""

SECTION 27

WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT

By John P. Velon and Thomas J. Johnson!

INTRODUCTION

The previous sections of this handbook describe the hydraulics of natural or en-
gineered systems commonly used to manage and utilize water resources for a va-
riety of purposes including drainage, flood control, power generation, navigation,
and irrigation. In this section, applications of hydraulic principles related to the
treatment and distribution of potable water are presented. Specific topics ad-
dressed include:

. Potable-water requirements associated with residential, commercial, industrial,

and other uses
. Hydraulics of water-treatment systems
. Hydraulics of water-distribution systems

POTABLE-WATER
REQUIREMENTS

The critical first step in the planning, design, or analysis of potable-water supply
facilities involves the definition of the water requirements for the area being stud-
ied. Determining the demands within a water system is comparable with deter-
mining the design loadings for a structure. The demands become the basis for
e,valuating the capacity of the system. For a water system, it is important to de-
fme both the quantity of water needed and how that need varies over the course
of a day, a week, or a year.
, 1. Demand, Consumption, and Unaccounted-for Water. At the start of any
~lsCussion on estimating potable-water requirements, it is important to clearly de-
fme some of the terms used to describe water usage. Several terms merit special
attention.
W~ter Demand. In this presentation, water demand is defined to be the total
quantity of water whkh must be delivered to a water system to meet all of the
system's needs, i- -!-- water lost through physical leakage.
er Consumption. L.-onsumption is the actual quantity of water used by consum-

-h s f?r their specific needs. Consumption does not include water lost through
P YSlcalleakage.

IVh.lACknowledgment is made to Thomas R. Camp and Joseph C. Lawler for material in this section
lch appeared in the third edition (1969).

27.1
"
 .,.
27.2 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT POTABLE-WATER REQUIREMENTS 27.3

Unaccounted-for Water. In metered water systems, the difference between loyment data for each community are also given to illustrate the variation in per
the total water usage and the sum of the metered and authorized unmetered usage ~apita usage with local characteristics. Table 2 shows representative per capita
is called the unaccounted-for water. This amount includes both water lost usage rates for each of the major categories of water users. Actual usage rates
throu~h physical leaks and water used but not accounted for through metering or will vary with local conditions, especially if a system serves large industrial or
an estImate. commercial users.
The ratio of unaccounted-for water to total water production is a common in-
dicator of the extent of leakage and incomplete or inaccurate metering. Results
TABLE2 Municipal Uses of Water and Representative
from a review of water use by nearly 200 water systems in the metropolitan Chi- Quantities in the United States
cago area during 1987 found estimates of unaccounted-for flow ranging from less
than 1 percent to greater than 30 percent. I For well-established systems, levels of Quantity, gpcpd
unaccounted-for flow less than 8 percent of total production are generally con- Use Range Typical
sidered acceptable.
2. Types of Water Users. In most urban water systems, users of water can be Domestic 40-80 65
Commercial and industrial 10-75 40
classified as falling under one of five major categories: residential, commercial
Public uses 15-25 20
industrial, institutional, or public. Residential water use is typically associated
Loss and waste 15-25 20
with single or multifamily homes, apartments, or other dwellings and is estimated Total 80-205 145
on the basis of per person or per capita consumption. Commercial water users
range from small retail businesses to office buildings to hotels and restaurants. Adapted from Ref. 2.
Water used for manufacturing or processing operations falls into the category of
industrial water use. Institutional water users include schools, hospitals, and
churches, while public users include municipal or governmental facilities which 4. EstimatingWater Use. Estimates of water requirements for a given area
use water. can be developed using several different approaches. The approach selected is
In areas where potable water is used for watering of lawns and/or gardens, usually a function of the type of data available. In well-developed urban areas,
special consideration must also be given to outdoor water use. Outdoor water use extensivedata pertaining to past, current, and projected population growth, land-
can significantly increase both average and peak water requirements depending use characteristics, commercial and industrial development, and water iIse may
on the climate of the area. be readily available. Historic metering and billing records maintained by existing
3. Typical Water Usage. Water usage varies widely from system to system as water utilities may also provide detailed information about water use. Where this
a result of the mixture of users among the categories given above, climate, and a type of existing data is available, projections of potable-water requirements can
number of other factors. A common indicator used to characterize the level of be readily developed with a high degree of confidence.
water use within a system is the average daily per capita consumption. Per capita In rapidly developing areas, however, historic data may be inadequate to ac-
consumption is the ratio of the average amount of water used in a system on a curatelyrepresent the type and variety of potable-water users that may influence
daily basis to the population served. Table 1 illustrates the range of per capita the demandsof the area over the course of the planning period. Additionally, past
consumption for several communities in the Chicago area. Population and em- records of use may be unavailable. In either case, it is necessary to project the
future characteristics of the area to establish estimates of future water demands.
Factors commonly considered in projecting future water use include population,
housing,commercial and/or industrial area, institutional operations, employment
TABLE 1 Per Capita Water Consumption in Selected Metropolitan Chicago Communi- characteristics, and land-use patterns. Once these factors have been used to char-
ties, 1985 acterizefuture conditions in the study area, typical water-usage rates may be as-
Service Total Manufacturing Averageper sumed as the basis for estimating current and future water needs.
City population employment employment capita demand . Commonly used water-usage rates for residential, commercial, and institu-
262 tional users are summarized in Tables 3, 4, and 5.
Chicago 3,001,001 1,499,261 252,443 . Industrial water use can vary dramatically from site to site depending on the
Evanston 71,822 41,368 3,757 158
Franklin Park 15,172 298 SIZ~of the plant and the way in which water is used. Facilities which use water in
17,906 30,009
Lake Forest 5,809 238 196 theirmanufacturingprocess will most often have large water requirements, while
16,003 460
Oak Brook 7,526 36,174 4,793 other plants at which water use is limited to sanitary and clean-up purposes may
2,795 137 needrelativelysmall amounts of flow. When developingestimatesof water require-
Naperville 60,265 32,841 120
Oak Lawn 58,435 19,424 631 rne~tsfor areas which include large industrial users, site-specificneeds should be
728 109 78 reVIewedand usage patterns developedbased on historicalor expected practices.
Round Lake 13,802
Beach
Schaumburg 58,734 59,660 4,340 --
140
. In addition, it should be noted that all estimates of water requirements must
Includeconsideration of water loss and leakage in the system as discussed at the
start of this section. Even in well-managed and -maintained systems, physical
Source: Ref. 1.

...
 ,
POTABLE-WATER REQUIREMENTS 27.5
27.4 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT

TABLE3 Typical Rates of Residential Water Use -

TABLE5 Typical Rates of Water Use for Institutional Facilities
Water usage, gaVunit/day
Per capita water usage, gpcpd
Type of residence Range
80-105
Typical value
95
-
Hospital, medical
Facility
Bed
Unit Range
130-260
Typical
175
Apartment/condominium 5-15 10
50-160 110 Employee
Average residence Bed 80-145 105
105-210 140 Hospital, mental
Average residence (unmetered) 5-15 10
130-250 150 Employee
Luxury home Inmate 80-160 120
Summer home 30-50 40 Prison
60-90 80 Employee 5-15 10
Trailer park Resident 50-120 90
Rest home
Note: For users with metered connections to a public supply, except as noted. Employee 5-15 10
Adapted from Refs. 3, 4, and 5. School, day:
With cafeteria, gym, showers Student 15-35 20
With cafeteria, but without gym and showers Student 10-20 15
TABLE4 Typical Rates of Commercial Water Use Without cafeteria, gym, or showers Student 5-18 10
School, boarding Student 50-105 75
Water usage, gaVunit/day
Type of water Unit Range Typical value Adapted from Refs. 3, 4, and 5.

Airport Passenger 25-50 3.0

Automobile service station Set of pumps 475-575 525
Vehicle served 10-15 13 used. Equation (1) gives the general form of the expression used to estimate the
Hotel Guest 40-60 50 allowableleakage for a given system. Table 6 summarizes the leakage allowance
Employee 8-13 10 factors used by IDOT-DOWR for various pipe materials and ages.
Laundry (self-service) Machine 400-650 550
Motel Person 25-40 35 L = 2: 2: (Pij)(LRjj) (1)
Motel (with kitchen) Person 50-60 55 j j
Office Employee 8-17 15
where L = unavoidable leakage allowance, gal/day
Restaurant (includingtoilet):
Average Meal 7-12 9 Pij = miles of pipe of material i, j years old
Short order Meal 2.5-5.0 3.0 LRij = allowable leakage rate for pipe of material i, j years old, gal/day/miles
Bar and lounge Customer 1.5-5.0 2 of pipe
Department store Restroom 420-635 525
Employee 8-13 10 The allowance computed using the IDOT-DOWR formula represents the "un-
Shopping center Parking space 0.5-2.0 1.0 avoidableleakage" that would be considered acceptable for a given system. In
Employee 8-13 10 areas where leakage is thought to be greater than the "acceptable" amount pre-
Theater (indoor) Seat 2-4 3 dicted by the IDOT-DOWR formula, an increased allowance expressed as a per-
centage of the system's total water requirements may have to be included in
Adapted from Refs. 3, 4, and 5. water-requirement estimates.
5. Variations in Water Use. Even within a single water-supply system, water
leakage often accounts for 5 to 10 percent of the total water production. In poorly demands fluctuate with time. Seasonal changes in climate affect water use in
maintained systems, water lost through leakage may account for 30 percent or
more of the total water produced.
In existing systems, estimates of water loss through leakage may be developed :!!-BLE6 Unavoidable Leakage Factors for Water-Distribution Systems
from the results of leak-detection studies, district measurements, or detailed wa-
ter audits. However, where such information is unavailable or where estimat~S Unavoidable leakage allowance, gaVday/mileof pipe
are to be developed for new or proposed water systems, an alternate procedure IS - Age of pipe Cast-iron pipe with lead joints All other pipe and joint materials
required. . > 60 years ~OO ~OO
One such procedure is used by the Illinois Department of Transportation DI- 40--60 years 2500 2000
vision of Water Resources (mOT -DOWR) in its program of regulating use of wa: 20-40 years 2000 1500
20 years or less 1500 1000
ter from Lake Michigan.6 The IDOT -DOWR procedure results in the comput~
tion of an acceptable allowance for "unavoidable leakage" in a water syst~ I Source: Ref. 6.
based on the size and age of the distribution network as well as the pipe matena

-"
 ..,.
27.6 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT POTABLE.W ATER REQUIREMENTS 27.7

180
many parts of the United States. Outdoor water use for lawn watering or garden- 0
----- PEAK HOUR
ing frequently results in higher usage during summer months. In other systems OF PEAK DAY
~
:::!'
180

temporary increases in population associated with seasonal tourism or school op: w

0
erations may affect water-use patterns.
~ 140
Significant fluctuations in water demand occur over the course of a day as ~
well. In many water systems, the resulting diurnal pattern will include water- ~
«
120

usage quantities which may range from as low as 25 to 40 percent of the average ::J
PEAK DA Y
daily demand during the hours between midnight and 6:00 A.M.to 150to 175per- ~
LL
100
cent of the average demand during the morning or evening peak periods. As an 0
example, Fig. 1 shows the range of daily and hourly variations over the course of s;:
w
80
a year in Valparaiso, Ind.7 ()
ffi 80
Because of the fluctuations in water demand experienced in every water sys- 0..

tem, it is important to define and consider the range of conditions that may OCcur.
5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23
Typically the range of conditions is dermed in terms of demand factors such as HOURS
the ratio of the maximum daily demand to the annual average daily demand, the
ratio of the peak hourly demand to the annual average daily demand, and the ra-
tio of the minimum hourly demand to the annual average daily demand. Other
factors, such as seasonal demand factors, may also help to define the range of
conditions which affect a water system. Table 7 gives representative ratios for
several of the most commonly used demand factors.
170
TABLE7 Typical Water-Demand Factors ------ PEAK DAY
0 160
z
Ratio to annual average day
Demand condition Range Typical value
~ 150
l1J

Daily average in maximum month 1.10-1.50 1.20 ~ 140

CJ
Daily average in maximum week 1.20-1.60 1.40 c? 130
Peak day 1.50-3.00 1.80 l1J
>
Peak hour 2.00-4.00 3.25 <{ 120
..J
Minimumhour 0.20-0.60 0.30 <{
~
z
110
Adapted from Refs. 2 and 8.
<{ 100 AVERAGE DAY
LL
0
I- 90
Like per capita usage rates, demand factors for individual water systems vary zl1J "1:11

with local conditions. Where available, historical data should be reviewed to de- ~ 80
l1J
termine these factors. Consideration of local conditions is particularly important Cl. 70
in the determination of the peak day and peak hour factors since these values
define the critical demand conditions in many systems. 60
6. Fire-Fighting Demands. When evaluating water requirements for a water- 1 31 61 91 121 151 181 211 241 271 301 331 361
II-

supply system, fire-protection needs must also be considered. While water re- DAYS
IIII
quired to fight fires is generally needed only for a period of several hours, the FlGURE 1 Daily and hourly variation in water consumption at Valparaiso, Ind. IIII

high rates of flow required frequently result in the rapid use of extremely large I
volumes of water within a limited area. Consideration of these extreme demands Ii
'I
is particularly important in the design or evaluation of small water systems ,:"h~re methods for estimating fire-flow requirements have been formulated in response to I"'!
",
the rate of flow and total volume of water required to fight a fire may be signifi- the changing patterns of development affecting urban areas and improvements in
I

i
cantly greater than the flow and volume required to meet normal peaks in domes- fire-suppression capabilities. Three of these methods are described in the AWWA
tic and commercial, industrial, and institutional water usage. . Manual of Practice M31, Distribution System Requirements for Fire Protection. 11
The rate of flow required for fire protection within the service area of a given The most detailed of these methods is the approach developed by the Insur-
water system was for many years estimated on the basis of population using ~n ance Services Office (ISO).12 The ISO method computes the needed fire flow
expression developed by the National Board of Fire Underwriters. (noW ~fi~ (NFF) for specific structures on the basis of four factors: construction (Ci), oc-
American Insurance Association).9 More recently, however, more site-specil cupancy (0;), exposure (Xi), and communication (Pi) using Eq. (2).

,II
~

27.8 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT
NFFi = (Ci)(O;)(X + Pi)
These factors take into consideration many features of the structure including
its size, material and manner of construction, purpose and contents, and location
relative to adjacent structures. Computed values of the needed fire flow range
from 500to 1500gpm for one- and two-familydwellingsless than or equal to two
stories in height. For other habitable buildings, the NFF may range up to a max-
imum of 3500gpm. Designers should refer to Ref. 12 for detailed information re-
lated to the computation of needed fire flow for specific structures.
Fire flows greater than 3500 gpm may be required for certain high-hazard or
high-risk industrial facilities. However, such facilities are often constructed with
on-site fire-suppression systems including sprinklers, fire pumps, and/or dedi-
cated water storage. The availability of these on-site resources can greatly reduce
the need for high fire flows from the local distribution system.
In planningfor fire-protection needs in a water system, it is also important that
the duration for which fire flows must be maintained is considered. Table 8 sum-
marizes recommended fire-flow durations as published by the National Fire Pro-
tection Association.
TABLE8 Recommended Fire-Flow Duration Require-
ments
Required fire flow, gpm Recommended duration, h
Up to 2500 2 the design of water-treatment facilities that the occurrence and transmittal of
3000-3500 3 waterborne disease have now been almost entirely eliminated in the United
4000-12,000 4 States.
Source: Ref. 10.
When defining the critical fire situation for a water system, the fire-flow require-
ments computed using the ISO or other methods most be added to the normal water
needs of the system. Typically, to provide a conservative estimate of the total re-
quirements, fire flows are superimposed on the maximum daily demand for a given
system. Thus the fire situation demand for a system can be computed as
DF = DpD + NFF
where DF = fire situation demand, gpm
DPD = peak day demand, gpm
NFF = needed fire flow, gpm
Where a water-distribution system consists of two or more pressure zones, the
critical fire situation demand must be computed separately for each zone, ~nd t~e
impact of each fire condition on the total system demand must be consl~e~e .
The computed fire situation demands then define additional demand conditions
which the water system must be capable of meeting.
7. Importance of Demand Projections. Because of the basic role of ~a~er-
demand projections in the planning and design of water-supply facilities, it ISIm-
portant that time and effort be made to define the water needs of the system a~
accurately as possible. In addition, demand projections must be develop~d so ~-
to properly represent the full range of current and future conditions incIudlllg fir r-
fighting conditions which can be expected within the design life of the wate
system facilities.
."
HYDRAULICS OF WATER-TREATMENT SYSTEMS 27.9
(2) The proper demand condition to be used for planning or design of various fa-
cilities within the water-supply system must be defined. For example, because
water- and -distribution mains must convey adequate flow throughout the service
area under all conditions, these facilities are typically sized on the basis of the
peak hour demand or the maximum fire-flow condition, whichever is more criti-
cal. Distribution system storage facilities are also sized on the basis of peak hour II
and fire-fightingconditions, since their primary purpose is to supplement flows
into the system during these high-demandperiods. Where treated water storage is
provided, water-treatment plants are generally sized to meet only peak day de-
mands. During high-demand periods, the required additional flow is supplied
from distribution storage. Lastly, pumping stations may be sized for a variety of
conditions ranging from average daily demand up to peak hour or fire-flow situ-
ations depending on their function in the system. In any case, estimates of de-
mand must represent both current and projected conditions for all facilities
through the end of the planning or design period.
HYDRAULICS OF
WATER-TREATMENT SYSTEMS
Prior to use for consumption, most waters must be treated to achieve acceptable
chemical,microbiological, and aesthetic standards. It is as a result of advances in
8. Water-Treatment-Plant Design. The design of a water-treatment plant typ-
ically involves two interrelated activities. These are:
..The design of the treatment process
The design of the hydraulic devices and structures within which the treatment
process takes place
The first of these two tasks, the process design, involves the selection and de-
sign of treatment techniques which will result in the production of a finished wa-
(3) ter that meets water-quality criteria set for the facility. Key factors in this stage of
the design include the characterization of the raw water to be treated, the selec-
tion of the specific unit processes to be used, and the determination of operating
criteria for those treatment processes.
In addition to the selection of the treatment processes, however, the hydraulic
characteristics of the treatment system must be considered. The channels, pipes, ill
and structures in the treatment system must be designed to provide the required 1Il
flow conditions and to allow for the production of the required volume of water in
the plant. Thus, the treatment capacity of a given water-treatment facility de-
pends both on the capacity of the physical and chemical processes selected for
treatment of the raw water and on the hydraulic capacity of the facilities in which
the treatment is to take place.
The focus of this presentation is the hydraulic analysis and design of water-
treatment systems. Detailed descriptions of procedures and criteria for the design
of water-treatment processes are presented elsewhere.13,14
Also, many of the basic hydraulic principles commonly used in the analysis
~nd design of water-treatment systems are presented in detail in Sec. 2. Descrip-
tIons of the basis of these principles will not be repeated here. Rather the balance
~
 ,.
27.10 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT HYDRAULICS OF WATER-TREATMENT SYSTEMS 27.11

of this section on hydraulics of water-treatment systems will focus on the deter- capable of supplementing water supplied to meet peak demands, water-treatment
mination of head losses in components of a treatment system and consideration facilities must be capable of delivering the maximum daily demand for the plan-
of other important hydraulic conditions. ning period. In systems where distribution storage is limited or pumping rates
9. Water-Treatment Systems. Water-treatment systems generally consist of a greater than the maximum daily rate are required, treatment systems may have to
number of physical and chemical unit processes connected in series to improve be designedfor higher production rates. In either case, treatment plants are com-
the quality of a given water. Given the wide range of treatment technologies cur- monlysized to provide hydraulic capacity equal to 110to 125percent of the nom-
rently in use, the number and type of process configurations possible are almost inal design capacity. This excess capacity provides both for minor variations in
limitless. Figure 2 shows the schematic layout of two common water-treatment the hydraulic conditions within the plant and for flexibility in normal plant oper-
systems. The system showri in Fig. 2a is a conventional coagulation, sedimenta- ations.
tion, and filtration system used widely in the United States for the treatment of Where the potential exists for future increases in the process capacity of a
surface waters. The system shown in Fig. 2b is a typical treatment facility de- plant through improvements to specific treatment units, the hydraulic design of
signed to remove iron and manganese from well water. the facilitymust also include consideration of the increased future capacity. This
While the process configurations found in modern water-treatment plants may factor is particularly important since process upgrades frequently require only the
vary widely, the basic hydraulic principles which govern flow through the plants installation or replacement of elements of a treatment unit while increases in
are relatively consistent for all types of facilities. From a hydraulic standpoint, a plant hydraulic capacity may require significantpiping improvements and expen-
water-treatment plant is simply a system of interconnected pipes, basins, and sive structural modifications.
channels through which water moves. Within the treatment train, the flow rate For example, consider a treatment plant originally designed for filtration rates
and the level of the water at any given point are governed by the geometry of the of 2 gpm per square foot. If, through media improvements, the filtration rate can
system and the head loss occurring at control points such as overflow weirs or be increased to 3 gpm per square foot, the treatment capacity of the process will
launders. be increased by 50 percent. Therefore, the original design of the treatment system
10. Hydraulic Design Criteria for Water-Treatment Plants. The primary should include sufficient hydraulic capacity to accommodate the potential in-
factor in the hydraulic design of a water-treatment plant is its rated treat- crease in capacity without major structural improvements.
ment capacity. For water-supply systems which include finished water storage In treatment systems where residuals from specific unit processes are wasted
Alum (e.g., chemical sludges, filter backwash water), an allowance in the design capac-
Polymer ity must be made to account for the difference between the raw water flow en-
I tering the plant and the finished water produced. In order to obtain the desired
:Settlll1g Basin
I No.1
treated water capacity at the discharge from the plant, certain process units must
I
To be sized to handle more than.the nominal design flow.
Distribution
ISettlll1g Basin Also, in establishing hydraulic design criteria for specific unit processes, con-
: No.2 siderationmust be given to units which are taken out of service frequently, such
as rapid sand filters, or on a more periodic basis, such as sedimentation basins. In
Coagu lation
Flocculation Filtration
a filtration plant, the treatment system must have adequate capacity to maintain
the maximumrequired production rate while filters are being backwashed. This is
Clarification an important factor in the design since backwashing of filters ,isa routine opera-
Fig.2a. TYPICAL SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT FLOWSHEET tion which goes on regularly under all operating conditions. '
Similar consideration must be given to plant operations with typically larger
units out of service for routine maintenance. While it may not be practical to de-
CI2 CI2 sign every facility with sufficient capacity to meet maximum day requirements
with a major unit out of service for maintenance or repair, these conditions must
be considered in the development of the hydraulic design criteria for a system.
To 11. Hydraulic Profile. The hydraulic analysis of a water-treatment system is
Distribution typically performed through the development of a series of hydraulic profiles.
I I I The hydraulic profile through a treatment plant is a plot of the critical water-
Ch lori nation/Detention surface elevations (for gravity systems) or hydraulic grade-line elevations (for
pressurized systems) associated with the flow through the system.
The hydraulic profile is a design tool that is used to define head losses, water-
Pressure
Filtration
surface elevations, and flow conditions in a treatment facility. The profile is de-
yel?~ed by systematically computing and adding the head losses associated with
IndIVIdualcomponents of the treatment system starting at the downstream water
Fig.2b. TYPICAL IRON/MANGANESE REMOVAL SYSTEM FLOWSHEET surface or hydraulic grade-line elevation. To verify that the hydraulic capacity of
~hesystem is adequate, profiles must consider the full range of current and future
FIGURE 2 Typical water-treatment plant flow sheets. ow conditions expected at the plant. Attention must also be given to hydraulic

. . .....
 '1
27.12 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT HYDRAULICS OF WATER-TREATMENT SYSTEMS 27.13

conditions during periods of maintenance or repair, when a given treatment unit 12. Pressure Flow through Pipes. Head losses associated with pressure flow
may be out of service. through pipes in a water-treatment plant are the result of friction losses in straight
The hydraulic profile through most treatment systems is a function of the head sections of pipe or channel combined with head losses at entrances, exits, bends,
loss and water-surface elevations at a series of hydraulic control points. These tees, and other valves and fittings. For most treatment-plant applications, these
points may be overflow weirs, orifice plates, pressure- or flow-regulating devices, losses can be adequately described using either the Darcy-Weisbach, Hazen- I
or other hydraulic devices, depending on the type and configuration of facility. Williams, or Manning equations listed below and minor loss coefficients.4
Specific conditions that must commonly be addressed in the development of a
hydraulic profile include:13
Darcy- W eisbach:
1. The loss of energy through trash racks and/or fine screens
2. The loss of energy through flow-measuring devices hf = 8fLQ2 (4)
3. Entrance losses associated with the equal division of flow among parallel -rr2gD5
treatment trains
Hazen-Williams:
4. Losses in open and closed conduits and fittings between treatment pro-
cesses
hf = 4.73Q1.85L (5)
5. Losses through control valves and rate of flow devices associated with plant Cl.85 D4.87
piping and treatment units
6. Set losses through filters and contactors, where the buildup of material in the Manning:
process affects the unit head loss and rate of flow
By considering these factors in combination it is possible to define other crit- hf = 4.66n2 D16/3
Q2 L (6)
ical hydraulic features of the treatment system. These include:
1. The water surface or hydraulic grade-line elevation needed at the head of the
where hi = head loss, ft
L = length of pipe, it
treatment plant to move water through the facility at the design rates Q = flow rate, cis
2. The total head loss through the treatment system under various current and D = pipe diameter, ft
future demand conditions
g = acceleration due to gravity, 32.2 it/s2
Given the widespread use of specialized equipment and proprietary processes, f = Darcy-Weisbach factor of friction
the development of a hydraulic profile for a modern water-treatment system is C = Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient
usually accomplished through a combination of basic hydraulic computations and n = Manning's roughness coefficient
close coordination with manufacturers. Losses through plant piping and fittings
are readily determined using the Darcy-Weisbach, Hazen-Williams, or Manning Friction or roughness coefficients are required to use each of these equations.
friction formulas. Open-channel flow conditions can be analyzed in similar fash- The Darcy-Weisbachfis determined based on Reynolds number, pipe roughness,
ion using Manning's equation and hydraulic formulas for various flow conditions and pipe diameter using the Moody diagram and values of roughness given in
as well as expressions for specific devices including sharp-crested weirs and Sec. 2. Commonly used values of the Hazen-Williams C factor and Manning's n
overflow launders. Minor loss relationships can be used to express entrance and for pipe materials found in water-treatment plants are given in Table 9.
exit losses, losses associated with fittings and valves, and other minor flow con- While the equations above adequately describe head loss due to friction in
straints, in terms of velocity. straight sections of pipe, they do not account for losses associated with bends,
However, losses associated with specialized treatment plant components such elbows, partially closed valves, and other fittings. These minor losses frequently
as screens and trash racks, flowmeters, and filtration systems are the result of make up a large portion of the head loss which occurs in treatment-plant piping.
complex hydraulic phenomena and cannot in most cases be readily comput~d A common method of representing minor losses in hydraulic computations in-
from basic hydraulic formulas. For these items, designers should consult WIth volves the use of a minor loss coefficient KL and the velocity head V2/2g as
manufacturers' literature or technical representatives who can provide data shown in Eq. (7).
based on testing and experience with the specific items.
The balance of this presentation on water-treatment-plant hydraulics presents V2
summaries of the basic hydraulic formula used in the analysis of pressure floW (7)
HL = KL 2g
and minor losses in pipes, flow over sharp-crested weirs, and flow in effluent
launders. The hydraulics of open-channel flow are mentioned briefly here but. are where HL = minor head loss, ft
presented in detail in Sec. 2. A brief discussion of other hydraulic considerat~ons KL =minor loss coefficient
related to water-treatment-plant design is included at the end of this discussIon. V = velocity, fps
g = accelerationdue to gravity,ft/s2
.
 .,
27.14 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT HYDRAULICS OF WATER-TREATMENT SYSTEMS 27.15

TABLE9 Typical Values of Pipe Roughness Coefficients TABLE 10 Minor Loss Coefficients for Pipe Flow

Values of C Values ofn Type of minor loss Loss in terms of V2/'lg

Pipe material Range Typical Range Typical Pipe fittings:
90° elbow, regular 0.21-0.30
Cast iron: 90° elbow, long radius 0.14-0.23
New, unlined 120-140 110 45° elbow, regular 0.2
Old, unlined 40-100 80 Return bend, regular 0.4
Cement-lined and sea-coated 100-140 120 0.011-0.015 0.013 Return bend, long radius 0.3
Ductile iron, cement-lined 100-140 120 0.011-0.015 0.013 AWWA tee, flow through side outlet 0.5-1.80
Steel: AWW A tee, flow through run 0.1-0.6
Welded and seamless 80-150 120 AWW A tee, flow split side inlet to run 0.5-1.8
Riveted 110 0.012-0.018 0.015 Valves:
Concrete pipe 100-140 110 0.011-0.015 0.015 Butterfly valve (6 = 90° for closed valve)*
Plastic pipe (smooth) 120-150 130 0.011-0.015 0.011 6 = 0° 0.3-1.3
6=10° 0.46-0.52
Adapted from Refs. 2 and 4. 6 = 20° 1.38-1.54
6 = 30° 3.6-3.9
Values of KL range widely depending upon the type of loss being represented. 6=40° 10-11
For example, KL = 0.3 is a typical value for a standard 900beI).d.But a half- 6 = 50° 31-33
closed 8-in diameter gate valve gives a KL = 3.0. Table 10provides a summaryof a = 60° 90-120
commonly used minor loss coefficients for standard entrances, exits, fittings, and Check valves (swing check) fully open 0.6-2.5
valves. Gate valves (4 to 12 in) fully open 0.07-0.14
13. Open-Channel Flow. Much flow through conventional water-treatment 1/4closed 0.47-0.55
1/2closed 2.2-2.6
plants falls under the category of open-channel flow. In treatment plants, this cat-
3/4closed 12-16
egory includes the flow of water through open channels and basins, over weirs
and in troughs, and through partially filled pipes. In fact, open-channel flow in- Sluice gates
As submerged port in 12 in wall 0.8
cludes all types of flow where a free surface is present. As contraction in conduit 0.5
Because of the presence of a free surface, the hydraulics of flow in open chan-
Width equal to conduit width and without
nels are more complex than those principles which apply to steady flow in pressur- 0.2
top submergence
ized pipes. Under open-channel conditions, the water surface and the hydraulic grade Entrance and exit losses:
line are the same. However, depending on the geometry of the channel, the depth and Entrance, bellmouthed 0.04
velocity of the flow may vary. In particular, the water-surface elevation at any given Entrance, slightly taunted 0.23
point may depend on either upstream or downstream conditions. Figure 3 illustrates Entrance, square edged 0.5
several ways in which channel characteristics and hydraulic controls may affect the Entrance, projecting 1.0
water surface in a hypothetical channel, resulting in transitions from subcritical to
supercritical flow. Detailed descriptions of the hydraulics of open channels are pre- Exit, bellmouthed V2 V2

sented in previous sections. A detailed description of flow in partially full pipes is 0.1 (~- 2~ )
included in the discussion of sewer hydraulics in Sec. 28. 1.0
Exit, submerged pipe to still water
14. Weirs. Weirs are commonly used to control the outlet elevation of flow
from a basin or channel in water-treatment systems. In some instances they may 'Loss coefficients for partially open conditions may vary widely. Individual
also be used as a means of measuring the rate of flow at a point. . manufacturers should be consulted for specific conditions.
The depth of flow over a weir depends on the type and geometry of the weir, Adapted from Refs. 4 and 19.
the weir length, and the flow rate across the weir. Flow across a weir may also be
affected by downstream conditions, if the weir is located within the influence of
backwater from a downstream control point or if the underside of the flow nappe
Q = 3.33(L - O.lnh)[(h + hv)312- h~l2] (8)
downstream of the weir is not fully ventilated and at atmospheric press~re. t
Figure 4 illustrates the basic characteristics of the sharp-crested weirs m~s where Q = flow rate, cfs
commonly found in water-treatment systems. Expressions for flow over the weirs L = length of weir crest, ft
shown are given below. . se n = number of end contractions
The general equation for describing flow over a rectangular weir such as tho
shown in Fig. 4a and b is given in Eq. (8).
h = upstream head above weir crest, ft
hv = velocity head associated with the flow approaching the weir, ft

,""
 ---,-
27.16 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT HYDRAULICS OF WATER-TREATMENT SYSTEMS 27.17

A B c D H

i- ,---
H --------

r
I
-------- -----

Siuice Gate
L

Hydraulic Jump ~o-.C-~C-C-:-~

Fig,4a, RECTANGULAR WEIR-NO END CONTRACTIONS

--,
°-
FIGURE 3 Open-channel flow conditions.
Fig,4b, RECTANGULARWEIR-WITH END CONTRACTIONS

The term n in the equation defines the number of end contractions associated
with a given weir. An end contraction occurs when the length of the weir crest is
less than the fullwidth of the approach channel upstream of the weir as shown in
Fig. 4b. Under these conditions the streamlines upstream of the weir must con- Illillilm

tract to allow all of the flow to pass through the opening. When the weir length is
equal to the channel width, as in Fig. 40, the end contractions are said to be sup-
pressed and n = O. °-
III',

The term hv is included in Eq. (8) to account for the effect of the upstream
approach velocity on the weir discharge, and can be written as '
I,
"Ii'
t
'11'
1

h-----V2 Q2 1 (9) Fig,4c, V-NOTCHWEIR

~'
u;,
v - 2g - A2 2g

where V = approach velocity in the channel upstream of the weir, fps H IIIII~
g = acceleration due to gravity, 32.2 ft/s2
A = cross-sectional area of the flow upstream of the weir, ft2 -------------
Q = discharge over weir, cfs ~I!
-=t-=--~- 'II
However, the incorporation of this term into the equation forces the use of a
trial-and-error solution method since both sides of the equation now depend on ° I
"
Q.
The solution of this problem can be quickly achieved by first assuming that hv
is small in comparison with h. Rewriting Eq. (8) with this assumption yields ."
!
Fig, 4d, CIPOLLETTI WE IR
Q = 3.33(L- 0.lnh)h312 (10)
FIGURE 4 Sharp-crested weirs.
Solving Eq. (10)for Q, an estimate of the discharge can be obtained and us~d
to estimate hv in Eq. (9). If hv is in fact small in comparison with h, then the dls.
!
'''I~f;
,Ji
27.18 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT
27.19
HYDRAULICS OF WATER-TREATMENT SYSTEMS
~
charge rate computed with Eq. (10) is correct. Otherwise, the computed value of I~i
hv can be substituted into Eq. (8) to obtain a revised discharge.
When the velocity in the approach to a rectangular weir is small in relation to III1
the head on the weir crest, and no end contractors exist, Eq. (10)can be reducedto: .,1Iii

Q = 3.33Lh3f2 (11) HL
he
Expressions for flow across triangular V-notch weirs and the trapezoidal
Cipolletti weir shown in Fig. 4c and d are as follows:ls
L
For V-notch weirs:

Q = Xh2.48 (12) Fig.5a. FREE FALL DISCHARGE, ho=he

For Cipolletti weir:

Q = 3.367Lh3f2 (13)
where Q = flow rate, cfs
X = 2.49 for a = 90°
= 1.443for a = 60°
= 1.035for a = 60°
= 0.497 for a = 22.5°
h = upstream head over vertex or crest of weir, ft
HL -
ho
L = length of weir crest, ft
15. Launders. A special application of hydraulics commonly found in water-
L
treatment plants is the use of launders or troughs for the collection of flow at the
outlet of a basin. Launders are most commonlyused at' the outlets of settling ba-
sins or clarifiers where it is important to maintain relatively low and well-
distributed flow velocities. Rectangular basins are usually constructed with Fig.5b. SUBMERGED DISCHARGE, ho> he
straight launders while circular basins often have circular effluent launders in- FIGURE 5 Flow conditions in a launder.
stalled around their perimeters. Washwater collection troughs in rapid sand filters ,)111

also function as launders. lilii"!'

Hydraulically, a launder functions as an open channel with a uniform addition IIII1

of water along its length. In designingwater-treatment facilities, it is necessary to
determine the maximumwater-surface elevation at the upstream end of the laun- HL = J(2h~/ho) + (ho - ~iLr - ~iL (14)
der in order to verify that the weir elevation and launder depth are sufficientfor
the design flow. where HL = flow depth at upstream end of launder, ft
The procedure for determining the maximum water-surface elevation in a he = critical depth in launder, ft = (Q2/gb2)113
L = length of channel III
launder depends on the discharge condition. In most cases, it is desirable to ho = depth at discharge location, ft
maintain a free outlet at the discharge of the launder. However, where the energy i= launder slope, ft/ft
associated with the free fall is too great, floc being carried by the flow may be g = acceleration due to gravity, 32.2 ft/s2 'ill
damaged. As a result, some launders may be designed to operate with a sub- b = channel width, ft
merged discharge. Figure 5 shows the configuration of typical launders under Q = total discharge from launder, cfs
both free-fall and submerged conditions. .
A detailed procedure for the determination of upstream flow depth 10a laun; For launders with zero slope, i = 0 and the expression can be reduced to
der was developed by Li.16This procedure utilizes a correction factor to account
for frictional losses associated with flow along the launder. However, for mos HL = V(2h~/ho) + h~
treatment plant design applications, simplified expressions as presented below (15)
can be used for this problem. t- Lastly, for launders which have a free discharge with ho = he, !II~

The simplifiedgeneral expression for flow depth at the upstream end of a rec :j

angular launder receiving uniformly distributed flow can be given aslS HL = \,/3 he = 1.732he (16)

....
 "

27.20 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT HYDRAULICS OF WATER-TREATMENT SYSTEMS 27.21

These expressions are based on the integration of the general differential equa- control valves on the discharge piping are frequently used to regulate the rate of
tion for a lateral spillway channel based on the momentum theory. The equations filtration by adjusting to maintain a relatively constant level in the filters. There-
do not include consideration of the effect of friction along the channel. However, fore, increasing head loss in the filter has limited effect on upstream hydraulic
experimental studies have shown that friction losses generally account for ap- conditions. In systems which include pressure filters, however, head loss that
proximately 10 percent of the water-surface drawdown in the channel. Therefore, builds up in the filter increases the hydraulic grade line at the inlet to the filter and
a correction factor of 1.1 can be used in most design applications to adjust for at all points upstream. As a result, the full range of filter head loss must be con-
frictional effects as shown in Eq. (17). sidered in the hydraulic analysis of the treatment system. In cases where propri-
etary filter designs are used, manufacturers can provide the most accurate infor-
Hi ;: CFHL (17) mation related to filter head loss.
Filter influent, effluent, wash, and waste piping is generally sized on the basis
where Hi = flow depth at upstream end of launder, corrected for friction, ft of minimizingcost while limitingvelocities and head loss. Final design criteria
CF = friction correction factor = 1.1 must consider site-specific conditions, but general design guidelines are as shown
HL = uncorrected flow depth at upstream end of launder, ft in Table 11.
Regardless of the method used to compute Hu standard practice is to provide
a minimum of 4 in of freeboard between the computed maximum water-surface TABLE 11 Typical Guidelines for Velocities in Filter Piping
elevation and the bottom of the weir crest along the side of the launder.
Maximum velocity at plant capacity
Upstream flow depths in troughs used for collection of backwash water may
also be estimated using Eqs. (16) and (17). Piping system or maximum wash rate, fps
16. Filtration. Filters are one of the most common treatment devices used in Filter influent 2
water-treatment plants. They can be constructed in a variety of configurations, Filter effluent 5
using different types of media depending on their intended function in the treat- Backwash supply 12
ment process. Backwash drain 8
From a hydraulic standpoint, the filtration process involves the flow of water Filter to waste 15
through a filter medium such as sand or anthracite. Viscous flow of clean water
through clean sand and other loose granular media, which has been studied by
many investigators, appears to be represented very well in an equation developed 17. Basin Hydraulics. Hydraulic conditions within the basins that make up a
rationally by Kozeny17from Poiseuille's law of flow through capillary tubes. The water-treatmentplant are frequentlyvery important to the performanceof the treat-
same equation was later developed by Fair and Hatch.18This equation states that ment system. This is particularlytrue in settlingbasins and clarifierswhere the per-
the hydraulic slope through the medium is formanceof the unit is directlyrelated to the proper hydraulicdesign of the tank.
However, even when uniform dispersion of and collection of flow are accom-
z. dh ~11(I-p)2 -v (18) plished at the basin inlet and outlet, the velocity in a typical rectangular basin is
- dl - gp p3 d2 not uniform over the cross section. Because of the drag on the walls and floor,
the velocity at these boundaries is zero, and it is greater than the average at some
where dh = head loss through bed thickness dl, ft points out from the boundaries. The velocity distribution over the cross section
p = porosity ratio of most settling basins is not stable, moreover, owing to the disturbing influences
d = diameter of the grains, ft of masses of water of varying density. This variation in density, which is due to
v = rate of filtration as a velocity, fps temperature differences and differences in concentration of solids and entrained
~ = dimensional friction factor gases, though slight, is nevertheless sufficient to cause vertical movements of wa-
11 = absolute viscosity of the fluid, lb-s/fe ter masses, dead spaces, and reversals in the direction of flow. As a result of
p = density of the fluid, slugs/fe these disturbing influences, the probable time of passage of all the particles in a
g = acceleration due to gravity, 32.2 ft/s2 g~venvolume of water will be less than the retention period, and the volume will
disperse itself while passing through the basin so that the time interval between
During the hydraulic design of filtration facilities, consideration must be given the passing of the first and last particles at the basin outlet will be much greater
to the range of head losses that will occur as particles removed from the ~ater than at the inlet. This phenomenon is called short-circuiting. If two or more suc-
begin to build up in the filter media. In practice, for rapid sand, dual media, or ce~dingvolumes of water passing through the basin at the same rate of flow re-
mixed media gravity filters, the total head loss through the filter is typically 4 to qUIremarkedly different times for passage, the basin lacks stability of flow.
10 ft. Head losses through pressure filters are usually in a similar range but may A particular type of short-circuiting common to many settling basis is caused
vary with system design up to 25 ft. . ro- by density currents. If the incoming suspension is heavier than the basin con-
Also, head loss is commonly used as one of the controls for filtratlOn P te~ts, and the basin velocity is insufficient to cause mixing,the heavy suspension
cesses. Along with effluent turbidity, head loss is usually the factor t~at go~ern~ will flow along the bottom as a density current. Similarly, light suspensions will
the duration of a filter run and the timing of backwashing. In gravity filters, oW flow along the surface. Since the incoming suspension contains more solids than

.III
 ml

27.22 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT HYDRAULICSOFWATER~REATMENTSYSTEMS 27.23

the clarified water in the basin and is therefore likely to be heavier, it is better to 5.6 I

introduce it near the bottom and to make the basin shallow. E I-- F I

5.2
Short-circuiting may be measured by inserting a charge of dye or other tracer
into the basin influent and observing its concentration in the effluent after various 4.8
time intervals as the slug of water containing the charge passes out of the basin.
Short-circuiting studies are usually made on model tanks operating in accordance 4.4
with Froude's law. Figure 6 shows the results of several such studies plotted in
dimensionless terms; with the relative concentration c/co as ordinates and the rel- 4.0I
ative time tiT as abscissa, where c is the concentration of the tracer in the effluent
3.6
after time t, Co is the concentration at t = 0 which would result with instanta-
neous dispersion of the tracet: throughout the tank, and T is the retention period 3.2
equal to the volume of the basin divided by the flow rate. If all the tracer charge I
is accounted for in the effluent, the area under the curve will be 1.0. If the flow 1
ocJ 2.8: I
pattern is stable and there are no dead spaces, the value of tl4 to the center of ~ D I
0
gravity of the curve will also be 1.0. A stable flow pattern is indicated when the on 2.4
same curve can be reproduced with ret:>eatedruns under the same conditions.
In practice the relative time to the center of area tA IT is usually less than 1.0.
'g
~ 2.0
( I

Smaller values indicate more severe short-circuiting. Since half the particles of \ '
water pass in less time, ta is the probable flowing through time. The dispersion of
the water is measured approximately by the time of initial appearance ti of the
1.6
B
c- - " \
1.2
tracer in the settling-tank effluent. Small values of t;lT and tA IT indicate serious 1.0
short-circuiting; and small values of Froude's number F indicate unstable flow I ), l).--J
0.8
patterns. Table 12 shows the hydraulic characteristics of the curves of Fig. 6.
Curves B, C, D, and E of Fig. 6 are characteristics of progressively better 0.4 £.e-t!
co. T j 11-- " NI:>..
types of settling tanks under stable flow conditions. The ideal dispersion tank, the
baffled mixing chamber, and the ideal settling tank have been added for the pur-
pose of comparison. A rough estimate of the effect of short-circuiting on removal
00
X0.2
LL.L
1/
0.4 0.6 0.8
IJ --.J_
1.0 1.2 1.4
-b-.
1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8

may be developed if it is assumed that the suspension is subjected to varying set- Values at t
tling times distributed as indicated by the dispersion curves. FIGURE 6 Typical dispersion curves for tanks.
Experiments indicate that, with well-designed inlets and outlets, both the inlet
and the outlet zone in a basin will extend for a distance about equal to the basin
depth. Since the floor area in these zones is ineffective for settling, it is obvious The problem of inlet and outlet design is much simplified if the length of the
that the length of a settling basin should be great compared with its depth. Since basin is made so great as compared with its depth that the inlet and outlet zones
radial-flow circular tanks and square tanks are quite inefficient for this reason, are a negligible part of the gross length. For example, the effective settling area in
the design of the inlets and outlets for such tanks is a critical problem. In order to a basin with a 20:1 ratio of length to depth is about 90 percent of the total floor
area. Orifice walls are of no benefit in such a tank.
effect good distribution at the inlet of such a tank and good flow distribution over
the cross section at the outlet end, with a minimum length for both inlet and out- 18. Inlet and Outlet Devices. The purpose of properly designed inlets and
let zones, it is essential to use orifice walls to the full depth and to have a rela- outlets is to distribute the water uniformly among basins, to distribute water uni-
tively high velocity through the orifices. Unfortunately, such a wall is detrimental formly over the cross section of each settling basin at the inlet end, and to collect
at the inlet end since the high velocity through the orifices may destroy floc. the effluent uniformly at the outlet end. Properly designed inlets and outlets assist "
in the reduction of short-circuiting and are very important for short basins with
low velocities. The velocity in the basin must be reduced to less than 1 percent of
TABLE 12 Hydraulic Characteristics of Typical Tanks
the velocity in the influent conduit in some cases.
Curve V2 The water may be distributed across the width of the plant by bringing it in
F=- tAIT
(see Fig. 6) Type of tank B, ft H, ft L, ft V, fpm Rg t;lT through several pipes at intervals across the width, as shown in Fig. 7a, or by
0.0 0.694 b~nging it in through a single conduit to a transverse influent flume, as shown in
A Ideal dispersion 0.831 Fig. 7b, which in turn distributes water across the width through orifices or sluice
B Radial-flowcircular 14.2 1.11 7.5 x 10-7 0.14
3.12 5.8 x 10-6 0.30 0.925 gates. An equal division of flow to all the basins is most readily approached if the
C Wide rectangular 135 18.5 330 0.903
D 16 14 273 5.17 4.53 x 10-6 0.52 ,,:ater level is nearly the same in all; this may be accomplished by means of freely
Narrow rectangular 0.988
E Baffledmixing 2 22.3 1,056 66.6 4 x 10-2 0.74 ?I~charging effluent weirs all at the same level, or by means of an effluent equal-
1.0 1.0 IZlllg channel with a substantially level water surface together with submerged
F Ideal settling
effluent slots having the same capacity for all tanks.

II'
.. II'
 'T
J~!I

27.24 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT HYDRAULICS OF WATER-DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 27.25

A uniform distribution of flow through inlet pipes or orifices, all of the same value of ho. The design should be based upon the peak flow and should be
size, may be approached by making the head loss at the inlet pipes or orifices checked for minimum-flow conditions.
large as compared with the maximum difference in energy head available at the The effluent from settling tanks may be collected uniformly across the width
inlets. The maximum difference in available energy head in Fig. 7 will be between of each basin, and the basin water levels may be kept nearly the same by means
inlets A and B owing to the change in energy head through the pipe CD or the of freely discharging weirs at the same level across the width of all basins at the
flume. The head loss at one of the two inlets considered is ho = hq2 where q is effluent end. Such weirs discharge into effluent flumes, such as EF (Fig. 7a),
the discharge through the inlet. If hi is the difference in energy head available at which hydraulically are lateral spillway channels. The hydraulics of these chan-
A and Band m is the ratio of the rates of discharge at the two inlets, the head loss nels are described in the previous discussion of launders.
at the other inlet is ho - hi = k(mq)2. Then the distribution formula is The distribution formula (19) has a variety of other uses, including the design
of equalizing channels, effluent slots, and orifice walls, the design of filter
---ho 1 underdrains for uniform distribution of washwater, and the design of manifold
(19)
ho - hf m2 systems for feeding of chemical solutions, air, and carbon dioxide.

.. t HYDRAULICS OF
E WATER-DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEMS
I:A-

~
The distribution of water to individual consumers is typically the final step in the
process of water supply. For the purpose of this presentation, water distribution
will be defined to include the conveyance of treated water from one or more
sources of supply (wells, treatment plants, storage facilities) to a large number of

~ users located throughout a given service area. The water-distribution system then
is the network of physical facilities (pipes, pumps, reservoirs, etc.) which distrib-
ute this water to the users.
Within a water-distribution system, the performance of individual system
components is based on basic principles of hydraulics as presented in previous
I:B~ F sections. Movement of water through pipes in the system is governed by the
Plan Plan principles of viscous fluid flow in closed conduits. Pressure is supplied, main-
tained, and regulated by pumping equipment, elevated storage facilities, and
r
S;" h

t::: ::J
hO ---- --= specialty valves. Thrust blocks and restraining equipment provide resistance
I~ - -- to hydraulic forces, and flowmeters and pressure gages provide indications of
~~~~ flow and energy conditions within the system. A good knowledge of these basic
principles of hydraulics is the key to understanding the operation of water-
Section Section distribution systems.
(a) (b) 'I'
This section focuses on the application of these principles to the operation and
FIGURE 7 Flow distribution and collection in basins.
analysis of water-distribution facilities working together as a system.
19. Components of a Distribution System. The facilities in a typical water- II!I~
I~I
distribution system include pipelines, pumping stations, storage facilities, valves, ,1".10

This equation may be used to compute the required inlet head loss ho for any and meters which direct and control the flow of water throughout the service
desired variation in discharge between the inlets. For example, if it is desired to area. The primary purpose of the distribution system is to deliver the required
1'11:

limit the variation in flow between points A and B to not more than 5 percent, m
must be equal to or greater than 0.95. Solving for ho yields ho ;:: 10 hi' Thus the
head loss through the orifice at point A should be at least 10 times as great as the
head loss occurring between points A and B.
The actual value of hi may be estimated from friction losses and velocity head
changes.2o . quently both large and complex. Many miles of pipe may be required to move
The size of orifices or gates may be determined by introducing the reqUIred
value of ho into the orifice formula with the proper discharge coefficien~. Th~
leading edges of all ports should be rounded to approach 1.0 for the coefficte~t 0
contraction and thus reduce the required port area. The proper size of inlet p~pe~
may be determined by making the velocity head in the pipes equal to the requIre
supply of water to all parts of the system service area while maintaining accept-
able levels of pressure. In.addition, most water-distribution systems also serve as !dl
1
the primary supply of water for fire-protection purposes within their service area. :I!
Because of the need for water-distribution systems to convey water to a large
number of users spread out over a wide service area, these systems are fre-
water from treatment facilities to users throughout a system. At the same time,
storage tanks and pumping stations are often required to provide flexibility within
the ~ystem and to help move the required water over long distances or widely
varymg topography. In some cases, a water-distribution system may include sev-
eral pressure zones where pumps, valves, and tanks maintain reasonable service

III
 1

WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT HYDRAULICS OF WATER-DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 27.27 I

27.26
Hydraulic Grade Line-Low Demand
High Zone
Distribution Storage
1-
I
J- Reservoir Fill Condition

-
--!,Iow to Tank c: ---
Pressure
Zone
Boundary I
1'10
--- ~ftorn p
--- ~

# If!:(?
~
I
I
c.:.. urnp S
--.:.:!~tJOI]
Hydraulic Grade Line
"

~
~/
~\o-rl
/"
/,,\(o~
-o(\¥-

I
I HighDemand
I Condition
c:
I
0
"'"
I
..>
'" I
LU I
I Minimum - /'" Elevated Tank
I HGL
Water Elevation
Treatment
Plant

Water Treatment Plant/

Pumping Station
FIGURE 8 Typical two-pressure-zone system.

FIGURE 9 Hydraulic grade line under two demand conditions. Datum

pressures for users distributed over wide ranges of ground-surface elevations.
Figure 8 shows a schematic of a typical two-pres sure-zone system in which a
pumping station boosts water from the low-pressure zone into the higher-
pressure service area.
20. The Piezometric Surface-Hydraulic Grade Line Elevations. While water-
distribution systems consist of networks of discrete components including pipes,
pumps, valves, and tanks, the hydraulics of such systems include the operation of
all the components as a system. One common way to visualize this aspect of
water-distribution-system hydraulics is in terms of a piezometric surface. An ex-
tension of the concept of the hydraulic grade line to three dimensions, this sur-
face represents the level to which water would rise in piezometers connected to
points throughout the distribution system.
By looking at the piezometric surface over a distribution system, it is possible
to readily see the manner in which water is moving through the network since the
elevation and slope of the surface vary in relation to the direction of flow and rate
of head loss occurring. Rapid decreases in the elevation of the piezometric sur-
face indicate areas of high head loss, while high and low spots correspond t~ the
location of major inflows and withdrawals to the system. In addition, the dIffer-
ence between the piezometric surface and the ground-surface elevations across a
system gives the pressure in the system at any given point.
The elevation of the piezometric surface across a system is a function of se~-
eral factors. The maximum level of the surface is typically controlled by the dis-
charge head of the supply pumps for the system, or by the level of a high elev~-
tion tank which feeds the balance of the network. As mentioned above, t e
changes in the surface are indicative of the direction of flow of water through the
system, and the friction loss associated with that flow. .
Figure 9 shows the profile of the piezometric line or hydraulic grade h~e
(HGL) for a simple system under two conditions. During periods of low demanh'
water is being pumped from the source across the distribution system to fill t e
elevated tank. As a result, the HGL is highest at the source pumping station, and
slopes downward to meet the free water surface at the tank. The slope of the
HGL gives an indication of how much energy is required to drive the water
across the system and into the tank. During a high demand period, heavy water
use between the source and the tank requires water be supplied from both points
with the HGL dropping to a minimum in the area of high demand.
In more complex systems, examination of three-dimensional or contour plots
of HGL elevations is particularly helpful in defining the ways in which water
moves through the distribution-system network.
By reviewing plots of pressure contours for the study area, it is possible to
quickly identify areas subject to low pressures under various demand conditions.
Plots of HGL elevations, reviewed in conjunction with the pressure plots, clearly
showwhere friction losses in the distribution system are high, and where existing
facilities limit the ability of the system to meet demand requirements. Together,
these graphical tools provide a convenient means for reviewing and analyzing
new or existing water-system operations.
21. Operating Criteria for Water Distribution on Networks. The primary
functions of a typical water-distribution network can be summarized as follows:
1. The supply of adequate water to users while maintaining acceptable levels of
pressure for service and protection against contamination
2. The supply of water as required for fire protection at specific locations within
the system while maintaining acceptable levels of pressure for normal service
throughout the remainder of the system
3. Provision of sufficient redundancy to provide a minimumlevel of reliable ser-
yice during emergency conditions such as an extended loss of power or a ma-
Jor water-main failure

.ill
 I'
27.28 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT HYDRAULICS OF WATER-DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 27.29 r
The tangible criterion upon which the performance of a water system is mea-
sured is service pressure. When seIVicepressures are adequate, users get the wa-
. The most limiting demand conditions for pumping systems alone are maximum-
day demand, maximum-day demand plus fire-flow demand, and peak-hour de-
~I

ter they require. If service pressures are not adequate, the distribution system mand.
may not be able to supply customers with the amount of water that they expect.
Table 13 summarizes typical criteria for distribution system service pressures as
. The most limiting demand conditions for pumping and storage systems in
combination are maximum-day demand plus fire-flow and peak-hour de-
Ilill

recommended by the Great Lakes Upper Mississippi Board of State Public mand. "11'11.
Health and Environmental Managers.21Actual criteria for specific systems may
vary. However, these values provide an indicationof common conditions in mod- 23. Example of Distribution-SystemOperating Criteria. An example of the
ern water-supply systems. formulation of operating criteria for a hypothetical water system is presented in I~~~

this section. Consider the water system shown in Fig. 10. The system includes IJ ,I

two pressure zones seIVedfrom a single treatment plant. In its existing condition, .f1
I.
.

TABLE13 Service Pressure Criteria for Distribution Systems the low zone of the distribution system is seIVed by the pumps at the treatment
Demand condition plant and a 2.0-million-gallonelevated water-storage tank. Water is supplied to
Range of acceptable service pressures, psi the high elevation zone through a booster pumping station. A small elevated tank
Average annual day 35-60 (0.2 milliongallons) provides storage in the high zone. Table 14 summarizes the
Peak day 35-60 existing demand conditions in the system.
Peak hour 35-60 Based on these demands, critical conditions can be defined by applying the
Fire situation > 20 limitingcondition criteria. The maximum-day and peak-hour requirements can be
Emergency conditions > 20 taken directly from Table 14.
Source: Ref. 21.
1IIIIil'

Limiting requirement
As discussed previously in this section, the conditions under which a distri- Low zone High zone Total system 111111!1

bution system must meet these criteria also vary depending upon factors such as Maximum day, mgd 7.0 0.6 7.6
season, water-use characteristics, and time of day. For example, it may be more Peak hour, mgd 14.0 1.2 15.2 11)

1
difficult to maintain the desired level of seIVicewithin a system during the peak
period of a hot summer day than it would be in the middle of a cool fall night. .
111I
Therefore, it is important that design or evaluation of a system consider the full 1,
range of demand conditions that may be experienced. Elevated Storage Elevated Storage
;Iil:
22. Conditionsfor AssessingSystemCapacity. When evaluating which condi- It
tions may be most critical for a system, it is also important to consider how the
distribution network responds hydraulically to the demand condition. While
peak-hour or fire-fightingconditions may require the greatest short-term supply ilill

of water to a specific location, flow from storage facilities can usually be assumed 111111

to provide some of the supply necessary for those conditions. On the other hand,
the system must be capable of meeting the maximum 24-h daily demand with no
net withdrawal from storage. In other words, the system should provide for re-
plenishment of the system's storage facilities. This means that the network must
have the capacity to refill its storage facilities during the nighttime or slack de-
mand period.
The AWWA Manual of Practice M32, Distribution Network Analysis for Wa-
ter Utilities, summarizes general criteria for the design or analysis of distribution
piping, storage, and pumping systems. Modified to include a condition for the
combined capacity of pumping and storage systems, these criteria can be stated "".,
as follows:8

. The most limitingdemand conditions for system pipin~ are maximum-dayd~:

mand plus fire-flow demand, maximum storage-replemshment rate, and pea
WaterTreatment Plant
and Pumping Station '~I

hour demand.
. The most limiting demand conditions for system storage are peak-hour de-
mand, and maximum-day demand plus fire-flowdemand FIGURE 10 Schematic of example system.

....
 T
27.30 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT
n
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS OF WATER-DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 27.31 IH
TABLE14 Water Demands for Example System
'I I
TABLE 15 Summary of Limiting Conditions '
i~ I
Demand condition Low zone High zone Total system .
Limiting condition .
~:il

Average day, mgd 4.0 0.4 4.4 System component and demand condition Low zone
7.0 0.6 7.6 High zone Total system
Maximumday, mgd
Peak hour, mgd 14.0 1.2 15.2 System piping: IIII
'.1
Fire flow required, mgd 2.9 1.1 Maximum day plus fire flow 9.9 1.7 10.5 I .
Fire duration, h 4.0 2.0 Storage replenishment rate 8.9 0.8 9.7
Peak-hour demand 14.0 1.2 15.2
Limiting condition 14.0 1.7 15.2 ~I

System storage: 1,11

Peak-hour demand 14.0 1.2 15.2
The limitingfire-flow conditions are determined by adding the required fire- I: ~~

flow rates to the maximum-day demands for each zone individually. Maximum day plus fire flow 9.9 1.7 10.5
Limiting condition 14.0 1.7 15.2
Pumping, maximum-day demand 7.0 0.6 7.6
Pumping plus storage:
Peak-hour demand 14.0 1.2 15.2
Limiting requirements Maximum day plus fire flow 9.9 1.7 10.5
Low zone High zone Total system Limiting condition 14.0 1.7 15.2
Fire situation-fire in low zone: ' 1
'
Base demand, mgd (maximumday) 7.0 0.6 7.6
Fire flow, mgd 2.9 0.0 2.9 li!:,1
11 1

i
Total, mgd 9.9 0.6 10.5 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS OF '!
Fire situation-fire in high zone: WATER.DISTRIBUTION III:

Base demand, mgd (maximumday) 7.0 0.6 7.6 SYSTEMS ' 'I'
Fire flow, mgd 0.0 1.1 1.1 .j
Total, mgd 7.0 1.7 8.7
24. Objectives. Although the hydraulic principles which govern the perfor- 11'11
I,
mance of the individual components of a water-distribution system are relatively IiI

straightforward, distribution systems do not operate as a group of independent

components. The elements of a distribution system depend directly on each other jll!l:

To determine the storage-replenish rate criteria, it is typically assumed that
the system must be capable of replenishing50 percent of the total system storage
during a 6-h slack demand period on the maximum day. If the average demand
during the slack period is assumed to be 70 percent of the peak day demand, the
required replenishment criteria are as follows:
and affect the performance of one another. The purpose of analyzing a water-
distributionsystem, therefore, is to de'terminehow the system will perform under
certain demand and operating conditions. The results of the analysis can be im-
portant in a number of situations including:
. The design of a new distribution network

Limiting requirement ..
The design of an extension to an existing network
Determination of the cause of a problem and definition of corrective actions
required
Storage replenishment Low zone High zone Total system . Evaluation of system reliability
~II

Base demand, mgd*

Reservoir fill, mgdt
4.9
4.0
0.4
0.4
5.3
4.4 ..Preparation for planned outages (maintenance)
Optimizationof system performance and operations
Total, mgd 8.9 0.8 9.7 Ili!'1
I
II'
.Base demand = 70 percent of maximum-day demand. , For example, assume that a developer approaches the utility operating the ex-
tReselVoir fill rate based on need to fill 50 percent of storage capacity in 6-h penod. ample system described above with a plan for the developmen.tof a large office
and industrial park complex to be located in the high-elevationsection of town. I ~I
How should the utility engineer assess the impact of the new development on the I
existingwater system?
Applying the criteria to the demands computed above yields the limiting con- I
ditions given in Table 15. , To.effectively analyze the effect of the new development on the existing dis- 1\
tnbutlOnsystem, the engineer needs a tool that will allow him or her to determine I

..... It I
 27.32 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS OF WATER-DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS

flow and pressure conditions in the network under a variety of operating condi- For the Hazen-Williams expression,
tions. That tool is a mathematical model of the distribution system.
Analysis of a water-distribution system requires as basic input information on 4.73L
k=-
the configuration and operating characteristics of the system's components and p C1.85D4.87
information on the quantity and distribution of water demands in the system;
When completed, the analysis can provide information on flow and hydraulic x = 1.85
grade line elevations throughout the system. From these results, other informa- Thus the full Hazen-Williams expression is given by
tion can be developed including pressures, flow velocities, and indications of
head loss in pipes.
25. Basic Pipe Network Equations. Formulation of a mathematical model hI = C1.85
4.73L
D4.87 Q1.85
representing a water-distribution system requires the development of a system of
simultaneous equations that can be solved to determine flow and pressure con- where hf = head loss, ft
ditions. The criteria that are the basis for this system of equations are as follows: L = length of pipe, ft
Energy Balance. The algebraic sum of the energy losses around any closed Q = flow rate, cfs
circuit in the network must be zero, and the total energy loss between any two C = Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient
points in the system must be equal to the sum of the energy losses in all the el- D = pipe diameter, ft
ements along any path between those two points.
Flow Balance. At each junction of pipes, the flow entering the junction must Extensive tables summarizing the relationships between the variables in the
, be equal to the flow leaving the junction. Hazen-Williams formula are presented in Ref. 22 for various values of C and
. Friction Loss. The appropriate relationship between flow rate and energy commerciallyavailable pipe diameters ranging from 6 to 144in. These tables are
loss must be maintained for all the pipes in the system. Typically, this relation- frequently useful in quickly evaluating simple pipe problems and determining trial
ship is based on either the Hazen-Williams or the Darcy-Weisbach formula and values of pipe diameter. I
takes the form24 I
In a simple network of pipes, where determination of the flow distribution and I
head loss in each pipe is the objective, these criteria can be readily used to de-
hi = kpQ" (20) velop the required equations for solution of the problem. As an illustration, con-
sider the simple pipe networks shown in Fig. 11.
where hI = energy lost in a pipe section, ft SystemA consists of two pipes in series. If the flow into one end of the system
kp =a pipe coefficient which is a function of pipe diameter, pipe length, is known, it is possible to determine the flow and head loss in each of the seg-
and pipe roughness or resistance to flow ments in the system. (While this problem may seem trivial, it is included to dem-
Q = flow through the pipe section, cfs onstrate the basis for solution of more complex problems.) Let Q represent the
x = exponential flow coefficient rate of flow into the system at point A. The unknowns to be determined include
qi and Q2,the flow rates in pipes 1 and 2, respectively; hI and h2, the friction
For the Darcy-Weisbach equation, the terms kp and x are defined as follows: losses in pipes 1 and 2; and h, the total head loss between pointsA and C. Based
on the energy balance, the total head loss between A and C must equal the sum of
8fL (21)
the head losses in pipes 1 and 2. Applying the flow balance criteria, the sum of
kp = -r?-gD5 flowsat point A must equal zero, as must the sum of flows at point B. Lastly, the
head losses in pipes 1 and 2 can be related to the flows in pipes 1 and 2 by one of
x=2 (22) the friction-loss equations of the form h = kq".
In this simple example, the five equations produced can be simplified and
Substituting into the general friction formula then gives the full Darcy- readily solved by substitution.
Weisbach equation System B shows a slightly more complicated network that can be represented
mathematically using the same approach. Given Q in this problem, the network
8fL Q2 (23) criteria can again be used to define the required system of equations. Based on
hI = -rr2gD2 the energy equation, the head loss between pointsA and B must be equal in each
of the pipes in the system. Second, the sum of the flows in the three segments
where hf = head loss, ft must equal the total flow entering and leaving the system. Lastly, the friction loss
f = friction factor eq~ations written for each of the pipes in the network provide the additional re-
L = length of pipe, ft q~Iredexpressions. As with the series pipe example above, it is possible to solve
Q = flow rate, cfs thISsystem using the appropriate substitutions.
'. System C presents a more complex problem which cannot be readily simpli-
D = pipe diameter, ft fIed. However, using the criteria described above, it is possible to readily define
g = acceleration due to gravity, 32.2 ft/s2 equations for the flow and head loss in each of the pipes as indicated. Application "

ill
.. lI~
 1
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS OF WATER-DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 27.35
27.34 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT

A q1' h1 B q2,h2 C
Unlike the equations formulated for the examples above, these equations re-
0 Q QJ IT] Q
Unknowns: q 1, q2' h 1, h2' h quire a two-step solution process. Through substitution, the problem can be re-
duced to six equations which can be solved simultaneously for the flow in each
pipe and h, the total head loss across the system. Once the distribution of flow is
F low Balance: Friction Loss: determined, the computed values can be back-substituted into the friction-loss
Energy Balance:
expressions to yield the energy loss in each pipe segment.
h=h1+h2 Q= q1 h1=k1q1X 26. Series and Parallel Pipe Problems. An alternative approach to the solu-
q1 = q2 h2 = k2 q2X tion of simple networks of pipes in series or parallel as shown in Fig. lIa and b
involves the principle of equivalent pipes. Two pipes are said to be equivalent
when, for the same head loss, both deliver the same rate of flow. Using the
q1' h1 Hazen-Williams expression:
[i] 4.73L Q 1.85 4.73L Q 1.85
h - 1 1 - h - 2 2 (27)
A q2' h2 B it - cl.85D1.87 - II - CP5D~.87
I- Unknowns: q1,q2,q3
@ Q Q
h" h2' h3' h
Since by the definition of equivalent pipes, Ql = Q2when hf = hfz' Eq. (27)
IT] can be simplified to 1

L1 L2
q3,h3 --- (28)
C 1.85D 1.87 C~.85D~.87
IT]
Friction Loss:
This relationship is extremely useful in the simplification of pipe network
Flow Balance:
Energy Balance: problems. For example, the system of pipes in series shown in Fig. lIa can be
h = h1 Q=q1+q2+q3 h1=k1q1X reduced to a single pipe with an equivalent diameter of DEo, length L = L1 + L2,
h2 = k2 q2X and roughness coefficient CEo using Eq. (29).
h = h2
h3 = k3 q3X 0.205
h = h3 Ll + L2 1
DEO = CEO L1 L2
(29)
h4,q4
@
h1' q1
( cl.85D1.87+ CP5D~.87 )
Q
[i]
[2] h3' q3
Unknowns: q1' q2' q3' q4' q5 where DEO = diameter of equivalent pipe, ft
h1' h2' h3' h4' h5 CEo = Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient
h2' q2 h5,q5 h L1 = length of pipe 1, ft
Q C1 = Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient for pipe 1
[2] [I] D1 = diameter of pipe 1, ft
Flow Balance: Friction Loss: L2 = length of pipe 2, ft
Energy Balance: C2 = Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient for pipe 2
h=h1+h4 Q=q1+q2 h1=k1q1X D2 = diameter of pipe 2, ft
q 1 = q3 + q4 h2 = k2 q2X
h2=h1+h3
h3 = k3 q3X
In a similar manner, the equivalent pipe method can be used to simplify sys-
h4 = h3 + h5 % = q2 + q3
tems of parallel pipes such as the one shown in Fig. lIb. Any set of parallel pipes
h4 = k4 Q4X
can be reduced to a single pipe of equivalent diameter DEO with length LEO and
h5 = k5 %x CEQ as shown in Eq. (30).
FIGURE 11 Simple pipe networks. C1 0.54 C2 LEO 0.54 0.38
LEO
DEO = -
[ CEO ( )-
L1
Dr.63 + -
CEO ( )
-
L2
D~.63
]
(30)

of the energy balance for each of the two independent loops and across the entire where DEO = diameter of equivalent pipe, ft
system yields three equations. Flow balances at points A, C, and D provide th~ee CEo = Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient
more equations, and friction-loss expressions for each of the five pipes proVIde L1 = length of pipe 1, ft
the remaining additional relationships necessary to determine the flow and energy C1 = Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient for pipe 1
loss in each pipe and the total energy loss across the system.
 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS OF WATER-DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 27.37
27.36 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT

where Hi = head at node i, ft

Vi = diameter of pipe 1, ft Kki = head-loss coefficient for pipe between node k and node i
L2 = Length of pipe 2, ft nki = exponent in head-loss equation for pipe between node k and node i
C2 = Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient for pipe 2 Ui = demand at node i, cfs
V2 = diameter of pipe 2, ft I

The third approach to the formulation of network equations as described by

Sets of more than two parallel pipes must be simplified two pipes at a time.
Walski depends on the development of a system of loop equations. In this ap- I!
However, the equation to be used does not change.
27. Formulation of Equations for Distribution Networks. While the criteria proach, the energy equation is written around each independent loop in the system il

in terms of the flows in the various pipes in each loop. To reduce the number of
illustrated above are applicable regardless of the complexity of a water-distribution
unknowns, however, the actual flow in each pipe is written in terms of an as-
network, analysis of actual systems is typically complicated by the presence of
sumed flow Qii and a correction factor I1Q, associated with each loop. Thus, for all ii'

pumps, tanks, regulating valves, and other components. Thus the formulation of the pipes in a specific loop,"
equations for analyzing such a system requires further consideration.
Three different approaches are commonly considered for formulating the Qj = Qij + I1QI (34)
I

';
II
II

mathematical relationships used to analyze complex distribution networks. These I

approaches as described by Walski23 include the use of where Qi = flow in pipe i

.. Flow equations
Qii = assumed initial flow in pipe i
I1Qr= flow correction for loop I

. Node equations
Loop equations This approach results in a system of I nonlinear equations written in terms of
I unknowns I1Qr.The form of these expressions as presented by Walski is given in
Formulation of the network equations in terms of pipe flows involves defining Eq. (35).23
equations in which flow rate is the unknown. Th,ese include one energy equation
for each independent loop (including pseudo-loops between tanks) and one con- = 1,2,3,...,L
tinuity equation for each node. The end result is a system of P nonlinear equa- dhl = j~Ki
=1
[sgn(Qii+ I1QI)]Qij+ II1Qlln for I (35)
tions, where P is equal to the number of pipes in the network. The general form
of the equations produced as presented by Walski is given in Eqs. (31) and (32).23 where dhr = change in head between constant head nodes in lth loop
Ki = head-loss coefficient for pipe i
~hil -
i=1
~
k=1
hpkl = dhl (I = 1,2,... ,L) (31) mr = number of pipes in lth loop
L = number of loops
nq Because of their nonlinearity, none of the systems of equations produced by
:2: Qiq = Uq (q = 1,2,...,N) (32) the approaches described above can be solved directly. In all three cases, an it-
j =1 erative numerical solution using a technique such as the Newton-Raphson or
Hardy Cross methods is required.
where hit = head loss in ith pipe in lth loop, ft Algorithms for the solution of complex network problems using most of these
hpkl = head provided by kth pump in lth loop, ft techniques have now been structured to run on computers, greatly simplifying
dhr = change in head between constant head nodes in lth loop, ft the effort required to obtain solutions for a variety of conditions.
mr = number of pipes in lth loop 28. Algorithm for Solution of Network Problem using a Computer. The ap- "

P, = number of pumps in lth loop proach for solution of complex network problems developed by Wood at the Uni-
Qiq = flow into qth node from ith pipe connected to the node, cfs versity of Kentuc~ is one of the algorithms most commonly used in modern
Uq = consumptive use at qth node, cfs network analysis programs. In this formulation, the distribution system is repre-
nq = number of pipes into qth node sented as a system of pipes and nodes. Each pipe is defined by two nodes, one at
each end. Water-storage facilities are included as fixed-grade nodes at which the
A second approach to the formulation of the network equations involves writ- hydraulic grade line is fixed and known. Within the network, individual, indepen-
ing the energy and continuity equations for each pipe in terms of the heads at the dent closed loops of pipes are known as primary loops. For a given system, the
endpoints of the pipe. When these expressions are combined, the result is ~ sys- relationship between the number of pipes, junctions, fixed grade nodes, and pri-
tem of j nonlinear equations where j is equal to the number of junctions ill the mary loops can be stated as follows:
network. The form of these equations as presented by Walski is given in Eq. (33).
p=j+l+f-1 (36)
~ Hk - H! l/nki
(33) where p = number of pipes
k
2.J sgn (Hk
=1
- Hi) ( Kid
I
) = Uj j = number of junctions

;8
 ,
27.38 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS OF WATER-DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 27.39

I = number of primary loops n = pipe diameter, ft

f = number of fIXed-grade nodes (tanks) Q = flow rate, cfs

This relationship provides the basis for the formulation of a system of p loop For the Darcy-Weisbach relationship, the expression is written
equations as described above. These equations can then be used to determine the
distribution of flow throughout a network. hi = kpQ2 (42)
First, considering the requirement for conservation of energy, the energy-
balance equation can be written around each independent closed loop in the net- where kp = 8fL/gn5Tr2
work to give I equations of the form24 hi = energyloss in the pipe section,ft
f = Moody friction factor
:Lhl = Dp (37) L = pipe length, ft
g = acceleration due to gravity, 32.2 ft/s2
where hi = energy loss in each pipe (includingminor losses) n = pipe diameter, ft
Ep = energyinput to the systemby a pump
Minor losses in system piping can also be introduced into the energy equations
Where a given loop includes no pumps, Ep = 0 and the equation becomes using the minor loss expression

:Lhl= 0 (38) him = M(V2/'2g) (43)

To account for the presence of fixed-gradenodes in a system it is also neces- where him = minor energy loss, ft
sary to write an energy-balance equation between each pair of fixed-gradepoints. M = minor loss coefficient
This will result inf - 1 equations of the form V = velocity in pipe, fps
g = acceleration due to gravity, 32.2 ft/s2
M: = :Lhl - :LEp (39)
Substituting for velocity in terms of flow rate and pipe diameter, the minor
where M: is the difference between the two fixed-grade nodes. loss expression becomes
Any path between each pair of fIXed-gradenodes can be used to formulate this
equation. However, the paths must not be redundant. him = kmQ2 (44)
A set ofj additional equations is produced by the formulation of flow-balance where km = 8M/Tr2n4.
equations at each junction in the system. These equations take the form

:LQin - :LQout = Qe (40) Flow-discharge relationships for pumps included in distribution networks can
be incorporated into the model using a quadratic equation to represent the pump
where Qin = flow toward the junction performance curve:
QOUI= flow away from the junction
Qe = external demand at the junction Ep =A + BQ + CQ2 (45)
In combination, the loop equations, the fixed-grade node equations, and the where EJ?.= energyinputto the systemby the pump,ft
junction equations provide a system of j + I + f - 1 equations written in terms ~ = flow through the pump, cfs
of flow rate and head loss in each pipe segment. A, B, C = curve-fittingcoefficients which define the pump operating character-
In order to make this system solvable, it is necessary to substitute into the istics
energy-balanceequations expressions for energy loss in each pipe section and en-
ergyinput from each pumpwritten in terms of the flowin each pipe. The energy-l~ss Using the relationships for pipe friction loss, energy input by a pump, and mi-
equationforeachpipeinthenetworkis typicallywrittenintheformhi = kpa: wIth nor losses, the final system of equations for the solution of the network problem
the pipe coefficientas defined by either the Hazen-Williamsor the Darcy-Welsbach can be formulated as follows:
friction-flowformula. For the Hazen-Williamsformula, the relationshipis24
(41) I +f - 1 energy-balance equations:
hi = kpQ!.852

where kp = 4.73L1C1.852n4.87 M: = :L(kpQ" + kmQ2) - :L(A + BQ + CQ2) (46)

hi = energy loss in the pipe section, ft
L = pipe length, ft where M: = 0 in the equation for each primary loop with no fixed-grade nodes or
C = Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient M: = difference in elevation between each pair of fIXed-gradenodes for
each pseudo-loop

.~....
27.40 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT
j flow-balance equations:
LQin - LQout = Qe (47)
This approach yields a system of p nonlinear algebraic equations written in
terms of p unknowns, that is, the flow rate in each pipe segment, that must be
solved simultaneously. In the Kentucky formulation, the energy equations are
linearized using iterative gradient methods to simplify the solution process. A de-
tailed description of the solution technique used is given in Ref. 24.
29. Computer Models of Distribution-SystemNetworks. With the widespread
availability of computers, the use of detailed mathematical models for the analy-
sis of water-distribution systems has become standard practice. Software tools
now available give users the ability to quickly evaluate .the performance of a dis~
tribution system for a wide range of operating conditions.
Several types of analysis can be performed using currently available
distribution-system models. These include:
.. Steady-state analysis of pressure and flow conditions
Time-dependent analysis of pressure and flow conditions under changing sys-
tem demands
. Time-dependent analysis of flow patterns and basic water quality
Steady-state analyses are generally adequate for the evaluation of the capacity
of distribution-system facilities including piping, storage tanks, and pumping sys-
tems. The results of steady-state simulations performed for critical conditions
such as peak hour, peak day plus fire flow, peak day, and storage replenishment
provide a "snapshot" of the conditions in the networks at a given point in time.
Time-dependent simulations, sometimes called extended-period simulations,
provide indications of system performance over time. These simulationstypically
consist of a series of steady-state runs in which the results of one simulation are
extrapolated to define the starting conditions for the next run. These time-
dependent simulations are most useful for evaluating the operation of facilities
such as pumping stations or variable-level storage tanks. In addition, the results
of this type of analysis provide the flow and velocity data necessary for modeling
of water-mixing and/or water-quality variations in a distribution system over
time.
The use of network models for the analysis of water-quality changes in distri-
bution systems has been developed in response to increasing concerns about
changes in water quality within distribution systems.
30. Application of Distribution-SystemComputer Models. Although comput-
ers and analysis software greatly increase the ability of engineers, operators, and
managers to accurately analyze the performance of complex distribution sys-
tems, the process of developing and applying these tools still requires significant
effort to achieve accurate and useful results. Key steps in this process are de-
scribed briefly here. For more detailed information, readers are referred to the
American Water Works Association Manual of Water Supply Practices M32 on
Distribution Network Analysis for Water Utilities.8 This manual presents a de-
tailed guide to the selection, development, and application of distribution models.
Model Formulation. Prior to starting the development of the comput,er
model, it is important that the objectives of the analysis, the general charactens~
tics of the water system, the availabilityof accurate data, and the time and man
....
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS OF WATER-DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 27.41
power available for the work be considered. These factors will affect the type of
model to be used, the level of detail to be included, and the types of analysis to be
performed.
Data Collection. In order to develop a useful model of a distribution system,
accurate data on the type, size, location, capacity, and condition of the physical
components of the system must be compiled. As indicated above, the amount of
data required will depend to a great extent on the level of detail to be used in the
model. For analysis of general system performance or design of major transmis-
sion and distribution facilities, it may be useful to "skeletonize" the system, in-
cluding in the model only the major facilities required to describe the basic struc-
ture of the network. On the other hand, models which are to be used to analyze
specific problems such as low pressures in a small service area or fire flows at a
specific site, may require that all the distribution mains in the system be consid-
ered.
Definition of the Network. Once the required data have been collected, they
must be used to define the system of pipes, nodes, tanks, pumps, and other fa-
cilities to be included in the model. It is this step of the process that defines the
geometry of the system. Several modeling packages now available facilitate this
step of the process by allowinggraphical data entry using a digitizer or by orga-
nizing the information on the physical components of the system into a database
that can also be used for inventory and maintenance purposes or as a link to in-
telligent mapping or facilities management systems.
Field Measurement and Testing. Accurate data on existing water-system fa-
cilities are not always readily available. Nor do records or drawings give accurate
indications of the condition of the facilities. To address these problems, field
measurement and testing of actual conditions in the system are usually required.
Typical measurements that may be made include loss-of-head tests to define ac-
tual pipe roughness characteristics; fire-flowtests to define the system's ability to
deliver large flows to specific locations; pump efficiency tests to define pump op-
erating conditions, and pressure and level measurements used to determine nor-
mal operating conditions in water storage facilities. Procedures for performing
these tests are presented in Ref. 23.
Definition and Allocation of Demands. The definition and allocation of de-
mands throughout the distribution network is a critical step in the model devel-
opment process. The demands imposed on the system are the driving force for
the performance of the distribution system. Procedures for projecting demand es-
timates for the analysis of distribution systems are discussed in a previous part of
this section. However, when allocating demands throughout the distribution net-
work, additional factors must be considered. In particular, it is beneficial to have
the ability to quickly modify usage data for a variety of demand conditions, both
current and future. For a 1986study of the Phoenix, Ariz., water distribution sys-
tem, this ability was provided by an interactive demand generator system.2SThe
system used past billing records, land-use characteristics, and projected demand
factors organized in a computer-based database to enable operators to quickly
prepare demand data sets for model simulations.
, Model Calibration. Model calibration is the process by which the completed
distribution system model is adjusted and refined to accurately reflect "real
world" conditions. The adjustment is normally accomplished by comparing the
results of field measurements made in the system (fire-flow tests, loss-of-head
tests, etc.) with model results obtained by simulating the test conditions. Most
commonly, calibration adjustments are made to the roughness coefficients input
to the model or to the demand distribution, since these factors are subject to the
 ---,
27.42 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT
greatest level of uncertainty. However, calibration testing in conjunction with
field checks also frequently identifies unknown conditions in the system such as
partially or completely closed valves or pipeline connections not noted in system
records. The end result of the calibration process is a distribution-system model
which accurately reflects the condition and capacity of the actual system.
Model Application. Once calibrated, the distribution-system model can be
used to reliably analyze the system's performance and operation. It is important,
however, to determine what simulations are necessary to effectively analyze the
problem being considered. Although computers provide the power to run multi-
ple simulations of all but the most complex distribution networks quickly, in
practice most problems can be solved using the results of only a few well-planned
simulations. This aspect of applying the model is particularly important when
steady-state simulations are being used. It is useful to develop a plan of the sim-
ulations which are expected to be needed before starting to use the model. This
plan should clearly define the purpose of each simulation and the conditions as-
sociated with it. Then, as the actual simulations are performed, the model and
expected results should be compared and used to refine the plan and to define
additional runs which are required.
31. Interpretation of Distribution-SystemModelResults. Results produced by
the analysis of a water-distribution system usually include listings of pressure
and/or hydraulic grade line elevation at all nodes; listings of flow, velocity, and
head loss through all pipes; indications of operating characteristics for all pumps;
and rates of flow into and out of storage facilities. To make use of all this infor-
mation, it is important that the modeler know how to interpret the output. Pres-
sures are not always the only indicator of system performance that need to be
considered. At a minimum, pump operating rates and tank fill and draw rates
must also be reviewed to provide a comprehensive understanding of network op-
erations. Table 16 summarizes some of the critical indicators that can be used in
the evaluation of model results.
TABLE 16 Distribution System Performance Criteria
Demand condition
System performance indicators
Peak day demand Service pressures in acceptable range
Flow into and out of tanks balanced
Peak hour demand Service pressures in acceptable range
Flow out of tanks in acceptable range
Peak day + fire flow Service pressure in acceptable range
Flows out of tanks in acceptable range
Storage replenishment Service pressures in acceptable range
Flow into tanks in acceptable range
WATER-DISTRIBUTION
PUMPING SYSTEMS
Within most water-distribution systems, service pressures are established a~d
maintained by pumping. Except in mountainous regions where supply reservOIrs
are located at elevations above the service area, pumps are used to lift water from
WATER-DISTRIBUTION PUMPING SYSTEMS 27.43
sources of supply, convey it to treatment facilities, and distribute it throughout
service zones that may be located at widely varying elevations.
32. Types of PumpingInstallations. Pumps are used for a variety of purposes
within water-supply and -distribution systems. The most common types of instal-
lations are:
. Low service pumping stations
. High service pumping stations
.
. Distribution booster pumping stations
Fire service pumping stations
Low service pumps are typically low-head, high-rate units which convey wa-
ter from a raw-water supply or storage facility to treatment facilities.
High service pumps are most commonly used to pump finished water from
treatment facilities out into distribution networks at pressures suitable for normal
service to customers.
Where portions of a distribution system are separated by long distances or
large changes in elevations booster pumps are commonly used to add energy to
the system and to maintain acceptable service pressures.
Fire-service pumps may be used to provide additional capacity for emergency
fire protection to facilities which have great value, are particularly susceptible to
damage by fire, or are located at the extreme edges of a distribution system.
33. Pumping-StationHydraulics. The basic hydraulic principles which gov-
ern pumping systems are presented in detail elsewhere in this text. This section
focuses on the hydraulic aspects of pumping systems most often used in the dis-
tribution of water. .
The operation of a given pumping system is a function of both the character-
istics of the pumping equipment (number of units, impeller size, motor horse-
power) and the hydraulic characteristics of the distribution system. For a simple
pumping system, the relationship between the pump performance and the system
hydraulics can be represented by two curves as shown in Fig. 12.
The conditions under which the pump will operate are defined by the intersec-
tion of the system head curve and the pump performance curve. At this point the
discharge from the pump is balanced by the combination of the static and friction
heads against which the unit must operate. As conditions in the system change,
so does the operating condition of the pump.
As a result, the operation of the pump will vary in direct response to fluctua-
tions in the head against which it is pumping. Over a longer time frame pumping
operations will vary as the roughness of the piping changes with age. Thus, in
selecting a pump for a given system it is important to consider the full range of
conditions under which the system must operate and the possible effects of time
on system conditions and pump performance.
In a water-distribution network the relationship between the pump curve and
the system head curve is further complicated by the wide range of flow-head con-
ditions that may occur. The numerous flow patterns that can occur in a network
system mean that the hydraulic characteristics of the networks are defined by a
family of system head curves rather than a single curve. Therefore, the pumping
facilities selected to serve a given system must be chosen to provide acceptable
levels of service throughout the full range of potential operating conditions,
rather than at a few selected points.
Figure 13 shows an example of the full range of operating conditions that can
27.44 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT WATER-DISTRIBUTION STORAGE FACILITIES 27.45

Pump Head-
Capacity Curve

~
... - 0
<{
Storage Replenishment

0 LlJ
<{ ::r:
LlJ
::r: t:)
z No Contribution
c... from Storage

I
~
:)
c... Storage Withdrawal
Pump Operating Point
Static Head
\\\:1 Range of Pumping Conditions

L D I S C H A R G E (ft3/sec)
PUMP DISCHARGE

FIGURE 12 Typical pump performance and system head-capacity curve.
be associated with pumping in a distribution network. In most cases this range of
conditions is too wide to be met by a single pump. Rather a multiple pump in-
stallation or variable-speed pumps may be required. Details of these types of
pumping systems are presented in Sec. 28.
WATER-DISTRIBUTION
STORAGE FACILmES
34. Classification of Storage Facilities. Water-storage capacity is a key ele-
ment in most water-distribution systems. Storage facilities provide operational
flexibility that allows a system to more effectively respond to constantly changing
demand conditions.
Distribution-system storage facilities are typically classified as either ground
or elevated storage depending on their hydraulic function in the network. Ground
storage facilities are generally constructed at about ground level and discharge
water to the distribution system through a pumping station. Elevated storage ,fa-
cilities are constructed so that the potential energy associated with the elevation
of the water in the tank is adequate to deliver water into the distribution systern
at the required pressure. Elevated storage may be provided by a tall tower or
pedestal structure supporting the actual water tank. Or in hilly areas it m,ay be
provided by a shorter tank constructed on high ground at sufficient elevatIon to
provide adequate pressure to the service area.
CDMinimum Day-PeakHour 0 Peak Day
CDMinimum Day-StorageReplenishment @ Peak Day-Fire Situation
0 AverageDay @ Peak Day-ReservoirFill
FIGURE 13 Range of operating conditions for a typical distribution pumping system.
The difference between ground and elevated storage can also be visualized in
terms of the relationship between the water level in the storage tank and the hydraulic
grade line (HGL) elevation in the adjacent distribution system. In ground storage
facilities, the water level in the tank is generally much lower than the required dis-
tribution system HGL. As a result, pumping is required to drive the water into the
network. Elevated storage facilities, however, are usually connected directly to the
distribution network so that the water level in the tank fluctuates with changes in the
system HGL. Elevated storage facilities of this type are said to "float" on the system
because of this direct relationship between tank level and system HGL.
35. Purpose of Storage. Distribution storage may be included in a specific
water system for a variety of reasons. However, the primary functions commonly
served by these storage facilities can be described as follows:
Equalization of Supply and Demand. By utilizing their supplemental supply
a~d available storage capacity, distribution storage facilities can be used to sim-
plify and/or manage the effective operation of treatment and pumping facilities.
During periods of demand greater than the normal system supply rate, water can
be drawn from storage to supplement the supply and meet the demand require-
ments. When demand drops to levels less than the normal supply rate, the excess
water being delivered to the system replenishes the storage tanks. In this way,

Jill
27.46 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT
the rate at which water must be treated and pumped into the system may be held
relatively constant, allowing for more efficient operation of the facilities.
Alternatively, distribution storage may be used to manage the operation of dis-
tribution facilities in other ways. For example, in areas where electric rates vary
depending upon the time of day that power is used, it may be advantageous to
provide and operate distribution storage facilities in such a way as to minimize
pumping during the peak rate period. This can be accomplished by providing suf-
ficient storage to meet all system needs during the peak period and pumping at an
increased rate during off-peak hours to replenish the storage.
Provision of Supply for Fire Protection. Water-storage facilities are fre-
quently used to provide large volumes of water for immediate availability in case
of fire. Especially in industrial or high-hazard areas, water stored for fire fighting
provides increased protection and reduces the need for extremely high capacity
conveyance mains to bring all the needed water to the site from the system's
source or point of supply.
Fire storage may be provided in either elevated or ground storage facilities.
Elevated storage has the advantage of not requiring pumping since the height of
the water in an elevated tank provides the energy needed to deliver the required
flow. However, elevated storage is typically more costly per unit volume, be-
cause of the structure required to support an elevated system. Where ground
storage is used for fire protection, pumping is required.
Provisions of Supply for Emergency Conditions. Stored water in a distribu-
tion system can provide a source of water for use during emergency conditions
when the normal supply of water to an area is interrupted. In this situation, water
from storage may be used to supplement a reduced supply or, in some cases, to
serve as the sole source of supply.
As with the storage for fire protection, emergency storage is most reliable
when provided in an elevated facility, since no pumping is required to distribute
the water.
Equalization of Distribution-System Pressures. In addition to the features
described above, elevated distribution storage facilities which float on the net-
work also serve to regulate pressures in the system. By providing a location for
supplyingor storing water as needed, storage facilities function as a "bulge" in a
distribution system. Fluctuations in flow into or out of the elevated tank result in
only gradual changes in water level. Thus pressures in the area around the tank
also see only minor fluctuations in HGL elevation and pressure.
36. Capacity of Storage. In designing new distribution storage facilities, the
required capacity for the proposed tank is the first criterion which must be de-
termined. The required capacity depends to a great extent on the function that
the tank is intended to serve. For multipurpose tanks, the relative volume re-
quired for each function must be considered, and where appropriate, added to-
gether to determine the total required volume. . erage daily demand.
Distribution storage capacity for accommodating normal fluctuations III de-
mand is determined based on the diurnal demand pattern and the desired level of
pumping. Common design practice is to rely on pumping to meet daily aver~ge
demands up to the maximum day. Distribution storage is then sized to proVIde
the necessary additional flow during peak demand portions of the day. Where de-
tailed demand data are not available, a commonly used guideline is that the stor-
age available to supply peak demand periods should equal 20 to 25 percent of~he
total peak day demand volume. For example, in a typical system with a peak ay
demand of 10 mgd, approximately 2.0 to 2.5 million gallons of available storage
would be needed to supplement pumping during peak periods. In systems where
..
WATER-DISTRIBUTION STORAGE FACILITIES 27.47
either greater or less dependence on supply pumping is desired, corresponding
adjustments to the required storage volume are necessary.
Sizing of storage facilities for provision of fire protection is usually based on
the critical fire situation for the zone being served. It is assumed that normal sup-
ply pumping will continue to keep up with system demands up to the maximum
day rate. Therefore, the volume of additional water that must be supplied from
storage is equal to the product of the critical fire-flow requirement and the cor-
responding flow-duration requirement. For example, in a zone serving an indus-
trial area with a needed fire flow of 3500 gpm for a duration of 4 h the fire-flow
storage volume required is given by
(48)
3500gal (4 h) (601~in) = 840,000gal
No firm guidelines exist for establishing emergency storage volumes in distri-
bution systems. Rather the volume of distribution storage reserved for emer-
gency conditions is usually determined based on a policy decision by the munic-
ipality or utility management. In theory, sufficient storage should be provided to
meet normal demands for the duration of time that the system could be affected
by a possible emergency. However, estimating the duration of outages associated
with potential emergencies is difficult unless one can draw on prior experience.
As a result guidelines for emergency storage volume for most municipal water-
supply systems vary from 1 to 2 days of supply capacity at average usage rates.
For example, the Recommended Standards for Water Works developed by the
Great Lakes Upper Mississippi River Board of State Public Health and Environ-
mental Managers suggest a minimum total system storage capacity equal to the
average daily system demand. In contrast, some systems target total system stor-
age capacity equal to twice their average daily usage.
In most public water-supply systems, storage facilities must provide capacity
for all three of the conditions described above. In practice, storage facilities are
generally sized using these conditions and the following criteria.
. Distribution storage facilities should have adequate volume to supply peak de-
mands in excess of the maximum day average using no more than 50 percent of
the available capacity.
. Distribution storage facilities should have adequate volume to supply the crit-
ical fire demand in addition to the volume required for meeting daily demand
fluctuations.
. Total distribution storage capacity in a system should be adequate to supply the
average demand of the system for the estimated duration of a possible emer-
gency. The minimum storage capacity should be equal to approximately the av-
Consideration of these criteria provides a general basis for the sizing of mul-
tipurpose distribution storage facilities such as those shown in Fig. 14.
37. Height. In addition to the capacity to be provided by a given storage fa-
cility, the height of the structure is also an important factor to be considered in
the planning and design of elevated storage. In these facilities the height of the
structure limits the HGL range over which the storage volume of the tank is ef-
fective.
For most fadlities providing elevated storage, the minimum acceptable water
level in the tank can be determined by computing the minimum acceptable HGL
 ,.

27.48 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT REFERENCES 27.49

distribution storage facility, the detailed design of such a structure requires con-
sideration of a number of other factors. These include:

/
. Structural and foundation design (including consideration of earthquake load-
Overflow
'
Pipe
.
Norma I0 peratlng Range
Overflow
Pipe
. ings as appropriate)
Selection of material of construction
I
. / Emergency Range
Fire . Compliance with siting regulations related to proximity to groundwater table,
potential sources of contamination, floodplains
-r I
. Design of inlet and outlet piping and valves
. Provisions of adequate venting and overflow piping to prevent pressurization or
depressurization during tank fill and draw cycles
.Provision of security and screening devices to protect the quality of the stored
water
.. Provision of corrosion-control systems
Provision of adequate safe access for inspection, maintenance, and repair
STAND PIPE ELEVATED TANK
Detailed standards and guidelines pertaining to the factors are contained in the
FIGURE 14 Distribution-system storage facilities. American Water Works Association Standards D100,D102, and DllO and in Ref.
22. However, brief mention of several piping-related design considerations is
made here.
in the service area and adding to that an estimate of the head loss between the Inlet and Outlet Piping. Inlet and outlet piping configurations for water-
critical service point and the storage tank under peak-day conditions. The over- distribution storage facilitiesvary widely depending upon the intended purpose of
flow elevation for the tank can then be estimated by computing the target HGL in the structure. Ground storage tanks which serve as receiving tanks or fire or
the critical section of the system and adding to that an allowance for the head loss emergency storage commonly have separate inlet and outlet piping. The inlet pip-
between the critical point in the system and the tank at peak-hour conditions. The ing serves as the supply for water to the facility while the outlet piping may be
difference between these elevations defines the normal operating range for the connected to a pumping station for distribution of water. Elevated storage facil-
tank. For most elevated storage tanks used to help regulate distribution-system ities which float on the distribution system grade line commonly have only one
pressures, the normal operating range is limited to 15 to 20 ft so that fluctuations pipe connection which serves as both inlet and outlet depending on the system
in pressure are limited to 5 to 10psi. Also, where possible, it is desirable to have conditions.
the normal operating range in the upper half of the tank with the lower portion In both cases, the piping facilities should be sized to allow flow into and out
being reserved for fire-fightingor emergency conditions as shown in Fig. 14. of the tank in excess of the expected maximum future fill and draw rates with
In systems where storage requirements for fire protection or emergency con- minimal head loss. This approach reduces the risk that inadequate piping may
ditions are large, additional capacity may be economically provided in the lower restrict tank operations under extreme conditions. Valving should be provided
portionof a standpipe.However,pumpingfacilitiesare requiredto make effec- to allow the facility to be isolated from the system and drained as required for
tive use of such storage. inspection or maintenance. Special valves or meters may also be provided in
Table 17 lists typical characteristics of several types of distribution facilities. some cases to monitor or control the movement of water into or out of the
38. Additional "DesignConsiderations. Although the determination of the tank.
type, size, and elevation are the primary steps in the planning of a water- Overflow Piping and Vents. All closed water-storage facilities should have
overflow piping and vents as required to eliminate the potential for pressurization
or depressurization of the tank during fill and draw cycles. Both the overflow and
TABLE17 GeneralCharacteristicsof DistributionStorageFacilities vent systems should be sized to accommodate fillor draw conditions in excess of
Capacity range, Typical head the expected maximum rates. As with all openings to a treated water-storage fa-
Facility type millions of gallons range,. ft cility, overflow and vent piping should be screened and located so as to minimize
the potential for contamination of the stored water.
Ground storage reservoirs (steel or
prestressed concrete) 0.05-10.0 20-40
Standpipes 0.05-5.0 30-100
Single-pedestalelevated tanks 0.025-3.0 15-45
REFERENCES
Multiple-support elevated tanks 0.025-3.0 12.5-40
1. "Regional Lake Michigan Water Demand Study," prepared for the Illinois Department
"Head range given for ground storage reservoirs and standpipes includes total usable water of Transportation, Harza Environmental Services, April 1989.
depth.

..
27.50 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND TREATMENT

2. LINSLEY, RAyK., and JOSEPHB. FRANZINI,Water Resources Engineering, McGraw-Hill,

New York, 1979, p. 404.
3. METCALF ANDEDDY,INC., Wastewater Engineering: Treatment Disposal Reuse, McGraw-
Hill, New York, 1979.
4. METCALF ANDEDDY,INC., Wastewater Engineering: Collection and Pumping of Waste-
water, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1981.
5. TCHOBANOGLOUS, GEORGE,and EDWARD D. SCHROEDER, Water Quality, Addison-Wesley,
Reading, Mass., 1985.
6. "Rules and Regulations for the Allocation of Water from Lake Michigan," Illinois De-
partment of Transportation-Division of Water Resources. January 1990.
7. COOTE,PHILIP,General Manager, Department Water Works, Valparaiso, Ind., personal
communication, 1991.
8. Distribution Network Analysis for Water Utilities, American Water Works Association
Manual of Water Supply Practices M32, 1989.
9. "Standard Schedule for Grading Cities and Towns ofthe United States with Reference
to Their Fire Defenses and Physical Conditions," National Board of Fire Underwriters,
1956.
10. COLE,A. E., and J. L. LINVILLE,eds., Fire Protection Handbook, National Fire Protec-
tion Association, Quincy, Mass. (16th ed., 1986).
11. Distribution System Requirements for Fire Protection, American Water Works Asso-
ciation Manual of Water Supply Practices M31, 1989.
12. Grading Schedule for Municipal Fire Protection, Insurance Services Office, New
York, 1974.
13. Water Treatment Plant Design, American Society of Civil Engineers, American Water
Works Association, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1990.
14. Water Quality and Treatment, American Water Works Association, McGraw-Hill,
New York; 1991.
15. WILLIAMS,ROBERT B., and GORDONL. CULP,eds., Handbook of Public Water Systems,
Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1986.
16. LI, WEN-HsIUNG, "Open Channels with Non-Uniform Discharge," Transactions of the
ASCE, vol. 120, 1955.
17. KoZENY,J., Wasserkraft and Wasserwirtschaft, vol. 22, p. 67, 1927.
18. FAIRand HATCH,Journal of the American Water Works Association, vol. 25, p. 1551,
1933.
19. "Hydraulics and Useful Information," Bulletin 9900, FMC Corporation, 1981.
20. CAM;,T. R., and S. D. GRABER, "Dispersion Conduits," Journal of the Sanitary Engi-
neering Division, ASCE, 1968.
21. Recommended Standards for Water Works, 1987, Great Lakes Upper Mississippi River
Board of State Public Health and Environmental Managers, Health Research, Inc.,
1987.
22. WILLIAM,
GARNER
S., and ALLENHAzEN,Hydraulic Tables, Wiley, New York, 1965.
23. WALSKI,THOMAS M., Analysis of Water Distribution Systems, Van Nostrand Reinhold,
New York, 1984.
24. WOOD,DONJ., Computer Analysis of Flow in Pipe Networks Including Extended p,eriod
Simulations, Office of Continuing Education and Extension of the College of Engmeer-
ing of the University of Kentucky, 1980.
25. VELON,J. P., et aI., Distribution Modeling Tools: Making Them Flexible and Friendly,
Presented at the 1986 AWWA Annual Convention, Denver, June 1986.

....