ALMA MATER STUDIORUM UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

CIVIL ENGINEERING

DICAM
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Materials Science
Course of Advanced Hydrosystems Engineering

WATER DISTRIBUTION NETWORK DESIGN

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS

Instructors:

Student:

Dott. Ing. Andrea Bolognesi

Dott. Ing. Cristiana Bragalli

Tommaso Cignali

Academic Year 2012 2013

1

The objective of the following project is to build a Water Distribution Network for an assigned area.
The distribution conduits and nodes has been already designed from the delivery of the project data:

Starting from this map already georeferenced on EPANET, we have determined some useful data of
the design project:
Minimum Hydraulic Head for each node:
Minimum hydraulic head is calculated only once and it is the value with which to compare the
hydraulic head that resulting from the single-period simulation:
Hmin = Minimum Head for each node (m)
Hmin = znode + p +Hbuild,max + f
Where:
znode = elevation of axis pipe
znode = zground p (zground by the map; p = 1.8 m is assumed as average depth of the axis pipe)
Hbuild,max = maximum height of the building in the area adjacent the node (Hbuild,max by map)
f = 5 m (height above the base of the roof)
Water demand
Residential usage rate per capita: d = 300 liters/capita/day
Population considered for the design (Geometric Increase Method)

=
  (1 + ) = 9184  (1 + 0.009) = 13.143
2

P0 = 9184 inhabitants at 2001

r = 9 rate of increase of the population
T = 40 years (In the case of WDNs, the higher are the years value, the safer is the design project)
Base demand for each node
Base demand for each node is calculated as follows:
  =
)

# = (
!
*

./# =




  ! = (#,$)' !#$

!#,
2

#  
(1/)
86400

Demand multipliers:
Peak Hour Demand: 34,567 = 3 (the average rate of usage during the maximum hour of usage in the year)
Minimum Hour Demand: 34,5#8 = 0.3 (the average rate of usage during the minimum hour of usage in the year)
These are the results obtained for each nodes:
Pipe ID
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31

Length
(m)
132,76
374,68
119,74
312,72
289,09
336,33
135,81
201,26
132,53
144,66
175,72
112,17
210,74
75,41
181,42
146,96
162,69
99,64
52,98
162,97
83,96
49,82
78,5
99,27
82,29
147,49
197,32
83,3
113,8
80,82
340,97

Diam
150
125
100
100
60
60
60
60
100
125
125
200
200
250
200
125
80
60
60
60
80
100
100
100
80
60
60
100
100
100
100

Unit Cost
/m
39,4
37
27,2
27,2
19,8
19,8
19,8
19,8
27,2
37
37
54,4
54,4
72,9
54,4
37
24,5
19,8
19,8
19,8
24,5
27,2
27,2
27,2
24,5
19,8
19,8
27,2
27,2
27,2
27,2

Cost
5230,744
13863,16
3256,928
8505,984
5723,982
6659,334
2689,038
3984,948
3604,816
5352,42
6501,64
6102,048
11464,256
5497,389
9869,248
5437,52
3985,905
1972,872
1049,004
3226,806
2057,02
1355,104
2135,2
2700,144
2016,105
2920,302
3906,936
2265,76
3095,36
2198,304
9274,384

32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58

77,39
112,37
37,34
108,85
182,82
136,02
56,7
124,08
234,6
203,83
248,05
65,19
210,09
147,57
103,8
210,95
75,08
180,29
149,05
215,05
144,44
34,74
59,93
165,67
119,97
83,17
1

TOTAL

8405,86

Node n
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

zground
65,5
63,7
62,3
61,9
60,4
64,9
67,3
65,5
65,6
63,8
62,8
61,5
60,3
61
62,4
63
65,2
63,4
61
61,2
61,5
62,7
61,4
66,5
63,6

80
80
100
100
125
150
150
125
60
80
60
60
80
80
80
60
80
80
80
80
100
125
150
80
100
100
300

24,5
24,5
27,2
27,2
37
39,4
39,4
37
19,8
24,5
19,8
19,8
24,5
24,5
24,5
19,8
24,5
24,5
24,5
24,5
27,2
37
39,4
24,5
27,2
27,2
90,7

1896,055
2753,065
1015,648
2960,72
6764,34
5359,188
2233,98
4590,96
4645,08
4993,835
4911,39
1290,762
5147,205
3615,465
2543,1
4176,81
1839,46
4417,105
3651,725
5268,725
3928,768
1285,38
2361,242
4058,915
3263,184
2262,224
90,7

TOT.
COST
Hbuild,max
26,9
16,7
30,3
18,2
34,1
26,8
17,5
12,1
26,8
29,7
33,4
19,2
23,6
15,1
33,5
17,7
30,6
30,2
30,6
34
26,8
27,7
24,3
21,1
11,8

239.228
f
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

Hmin
97,4
85,4
97,6
85,1
99,5
96,7
89,8
82,6
97,4
98,5
101,2
85,7
88,9
81,1
100,9
85,7
100,8
98,6
96,6
100,2
93,3
95,4
90,7
92,6
80,4

Hmax
133,7
131,9
130,5
130,1
128,6
133,1
135,5
133,7
133,8
132
131
129,7
128,5
129,2
130,6
131,2
133,4
131,6
129,2
129,4
129,7
130,9
129,6
134,7
131,8

H
120,99
114,64
111,59
106,93
105,02
105,15
107,26
113,5
117,97
118,81
114,28
106,34
105,79
107,69
111
114,14
119,45
117,58
108,63
108,23
106,88
109,1
110,31
111,58
111,97

test
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK

26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36

After

62,1
62,4
65,8
63,9
64,1
64,1
63,9
64,6
64,7
64,9
66

that

33,9
17,1
10,9
17,1
15,4
30,6
23,6
29,4
17,9
16,5
21,4

5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

searched

the

pipes

Commercially

available

and

have

101
84,5
81,7
86
84,5
99,7
92,5
99
87,6
86,4
92,4

130,3
130,6
134
132,1
132,3
132,3
132,1
132,8
132,9
133,1
134,2

113,07
115,12
115,23
115,53
116,16
120,45
117,94
119,29
119,78
117,84
118,71

OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK

assigned to each pipe its diameter and

relative roughness; considering this
scheme with a polyethylene pipes with
PN 16 bar and roughness equal to
0.0015 mm.
5

The assignment of the diameters of the pipes is probably the most delicate
part of the project, as derived from this all the results calculated later.
The design criteria is performed through an iterative method, parallel to a
first verification of the criteria set out below, and check if the network is
more or less balance.
After several attempts, have been adopted for this network of diameters
between 60 125 mm. and a few diameters between 125 250 mm while
the diameter of the reservoir is used as diameter of 300 mm
Once you have assigned to all pipes diameters must run the program and verify that all scenarios, that
after describe, satisfy the following design criteria:
9#5#8 = 95#8
@ 5#8 0.2 ?/

9#5#8 9# 9#567 () <

@ 5#8 @#$ @ 567 () B

9#567 = =# + 70 ?
@ 567 = 2 ?/

N = set of nodes
R = set of pipes
The Hi test is already done in the excel table reported above. When OK means that the Hi is
between Hmin and Hmax. While the velocity test is reported as follows:

All the velocities into the networks conduits are above 0.2 m/s and below 2 m/s. So, also the velocity
test is satisfied. I can proceed now with network analysis (Steady State Simulation).
Inversion flow must not take place.
Velocity and unit headloss should have a certain uniformity.

STEADY STATE SIMULATIONS

Normal operation of the Water distribution Network.

Steady- state simulation (single period) for the following water demand conditions:

1.1 Peak Hour Demand Demand Multiplier = 34,567 = 3

1.2 Minimum Hour Demand Demand Multiplier = 34,5#8 = 0.3

1.3 Average Demand Demand Multiplier = 1

1.1 - Peak Hour Demand Demand Multiplier = CD,EFG = H (*already previously verified, as
follows).

Node n
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36

zground
65,5
63,7
62,3
61,9
60,4
64,9
67,3
65,5
65,6
63,8
62,8
61,5
60,3
61
62,4
63
65,2
63,4
61
61,2
61,5
62,7
61,4
66,5
63,6
62,1
62,4
65,8
63,9
64,1
64,1
63,9
64,6
64,7
64,9
66

Hbuild,max
26,9
16,7
30,3
18,2
34,1
26,8
17,5
12,1
26,8
29,7
33,4
19,2
23,6
15,1
33,5
17,7
30,6
30,2
30,6
34
26,8
27,7
24,3
21,1
11,8
33,9
17,1
10,9
17,1
15,4
30,6
23,6
29,4
17,9
16,5
21,4

f
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

Hmin
97,4
85,4
97,6
85,1
99,5
96,7
89,8
82,6
97,4
98,5
101,2
85,7
88,9
81,1
100,9
85,7
100,8
98,6
96,6
100,2
93,3
95,4
90,7
92,6
80,4
101
84,5
81,7
86
84,5
99,7
92,5
99
87,6
86,4
92,4

Hmax
133,7
131,9
130,5
130,1
128,6
133,1
135,5
133,7
133,8
132
131
129,7
128,5
129,2
130,6
131,2
133,4
131,6
129,2
129,4
129,7
130,9
129,6
134,7
131,8
130,3
130,6
134
132,1
132,3
132,3
132,1
132,8
132,9
133,1
134,2

tot head
120,99
114,64
111,59
106,93
105,02
105,15
107,26
113,5
117,97
118,81
114,28
106,34
105,79
107,69
111
114,14
119,45
117,58
108,63
108,23
106,88
109,1
110,31
111,58
111,97
113,07
115,12
115,23
115,53
116,16
120,45
117,94
119,29
119,78
117,84
118,71

test
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK

All criteria are satisfied.

1.2 - Minimum Hour Demand Demand Multiplier = CD,EIJ = K. H

Node n
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36

H
121
120,91
120,87
120,8
120,78
120,78
120,81
120,89
120,96
120,97
120,91
120,79
120,79
120,81
120,86
120,9
120,98
120,95
120,83
120,82
120,8
120,83
120,85
120,87
120,89
120,92
120,92
120,92
120,93
120,99
120,96
120,98
120,98
120,96
120,97
120,95

Hmin
97,4
85,4
97,6
85,1
99,5
96,7
89,8
82,6
97,4
98,5
101,2
85,7
88,9
81,1
100,9
85,7
100,8
98,6
96,6
100,2
93,3
95,4
90,7
92,6
80,4
101
84,5
81,7
86
84,5
99,7
92,5
99
87,6
86,4
92,4

Hmax
133,7
131,9
130,5
130,1
128,6
133,1
135,5
133,7
133,8
132
131
129,7
128,5
129,2
130,6
131,2
133,4
131,6
129,2
129,4
129,7
130,9
129,6
134,7
131,8
130,3
130,6
134
132,1
132,3
132,3
132,1
132,8
132,9
133,1
134,2

test
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK

From the previous table collected on Excel its immediate to understand that all the Head verifies are
satisfied but from the following picture comes that none velocity is verified (every velocity is below
the minimum velocity limit: 0.2 [m/s]

10

All the Head are met but none Velocity is met.

11

1.3 - Average Demand Demand Multiplier = L

Node n
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36

H
121
120,17
119,77
119,16
118,91
118,93
119,2
120,02
120,6
120,71
120,12
119,08
119,01
119,26
119,69
120,1
120,8
120,55
119,38
119,82
119.96
120,23
120,25
120,29
120,37
120,93
120,6
120,78
120,84
120,59
120,7
120,46
120,32
120,1
120,38
120,81

Hmin
97,4
85,4
97,6
85,1
99,5
96,7
89,8
82,6
97,4
98,5
101,2
85,7
88,9
81,1
100,9
85,7
100,8
98,6
96,6
100,2
93,3
95,4
90,7
92,6
80,4
101
84,5
81,7
86
84,5
99,7
92,5
99
87,6
86,4
92,4

Hmax
133,7
131,9
130,5
130,1
128,6
133,1
135,5
133,7
133,8
132
131
129,7
128,5
129,2
130,6
131,2
133,4
131,6
129,2
129,4
129,7
130,9
129,6
134,7
131,8
130,3
130,6
134
132,1
132,3
132,3
132,1
132,8
132,9
133,1
134,2

test
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK

Also for the Average demand multiplier (equal to 1) all the Heads are verified. The following picture
reports which pipes do not satisfy the velocity test (that is, the ones which has velocity below the
minimum velocity limit: 0.2 [m/s]):

12

The pipes that don t satisfy the velocity test are: 5 6 40 41 42 47 50 .

13

Breakdown of a pipe in the Water distribution Network:

Steady- state simulation (single period) for the average water demand conditions.

I must choose to Close three main pipes in my network and analyze the consequences of these outof-service pipes. (Considering one break at a time):
A. Break Pipe number 1
B. Break Pipe number 13
C. Break Pipe number 15

Pipe n. 1

Pipe n. 13

Pipe n. 15

Pipe in which there is the breakdown Status: Closed.

14

A. Break Pipe number 1:

Node n
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36

Head
120,86
116,99
116,99
116,99
117,16
117,75
118,32
119,5
120,73
119,42
117,28
117,32
118,12
118,92
119,56
116,98
118,98
118,27
118,09
118,62
118,9
119,18
119,21
119,26
119,72
119,78
119,83
119,94
120,74
120,22
120,52
120,62
120,3
120,49
119,76
119,96

Pressure
55,71
52,59
53,64
54,49
55,92
53,35
50,42
53
54,22
56,16
55,72
54,64
55,42
55,52
55,42
55,26
51,48
54,88
55,37
55,44
55,29
54,72
54,7
52,68
54,81
55,86
55,82
54,13
55,33
55,84
56,34
56,02
55,92
55,92
54,87
54,59

Hmin
97,4
85,4
97,6
85,1
99,5
96,7
89,8
82,6
97,4
98,5
101,2
85,7
88,9
81,1
100,9
85,7
100,8
98,6
96,6
100,2
93,3
95,4
90,7
92,6
80,4
101
84,5
81,7
86
84,5
99,7
92,5
99
87,6
86,4
92,4

Hmax
133,7
131,9
130,5
130,1
128,6
133,1
135,5
133,7
133,8
132
131
129,7
128,5
129,2
130,6
131,2
133,4
131,6
129,2
129,4
129,7
130,9
129,6
134,7
131,8
130,3
130,6
134
132,1
132,3
132,3
132,1
132,8
132,9
133,1
134,2

test
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK

All the Heads in every node are verified within the limits.

15

Some velocities in some pipes are not placed within the minimum and maximum limit. Those pipes
are: 2 3 4 5 41 42 50. (The 1 pipe is the broken one). (Vmin has not to be considered at this
stage).
Its very important to say that the weve checked that red conduits do not overtake the maximum
velocity limit: 2 [m/s].

16

B. Break Pipe number 13:

We can immediately see that all the Heads at nodes are within the Heads limits (max.
(max and min.), in
case of pipe 13 as a broken pipe.
17

Now, lets check the velocities for each pipe.

Its immediate to see how the break of Pipe 13 causes 9 non-verified velocities on pipes under the
minimum velocity limit. (Vmin has not to be considered at this stage).
Its very important to say that the weve checked that red conduits do not overtake the maximum
velocity limit: 2 [m/s].

18

B. Break Pipe number 15:

19

Even for the breakdown of Pipe 15 all the Heads for each node are verified (within their own max. and
min. Head).

Even in the case of Pipe 15 breakdown, 9 velocities of 9 conduits are below the minimum velocity
limit. (Vmin has not to be considered at this stage).
Its very important to say that the weve checked that red conduits do not overtake the maximum
velocity limit: 2 [m/s].

20

Fire Condition in Water distribution Network:

Two fire conditions are considered: fire in correspondence of the node with grater population
(Maximum Base Demand) and fire in the node of the network faraway to the reservoir.

Steady state simulation (single period) for the average water demand condition Demand
Multiplier = 1.
Two fire condition are considered, fire in correspondence of :
A. Node number 17: the node with great population;
B. Node number 6: the node of the network faraway to the reservoir.
Fire flow is valuated with the formula of Conti: M# = 6

Where P in the population express in thousands of inhabitants.
Fire M# is added to the Base Demand of the node.
A. Fire Condition in Node 17: the most populated node:

All the Heads are verified in case of Fire Condition in the most populated node: Node 17. Now, lets
check the velocities in every conduit:

21

The pipes where is not satisfied the Velocity test in case of fire condition in Node 17 are:
5 6 40 41 42 47 50. (Vmin has not to be considered at this stage).
Its very important to say that the weve checked that red conduits do not overtake the maximum
velocity limit: 2 [m/s].

22

A. Fire Condition in Node 6: the one faraway to the reservoir

The Heads in each node are all verified in case of fire in Node 6: the most faraway node to the
reservoir.
Now lets check the velocities in the same case:

23

Only two pipes dont supply the minimum velocity limit in case of fire conditions at node 6: the most
faraway to the reservoir.
Its very important to say that the weve checked that red conduits do not overtake the maximum
velocity limit: 2 [m/s].

24

EXTENDED PERIOD SIMULATIONS

SIMULATION
In this part of the project three different simulations have been analyzed:
1. Extended period simulation with leakage allocation;
2. Extended period simulation with leakage allocation and water age analysis;
3. Extended period simulation with leakage allocation and water quality analysis.
The input data are as follows:
Leakage:
p = 0.39 (real losses rate that is the fraction of water that is lost)
emitter exponent n = 1.1
Demand Pattern:
O() =

/()
./

D
BD

Actual Demand
Base Demand (users consumption + leakage)

BD= (1 p) BD (user consumption only)

O() =

/()
./

Chlorine parameters:
Global Bulk Coeff. = - 1.2
Global Wall Coeff. = - 1.1
Source quality (reservoir) = 0.4 mg/l

Inputting data into the program we obtain the following pattern:

25

Before starting the actual analysis is necessary to calculate:

)

QR1 . /?:

Q./ = ( ./# = 45.63

V1R1 !WX:

M1 = Y  Q/. = 0.36  44.13 = 17.796

Z? OR[[O:

M1# = \#  Y#8 \# =

#T*

M1#
Y#8

Where Y# is the average pressure at node i-th (obtain from Demand Multiplier = 1).
After this I insert \# as Emitter coefficient in each node.

Node IDs
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34

Tot Length
418,91
657,39
629,78
654,79
702,81
682,23
678,04
424,68
411,97
462,16
590,27
356,45
393,59
214,9
486,29
500,4
742,04
481,53
510,38
394,24
422,85
673,16
389,83
544,74
304,86
377,39
358,06
469,43
556,82
300,75
316,76
272,76
394,23
260,34

Half Length
209,455
328,695
314,89
327,395
351,405
341,115
339,02
212,34
205,985
231,08
295,135
178,225
196,795
107,45
243,145
250,2
371,02
240,765
255,19
197,12
211,425
336,58
194,915
272,37
152,43
188,695
179,03
234,715
278,41
150,375
158,38
136,38
197,115
130,17

Node BD
1,1371
1,7844
1,7095
1,7774
1,9077
1,8518
1,8405
1,1528
1,1183
1,2545
1,6022
0,9675
1,0684
0,5833
1,3200
1,3583
2,0142
1,3071
1,3854
1,0701
1,1478
1,8272
1,0582
1,4786
0,8275
1,0244
0,9719
1,2742
1,5114
0,8164
0,8598
0,7404
1,0701
0,7067

Pressure
55,85
55,77
56,42
56,66
57,67
53,53
51,3
53,52
54,6
56,54
56,42
54,44
57,11
56,66
56,19
55,8
55,3
56,45
56,48
56,51
56,35
55,54
55,4
52,27
55,42
56,56
56,33
54,6
55,79
56,27
56,53
56,4
56,18
56,14

alpha
0,005
0,008
0,008
0,008
0,009
0,009
0,009
0,006
0,005
0,006
0,007
0,005
0,005
0,003
0,006
0,006
0,009
0,006
0,006
0,005
0,005
0,009
0,005
0,007
0,004
0,005
0,004
0,006
0,007
0,004
0,004
0,003
0,005
0,003

ql
0,441
0,692
0,663
0,690
0,740
0,719
0,714
0,447
0,434
0,487
0,622
0,375
0,415
0,226
0,512
0,527
0,782
0,507
0,538
0,415
0,445
0,709
0,411
0,574
0,321
0,397
0,377
0,494
0,586
0,317
0,334
0,287
0,415
0,274

26

35
36

368,81
406,08

TOTAL

184,405
203,04
TOT. BD

1,0011
1,1023

55,16
54,8

0,005
0,005

0,388
0,428

45,6283

1 - EXTENDED PERIOD SIMULATION WITH LEAKAGE ALLOCATION:

Demand Multiplier = 0.61

Emitter exponent = 1.1

Total Duration= 24:00 h

Hydraulic Time Step = 1:00 h

1.1 - Graph with velocity versus all pipes at some particular time.

Velocities in each conduit at 7:00 AM

27

Velocities in each conduit at 8:00 PM

28

Total Heads for each node at 7:00 AM

29

Total Head for each node at 8:00 PM

30

The velocity changes according to the demand; in fact, during the night (low demand) we obtained
low speeds (0.10 0.30 m/s), but at eight oclock in the morning, when we have peak demand day,
the higher speeds are three times the lower ones (0.30 0.90 m/s).
1.2 - Table with hydraulic head versus all nodes at some particular time
Node n
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36

Head at 7:00
120,74
119,17
118,4
117,23
116,74
116,77
117,29
118,78
119,82
120,2
119,06
117,07
116,93
117,4
118,21
118,97
120,36
119,89
117,65
117,54
117,2
117,74
118,02
118,32
118,43
118,74
119,24
119,19
119,3
119,45
120,61
119,97
120,31
120,44
119,95
120,21

Head at 20:00
120,79
119,52
118,9
117,95
117,55
117,58
118
119,2
120,05
120,35
119,43
117,82
117,71
118,09
118,75
119,36
120,49
120,11
118,29
118,21
117,93
118,36
118,6
118,83
118,93
119,18
119,58
119,54
119,63
119,74
120,69
120,17
120,44
120,55
120,15
120,36

From the values in this table we can find the relation that exists between the speed and the head.

31

1.3 - Graph with velocity V versus time for some selected pipes.

Here you can see in detail what was stated in paragraph 1.1, namely that the velocity of the water
varies throughout the day according to demand.

1.4 - Graph with hydraulic head H versus time for some nodes

For example, comparing the speed and the head at 8.00 am is well known that when the demand for
water increases, there is a parallel increase in speed and decrease in head.
Then the two graphs (1.3 and 1.4) will be one the opposite of the other.

32

1.5 Graph frequency plot (value of V for pipe or H for node versus fraction not exceeding the
value)

Frequency graph gives us the speed distribution as a percentage.

For example if we look we see that the graph of 4.00 am in 95% of the water pipe has a velocity of
about 0.28 m/s, but at 8.00 am in 95% of the water pipe has a velocity of about 0.85 m/s.
We see that within 24 hours, the speed changes in all the pipes.

33

Same thing for the distribution of the head.

See for example, that at 4.00 am to 50% of the pipes has a head of 118.15 m, while at 8.00 am, 50% of
the pipes has a head of about 116.5 m.

34

2 - EXTENDED PERIOD SIMULATION WITH LEAKAGE ALLOCATION AND WATER

AGE ANALYSIS.
For this analysis we consider the second 24 hours.
2.1 Table with Water Age versus all nodes at some particular time

Water Age analysis at 31:00 hours

35

Water age analysis at 44:00 hrs

In this pictures we can see how long it takes water from the reservoir to reach the various node at
certain hours. And we can see that the growth in demand less time spent using the water to reach the
various nodes.

36

2.2 Graph with Water Age versus time for some nodes

In these graph we can see how much water takes to get to node during the different hours of the day.

2.3 Graph frequency plot (value of Water Age for node versus fraction not exceeding the value)

37

Here we observe at certain hours, how long it takes water to each a percentage of the nodes. For
example at 28.00 am per hour to reach 60% of the nodes, while at 32.00 am per hour to reach 93% of
the nodes.

2.4 Contour plot some instant of Water Ages.

Here we see graphically how long does the water take to reach the different nodes of the network
during the different hours of the day.

38

3 - EXTENDED PERIOD SIMULATION WITH LEAKAGE ALLOCATION AND WATER

QUALITY ANALYSIS.
hlorine concentration versus all nodes at some particular time.
3.1 Pictures with Chlorine

Chlorine Concentration at 32:00 hrs

39

Chlorine concentration at 44:00 hrs

40

This pictures provides us with the chlorine levels in the nodes during the different hours of the day,
the level of chlorine increases with the passing of the day.
3.2 Graph with Chlorine concentration versus time for some nodes

This is the distribution of the concentration level of chlorine knowing that the reservoir was given as a
value of 0.4 mg/l.
In all nodes is lower during the night and higher during the day.

3.3 Graph frequency plot (value of Chlorine concentration for node versus fraction not exceeding
the value)

41

We see the percentage distribution of chlorine at different times of the day.

42

3.4 Contour plot for some instant of Chlorine concentration.

Chlorine concentration levels at

28:00 hrs

Chlorine concentration levels at

44:00 hrs

Chlorine concentration levels at

32:00 hrs

Chlorine concentration levels at

47:00 hrs

This is the distribution of chlorine levels during the different hours of the day.

43

CONCLUSIONS: I had considered important to conclude the project in terms of costs. As I have
reported at the beginning, (first table) the pipe cost and consequently the final sum is:
Pipe ID
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

Length (m)
132,76
374,68
119,74
312,72
289,09
336,33
135,81
201,26
132,53
144,66
175,72
112,17
210,74
75,41
181,42
146,96
162,69
99,64
52,98
162,97
83,96
49,82
78,5
99,27
82,29
147,49
197,32
83,3
113,8
80,82
340,97
77,39
112,37
37,34
108,85
182,82
136,02
56,7
124,08
234,6
203,83
248,05
65,19
210,09
147,57
103,8
210,95
75,08
180,29
149,05

Diam
150
125
100
100
60
60
60
60
100
125
125
200
200
250
200
125
80
60
60
60
80
100
100
100
80
60
60
100
100
100
100
80
80
100
100
125
150
150
125
60
80
60
60
80
80
80
60
80
80
80

Unit Cost /m
39,4
37
27,2
27,2
19,8
19,8
19,8
19,8
27,2
37
37
54,4
54,4
72,9
54,4
37
24,5
19,8
19,8
19,8
24,5
27,2
27,2
27,2
24,5
19,8
19,8
27,2
27,2
27,2
27,2
24,5
24,5
27,2
27,2
37
39,4
39,4
37
19,8
24,5
19,8
19,8
24,5
24,5
24,5
19,8
24,5
24,5
24,5

Cost
5230,744
13863,16
3256,928
8505,984
5723,982
6659,334
2689,038
3984,948
3604,816
5352,42
6501,64
6102,048
11464,256
5497,389
9869,248
5437,52
3985,905
1972,872
1049,004
3226,806
2057,02
1355,104
2135,2
2700,144
2016,105
2920,302
3906,936
2265,76
3095,36
2198,304
9274,384
1896,055
2753,065
1015,648
2960,72
6764,34
5359,188
2233,98
4590,96
4645,08
4993,835
4911,39
1290,762
5147,205
3615,465
2543,1
4176,81
1839,46
4417,105
3651,725

44

51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
TOTAL

215,05
144,44
34,74
59,93
165,67
119,97
83,17
1

80
100
125
150
80
100
100
300

24,5
27,2
37
39,4
24,5
27,2
27,2
90,7

5268,725
3928,768
1285,38
2361,242
4058,915
3263,184
2262,224
90,7

TOT. COST

8405,86

239.228

The previous table is based on the following costs list:

Cost Table
D (mm)

/m

60
80
100
125
150
200
250
300

19,8
24,5
27,2
37
39,4
54,4
72,9
90,7

Now, is reported the whole amount of the project due to: valves (2 for pipe), Cutting Asfalt,
Excavation, Supply and installation of polyethylene pipe, with PN 16 including fittings and covering
with sand, Backfilling with gravel, Base layer, binder layer and wear layer of asphalt:

ARTICLE
000

JOB
DESCRIPTION
Cleaning the proposed
site from all dirt or
any un-required top
soil up to 25cm and
leveling the site,
all according to
drawings,
specifications,
conditions and
directed instructions
by the engineer.

UNITS QUANTITY

L.S.

1,00

UNIT
PRICE

TOTAL

17694,00

106945,00

45

001

Cutting Asfalt.
0,60 x 8.302,00

002

003

4992,08

5,00

24960,40

9984,17

15,00

149762,55

Excavation.
The item also includes
the demolition and
transport a refusal of the
asphalt.
0,60 x 2,00 x 8320,13
Supply and installation
of polyethylene pipe,
with PN 16, including
fittings and covering
with sand.
With the following
diameters:

a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
004

60
80
100
125
150
200
250
300
Supply and installation
of valves, with
following diameters:

ml.
ml.
ml.
ml.
ml.
ml.
ml.
ml.

2381,70
1969,13
1905,24
1183,66
385,66
504,33
75,41
1,00

19,80
24,50
27,20
37,00
39,40
54,40
72,90
90,70

47157,66
48243,69
51822,53
43795,42
15195,00
27435,55
5497,39
90,70

a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
005

60
80
100
125
150
200
250
300

cad.
cad.
cad.
cad.
cad.
cad.
cad.
cad.
m

26
28
30
14
8
6
2
1
5990,49

200,00
250,00
313,00
386,00
459,00
530,00
850,00
1000,00
35,00

5200,00
7000,00
9390,00
5404,00
3672,00
3180,00
1700,00
1000,00
209667,15

748,81

40,00

29952,40

349,45

150,00

52417,50

4992,08

16,50

82369,32

006

007

008

Backfilling with gravel.

0,60 x 1,20 x 8320,13
Asphalt.
Base layer.
0,60 x 0,15 x 8320,13
Asphalt.
Binder.
0,60 x 0,07 x 8320,13
Asphalt.
Wear layer.
0,60 x 8320,13

TOTAL EURO

931858,26
46