Professional Documents
Culture Documents
40
p ro p e rtie s p e r y e a r
M A IN S B U R S T F R E Q U E N C Y /1 0 0 K m / Y E A R
10
0 0
8 30
1 0
6
e r
20
p
4
t s
10
s
2
u r
0
B
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
0 20 40 60 80 100 AVERAGE PRESSURE (METRES)
2003: IWA Water Loss Task Force creates Pressure Management Group
practitioners, consultants, researchers from 10 countries
starts to publish articles, case studies, research into concepts.
Water 21 articles: Oct 2003, Dec 2006, April 2011
Papers at IWA Water Loss Conferences 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011
Australia
Brisbane
Gold Coast
1
10
4
100
60-90
100
35%
50%
30%
28%
60%
70%
28%
M
M,S
S
pressure: breaks
Yarra Valley M
Bahamas New Providence
Bosnia
Herzegovin
Gracanica
7
3
39
50
34%
20%
40%
59%
72%
M
M,S
S
data analysis
58% M
Caesb 2 70 33%
24% S
Sabesp ROP 1 40 30% 38% M
80% M
Brazil
Sabesp MO
Sabesp MS
1
1
58
23
65%
30%
29%
64%
64%
M
S
S
10 countries,
112 systems
50% M
SANASA 1 50 70%
50% S
30% M
Sanepar 7 45 30%
70% S
23% M
Canada Halifax 1 56 18%
23% S
50% M
Armenia 25 100 33%
Colombia
Palmira
Bogot
5
2
80
55
75%
30%
50%
94%
31%
M,S
S
S
On average, 38%
45% M
Cyprus Lemesos
Bristol Water
7
21
52.5
62
32%
39%
40%
25%
45%
M
S
S
reduction in Pmax
England
Italy
United Utilities
Torino
Umbra
10
1
1
47.6
69
130
32%
10%
39%
72%
75%
45%
71%
M
M,S
M,S
S
produced 53%
USA American Water
Total number of systems
1
112
Maximum
199
199
36%
75%
50%
94%
M
All data
reduction in bursts
Minimum 23 10% 23% All data
Median 57 33.0% 50.0% All data
Average 71 38.0% 52.5% M&S together Source: Thornton & Lambert
Average 36.5% 48.8% Mains only
Average 37.1% 49.5% Services only
Water 21, Dec 2006
WLTF pressure:bursts initial concepts
and prediction methods, in 2006/07
The straw that
ENT
N
ING
breaks the
SIO
VEM
FAILURE
RE
OAD
RATE COMBINATION OF FACTORS
RO
MO
ATU
OR
C L
CAUSES INCREASED
ND
PER
+C
camels back
FFI
OU
TEM
AGE
TRA
FAILURE RATE
GR
concept
Operating range PRESSURE
DONT mix mains and services data each can respond differently
PRESSURE
Source: Thornton & Lambert, IWA Water Loss Bucharest, Sep 2007
Applying the basic IWA concept Scheme
prioritisation, Bristol Water (2008)
A UK Water Company with 285 District Metered Areas
Initial Burst mains frequency ratio , using Maximum pressure
6.0
Initial burst mains
5.5
frequency ratio > 3
Burst frequency ratio (Actual break frequency/UARL
0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Maximum pressure mH
Po, BFo
100
Burst frequency BF
80 Linear
conns/year
60 After pressure
management
40 P1, BF1 Burst frequency
component that
Power varies wholly or
20 partly with
pressure
0 BFnpd Px
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 NPD Burst frequency component that is
Pmax at AZP Point (metres)
independent of changes in pressure
UARL service conn burst frequency
Non Pressure-dependent burst frequency BFnpd if N2 = 3 Maximum AZP Pressure Pmax
Substantial
reductions in
burst frequency
have been
achieved for
CICL mains
even small reductions of just a few metres can give significant benefits
zone-specific benefits and savings for mains, and for services, can be
quickly predicted using IWA best practice methods with the right data
extension of residual asset life is a further large benefit, and can now be
predicted for AC mains NPV benefits on CI mains are next to be studied