Lake Atitlan Pipeline Report

15% Design Steel Wastewater Pipeline
Lake Atitlan, Guatemal a

Prepared For: Dr. Steffen Mehl
Professor
California State University, Chico

Dr. Stewart Oakley
Professor

Prepared By: Andrew Bartholow
Undergraduate Student

Albert Guidice

Michael Hanson

Kymberly Laubach

Alexandra Oran

May 9, 2014
Lake Atitlan Steel Wastewater Pipeline
May 9, 2014

i

Table of Contents
BASIS OF DESIGN 1
CURRENT AND FUTURE CONDITIONS 1
DESIGN PARAMETERS 1
DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS 1
DESIGN ALTERNATIVES 1
ALTERNATIVE 1 2
ALTERNATIVE 2 2
ALTERNATIVE 3 2
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 3
ASSUMPTIONS 3
YEARLY CAPITAL RECOVERY FACTOR 3
PRESENT DAY WORTH 4
ELECTRIC COSTS 4
CAPITAL COSTS 4
RECOMMENDATIONS 5
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 5
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS 5
HEAD LOSS 6
CAVITATION 7
SUBMERGENCE DEPTH 7
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS 8
BURIED PIPE 8
ABOVEGROUND PIPE 9
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS BREAKDOWN 9
SPECIFICATIONS 10
PUMPING 10
PIPE AND PIPE STRUCTURES 12

May 9, 2014

ii

List of Tables
Table 1 - Pipeline Section Breakdown ............................................................................................ 2
Table 2 - Alternative 1 Summary ...................................................................................................... 2
Table 5 - Yearly Capital Recovery Factor ....................................................................................... 3
Table 6 - Present Day Worth .............................................................................................................. 4
Table 7 Monthly Electric Costs ....................................................................................................... 4
Table 8 Capital Costs .......................................................................................................................... 4
Table 9 - Design Alternatives Summary ......................................................................................... 5
Table 10 Friction Head Loss ............................................................................................................ 7
Table 11 - Allowable Buckling Pressure ........................................................................................ 8
Table 12 - Cross Section Deflection ................................................................................................. 8
Table 13 - Combined Pipe Stresses .................................................................................................. 9
Table 14 - Pipe Deflections .................................................................................................................. 9
Table 15 - Economic Analysis Breakdown For Alternative 1 ............................................. 10
Table 16 - Pump Specifications ...................................................................................................... 11
Table 17 - Motor Specifications ...................................................................................................... 11
Table 18 - Thrust Block Surface Areas ........................................................................................ 12

List of Figures

Figure 1 - System and Pump Curves ................................................................................................ 6
Figure 2 - Hydraulic Grade Line ........................................................................................................ 6

May 9, 2014

1

Basis of Design
Current and Future Conditions
The Lake Atitln area releases their wastewater into Lake Atitln. In the future, they
plan on storing their wastewater in a basin at San Lucas Toliman, where they will
pump the primary treated water up and out of the Lake Atitln Basin. The release of
wastewater back into the lake has caused environmental impacts such as
eutrophication, which causes an increase in the amount of nutrients in the water,
leading to blooms in the phytoplankton wastewater.

The flow of wastewater to the wastewater collection basin in San Lucas Toliman will
need to be approximately 18,809 cubic meters per day. Within the next twenty
years, however, the Lake Atitln area can be expected to have a growth in
population, bringing the flow requirements of the wastewater system to
approximately 33,974 cubic meters per day.
Design Parameters
For this steel pipeline design, the required flow capacity was based on the build out
condition of 33,974 cubic meters per day. For current day conditions, the flows will
be smaller and will require fewer pumps to be run at any given time than during the
build out condition.
Design Assumptions
The assumptions made for the design of the pipeline are as follows:
1. Buried pipe will be under four-feet (4) of 100 pcf soil.
2. There is no water present in the soil that the pipe will be buried in.
3. The soil density is 100 pcf.
4. A 25% increase in pressure for surge allowance.
5. The roughness of the pipe is 0.0003 feet.
6. Working stress in the pipe is limited to 18 ksi (a factor of safety of 2.0 for A36
steel).
Design Alternatives
For these design alternatives, the pipeline was broken down into five (5) different
sections. The length and elevation change of each section can be found below in
Table 1 - Pipeline Section Breakdown. Sections 1 and 2 run through the city and will
have to be buried, while sections 3, 4, and 5 all have the option to be above ground.
All alternatives were designed having sections 3, 4, and 5 being above ground and
held by saddle supports. The distance of the saddle supports and total supports
used varies depending on each section of pipe and can be found in their respective
sections.

May 9, 2014

2

Table 1 - Pipeline Section Breakdown
Section Length (ft) Elevation Change (ft)
1 660 49.5
2 3235 16.5
3 1880 66
4 990 33
5 990 -33
Alternative 1
Alternative 1 uses the 14 M160-11.3 pump in a six (6) pump manifold with each
pump having five (5) stages. The pipeline design for Alternative 1 can be seen
below in Table 2 - Alternative 1 Summary.

Table 2 - Alternative 1 Summary
Section Diameter (in) Thickness (in)
1 28 0.188
2 30 0.188
3 26 0.188
4 26 0.188
5 18 0.188
Alternative 2
Alternative 2 uses the 10 EMB 7.5 pump in an eight (8) pump manifold with each
pump having six (6) stages. The pipeline design for Alternative 1 can be seen below
in Table 3 - Alternative 2 Summary.

1 24 0.438
2 22 0.312
3 22 0.312
4 20 0.188
5 18 0.188
Alternative 3
Alternative 3 uses the 10 EBM 7.13 pump in an eight (8) pump manifold with
each pump having seven (7) stages. The pipeline design for Alternative 1 can be
seen below in Table 4 - Alternative 3 Summary.

May 9, 2014

3

1 24 0.375
2 28 0.312
3 28 0.375
4 24 0.188
5 18 0.188

Economic Analysis
Assumptions
Assumptions that were made during the economic analysis of the pipeline were as
follows:
1. A 6% interest rate was used.
2. Pipe will have a 100-year lifetime.
3. No large capital costs will be made in maintaining the pipe over its lifetime.
4. Electricity will average $0.25 per kW/h over the lifetime of the pipe.
5. Pipe costs $0.94 per pound.
6. Saddle supports costs, valve costs, and motor costs are not included in these
initial estimates.
7. The build out condition flow is running constantly for the entire life of the
pipeline.
8. Motor efficiency is assumed to be 90% (For final estimates a motor is chosen
and manufacture supplied efficiency is used), actual pump efficiency is used
however.
Yearly Capital Recovery Factor
Based on the assumptions above a Yearly Capital Recovery Factor was obtained for
each alternative and can be seen below in Table 5 - Yearly Capital Recovery Factor.
The values in this table represent the average annual cost of pumping and capital
costs incurred. This value includes the total cost of the pipeline with assumptions to
be recovered during the lifetime of the pipeline.

Table 5 - Yearly Capital Recovery Factor
Alternative Yearly Capital Recovery Factor
1 $ 84,255.06
2 $ 88,582.67
3 $ 94,313.29

May 9, 2014

4

Present Day Worth
If the pipeline was to be constructed with current US dollars the total pipeline cost
with assumptions can be seen below in Table 6 - Present Day Worth. The present
worth analysis was based on a monthly electric cost over the lifetime of the pipe at
an APR of 6% plus the initial cost of the pipeline with assumptions.

Table 6 - Present Day Worth
Alternative Present Day Worth
1 $ 14,430,282.06
2 $ 15,171,478.09
3 $ 16,152,947.15
Electric Costs
Due to a large chance in variability of electric costs in the region an average cost of
$0.25 per kW/h was used. The value for each alternative can be seen below in Table
7 Monthly Electric Costs. A major factor in these values is the amount of pumps in
each pipeline alternative. If the system were to run at current flow conditions the
cost would decrease because these values are based on the build out flow
conditions. Note that these monthly electric costs are based on the actual
performance of the pump and an assumed motor efficiency of 90%.

Table 7 Monthly Electric Costs
Alternative Monthly Electric Costs
1 $ 83,072.10
2 $ 87,542.65
3 $ 93,040.76

Capital Costs
The capital cost of each alternative can be seen below in Table 8 Capital Costs.
This cost includes the purchasing of the pipeline, pumps, and motors.

Table 8 Capital Costs
Alternative Capital Costs
1 $ 438,562
2 $ 414,195
3 $ 465,668

May 9, 2014

5

Recommendations
A summary of the three (3) alternatives can be seen below in Table 9 - Design
Alternatives Summary.

Table 9 - Design Alternatives Summary

Recommended Alternative
The recommended alternative for the pipeline is alternative 1. Alternative 1 was the
most economical of the three (3) alternatives and provides the best long-term
performance.
Hydraulic Analysis
For alternative 1, the following pump and system curves can be seen below in
Figure 1 - System and Pump Curves and the hydraulic grade line can be seen in
Figure 2 - Hydraulic Grade Line.
May 9, 2014

6

Figure 1 - System and Pump Curves

Figure 2 - Hydraulic Grade Line
Head Loss
The friction head loss for each section of pipe can be seen below in Table 10
Friction Head Loss. The head loss is a factor is based on the Darcy-Weisbach
equation using the Colebrook-White equation to determine a friction factor and
including minor losses as seen below Equation 1 - Head Loss.

Equation 1 - Head Loss
) (

0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
H
e
a
d

(
f
t
)

Flow (GPM)
14 M160 - 11.30"
Pump Curve System Curve
0
50
100
150
200
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
H
e
a
d

(
f
t
)

Length (ft)
HGL for Pipeline
Pipeline
HGL
May 9, 2014

7

Notice that the velocity is one of the major controlling factors and is a function of the
pipe diameter. Therefore in alternative 1 the pipe in section 5 is reduced from the
initial section 1 pipe 28 to 18. This increases the contact surface area between the
fluid and the pipe wall. Also, section 5 is sloped downhill and partially gravity fed.
This results in section 5 containing most of the Friction head loss.

Table 10 Friction Head Loss
Section Friction Head Loss (ft)
1 1.43
2 4.95
3 5.93
4 3.12
5 20.37
Total 35.80

Cavitation
Section 4 of the pipeline was the highest peak in the system and was therefor the
controlling factor for cavitation when there is only one pump station. A minimum
pressure head of -10 was used when checking for cavitation. This value includes a
factor of safety of 3 (vapor pressure is approximately -30) per USBR suggestions,
this factor of safety allows for changes in atmospheric conditions to occur without
fear of causing cavitation problems in the pipe.
Submergence Depth
The submergence depth is controlled by vortexing with a required submergence
depth of three-feet (3), the net positive suction head allows for the pump to be
place a maximum of one-foot (1) above the water surface.
Vortexing
Per the curve provided by Allis-Chalmers the recommended submergence depth to
prevent vortexing is three-feet (3).
Net Positive Suction Head
The pump curve provided by the manufacturer states that at the design flow rate,
the required net positive suction head is seven-feet (7). A factor of safety being the
larger of two-feet (2) and 20% of the manufacturer recommendation was added to
make a final required net positive suction head of nine-feet (9). Assuming a usable
suction pressure of approximately -10 feet (factor of safety being 3.0), the pump
may be placed a maximum of one-foot (1) above the water surface.
May 9, 2014

8

Structural Analysis
Buried Pipe
Pipes in section 1 and section 2 are both buried; buckling or cross section deflection
will govern the structural integrity.
Buckling
Allowable buckling pressure is determined by Equation 2 (shown below) and must
be greater than or equal to the summation of external loads

Equation 2 - Allowable Buckling Pressure

The external loads on the pipe consist of the weight of the soil above the pipe and a
400 psf HS-20 truck load.

Table 11 - Allowable Buckling Pressure
Section Allowable Pressure (psi) Max Pressure (psi)
1 52.15 8.56
2 47.02 5.78

Cross Section Deflection

Cross section deflection is determined by Equation 3 (shown below) and with steel
pipe; the deflection should be below 1.5%.

Equation 3 - Cross Sectional Deflection

As can be seen below in Table 12 - Cross Section Deflection, both sections pass this
requirement.

Table 12 - Cross Section Deflection
Section Deflection (in) Deflection (%)
1 0.154 0.55%
2 0.159 0.52%

May 9, 2014

9

Aboveground Pipe
Yielding
Yielding of the pipe is caused by a combination of stresses in the pipe. Stresses used
include hoop stress, longitudinal stress, and bending stress. Bending stress is
caused by the self-weight of the pipe as well as the fluid inside, while the pressure of
the fluid in the pipe causes hoop and longitudinal stresses. The stresses in the pipe
can be found below in Table 13 - Combined Pipe Stresses.

Table 13 - Combined Pipe Stresses
Section Support
Distance
(ft)
Bending
Stress
(psi)
Hoop Stress
(psi)
[max/min]
Longitudinal
Stress (psi)
[max/min]
Maximum
Combined
Stress (psi)
3 43 8028 3838/1089 1919/544 10662
4 43 8028 1089/-364 544/-182 8642
5 41 8016 24/-126.8 12/-127 8028

All sections of aboveground pipe pass checks for yielding and the support distances
found in Table 13 are suitable for use in the alternative.
Deflection
Too much deflection in an aboveground section can create ponding problems when
draining; therefor it is necessary to check deflection with the maximum deflection
being length of unsupported pipe divided by 360. The maximum deflections for
each section are found below in Table 14 - Pipe Deflections.

Table 14 - Pipe Deflections
Section Deflection (in) Max Deflection (in)
3 0.59 1.43
4 0.59 1.43
5 0.77 1.37

Economic Analysis Breakdown
An economic analysis of Alternative 1 is broken down in Table 15 - Economic
Analysis Breakdown For Alternative 1 below. This analysis is on a per-section base
using the assumptions listed in the Economic Analysis previously mentioned. This
analysis does not include any electrical cost.

May 9, 2014

10

Table 15 - Economic Analysis Breakdown For Alternative 1

Specifications
Pumping
Pumps
The Pump which will be used in the recommended design will be a Flowserve
14M160 with an 11.3 inch diameter. The Column is a standard size of 10 inch and
maximum flow is 3000 GPM. A summary of these specifications can be seen below in
Table 16 - Pump Specifications.

Location: Item Description: Quantity Units Cost / Unit Total Cost
Pump Station
Pump - 6 x 14M160 6 8,380.00 $ 50,280.00 $
Motor - 6 x 6 4,254.00 $ 25,524.00 $
Section # 1
Pipe
- 28 in diameter, .188 in thinkness 656 ft 48.83 $ 32,030.10 $
Section # 2
Pipe
Section # 3
Pipe
Section # 4
Pipe
Section # 5
Pipe
Total = 436,412.57 $
May 9, 2014

11

Table 16 - Pump Specifications
Parameter Value Unit
Pump Brand Flowserve
Pump Model 14M160
Diameter 11.3 Inch
Column 10 Inch
Column Max GPM 3000 GPM
A Flanged 13.5 Inch
B Threaded 11.62 inch

Motor
The motor that is best suited for the pump that is being used is an Emerson
HO75S2BLG - 75 horsepower motor that provides a maximum of 1800 RPM. The
frame is a 365TYP and the type is RU. The pump runs at a voltage of 230 or 460
volts. This specific motor has a unit price of $4,254 and comes with a safety feature
known as the non-reverse ratchet. The non-reverse ratchet is necessary for if there
was ever backflow, it would slow the flow water reducing the stirring of solids
caused by the unrestricted turbulence of backflow through freely rotating impellers.
The non-reverse ratchet also helps from damaging the motor during backflow.
Motor specifications can be found below in Table 17 - Motor Specifications.

Table 17 - Motor Specifications
Motor Specifications
HP 75
RPM 1800
Frame 365TYP
Volts 230/460
Type RU
Unit $ $4,254
% Eff 91.7
Down Thrust (lbs) 5700
Base Dia (in) 16.5
CPLG Height (in) 31.1562
5

Intake Structure
The intake structure consists of a six (6) parallel sumps with a 10-inch column
and a 13.5-inch bell. Dimensions of the pump house intake can be seen in
Appendix B.
May 9, 2014

12

Pipe and Pipe Structures
Thrust Blocks
The thrust blocks are a mass of concrete between the pipe wall and the soil that will
be placed at the bends in the pipe. The surface area that the thrust blocks must
have can be found below in Table 18 - Thrust Block Surface Areas.

Table 18 - Thrust Block Surface Areas
Pipe Diameter
(in)
Deflection Angle (degrees) Area (ft
2
)
28 90 36
30 22.5 16
26 90 36
26 22.5 9
18 90 25

Saddle Supports
Saddle supports will be standard 120-degree supports. Calculations for stress
concentrations were included in yielding.

May 9, 2014

13

References
Hydraulic Institute Standards for Centrifugal, Rotary, and Reciprocating Pumps (14 ed.).
(1983). Cleveland, Ohio: Hydraulic Institute.

Mays, L. W. (2011). Water resources engineering (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

Steel Pipe - A Guide for Design and Installation - Manual of Water Supply Practices, M11
(4th Edition) (4th ed.). (2004). S.l.: American Water Works Association (AWWA).
May 9, 2014

i

Appendix A Pump Curve

May 9, 2014

ii

May 9, 2014

i

Appendix B Pump Station Plans
May 9, 2014

ii

P
R
O
D
U
C
E
D

B
Y

A
N

A
U
T
O
D
E
S
K

E
D
U
C
A
T
I
O
N
A
L

P
R
O
D
U
C
T
P R O D U C E D B Y A N A U T O D E S K E D U C A T I O N A L P R O D U C T
P
R
O
D
U
C
E
D

B
Y

A
N

A
U
T
O
D
E
S
K

E
D
U
C
A
T
I
O
N
A
L

P
R
O
D
U
C
T
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

Lake Atitlan Pipeline Report

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Lake Atitlan Pipeline Report

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

15% Design Steel Wastewater Pipeline

Lake Atitlan, Guatemal a

S-ar putea să vă placă și