales
- OTE Outotec Industrial Water Treatment Solutions sUploaded byHernán Benites
- 014300-00Uploaded byHernán Benites
- 64 Interview QuestionsUploaded byshivakumar N
- ES DestControlUploaded byHernán Benites
- Riego.sostenibleUploaded byHernán Benites
- ADM. PUBLICAUploaded byHernán Benites
- evolucionUploaded byHernán Benites
- FACULTAD MINAS UNMSMUploaded byHernán Benites
- OS.080Uploaded byXNandox Ramos Pariona
- agualimaUploaded byHernán Benites
- 2_vertederosUploaded byMarvin Clay Alvarez Morales
- haestad_20sewer_20solutionspdfloUploaded byHernán Benites
- LogUploaded byHernán Benites
- Temario_Similacion_HidraulicaUploaded byHernán Benites
- FT-DMF05Uploaded byHernán Benites

- reza.pdfUploaded byinam vf
- SolveUploaded byShamanAcolyte
- Workshop A MMSD Private Property I&I Solutions Incubator Jerome FlogelUploaded bySweet Water
- Golpe de ariete y Surge en tanquesUploaded byLuciano Salituri
- oilUploaded byanellbmc
- Price List Bit Ftp - 16.04.2018Uploaded bykarunamoorthi_p2209
- empanganUploaded bynadia_ya05
- Stormwater Detention Tank SystemUploaded bySoe Naing Win
- Environmental Assessment and Risk Screening for Rural Water Supply: Guidance note developed for the SWIFT ConsortiumUploaded byOxfam
- Sizing Water Supply SystemUploaded byArnel Alvarez
- FMM ASSUploaded bytagoreboopathy
- Mec 551 ConvectionUploaded byFikri Rahim
- Schmidt 1993Uploaded bydequanzhou
- GEOGRAPHY PEEL PARAGRAPHS.docxUploaded bywutyee
- CE6503 Environmental Engineering-I.pdfUploaded bysathishkumar
- Pickett plotUploaded byDeclined Falcon
- Whirlpool Osmosis GuideUploaded byg_junk5213
- Models.heat.Double Pipe Heat ExchangerUploaded byWyatt
- A Simple Pipe CFD Simulation in SolidWorksUploaded byCarlos Manuel Romero Luna
- EXPERIMENTS IN MOMENTUM AND HEAT AND MASS TRANSFE2- FINAL.docxUploaded byAngelica Joyce Benito
- Water Treatment System-iit NoteUploaded byBhaswar Majumder
- Non Thermal Chemical Methods fot EORUploaded byakshitppe11
- libya.xlsxUploaded bymansoor hussain
- Chapter 4_Adjustment of PHUploaded bysheil.cogay
- Water Flow and Velocity Head in Steel Pipes - Schedule 40Uploaded bydave
- Irrigation_Drainage_Review_Class_072106.pptUploaded byFred Nico Paras
- PareaPipe Sizing Steam Supply and Condensate Return Lines Sizing Charts Chart CG-25, page CG-51, is the basic chart for determining the flow rate and velocity of steam in Schedule 40 pipe for various values of pressure drop per 100 ft, based on 0 psig saturated steam. Using the multiplier chart (Chart CG-24), Chart CG-25 can be used at all saturation pressures between 0 and 200 psig (see Example). These Charts are based on the Moody Friction Factor, which considers the Reynolds number and the roughness of the internal pipe surfaces. Notes: Based on Moody Friction Factor where flow of condensate does not inhibit the flow of steam. See Chart CG-24 for obtaining flow rates and velocities of all saturation pressures between 0 to 200 psig: see Example. Pipe Sizing Two principal factors determine pipe sizing in a steam system: 1. The initial pressure at the boiler and the allowable pressure drop of the total system. The total pressure drop in the system should not exceed 2Uploaded by1970aco
- 03-1 Exercise Reservoir Pressure and TemperatureUploaded byDavid John Marcus
- Hydraulic TurbinesUploaded byvikas_1989
- QT00129 Vol 8 FinalUploaded byCristian Giurgea