23/10/2019

BRICS Project:
Leakage detection and soil-pipe interactions
in water distribution systems

Iran E. Lima Neto (UFC)

OVERVIEW OF THE BRICS PROJECT

1
 23/10/2019

OVERVIEW OF THE BRICS PROJECT

BRICS Workshops:

South China
Africa Brazil
2018 2019 2020

WORKSHOP IN CAPE TOWN (2018)

2
 23/10/2019

WORKSHOP IN FORTALEZA (2019)

OVERVIEW OF THE BRICS PROJECT

Invisible leakages???

Visible leakage!

3
 23/10/2019

OVERVIEW OF THE BRICS PROJECT

OVERVIEW OF THE BRICS PROJECT

4
 23/10/2019

OVERVIEW OF THE BRICS PROJECT

Water losses: 40%?

Brazil: > 10 billion R$/year

OVERVIEW OF THE BRICS PROJECT

Leakage Leak-soil
identification: interactions:

- Water balance - Laboratory studies

- Pressure time series - Theoretical studies

- Empirical correlations - CFD modelling

- EPANET modelling - Field studies

5
 23/10/2019

WATER LOSSES IN FORTALEZA

Leakage intensity

Investiment/year:
10 million R$
Real losses: ~ 25%
Total losses: ~ 45%

Water balance:
Production x Consumption!

IDENTIFICATION OF LEAKAGES

6
 23/10/2019

PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS

PRESSURE TIME SERIES, EWMA AND LEAKAGE REPORTS

𝒙𝒕𝒊$𝟏 − 𝑴𝑪𝒕𝒊$𝟏
>𝟑
𝑽𝑪𝒕𝒊$𝟏

Leakage “detection”:
30 – 60%

7
 23/10/2019

RESIDENTIAL CONNECTIONS

EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS

3000

2500
y = 0.084x
2000 R² = 0.88
Leakages

1500

1000

500

0
0 10000 20000 30000 40000

Connections

8
 23/10/2019

EPANET MODELLING: LEAKAGE DETECTION

EPANET MODELLING: LEAKAGE DETECTION

9
 23/10/2019

EPANET MODELLING: LEAKAGE DETECTION

EPANET MODELLING: LEAKAGE DETECTION

10
 23/10/2019

EXPERIMENTAL WORK

Lab at ZJU:
Prof. Tingchao Yu
Prof. Yu Shao

𝑄
𝐶- =
𝐴 2𝑔Δ𝐻

EXPERIMENTAL WORK

DN25, λ=0.12
0.90 DN50, λ=0.06
DN100, λ=0.03

0.85

Cd 0.80

0.75

0.70
0 5000 10000 15000 20000

11
 23/10/2019

EXPERIMENTAL WORK

Lab at UFC:
LABOSAN

EXPERIMENTAL WORK

Anemometer

Water H'

H
Soil h
Water jet

Nozzle

Rotameter

Pump

12
 23/10/2019

FLUENT SIMULATIONS

EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL RESULTS

0.25
Exp. 1 (H=0.10m, d=0.27mm)
Exp. 2 (H=0.15m, d=0.27mm)
0.20
Exp. 3 (H=0.20m, d=0.27mm)
Exp. 4 (H=0.20m, d=0.31mm)
0.15
u (m/s)

CFD (H=0.40m, d=0.90mm)

0.10

0.05

0.00
0 100 200 300 400 500
Q (ml/s)

13
 23/10/2019

FITTED RELATIONSHIPS

0.05

0.04 y = 0.015(x - 1)
R² = 0.89

Exp. 1
0.03 h/H < 1 h/H > 1
Exp. 2
u/U

Exp. 3
0.02 Exp. 4
CFD
Tang et al. [11]
0.01
kFr = 1 (h = H)
Adjusted line
0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5
kFr

FITTED RELATIONSHIPS

1.6
Exps. 1-3
1.4 Exp. 4
1.2 CFD
Tang et al. [11]
1.0 Adjusted line
0.8
k

y = 1.5x
R² = 0.97
0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
d (mm)

14
 23/10/2019

VALIDATION OF THE THRESHOLD CONDITION

0.5
cavity regime
0.4

0.3
H (m)

chimney regime
0.2

0.1 motionless kFr < 1

kFr > 1

0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Q (ml/s)

PREDICTIVE EQUATION
16
H = 1m (a)
14 H = 2m
12 H = 3m
H = 4m
10
H = 5m
Q (l/s)

8
d = 0.3 mm
6

0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

𝜋𝐷 7 D (cm)
𝑄= 𝑔𝐻
6𝑑
20
d = 0.1 mm (b)
18
d = 0.3 mm
16
d = 0.5 mm
14
d = 0.7 mm
12 d = 0.9 mm
Q (l/s)

10
8 H = 1.0 m
6
4
2
0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
D (cm)

15
 23/10/2019

COMPARISON WITH FIELD DATA

16