Anc Epa

AReferenceGuideforUtilities
i
EPA/600/R-06/028
December2005
WaterDistributionSystemAnalysis:
FieldStudies,ModelingandManagement
U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency
OfficeofResearchandDevelopment
NationalRiskManagementResearchLaboratory
WaterSupplyandWaterResourcesDivision
Cincinnati,Ohio
Notice
Anyopinionsexpressedinthisdocument/referenceguideforutilitiesarethoseoftheauthor(s)and
donot,necessarily,reflecttheofficialpositionsandpoliciesoftheU.S.EnvironmentalProtection
Agency(EPA).Anymentionofproductsortradenamesdoesnotconstituterecommendationforuse
byEPA. ThisdocumenthasbeenreviewedinaccordancewithEPAspeerandadministrativereview
policiesandapprovedforpublication.
ii
Foreword
TheU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)ischargedbyCongresswithprotectingtheNations
land,air,andwaterresources.Underamandateofnationalenvironmentallaws,theAgencystrives
toformulateandimplementactionsleadingtoacompatiblebalancebetweenhumanactivitiesand
theabilityofnaturalsystemstosupportandnurturelife.Tomeetthismandate,EPAsresearchprogram
isprovidingdataandtechnicalsupportforsolvingenvironmentalproblemstodayandbuildinga
science knowledge base necessary to manage our ecological resources wisely, understand how
pollutantsaffectourhealth,andpreventorreduceenvironmentalrisksinthefuture.
TheNationalRiskManagementResearchLaboratory(NRMRL)istheAgencyscenterforinvestigation
oftechnologicalandmanagementapproachesforpreventingandreducingrisksfrompollutionthat
threatenhumanhealthandtheenvironment.ThefocusoftheLaboratorysresearchprogramison
methodsandtheircost-effectivenessforpreventionandcontrolofpollutiontoair,land,water,and
subsurfaceresources;protectionofwaterqualityinpublicwatersystems;remediationofcontaminated
sites,sedimentsandgroundwater;preventionandcontrolofindoorairpollution;andrestorationof
ecosystems. NRMRLcollaborateswithbothpublicandprivatesectorpartnerstofostertechnologies
thatreducethecostofcomplianceandtoanticipateemergingproblems.NRMRLsresearchprovides
solutionstoenvironmentalproblemsby:developingandpromotingtechnologiesthatprotectand
improvetheenvironment;advancingscientificandengineeringinformationtosupportregulatory
and policy decisions; and providing the technical support and information transfer to ensure
implementationofenvironmentalregulationsandstrategiesatthenational,state,andcommunity
levels.
ThispublicationhasbeenproducedaspartoftheLaboratorysstrategiclong-termresearchplan.Itis
published and made available by EPAs Office of Research and Development to assist the user
communityandtolinkresearcherswiththeirclients.
SallyGutierrez,Director
NationalRiskManagementResearchLaboratory
iii
TableofContentsOverview
Overviewofdistributionsystem
infrastructure,generalwaterqualityissues
andmanagementapproaches
Summarydiscussionofvarioushydraulic
andwaterqualitymodelingtools
Outlineforplanningandexecutionofa
tracerstudytoperformdistributionsystem
evaluation
Techniquesforcalibrationandvalidationof
distributionsystemmodels
Frameworkofavailableoptionsfor
monitoringdistributionsystemwaterquality
Introductiontotheuseofgeospatial
technologyforwaterdistributionsystems
Realworldapplicationsofdistribution
systemmodelingapproaches
Chapter1
Chapter2
Chapter3
Chapter4
Chapter5
Chapter6
Chapter7
iv
TableofContents
Notice .......................................................................................................................................................ii
Foreword.................................................................................................................................................. iii
TableofContentsOverview....................................................................................................................iv
TableofContents .....................................................................................................................................v
ListofTables............................................................................................................................................ix
ListofFigures..........................................................................................................................................ix
AcronymsandAbbreviations................................................................................................................ xii
Acknowledgments..................................................................................................................................xv
1.0 Introduction..................................................................................................................................1-1
1.1 DistributionSystem-InfrastructureDesignandOperation..................................................1-3
1.1.1 KeyInfrastructureComponents.....................................................................................1-3
1.1.1.1 StorageTanks/Reservoirs.....................................................................................1-3
1.1.1.2 PipeNetwork........................................................................................................1-3
1.1.1.3 Valves....................................................................................................................1-3
1.1.1.4 Pumps...................................................................................................................1-4
1.1.1.5 HydrantsandOtherAppurtenances....................................................................1-4
1.1.2 BasicDesignandOperationPhilosophy.......................................................................1-4
1.1.2.1 Pipe-NetworkConfigurations...............................................................................1-5
1.1.2.2 MultipleSourceConfiguration ............................................................................1-5
1.1.2.3 ImpactofSystemDesignandOperationonWaterQuality................................1-5
1.2 WaterQualityProblemsandIssues.......................................................................................1-6
1.3 RegulatoryFramework...........................................................................................................1-7
1.4 AssessmentandManagementofWaterQuality...................................................................1-8
1.5 AdvancedToolsforWaterQualityManagement ................................................................1-11
1.6ReportOrganization................................................................................................................1-11
1.7 Summary..............................................................................................................................1-11
References.....................................................................................................................................1-13
2.0 ModelingWaterQualityinDrinkingWaterDistributionSystems...............................................2-1
2.1 DistributionSystemNetworkHydraulicModeling................................................................2-1
2.1.1 HistoryofHydraulicModeling.......................................................................................2-1
2.1.2 OverviewofTheoreticalConcepts................................................................................2-2
2.1.3 BasicHydraulicModelInputCharacterization..............................................................2-3
2.1.3.1 PipeNetworkInputs.............................................................................................2-3
2.1.3.2 WaterDemandInputs...........................................................................................2-3
2.1.3.3 TopographicalInputs............................................................................................2-5
2.1.3.4 ModelControlInputs ...........................................................................................2-5
2.1.3.5 ExtendedPeriodSimulation(EPS)SolutionParameters....................................2-5
2.1.4 GeneralCriteriaforModelSelectionandApplication..................................................2-6
2.1.4.1 DevelopingaBasicNetworkModel.....................................................................2-6
2.1.4.2 ModelCalibrationandValidation.........................................................................2-6
2.1.4.3 EstablishingObjectivesandModelApplication..................................................2-6
2.1.4.4 AnalysisandDisplayofResults............................................................................2-7
2.2 ModelingWaterQualityInDistributionSystemNetworks....................................................2-7
2.2.1 HistoryofWaterQualityModeling................................................................................. 2-7
2.2.2 TheoreticalConceptsforWaterQualityModeling........................................................2-8
2.2.3 WaterQualityModelInputsandApplication ..............................................................2-10
2.3 HydraulicandWaterQualityModelingSoftware................................................................2-11
2.3.1 EPANETSoftware ........................................................................................................2-11
2.3.2 CommercialHydraulic-WaterQualityModelingSoftware..........................................2-12
2.4 AdditionalModelingTools....................................................................................................2-12
2.4.1 StorageModelingTools...............................................................................................2-12
2.4.1.1 CFDModels ........................................................................................................2-13
2.4.1.2 CompartmentModels........................................................................................2-14
2.4.1.3 PhysicalScaleModels........................................................................................2-14
2.4.2 TransientAnalysisSoftware.........................................................................................2-15
v
2.4.3 OptimizationTools........................................................................................................2-15
2.4.3.1 OptimizingCalibration........................................................................................2-15
2.4.3.2 DesignOptimization ...........................................................................................2-16
2.4.3.3 OptimizationofOperation..................................................................................2-17
2.4.4 ProbabilisticModels.....................................................................................................2-17
2.5 SummaryandConclusions .................................................................................................2-17
References.....................................................................................................................................2-19
3.0 TracerStudiesforDistributionSystemEvaluation.....................................................................3-1
3.1 PlanningandDesigningaDistributionSystemTracerStudy ..............................................3-2
3.1.1 EstablishingStudyObjectivesandTime-Line...............................................................3-2
3.1.2 FormingaStudyTeam...................................................................................................3-2
3.1.3 DefiningStudyAreaCharacteristics..............................................................................3-2
3.1.4 SelectingTracerMaterial...............................................................................................3-3
3.1.4.1 Fluoride.................................................................................................................3-3
3.1.4.2 CalciumChloride..................................................................................................3-4
3.1.4.3 SodiumChloride..................................................................................................3-5
3.1.4.4 OtherChemicalsThatMaybeAddedasTracers................................................3-5
3.1.4.5 NaturallyorNormallyOccurringTracers............................................................3-5
3.1.4.6 ComparisonofTracers.........................................................................................3-6
3.1.5 SelectingFieldEquipmentandProcedures..................................................................3-8
3.1.5.1 InjectionPump(s)..................................................................................................3-8
3.1.5.2 TracerStorageandDosageRateMeasurement.................................................3-8
3.1.5.3 DistributionSystemFlowRateMeasurement.....................................................3-9
3.1.5.4 FieldMeasurementofTracerConcentration.......................................................3-9
3.1.6 DevelopingaDetailedStudyDesign..........................................................................3-10
3.1.7 AddressingAgencyandPublicNotification................................................................3-11
3.2 ExecutingaTracerStudy.....................................................................................................3-11
3.2.1 Procurement,Setup,TestingandDisinfectionofStudyEquipment.........................3-11
3.2.2 InstallationofFieldEquipmentandTesting.................................................................3-12
3.2.3 TracerDosageandInjectionDurationCalculations....................................................3-13
3.2.4 DryRunsandPlannedTracerInjectionEvent(s).........................................................3-13
3.2.5 RealTimeFieldAssessments,Sampling,andAnalysis..............................................3-13
3.2.6 EquipmentDe-Mobilization,InitiationofDataCollection,Reduction,andVerification
Process.........................................................................................................................3-14
3.3 TracerStudyCosts...............................................................................................................3-14
3.4 Summary,ConclusionsandRecommendations.................................................................3-15
References.....................................................................................................................................3-17
4.0 CalibrationofDistributionSystemModels..................................................................................4-1
4.1 HydraulicandWaterQualityModelCalibration....................................................................4-2
4.1.1 HydraulicModelCalibration..........................................................................................4-2
4.1.2 WaterQualityModelCalibration....................................................................................4-2
4.2 StaticCalibrationandDynamicCalibration...........................................................................4-4
4.2.1 Steady-StateCalibrationMethods.................................................................................4-4
4.2.1.1 C-FactorTests .......................................................................................................4-4
4.2.1.2 Fire-FlowTests ......................................................................................................4-5
4.2.1.3 ChlorineDecayTests............................................................................................4-5
4.2.2 DynamicCalibrationMethods.......................................................................................4-6
4.3 ManualCalibrationandAutomatedCalibration....................................................................4-7
4.4 CaseStudies...........................................................................................................................4-7
4.4.1 Case1-Small-Suburban,Dead-EndSystem ...............................................................4-8
4.4.2 Case2-Large-SuburbanPressureZone....................................................................4-10
4.5 FutureofModelCalibration.................................................................................................4-13
4.5.1 CalibrationStandards ..................................................................................................4-13
4.5.2 TechnologicalAdvances..............................................................................................4-14
References.....................................................................................................................................4-15
vi
5.0 MonitoringDistributionSystemWaterQuality...........................................................................5-1
5.1 EstablishingMonitoringObjective(s).....................................................................................5-1
5.1.1 RegulatoryDrivenMonitoring.......................................................................................5-2
5.1.2 SecurityRelatedMonitoring..........................................................................................5-2
5.1.3 ProcessControl-RelatedMonitoring.............................................................................. 5-3
5.1.4 WaterQualityCharacterization......................................................................................5-3
5.1.5 Multi-PurposeUseofMonitoringData..........................................................................5-3
5.2 MonitoringTechniques ..........................................................................................................5-3
5.2.1 ManualGrabSampling..................................................................................................5-3
5.2.2 Automated/OnlineMonitoring.......................................................................................5-4
5.3 MonitoringEquipmentOverview..........................................................................................5-4
5.3.1 PhysicalMonitors...........................................................................................................5-4
5.3.2 ChemicalMonitors.........................................................................................................5-4
5.3.3 BiologicalMonitors......................................................................................................... 5-4
5.4 EstablishingMonitoringRequirements..................................................................................5-5
5.4.1 MonitoringParameters...................................................................................................5-5
5.4.2 NumberandLocationofMonitors................................................................................5-5
5.4.2.1 NumberofMonitors.............................................................................................5-6
5.4.2.2 OptimalMonitorLocations ..................................................................................5-6
5.4.3 MonitorCharacteristics..................................................................................................5-7
5.4.4 AmenabilitytoRemoteMonitoringandSCADAIntegration........................................5-8
5.4.4.1 OnlineSampling/ControlDevices........................................................................5-9
5.4.4.2 SCADAorRemoteMonitoringNetwork .............................................................5-9
5.4.4.3 FieldWiringandCommunicationMedia.............................................................5-9
5.5 EngineeringandEvaluatingaRemoteMonitoringSystem ...............................................5-10
5.5.1 RemoteMonitoringSystemEvaluation.......................................................................5-11
5.6 MonitoringCaseStudies......................................................................................................5-11
5.6.1 RuralCommunityApplication......................................................................................5-11
5.6.2 WashingtonD.C.RemoteMonitoringNetwork...........................................................5-11
5.6.3 TucsonWaterMonitoringNetwork.............................................................................5-12
References.....................................................................................................................................5-15
6.0 GeospatialTechnologyforWaterDistributionSystems .............................................................6-1
6.1 HistoryofGeospatialDataManagement...............................................................................6-2
6.1.1 Mapping,Surveying,andRemoteSensing..................................................................6-2
6.1.2 CADD ..............................................................................................................................6-4
6.1.3 GIS..................................................................................................................................6-4
6.1.4 DEMs...............................................................................................................................6-5
6.1.5 DatabaseManagementSystems...................................................................................6-6
6.1.6 FacilityManagement......................................................................................................6-6
6.2 GISPrinciples .........................................................................................................................6-6
6.2.1 GISFeatures...................................................................................................................6-6
6.2.2 Topology.........................................................................................................................6-7
6.2.3 MapProjections,Datum,andCoordinateSystems......................................................6-8
6.2.4 GISDatabaseDesign......................................................................................................6-8
6.2.5 ManagementofGIS.......................................................................................................6-8
6.3 GeospatialDataManagementintheWaterIndustry............................................................6-9
6.3.1 CADD ..............................................................................................................................6-9
6.3.2 GIS..................................................................................................................................6-9
6.3.3 CIS ..................................................................................................................................6-9
6.3.4 SCADA............................................................................................................................6-9
6.3.5 LIMS................................................................................................................................6-9
6.3.6 SupportTechnology......................................................................................................6-9
6.4 IntegrationofGeospatialDataManagementandModeling...............................................6-10
6.4.1 ModelIntegrationTaxonomy.......................................................................................6-10
6.4.2 IssuesinIntegratingGISandWaterDistributionSystemModels..............................6-11
vii
6.5 UseofGISinWaterUtilities-CaseStudies.........................................................................6-11
6.5.1 UseofGISatLVVWD...................................................................................................6-11
6.5.1.1 PressureComplaintResolution..........................................................................6-13
6.5.1.2 WaterMainBreakAnalysis.................................................................................6-13
6.5.2 Geo-codingforDemandForecastingandAllocationatDenverWater ......................6-13
6.6 Summary..............................................................................................................................6-17
References.....................................................................................................................................6-18
7.0 Real-WorldApplicationsPlanning,Analysis,andModelingCaseStudies..............................7-1
7.1 AnalysisofWaterborneOutbreakGideon,Missouri..........................................................7-1
7.1.1 GideonCaseStudyOverview........................................................................................7-1
7.1.2 TheGideonWaterSystemSetup..................................................................................7-1
7.1.3 EPAFieldStudy..............................................................................................................7-2
7.1.4 DistributionSystemEvaluation......................................................................................7-2
7.1.5 CaseStudySummaryandConclusions.......................................................................7-3
7.2 ReconstructingHistoricalContaminationEvents-DoverTownship(TomsRiver),NJ........7-4
7.2.1 CaseStudyOverview.....................................................................................................7-4
7.2.2 OverallModelingApproach...........................................................................................7-5
7.2.3 SimulationTechniques...................................................................................................7-6
7.2.4 SimulationResultsandConclusions.............................................................................7-7
7.3 ApplicationofWaterDistributionSystemModelinginSupportofaRegulatoryRequirement......7-9
7.3.1 IDSERequirementsOverview......................................................................................7-10
7.3.2 ExampleApplicationofModelingintheIDSEProcess..............................................7-10
7.4 UseofWaterDistributionSystemModelsinthePlacementofMonitorstoDetectIntentional
Contamination......................................................................................................................7-13
7.4.1 RedTeam-BlueTeamExercise.....................................................................................7-13
7.4.2 ApplicationofOptimizationModel..............................................................................7-14
7.4.3 CaseSummary.............................................................................................................7-15
7.5CaseStudyUseofPipelineNetModel................................................................................7-15
7.5.1 Overview.......................................................................................................................7-16
7.5.2 ModelCalibration.........................................................................................................7-16
7.5.3 MonitoringSiteLocationMethodology......................................................................7-16
7.5.4 ResponseandMitigationTools....................................................................................7-17
7.5.4.1 ConsequenceAssessmentTool .........................................................................7-17
7.5.4.2 IsolationTool.......................................................................................................7-17
7.5.4.3 SpatialDatabaseDisplayTool ............................................................................7-17
7.5.5 CaseSummary.............................................................................................................7-17
7.6 UseofThreatEnsembleVulnerabilityAssessment(TEVA)ProgramforDrinkingWater
DistributionSystemSecurity ...............................................................................................7-18
7.6.1 TEVAOverview.............................................................................................................7-18
7.6.1.1 StochasticModeling...........................................................................................7-19
7.6.1.2 ImpactAnalysis...................................................................................................7-19
7.6.1.3 ThreatMitigationAnalysis..................................................................................7-19
7.6.2 ApplicationofTEVAtoaWaterDistributionSystemforOptimalMonitoring...........7-19
7.6.2.1 SimulationOverview..........................................................................................7-20
7.6.2.2 TEVAAnalysisApproach ...................................................................................7-20
7.6.2.3 TEVAAnalysisResults........................................................................................7-21
7.6.3CaseSummary..............................................................................................................7-22
7.7 FieldTestingofWater-DistributionSystemsinSupportofanEpidemiologicStudy ........7-22
7.7.1 CaseStudyOverview...................................................................................................7-22
7.7.2 FieldWork.....................................................................................................................7-23
7.7.2.1 C-FactorandFire-FlowTests..............................................................................7-23
7.7.2.2 TracerTestandContinuousMeasurements......................................................7-23
7.7.3 AdditionalTestProcedures..........................................................................................7-24
7.7.4 CaseStudySummary..................................................................................................7-25
7.8 ChapterSummary................................................................................................................7-25
References.....................................................................................................................................7-25
viii
ListofTables
Table Page
Table1-1. SelectedRulesandRegulationsDealingwithDistributionSystems(NotInclusive).....1-9
Table2-1. AvailableHydraulicandWaterQualityNetworkModelingSoftwarePackages..........2-13
Table2-2. ExampleCFDModelingSoftwarePackages.................................................................2-14
Table2-3. ExampleTransientModelingSoftwarePackages.........................................................2-15
Table3-1. TracerCharacteristics(adaptedfromTeefy,1996) .......................................................... 3-7
Table3-2. EquipmentCosts............................................................................................................3-14
Table3-3. RepresentativeLaborHoursforaRangeofStudies....................................................3-15
Table4-1 Calibration/InputRequirementsforWaterQualityModels.............................................4-3
Table4-2 DraftCalibrationCriteriaforModeling(basedonECAC,1999)...................................4-13
Table5-1. FederalDistributionSystemWaterQualityMonitoringRequirements..........................5-2
Table7-1. MasterOperatingCriteriaUsedtoDevelopOperatingSchedulesfortheHistoricalWater
DistributionSystem,DoverTownshipArea,NJ(fromMasliaetal.,2001)....................7-6
Table7-2. FieldDataCollectedDuringFire-FlowTestatSiteH02.................................................7-24
ListofFigures
Figure Page
Figure1-1. WaterTreatmentProcessattheMillerPlantontheOhioRiver(Adaptedfrom:GCWW
2005).................................................................................................................................1-1
Figure1-2. DistributionSystemInteractionsthatAffectWaterQuality(Adaptedfrom:MSU,2005)..1-3
Figure1-3. TotalNumberandProportionofU.S.WaterborneDiseasesAssociatedwithWater
DistributionSystemDeficiencies.....................................................................................1-6
Figure1-4. EvolutionofFederalDrinkingWaterRegulations-Timeline..........................................1-8
Figure2-1. SimpleLink-NodeRepresentationofaWaterDistributionSystem................................2-2
Figure2-2. AFlowChartforEstimatingFutureWaterDemandBasedonLand-UseMethodology...2-5
Figure2-3. EPANETGraphicalOutputShowingFlowandPressure...............................................2-7
Figure2-4. SampleEPANETTimeSeriesPlotsofFlow,Pressure,andTankWaterLevel. .............2-7
Figure2-5. EPANETSampleTabularOutputs(attime10.00hrs).....................................................2-8
Figure2-6. IllustrationoftheEvolutionofHydraulicandWaterQualityModels.............................2-9
Figure2-7. GraphicalOutputfromaCFDModelShowingTracerConcentrationinaTank. .......2-14
Figure2-8. ALargePhysicalModelofaTank(Source:BureauofReclamationLaboratory).......2-14
Figure2-9. GraphicalOutputBasedon3-DLaserInducedFluorescencewithaPhysicalScale
ModelShowingMixinginTank(Source:GeorgiaTech).............................................2-15
Figure2-10. NegativePressureTransientAssociatedwithaPowerOutage. ..................................2-16
Figure2-11a. VelocityFieldataJunction. ...........................................................................................2-18
Figure2-11b.TracerConcentrationataJunction..............................................................................2-18
Figure3-1. FlowCalibrationTube......................................................................................................3-9
Figure3-2. AutomatedMonitoringStation.....................................................................................3-10
Figure3-3. TracerInjectionSetup(StorageTank,CalibrationTubeandFeedPump)..................3-11
Figure4-1. ConceptualRepresentationofCalibration......................................................................4-1
Figure4-2. EffectsoftheInitialWaterAgeontheModeledResults. ................................................ 4-3
Figure4-3. SchematicofStandardTwo-GageC-FactorTestSetup. ................................................ 4-4
Figure4-4. SchematicofParallelHoseC-FactorTestSetup.............................................................4-4
Figure4-5. Fire-FlowTestSetup. .......................................................................................................4-5
Figure4-6. AHydrantBeingFlowedwithaDiffuserasPartofaFire-FlowTest..............................4-5
Figure4-7. SchematicRepresentationofSmall-SuburbanDead-EndSystem................................4-8
Figure4-8. EmpiricalRelationshipBetweenChlorideandConductivity..........................................4-8
Figure4-9. SampleChlorideDataUsedatOneStationforCalibration...........................................4-9
Figure4-10. ComparisonofModelVersusFieldResultsforContinuousMonitorLocationCM-18at
VariousCalibrationStages..............................................................................................4-9
ix
Figure4-11. CalibrationofLoopedPortion....................................................................................4-10
Figure4-12. SchematicRepresentationofCase2StudyLocation..................................................4-11
Figure4-13a.ModeledFlowsComparedtoMeasuredFlowsBeforeCalibration.............................4-11
Figure4-13b.ModeledFlowsComparedtoMeasuredFlowsAfterCalibration................................4-11
Figure4-14a.ChlorideConcentrationforCalibrationEventatContinuousMonitorLocationCM-59. 4-12
Figure4-14b.ChlorideConcentrationforValidationEventatContinuousMonitorLocationCM-59...4-12
Figure5-1. WastewaterInjection:FreeChlorineandAssociatedGrabSampleResults. ................5-6
Figure5-2. TheoreticalExampleofBenefitsfromMonitors.............................................................5-6
Figure5-3. Pareto-OptimalCostEffectivenessDiagram....................................................................5-7
Figure5-4. FortReno#2RemoteSamplingSystem......................................................................5-12
Figure5-5. WASARemoteMonitoringSystemLayoutandDataTransmissionScheme.............5-12
Figure5-6. MonitoringDataforFortRenoTank..............................................................................5-13
Figure5-7. CityofTucsonWaterQualityZoneMap.......................................................................5-13
Figure5-8. ContinuousWaterQualityMonitoringStation.............................................................5-13
Figure6-1. MercatorsMapoftheWorldin1569(Whitfield,1994)..................................................6-2
Figure6-2. LandsatThematicMapperImagesoftheMissouriRiverFloodplainNearGlasgow,
Missouri.(USGS,1993). ...................................................................................................6-4
Figure6-3. TypicalInputsandResultsofCurrentGISPackages......................................................6-5
Figure6-4. DigitalTerrainModelofMountSt.HelensafterEruptionin1980(R.Horne,2004)......6-6
Figure6-5. MapofPressureZoneShowingThreeTypesofGISVectorData. ...............................6-6
Figure6-6. RegionalLandCoverCharacterizationasaRasterDatabase(USGS,1992). ................6-7
Figure6-7. TriangulationofElevation(Z)Data..................................................................................6-7
Figure6-8a. TypicalRepresentationofaPipeSectioninGIS. ..........................................................6-11
Figure6-8b. TypicalRepresentationofaPipeSectioninaNetworkModel....................................6-11
Figure6-9. LVVWDDistributionSystemGrowth............................................................................6-12
Figure6-10. ConceptualRelationshipModelforIntegration............................................................6-12
Figure6-11. One-to-OneRelationshipBetweenGISandNetworkModelingData..........................6-12
Figure6-12. PressureComplaintResolutionGISParcel/AccountSearchWindow......................6-13
Figure6-13. PressureComplaintResolutionParcelandHydrantLocation. .................................. 6-14
Figure6-14. PressureComplaintResolutionModelandFieldPressureComparison..................6-14
Figure6-15. WaterMainBreakAnalysisValveIsolation.................................................................6-15
Figure6-16.WaterMainBreakAnalysisImpactedCustomerList.................................................6-15
Figure6-17. WaterMainBreakAnalysisComparisonofJunctionPressures-BeforeandAfter
Shutdown......................................................................................................................6-16
Figure6-18. GISGeo-coding-MeteredSalesDemandAllocationProcedure................................6-17
Figure7-1. ComparisonofEarlyConfirmedCasesofSalmonellaPositiveSampleVersusthe
EstimatedDistributionofTankWaterDuringtheFirst6HoursoftheFlushingProgram. 7-3
Figure7-2. InvestigationArea,DoverTownship,OceanCounty,NJ(modifiedfromMasliaetal.,
2001).................................................................................................................................7-4
Figure7-3. DistributionSystemZonesWoburn,MA(May1969)..................................................7-5
Figure7-4. Three-DimensionalRepresentationofMonthlyProductionofWater,DoverTownship
Area,NJ(fromMasliaetal.,2001)..................................................................................7-6
Figure7-5. ArealDistributionofSimulatedProportionateContributionofWaterfromtheParkway
Wells(22,23,24,26,28,29)toLocationsintheDoverTownshipArea,NJ,July1988
Conditions(fromMasliaetal.,2001). ..............................................................................7-8
Figure7-6. SimulatedProportionateContributionofWaterfromWellsandWellFieldstoSelected
Locations,DoverTownshipArea,NJ,July1988Conditions(fromMasliaetal.,2001)....7-8
Figure7-7. EstimatedUpper97.5PercentCredibilityLimitforAnnualPerchlorateIntakebyOne
Plaintiff(Grayman,2004). ................................................................................................7-9
Figure7-8. AverageWaterAgeintheDistributionSystemOverLast24Hoursofa2-Week
Simulation......................................................................................................................7-11
Figure7-9. MinimumWaterAgeintheDistributionSystemOverLast24Hoursofa2-Week
Simulation......................................................................................................................7-11
Figure7-10. DiurnalWaterAgeatNodeJ-456..................................................................................7-12
Figure7-11. MinimumChlorineResidualinDistributionSystemOverLast24Hoursofa2-Week
Simulation......................................................................................................................7-12
x
Figure7-12. ZonesRepresentingPotentialMonitoringLocationsforIDSEBasedonModeling....7-12
Figure7-15. ContaminantConcentrationJustDownstreamofContaminantIntroductionLocation
Figure7-16. ContaminantConcentrationFarDownstreamofContaminantIntroductionLocation
Figure7-20. HypotheticalSystemShowingHighScoreAreas(>27)OverlainwithHospitalsand
Figure7-21. DisplayofLow-VelocityPipes,OversizedPipes,andCurrentMonitoringStationsUsing
Figure7-23. Comparisonof24-Hour,48-Hour,andReal-Time,ContinuousContamination
MonitoringSystemsfortheReductioninMeanInfectionsfora24-HourContaminant
Figure7-24. Comparisonof24-Hour,48-Hour,andReal-Time,ContinuousContamination
Figure7-26. ContinuousRecordingPressureLoggerMountedonBrassShutoffValveandHydrant
Figure7-29. ArrivalTimesoftheCalciumChlorideTraceratMonitoringLocationsinHadnotPoint
Figure7-13. WaterDistributionSystemCharacteristics....................................................................7-13
Figure7-14. AllowableContaminantIntroductionLocations...........................................................7-14
(Node121)......................................................................................................................7-14
(Node143)......................................................................................................................7-14
Figure7-17. MonitoringLocationsSelectedbytheOptimizationModel. ........................................ 7-15
Figure7-18. HypotheticalWaterDistributionSystemShowingPipelines........................................7-16
Figure7-19. ConceptualDiagramShowingtheRankingandPrioritizationMethodology. ............. 7-16
Schools..........................................................................................................................7-17
theSpatialDatabaseDisplayTool. ................................................................................7-18
Figure7-22. ThreatEnsembleVulnerabilityAssessmentFramework. ..............................................7-18
Attack..............................................................................................................................7-21
MonitoringSystemsfortheReductionintheMaximumNumberofInfectionsfora24-
HourContaminantAttack..............................................................................................7-21
Figure7-25. WaterDistributionSystemsServingU.S.MarineCorpsBase,CampLejeune,NC....7-22
AdapterCapUsedforFire-FlowandC-FactorTests. ....................................................7-23
Figure7-27. LocationofFireHydrantsUsedinFire-FlowTestatSiteH02.......................................7-23
Figure7-28. HoribaW-23XDDualProbeIonDetectorInsideFlowCell...........................................7-24
WTPArea,May25,2004...............................................................................................7-25
xi
AcronymsandAbbreviations
AC AlternatingCurrent
ACCNSCM ArsenicandClarificationsto
ComplianceandNewSource
ContaminantMonitoring
ADAPT ArealDesignandPlanningTool
ADEQ ArizonaDepartmentof
EnvironmentalQuality
Al
2
(SO
4
)
3
AluminumSulfate
AM/FM AutomatedMapping(orAsset
Management)/Facilities
Management
AMR AutomatedMeterReading
ASCE AmericanSocietyofCivilEngineers
ATSDR AgencyforToxicSubstancesand
DiseaseRegistry
AWWA AmericanWaterWorksAssociation
AwwaRF AwwaResearchFoundation
C CoefficientofRoughness
ClO
4
PerchlorateAnion
CaCl
2
CalciumChloride
CAD Computer-AidedDesign
CADD Computer-AidedDesignand
Drafting
CDC CentersforDiseaseControland
Prevention
CFD ComputationalFluidDynamics
CIS CustomerInformationSystem
CM ContinuousMonitoring
COGO CoordinatedGeometry
CRT CathodeRayTube
CWS ContaminationWarningSystem
DBP DisinfectionBy-Products
DBPR1 Disinfectant By-Product Rule -
Stage 1
DBPR2 Disinfectant By-Product Rule -
Stage 2
DC Direct Current
D.C. DistrictofColumbia
DEM DigitalElevationModel
DIME DualIndependentMapEncoding
DLG DigitalLineGraph
DSOP DistributionSystemWaterQuality
OptimizationPlan
DSS DistributionSystemSimulator
DTM DigitalTerrainModel
DWQM DynamicWaterQualityModel
EBMUD EastBayMunicipalUtilityDistrict
EDM ElectronicDistanceMeasurement
EMPACT EnvironmentalMonitoringforPublic
AccessandCommunityTracking
EOSAT EarthObservationSatellite
EPA U.S.EnvironmentalProtection
Agency
EPS ExtendedPeriodSimulation
ESSA EnvironmentalScienceServices
Administration
EWS EnvironmentalWarningSystem
FC FecalColiform
FeCl
3
FerricChloride
FOH FederalOccupationalHealth
GA GeneticAlgorithm
gal Gallon
GBF GeographicBaseFile
GC GasChromatograph
GCWW GreaterCincinnatiWaterWorks
GIS GeographicInformationSystem
GPD GallonsPerDay
gpm GallonsPerMinute
GPS GlobalPositioningSystem
GRASS GeographicResourcesAnalysis
SupportSystem
GUI GraphicalUserInterface
GWR GroundWaterRule
HAA HaloaceticAcid
HAA5 ThefiveHaloaceticAcids
HACCP HazardAnalysisCriticalControl
Point
HGL HydraulicGradeLine
HSPP HealthandSafetyProjectPlan
ICR InformationCollectionRule
IDSE InitialDistributionSystem
Evaluation
IESWTR InterimEnhancedSurfaceWater
TreatmentRule
ILSI InternationalLifeSciencesInstitute
I/O Input/Output
ISE IonSelectiveElectrode
ISO InsuranceServicesOffice
LCR LeadandCopperRule
xii
LIFO LastIn/FirstOut
LIMS LaboratoryInformation
ManagementSystem
LIS LandInformationSystem
LT1ESWTR LongTerm1EnhancedSurface
WaterTreatmentRule
LT2ESWTR LongTerm2EnhancedSurface
WaterTreatmentRule
LVVWD LasVegasValleyWaterDistrict
ma Milli-Amperes
MCL MaximumContaminantLevel
MCLG MaximumContaminantLevelGoal
MDL MinimumDetectionLimit
MDNR MissouriDepartmentofNatural
Resources
MDOH MissouriDepartmentofHealth
MGD MillionGallonsperDay
mg/L milligramsperliter
MIT MassachusettsInstituteof
Technology
MOC MasterOperatingCriteria
MRDLG MaximumResidualDisinfectant
LevelGoals
MS MassSpectrometer
MSU MontanaStateUniversity
NaCl SodiumChloride
NAD27 NorthAmericanDatumof1927
NAD83 NorthAmericanDatumof1983
NAPP NationalAerialPhotography
Program
NASA NationalAeronauticsandSpace
Administration
NFPA NationalFireProtectionAssociation
NHAP NationalHighAltitudePhotography
NIPDWR NationalInterimPrimaryDrinking
WaterRegulations
NJDHSS NewJerseyDepartmentofHealth
andSeniorServices
NMWD NorthMarinWaterDistrict
NPL NationalPrioritiesList
NPWA NorthPennWaterAuthority
NOM NaturallyOccurringOrganic(and/
orInorganic)Matter
NRC NationalResearchCouncil
O&M OperationsandMaintenance
OCMS OnlineContaminantMonitoring
System
ODBC OpenDatabaseConnectivity
ORD OfficeofResearchandDevelopment
ORP OxidationReductionPotential
PAB3D AThree-DimensionalComputational
FluidDynamicsModeldevelopedby
AnalyticalServices&Materials,Inc.
PC PersonalComputer
PDD PresidentialDecisionDirective
PHRP PublicHealthResponsePlan
PL PublicLaw
POE PointofEntry
POGA ProgressiveOptimalityGenetic
Algorithm
psi PoundsPerSquareInch
PVC PolyvinylChloride
PWS PublicWaterSystem
QA QualityAssurance
QAPP QualityAssuranceProjectPlan
QC QualityControl
RDBMS RelationalDatabaseManagement
Systems
RDWR RadoninDrinkingWaterRule
SAN StyreneAcrylonitrile
SCADA SupervisoryControlandData
Acquisition
SCCRWASouthCentralConnecticutRegional
WaterAuthority
SDMS SpatialDatabaseManagementSystem
SDWA SafeDrinkingWaterAct
SDWAA SafeDrinkingWaterActAmendments
SMP StandardMonitoringProgram
SNL SupplyNodeLink
SOP StandardOperatingProcedure
SPC StatePlaneCoordinates
SSS SystemSpecificStudy
SVOC SemivolatileOrganicCompound
SWTR SurfaceWaterTreatmentRule
SYMAP SynagraphicMapping
T&E TestandEvaluation
TCE Trichloroethylene
TCR TotalColiformRule
TEVA ThreatEnsembleVulnerability
Assessment
THM Trihalomethane
TIGER TopologicallyIntegratedGeographic
EncodingandReferencing
xiii
TIN TriangulatedIrregularNetwork
TIROS1 TelevisionandInfraredObservation
Satellite1
TOC TotalOrganicCarbon
TT TreatmentTechnique
TTHM TotalTrihalomethane
TV Television
U.S. UnitedStates
UF Ultrafiltration
UHF UltraHighFrequency
UV Ultraviolet
UV-Vis Ultraviolet-Visible
USGS UnitedStatesGeologicalSurvey
UTM UniversalTransverseMercator
VHF VeryHighFrequency
WASA WaterandSewerAuthority
WATERS WaterAwarenessTechnology
EvaluationResearchandSecurity
WQP WaterQualityParameter
WRC WaterResearchCentre
WSSM WaterSupplySimulationModel
WSTP Wells,StorageTanks,andPumps
WTP WaterTreatmentPlant
xiv
Acknowledgments
EPAwouldliketoacknowledgetheprincipalauthorsofthedocument,WaterDistributionSystem
Analysis:FieldStudies,Modeling,andManagement,aReferenceGuideforUtilities. Theauthors
were Mr. Srinivas Panguluri, P.E. (Shaw Environmental, Inc.), Dr. Walter M. Grayman, P.E. (W.M.
GraymanConsultingEngineer),andDr.RobertM.Clark,P.E.,D.E.E.(EnvironmentalEngineeringand
Public Health Consultant). The work was performed under EPA Contract No. EP-C-04-034, Work
AssignmentNo.0-08and1-08,withShawEnvironmental,Inc.
EPAacknowledgesthesignificantcontributionsfromMr.DavidJ.HartmanandDr.YeonghoLee,
P.E.,oftheGreaterCincinnatiWaterWorks.Mr.HartmanandDr.Leeservedasexternalreviewers
anddirectlycontributedtothedevelopmentofportionsofthisdocument. GreaterCincinnatiWater
Works also participated significantly in the field tracer tests that served as a foundation for the
developmentofthisdocument.
EPAacknowledgesthepeerreviewsbythefollowingutilitypersonnel:Mr.WilliamR.Kirkpatrickand
Mr.RonaldB.HunsingerofEastBayMunicipalUtilityDistrict,andMr.ArnoldStrasser,P.E.,ofDenver
Water.
EPAalsoacknowledgesthepeerreviewsprovidedforthisdocumentbyDr.FranA.DiGiano,P.E.,of
UniversityofNorthCarolina,Mr.MorrisL.Maslia,P.E.,D.E.E.,oftheAgencyforToxicSubstances
andDiseaseRegistry,Dr.EdwardA.McBean,P.E.,ofUniversityofGuelph,Dr.VanessaL.Speight,
P.E.,ofMalcolmPirnie,Ms.L.MichelleMooreofNationalDrinkingWaterClearinghouse,andMr.E.
RadhaKrishnan,P.E.,ofShawEnvironmental,Inc.
EPAalsogratefullyacknowledgesthefollowingcontributorstothisdocument:Mr.DanielR.Quintanar
ofTucsonWater,Ms.LauraB.Jacobson,P.E.,Mr.SridharKamojjala,P.E.,andMr.MaoFang,P.E.,of
LasVegasValleyWaterDistrict,Mr.MorrisL.Maslia,P.E.,D.E.E.,oftheAgencyforToxicSubstances
andDiseaseRegistry,Dr.WilliamB.Samuels,P.E.,ofSAIC,Dr.MarkW.LeChevallierandDr.KalaK.
FlemingofAmericanWater.
EPAContributors
Ms.ShirleyJ.GibsonfunctionedasProjectOfficerofEPAContractNo.EP-C-04-034,Ms.LucilleM.
GarnerservedasWorkAssignmentManagerandMr.CraigL.Patterson,P.E.,servedastheAlternate
WorkAssignmentManagerandtechnicalreviewerforthisdocument.Mr.RoyC.Haughtservedas
EPATechnicalAdvisor.Mr.JonathanG.Herrmann,P.E.,Mr.KimR.Fox,P.E.,D.E.E.,andDr.James
A.Goodrichperformedtechnicalreviewsofthedocument. Mr.StephenM.HarmonwastheEPA
QualityAssuranceManager,andwasresponsibleforthequalityassurancereviewofthedocument.
ThedocumentwasalsoreviewedbymanyotherEPAreviewersincludingthefollowing:Mr.BlakeL.
Atkins,Mr.WilliamH.Davis,Ms.JeanE.Dye,Mr.RobertJ.Janke,Mr.BruceA.Macler,Ms.JillR.
Neal,Dr.LewisA.Rossman,P.E.,Mr.KennethH.Rotert,Dr.IrwinJ.Silverstein,P.E.,D.E.E.,andMs.
ElinA.Warn.
xv
Chapter1
Introduction
DrinkingwaterutilitiesintheUnitedStates(U.S.)
andthroughouttheworldfacethechallengeof
providingwaterofgoodqualitytotheirconsumers.
Frequently,thewatersupplyisderivedfromsurface
waterorgroundwatersourcesthatmaybesubjectto
naturally occurring or accidentally introduced
contamination(ILSI,1999;Gullicketal.,2003).In
othercases,routineupstreamwastedischargesor
purposefulcontaminationofthewatercandiminish
thequalityofthewater.Thetreatedwatermaybe
transmittedthroughanetworkofcorrodedor
deterioratingpipes. Allofthesefactorscanresult
indegradationinthequalityofthewaterdelivered
tocustomers.
IntheU.S.,drinkingwaterqualityhastocomply
withfederal,state,andlocalregulations. Thisis
basedonselectedphysical,chemical,andbiologi-
calcharacteristicsofthewater.TheU.S.Environ-
mentalProtectionAgency(EPA)haspromulgated
manydrinkingwaterstandardsundertheSafe
DrinkingWaterAct(SDWA)of1974.Theserules
andregulationsrequirethatpublicwatersystems
(PWSs)meetspecificguidelinesand/ornumeric
standardsforwaterquality.TheSDWAdefinesa
PWSasasystemthatservespipedwatertoatleast
25personsor15serviceconnectionsforatleast60
dayseachyear.Forthepurposesofthisreference
guide,PWSsarereferredtoasutilities.
TheSDWAhasestablishedtwotypesofnumeric
standards. Thefirsttypeofstandardisenforceable
andreferredtoasamaximumcontaminantlevel
(MCL). Theothernon-enforceablestandardis
referredtoasamaximumcontaminantlevelgoal
(MCLG). MCLGsaresetatalevelatwhichnoknown
oranticipatedadversehumanhealtheffectsoccur.
Whereitisnoteconomicallyortechnologically
feasibletodeterminethelevelofacontaminant,a
treatmenttechnique(TT)isprescribedbyEPAinlieu
ofestablishinganMCL. Forexample,Giardiaisa
microbialcontaminantthatisdifficulttomeasure.To
ensureproperremoval,experimentalworkhas
establishedoptimumtreatmentconditionsforthe
waterataspecifiedpH,temperature,andchlorine
concentrationforaspecifiedlengthoftimetoachieve
afixedlevelofinactivation.
CompliancewithMCLandTTrequirementsis
typicallyensuredbyrequiringthatwaterutilities
periodicallymonitorvariouscharacteristicsofthe
treatedwater.Insummary,theEPAGuidelinesand
Standardsaredesignedtoensurethatdrinking
waterisadequatelytreatedandmanagedbywater
A Reference Guide for Utilities
Removingcontaminantsfromdrinkingwatercanbe
expensive. Dependinguponthetypeandlevelof
contaminant(s)presentinthesourcewater,utilitiescan
choosefromavarietyoftreatmentprocesses. These
individualprocessescanbearrangedinatreatment
train(aseriesofprocessesappliedinasequence).
Themostcommonlyusedtreatmentprocessesinclude
coagulation/flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and
disinfection. Somewatersystemsalsouseionex-
change,membraneseparation,ozonation,orcarbon
adsorptionfortreatment. Thebasictreatmentoptions
arebrieflydiscussedlaterinthischapter.Asan
example,Figure1-1depictsthewatertreatment
processimplementedbytheGreaterCincinnatiWater
Works(GCWW)attheMillerPlantontheOhioRiver.
Presettling
Finalsettlingoccurs,
removesmostsolids
waterprepared
Furthersettling forfinaltreatment
occursinreservoir
pHadjusted
Settlingaidsadded
OhioRiver
Intake
Pumps
Todistribution
system
Sandand
Granularactivated
gravelfilter
water
Furnace
cleanscarbon
forreuse
organics
carbonremoves
pHadjusted,
chlorineadded,
fluorideadded
Reservoir
Figure 1-1. Water Treatment Process at the Miller
Plant on the Ohio River (Adapted from: GCWW 2005).
utilities to support public safety, protect public
health,andpromoteeconomicgrowth(Clarkand
Feige,1993).
Disinfectionofdrinkingwaterisconsideredtobeone
ofthemajorpublichealthadvancesofthe20th
century.Thesuccessfulapplicationofchlorineasa
disinfectantwasfirstdemonstratedinEngland. In
1908,JerseyCity(NJ)initiatedtheuseofchlorinefor
waterdisinfectionintheU.S. Thisapproachsubse-
quentlyspreadtootherlocations,andsoontherates
ofcommonepidemicssuchastyphoidandcholera
droppeddramatically.Today,disinfectionisan
essentialpartofadrinkingwatertreatmenttrain.
Chlorine,chlorinedioxide,andchloraminesaremost
1-1

Whiledisinfectantsareeffectiveincontrollingmany
microorganisms,theycanreactwithnaturallyoccurring
organic(and/orinorganic)matter(NOM)inthetreated
and/ordistributedwatertoformpotentiallyharmful
disinfectionbyproducts(DBPs). ManyoftheseDBPs
aresuspectedofcausingcancer,reproductive,and
developmentalproblemsinhumans.Tominimizethe
formationofDBPs,EPAhaspromulgatedregulations
thatspecifymaximumresidualdisinfectantlevelgoals
(MRDLGs)forchlorine(4milligramsperliter[mg/L]as
chlorine),chloramines(4mg/Laschlorine),and
chlorinedioxide(0.8mg/Laschlorinedioxide). In
addition,MCLsfortheDBPstotaltrihalomethanes
(TTHMs)andhaloaceticacids(HAA5)havebeen
establishedas0.080and0.060mg/L,respectively.The
TTHMsincludechloroform,bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethaneandbromoform. TheHAA5
include monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid,
trichloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic acid and
dibromoaceticacid. Inordertomeettheserequire-
ments,utilitiesmayneedtoremovetheDBPprecursor
materialfromthewaterpriortodisinfectionbyapply-
ingappropriatetreatmenttechniquesormodifytheir
disinfectionprocess.
oftenusedbecausetheyareveryeffectivedisinfec-
tants,andresidualconcentrationscanbemaintained
inthewaterdistributionsystem. Someutilities(inthe
U.S.andEurope)useozoneandchlorinedioxideas
oxidizingagentsforprimarydisinfectionpriortothe
additionofchlorineorchlorinedioxideforresidual
disinfection. TheNetherlandsidentifiesozoneasthe
primarydisinfectant,aswellascommonuseof
chlorinedioxide,buttypicallyusesnochlorineor
otherdisinfectantresidualinthedistributionsystem
(Connell, 1998).
PriortothepassageoftheSDWAof1974,most
Someimportantdistributionsystemwaterquality
concernsare:maintenanceofproperdisinfectantlevels;
minimizationofDBPformation;turbidity,taste,color,
andodorissues;distributiontankmixingandutiliza-
tion;mainrepairandpressurestabilization;flow
management;cross-connectioncontrolandback-flow
prevention.
Somewaterqualitygoalsarecontradictory.For
example,animportantgoalistomaintainapositive
disinfectantresidualinordertoprotectagainstmicro-
bialcontamination. However,DBPs(TTHMs)will
increaseaswatermovesthroughthenetworkaslongas
disinfectantresidualandNOMisavailable. OtherDBPs
(HAA5)aredegradedbiologicallywhenfreechlorineor
chloraminesarenearlyabsent.
drinkingwaterutilitiesfocusedonmeetingdrink-
ingwaterstandardsatthetreatmentplant,even
thoughithadlongbeenrecognizedthatwater
qualitycandeteriorateinadistributionsystem.
TheSDWAintroducedanumberofMCLsthatmust
bemeasuredatvariousmonitoringpointsinthe
distribution system. Consequently, water quality in
thedistributionsystembecameafocusofregula-
toryactionandofmajorinteresttodrinkingwater
utilities. Subsequently, utilities worked with
variousresearchorganizations(includingEPA)to
understandtheimpactofthedistributionsystemon
waterquality.Thecollectiveknowledgefromthis
researchhasbeenappliedtoimprovethequalityof
waterdeliveredtotheconsumer(Clarkand
Grayman,1998).
PriortoSeptember11,2001(9/11),fewwaterutilities
wereusingonlinemonitorsinadistributionsystemasa
meansofensuringthatwaterqualitywasbeingmain-
tainedandaddressedincasesofdeviationfromestab-
lishedranges. Nowtheenhancedfocusonwater
securityhasledEPAandwaterutilitiestocollectively
evaluatecommercialtechnologiestoremotelymonitor
thedistributionsystemwaterqualityinreal-time. Asa
partofanevolutionaryprocess,inthefuture,these
monitoringtechnologiesareexpectedtobeintegrated
with computer modeling and geospatial technologies.
This evolution of monitoring and modeling technolo-
giescanpotentiallyminimizetherisksfromdrinking
watercontaminantsindistributionsystems.
Thisreferenceguidehasbeenpreparedtoprovide
informationtodrinkingwaterutilitiesandresearch-
ersonthestateoftheartfordistributionsystem
managementandmodeling. Guidanceisprovided
on the application of advanced modeling tools that
canenhanceautilitysabilitytobettermanage
distributionsystemwaterquality.Thisintroduc-
torychapterprovidesthebasicconcepts,which
include:
Distributionsysteminfrastructuredesignand
operation(definitionsandoverview).
Waterqualityproblemsandissues(abrief
review).
Regulatoryframework(anoverview).
Assessmentandmanagementofwaterquality
(currentpractices).
Advancedtoolsforwaterqualitymanagement
(indistributionsystems).
Subsequentchapterswillprovidemoredetailson
relatedconceptsandtools.
1-2
1.1 Distribution System -
Infrastructure Design and
Operation
Distributionsysteminfrastructureisamajorassetofa
waterutility,eventhoughmostofthecomponentsare
eitherburiedorlocatedinconspicuously.Drinking
waterdistributionsystemsaredesignedtodeliver
waterfromasource(usuallyatreatmentfacility)in
therequiredquantity,quality,andatsatisfactory
pressuretoindividualconsumersinautilitysservice
area. Ingeneral,tocontinuouslyandreliablymove
waterbetweenasourceandacustomer,thesystem
wouldrequirestoragereservoirs/tanks,andanetwork
ofpipes,pumps,valves,andotherappurtenances.
Thisinfrastructureiscollectivelyreferredtoasthe
drinkingwaterdistributionsystem(Walskietal.,2003).
1.1.1KeyInfrastructureComponents
Adetaileddescriptionofthevariousdistribution
systeminfrastructurecomponentsisreadilyavailable
fromothersourcesandbeyondthescopeofthis
document. However,forthepurposesofestablishing
thebasics,thissectionincludesabriefdiscussionof
theusesofthemajorcomponents,theircharacteris-
tics,generalmaintenancerequirements,anddesirable
features.
1.1.1.1 StorageTanks/Reservoirs
Tanksandreservoirsareusedtoprovidestorage
capacitytomeetfluctuationsindemand,toprovide
reservesforfire-fightinguseandotheremergency
situations,andtoequalizepressuresinthedistribu-
tionsystem. Themostfrequentlyusedtypeofstorage
facilityistheelevatedtank,butothertypesoftanks
andreservoirsincludein-groundtanksandopenor
closedreservoirs. Materialsofconstructioninclude
concreteandsteel. Anissuethathasdrawnagreat
dealofinterestistheproblemofwaterturnover
withinstoragefacilities. Muchofthewatervolumein
storagetanksisdedicatedtofireprotection. Unless
utilitiesmakeadeliberateefforttoexercise(filland
draw)theirtanks,ortodownsizethetankswhenthe
opportunitypresentsitself,therecanbebothwater
agingandwatermixingproblems.Thelattercanlead
tostratificationand/orlargestagnantzoneswithinthe
watervolume. Someoftheseissueswillbediscussed
laterinthisdocument.
1.1.1.2 PipeNetwork
Thesystemofpipesormainsthatcarrywaterfrom
thesource(suchasatreatmentplant)totheconsumer
isoftencategorizedastransmission/trunk,distribu-
tion,andservicemains. Transmission/trunkmains
usuallyconveylargeamountsofwateroverlong
distances,suchasfromatreatmentfacilitytoa
storagetankwithinthedistributionsystem. Distribu-
tionmainsaretypicallysmallerindiameterthanthe
transmissionmainsandgenerallyfollowcitystreets.
Servicemainsarepipesthatcarrywaterfromthe
distributionmaintothebuildingorpropertybeing
served. Servicelinescanbeofanysize,depending
onhowmuchwaterisrequiredtoserveaparticular
customer,andaresizedsothattheutilitysdesign
pressureismaintainedatthecustomerspropertyfor
thedesiredflows. Themostcommonlyusedpipes
todayforwatermainsareductileiron,pre-stressed
concrete,polyvinylchloride(PVC),reinforced
plastic,andsteel. Inthepast,unlinedcastironpipe
andasbestos-cementpipeswerefrequentlyused.
Evenamedium-sizedwaterutilitymayhavethou-
sandsofmilesofpipesconstructedfromvarioustypes
ofmaterials,rangingfromnew,linedorplasticpipes
tounlinedpipesthataremorethan50yearsold.Over
time,biofilmsandtuberclesattachedtopipewallscan
resultinbothlossofcarryingcapacityandasignificant
lossofdisinfectantresidual,therebyadversely
affectingwaterquality(ClarkandTippen,1990).
Figure1-2depictsthevariousdistributionsystem
interactionsthatmayadverselyaffectwaterquality.
Figure 1-2. Distribution System Interactions that Affect
Water Quality (Adapted from: MSU, 2005).
Themainsshouldbeplacedinareasalongthepublic
rightofway,whichprovidesforeaseofaccess,
installation,repair,andmaintenance.Brokenor
leakingwatermainsshouldberepairedassoonas
possibletominimizepropertydamageandlossof
water.Inthepast,ithasbeenstandardpracticeto
maintainthecarryingcapacityofthepipeinthe
distributionsystemashighaspossibletoprovidethe
designflowandkeeppumpingcostsaslowas
possible. However,therehasbeenrecentconcernthat
excesscapacitycanleadtolongresidencetimesand
thuscontributetodeteriorationinwaterquality.
1.1.1.3 Valves
Therearetwogeneraltypesofvalvesinadistribution
system:isolationvalvesandcontrolvalves. Isolation
valvesareusedinthedistributionsystemtoisolate
sectionsformaintenanceandrepairandaretypically
1-3
locatedinasystemsothattheareasisolatedwill
causeaminimumofinconveniencetootherservice
areas. Maintenanceofthevalvesisoneofthemajor
activitiescarriedoutbyautility.Manyutilitieshave
aregularvalve-turningprograminwhichapercentage
ofthevalvesareopenedandclosedonaregularbasis.
Itisdesirabletoturneachvalveinthesystematleast
onceperyear.Inlargesystems,thismayormaynot
bepractical,butperiodicexerciseandcheckingof
valveoperationsshouldoccur.Thispracticemini-
mizesthelikelihoodthatvalveswillbecomeinoper-
ableduetocorrosion.Theimplementationofsucha
programensuresthat,especiallyduringanemergency,
watercanbeshutoffordivertedandthatvalveshave
not been inadvertently closed.
Controlvalvesareusedtoregulatetheflowor
pressureinadistributionsystem.Typicaltypesof
controlvalvesincludepressure-reducingvalves,
pressure-sustainingvalves,flow-ratecontrolvalves,
throttlingvalves,andcheckvalves.
1.1.1.4 Pumps
Pumpsareusedtoimpartenergytothewaterinorder
toboostittohigherelevationsortoincreasepressure.
Routinemaintenance,properdesignandoperation,
andtestingarerequiredtoinsurethattheywillmeet
theirspecificobjectives. Pumptestsaretypicallyrun
everyfivetotenyearstocheckthehead-discharge
relationshipforthepump. Manysystemdesigners
recommendtwosmallerpumpsinsteadofonelarge
pumptoensureredundancy.
1.1.1.5 HydrantsandOtherAppurtenances
Hydrantsareprimarilyapartofthefire-fighting
infrastructureofawatersystem. Althoughwater
utilitiesusuallyhavenolegalresponsibilityforfire
flow,developmentalrequirementsoftenincludefire
flows,andthus,distributionsystemsaredesignedto
supportneededfireflowswherepractical(AWWA,
1998).Properdesign,spacing,andmaintenanceare
neededtoinsureanadequateflowtosatisfyfire-
fightingrequirements. Firehydrantsaretypically
exercisedandtestedperiodicallybywaterutilityor
firedepartmentpersonnel. Fire-flowtestsarecon-
ductedperiodicallytosatisfytherequirementsofthe
InsuranceServicesOffice(ISO,2003)oraspartofa
waterdistributionsystemcalibrationprogram. Other
appurtenancesinawaterdistributionsysteminclude
blow-offvalvesandairreleasevalves.
1.1.2BasicDesignandOperationPhilosophy
Adetailedunderstandingofhowwaterisusedis
criticaltounderstandingwaterdistributionsystem
designandoperation. Almostuniversally,themanner
inwhichindustrialandresidentialcustomersuse
waterdrivestheoveralldesignandoperationofa
waterdistributionsystem.Generally,waterusevaries
Conservative design philosophies, aging water supply
infrastructure,andincreasinglystringentdrinkingwater
standardshaveresultedinconcernsovertheviabilityof
drinkingwatersystemsintheU.S. Questionshavebeen
raisedoverthestructuralintegrityofthesesystemsas
wellastheirabilitytomaintainwaterqualityfromthe
treatmentplanttotheconsumer.TheCleanWaterand
DrinkingWaterInfrastructureGapAnalysis(EPA2002),
which identified potential funding gaps between
projectedneedsandspendingfrom2000through2019,
estimatedapotential20-yearfundinggapfordrinking
watercapital,andoperationsandmaintenance,ranging
from$45billionto$263billion,dependingonspend-
inglevels. Basedoncurrentspendinglevels,theU.S.
facesashortfallof$11billionannuallytoreplaceaging
facilitiesandcomplywithsafedrinkingwaterregula-
tions. Federalfundingfordrinkingwaterin2005
remainedlevelat$850millionlessthan10%ofthe
totalnationalrequirement(ASCE,2005). Partsofmany
systemsareapproachingorexceed100yearsold,andan
estimated26percentofthedistributionsystempipein
thiscountryisunlinedcastironandsteelinpoor
condition. Atcurrentreplacementratesfordistribution
systemcomponents,itisprojectedthatautilitywill
replaceapipeevery200years(Kirmeyeretal.,1994).
Grigg,NS,2005,providescomprehensiveguidanceto
utilitiesonhowtoassessoptionsfordistributionsystem
renewal.Griggsreportcontainsaknowledgebaseon
condition assessment, planning and prioritization, and
renewalmethods.
bothspatiallyandtemporally.Besidescustomer
consumption,amajorfunctionofmostdistribution
systemsistoprovideadequatestandbyfire-flow
capacity(FairandGeyer,1971).Forthispurpose,fire
hydrantsareinstalledinareasthatareeasilyacces-
siblebyfirefightersandarenotobstaclestopedestri-
ansandvehicles. Theready-to-serverequirementsfor
firefightingaregovernedbytheNationalFire
ProtectionAssociation(NFPA)thatestablishes
standardsforfire-fightingcapacityofdistribution
systems(NFPA,2003).Inordertosatisfythisneedfor
adequatestandbycapacityandpressure(asmentioned
earlier),mostdistributionsystemsusestandpipes,
elevatedtanks,andlargestoragereservoirs. Addi-
tionally,mostdistributionsystemsarezoned.
Zonesareareasorsectionsofadistributionsystemof
relativelyconstantelevation. Zonescanbeusedto
maintainrelativelyconstantpressuresinthesystem
overarangeofgroundelevations. Sometimes,zone
developmentoccursasaresultofthemannerinwhich
thesystemhasexpanded.
Theeffectofdesigningandoperatingasystemto
maintainadequatefireflowandredundantcapacity
canresultinlongtraveltimesforwaterbetweenthe
1-4
Non-potablewaters(e.g.,sea,river,andlakewater)
withoutadequatetreatmenthavebeenusedforfire
protectionformanyyears,oftenwithdisastrousresults.
However,reclaimedwastewater(incaseswhereits
qualityisbettermanagedthantheaforementioned
unregulatedsources)hasbeeneffectivelyusedfor
providingfireprotection(AwwaRF,2002).St.Peters-
burg,FL,hasbeenoperatingsuchasystemtobolster
fire-protectioncapacitysince1976. Thereclaimed
waterhydrantsaredistinguishedfrompotablewater
hydrantsbycolorandtheirspecialvalves. Ifthe
reclaimedwatersystemisdesignedforfireprotection,
thepotablewaterpipingcanhaveaverysmalldiameter
andinvestmentscanbemadeinhigherqualitypipe
materials,which,withmuchshorterresidencetimein
thesystem,wouldvastlyimprovethequalityofthe
wateratthetap.Withthisinmind,whereretrofitting
oneofthetwosystemsisnecessary,itmightbewiserto
usetheexistingpotablewatersystemforthereclaimed
waterandretrofitwithnew,high-quality,smaller,
potablewaterlines(Okun,D.,1996).
treatmentplantandtheconsumer.Theselongtravel
timesandlowvelocitiesmaybedetrimentalto
meetingthedrinkingwaterMCLs. Longresidence
timesmayleadtoformationofDBPs,lossofdisinfectant
residuals,bacterialgrowth,andformationofbiofilm.
1.1.2.1 Pipe-NetworkConfigurations
Thebranchandgrid/looparethetwobasicconfigura-
tionsformostwaterdistributionsystems.Abranch
systemissimilartothatofatreebranchwithsmaller
pipesbranchingofflargerpipesthroughoutthe
servicearea. Thistypeofsystemismostfrequently
usedinruralareas,andthewaterhasonlyone
possiblepathwayfromthesourcetotheconsumer.A
grid/loopsystemisthemostwidelyusedconfigura-
tioninlargemunicipalsystemsandconsistsof
interconnectedpipeloopsthroughouttheareatobe
served. Inthistypeofsystem,thereareseveral
pathwaysthatthewatercanfollowfromthesourceto
theconsumer.Transmissionmainsaretypically20to
24inchesindiameterorlarger. Dual-servicemains
thatservebothtransmissionanddistributionpurposes
arenormally12to20inchesindiameter. Distribu-
tionmainsareusually6to12inchesindiameterin
everystreet.Servicelinesaretypically1inchin
diameter.Specificpipesizescanvarydependingon
theextentofthedistributionsystemandthemagni-
tudeofdemand.Loopedsystemsprovideahigh
degreeofreliabilityshouldalinebreakoccur,
becausethebreakcanbeisolatedwithlittleimpact
onconsumersoutsidetheimmediatearea(Clarkand
Tippen,1990;Clarketal.,2004).
1.1.2.2 MultipleSourceConfiguration
Manysystemsservecommunitieswithmultiple
sourcesofsupply,suchasacombinationofwellsand/or
surfacesources. Inagrid/loopedsystem,thisconfigu-
rationwillinfluencewaterqualityinadistribution
systemduetotheeffectofmixingofwaterfromthese
differentsources. Theseinteractionsareafunctionof
complexsystemhydraulics(Clarketal.,1988;Clark
etal.,1991a). Waterqualitymodelscanbevery
usefulindefiningmixingandblendingzoneswithin
waterutilitydistributionnetworks. Mixingofwater
inanetworkcanresultintasteandodorproblemsor
otherwaterqualityproblemsandcaninfluence
maintenance,repair,andrehabilitationprocedures.
1.1.2.3 ImpactofSystemDesignandOperation
onWaterQuality
Basedonthedesignandconfigurationofaparticular
system,therearemanyopportunitiesforwaterquality
tochangeaswatermovesbetweenthetreatmentplant
andtheconsumer. Theseunwantedchangesmay
occurduetovariousreasonsincluding:failuresatthe
treatmentbarrier,transformationsinthebulkphase,
corrosionandleachingofpipematerial,biofilm
formation,andmixingbetweendifferentsourcesof
water.Manyresearchershaveinvestigatedthefactors
thatinfluencewaterqualitydeteriorationonceit
entersthedistributionsystem. Ithasbeenwell
documentedthatbacteriologicalgrowthcancause
taste-and-odorproblems,discoloration,slimebuildup,
andeconomicproblems,includingcorrosionofpipes
andbio-deteriorationofmaterials(WaterResearch
Centre,1976). Bacterialnumberstendtoincrease
duringdistributionandareinfluencedbyseveral
factors,includingbacterialqualityofthefinished
waterenteringthesystem,temperature,residence
time,presenceorabsenceofadisinfectantresidual,
constructionmaterials,andavailabilityofnutrients
forgrowth(Geldreichetal.,1972;LeChevallieretal.,
1987;Mauletal.,1985aandb;ZhangandDiGiano,
2002;Camperetal.,2003).
Itisdifficultandexpensivetostudytheproblems
causedbysystemdesignandconfigurationinfull-
scalesystems. Forexample,oneapproachto
studyingresidualchlorinelevelsindead-endor
low-flowsituationswouldbetoconstructapilot-
scalepipesystemtosimulatethephenomena.
Anotherapproachwouldbetousemathematical
hydraulicandwaterqualitymodelsforsimulation.
Foreitheroftheseapproachestowork,theymust
beproperlyconfiguredand/orcalibratedtoclosely
simulateafull-scalesystem. Acombinationof
theseapproachesmaybeusedtoassessvarious
operational and design decisions, to determine the
impactsresultingfromtheinadvertentordeliberate
introduction of a contaminant into the distribution
system,andtoassistinthedesignofsystemsto
improvewaterquality.
1-5

Figure 1-3. Total Number and Proportion of U.S. Waterborne Diseases Associated with Water Distribution
System Deficiencies.

Inpipes,ithasbeenfoundthatchlorinecanbelost
throughboththeinteractionwithNOMinthebulk
phaseandwithpipewallsthemselvesintransporting
finishedwater.Thismechanismforlossofchlorinemay
beevenmoreseriousthanlongresidencetimesin
tanks. Thepipewalldemand,possiblyduetobiofilm
andtubercles,mayuseupthechlorineveryrapidlyina
distribution system. Maintaining adequate levels of
disinfectantresidualmayrequireroutinecleaning/
replacementofpipesandintensivetreatment(Clarket
al.,1993a).
in1989andaSalmonella outbreakinGideon,
Missouri,in1993. Thesetwoexamples,discussed
laterinChapter7,illustratetheimportanceofthe
multiple-barrierconcept. Inbothcases,thewater
sourcewasun-disinfectedgroundwaterandthe
utilitysinfrastructurewasbreached,allowing
contaminantstoenterthesystem. Thiscontamination
resultedinmajorwaterborneoutbreaks.Waterquality
modelingwasusedinbothcasestoidentifythe
sourceoftheoutbreaksandtostudythepropagation
oftheoutbreakthroughthedistributionnetwork
(Clarketal.,1993aandb).
1.2 Water Quality Problems and
Issues
DrinkingwatertreatmentintheU.S.hasplayeda
majorroleinreducingwaterbornedisease. For
example,thetyphoiddeathrateforaparticularyear
inthe1880swas158per100,000inPittsburgh,PA,
comparedwith5per100,000in1935. Suchdramatic
reductionsinwaterbornediseaseoutbreakswere
broughtaboutbytheapplicationofdrinkingwater
standardsandengineeringmultiplebarriersof
protection. Themultiple-barrierconceptincludesthe
useofconventionaltreatment(e.g.,sandfiltration)in
combinationwithdisinfectiontoprovidesafeand
aestheticallyacceptabledrinkingwater.Theresidual
disinfectantlevelsservedtoprotectthewaterquality
withinthedistributionsystempriortoitsdeliveryto
theconsumer(Clarketal.,1991b).
DespitethepassageoftheSDWA,waterborneout-
breaksstilloccur. Twoextensivelystudiedexamples
ofwaterbornediseaseintheU.S.wereanEscherichia
coli O157:H7 (E. coli) outbreakinCabool,Missouri,
OneusefuloutcomeoftheoutbreaksinMissouriis
that the ensuing investigative studies have typically
ledtothedevelopmentandenhancementofscientific
analysistechniques. Forexample,theGideon
Salmonella outbreakconclusionswerebasedon
statisticalstudiesperformedbyCentersforDisease
ControlandPrevention(CDC)andcorroboratedby
waterqualitymodelingperformedbyEPA.Thestudy
providesanexampleofhowtoolssuchaswater
qualitymodelscanbeusedtoreliablystudycontami-
nantpropagationinadistributionsystem(Clarketal.,
1996). BoththeGideonandCaboolincidentswere
associatedwithsourcewatercontamination,inad-
equatetreatment,andbreechesinthedistribution
system.
Thesetypesofproblemsarenotjustisolatedincidents
ofinfrastructurebreakdowns. Infact,severalprob-
lemswithdrinkingwatersystemsintheU.S.have
beenidentifiedbyresearchers. TheNationalResearch
Council(NRC,2005)examinedthecausesofwater-
borneoutbreaksreportedbyvariousinvestigators
between1971and2004. Figure1-3presentsthetotal
numberandproportionofwaterbornediseases
associatedwithdistributionsystemdeficiencies
1-6
OnDecember16,1974,theU.S.Congresspassedthe
SDWA,whichauthorizedtheEPAtopromulgate
regulationswhichwouldprotecthealthtotheextent
feasible,usingtechnology,treatmenttechniques,and
othermeans,whichtheAdministratordeterminesare
generallyavailable(takingcostsintoconsidera-
tion)(SDWA,1974).Asaresult,asetofregulations
waspromulgatedin1975whichbecameeffectiveJune
24,1977. ThesewereknownastheNationalInterim
PrimaryDrinkingWaterRegulations(NIPDWR).The
NIPDWRestablishedMCLsfor10inorganiccontami-
nants,sixorganiccontaminants,turbidity,coliform,
radium-226,radium-228,grossalphaactivity,and
man-maderadionuclides. TheNIPDWRalsoestab-
lishedmonitoringandanalyticalrequirementsfor
determining compliance.
(extractedfromtheNRCreport). Asthefigure
reveals,overallthereisageneraldecreaseinthe
totalnumberofwaterbornediseaseoutbreaks
duringthereportedperiod. However,thereisa
generalincreaseinthepercentageofoutbreaksthat
areassociatedwithdistributionsystemdeficiencies.
TheNRCreportattributesthisincreaseinpercent-
ageofoutbreaks(attributabletodistributionsystem
deficiencies)tothelackofhistoricalregulatory
focusondistributionsystems.
1.3 Regulatory Framework
Concernsaboutwaterbornediseaseanduncon-
trolledwaterpollutionresultedinfederalwater
quality legislation starting in 1893 with the
passageoftheInterstateQuarantineActand
continuingto1970underthestewardshipofthe
U.S.PublicHealthService(AWWA,1999).Even
thoughsignificantadvancesweremadetoeliminate
waterbornediseaseoutbreaksduringthatperiod,
thefocusofdrinkingwaterconcernsbeganto
changewiththeformationoftheEPAinlate1970.
Bythe1970s,morethan12,000chemicalcom-
poundswereknowntobeincommercialuseand
manymorewerebeingaddedeachyear.Manyof
thesechemicalscausecontaminationofgroundwa-
terandsurfacewater,andareknowntobecarcino-
genicand/ortoxic.ThepassageoftheSDWAof
1974wasareflectionofconcernsaboutchemical
contamination. Inthissection,abriefoverviewof
theregulatoryframeworkispresented. Adetailed
historyoftheevolutionofthefederaldrinking
waterregulationsisbeyondthescopeofthis
document.
EarlyinthehistoryoftheSDWA,themajorfocusof
EPAwastoimplementtheActandtoinitiatethe
regulatoryprocess. ThefirstMCLestablished
undertheSDWAwastheTTHMRulein1979.
However,afterseveralyearsofdevelopingregula-
tions,itbecameobviousthattherulemaking
processmustextendbeyondafocusonMCLsatthe
treatmentplantandintothedistributionsystem.
ManywaterutilitiesintheU.S.usingsurface
supplieswereexperiencingwaterborneoutbreaks,
especiallyfromGiardia. The1986SDWAAmend-
mentslaidthegroundworkforthepromulgationof
theTotalColiformRule(TCR)andtheSurface
WaterTreatmentRule(SWTR)in1989.The1986
SDWAAmendmentsalsosetforthanaggressive
plantoeliminateleadfromPWSsandresultedin
thepromulgationoftheLeadandCopperRule
(LCR)in1991. Theseactionsthereforeextended
theSDWAbeyonditsfocusonthetreatmentplant
andintothedistributionsystem(Owens,2001).
Asummaryoftheevolutionoffederaldrinkingwater
regulationsincethepassageoftheSDWAin1974is
presentedinFigure1-4.Inadditiontotherulesand
regulationspromulgatedundertheSDWA,security
hasrecentlybecomeanissueforthewaterutility
industry. Securityofwatersystemsisnotanewissue.
Thepotentialfornatural,accidental,andpurposeful
contaminationofwatersupplieshasbeenthesubject
ofmanystudies. Forexample,inMay1998,President
ClintonissuedPresidentialDecisionDirective(PDD)
63thatoutlinedapolicyoncriticalinfrastructure
protection,includingournationswatersupplies.
However,itwasnotuntilafterSeptember11,2001,
thatthewaterindustryfocusedonthevulnerabilityof
thenationswatersuppliestosecuritythreats.In
recognitionoftheseissues,PresidentGeorgeW.Bush
signedthePublicHealthSecurityandBioterrorism
PreparednessandResponseActof2002(Bioterrorism
Act)intolawinJune2002(PL107-188). Underthe
requirementsoftheBioterrorismAct,community
watersystems(CWSs)servingmorethan3,300people
arerequiredtopreparevulnerabilityassessmentsand
emergencyresponseplans. CWSsarePWSsthat
supplywatertothesamepopulationthroughoutthe
year.
Table1-1summarizesthekeyrequirementsofthe
regulationspresentedinFigure1-4fromadistribu-
tionsystemcomplianceperspective.
Manyofthetoolsandtechniquesdiscussedinthis
referenceguidecanassistincomplyingwiththe
rulesandregulationsandsecurityissuesdiscussed
above.Waterqualitymodelingtechniquescanbe
used to identify points in the distribution system
thatexperiencelongretentiontimes,whichcanin
turnrepresentlocationsinthesystemthatmay
experiencechlorineresidualloss,excessive
formationofDBPs,andtheformationofbiofilms.
Chlorineresidualloss,inconjunctionwithbiofilm
1-7

Figure 1-4. Evolution of Federal Drinking
Water Regulations - Timeline.

Meetingandbalancingtherequirementsofthe
variousregulationscanprovideasignificantchal-
lengetowaterutilities.Insomecases,regulations
provideguidanceorrequirementsthatcouldresultin
contradictoryactions. Forexample,theSWTR
requirestheuseofchlorineorsomeotherdisinfectant.
However,chlorineorotherdisinfectantsinteractwith
NOMintreatedwatertoformDBPs.Similarly,raising
thepHoftreatedwaterwillassistincontrolling
corrosionbutmayincreasetheformationofTTHMs.
Variousanalyticaltools,suchaswaterqualitymodels,
canprovidetheutilitywithinformationandan
understanding that helps the utility in balancing the
contradictoryrequirementsofsomeregulations.
formation,mayresultinthesporadicoccurrenceof
coliforms(indicatororganismsassociatedwith
bacteriologicallypollutedwater). Modelscanbe
usedtodefinemixingzoneswhereblendingwater
fromtwoormoresourcesresultsinwaterquality
problems. Specifically,waterqualitymodeling
toolsmayassistutilitiesincomplyingwiththe
TCR,SWTR,IESWTR,LT1ESWTR,andLCR.
Modelingcanassistinidentifyingpartsofthe
systemwithhighTTHMformationpotential
(DBPR1)andmeetingtheInitialDistribution
SystemEvaluation(IDSE)requirementsofthe
DBPR2(seetheIDSECaseStudyinChapter7). In
addition, modeling techniques can assist in
tracking contamination from cross-connections and
other accidental or deliberate contamination events
suchasawaterborneoutbreak.
1.4 Assessment and Management
of Water Quality
Waterutilitiestreatnearly34billiongallonsofwater
everyday(EPA,1999). Generally,surfacewater
systemsrequiremoretreatmentthangroundwater
1-8
Table 1-1. Selected Rules and Regulations Dealing with Distribution Systems (Not Inclusive)
Regulation KeyDistributionSystemRequirements
SDWA Gives EPA the authority to establish national primary and secondary drinking water regulations
(MCLs and MCLGs).
NIPDWR The NIPDWR which was adopted at the passage of the SDWA required that representative
coliform samples be collected throughout the distribution system.
TTHM Established a standard for TTHMs as 0.1 mg/L.
86SDWAA Established the MCLG concept.
TCR Regulates coliform bacteria which are used as surrogate organisms to indicate whether or not
treatment is effective and system contamination is occurring.
SWTR Requires using chlorine or some other disinfectant.
LCR Monitoring for compliance with the LCR is based entirely on samples taken at the consumers tap.
ICR Provided data to support the interim and long-term enhanced SWTR, and Stage 2 DBP rule.
96SDWAA Has many provisions dealing with distribution systems, including the role that surface water
quality can play in influencing the quality of distributed water.
IESWTR Provisions to enhance protection from pathogens, including Cryptosporidium, and intended to
prevent increases in microbial risk while large systems comply with the DBPR1.
DBPR1 This standard applies to all Has lowered the standard for TTHMs from 0.1 mg/L to 0.08 mg/L.
community water supplies in the U. S. and requires monitoring and compliance at selected points
in the distribution system.
LT1ESWTR Provisions to enhance protection from pathogens, including Cryptosporidium, and prevent
increases in microbial risk for systems serving less than 10,000 people while they comply with
the DBPR1.
systemsbecausetheyaredirectlyexposedtothe
atmosphere,runofffromrainandmeltingsnow,and
otherindustrialsourcesofcontamination. Water
utilitiesuseavarietyoftreatmentprocessestoremove
contaminantsfromdrinkingwaterpriortodistribu-
tion. Theselectedtreatmentcombinationisbasedon
thecontaminantsfoundinthesourcewaterofthat
particularsystem. Thegeneraltechniquesinclude:
Coagulation/Flocculation: This process
removesdirtandotherparticlessuspendedin
thewater.Inthisprocess,alum,ironsalts,and/
orsyntheticorganicpolymersareaddedtothe
watertoformstickyparticlescalledfloc,
whichattractthesuspendedparticles.
Sedimentation:Inthisprocess,theflocculated
particlesaregravity-settledandremovedfrom
thewater.
Filtration:Manywatertreatmentfacilitiesuse
filtrationtoremovethesmallerparticlesfrom
thewater.Theseparticlesinclude:claysand
silts,naturalorganicmatter,precipitatesfrom
othertreatmentprocessesinthefacility,iron
andmanganese,andmicroorganisms. Filtration
clarifiesthewaterandenhancesthe
effectivenessofdisinfection.
Disinfection: Waterisdisinfectedatthewater
treatmentplant(orattheentrytothe
distributionsystem)toensurethatmicrobial
contaminantsareinactivated. Secondary
disinfectionispracticedinordertomaintaina
residualinthedistributionsystem.
Oncethetreatedwaterentersthedistributionsystem,
anumberofprocessesmayoccurthatcanadversely
impactthewaterqualitydeliveredtoconsumers. As
thewaterentersanetworkofburiedpipes,valves,
joints,meters,andservicelines,itissubjectto
disruptionssuchaswaterhammer(transientpressure
shockwave),aging(atdeadendsandlargetanks),
corrosion,cross-connections,leachingoftoxic
chemicals,intrusionofpathogens,andpipeline
breaks.Someoftheseeventsmayberegularoccur-
rences,suchaswateraging,lossofchlorineresidual
indeadends,ordepositionofsedimentationin
stagnantareas. Othersmayberareorunusualevents.
Anyoftheseeventscancausethewaterqualityto
deteriorateandposeapotentialpublichealthrisk.
Someroutinedistributionsystemdesignchangesand
maintenanceoroperationalproceduresthatcanhelp
topreventorreducetheeffectsofsucheventsinclude
the following:
TankMixing:Inadequatemixinginatankcan
leadtostagnantareascontainingolderwater
1-9

Maintainingwaterqualityinadrinkingwaterdistribu-
tionsystemwhileassuringadequatedisinfectionand
reducingDBPsisasignificantchallengeformany
drinkingwaterutilities. Thischallengewillbeeven
greaterunderthemorestringentrequirementsofthe
LT2ESWTRandtheDBPR2.Utilitiesthatusechorine
astheirprimarydisinfectantandthathaveelevated
organiclevelsintheirtreatedwater,longdetention
times,and/orwarmwatermayhavedifficultyinmeeting
theseregulations.TheLasVegasValleyWaterDistrictis
conductingresearchtoexplorethefeasibilityofemploy-
ingtargeteddistributionsystemtreatmentsystems.
Thistypeoftargetedsystem(orsystems)wouldutilize
small-scalewatertreatmenttechnologytoreducethe
concentrationofdisinfectionbyproductsinthoseareas
thatmightexceedtheSDWAMCLsestablishedunder
theLT2ESWTRandDBPR2.Thesesystemsarein-
tendedtobedesignedandoperatedinconjunctionwith
awaterquality/hydraulicmodelwhichwouldbeusedto
predictwherethesedecentralizedtreatmentsystems
shouldbelocated. Ifthetreatmenttechnologyis
relativelymobile,itcouldbemovedbasedonmodel
predictionstolocationswhereMCLviolationsare
likelytooccur. Inaddition,thesetypesofsystems
wouldbevaluableshouldasecuritythreatarise.
thathaslostitsdisinfectantresidual. Changes
inoperations(e.g.,exercisingthetank)or
modifications to inlet-outlet configurations can
improve mixing.
Re-chlorination:Somepartsofadistribution
systemmayexperiencelongtraveltimesfrom
thetreatmentplantresultinginlossofchlorine
residual. Installation of booster chlorination
facilitiesattheselocationscansometimesbean
effectivemeansofinsuringanadequateresidual
intheseareas.
Conventional Flushing: This procedure
generallyinvolvesopeninghydrantsinanarea
untilthewatervisiblyrunsclear.Theobjectof
thisactionwouldbetoquicklyremove
contaminatedwater;however,itwouldnot
likelybeeffectiveinremovalofcontaminants
thatbecomeattachedtothepipesurfaces.
Flushingonlyprovidesashort-termremedy.
Unidirectional Flushing: This procedure
involvestheclosureofvalvesandopeningof
hydrantstoconcentratetheflowinalimited
numberofpipes. Flowvelocitiesare
maximizedsothatshearvelocitynearthepipe
wallismaximized.Itisintendedtobedonein
aprogressivefashion,proceedingoutwardfrom
thesourceofwaterinthesystemsothat
flushingwaterisdrawnfrompreviouslyflushed
Federalandstatedrinkingwaterregulationsaredesigned
toprovideawatersupplytoconsumersthatmeets
minimumhealth-basedrequirements. However,water
utilitiesmaychoosetoimplementprogramsthatgo
beyondcurrentfederal,state,andlocalregulatory
requirementstoincreasethewaterqualityandreducethe
potentialforcontaminationinwatersystems. Thereare
severalmethodsandguidelinesthathavebeendesigned
toassistutilitiesinprovidingwaterofaqualitythat
exceedstheminimumrequirements. Thesemethods
include:HazardAnalysisCriticalControlPoint
(HACCP),sourcewateroptimization,anddistribution
systemwaterqualityoptimizationplans(DSOP).
DSOPisoneexampleofaframeworkforevaluatingand
improvingprogramsthataffectdistributionsystemwater
quality(Friedmanetal.,2005).AspectsoftheDSOP
include evaluation of conditions within the distribution
system,creationofimproveddocumentation,and
enhancementofcommunicationbetweenthevarious
utilityfunctionsthatimpactwaterqualityinthedistri-
butionsystem.DSOPsaddressbothregulatory/compli-
anceissuesandcustomerissuesrelatedtoaesthetic
propertiesofdrinkingwater.TheDSOPapproachwas
pilotedatthreewaterutilitiesandageneraltemplatewas
developedthatcanbeusedbysmall,medium,andlarge
utilities. Thefollowingtenstepsareidentifiedaspartof
thedevelopmentofaDSOP:
1. Formationofacommitteetodiscussdistribution
systemissuesofinterest/concernandtoguidethe
processofDSOPdevelopment.
2. Identificationofwaterqualityandoperatinggoals.
3. Completionofadistributionsystemaudit.
4. Comparisonofauditresultstoindustrybest
managementpractices.
5. Developmentofalistofutilityneedsfor
optimizing distribution system water quality.
6. PrioritizationofDSOPelementsbasedonrelative
contributiontowardsimprovingwaterqualityand
precludingwaterqualitydegradationor
contamination.
7. ForeachpriorityDSOPelement,compilationof
applicablestandardoperatingprocedures(SOPs)
andongoingprogramsthatprovideinformation
relatedtotheconditionofthedistributionsystem
andwaterquality.
8. Developmentandimplementationofpriority
programs.
9. Periodicreviewofprogramsandgoalsdeveloped
aspartoftheDSOP.
10. DevelopmentofrevisedSOPsthatdescribethe
optimized approach.
DSOPandotheraforementionedmethodologiesarestill
intheirearlystagesofapplicationinthewatersupply
industryandwillrequirefurtherevaluationtodetermine
theireffectivenessinmeetingthegoalstoimprovewater
qualityindrinkingwatersystems.
1-10
reaches. Nospecialequipmentisrequired;
however,someplanningtimeisrequiredto
determinetheflushingzones,thevalvesand
hydrantstobeoperated,andthedurationofthe
flushingexerciseforeachzone.
ValveExercisingProgram:Aroutineprogramto
exerciseisolationvalvescanhaveseveral
positiveeffects. Theseincludeidentifying(and
repairing) malfunctioning valves and
identifyingvalvesthatareinaninappropriate
setting(e.g.,closedvalvesthatareexpectedto
beopen).
Cross-ConnectionControlProgram: An
inspectionprogramintendedtoensureno
interconnection(s)betweenthedrinkingwater
andwastewatersystemsinhomesandbuildings.
Examplesofroutinemaintenanceandoperation
proceduresforpipecleaningincludethefollowing
(AwwaRF,2004):
AirScouring,SwabbingandAbrasivepigging:Air
scouring,swabbing,andabrasivepiggingare
progressivelymoreaggressivecleanuptechniques
thatinvolvemorespecializedequipmentandskills.
Afewwaterutilitieshaveimplementedthese
methodsusingtheirownstaff;typically,these
methodsarecontractedtospecialtyfirms.
Implementationofthesemethodswouldrequire
installationofnewpipelineappurtenances(e.g.,pig
launching and receiving stations; pigging is not
recommendedforcastironpipes).
Chemical/Mechanical Cleaning and Lining:
Chemicalcleaninginvolvestherecirculationinan
isolatedpipesectionofproprietaryacidsand
surfactantstoremovescaleanddeposits,while
mechanicalcleaningisaccomplishedbydragged
scrapers.Thesetechniquesaretypicallyappliedin
therehabilitationofolderunlinedcastironpipe
which,overtime,havebecomescaledand
tuberculated.Thesecleaningoperationsare
typicallyfollowedbyanin-situapplicationofa
thincementmortarorepoxyliningtoensurelasting
protection.
Ifthesymptomspersistaftertheapplicationofthese
techniques,thepipesareusuallyreplaced.
1.5 Advanced Tools for Water
Quality Management
Recent advancements in computation and instru-
mentation technologies have led to the availability
ofadvancedtoolsthatarealreadybeginningto
improve a utilitys ability to effectively manage
waterqualityindistributionsystems. These
computationaladvancementshaveledtothe
developmentofsoftwaremodelsthatcansimulate
thebehaviorofdistributionsystemnetworks.Water
distributionsystemmodels(suchasEPANET)have
becomewidelyacceptedbothwithinthewater
utilityindustryandthegeneralresearcharenafor
simulating both hydraulic and water quality
behaviorinwaterdistributionsystems. The
advancements in instrumentation and Supervisory
ControlandDataAcquisition(SCADA)systems
nowenabletheutilitiestomonitorandcontrol
variouswaterqualityparametersfromaremote
locationinreal-timewithinadistributionsystem
network. Furthermore,recentadvancesinGeo-
graphicInformationSystems(GIS)technologyhave
ledtotheintegrationofremotemonitoringnetwork
modelswithGISlayers. Thiscombinationprovides
utilitiesavisualtooltoefficientlymanageboth
waterqualityanddistributionsystemassetssuchas
pipes,pumps,andvalves.
1.6 Report Organization
Variouschaptersofthisreferenceguidewill
describemodelingandmonitoringtoolsfor
effectively managing water quality in drinking
waterdistributionsystems. Examplesandprotocols
foreffectivelyapplyingwaterqualitymodelsfor
understandingandresolvingwaterqualityissuesin
networkswillbepresented. Anotherimportant
aspectofeffectivelyapplyingwaterqualitymodels
istoensurethattheyareproperlyandperiodically
calibrated. Tracertestsareoneofthemosteffec-
tivetechniquesforcalibratingawaterquality
model. Modeling techniques, when combined with
advanced monitoring and geospatial technologies,
canplayavitalroleinmanagingwaterqualityin
distributionsystems. Chapter2providesan
overviewonmodelingofdistributionsystemsfor
waterquality.Chapter3describestechniquesfor
conducting tracer studies in distribution systems.
Chapter4presentsdataanalysistechniquesfor
effectivelycalibratingadistributionsystemmodel
usingtracerorotherfielddata. Chapter5provides
anoverviewofmonitoringtechniquesandtech-
nologies available for monitoring water quality.
Chapter 6 introduces geospatial technology and its
relationtowaterdistributionsystems.Finally,
Chapter7isacompilationofreal-worldapplica-
tionsofwaterqualitymodelingandmonitoringfor
planning, analysis and simulation of historical
events.
1.7 Summary
Distributionsysteminfrastructureisamajorassetof
mostwaterutilities. Itservesmanyimportant
functionsinacommunity,suchaspromotingeco-
1-11
Theinformationpresentedinthisreferenceguideis
intendedforageneraltechnicalaudience. The
variouschaptersprovideanoverviewofthestate-of-
arttechniquesformanagingwaterqualityindistribu-
tionsystems. Foramorecomprehensivecase-specific
solution,thereadershouldrefertotextbooksin
specificsubjectareasand/orconsultwithwater
qualityprofessionals. Thefollowingisabrieflisting
ofrecommendedbooks(listedinalphabeticalorder
by title):
1. Advanced Water Distribution Modeling and
Management. T.M.Walski,D.V.Chase,D.A.
Savic,W.Grayman,S.Beckwith,andE.Koelle.
HaestadPress,Waterbury,CT.2003.
2. ComprehensiveWaterDistributionSystems
AnalysisHandbook. P.B.Boulos,K.E.Lansey,
andB.W.Karney.MWHSOFT,Inc.,Pasadena,CA.
2004.
3. ComputerModelingofWaterDistribution
Systems(M32),AWWA.2004.
4. GISApplicationsforWater,Wastewater,and
StormwaterSystems. U.Shamsi.CRCPress.2005.
5. HydraulicsofPipelineSystems.B.E.Larock,R.W.
Jeppson,G.Z.Watters.CRCPress. 1999.
6. MicrobialQualityofWaterSupplyinDistribution
Systems. EdwinE.Geldreich.CRCPress. 1996
7. Modeling,AnalysisandDesignofWater
DistributionSystems. L.Cesario. AWWA.1995.
8. ModelingWaterQualityinDrinkingWater
DistributionSystems.R.M.ClarkandW.M.
Grayman. AWWA.1998.
9. OnlineMonitoringforDrinkingWaterUtilities.
EditedbyE.Hargesheimer,O.Conio,andJ.
Popovicova.AwwaRFCRSProAqua.2002.
10. SafeDrinkingWater:LessonsfromRecent
OutbreaksinAffluentNations. S.E.Hrudeyand
E.J.Hrudey,IWAPublishing.2004.
11. WaterDistributionSystemsHandbook.Editedby
L.W.Mays,McGrawHill.2000.
12. WaterSupplySystemsSecurity.EditedbyL.W.
Mays,McGrawHill. 2004.
nomicgrowth,supportingpublicsafety,andprotect-
ingpublichealth. Inorderforacommunitytogrow
andprosper,itmusthavethephysicalinfrastructureto
providebasicservicessuchaswatersupply.In
addition to the economic implications of adequate
watersupply,watersystemsplayacriticalrolein
supportingpublicsafetythroughtheprovisionoffire
protectioncapacity.Frequently,insuranceratesina
communityaretiedtothefireprotectioncapabilityof
thewatersystem.Watersystemsplayakeyrolein
protecting a communitys public health by providing
safedrinkingwatertowaterconsumers.
1-12
References
AmericanSocietyofCivilEngineers(ASCE).
ReportCardforAmericasInfrastructure,Drinking
Water.ASCE,Reston,VA.2005.
AmericanWaterWorksAssociation(AWWA). AWWA
Manual M31, Distribution System Requirements for
Fire Protection,AWWA,Denver,CO.1998.
AWWA.Water Quality & Treatment A Handbook of
Community Water Supplies. EditedbyR.D.
Letterman,McGraw-Hill,NY.1999.
AmericanWaterWorksAssociationResearchFounda-
tion(AwwaRF).Standard Operating Procedures for
Decontamination of Water Infrastructure. March,
2004.
AwwaRF.Impacts of Fire Flow on Distribution
System Water Quality, Design, and Operation. 2002.
Camper,A.K.,K.Brastrup,A.Sandvig,J.Clement,C.
Spencer,andA.J.Capuzzi.Impactofdistribution
systemmaterialsonbacterialregrowth.Journal of
AWWA,95(7):107-121. 2003.
Clark,R.M.,W.M.Grayman,andR.M.Males.
ContaminantPropagationinDistributionSystems,
Journal of Environmental Engineering,ASCE,
114:(2). 1988.
Clark,R.M.,W.M.Grayman,andJ.A.Goodrich.
WaterQualityModeling:ItsRegulatoryImplica-
tions.Proceedings,AwwaRF/EPAConferenceon
WaterQualityModelinginDistributionSystems,
Cincinnati,OH. 1991a.
Clark,R.M.,D.J.Ehreth,andJ.J.Convery.Water
LegislationintheUS: AnOverviewoftheSafe
DrinkingWaterAct,Toxicology and Industrial
Health,7(516):43-52. 1991b.
Clark,R.M.,andW.A.Feige.MeetingtheRequire-
mentsoftheSafeDrinkingWaterAct,inStrategies
and Technologies for Meeting the Requirements of
the SDWA. EditedbyRobertM.ClarkandR.Scott
Summers,Technomics,PublishingCompany,Inc.,
Lancaster,PA.1993.
Clark,R.M.,W.M.Grayman,R.M.Males,andA.F.
Hess,1993a. ModelingContaminantPropagationin
DrinkingWaterDistributionSystems,Journal of
Environmental Engineering,ASCE,119(2):349-364.
1993.
Clark,R.M.,J.A.Goodrich,andL.J.Wymer.Effectof
theDistributionSystemonDrinkingWaterQuality,
Journal of Water Supply Research and Technology -
Aqua,42(1):30-38. 1993b.
Clark,R.M.,E.E.Geldreich,K.R.Fox,E.W.Rice,C.H.
Johnson,J.A.Goodrich,J.A.Barnick,andF.
Abdesaken. TrackingaSalmonellaserovar
TyphimuriumOutbreakinGideon,Missouri:Roleof
Contaminant Propagation Modeling, Journal of
Water Supply Research and Technology - Aqua,
45(4):171-183. 1996.
Clark,R.M.,andW.M.Grayman.Modeling Water
Quality in Drinking Water Distribution Systems.
AWWA,Denver,CO.1998.
Clark,R.M.,W.M.Grayman,S.G.Buchberger,Y.Lee,
andD.J.Hartman. DrinkingWaterDistribution
Systems: AnOverview,inWater Supply Systems
Security. EditedbyLarryW.Mays,McGraw-Hill,NY.
pp4.1-4.49. 2004
Clark,R.M.,andD.L.Tippen.WaterSupplyin
Standard Handbook of Environmental Engineering.
EditedbyRobertA.Corbitt,McGraw-Hill,NY.pp
5.173-5.220. 1990.
Connell,G.F.EuropeanWaterDisinfectionPractices
ParallelU.S.TreatmentMethods,Drinking Water
and Health Quarterly. August1,1998. http://
www.clo2.com/reading/waternews/european.html
EPA.The Clean Water and Drinking Water Infra-
structure Gap Analysis. EPA-OfficeofWater,
WashingtonDC.September2002.
EPA.25 Years of the Safe Drinking Water Act:
History & Trends.EPA816-R-99-007.December
1999.
Fair,G.M.,andJ.C.Geyer.WaterSupplyandWaste-
WaterDisposal,JohnWileyandSons,Inc.,NY.1971.
Friedman,M.,G.Kirmeyer,G.Pierson,S.Harrison,K.
Martel,A.Sandvig,andA.Hanson. Development of
Distribution System Water Quality Optimization
Plans. AwwaRF/AWWA.Denver,CO.2005.
Geldreich,E.E.,H.D.Nash,D.J.Reasoner,andR.H.
Taylor.TheNecessityofControllingBacterial
PopulationsinPotableWater:CommunityWater
Supply,Journal of AWWA,64:596-602. 1972.
1-13
GreaterCincinnatiWaterWorks.WaterTreatment,
http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/water/pages/-3283-/.
2005.
Grigg,NS. Assessment and Renewal of Water
Distribution Systems.AwwaRFReport#91025F,
June 2005.
Gullick,R.W.,W.M.Grayman,R.A.Deininger,and
R.M.Males. DesignofEarlyWarningMonitoring
SystemsforSourceWaters,Journal of AWWA,
95(11):58-72. 2003.
InsuranceServicesOffice(ISO).Fire Suppression
Rating Schedule.InsuranceServicesOffice,NY.
2003.
InternationalLifeSciencesInstitute. Early Warning
Monitoring to Detect Hazardous Events in Water
Supplies.EditedbyT.M.Brosnan,Washington,D.C.
1999.
Kirmeyer,G.J.,W.Richards,andC.Dery-Smith.An
Assessment of Water Distribution Systems and
Associated Needs.AwwaRF.1994.
LeChevallier,M.W.,T.M.Babcock,andR.G.Lee.
Examination and Characterization of Distribution
SystemBiofilms,Applied and Environmental
Microbiology, 53:2714-2724. 1987.
Maul,A.,A.H.El-Shaarawi,andJ.C.Block. Het-
erotrophicBacteriainWaterDistributionSystems-I.
SpatialandTemporalVariation.The Science of the
Total Environment,44:201-214. 1985a.
Maul,A.,A.H.El-Shaarawi,andJ.C.Block. Het-
erotrophicBacteriainWaterDistributionSystems-II.
SamplingDesignforMonitoring.The Science of the
Total Environment,44:215-224. 1985b.
MontanaStateUniversity(MSU)CenterforBiofilm
Engineering. ImageprovidedbyPatDirckx. 2005.
NationalFireProtectionAssociation(NFPA).Fire
Protection Handbook, 19th edition. EditedbyA.E.
Cote,NationalFireProtectionAssociation,Quincy,
MA. 2003.
NRC. Public Water Supply Distribution Systems:
Assessing and Reducing Risks First Report. The
NationalAcademiesPress,Washington,DC.2005.
Okun,D. Distributingreclaimedwaterthroughdual
systems,Journal of AWWA,89(11),pp.52-64.1996.
Owens,J. A Review of Federal Drinking Water
Regulations in the U.S., in Controlling Disinfection
By-Products and Microbial Contaminants in Drinking
Water. EditedbyRobertM.ClarkandBrendaBoutin,
EPA-600-R-01-110.pp2-1to2-14. December2001.
PDD63. Critical Infrastructure Protection.The
WhiteHouse,WashingtonD.C.May22,1998.
PL107-188. PublicHealthSecurityandBioterrorism
PreparednessandResponseActof2002.
SafeDrinkingWaterAct(SDWA),1974,PublicLaw
93-523.
Walski,T.M,D.V.Chase,D.A.Savic,W.M.Grayman,
S.Beckwith,andE.Koelle.Advanced Water Distri-
bution Modeling and Management. HaestadPress,
Waterbury,CT.pp1-4. 2003.
WaterResearchCentre.DeteriorationofBacterio-
logicalQualityofWaterDuringDistribution,Notes
onWaterResearchNo.6.1976.
Zhang,W.,andF.A.DiGiano.Comparisonof
BacterialRegrowthinDistributionSystemsUsing
FreeChlorineandChloramine: AStatisticalStudyof
Causative Factors. Water Research, 36:6:1469-1482.
2002.
1-14
Chapter2
ModelingWaterQualityinDrinkingWater
DistributionSystems
This chapter covers the use of models to simulate the flow and water quality conditions in a distribution
system network. Models are mathematical or physical approximations of a real-world system and can be
used to study the behavior of actual system(s). A variety of computer software modeling tools are now
available to perform these simulations. These tools are now commonly used by trained engineers and
scientists to study and improve water distribution system network design and operation.
Waterdistributionsystemmodelshavebecome
widelyacceptedwithinthewaterutilityindustryasa
mechanismforsimulatingthehydraulicandwater
qualitybehaviorinwaterdistributionsystemnet-
works. Currentwaterdistributionmodelingsoftware
ispowerful,sophisticatedanduser-friendly.Many
softwarepackagesareintegratedwithGISand
ComputerAidedDesign(CAD)technologyinorderto
facilitatemodelconstructionandstorageanddisplay
ofmodelresults. Earlynetworkmodelssimulated
onlysteady-statehydraulicbehavior.Inthe1970s,
modeling capability was expanded to include
ExtendedPeriodSimulation(EPS)modelsthatcould
accommodatetime-varyingdemandandoperations.
Subsequently,intheearly1980s,investigatorsbegan
introducingtheconceptofwaterqualitymodeling.
Mostwaterdistributionsystemmodelingsoftware
packagesnowroutinelyincorporatewaterquality
simulationcapability.Morerecently,transient
modelsforsimulatingwaterhammer(atransient
phenomenon) and tank mixing/aging models have
eitherbeenincorporatedintoorintegratedwithwater
distributionsystemmodels. Algorithmshavebeen
developedthatenableuserstooptimizewatersystem
designandoperation,assistinmodelcalibration,and
performprobabilisticanalyses. Eachofthesemodel
typesarebrieflydescribedlaterinthischapter.
Waterdistributionsystemmodelsaremorecommonly
beingusedtoreplicatethebehaviorofarealor
proposedsystemforavarietyofpurposesincluding:
capitalinvestmentdecisions,developmentofmaster
plans,estimationoffireprotectioncapacity,designof
newsystemsandextensionorrehabilitationof
existingsystems,energymanagement,waterquality
studies,variouseventsimulationsandanalysis,
optimalplacementofsensors,anddailyoperations.
Thecostsassociatedwithconstructingandmaintain-
ingadistributionsystemmodelmaybemoreeasily
justifiedifitisusedforavarietyofapplicationsbya
waterutility(Grayman,2000).
2.1 Distribution System Network
Hydraulic Modeling
Thenetworkhydraulicmodelprovidesthefoundation
formodelingwaterqualityindistributionsystems.
Thissubsectionprovidesabriefhistoryofhydraulic
modeling,anoverviewoftheoreticalconcepts,basic
modelinputs,andgeneralcriteriaforselectionand
application.
2.1.1HistoryofHydraulicModeling
HardyCrossfirstproposedtheuseofmathematical
methodsforcalculatingflowsincomplexnetworks
(Cross,1936). Thismanual,iterativeprocedurewas
usedthroughoutthewaterindustryforalmost40
years. Withtheadventofcomputersandcomputer-
basedmodeling,improvedsolutionmethodswere
developedforutilizingtheHardyCrossmethodology.
Theimprovedimplementationsofthismethodwerein
widespreadusebythe1980s(Wood,1980a).
Also,intheearly1980s,theconceptofmodeling
waterqualityindistributionsystemnetworkswas
developedbasedonsteady-stateformulations(Clark
etal.,1986). Bythemid-1980s,waterqualitymodels
weredevelopedthatincorporatedthedynamic
behaviorofwaternetworks(Graymanetal.,1988).
Theusabilityofthesemodelswasgreatlyimprovedin
the1990swiththeintroductionofthepublicdomain
EPANETmodel(Rossman,2000)andotherWindows-
basedcommercialwaterdistributionsystemmodels.
Initially,hydraulicmodelssimulatedflowand
pressuresinadistributionsystemundersteady-state
conditionswherealldemandsandoperationsre-
mainedconstant. Sincesystemdemands(and
consequentlytheflowsinthewaterdistribution
network)varyoverthecourseofaday,EPSmodels
weredevelopedtosimulatedistributionsystem
behaviorundertime-varyingdemandandoperational
conditions. Thesemodelshavenowbecomeubiqui-
touswithinthewaterindustryandareanintegralpart
ofmostwatersystemdesign,masterplanning,andfire
flowanalyses.
2-1

2.1.2OverviewofTheoreticalConcepts
Thetheoryandapplicationofhydraulicmodelsis
thoroughly explained in many widely available
references(Walskietal.,2003;AmericanWaterWorks
Association,2004;Larocketal.,2000). Essentially,
threebasicrelationsareusedtocalculatefluidflowin
apipenetwork. Theserelationshipsare:
ConservationofMass:Thisprinciplerequires
thatthesumofthemassflowsinallpipes
enteringajunctionmustequalthesumofall
massflowsleavingthejunction.Becausewater
isessentiallyanincompressiblefluid,
conservationofmassisequivalentto
conservationofvolume.
ConservationofEnergy:Therearethreetypes
ofenergyinahydraulicsystem:kineticenergy
associatedwiththemovementofthefluid,
potential energy associated with the elevation,
andpressureenergy.Inwaterdistribution
networks,energyisreferredtoasheadand
energylosses(orheadlosses)withinanetwork
areassociatedprimarilywithfrictionalongpipe
wallsandturbulence.
PipeFrictionHeadloss: Akeyfactorin
evaluatingtheflowthroughpipenetworksis
the ability to calculate friction headloss
(Jeppson,1976).Threeempiricalequations
commonlyusedaretheDarcy-Weisbach,the
Hazen-Williams,andtheManningequations.
Allthreeequationsrelateheadorfrictionlossin
pipestothevelocity,lengthofpipe,pipe
diameter,andpiperoughness.Afundamental
relationshipthatisimportantforhydraulic
analysisistheReynoldsnumber,whichisa
functionofthekinematicviscosityofwater
(resistancetoflow),velocity,andpipediameter.
Themostwidelyusedheadlossequationinthe
U.S.istheHazen-Williamsequation.Though
theDarcyWeisbachequationisgenerally
consideredtobetheoreticallymorerigorous,
thedifferencesbetweentheuseofthesetwo
equations is typically insignificant under most
circumstances.
Adistributionsystemisrepresentedinahydraulic
modelasaseriesoflinksandnodes. Linksrepresent
pipeswhereasnodesrepresentjunctions,sources,
Hydraulicmodelsrepresentthebasicunderlying
equations(conservationofmassandconservationof
energy)asaseriesoflinearandnon-linearequations.
Becauseofthenon-linearity,iterativesolutionmethods
arecommonlyusedtonumericallysolvethesetof
equations. Themostcommonnumericalmethod
utilizedistheNewton-Raphsonmethod.
Source
Pump
LEGEND
Tank
Valve
Junction node
Pipe link
Figure 2-1. Simple Link-Node Representation of a
Water Distribution System.
tanks,andreservoirs.Valvesandpumpsarerepre-
sentedaseithernodesorlinksdependingonthe
specificsoftwarepackage. Figure2-1illustratesa
simplelink-noderepresentationofawaterdistribu-
tionsystem.
Asmentionedpreviously,therearetwotypesof
analysesthatmaybeconductedondrinkingwater
distributionsystems:steady-stateandEPS. Ina
steady-stateanalysis,alldemandsandoperationsare
treatedasconstantovertimeandasinglesolutionis
generated.IntheEPSmode,variationsindemand,
tankwaterlevels,andotheroperationalconditions
aresimulatedbyaseriesofsteady-stateanalysesthat
arelinkedtogether.Eachsteady-statesolutioninthe
EPSmodeinvolvesaseparatesolutionofthesetof
non-linearequations. EPSisusedasthebasisfor
ConservationofMass:Theconservationofmass
principleforhydraulicanalysisrequiresthatthesumof
themassflowinallpipesenteringajunctionmust
equalthesumofallmassflowsleavingthejunction.
InEPS,ifstorageisinvolved,atermfordescribingthe
accumulationofwateratthosenodesisincluded.
Mathematically,theprinciplecanberepresentedas
follows:

2-2
P V
2 2
P V
h
L
+ h
M
(Equation2-2) Z
1
+
1
+
1
+ h Z = +
2
+
2
+
P 2
2g 2g

waterqualitymodeling.ThoughtheEPSsolution
doesintroducesomeapproximationsandignoresthe
transientphenomenaresultingfromsuddenchanges
(e.g.,apumpbeingturnedon),thesemorerefined
assumptionsaregenerallynotconsideredsignificant
formostdistributionsystemstudies.
ConservationofEnergy:Theconservationofenergy
principlerequiresthatthedifferenceinenergy
betweentwopointsinanetworkmustbethesame
regardlessofflowpath. Forhydraulicanalysis,this
principlecanberepresentedintermsofheadas
follows:
where
Z
1and2
=elevationatpoints1and2,respectively,inft(m)
2 2
P
1and2
=pressureatpoints1and2,respectively,inlb/ft (N/m )
3 3
=fluid(water)specificweight,inlb/ft (N/m )
V
1and2
=velocityatpoints1and2,respectively,inft/s(m/s)
2 2
g=accelerationduetogravity,inft/sec (m/sec )
h
P
=pumpingheadgain,inft(m)
h
L
=headlossinpipes,inft(m)
h
M
= headlossdue to minor losses,in ft(m)
Pipe-frictionheadloss:Theequationmostcommonly
usedinmodelingsoftwareforcomputationofpipe-
frictionheadlossistheHazen-Williamsequation
representedasfollows:
2.1.3BasicHydraulicModelInput
Characterization
Buildinganetworkmodel,particularlyifalarge
numberofpipesareinvolved,isacomplexprocess.
Thefollowingcategoriesofinformationareneededto
constructahydraulicmodel:
Characteristicsofthepipenetworkcomponents
(pipes,pumps,tanks,valves).
Wateruse(demands)assignedtonodes
(temporalvariationsrequiredinEPS).
Topographic information (elevations assigned
tonodes).
Controlinformationthatdescribeshowthe
systemisoperated(e.g.,modeofpump
operation).
Solutionparameters(e.g.,timesteps,tolerances
asrequiredbythesolutiontechniques).
Commonlyusedmethodsfortheseinputsarebriefly
describedinthefollowingsubsections.
2.1.3.1 PipeNetworkInputs
Constructionofthepipenetworkanditscharacteris-
ticsmaybedonemanuallyorthroughuseofexisting
spatialdatabasesstoredinGISorCADpackages.
Mostcommonly,GISorCADpackagesareusedin
thisprocessandaredescribedinmoredetailin
Chapter6. Theinitialstepinconstructinganetwork
modelistoidentifypipestobeincludedinthe
model. Nodesareusuallyplacedatpipejunctions,or
atmajorfacilities(tanks,pumps,controlvalves),or
wherepipecharacteristicschangeindiameter,C-
value(roughness),ormaterialofconstruction.Nodes
mayalsobeplacedatlocationsofknownpressureor
atsamplinglocationsoratlocationswherewateris
used(demandnodes). Therequiredpipenetwork
component information includes the following:
pipes(length,diameter,roughnessfactor),
pumps(pumpcurve),
valves(settings),and
tanks(crosssectioninformation,minimumand
maximumwaterlevels).
2.1.3.2 WaterDemandInputs
Waterconsumptionorwaterdemandisthedriving
forcebehindtheoperationofawaterdistribution
system. Anylocationatwhichwaterleavesthe
systemcanbecharacterizedasademandonthe
system. Thewaterdemandsareaggregatedand
assignedtonodes,whichrepresentsanobvious
simplificationofreal-worldsituationsinwhich
individualhousetapsaredistributedalongapipe
ratherthanatjunctionnodes. Itisimportanttobe
abletodeterminetheamountofwaterbeingused,
whereitisbeingused,andhowthisusagevarieswith
time(Walskietal.,2003).Demandmaybeestimated
byacountofstructuresofdifferenttypesusinga
representativeconsumptionperstructure,meter
readingsandtheassignmentofeachmetertoanode,
andtogenerallanduse.Auniversaladjustmentfactor
shouldbeusedtoaccountforlossesandother
unaccountedwaterusagesothattotalusageinthe
2-3

Earlysoftwarepackageslimitedthenumberofpipesthat
couldbeincludedduetocomputerstoragerestrictions.
Thisledtotheconceptofskeletonizinganetworkor
includingonlythosepipesthatwereconsideredtobe
themostimportant.Thedegreeofskeletonizationthatis
acceptableshoulddependupontheultimateuseofthe
model. Forexample,masterplansandenergystudies
mightbebasedontheuseofskeletonizednetworks.
Otherapplications,suchaswaterqualitymodelingand
designingflushingprograms,requireamodelthat
includesmorepipes.Thoughthereisnonational
standardforskeletonization,theEPAdraftguidance
issuedformodelingtosupporttheIDSEunderDBPR2
suggestsinclusionof(EPA,2003):
Atleast50percentoftotalpipelengthinthe
distribution system.
Atleast75percentofthepipevolumeinthe
All12-inchdiameterandlargerpipes.
All8-inchandlargerpipesthatconnectpressure
zones,influencezonesfromdifferentsources,
storagefacilities,majordemandareas,pumps,and
controlvalves,orareknownorexpectedtobe
significantconveyorsofwater.
All6-inchandlargerpipesthatconnectremote
areasofadistributionsystemtothemainportion
ofthesystem.
Allstoragefacilitieswithcontrolsorsettings
appliedtogoverntheopen/closedstatusofthe
facilitythatreflectstandardoperations.
Allactivepumpstationswithrealisticcontrolsor
settingsappliedtogoverntheiron/offstatusthat
reflectstandardoperations.
Allactivecontrolvalvesorothersystemfeatures
thatcouldsignificantlyaffecttheflowofwater
throughthedistributionsystem(e.g.,
interconnectionswithothersystems,valving
betweenpressurezones).
AcasestudypresentedinSection7.3.1illustratesthe
useofmodelsinsupportofIDSE.
Mostmodernsoftwarepackagessupportanunlimited
numberofpipes;however,skeletonizationisstill
frequentlyusedinordertoreducethemodelingeffort.A
minimal skeletonization should include all pipes and
featuresofmajorconcern.
modelcorrespondstototalproduction.
InordertouseamodelintheEPSmode,information
ontemporalvariationsinwaterusageovertheperiod
beingmodeledarerequired. Spatiallydifferent
temporalpatternscanbeappliedtotheindividual
networknodes. Thebestavailableinformation
shouldbeusedfordevelopingtemporalpatternsin
ordertomakeEPSmosteffective.Forexample,some
usersmayhavecontinuouswatermeteringdata,while
othersmayuseliteraturevaluesasafirstapproxima-
tionforestimatingresidentialtemporalpatterns.
Temporalpatternsalsovarywithclimate.Forex-
ample,lawnwateringinsummermonthswillcausea
spikeinusageofwaterduringthattimeperiod. In
somecases,informationfromSCADAsystemscanbe
usedtoestimatesystem-widetemporalpatterns.
Atypicalhierarchyforassigningdemandsincludes
the following:
BaselineDemands:Baselinedemandsusually
correspondtoconsumerdemandsand
unaccounted-for-waterassociatedwithaverage
dayconditions.Thisinformationisoften
acquiredfromawaterutilitysexistingrecords,
suchascustomermeterandbillingrecords.
Althoughthespatialassignmentofthese
demandsisextremelyimportantandshould
includetheassignmentofcustomerclassessuch
asindustrial,residential,andcommercialuse,
actualmeteringdatashouldbeusedwhen
available.
SeasonalVariation:Waterusetypicallyvaries
overthecourseoftheyearwithhigherdemands
occurringinwarmermonths. Whendeveloping
asteady-statemodel,thebaseline(averageday)
demandcanbemodifiedbymultipliersinorder
toreflectotherconditionssuchasmaximum
daydemand,peak-hourdemand,andminimum
day demand.
FireDemands:Waterprovidedforfireservices
canbethemostimportantconsiderationin
developingdesignstandardsforwatersystems.
Typically,asystemismodeledcorrespondingto
maximum-useconditions,withneededfire-flow
addedtoasinglenodeatatime.Itisnot
uncommonforarequirementthatmultiple
hydrantsbeflowingsimultaneously.
DiurnalVariation:Allwatersystemsare
unsteady due to continuously varying demands.
Itisimportanttoaccountforthesevariationsin
ordertoachieveanadequatehydraulicmodel.
Diurnalvaryingdemandcurvesshouldbe
developedforeachmajorconsumerclassor
geographiczoneswithinaservicearea. For
example,diurnaldemandcurvesmightbe
developed for industrial establishments,
commercialestablishments,andresidences.
Largeuserssuchasmanufacturingfacilities
mayhaveuniqueusagepatterns.
2-4
Futurewateruse:Fordesignandplanningpurposes,a
watersystemmustbeexaminedunderfutureconditions.
Insituationswhereasystemislargelycurrentlybuilt
out,futuredemandsmaybeestimatedbydeveloping
globalorregionalmultipliersthatareappliedtocurrent
demands.However,innewordevelopingareas,existing
waterusedoesnotprovideausefulbasisforestimating
futuredemands. Alternativeapproachesusepopula-
tion-based projections, socioeconomic modeling, and
land-usemethods(JohnsonandLoux,2004).
Inestimatingfuturedemandsforuseinanetwork
model,themostappropriatemethodisgenerallythe
land-usemethod. Theland-usemethodisbasedon
mappinglandusesandthenapplyingawater-usefactor
toeachland-usecategory.Whenappliedtoexisting
situationsorinhistoricalreconstructionofwater
systems,aerialphotographsaremostcommonlyusedas
thebasemapforidentifyingland-usecategories. For
developmentoffuturedemands,landusemapscanbe
obtainedfromplanners. Theland-usemethodologyis
depictedinFigure2-2.

Figure 2-2. A Flow Chart for Estimating Future Water

Demand Based on Land-Use Methodology.
Land-useunitdemandsorwater-usefactorsaretypically
developedinunitsofgallonsperday(GPD)peracre
fromlocalhistoricalconsumptiondataorfromavailable
regionalinformation. GIStechnologyisfrequently
usedasameansofdevelopingandmanipulatingthe
land-usepolygonsandassigningthecalculatedde-
mandstothemodelnodes.
2.1.3.3 TopographicalInputs
Hydraulicmodelsuseelevationdatatoconvertheads
topressure. Actualpipeelevationsshouldbeusedto
establishthecorrecthydraulicgradeline. Elevations
areassignedtoeachnodeinanetworkwherepressure
informationisrequired.Varioustechniquesareused
to determine elevation information including the
following:
Topographicalmaps:Papertopographicalmaps
producedbytheUnitedStatesGeological
Survey(USGS)orotherlocalagenciesmaybe
usedtomanuallyinterpolateelevationsfor
nodes. Therelativeaccuracydependsuponthe
degreeoftopographyinthearea,thecontour
elevationsonthemap,andthemanualtakeoff
methodsused.
Digitalelevationmodels(DEM):USGSand
other agencies produce digital files containing
topographicalinformation. Whenusedwith
varioussoftwaretools,elevationinformation
canbedirectlyinterpolatedandassignedto
nodesbasedonthecoordinatesofthenodes.
Theaccuracyofthisprocessdependsuponthe
degreeofdetailintheDEM.
GlobalPositioningSystems(GPS)orotherfield
surveymethods:Standardfieldsurveying
techniquesormodernsurveyingmethodsusing
aGPSsatellitecanbeusedtomeasure
elevationsatnodes. ThemodernGPSunitscan
calculateelevationbyusingfourormore
satellites. However,elevationisthemost
difficultcalculationforaGPSunit,and
dependinguponthelocationsurveyed,itmay
bepronetosignificanterror.
2.1.3.4 ModelControlInputs
InordertoapplyanEPSmodel,itisnecessaryto
defineasetofrulesthattellsthemodelhowthewater
systemoperates. Thismaybeassimpleasspecifying
thataparticularpumpoperatesfrom7:00AMto
10:00AMeachday.Alternatively,itmaybeasetof
complexlogicalcontrolsinwhichoperationssuch
aspumpoff/on,pumpspeed,orvalvestatusare
controlledusingBooleanoperators(includingif-
then-elselogic)forfactorssuchastankwaterlevels,
nodepressures,systemdemand,andtimeofday
(GraymanandRossman,1994). Forwatersystems
thatoperateautomaticallybasedonasetofrules,
determinationoftheserulesarequitestraightforward.
Formanualsystems,therulesmustbedeterminedby
interviewswithsystemoperators.
2.1.3.5 ExtendedPeriodSimulation(EPS)
SolutionParameters
Solutiontechniquesusedtoiterativelysolvetheset
ofnon-linearequationstypicallyhavevariousglobal
parametersthatcontrolthesolutiontechnique. These
parametersmaybetime-steplengthsforEPSrunsor
tolerancefactorsthattellthemodelwhenasolutionis
consideredtohaveconverged.Theusermustspecify
2-5
thevaluesforthesolutionparameters,or(asis
frequentlydone)acceptthedefaultvaluesthatare
builtintothesoftwareproducts.Thespecificsolution
parametersvarybetweensolutiontechniquesand
specificsoftwareproducts.
2.1.4GeneralCriteriaforModelSelectionand
Application
Theinitialstepinmodelingistodefinethebasic
scopeandneedsofthemodelingprocessandtoselect
anappropriatesoftwarepackagethatwillsatisfyboth
thespecificneedsofthecurrentprojectandlikely
futureneeds.Factorsthatmayenterintotheselection
ofasoftwarepackageinclude:
technicalfeatures,
training/support and manuals,
userinterface,
integrationwithothersoftware(suchasGIS,
CAD),
compatibilitywithEPANET,
cost,and
responsefromexistingusers.
Asummaryofmajoravailablehydraulic-waterquality
modelingsoftwareisprovidedinSection2.3.2. Once
asuitablemodelhasbeenselected,thefollowing
stepsshouldbefollowedinapplyingnetworkmodels
(ClarkandGrayman,1998):
Developthebasicnetworkmodel.
Calibrateandvalidatethemodel.
Establishclearobjectivesandapplythemodel
inamannertomeettheobjectives.
Analyzeanddisplaytheresults.
2.1.4.1 DevelopingaBasicNetworkModel
Thebasicnetworkmodelinputsshouldbefirst
characterizedusingthetechniquesdescribedin
Section2.1.3. Themodelshouldbedevelopedbased
onaccurate,up-to-dateinformation. Information
shouldbeenteredcarefullyandcheckedfrequently.
Followingtheentryofthedata,aninitialrunofthe
modelshouldbemadetocheckforreasonableness.
2.1.4.2 ModelCalibrationandValidation
Calibrationisanintegralaspectoftheartofmodeling
waterdistributionsystems. Modelcalibrationisthe
processofadjustingmodelinputdata(or,insome
cases,modelstructure)sothatthesimulatedhydraulic
andwaterqualityoutputsufficientlymirrorsobserved
fielddata. Dependingonthedegreeofaccuracy
desired,calibrationcanbedifficult,costly,andtime-
consuming.Theextentanddifficultyofcalibration
areminimizedbydevelopinganaccuratesetofbasic
inputsthatprovideagoodrepresentationofthereal
networkanditscomponents.
Atraditionaltechniqueforcalibrationistheuseof
fire-flowtests. Inafire-flowtest,thesystemis
stressedbyopeninghydrantstoincreaseflowsin
smallpartsofthesystem.Thisresultsinincreased
headlossinpipesinthevicinityofthetest.Pressures
andflowarethenmeasuredinthefield. Model
parameters,suchasroughnessfactors(C),demands,
andvalvepositions,areadjustedsothatthemodel
adequatelyreflectsthefielddata. Anothercommon
calibrationtechniqueistomeasurepredictedtank/
reservoirlevelsderivedfromcomputersimulations
againstactualtanklevelsduringagivenperiodof
record.Forexample,usingwaterlevel,pressure,or
flowdatafromSCADAsystemsorfromon-line
pressureandtank-levelrecorders,modelparameters
(suchasroughness,waterdemands,andpump
controls)canbeadjustedinthesimulationmodel
untilthemodelresultsmatchtheactualtanklevel
andothercontinuousinformationforthedefined
criteria.Theresultingoptimalparametervalues
shouldbecheckedtoensurethatthevaluesare
realistic.Sophisticatedcommercialhydraulicmodels,
suchasthoselistedinSection2.4,mayalsoincorpo-
rateoptimizationcomponentsthataidtheuserin
selectingsystemparametersresultinginthebest
matchbetweenobservedsystemperformanceand
modelresults(Walski,2003).
Modelvalidationisthestepthatfollowscalibration
andusesanindependentfielddatasettoverifythat
themodeliswellcalibrated. Inthevalidationstep,
thecalibratedmodelisrununderconditionsdiffering
fromthoseusedforcalibrationandtheresults
comparedtofielddata.Ifthemodelresultsclosely
approximatethefieldresults(visually)foranappro-
priatetimeperiod,thecalibratedmodelisconsidered
tobevalidated. Significantdeviationsindicatethat
furthercalibrationisrequired. Avarietyofcalibra-
tion and validation techniques suitable to both large
andsmallwaterutilitiesarediscussedinChapter4of
this document.
Anotherrigorousmethodologyforcalibrationandvalida-
tionistheuseoftracers. Concentrationsofnaturally
occurringmaterialsoraddedchemicaltracersmaybe
measuredinthefieldandtheresultsusedtocalibrate
hydraulicandwaterqualitymodels. Thismethodologyis
furtherdescribedinChapter3ofthisdocument.
2.1.4.3 EstablishingObjectivesandModel
Application
Priortoapplyingthemodel,thespecificmodeling
objectivesshouldbeclearlyestablished.Theobjec-
tivesmayincludespecificationofparticularwater
demandandoperationalmodes. Basedonthese
2-6
specifications,aseriesofscenarioscanbedefinedand
themodelappliedappropriately.Somesoftware
productscontainascenariomanagerthathelpsthe
usertodefineandmanagealargenumberofspecific
modelruns.Additionalscenarioscanbedevelopedin
ordertotestthesensitivityofthesystemtovariations
inmodelparametersthatarenotknownwithcertainty.
2.1.4.4 AnalysisandDisplayofResults
Waterdistributionsystemmodelsgeneratealarge
amountofoutput. Theamountofcalculatedinforma-
tionincreaseswithincreasingmodelsizeand,for
EPS,thedurationofthemodelrun.Modernwater
distributionsystemanalysissoftwaretypically
providesarangeofgraphicalandtabulardisplays
thathelptheuserwadethroughthelargeamountof
outputdatasothatitmaybeefficientlyanalyzed.
Figures2-3,2-4,and2-5containexamplesofvarious
graphicalandtabularoutputsgeneratedbythe
EPANETsoftware.Theseoutputsrepresentasmall
subsetoftypesofgraphicsgeneratedbymost
modelingsoftware. Theoutputshouldbeanalyzedto
ensurethatthemodelisoperatingproperlyandto
extracttheinformationrequiredinordertoanalyze
thespecificproblembeingstudied.
2.2 Modeling Water Quality In
Distribution System Networks
Waterqualitymodelsusetheoutputofhydraulic
models in conjunction with additional inputs
(describedlaterinthissection)topredictthetemporal
andspatialdistributionofavarietyofconstituents
withinadistributionsystem.Theseconstituents
include:
Thefractionofwateroriginatingfroma
particularsource.
Theageofwater(e.g.,durationsinceleaving
thesource).
Theconcentrationofanon-reactiveconstituent
ortracercompoundeitheraddedtoorremoved
fromthesystem(e.g.,chlorideorfluoride).
Theconcentrationofareactivecompound
including the concentration of a secondary
disinfectantwithadditionalinputofitslossrate
(e.g.,chlorineorchloramines)andthe
concentration of disinfection by-products with
theirgrowthrate(e.g.,THMs).
Thefollowingsubsectionprovidesabriefhistoryof
waterqualitymodeling,anoverviewoftheoretical
conceptsrelatedtowaterqualitymodeling,basic
modelinputs,andmodelapplication.
2.2.1HistoryofWaterQualityModeling
Theuseofmodelstodeterminethespatialpatternof

Figure 2-3. EPANET Graphical Output Showing

Flow and Pressure.

Figure 2-4. Sample EPANET Time Series Plots of Flow,

Pressure, and Tank Water Level.
2-7
Figure 2-5. EPANET Sample Tabular Outputs
(at time 10.00 hrs).
waterqualityinadistributionsystemresultingfrom
sourcesofdifferingqualitywassuggestedbyWood
(1980b)inastudyofslurryflowinapipenetwork.
Thesteady-statehydraulicmodelwasextendedby
solvingaseriesofsimultaneousequationsateach
node. Inageneralizationofthisformulation,Males
etal.,(1985)usedsimultaneousequationstocalcu-
latethespatialdistributionofvariablesthatcouldbe
Theabilitytomodelthetransportandfateofthewater
constituentsinadistributionsystemcanhelputility
managersperformavarietyofwaterqualitystudies.
Examples include:
Locatingandsizingstoragetanksandmodifying
systemoperationtoreducewaterage.
Modifyingsystemdesignandoperationto
provideadesiredblendofwatersfromdifferent
sources.
Findingthebestcombinationof:i)pipe
replacement,relining,andcleaning;ii)reduction
instorageholdingtime;iii)locationand
injectionrateofboosterstationstomaintain
desired disinfectant levels throughout the
system.
Assessingandminimizingtheriskofconsumer
exposuretodisinfectantby-products.
Assessingsystemvulnerabilitytoincidentsof
external contamination.
Designingacost-efficient,routinemonitoring
programtoidentifywaterqualityvariationsand
potential problems.
associatedwithlinksandnodessuchasconcentra-
tion,traveltimes,costs,andothers. Thismodel,
calledSOLVER,wasacomponentoftheWater
SupplySimulationModel(WSSM),anintegrateddata
basemanagement,modeling,anddisplaysystemthat
wasusedtomodelwaterqualityinnetworks(Clark
andMales,1986). Amoregeneralmarchingout
solutionwasproposedbyMalesetal.,(1988).
Althoughsteady-statewaterqualitymodelsprovided
somegeneralunderstandingofwaterqualitybehavior
indistributionsystems,theneedformodelsthat
wouldrepresentcontaminantdynamicswasrecog-
nized. Thisresultedintheintroductionofthreesuch
dynamicmodelsinthemid-1980s(Clarketal.,1986;
LiouandKroon,1986;andHartetal.,1986).
Thehistoryandproliferationofwaterqualitymodel-
ingindistributionsystemscanbetracedbacktotwo
expertworkshopsthatwereconvenedin1991andin
2003. Theresultsoftheseworkshopsarepresentedin
AWWARF/USEPA(1991)andPowelletal.,(2004).
Figure2-6illustratestheevolutionofhydraulicand
waterqualitymodelssincethe1930s.
2.2.2TheoreticalConceptsforWaterQuality
Modeling
Variouswaterqualityprocessesareoccurringinwater
distributionsystemsthatcanleadtointroductionof
contaminantsandwaterqualitytransformations(see
Figure1-2,presentedearlierinChapter1)aswater
movesthroughthedistributionsystem. Cross
connections,failuresatthetreatmentbarrier,and
2-8

W
a
t
e
r

Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
M
o
d
e
l

H
i
s
t
o
r
y
H
y
d
r
a
u
l
i
c
M
o
d
e
l

H
i
s
t
o
r
y

Integration with GIS, SCADA
2000
optimization techniques
Powerful PC-based models
1990
1980
Water quality models
1970
1960 Advent of computer models
1950
1940
1930
Hardy Cross Method
Figure 2-6. Illustration of the Evolution of Hydraulic
and Water Quality Models.
transformationsinthebulkphasecanalldegrade
waterquality.Corrosion,leachingofpipematerial,
biofilmformation,andscourcanoccuratthepipe
walltodegradewaterquality.Bacteriologicalquality
changesmaycauseaestheticproblemsinvolvingtaste
andodordevelopment,discoloredwater,andother
adverseimpacts.
Inadditiontothebasichydraulicmodelingequations
presentedearlierinthischapter,thewaterquality
modelsutilizevariousmathematicalequationsthat
arebasedonconservationofconstituentmass.These
modelsrepresentthefollowingphenomenaoccurring
inadistributionsystem(Rossmanetal.,2000):
Advectivetransportofmasswithinpipes:A
dissolvedsubstancewilltraveldownthelength
ofapipewiththesameaveragevelocityasthe
carrierfluidwhileatthesametimereacting
(eithergrowingordecaying)atsomegivenrate.
Longitudinal dispersion is not an important
transportmechanisminturbulentflow,whichis
normalinsidetransmissionmainsundermost
operatingconditions.Itmay,however,bean
importantfactorindead-endpipesorinlowand
intermittentflowscenarios.
Mixingofmassatpipejunctions:Allwater
qualitymodelsassumethat,atjunctions
receivinginflowfromtwoormorepipes,the
mixingoffluidiscompleteandinstantaneous.
Thus,theconcentrationofasubstanceinwater
leavingthejunctionissimplytheflow-
weightedsumoftheconcentrationsinthe
inflowing pipes.
Mixingofmasswithinstoragetanks:Most
waterqualitymodelsassumethatthecontents
ofstoragetanksarecompletelymixed.Seethe
discussioninSection2.4.1forfurtherdetails
and alternative representations.
Reactionswithinpipesandstoragetanks:
Whileasubstancemovesdownapipeorresides
instorage,itcanundergoreaction.Therateof
reaction,measuredinmassreactedpervolume
ofwaterperunitoftime,willdependonthe
typeofwaterqualityconstituentbeing
modeled.Someconstituents,suchasfluoride,
donotreactandaretermedconservative.
Otherconstituents,suchaschlorineresidual,
decaywithtime;whilethegenerationofDBPs,
suchasTHMs,mayincreaseovertime.Some
constituents,suchaschlorine,willreactwith
materialsbothinthebulkliquidphaseandat
the liquid-pipe wall boundary.
Waterqualitymodelsrepresentthesephenomena
(transportwithinpipes,mixingatjunctionsand
storagetanks,andreactionkineticsinthebulkliquid
phaseandattheliquid-pipewallboundary)withaset
ofmathematicalequations.Theseequationsarethen
solvedunderanappropriatesetofboundaryand
initialconditionstopredictthevariationofwater
quality throughout the distribution system.
Severalsolutionmethodsareavailablefordynamic
waterqualitymodels(RossmanandBoulos,1996).
Allofthesemethodsrequirethatahydraulicanalysis
berunfirsttodeterminehowflowquantitiesand
directionschangefromonetimeperiodtoanother
throughoutthepipenetwork.Thewaterquality
constituent is subsequently routed through each pipe
linkandthenmixedatdownstreamnodeswithother
inflowsintothenode. Fornon-conservativesub-
stances, concentrations are continuously adjusted to
accommodatethedecayorgrowthoftheconstituent
withtime. Thisconcentrationisthenreleasedfrom
thenodeintoitsout-flowingpipes. Thisprocess
continuesforallpipesandforthedurationofthe
simulation.
Themethodsdescribedabovearealsoappliedwhen
modelingwaterageandsource-tracinginwater
qualitymodels. Waterageisequivalenttomodeling
areactiveconstituentthatagesandcombineslinearly.
Forexample,foreveryhourthatapacketofwater
spendsinatank,itsagewillincreasebyonehour.
Additionally,combiningavolumeofwaterthatis
fourdaysoldwithasimilarvolumeofwaterthatis
eightdaysoldwillresultinanaverageageofsix
days. Whenmodelingthefractionofwatercoming
fromadesignatedsource(sourcetracing),this
parameterismodeledasaconservativesubstanceand
islinearlycombined. Forexample,combininga
volumeofwaterthatisentirelyfromthedesignated
sourcewithasimilarvolumeofwaterfromadifferent
2-9
Q C
ki kj@x=L
C
ij@x=0
=
k
(Equation2-6)
Q
kj
k
where
C
ij@x=0
= theconcentrationat thestartofthelink
connectingnodeitonodejinmg/L(i.e.,wherex=0)
C
kj@x=L
= theconcentrationat theendof a link,in mg/L
Q
kj
= flowfrom ktoi
Modelingthemovementofacontaminantwithinthe
distributionsystemsasitmovesthroughthesystem
fromvariouspointsofentry(e.g.,wellsortreatment
plants)towaterusersisbasedonthreeprinciples:
Conservationofmasswithindifferentiallengths
ofpipe.
Completeandinstantaneousmixingofthewater
entering pipe junctions.
Appropriatekineticexpressionsforthegrowthor
decayofthesubstanceasitflowsthroughpipes
andstoragefacilities.
Thischangeinconcentrationcanbeexpressedbythe
following differential equation:
AccordingtoEquation2-5,therateatwhichthemassof
materialchangeswithinasmallsectionofpipeequals
thedifferenceinmassflowintoandoutofthesection
plustherateofreactionwithinthesection. Itisas-
sumedthatthevelocitiesinthelinksareknown
beforehandfromthesolutiontoahydraulicmodelof
thenetwork. InordertosolveEquation2-5,oneneeds
toknowC
ij
atx=0foralltimes(aboundarycondition)
andavaluefork
ij
.
Equation2-6representstheconcentrationofmaterial
leaving the junction and entering a pipe:
Equation2-6statesthattheconcentrationleavinga
junctionequalsthetotalmassofasubstanceflowing
intothejunctiondividedbythetotalflowintothe
junction.
sourcewillprovideamixedvolumecalculatedas50
percentfromthedesignatedsource.
2.2.3WaterQualityModelInputsand
Application
Inadditiontothebasichydraulicmodelinputs
describedinSection2.1.3,thewaterqualitymodels
requirethefollowingdataelementstosimulatethe
behaviorinadistributionsystem:
WaterQualityBoundaryConditions-Awater
qualitymodelrequiresthequalityofall
externalinflowstothenetworkandthewater
qualitythroughoutthenetworkbespecifiedat
thestartofthesimulation.Dataonexternal
inflowscanbeobtainedfromexistingsource
monitoringrecordswhensimulatingexisting
operationsorcouldbesettodesiredvaluesto
investigateoperationalchanges.Initialwater
qualityvaluescanbeestimatedbasedonfield
data.Alternatively,bestestimatescanbemade
forinitialconditions.Thenthemodelisrunfor
asufficientlylongperiodoftimeundera
repeatingpatternofsourceanddemandinputs
so that the initial conditions, especially in
storagetanks,donotinfluencethewaterquality
predictionsinthedistributionsystem.The
waterageandsourcetracingoptionsonly
requireinputfromthehydraulicmodel.
ReactionRateDataFornon-conservative
substances,informationisneededonhowthe
constituentsdecayorgrowovertime.
Modelingthefateofaresidualdisinfectantis
oneofthemostcommonapplicationsof
networkwaterqualitymodels.Thetwomost
frequently used disinfectants in distribution
systemsarechlorineandchloramines(areactant
ofchlorineandammonia). Freechlorineis
morereactivethanchloramineanditsreaction
kinetics have been studied more extensively.
Studieshaveshownthattherearetwoseparate
reactionmechanismsforchlorinedecay,one
involving reactions within the bulk fluid and
anotherinvolvingreactionswithmaterialonor
releasedfromthepipewall(Vasconcelosetal.,
1997). Bulkdecayistypicallyrepresentedasa
firstorderexponentialdecayfunctionwitha
singledecaycoefficientspecifiedtorepresent
thedecayovertime.Insomecircumstances,this
functiondoesnotadequatelyrepresentthe
observeddecaycharacteristics,andmore
complexformulationsmaybeusedtodescribe
thedecay. Wallreactionrepresentsthe
disinfectantdecayduetocontactwith
oxidizeablesubstancesatthepipewall,suchas
corrosionproductsorbiofilm.Themostwidely
usedapproachforrepresentingwalldemand
considerstwointeractingprocessestransport
2-10
Storagetanksareusuallymodeledascompletely
mixed,variablevolumereactorsinwhichthechanges
involumeandconcentrationovertimeareasfollows:
Manyalgorithmsandmethodsexistforthenumerical
solutionoffluidflowsdescribedbytheNavier-Stokes
equations.Thesealgorithmscanbeclassifiedas
EulerianorLagrangianandaseithertime-drivenor
event-driven.InaEulerianmethod,themovementof
thefluidisviewedfromastationarygridasthewater
movesthroughthesystem.Onthecontrary,ina
Lagrangianmethod,theanalysisisviewedfroma
frameworkthatismovingwiththeflow.Time-driven
methodsassessthesystematfixedtimesteps. Event-
drivenmethodsevaluatethesystemonlywhenthereis
adiscretechangeinwaterqualitysuchasapulseof
waterwithdifferentconcentrationsenteringorleaving
apipe. VariousmethodologiescombineeitherEulerian
orLagrangiansolutions(orhybridcombinationsof
thesetwocases)witheithertime-drivenorevent-driven
procedures.
ofthedisinfectantfromthebulkflowtothe
wallandinteractionwiththewall(Rossmanet
al.,1994). Recentstudieshavesuggestedthat
thisformulationmaynotadequatelyrepresent
theactualwalldemandprocessesandthat
furtherresearchisneeded(Clarketal.,2005;
Graymanetal.,2002;DiGianoandZhang,
2004). Therehasbeenlittlestudyonthenature
ofthewallreactioninchloraminatedsystems.
Alimitedamountofmodelingofthegrowthof
DBPs(mostnotablyTHMs)hasbeenperformed
assuminganexponentialgrowthapproachinga
maximumvaluecorrespondingtotheTHM
formationpotential. Boththeformation
potentialandthegrowthrateconstantmustbe
specifiedinthistypeofmodel(Clarketal.,
1996). Therehasbeenextensiveresearchon
biofilmformationindistributionsystemsand
thishasledtothedevelopmentofseveral
theoreticalmodelsofthisphenomenon(Powell
etal.,2004).However,thesemodelsare
generally quite complex involving many
parametersthataredifficulttodetermine,and
thusarenotreadyforinclusioninageneral
waterdistributionsystemmodel.
Thefollowingsectionprovidesanoverviewof
availablesoftwareforhydraulicandwaterquality
modeling.
Distributionsystemwaterqualitymodelsaregenerally
limitedtotrackingthedynamicsofasinglecomponent
(e.g.,chlorine,waterage)atatimewhentheselected
componentistransportedthroughoutthenetworkof
pipesandstoragetanks. Suchmodelsdonotconsider
interactionsbetweendifferentcomponentsinthe
flowingwaterorcomplexreactionsbetweencompo-
nentsthataretransportedwiththewaterandsurface
componentsthatarefixedtothepipewall.Thiscanbea
significantlimitationwhenmodelingreactivecompo-
nents,forexamplewhenchlorineresidualismodeledfor
acasewheretherearemultiplesourceswithsignificant
differencesinwaterqualitycharacteristics. Another
morecomplexexamplethatisnotadequatelyrepre-
sentedbythesingle-speciesmodelismodelingofDBP
formation. Asolutiontothisdeficiencyisageneral-
purpose,multi-speciescapabilitythatisbeingaddedto
EPANET(Uberetal.,2004).Thisadditionwillallow
userstoprogramtheirownchemical/physical/biological
reactionsinEPANETwithalmostunlimitedinteraction
capability between multiple species.
2.3 Hydraulic and Water Quality
Modeling Software
Avarietyofsoftwarepackagesareavailableto
performhydraulicandwaterqualitymodeling.A
majorityofthesepackagesutilizetheEPANET
formulationasthebasiccomputationengine. Afull
discussionofindividualsoftwarepackagesisbeyond
thescopeofthisdocument. Thefollowingsubsec-
tionsbrieflydescribetheEPANETmodeland
summarizethefeaturesofotheravailablesoftware.
2.3.1EPANETSoftware
EPANETwasinitiallydevelopedin1993asa
distributionsystemhydraulic-waterqualitymodelto
supportresearcheffortsatEPA(Rossmanetal.,1994).
ThedevelopmentoftheEPANETsoftwarehasalso
satisfiedtheneedforacomprehensivepublic-sector
modelandhasservedasthehydraulicandwater
qualityengineformanycommercialmodels.
2-11
EPANETcanbeusedforbothsteady-stateandEPS
hydraulicsimulations. Inaddition,itisdesignedto
bearesearchtoolformodelingthemovementandfate
ofdrinkingwaterconstituentswithindistribution
systems. EPANETcanbeoperatedintheSI(metric)
orBritishsystemsofmeasurement.
ThewaterqualityroutinesinEPANETcanbeusedto
modelconcentrationsofreactiveandconservative
substances,changesinageofwaterandtraveltimeto
anode,andthepercentageofwaterreachinganynode
fromanyothernode.OutputsfromEPANETinclude:
color-codednetworkmaps,
timeseriesplots,and
tabularreports.
ExampleoutputsfromEPANETwerepreviously
presentedinFigures2-3,2-4,and2-5.
2.3.2CommercialHydraulic-WaterQuality
ModelingSoftware
InadditiontoEPANET,thereareseveralcommercial
softwarepackagesthatarewidelyusedintheU.S.and
internationally.Mostofthesepackagesarebasedon
theEPANETformulationandincludevalue-added
componentsaspartsofGUIthatincreasethecapabil-
ityofthesoftware. Examplesofsuchvalue-added
componentsthatarepartofoneormoreofthe
commerciallyavailablesoftwarepackagesinclude:
Scenariomanager:Manageinputsandoutputs
ofagroupofmodelruns.
Calibration optimization: Utilize genetic
algorithm optimization technique to determine
modelparametersthatbestfitasetoffielddata.
Design optimization: Utilize genetic algorithm
optimizationtechniquestoselectpipesizesthat
minimizecostsorotherselectedobjectives.
IntegrationwithGISorCAD:Waterdistribution
modeldirectlyintegrateswithGISorCADto
assistinconstructingorupdatingmodeland
InadditiontothestandarduseofEPANETina
Windowsenvironmentusingthegraphicaluser
interface(GUI),thefunctionalityofEPANETcanbe
accessedthroughtheEPANETtoolkit.Thetoolkitisa
seriesofopensourceroutinesavailableinbothVisual
BasicandC(programminglanguage)thatcanbeused
asisormodifiedandaccessedfromausersown
computerprogram. Thispowerfulcapabilityhasbeen
widelyusedthroughouttheworldtosupportboth
researchandspecificapplicationsinthefieldofwater
distribution system analysis.
displayresults.
Flexible output graphics: Provides convenient
waystomodifyparametersforgraphical
displaysofoutputdata.
Energymanagement:Calculatesenergyusefor
aselectedalternative.
Automatedfire-flowanalysis:Assessesthe
availabilityoffireflowatarangeofnodesand
determineswhetherasystemmeetsfire-flow
requirements.
Watersecurityandvulnerabilityassessment
methods, skeletonization, and demand
allocation tools.
Table2-1providesasummarylistingofmajor
commercialsoftwareandaWeblinkwhereadditional
detailsmaybeobtainedonspecificfeaturesand
current version availability/pricing.
2.4 Additional Modeling Tools
Inadditiontostandardhydraulicandwaterquality
modelingofdistributionsystems,thereareseveral
otherrelatedtypesofmodelsthatcanbeusedto
assesshydraulicandwaterqualitybehaviorin
distributionsystems.Theseinclude:storagemodeling
tools,transient(waterhammer)modelingtools,
optimizationtools,andprobabilisticmodels. Eachof
thesetypesofmodelsarebrieflydescribedand
demonstratedinthefollowingsections.
2.4.1StorageModelingTools
Animportantaspectofwaterqualityandcontaminant
propagationindrinkingwaterdistributionsystemsis
theeffectofsystemstorage. Mostutilitiesusesome
typeofgroundorelevatedstoragesystemtoprocess
waterduringtimeperiodswhentreatmentfacilities
wouldotherwisebeidle. Itisthenpossibleto
distributeandstorewateratoneormorelocationsin
theserviceareaclosesttotheuser.
Theprincipaladvantageofdistributionstorageisthat
itequalizesdemandsonsupplysources,production
works,andtransmissionanddistributionmains.Asa
result,thesizesorcapacitiesoftheseelementsmaybe
minimizedandpeakpowertariffperiodsforpumping
canoftenbeavoided.Additionally,systemflowsand
pressuresareimprovedandstabilizedtobetterserve
thecustomersthroughouttheservicearea.Finally,
reservesuppliesareprovidedinthedistribution
systemforemergencies,suchasfirefightingand
poweroutages.
Inmostmunicipalwatersystems,lessthan25percent
ofthevolumeofthestorageintanksisactivelyused
(onadailybasis)underroutineconditions.Asthe
2-12

Table 2-1. Available Hydraulic and Water Quality Network Modeling Software Packages
NetworkModelingSoftware Company
EPANET
Based
Website
AQUIS Seven Technologies www.7t.dk/aquis
EPANET EPA X www.epa.gov/ord/nrmrl/wswrd/epanet.html
InfoWater H2ONET/H2OMAP MWHSoft X www.mwhsoft.com
InfoWorks WS Wallingford Software www.wallingfordsoftware.com
MikeNet DHI, Boss International X www.dhisoftware.com/mikenet
Pipe2000 University of Kentucky www.kypipe.com
PipelineNet SAIC, TSWG X www.tswg.gov/tswg/ip/pipelinenettb.htm
SynerGEE Water Advantica www.advantica.biz
WaterCAD/WaterGEMS Haestad Methods X www.haestad.com
STANET Fisher-Uhrig Engineering www.stanet.net
Wadiso GLS Eng. Software X www.wadiso.com
waterleveldrops,tankcontrolsrequirehigh-service
pumpstostartinordertosatisfydemandandrefilling
ofthetanks.Theremainingwaterinthetanks(70to
75percent)isnormallyheldinreserveasdedicated
fireoremergencystorage.Thiswatertendstobe
stagnantandmaycausewaterqualityproblems.
Storagetanksandreservoirsarethemostvisible
componentsofawaterdistributionsystem,butare
oftentheleastunderstoodintermsoftheireffecton
waterquality.Althoughthesefacilitiescanplaya
majorroleinprovidinghydraulicreliabilityforfire
fightingneedsandinprovidingreliableservice,they
mayalsoserveasvesselsforunwantedcomplex
chemicalandbiologicalchangesthatmayresultin
thedeteriorationofwaterquality.Thesestoragetanks
andreservoirsalsocontributetoincreasedresidence
timeindrinkingwatersystems. Thisincreased
residencetimecancontributetothelossofdisinfec-
tantresidualsandcausesubsequentgrowthof
microorganisms. Modelingcanprovideinformation
onwhatwillhappeninexisting,modifiedorproposed
distributionsystemtanksandreservoirsunderarange
ofoperatingsituations(Graymanetal.,2004a).
Threeprimarytypesofmodelsareusedforrepresent-
ingstoragetanksandreservoirs:computationalfluid
dynamics(CFD)models,compartmentmodels,and
physicalscalemodels. Inmathematicalmodels,
equationsarewrittentosimulatethebehaviorof
waterinatankorreservoir.Thesemodelsrangefrom
detailedrepresentationsofthehydraulicmixing
phenomenainthefacilitycalledCFDmodelsto
simplifiedconceptualrepresentationsofthemixing
behaviorcalledcompartmentorsystemsmodels.
Physicalscalemodelsareconstructedfrommaterials
suchaswoodorplastic. Dyesorchemicalsareused
totracethemovementofwaterthroughthemodel.
2.4.1.1 CFDModels
CFDmodelsusemathematicalequationstosimulate
flowpatterns,heattransfer,andchemicalreactions.
Partialdifferentialequationsrepresentingconserva-
tionofmass,momentum,andenergyaresolved
numericallyforatwo-orthree-dimensionalgridthat
approximatesthegeometryofthetank. CFDmodel-
inghasbeenusedwidelyinthechemical,nuclear,and
mechanicalengineeringfields,andinrecentyearshas
emergedasamodelingtoolinthedrinkingwater
industry(GraymanandArnold,2003).CFDmodels
canbeusedtosimulatetemperaturevariations,
unsteadyhydraulicandwaterqualityconditions,and
decayofconstituentsinstoragefacilities. Signifi-
cantexperienceisrequiredtoapplyCFDmodels,and
modelruntimesofmanyhours,days,orevenweeks
arerequiredforcomplexsituations.Figure2-7depicts
agraphicaloutputfromaCFDmodelshowingthe
concentrationthroughoutatankatasnapshotintime
resultingfromatracerthathasbeeninjectedintothe
inflow.
ManygeneralizedCFDsoftwarepackagesare
availablethatcanbeusedtoconstructCFDmodelsof
tanks. ExamplesofsuchpackagesarelistedinTable
2-2.Thesepackagesvaryintermsofcapabilities,
solutionmethods,easeofuse,andsupport. Priorto
selectionofapackage,thespecificneedsand
capabilitiesoftheusershouldbecarefullyevaluated.
2-13

Figure 2-7. Graphical Output from a CFD Model
Showing Tracer Concentration in a Tank.
Generallythepurchaseorleaseofthesepackagesis
significant(typicallyontheorderof$25,000per
year)andsignificanttraining/expertiseisrequiredto
effectivelyapplythem.
2.4.1.2 CompartmentModels
Compartmentmodelsareaclassofmodelsinwhich
physicalprocesses(i.e.,themixingphenomenainthe
tankorreservoir)arerepresentedbyhighlyconcep-
tual,empiricalrelationships. Thistypeofmodelis
alsoreferredtoasablackboxmodel,orinput-output
model. Sincesuchmodelsdonotusedetailed
mathematicalequationstodescribethemovementof
waterwithinthetank,theyrelyonengineering
judgmentoruponfielddataandpastexperienceto
definetheparametersthatcontrolthebehaviorofthe
model. Compartmentmodelsareusedinwater
distributionnetworkmodelstorepresentmixingin
tanksandreservoirs.Variousassumptionscanbe
madeinthesemodelsaboutthemixingbehaviorin
tanks including complete and instantaneous mixing,
plugflow,last-in/first-out(LIFO)behavior,andmulti-
Table 2-2. Example CFD Modeling Software Packages
compartmentmodels. Bothconservativesubstances
andsubstancesthatdecayaccordingtoafirst-order
decayfunctionmaybesimulatedinadditionto
simulationofwaterage. Compartmentmodelsare
relativelyeasytouseandruninsecondsasopposed
tothelongruntimesofCFDmodels.
Compartmentmodelsoftanksareavailableaspartof
mostwaterdistributionsystemmodels. EPANETand
severalofitsderivativecommercialmodelsallowthe
usertoselectfromfouroptionsacompletemix
model,aplugflowfirst-in/first-out(FIFO)model,a
LIFO(shortcircuiting)modelandatwo-compartment
model. Astand-alonemodelcalledCompTank
providesawiderangeofalternativesandallowsthe
usertomodelwaterageandreactiveorconservative
substancesoveralongperiodoftime(Graymanetal.,
2000). Thismodelusestankinflowandoutflow
informationthatisgenerallyavailablefromSCADA
recordsasitsprimaryinput.
2.4.1.3 PhysicalScaleModels
Physicalscalemodelsprovidearelativelyinexpen-
sivemechanismforstudyingthemixingcharacteris-
ticsoftanks. Inaphysicalscalemodel,atracer
chemicalisaddedtotheinflow(orinternallywithin
themodel)andthemovementofthetracerismoni-
toredduringtheexperiment(Graymanetal.,2000).
Tracersubstancesincludevisibledyes,whichare
appropriate for developing a qualitative understand-
ingofmixingbehavior,andchemicals(e.g.,calcium
chloride)thatcanbemeasuredbysensorsinthetanks
andusedforquantitativeassessments. Useoftracers
ofdifferentdensityorcarefulcontroloftemperature
ofthetracercanbeusedtostudytheimpactsof
thermalvariationsonmixing. Lawsofsimilitudein
hydraulicsmustbefollowedinordertoaccountfor
thescalingeffects. Scalemodelscanvaryinsizeand
complexityfromsmalltabletopmodelstolarge-scale
modelsbuiltinhydraulicslaboratories. Figure2-8
depictssuchalarge-scalemodel.
CFDPackage Company Website
CFD-ACE CFD Research Corp. www.cfdrc.com
Cfdesign Blue Ridge Numerics www.brni.com
CFX Ansys, Inc. www.software.aeat.com/cfx
-3D FLOW Flow Science, Inc. www.flow3d.com
Fluent Fluent, Inc. www.fluent.com
Phoenics CHAM www.cham.co.uk
SWIFT AVL www.avl.com
Sinda/Fluint C&R Technologies www.crtech.com
PAB3D Analytical Services &
Materials
www.asm-usa.com
Figure 2-8. A Large Physical Model of a Tank (Source:
Bureau of Reclamation Laboratory).
2-14
Inanadvancedtechnologyformofphysicalscale
modeling,three-dimensionallaserinducedfluores-
cenceisbeingusedtoprovidedetailedmeasurements
ofmixingintanks(RobertsandTian,2002). Figure2-
9showsanillustrationofoutputfromthistechnology.
2.4.2TransientAnalysisSoftware
Ahydraulictransientisarapidchangeinpressure
associatedwithapressurewavethatmovesrapidly
throughapipingsystem.Atransientcanbecaused
byavarietyofevents,suchasrapidoperationofa
valve(includingfirehydrants)orrapidpumpstarts
andstops. Ifthemagnitudeoftheresulting
pressurewaveislargeenoughandadequate
transientcontrolmeasuresarenotinplace,a
transientcancauseawaterhammerleadingto
failureofhydrauliccomponents. Itcanalsoleadto
instantaneouslowornegativepressuresthatcan
resultinintrusionofuntreatedwaterintothepipe,
potentially resulting in contamination. Transient
events are highly dynamic and sophisticated.
Mathematicalmodelsarerequiredtoanalyzetheir
movementinadistributionsystem.
Severalcommercialsoftwarepackagesforperforming
transientanalysisinwaterdistributionsystemsare
available. Examplesofsuchsoftwarearelistedin
Table2-3.Thetechnicalcapabilities,userinterface,
solution methods, graphical display, and technical
supportandtrainingvaryconsiderablyamongthe
packages.
2.4.3OptimizationTools
Optimizationtoolsallowtheusertoevaluatealarge
numberofoptionsandtoselectthespecificalterna-
tivethatgivesthebestresultsintermsofpredefined
objectivefunctions. Intheareaofwaterdistribution
systemanalysis,optimizationmodelsareusedfor
calibration,design,andoperationalpurposes. These
applicationsarebrieflydescribedinthefollowing
subsections.
2.4.3.1 OptimizingCalibration
Calibrationofawaterdistributionsystemmodel
involvesadjustmentsinvariousmodelparametersso
thatthemodelagreeswithfieldmeasurementsofflow
andpressure.Suchatoolisusedmostfrequentlywith
flowandpressuremeasurementstakenduringflow
(hydrant)teststostressthesystem. Parametersthat
aretypicallyadjustedincluderoughnessfactors,
demands,andstatusofisolationvalves.
Figure 2-9. Graphical Output Based on 3-D Laser Induced Fluorescence with a Physical Scale Model Showing
Mixing in Tank (Source: Georgia Tech).
Table 2-3. Example Transient Modeling Software Packages
TransientModelingSoftware Company Website
AQUIS Surge Seven Technologies www.7t.dk/aquis
HAMMER Haestad Methods www.haestad.com
Hytran v3.0 Hytran Solutions www.hytran.net
Impulse Applied Flow Technology www.aft.com/products/impulse
InfoSurge, H2OSurge MWHSoft www.mwhsoft.com
2-15
Theproductionoftransientlow-andnegative-
pressuresinotherwisepressurizeddrinkingwater
supply distribution systems creates the opportunity
forcontaminatedwatertoenterthepipefrom
outside. Sucheventsmaybecausedbythesudden
shutdownofpumpsorbyotheroperationalevents
suchasflushing,hydrantuse,andmainbreaks.
Figure2-10illustratesaneventthatresultsina
negativepressuretransientfor22secondscaused
byapoweroutageassociatedwithalightning
strike.
Inaseriesofresearchprojects(LeChevallieretal.,
2003;Gullicketal.,2004),thefrequencyand
locationoflow-andnegative-pressuresinrepresen-
tativedistributionsystemsweremeasuredunder
normal operating conditions and during specific
operational events. These investigators also
confirmedthatfecalindicatorsandculturable
humanviruseswerepresentinthesoilandwater
exteriortothedistributionsystempipes. Their
researchshowsthatawell-calibratedhydraulic
surgemodelcanbeusedtosimulatetheoccurrence
ofpressuretransientsunderavarietyofoperational
scenarios,andamodelcanalsobeusedtodeter-
mineoptimalmitigationmeasures.
Althoughthereareinsufficientdatatoindicate
whetherpressuretransientsposeasubstantialrisk
towaterqualityinthedistributionsystem,mitiga-
tiontechniquescanbeimplemented. These
techniquesincludethemaintenanceofaneffective
disinfectant residual throughout the distribution
system,leakcontrol,redesignofairreliefventing,
installationofhydro-pneumatictanks,andmore
rigorous application of existing engineering
standards.
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
p
s
i
)
negative 4.4 psi
( 2.0 psi)
for 20 seconds
Figure 2-10. Negative Pressure Transient Associated
with a Power Outage.
Useofmanualadjustmenttechniquesmayinvolve
manytediousrunsofadistributionsystemmodel
untiltheresultingpredictedflowsandpressures
approximatethevaluesobservedinthefield. When
anoptimizationmodelisapplied,theuserdefinesan
objectivefunction,suchasminimizingthesquareof
thedifferencebetweenobservedandpredictedvalues
(forpressureandflow). Theoptimizationalgorithm
thenusessometypeofcontrolledsearchmethodto
identifythesetofmodelparametersthatwillresultin
thebestresults(i.e.,minimizetheerror). Theuserwill
generallysetconstraintsonparameterssothatthe
resultingvaluesarereasonable. Forexample,theuser
mayspecifythattheallowablerangefortherough-
nessfactorforacertainsetofductileironpipesrange
between90and120.
Overthepast40years,varioustechniqueshavebeen
appliedaspartofautomatedcalibrationmethods
(Rahaletal.,1980;Walskietal.,2003).Themost
common optimization technique in use today couples
ahydraulicmodelwithanoptimizationroutineusing
geneticalgorithms.Geneticalgorithmsarebasedon
thetheoryofgeneticsinwhichsuccessivepopulation
trialsaregeneratedwiththefittestonessurviving
tobreedandevolveintoincreasinglydesirable
offspringsolutions. Thefitnessofasolutionisbased
ontheobjectivefunctionsthatwerepreviously
described. Geneticalgorithm-basedcalibrationtools
areavailableasoptionalcomponentsofseveralwater
distributionsystemanalysissoftwarepackages.
2.4.3.2 DesignOptimization
Inamanneranalogoustothecalibrationoptimization
technique described above, design optimization
techniquesevaluatealargenumberofdistribution
systemdesignoptionsandselecttheonethat
providesthebestsolution(Lansey,2000).Schaake
andLai(1969)firstproposedsuchanapproachand
appliedittothedesignofmajortransmissionlines
providingwatertoNewYorkCity.Sincethattime,
numerouspapershavebeenwrittenonthesubject
(Walskietal.,2003)andhaveincludedavarietyof
techniquessuchaslinearprogramming,dynamic
programming,mixedintegerprogramming,heuristic
algorithms,gradientsearchmethods,enumeration
methods,geneticalgorithms,andsimulatedanneal-
ing. Inrecentyears,geneticalgorithmmethodshave
beenfavoredforthisproblemandhavebeenwidely
usedinavarietyofsituationsandareincludedin
severalcommercialsoftwarepackages. Theuser
should,however,beawarethatgeneticalgorithmsdo
notguaranteeoptimality.Thesealgorithmsmustbe
runseveraltimestoensurenearoptimalsolutions.
Typically,designoptimizationtoolslimitauserto
choosefromdesignatedpipingoptionsandtosize
thepipestomeetpresentandfuturedemands. Cost
minimizationisthemostcommonobjectivefunction.
2-16
Additionally,someresearchershaveincorporated
reliabilityandcapacityconsiderations(Mays,1989).
2.4.3.3 OptimizationofOperation
Modelscanalsobeusedtooptimizeoperationsofa
distributionsystem(Goldmanetal.,2000). Themost
commonareasofoperationwheresuchmodelshave
beenappliedareinenergymanagementandwater
quality.Chaseetal.(1994)describeacomputer
programtocontrolenergycoststhatincorporatesa
hydraulicmodel,apumpoptimizationprogram,and
aninterface. Inthewaterqualityarea,Uberetal.
(2003)usedoptimizationtechniquestodetermine
optimallocationandoperationofchlorinebooster
stations. Jentgenetal.(2003)implementedaproto-
typeenergyandwaterqualitymanagementsystemat
ColoradoSpringsUtilities.Thissystemcombinesa
simplifieddistributionsystemmodelandanoptimi-
zationroutinetoadjustoperationofthewatersystem
andpowergenerationsysteminnearreal-time.
2.4.4ProbabilisticModels
Hydraulicandwaterqualitymodelsofdistribution
systemsaredeterministicmodels. Forasetofnetwork
parametersandspecificoperationsanddemands,the
modelproducesasinglesetofresultingflowsand
pressures. However,thereisuncertaintyinmanyof
theaspectsofthesemodelsincludingparameterssuch
asroughness,demands,actualinsidediameterof
pipes,valvesettings,andsystemcontrols. This
uncertaintyisgenerallyduetobothimperfect
knowledgeandnaturalvariability.Anemerging
procedureistoembedadeterministicnetworkmodel
withinaprobabilisticframeworkandtoexaminethe
effectofuncertaintyontheresults.
Themostcommonapproachtoincorporatinguncer-
taintyinmodelsistheuseofaMonteCarlosimula-
tion(Vose,2000).Inthismethod,probability
distributionsareassignedtomodelparametersto
representtheuncertaintyassociatedwitheach
parameter.Thedistributionsystemmodelisthenrun
manytimeswithparametervaluesbeingrandomly
drawnfromtheprobabilitydistributions. Theresults
ofmanyiterationsarecombinedtodeterminethe
mostlikelyresultandadistributionofresults. This
approachhasbeenusedinlegalcaseswherehistorical
contamination events have been reconstructed
(Graymanetal.,2004b),inevaluationoftheimpacts
ofpurposefulcontamination(Murrayetal.,2004)and
modelingbacterialregrowthindistributionsystems
(DiGianoandZhang,2004).
2.5 Summary and Conclusions
Acquiringandutilizingtheproperdataisvery
importantforimplementingwaterdistributionsystem
models. Thekeyinputsincludethecharacterization
ofthepipenetwork(e.g.,pipes,pumps,tanks,and
valves),water-demandinformation(temporalvaria-
tionsarerequiredinEPS),topographicinformation
(elevationsassignedtonodes),controlinformation
thatdescribeshowthesystemisoperated,andEPS
solutionparameters(e.g.,timesteps,tolerancesas
requiredbythesolutiontechniques). Periodic
calibrationandvalidationofamodelisimportantto
achieveoptimumresults.
Modelshavebecomewidelyacceptedwithinthe
waterutilityindustryasamechanismtosimulatethe
hydraulicandwaterqualitybehaviorofarealor
proposeddistributionsystem. Theyareroutinely
usedforanumberoftasksincludingcapitalinvest-
mentdecisions,masterplandevelopment,andfire
protectioncapacitydesign. Furthermore,these
modelshavebecomeverysophisticatedandtypically
simulatebothhydraulicandwaterqualitybehavior.
ManymodelingpackagesareintegratedwithGISor
CAD. Somesoftwarepackagesincorporatewater
hammersandtankmixing. EPANETisapublicsector
hydraulic/waterqualitymodeldevelopedbyEPA.
EPANETalsoservesasthecomputationenginefor
manyofthecommercialmodelsusedbywater
utilitiesthroughoutthecountry.Inadditionto
EPANETandEPANET-basedwaterdistribution
systemmodels,thereareseveralothertoolsavailable
tousersforstudyingspecificneeds,suchastransient
analysis and optimization analysis.
Tosuccessfullyapplyamodeltostudyaproblem,one
shouldclearlydefinetheobjectivesandselectan
appropriatetool. Thereafter,understandingthe
accuracyoftheinputdataandlimitationsofthe
modelwillenabletheusertobetterinterpretthe
resultsoftheanalysisanddevelopappropriate
solutions.
2-17

Manyoftheassumptionsandmethodologiesinuse
todayinwaterdistributionsystemmodelingdate
backtotheearlyworkofHardyCross(1936).With
themonumentalincreaseincomputationalpower
andimprovementsintheabilitytomeasureflowin
experimentaldistributionsystems,itisnaturalthat
someofthebasicassumptionsarebeingexamined
andchallenged. Threenotableexamplesofactive
researchareasincludethefollowing:
Distributionsystemwaterqualitymodels
currentlyassumeadvectiveflowthatresults
inwaterqualitypulsesmovingthrougha
pipe without spreading out longitudinally.
LeeandBuchberger(2001)havestudied
pipeflowandfoundthatdispersionhasa
significanteffectonconcentrationprofiles,
especiallyincasesofintermittentlaminar
flow.Lee(2004)developedananalytical
equation which describes the unsteady
dispersionofchangingflowvelocityin
pipesbasedontheclassicone-dimensional
advection-dispersion equation by Taylor
(1953). Tzatchkovetal.,(2002)have
developed an extension to the standard
EPANETmodelthatincludesdispersion.
Indistributionsystemmodels,deterministic
demandsareassignedtonodes. Buchberger
etal.,(2003)monitoredwateruseatthe
individual home and neighborhood level
andfoundthattherearesignificantshort-
termvariationsinwateruse. Theyhave
developedamodelthatrepresentswater
useasaseriesofpulseswhichcanbe
simulated using a Poisson Rectangular
Pulsemodeltocapturethenatural
variabilityassociatedwithwateruse.
Distributionsystemmodelscurrently
assumecompletemixingatajunction. As
aresult,iftherearetwopipeswithflow
entering the junction and two pipes
throughwhichtheflowexits,thechemical
contentofthewaterinthetwoexiting
pipeswillbeidenticalandrepresentan
averageofthecharacteristicsofthetwo
enteringpipes. VanBloemenWaanderset
al.,(2005)havetestedthisassumption
usingbothlaboratoryanalysisandCFD
modeling. Figure2-11adepictsthe
velocityfieldatajunction. Figure2-11b
presentsthecorrespondingtracer
concentrationsatthatjunction. Thefigures
indicate that the complete mix assumption
wouldleadtosomeinaccuracyin
computingchemicaltransportina
Velocity (m/s)
1.9
1.7
1.5
1.3
1.1
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.1
Figure 2-11a. Velocity Field at a Junction. Figure 2-11b. Tracer Concentration at a Junction.
1.0
Tracer
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
2-18
References
AmericanWaterWorksAssociation(AWWA).Com-
puter Modeling of Water Distribution Systems, AWWA
Manual M-32,Denver,CO.2004.
AwwaRF/U.S.EPA.Water Quality Modeling in
Distribution Systems.EditedbyW.M.Grayman,R.M.
Clark,andR.M.Males. AwwaRF-AWWA.Denver.
CO. 1991.
Buchberger,S.G.,J.T.Carter,Y.H.Lee,andT.G.
Schade.RandomDemands,TravelTimes,andWater
QualityinDeadends.AwwaRF/AWWA,Denver,CO.
2003.
BureauofReclamationLaboratory.Photoprovided
byBatesEngineering,Inc.,2004.
Chase,D.V.,D.Guastella,K.LLai,andL.E.Ormsbee.
EnergyManagementforLargeScaleWaterSupply
Systems.AWWAComputerConference,Los
Angeles,CA. 1994.
Clark,R.M.,W.M.Grayman,R.M.Males,andJ.A.
Coyle.PredictingWaterQualityinDistribution
Systems.Proceedings,AWWADistributionSystem
Symposium,Minneapolis,MN. 1986.
Clark,R.M.,andR.M.Males. Developingand
ApplyingtheWaterSupplySimulationModel,
Journal of AWWA,78(8). 1986.
Clark,R.M.,andW.M.Grayman.Modeling Water
Quality in Drinking Water Systems.AWWA.1998.
ClarkR.M.,R.C.Haught,andW.M.Grayman.
PredictingChlorineResidualsinUnlinedMetallic
Pipes.Proceedings,ASCE-EWRIWorldWater&
EnvironmentalResourcesCongress,Anchorage,AK.
2005.
Clark,R.M.,H.Pourmaghaddas,L.G.Wymer,andR.C.
Dressman. ModelingtheKineticsofChlorination
By-ProductFormation:TheEffectsofBromide,
Journal Water Supply Research and Technology -
Aqua,45(1):1-8. 1996.
Cross,H. AnalysisofFlowinNetworksofConduits
orConductors,University of Illinois Engineering
Experiment Station Bulletin 286,Urbana,IL. 1936.
DiGiano,F.A.,andW.Zhang.UncertaintyAnalysis
inaMechanisticModelofBacterialRegrowthin
DistributionSystem.Environmental Science and
Technology 38:22:5925-5931. 2004.
EPA.Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts Initial Distribution System Evaluation
Guidance Manual, Draft. 2003.
GeorgiaTech.PhotoprovidedbyDr.PhilipJ.W.
Roberts,SchoolofCivilEngineering,Georgia
Institute of Technology, 2004.
Goldman,F.E.,A.B.A.Sakarya,L.E.Ormsbee,J.G.
Uber,andL.W.Mays.OptimizationModelsfor
Operation.ChapterinWater Distribution System
Handbook. EditedbyLarryMaysforMcGraw-Hill,
NY.2000.
Grayman,W.M.,R.M.Clark,andR.M.Males.
ModelingDistributionSystemWaterQuality
DynamicApproach,Journal of Water Resources
Planning and Management,ASCE,114(3). 1988.
Grayman,W.M.PutYourHydraulicModeltoWork
HowThatCostlyModelCanEarnitsKeepby
MakingOperationsMoreEffective.Proceedings,
AWWAAnnualConference,Denver,CO.2000.
Grayman,W.M.,L.A.Rossman,M.A.Gill,Y.Li,and
D.E.Guastella. MeasuringandModelingDisinfec-
tantWallDemandinMetallicPipes.Proceedings,
EWRIConferenceonWaterResourcesPlanningand
Management,RestonVA.ASCE. 2002.
Grayman,W.M.,L.A.Rossman,R.A.Deininger,C.D.
Smith.,C.N.Arnold.,andJ.F.Smith.Mixingand
AgingofWaterinDistributionSystemStorage
Facilities.Journal of AWWA,96(9):70-80. 2004a.
GraymanW.M.,R.M.Clark,B.L.Harding,M.Maslia,
andJ.Aramini. ReconstructingHistoricalContami-
nationEvents,ChapterinWater Supply Systems
Security. EditedbyLarryMays,McGraw-Hill,NY.
2004b.
Grayman,W.M.,andC.N.Arnold.OverviewofCFD
MethodsinAnalysisofDistributionSystemTanks
andReservoirs.Proceedings,AWWAAnnual
Conference,AWWA,Denver,CO.2003.
Grayman,W.M.,andL.A.Rossman.Integratinga
NetworkModelwithanExpertSystem.Proceedings,
AWWAComputerConference,AWWA,Denver,CO.
1994.
Grayman,W.M.,L.A.Rossman,C.N.Arnold,R.A.
Deininger,C.D.Smith,J.F.Smith,andR.Schnipke.
Water Quality Modeling of Distribution System
Storage Facilities.AwwaRFandAWWA.2000.
2-19
Gullick,R.W.,M.W.LeChevallier,R.C.Svindland,
andM.Friedman. OccurrenceofTransientLowand
NegativePressuresinDistributionSystems.Journal
of AWWA.96(11):52-66.November2004.
Hart,F.L.,J.L.Meader,andS.N.Chiang.CLNET A
SimulationModelforTracingChlorineResidualsina
PotableWaterDistributionNetwork.Proceedings,
AWWADistributionSystemSymposium,Minneapo-
lis,MN. 1986.
Jentgen,L.,S.Conrad,R.Riddle,E.VonSacken,K.
Stone,W.M.Grayman,andS.Ranade.Implementing
a Prototype Energy and Water Quality Management
System.AwwaRF,Denver,CO.2003.
Jeppson,R.W.Analysis of Flow in Pipe Networks.
AnnArborScience,AnnArbor,MI. 1976.
JohnsonK.E.,andJ.Loux. Water and Land Use:
Planning Wisely For Californias Future. Solano
Press,PointArena,CA. 2004.
Lansey,K.E.OptimalDesignofWaterDistribution
Systems.ChapterinWater Distribution System
Handbook. EditedbyLarryMaysforMcGraw-Hill,
NY.2000.
Larock,B.E.,R.W.Jeppson,andG.Z.Watters.Hy-
draulics of Pipeline Systems. CRCPress,LLC,Boca
Raton,FL. pp12-26. 2000.
LeChevallier,M.W.,R.W.Gullick,M.R.Karim,M.
FriedmanandJ.E.Funk. ThePotentialforHealth
RisksfromIntrusionofContaminantsintothe
DistributionSystemfromPressureTransients,
Journal of Water and Health,IWAPublishing.pp.3-
14.January2003.
Lee,Y.andS.G.Buchberger.Estimationofdisper-
sioninunsteadyrandomflowconditionsindead-end
pipesofwaterdistributionsystems.Proceedings,
ASCE-EWRIWorldWater&EnvironmentalRe-
sourcesCongress,Orlando,FL. 2001.
Lee,Y.MassDispersioninIntermittentLaminarFlow.
Ph.D.DissertationinCivilandEnvironmental
Engineering, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati,
Ohio. 2004.
Liou,C.P.,andJ.R.Kroon.PropagationandDistri-
butionofWaterborneSubstancesinNetworks,
Proceedings,AWWADistributionSystemSymposium,
Minneapolis,MN. 1986.
Males,R.M.,R.M.Clark,P.J.Wehrman,andW.E.
Gates. AlgorithmforMixingProblemsinWater
Systems,Journal Hydraulic Engineering,ASCE,
111(2). 1985.
Males,R.M.,W.M.Grayman,R.M.Clark.Modeling
WaterQualityinDistributionSystems,Journal
Water Resources Planning and Management,ASCE,
114(2). 1988.
Mays,L.W.,Editor.Reliability Analysis of Water
Distribution Systems. ASCE. NY.1989.
Murray,R.,R.Janke,andJ.Uber.TheThreat
EnsembleVulnerabilityAssessment(TEVA)Program
forDrinkingWaterDistributionSystemSecurity.
Proceedings,ASCE-EWRIWorldWater&Environ-
mentalResourcesCongress,SaltLakeCity,UT.2004.
Powell,J.,J.Clement,M.Brandt,R.Casey,D.Holt,
W.Grayman,andM.LeChevallier.Predictive
ModelsforWaterQualityinDistributionSystems.
AwwaRF,Denver,CO.2004.
Rahal,C.M.,M.J.H.Sterling,andB.Coulbeck.
ParameterTuningforSimulationMethodsofWater
DistributionNetworks.Proceedings,Instituteof
CivilEngineers,Part269,751. 1980.
Roberts,P.J.W.,andX.Tian.ApplicationofThree-
DimensionalLaser-InducedFluorescencetoStratified
TurbulentMixingProcesses.Proceedings,ASCE
HydraulicMeasurementsandExperimentsConfer-
ence. 2002.
Rossman,L.A.,andP.F.Boulos.NumericalMethods
forModelingWaterQualityinDistributionSystems:
AComparison.Journal Water Resources Planning
and Management,ASCE,122(2):137-146. 1996.
Rossman,L.A.EPANET Version 2 Users Manual,
DrinkingWaterResearchDivision,EPA,Cincinnati,
OH. 2000.
Rossman,L.A.,R.M.Clark,andW.M.Grayman.
ModelingChlorineResidualsinDrinkingWater
DistributionSystems.Journal Environmental
Engineering, 120(4):803-820. 1994.
Schaake,J.,andD.Lai.Linear Programming and
Dynamic Programming Applications to Water
Distribution Network Design - Report 116. Depart-
mentofCivilEngineering,MIT,Cambridge,MA.
1969.
2-20
Taylor,G.I.Dispersionofsolublematterinsolvent
flowingslowlythroughatube,Journal of the Royal
Society of London Series A,TheRoyalSociety,
London,UK. 219:186-203. 1953.
Tzatchkov,V.G.,A.A.Aldama,andF.I.Arreguin.
Advection-dispersion Reaction Modeling in Water
DistributionNetworks.Journal Water Resources
Planning & Management,128(5):334-342. 2002.
Uber,J.,F.Shang,M.Polycarpou,andZ.Wang.
FeedbackControlofBoosterChlorinationSystems.
Uber,J.,F.Shang,andL.Rossman.Extensionsto
EPANETforFateandTransportofMultipleInteract-
ingChemicalorBiologicalComponents.Proceed-
ings,ASCE-EWRIWorldWater&Environmental
ResourcesCongress,SaltLakeCity,UT.2004.
VanBloemenWaanders,B.,G.Hammond,J.Shadid,
S.Collis,andR.Murray.AComparisonofNavier-
StokesandNetworkModelstoPredictChemical
TransportinMunicipalWaterDistributionSystems.
mentalResourcesCongress,Anchorage,AK. 2005.
Vasconcelos,J.J.,L.A.Rossman,W.M.Grayman,P.F.
Boulos,andR.M.Clark. KineticsofChlorine
Decay,Journal of AWWA,89(7):54-65. 1997.
Vose,D.Risk Analysis A Quantitative Guide. John
Wiley&Sons.Chichester,UK.2000.
Walski,T.M.,D.V.Chase,D.A.Savic,W.Grayman,S.
Beckwith,andE.Koelle.Advanced Water Distribu-
tion Modeling and Management. HaestadPress,
Waterbury,CT.2003.
Wood,D.J.Computer Analysis of Flow in Pipe
Networks. DepartmentofCivilEngineering,Univer-
sityofKentucky,Lexington,KY.1980a.
Wood,D.J.SlurryFlowinPipeNetworks.Journal
of Hydraulics,ASCE,106(1). May1980b.
2-21
Chapter3
TracerStudiesforDistributionSystemEvaluation
Tracershavebeenusedfordecadestodetermine
flow,traveltime,anddispersioninsurfacewaters
andgroundwater.Tracerscanbeofvarioustypes,
rangingfromaphysicalobjectthatcanbevisually
detectedinastreamorrivertodyesorother
chemicalswhoseconcentrationscanbemonitored
usingspecialinstrumentation. Fluorescentdyes
havebeenusedformanyyearstomeasurevelocity
andtidalmovementinstreamsandestuaries. Use
oftracerstounderstandthehydraulicmovementin
drinkingwatertreatmentunitprocessesordistribu-
tionsystemsisamorerecentdevelopment. When
tracersareusedindrinkingwater,caremustbe
takentoensurethattheywillhavenoadverse
healtheffectsandthattheirusedoesnotresultin
anyviolationsofprimaryand/orsecondarydrink-
ingwaterMCLs.
Tracershavebeenusedindrinkingwaterto
estimatethetraveltimethroughvariouswater
treatmentunitprocessesincludingclearwells
(TeefyandSinger,1990;Teefy,1996;DiGianoet
al.,2005). Tracerstudieshavealsobeenconducted
indistributionsystemtanksandreservoirsinan
attempttounderstandtheirmixingcharacteristics
(Graymanetal.,1996;Boulosetal.,1996). They
havealsobeenusedinwaterdistributionnetworks
toprovideinsightintothecomplexmovementof
waterinadistributionsystem,todeterminetravel
times,andtoassistincalibrationofdistribution
systemhydraulicmodels(Clarketal.,1993;
DeGianoetal.,2005;Vasconcelosetal.,1997;
Grayman,2001). Forexample,Boccellietal.
(2004)andSautneretal.(2005)haveuseddual
tracersinjectedintowaterdistributionsystemsto
assesstraveltimeandcharacterizeflowpatternsin
support of epidemiological investigations. With the
recentinterestinhomelandsecurityissues,tracers
arebeingusedtosimulatethemovementand
impacts of accidental or intentional contamination
ofwaterdistributionsystems(Pangulurietal.,
2005).
Conductingadistributionsystemtracerstudy
involves(1)injectingthetracerintoapipeup-
streamoftheareatobestudied,(2)shuttingoffor
reducingacontinuouschemicalfeedatthewater
treatmentplant,or(3)useofanaturallyoccurring
substanceinsourcewater.Theconcentrationis
measuredovertimeatvariouslocationsinthe
waterdistributionnetworkasitmovesthroughthe
studyarea. Tobesuccessful,atracerstudyrequires
carefulplanningandimplementation. Thischapter
provides information and guidance on planning
andconductingtracerstudiesindrinkingwater
distribution systems.
Tracerstudiesindistributionsystemsmayprovidea
widevarietyofusefulinformation,includingthe
following:
Calculatingtraveltime,residencetime,orwater
ageinanetwork.
Calibrating a hydraulic model.
Definingzonesinanetworkservedbya
particularsourceand/orassessingthedegreeof
blendingwithwaterfromothersources.
Determiningtheimpactsofaccidentalor
intentional contamination.
Identifying appropriate sampling locations
withinthewaterdistributionnetwork.
Tracerstudiesmayalsoassistwaterutilitiesin
complyingwithvariousregulatoryrequirements.For
example,theDBPR2IDSEdraftGuidanceManual
(EPA,2003a)recognizestheuseoftracersasameans
ofcalibratingmodelsandpredictingresidencetimeas
apartialsubstituteforrequiredfieldmonitoring.
Severalrulesandregulations(bothexistingand
proposed)arecurrentlybeingreviewed,suchasthe
TCRandaproposeddistributionsystemrule.Water
qualitymodelingandmodelcalibrationarelikelyto
playaroleinthedevelopmentand/orpromulgation
oftheserules.
Thescopeofatracerstudymayvaryconsiderably
dependinguponthestudyneeds,size,andcomplex-
ityofthedistributionnetworkbeingevaluated. A
studyareamayconsistofasinglestretchofpipe,an
entireneighborhood,aportionofalargedistribution
system,apressurezone,orinsomecases,theentire
distributionnetwork.Theresourcesrequiredto
conductatracerstudywillvarywiththeextent,
complexityofthestudy,andthetestequipmentused.
Carefulplanningandimplementationarecriticalin
allcasestoensuremeaningfulresults. Section3.1of
thischaptercontainsinformationthatcanbeused
duringtheplanningphasesofatracerstudy.Section
3.2providesasummaryofthetasksassociatedwith
executingatracerstudy.Section3.3presentstypical
costsassociatedwithconductingatracerstudy.
Finally,Section3.4presentsasummary,conclusions,
andrecommendationsforthischapter.Theuseof
tracerstudydataformodelcalibration/validationis
describedinChapter4.
3-1
3.1PlanningandDesigninga
DistributionSystemTracer
Study
Theinitialstepinanytracerstudyisaplanningand
designphaseduringwhichstudy-specificlogistical
detailsareidentifiedandaddressed. Thesedetails
shouldbepresentedinacomprehensivemannerina
planningdocumentorworkplanthatcanbereviewed
andcommentedonbypartiesthatmayhavean
interestinthetracerstudy(e.g.,teammembers,water
utilitystaffandmanagers,andstateregulatory
officials).Planninganddesign-phaseelementsmay
include the following:
Establishing study objectives and timeline.
Formingastudyteam.
Definingstudyareacharacteristics.
Selectingtracermaterial.
Selectingfieldequipmentandprocedures.
Developing a detailed study design.
Addressing agency and public notification.
Thedetailsofeachofthesetasksaredescribedinthe
followingsub-sections.
3.1.1EstablishingStudyObjectivesandTime-
Line
Aclearstatementofthestudyobjectivesshouldbe
developed, even before logistical planning begins.
Forexample,anobjectivestatementmightread
determinetraveltimesfromtheLincolnWater
TreatmentPlanttokeylocations(transmissionmains
andrepresentativelocalmains)intheWashington
PressureZoneundertypicalsummeroperation.Such
astatementprovidesaclearunderstandingofthe
studysoverallgoalsandobjectives.Astudyobjec-
tivemayalsobemorespecificanddefineadditional
keyelementssuchastracermaterial,dosage,and
injection duration.
Dependingupontheobjective,anapproximatetime-
line(schedule)forthestudyshouldbeformulated.
Frequently,externalconstraintssuchasweather,
systemoperation,andavailabilityofpersonnel/
equipmentmayinfluencethistimeline. Inother
cases,theprojecttimelinemaydependuponthe
specificobjectiveofthestudy.Forexample,ifthe
maximumcommunityexposuretoacontamination
eventisbeingstudied,thetimelineshouldbe
consistentwiththeseasonandtimeduringwhichthe
eventislikelytooccur.Ifthestudyisintendedto
identifylocationsinthesystemwherethelowest
chlorineresidualsarefound,thestudyshouldbe
conductedduringaperiodwhenminimumchlorine
residualsoccur.However,itisnotalwayspossibleto
conductatracerstudytomatchsystemconditions
thatcoincidewiththestudytime-frame.Therefore,a
reasonablealternativeistousethetracertocalibratea
study-area-specificnetworkmodel,underagivenset
ofconditions,thatcanbeusedtosimulateother
criticaleventsunderdifferentconditions.
Inmid-westernU.S.,October-Novemberisthebest
time-frametoconductatracerstudyinaresidential
area.Duringthistime,theutilityhasgreateroperational
flexibilitybecauseitisnotstressedbyhighdemands,
weatherisconducivetooutdooractivity,andcold
weatherpipebreaksareminimal.
3.1.2FormingaStudyTeam
Atracerstudyteamshouldbeformedatthe
beginningoftheproject. Dependingonthesizeand
scopeofthestudy,thesizeoftheteammayvaryfrom
asfewasthreememberstoasizablegroupofasmany
astwentymembers. However,therangeoffunctions
andresponsibilitiesthatmustbeconsideredare
approximatelythesameinalltypesofstudies. The
teammakeupmustincludememberswithexpertisefor
planning and carrying out the following activities
and functions: understanding study area distribution
systemandtreatmentoperations;conductingprelimi-
narymodelingstudies;selecting,acquiring,and
installing field equipment; managing and organizing
fieldcrews;performingfieldsampling;conducting
laboratoryanalysis;analyzingandreportingresults;
andperformingcommunicationsandnotifications.
Studyteamsmaybemadeupofwaterutilityperson-
nel,consultingengineeringfirmpersonnel,contractor
staff,studentsfromuniversities,andinsomecases,
federalorstategovernmentalagencyemployees.
Specificresponsibilitiesandrolesshouldbeassigned
toeachteammember.Itisrecommendedthatthe
studyteammeetonaregularbasistoensurethatthe
taskdeadlinesaremetandthestudyobjectivesare
achievable. Ifthetracerstudyincludesnewornever-
beforeusedequipment,trainingsessionsforstudy
teammembersshouldbeincludedaspartofstudy
timeline and activities.
3.1.3DefiningStudyAreaCharacteristics
Afterthestudyteamisformed,perhapsthefirsttask
tobeundertakenistoidentifythekeycharacteristics
ofthestudyarea. Thesecharacteristicsinclude:the
pipingsystemnetwork,pumpingandstorageopera-
tions,inflowandoutflowthroughstudyareabound-
aries,temporalandspatialvariationsinwatercon-
sumption,presenceoflargewaterusersthatmay
significantlyimpactwaterusepatterns,andthe
3-2
Whenplanningatracerstudy,theeffectsofdistribu-
tionsystemtanksandreservoirsshouldbeconsidered
(Graymanatal.,2004). Whenatracerentersatankin
theinflow,itmixeswiththedistributedwaterandthen
exitsthetankatadifferentconcentrationduringthe
subsequentdrawcycles. Mixinginthetankmaybe
rapidandcompleteortheremaybeshort-circuitingor
plugflowbehaviorthataffectstheconcentrationinthe
effluent.VariousmathematicaltoolssuchasCFD
modelsmaybeappliedtoestimatethemixingcharac-
teristicsofatankandtheeffectsontracerconcentra-
tionduringdischargeperiods(Graymanetal.,2004).
DistributionsystemmodelssuchasEPANETallowthe
usertosimulatemixingintanksbyseveralalternative
conceptualandsimplifiedmodelssuchascompletely
andinstantaneouslymixed,shortcircuiting,plugflow,
andmultiplecompartmentmixing.Theeffectsoftanks
canimpacttheneededtracerdosagerateandinjection
durationandthesubsequentsamplingfrequencyand
durationinpartsofthedistributionsystemimpacted
bythetank. Duringthetracerstudy,theimpactsof
mixinginthetankcanbedeterminedbysamplingin
theinflowandoutflowlines,andinsomecases,
internally within the tank.
geographyandlocalfeaturesassociatedwiththe
studyareathatcouldpotentiallyconstrainfield
activities.
Alargecommercialusersuchasagolfcourseinthe
neighborhoodmayimpactthestudyevents.
Thereareseveraltoolsandproceduresthatcanbe
appliedtoimprovetheteamsunderstandingofthe
targetwaterdistributionsystemareapriortoconduct-
ingthetracerstudy.Ifahydraulicmodelofthe
distributionsystem(understudy)isavailable,it
wouldbeveryhelpfultousethemodeltosimulate
thetracerstudyunderexpectedconditions.Examina-
tionofdocuments,suchasmasterplansoroperational
reports,canalsoshedlightonhowthewatersystem
behaves. Thestudyteamorkeymembersofthestudy
teamshouldalsotourthestudysitewithas-builtpipe
drawingstoidentifypotentiallocationsforsafely
installingfieldinjectionequipment,aswellasflow
andtracermonitoringequipment.
3.1.4SelectingTracerMaterial
Criteriathatcaninfluencetheselectionofaparticular
tracer include:
regulatoryrequirements,
analytical methods and instruments available
formeasuringtracerconcentration,
injectionandstoragerequirements,
chemical reactivity,
chemicalcompositionofthefinishedwater,
overallcost,and
public perception.
Ideally,atracershouldbeinexpensive,nonreactive
withbothwateranddistributionsystemmaterials,
safetodrinkwhendissolvedinwater,easilydispersed
inwater,aestheticallyacceptabletocustomers,ableto
meetalldrinkingwaterregulations,andinexpen-
sivelyandaccuratelymonitoredinthefieldby
manualandautomatedmethods. Thereisnoone
tracerthatwillmeetallofthesecriteriaforagiven
study.Frequently,therearetradeoffsamongthe
criterialistedabovethatmustbeassessedwhen
selectingatracer.Thetracertobeusedinthestudy
shouldbedeterminedearlyintheplanningstage,and
approvalforitsusereceivedfromthewaterutilityand
state regulatory agencies.
Tracersmayfallintothreebroadcategories: a
chemicalthatisnormallyaddedtothewaterduring
thetreatmentprocessandthatmaybetemporarily
shutoffduringthestudy;achemicalthatisaddedto
thewaterbytheteamduringthestudy;oranaturally
occurringsubstanceinthesourcewaterthatmaybe
adjustedinsomemannertocreateatracer.
Themostcommonlyusedtracersarefluoride,calcium
chloride,andsodiumchloride.
3.1.4.1 Fluoride
Fluorideisfrequentlyaddedtowatersupplies
becauseofitshealthbenefits,butcanbeturnedoff
forshortperiods,therebymakingthenon-fluori-
datedwateratracerinthesystem. Whenfluorida-
tionisnotpracticed,fluoridecanbeaddedtothe
watersystemandusedasatracerbyinjection. Itis
especially popular with utilities that routinely add
fluorideaspartofthetreatmentprocess,because
littleeffortisrequiredtoturnthefluorideoffand
on. Whenthefluoridefeedisshutoff,afrontof
low-fluoridewater(ornofluorideifthereisno
natural background concentration) becomes the
tracer.Asecondtracertest(oracontinuationofthe
initialtest)canbeperformedwhenthefluoridefeed
Fluoridecaninteractwithcoagulantsthathavebeen
addedduringtreatmentandinsomecircumstances
caninteractwithpipewallsleadingtonon-conserva-
tivebehavior.Thus,whenusedinsystemsthatdonot
generallyfluoridate,afieldtestshouldbeperformed
todeterminepossibleinteractionswithpipes.
3-3
isturnedbackon,thusmakingitpossibleto
generatetwosetsoftracerdatainonestudy.
TheMCLforfluorideis4mg/L. However,ifthe
secondaryMCLof2mg/Lisexceeded,customers
mustbenotified. Backgroundlevelsoffluoridecan
varysignificantlyandactuallyexceedthesecondary
MCLinsomegeographicareas.
Incaseswhereautilityisnotpermittedtocompletely
shutoffthefluoridefeed,itmaybefeasibleto
increasethefluoridefeedpriortothetracerstudyand
toreducethefluoridefeedduringthetest. Care
shouldbeexercisedtoavoidexceedingthesecondary
MCL.However,theremustbeasufficientchangein
thefluorideconcentrationfeedinordertotracethe
changethroughthesystem. Thus,forexample,a
decreaseinfeedconcentrationfrom1.2mg/Lto0.8
mg/Lmaynotbesufficient,butadecreaseinconcen-
trationfrom1.5mg/Lto0.5mg/Lmaybeadequate.A
changeinfluoridedosagemayhavetobepre-
approvedbystateregulators. Dependinguponthe
durationofthestudy,thestateagencymaychooseto
allowatemporaryshutofforsetaspecificlowest
allowable-fluoride-concentration requirement.
Inmosttreatmentplants,fluorideisinjectedpriortoa
finalclearwell.Asaresult,whenthefeedisshutoffas
apartofthetracerstudy,thereisbothatimedelay
andagradualchangeinconcentrationintheclearwell
dischargeasthenon-fluoridatedandfluoridatedwater
mix. Therefore,whereverandwheneverpossible,the
clearwellshouldbeoperatedatminimumwaterlevels
duringthetracertestinordertoachievearelatively
sharpfrontofnon-fluoridatedwaterleavingthe
InastudyconductedintheCheshireserviceareaofthe
SouthCentralConnecticutRegionalWaterAuthority
(SCCRWA)in1989,thefluoridefeedwasturnedoffto
provideatracertovalidateahydraulicandwater
qualitymodeloftheirwaterdistributionsystem(Clark
etal.,1991). Thisstudywasamongthefirstapplica-
tionsofwaterqualitymodelsintheworld.SCCRWA
normallyaddedfluorideatalevelofapproximately1
mg/L. Forpurposesofthemodelvalidationstudy,the
fluoridefeedwasturnedoffforaperiodof7daysand
thenturnedbackonwithsamplingoccurringforan
additional7days. Thisapproachyielded,ineffect,two
tracerfronts.Duringthestudy,grabsamplesweretaken
everyfewhoursat16hydrants,twowellfields,one
tank,fourcontinuousanalyzersites,anddailyat19
deadendsites.Additionally,experimentalunitswere
installedatafewshelteredsitestoautomatically
measurefluorideconcentrationsandtotakediscrete
samplesforlateranalysis.Atotalof2,150fluoridegrab
samplesweretakenduringthestudyandanalyzedin
the laboratory.
treatmentplant.Itisalsoimportanttoevaluatethe
impactoftravelthroughfinishedwaterstorage
reservoirsontheconcentrationoftracerduringthe
study.Analternativeistoinjectfluoridesolution
(e.g.,sodiumfluoride)atapointinthemaintransmis-
sionlinedownstreamoftheclearwellwherebothflow
andinjectionratecanbesimultaneouslymonitored
andmeasured.
Ion-selectiveelectrodes(ISE)canbeusedinconjunc-
tionwithdataloggerstoprovidecontinuousmonitor-
ingcapability.Atpresent,however,theseinstruments
arerelativelyexpensive(approximately$5,000to
$10,000each)andhaveonlybeenusedextensively
inlarge-scaletracerstudies(Masliaetal.,2005;
Sautneretal.,2005). Generally,grabsamplesare
takenandanalysisisperformedmanuallyinthefield
orlaboratory.
Undersomecircumstances,fluorideisnotafully
conservativechemical.Inonestudy(Vasconceloset
al.,1996)inasystemthatdidnotnormallyfluoridate,
a13-hourpulse(stepinputoflimitedduration)of
fluoridewasinjectedintothefeedlineofapressure
zone. Fieldmeasurementsoffluorideconcentrations
inthezoneduringthestudyindicatedasignificant
lossoffluoride. Itwaspostulatedthatsomeofthe
fluoridewasdepositedonthepipewall. Ina
followupstudy,thisproblemwasvirtuallyeliminated
byinjectingfluorideoveraperiodofseveraldays
priortotheactualstudyinordertopre-conditionthe
pipes.
3.1.4.2 CalciumChloride
Calciumchloride(CaCl
2
)hasbeenusedinmany
tracerstudiesthroughouttheU.S.Itisconsideredto
besafeandrelativelyeasytohandle.Generally,a
foodgradesubstanceisrequired. Itcanbepurchased
asaliquid(typicallya30to35%solution)orasa
powderthatcanbemixedwithwatertoforma
solution.
Ifcalciumchlorideischosenasatracer,thestudy
personnelshouldbeawareofthesecondarydrinking
waterMCLforchloride(250mg/L).Atargetthatis
lessthanthesecondaryMCLshouldbesetinorderto
provideasafetyfactor.Wherechloridelevelsare
high,calciumchloridemaynotbeanappropriate
choiceforatracer.
Graymanetal.,(2000)utilizedcalciumchlorideasa
tracerintwostudiesofmixingindistributionsystem
tanks. Inbothstudies,thechemicalwasinjectedinto
theinflowpipeofthetankduringthefillcycles,and
conductivityandchlorideweremeasuredatlocations
withinthetank. Calciumchloridehasrecentlybeen
usedinseveraldistributionsystemstudies(Panguluri
etal.,2005;Masliaetal.,2005;andSautneretal.,
2005).
3-4
Calciumchloridecanbemonitoredbymeasuring
conductivity,orbymeasuringthecalciumorchloride
ion(StandardMethods,1998). Conductivityis
typicallytheeasiestoftheseparameterstomeasure
andismostamenabletoinexpensivecontinuous
monitors. However,conductivityisnotatrulylinear
parameter(i.e.,ifabeakerofwaterofconductivity100
mS/cmiscombinedwithalikevolumeofwaterwitha
conductivityof300mS/cm,theconductivityofthe
resultingsolutionwillnotbeexactly200mS/cm). As
aresult,distributionsystemmodels(thatallassume
linearity)canonlyapproximatelyrepresentconductiv-
ity.Therefore,whenusingconductivityasthe
measuredparameter,theoptionsaretoacceptthe
linearapproximationorconvertconductivitytoatrue
linearparametersuchaschlorideorcalcium. Ifthe
formeroptionischosen,theamountofresultingerror
shouldbeestablishedinlaboratorytestsofwatersof
varyingconductivity.Ifthelatteroptionischosen,
therelationshipbetweenconductivityandchloride(or
calcium)mustbeestablishedinthelaboratory.It
shouldalsobenotedthatmostfielddevicesaresetup
tomeasurespecificconductanceinsteadofconductiv-
ity(conductivityistemperaturesensitive,whereas
specificconductanceisreferencedto25C). Forthe
purposesofthisdocument,conductivityisassumedto
representspecificconductance.
3.1.4.3 SodiumChloride
Sodiumchloride(NaCl)canbeusedasatracerand
hasmanycharacteristicssimilartocalciumchloride
inthatitcanbetracedbymonitoringforconductivity
orfortheconcentrationofthechlorideorsodiumion.
Theallowableconcentrationforsodiumchlorideis
alsolimitedbythesecondaryMCLforchlorideand
thepotentialhealthimpactsofelevatedsodium
InarecenttracerstudyinHillsboroughCounty,
Florida,twoseparatetracerchemicalswereusedto
studythemovementofwaterinalargedistribution
system(Boccellietal.,2004). Approximately2,200
gallonsofasaturatedNaClsolutionwasinjectedinto
thefinishedwaterofatreatmentplantasaseriesof
fourpulsesrangingindurationfrom1to3hoursover
a24-hourperiod. Simultaneously,thenormalfluoride
feedwasshutoffattheplant. Continuousconductiv-
itymonitorswereinstalledat14locationsinthe
distributionsystemtomonitorfortheNaCltracer.
Grabsamplesweretakentomonitorthelowfluoride
frontasitmovedthroughthesystemandtoevaluate
waterqualitychanges. Theresultingextensive
hydraulicandwaterqualitydatabaseisbeingusedto
calibrateahydraulicandwaterqualitymodelofthe
system(BoccelliandUber,2005).
levels.EPAreportsthattastethresholdsforsodium
varysignificantlyamongindividuals,rangingfrom
30to460mg/L(EPA,2003b).
3.1.4.4 OtherChemicalsThatMaybeAddedas
Tracers
Otherchemicalsaddedaspartofatracerstudy
includelithiumchlorideandchlorine. Lithium
chlorideisapopulartracerintheUnitedKingdombut
isusedlessfrequentlyintheU.S.,partlybecauseof
thepublicperceptionoflithiumasamedicalpharma-
ceutical. Therearenofieldtechniquesformeasuring
lithium,anditisnoteasilyamenabletoautomated
continuousmeasurement. Samplesmustbecollected
andlithiumconcentrationsmeasuredinthelaboratory.
Chlorineiscommonlyusedasadisinfectantinmany
watersystems. Becausechlorineisreactive,itwill
decayovertime.Undersomecircumstances,however,
itcanbeusedeffectivelyasatracer.Itismost
effectiveinawaterwherechlorineisnothighly
reactive(lowdecayrate)witheitherthewateror
distributionsystemmaterial,andwheretheconcentra-
tionlevelscanbeincreasedabovethenormallevelto
createafrontofwaterwithahighchlorineconcentra-
tionpropagatingthroughthesystem.However,inno
caseshouldthechlorineorchloraminebedecreased
toalevelthatmayaffectthedisinfectionprocess
(FergusonandDiGiano,2005). Again,anytracer
studyshouldfirstbeapprovedbythestateregulators.
3.1.4.5 NaturallyorNormallyOccurringTracers
Perhapsthemostdifficultpartofconductingatracer
studyisobtainingpermissiontoaddachemicaland
theninjectingthetracerintothesystemataconcen-
trationconsistentwithregulations. Muchofthis
effortcanbeavoidedifthereisanaturaltracer
available. Naturaltracersaregenerallysite-specific,
butmanyoptionsdoexistandshouldbeexplored.
Themostcommonsituationistheexistenceof
multiplesourcesofwaterwithdifferentchemical
signaturesorifachangeisplannedinthechemical
signatureatasinglesource. Examplesofthese
situationsaredescribedbelow.
Someofthechemicalsignaturesthatmaybeusedto
differentiatebetweensourcesincludeTHMconcen-
trations,hardness,conductivity,andtreatment
coagulant. Samplinginthedistributionsystemfor
thesetracerswillprovideinformationonzones
servedbyeachofthesourcesandtheextentand
variationofthemixingthattakesplaceinthesezones
overtime.Alternatively,ifonewatersourcecanbe
turnedoffforaperiodoftimeuntiltheothersource
hasreachedchemicalequilibriumthroughoutthe
system,theoriginalsourcecanbeturnedbackonand
usedasatracerasitpropagatesthroughthesystem.
OneofthefirstusesofnaturaltracerswasintheNorth
3-5
Makingamajorchangeintheincomingwatersupply
suchasachangeinsourcewaterormodifyingtreatment
mayprovideanopportunitytoconductatracertest.
Theincreaseduseofchloraminesasasecondary
disinfectant,toreducetheformationofDBPs,intro-
ducesanotherpotentialtraceropportunity.Whena
waterutilityswitchesfromchlorinetochloramines(or
viceversa),thechemicalsignatureofthewaterchanges
andcanbemonitoredbymeasuringbothfreeandtotal
chlorine. Namely,withchloramination,totalchlorineis
typicallymuchhigherthanfreechlorine,whilewithfree
chlorination,freeandtotalchlorinewilltypicallybe
verysimilar.Atracerstudycanbeconductedwhena
systemfirstadoptschloramination.Alternatively,many
waterutilitiesroutinelyswitchbackfrom
chloraminationtochlorine(e.g.,annuallyforamonth)
inordertokillammonia-oxidizingbacteriaandthus
reducethechancesofnitrification. Thisprovidesa
recurringopportunitytoconductsuchatracerstudy.
PennWaterAuthority(NPWA)locatedinLansdale,PA
(ClarkandCoyle,1990).Afieldresearchprojectwas
conductedbyEPAandNPWAthatresultedinthe
developmentofaseriesofmodelsthatwereusedto
studycontaminantpropagationinthewaterdistribu-
tionsystem. Theutilityusedacombinationof
groundwaterwithhighlevelsofhardnessandsurface
watercontaininghigherlevelsofTHMs.Thisresulted
intwosourcesofwaterwithverydifferentquality
characteristics. Bymonitoringchangesinwater
qualitythatoccurredatselectedsamplingpointsin
theutilitynetwork,itwaspossibletousehardness
andTHMconcentrationsastracerstovalidatethe
model.
AnothercaseoccurredintheNorthMarinWater
District(NMWD)innorthernCalifornia(Clarketal.,
1994)wherenaturaldifferencesinwatercharacteris-
ticswereusedtoserveasatracerforvalidationofa
waterdistributionsystemmodel.InthisEPA-
sponsoredstudy,theutilityusedtwosourcesofwater
withdramaticallydifferentwaterqualitycharacteris-
tics. Thefirstsource,StaffordLake,hasaveryhigh
humiccontentandthushasaveryhighTHMforma-
tionpotential. TheothersourceistheNorthMarin
Aqueductwithaverylowhumiccontentandthusa
verylowTHMformationpotential. Themodelwas
furthervalidatedbypredictingchlorineresidual
lossesatvariouspointsinthenetwork. Inafollow-up
studysupportedbyAwwaRF(Vasconcelosetal.,
1997),theinvestigatorsusedsodiumasatracerto
validatethemodel.
DiGianoandCarter(2001)andDiGianoetal.(2005)
tracedtheflowfromtwoseparatetreatmentplant
sourcesatthesametimebysimultaneouslyreducing
thefluoridefeedatoneplantwhilechangingthe
coagulantaddedattheotherplant. Normally,ferric
chloride(FeCl
3
)wasusedasacoagulantatboth
plants. Duringthetracerstudy,thecoagulantatone
plantwaschangedtoaluminumsulfate[Al
2
(SO
4
)
3
].
Fluoride,sulfate,andchlorideweremeasured
throughout the distribution system.
Waterutilitiesshouldcarefullyexaminetheirparticu-
larsystemtodetermineifanaturaltracerisavailable
orifsource-chemicalsignaturesmaybemodifiedto
beusedasatracer.
SweetwaterAuthorityinsouthernCaliforniatook
advantageofanormalchangeoverinsourcewater
qualitytoperformatracerstudyintheirdistribution
system(Hatcheretal.,2004). Inthiscase,theutility
semi-annuallychangestheprimarysourceoftheirwater
supplyfromlocalSweetwaterReservoirrawwaterto
waterprovidedbytheCaliforniaAqueduct. Thesetwo
sourceshaveverydifferentchemicalcharacteristics;
mostsignificantly,theorganiccarboncontent(i.e.,
humicandfulvicacids)ofSweetwaterLakewateris
muchhighercomparedtotherawaqueductwater.The
measurementofmolecularorganiccarbonabsorbanceat
254nanometers,utilizinganultra-violet-visible(UV-
VIS)spectrophotometer,isasurrogatemeasurementfor
theorganiccarboncontentinwater.UV-254measure-
mentsweretakenfromgrabsamplesatthetreatment
plantandat28siteswithinthedistributionsystemover
thefive-daychangeoverperiod. Thedistribution
systemsitesincludedmostoftheTCRsamplingsitesin
additiontoselectedtanks. Theresultingdatabasewas
usedtoassessthemovementofwaterinthesystem,the
traveltimethroughoutthesystem,boundaryzonesin
thedistributionsystembetweenareasservedbythe
surfacewaterplantandsecondarysources,andcalibra-
tion/validation of the distribution system model.
3.1.4.6 ComparisonofTracers
Teefy(1996)investigatedtraceralternativesforusein
studiesofresidencetimeinclearwellsanddescribed
thechemicalcharacteristicsoftheindividualtracers.
Table3-1summarizesvariouschemicalcharacteristics
identifiedinthatreport.
Thereareadvantagesanddisadvantagesassociated
witheachofthegeneraltypesoftracers: conservative
(nonreactive)tracers,reactivetracers,chemicalsthat
arenormallyaddedtothewaterbutcanbeturnedoff,
andnaturalchemicalsignaturesinthefinishedwater.
Conservativetracersaremoreeasilymodeledthan
non-conservativetracers. Naturaltracersorchemicals
thatcanbeturnedoffareeasiertousethaninjected
chemicals. Certainchemicalsaremoreamenableto
continuousmonitors. Theseandotherfactorsshould
allbeconsideredwhenselectingatracerforastudy.
3-6
Table 3-1. Tracer Characteristics (adapted from Teefy, 1996)
Fluoride Calcium Sodium Lithium Chloride
Commonly
availableforms
H
2
SiF
6
NaF
Na
2
SiF
6
CaCl
2
NaCl dryLiCl CaCl
2
NaCl
KCl
Analytical IC, AA, AA, AA, IC,
methods ISE, IC, IC, IC, ISE,
SPADNSmethod ICP,
EDTAtitration
Conductivity
ICP,
FEP
Conductivity
ICP,
FEP
AgNO
3
titration,
Hg(NO
3
)
2
titration
Typical
chemicalcost
Food-grade
H
2
SiF
6
$7.6/100lb-
23.97%liquid
1
$140/55gallons
- 49%liquid
2
Food-grade
CaCl
2
$150/55gallons
- 35%liquid
3
Food-gradeNaCl
$12/50lb
4
$6/50lb
5
Lab-gradeLiCl
6
$22- $48/500g
7
Food-gradeNaCl
$12/50lb
4
$6/50lb
5
Typical
analyticalcost
persample
$18
8
(IC)
$16
10
(IC)
$12
11
(ISE)
$25
12
(IC)
$10
8
(ICP)
$12
10
(ICPMS)
$5
11
(ICP)
$10
8
(ICP)
$12
10
(ICPMS)
$5
11
(ICP)
$12
8
(ICP
9
)
$12
10
(ICPMS)
$6
11
(AA
13
)
$18
8
(IC)
$16
10
(IC)
$12
10
(EPA325.3)
$12
11
(IC)
Typical 0-4mg/L Variesgreatly(1- Variesgreatly(1- Usuallybelow5 Variesgreatly(1-
background 300mg/L),use 500mg/L) mg/L 250mg/L)
levelsinwater onlywhenlow
distribution
systems
Regulatory 4mg/LSDWA Noneknown. 20mg/Lfor Noneknown. 250mg/L
limits MCL,2mg/L Seelimitsfor restricteddiet Seelimitsfor secondary
secondaryMCL chloride. (EPA chloride. standard
recommendation)
1
Provided byLucier Chemical Industries (LCI), Ltd., http://
www.lciltd.com
2
Provided byBonded Chemicals, Inc., http://www.chemgroup.com/
bci.htm
3
Provided by Benbow Chemical Packaging, Inc., http://
www.benbowchemical.com
4
Provided by Skidmore Sales and Distributing Company, Inc., http:/
/www.skidmore-sales.com
5
Provided by Ulrich Chemical, Inc., http://www.ulrichchem.com
6
Food grade LiCl is not available.
7
Provided by Science Kit & Boreal Laboratories, http://
www.sciencekit.com
8
Provided by Severn Trent Laboratories (STL) North Canton, Ohio,
http://www.stl-inc.com. Prices are based on a large sample volume
(> 500 samples).
9
STL North Canton Laboratory is not certified for Lithium test in
Ohio.
10
Provided bySPL Laboratories, Inc., http://www.spl-inc.com
Prices are based on a large sample volume (> 500 samples).
11
Provided byEnvironmental Enterprises, Inc., http://
www.eeienv.com Prices are based on a large sample volume (>
500 samples).
12
Provided by FOH Environmental Laboratory for the CDC study at
Camp Lejeune, NC. http://www.foh.dhhs.gov/. The analytical cost
per sample includes cost for providing a sample bottle and report.
13
Environmental Enterprises, Inc. is not certified for Lithium test.
Note: Tracers
CaCl calcium chloride
2
H SiF hydrofluosilicic acid
2 6
KCl potassium chloride
LiCl lithium chloride
NaF sodium fluoride
Na SiF sodium silicofluoride
2 6
NaCl sodium chloride
Analytical methods
AA atomic absorption spectrometry
AgNO
3
silver nitrate
EDTA ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid
FEP flame emission photometric method
Hg(NO
3
)
2
mercuric nitrate
IC ion chromatography
ICP inductively coupled plasma
ISE ion selective electrode
SPADNS Trisodium (4,5-Dihydroxy-3-[(p-
sulfophenyl)-2,7-) naphthalene
disulfonic acid
3-7
Afterinvestigatingtraceroptionsandselectingthe
mostappropriatetracer,thegoverningstatedrinking
wateragencyshouldbecontacted. Theagency
shouldbeprovidedwiththespecificsregardingthe
proposedstudyincludinglocation(s),proposedtime-
line(s)andselectedtracermaterial. Onceagreement
hasbeenreachedandconsentisreceived,thestudy
teamcanthenproceedwiththenextstepsinthe
planning process.
3.1.5SelectingFieldEquipmentandProcedures
Onceatracerhasbeenselectedandapprovalhasbeen
receivedfromtheappropriatewaterutilitymanagers
andregulatoryagencies,specializedequipmentmust
be identified and procured, including injection
pumps,temporarytracerstoragetanks,andvarious
flowandtracermonitoringequipment(e.g.,tracer
chemical,reagents,and/orsamplebottles). Vendors
shouldbecontactedfortechnicalinformation,
equipment availability, and cost quotations for the
requiredfieldequipmentandanalyticalinstrumenta-
tion. Themajordecisionstobemadeandtheitemsto
bepurchasedpriortotheexecutionofthestudyare
discussedinthefollowingsubsections.
3.1.5.1 InjectionPump(s)
Pumpsthataretypicallyusedindrinkingwater
applicationscanbebroadlyclassifiedascentrifugal
pumpsorpositivedisplacementpumps. Thecentrifu-
galpumpsproduceaheadandaflowbyincreasing
thevelocityoftheliquidwiththehelpofarotating
vaneimpeller.Thepositivedisplacementpumps
operatebyalternatingbetweenfillingacavityand
displacingthevolumeofliquidinthecavity.The
positivedisplacementpumpsdeliveraconstant
volumeofliquid(foragivenspeed)againstvarying
dischargepressureorhead. Bydesign,thepositive
displacementpumpsarebettersuitedtoserveasan
injectionpumpforatracerstudy.Examplesof
positivedisplacementpumpsinclude: rotarylobe,
progressingcavity,rotarygear,piston,diaphragm,
screw,andchemicalmeteringpumps(e.g.,bellows,
diaphragm,piston,andtravelingcylinder).
Selectionofthemostappropriatepositivedisplace-
mentpumpdependsupontheinjectionrate,the
pressureinthereceivingsystem,thechemical
characteristicsofthetracer,andlocalexperienceand
preferences.Twotypesofpositivedisplacement
pumpshavegenerallybeenusedintracerstudies:
gearpumpsandmeteringpumps. Thefinalselection
dependsuponviscosityofthetracermaterial,
variabilityofpressureinthemain,dosageaccuracy
needs,andotherlocalfactors. Furthermore,tocontrol
thedrivespeed(i.e.,dosage),thesepumpsare
equippedwithalternatingcurrent(AC)ordirect
current(DC)motor.IfapumphasanACmotor,
frequencyisadjusted;ifitisequippedwithaDC
motor,voltageisadjustedtocontrolspeed.
EPAhasusedgearpumpsequippedwithvariable
frequencydrivesinthepastwithsuccessforconduct-
ingtracerstudies. Otherstudieshavereportedsuccess
withmeteringpumpswithvariablespeedorvariable
strokecontrollers. Thepumpshouldbesizedin
accordancewiththeanticipatedtracerdosage(for
moredetails,seeTracerDosageandInjectionDura-
tionSection3.2.3)andpressurerangeinthemain
pipefortheselectedinjectionlocation(s)inthestudy
area. Dependinguponthelocationanddosage
requirements,morethanonesizeofpumpmaybe
needed (excluding backup pumps).
3.1.5.2 TracerStorageandDosageRate
Measurement
Tracersareavailableindryorliquidform. Ifpur-
chasedasapowder,provisionsformixingthepowder
withwatermustbemade. Ifthetracerispurchasedin
liquidform,ittypicallycomesineither55-gallon
drumsorinlargercontainerssuchasa330-gallon
tote. Ifonlyasmallamountoftracerisneeded,a
single55-gallondrumwilltypicallysuffice. For
greateraccuracy,itisrecommendedthatthetracerbe
transferredfrom55-gallondrumstoasuitablysized
daytankwithasightglass(usedtoperiodically
monitorthetotaltracervolumedosed). Itiseasiestto
pumpthetracerfromasinglecontainerratherthan
havingtoswitchthepumpfromcontainertocon-
tainerduringtheinjectionprocess. Detailsontracer
dosagecalculationsarepresentedinSection3.2.3.
Ifameteringpumpispurchased,caremustbetakenso
thatthepumpflowrateiscalibratedforthespecific
tracersolution(bythevendor). Furthermore,the
Duringatracerstudywhenatracerchemicalisbeing
injectedintothesystem,inordertomeetwaterquality
regulationsandtosimplifythemodeling,itmaybe
desirabletomaintainaconstanttracerconcentrationin
thereceivingpipe. Thiscanbeaccomplishedby
monitoring the resulting concentration in the receiving
pipeandmanuallyadjustingthetracerinjectionrateor
throughtheuseofaclosed-loopsystemforautomati-
callycontrollingtheinjectionratebasedonflowinthe
receivingpipe. Theautomatedprocessismost
effectiveatalocationwheretheflowinthepipeis
varyingrelativelyslowlyandwhereaflowmeter
exists.Atypicalsituationistheuseofanexisting
venturimeterthatgeneratesa4-20milli-ampere(ma)
signal. Thissignalcanbeusedasinputtoacontroller
thathasbeencalibratedandprogrammedtocontrolthe
strokeorspeedofavariablestrokeorspeedinjection
pump. Iftheflowinthereceivingpipeisvarying
rapidlyoveralargeflowrange,itisdifficultforthe
closed-loopsystemtorespondquickly.
3-8
variableareaflowmeters(rotameters-withfloats
containedinanuprightconicaltube)arerelatively
inaccurateformeasuringtracerdosageevenafter
adjustmentsaremadefordensityandviscosity.
Figure3-1showsaflowtubethatcaneasilybe
customfabricatedandcalibratedtoaccurately
measuretherateoftracerinjection. Itisrecom-
mendedthatthesupplytankalsobemarkedtokeep
trackofthetracerfluidlevel. Timesshouldbenoted
ateachmarksothatitispossibletocreateamass
balanceforthetracerinjectedduringthestudy.
5 gal
4 gal
3 gal
2 gal
1 gal
from to
storage injection
tank pump inlet
Figure 3-1. Flow Calibration Tube.
3.1.5.3 DistributionSystemFlowRate
Measurement
Inordertocalculatetheconcentrationofthetracerin
thereceivingpipe,itisnecessarytoknowtheflow
rateinthepipe,theinjectionrateofthetracer,the
injectedconcentrationofthetracer,andtheback-
groundconcentrationinthewaterbeforetraceris
added. Flowrateshouldbemeasuredcontinuously,
becausevariationsinpipeflowratecanaffecttracer
concentration. Thesefluctuationsinflowcanbe
accommodatedbymanuallyadjustingthetracer
injectionrateinthefieldorthroughtheuseofaflow-
pacedinjectionpumpthatrespondstotheflowinthe
receiving pipe.
Placementofadditionalflowmetersorotherflow
measuringdevicesatvariouspointsinthesystemis
recommended. Thisinformationwillbeveryuseful
duringthepost-tracermodelingstudiesandis
invaluableincalibratinganetworkhydraulicmodel.
Iftheexistingsystemdoesnothaveanadequate
numberofflowmetersforpurposesofatracerstudy,
installationofadditionalmetersisrecommended.
Varioustypesofflowmetersmaybeusedto
measureflowinpipes.Theyarecategorizedaseither
non-intrusiveorintrusivemeters.Portableultrasonic
flowmetersarenon-intrusiveandprovidereasonably
accuratedataifthepipematerialisconductiveand
relativelynon-tuberculated. Theultrasonicflow
meterrequiressuitableupstream/downstreamstraight
runsofpipe. Insertionflowmetersarealsoanoption
formeasuringpipeflowrates. Insertionmetersare
intrusive,andmaybemagnetic(magmeters)thatare
flangecoupledtothepipeorhavepropellersthat
mustbeinsertedthroughaholeinthepipe.Allmeters
requirethatthereceivingmainpipebeexposed(via
excavation)orthatanexistingvaultbeused. Ifthe
injectionlocationisinthevicinityofareservoir/tank
andthewaterlevelchangesareavailableinrealtime,
itmay,insomeinstances,serveasaroughsurrogate
forin-pipeflowmeasurement. Theselectedmethodof
flowmeasurementmustbefieldtested.
Dependinguponthesizeofthereservoir/tankandthe
localdemand,thereservoirlevelchangesmaynotbe
fastoraccurateandpreciseenoughtodeterminethe
flowrateinrealtime.
3.1.5.4 FieldMeasurementofTracer
Concentration
Tracerconcentrationmaybemeasuredinthefield
usingeitherautomatedmonitorsthatanalyzea
sampleatapresetfrequency,bycollectinggrab
samples,oracombinationofboth. Grabsamplescan
bemanuallyanalyzedinthefieldorinthelaboratory.
Ifgrabsamplingisusedduringatracerstudy,the
samplingteamwillgenerallytraverseacircuitof
severalsamplinglocations. Usingsuchanapproach
willgenerallyyieldasamplingfrequencyofone
sampleperstationeveryonetothreehoursforan
average-sized residential neighborhood (unless
multiplecrewsareused). Someofthefactorsthatwill
influencesamplingfrequencyincludethespeedat
whichthetracerismovingwithinthedistribution
system,thenumberofsamplingcrewsparticipatingin
thestudy,thenumberofsamplingsitesselected,the
timeoftheday,andthedistancebetweensampling
sites. Equipmentrequirementsforgrabsamplingare
minimalandmayincludethefollowing:coolers,ice,
labeledsamplebottles,logbooks,andtemperature
blanks. Ifsamplesaretobeanalyzedinthefield,the
samplingteamswillneedtheappropriateanalytical
equipment. Ifsamplesaretobeanalyzedinthe
laboratory,theteamwillneedthemeanstoproperly
storeandtransportsamplestoacentrallaboratory.
Thequalityassuranceprojectplan(QAPP)may
requireduplicateorsplitsamplesforsomeorallof
theprimarysamples. Whentakingagrabsample,care
mustbetakentoflushthetapforasufficienttimeto
ensurethatthesampleisrepresentativeofthe
distributionmainratherthantheservicelines.
3-9
Reliancesolelyongrabsamplingmaybeimpractical
ifthestudyareaislarge,thetracerfrontismoving
rapidly,orahighfrequencyofsamplingisdesired.In
thesecases,continuousautomatedmonitoringmaybe
thebestchoicealthoughsomegrabsamplesfor
qualityassuranceandqualitycontrolarerecom-
mended. Ifcalciumchlorideorsodiumchlorideisthe
tracerselected,anonlinespecific-conductivitymeter
equippedwithanassociateddataloggerisrecom-
mended. Automatedmonitorsareavailableif
chlorineresidualisusedasatracer.Therearealso
automatedmonitorsavailableiffluorideisusedasa
tracer,buttherehasbeenrelativelylimiteduseunder
fieldconditions. Sincemostautomatedmonitors
requireacontinuoussidestream(ratherthanbeing
inserteddirectlyintoamain),thedrainageflowfrom
themonitormustbedischargedintoasewer,intothe
streetandsubsequentlyintoastormdrain,orintoa
perviousarea. Thisdischargecanbeanadded
complicationduringcoldweatherwhenitmayfreeze.
Sincethisdischargestreamisgenerallychlorinatedor
chloraminated,regulationsmaycontroldischargeinto
naturalwatercourses.Additionally,thisdischarge
flowmayhavetobeaccountedforifthedatasetis
beingusedtocalibrateadistributionsystemmodel,
andthequantityofdischargethroughaparticular
meterissignificantrelativetothedemandinthe
vicinityofthemeter.Ifthetotaldrainagedischargeis
significantforthepurposesofmodeling,provisions
forcontinuouslyormanuallymeasuringtheamount
offlowbeingbypassedareneeded.
Potentialgrabandonlinesamplingsitesinclude:
dedicatedsamplingtaps,hydrants,pumpstations,
tankinlet-outletlines,andfaucetslocatedinsideor
outsideofbuildings. Figure3-2depictsanautomated
monitoringstationusedbyEPA.Thisfigureillus-
tratesthecasewherethesamplingtapisallowedto
Figure 3-2. Automated Monitoring Station.
EPAandGCWWhavepioneeredtheuseofonline
monitorsasacentralfocusfordistributionsystem
tracerstudies. Inaseriesoffieldtests,EPAandGCWW
injectedcalciumchloridetracerintothewatersystem
andfollowedthemovementofthetracerusingauto-
mated conductivity meters strategically placed
throughoutthestudyarea. Threeseparatestudieswere
conductedinalargewatersystemrepresentingasmall
highlyurbanizedarea,asmalldead-endsuburbanarea,
andalargesuburbanpressurezone. Basedonthe
successofthesestudies,similartracerstudieshave
been conducted utilizing a combination of online
monitorsandgrabsamplesbytheCDCusingboth
fluorideandsodiumchlorideastracersinHillsborough
County,Florida(Boccellietal.,2004)andbytheAgency
forToxicSubstancesandDiseaseRegistry(ATSDR)using
fluorideandcalciumchlorideatalargemilitarybasein
NorthCarolina(Masliaetal.,2005;Sautneretal.,2005).
runcontinuouslythroughoutthestudywiththewater
goingtoadrain.Theflowratetoorthroughthe
samplingtapmustbesufficienttominimizethetravel
timefromthemaintothemonitor.
Online,automatedsamplingprogramsshouldbe
complementedwithagrabsamplingprogramtoadda
degreeofconfidenceinmeasureddataandtosupple-
mentfielddataatadditionallocationsoratthe
automatedmonitorstationsiftheyfailtorecord
correctly.
3.1.6 DevelopingaDetailedStudyDesign
Akeyelementinplanninganddesigningatracer
studyisthepreparationofastudydesigndocument.
Thisdocumentservesastheoverallplanforconduct-
ingatracerstudyandthus,theroadmapforexecution
ofthestudy.Threeimportantstudy-specificpartsof
thedesignplanthatmayberequiredbeforethe
executionphaseareaQAPP,aHealthandSafety
ProjectPlan(HSPP),andacontingencyplan.The
contingencyplandescribestheactionstobetakenif
unexpectedeventsoccur; forexample,ifdistribution
systemconcentrationsofthetracerexceedtheMCL
forchlorideorfluoride.TheHSPPshouldata
minimumdefinethejobhazardsthatmightbe
encounteredandthecontrols,protectiveequipment,
samplehandlingandworkpractices,safetyreview
procedures,andemergencyprocedurestobeem-
ployedduringthestudy.
TheQAPPshouldclearlydefinetheprojectobjectives,
organization, experimental approach, sampling
procedures,analyticalmethods,protocols,instrument
calibrationrequirements,datareporting,datareduction,
anddataverificationprocedures.
3-10
3.1.7AddressingAgencyandPublic
Notification
Appropriateagencies,includingfireandpolice
departments,shouldbenotifiedpriortothecom-
mencementoffieldactivities.Withheightened
awarenessofsecurity,allpeopleparticipatingshould
haveavalididentificationandcontactinformation.A
standardstatementconcerningthestudyshouldbe
developedandprovidedtoallteammembersincase
theyreceiveinquiresatthestudysite. Thissame
statementshouldbeusedbyutilitypersonnelto
answeranytelephoneinquiresthatmightbereceived.
Asummaryinformationcardmaybeprovidedtothe
studyparticipantsthatcouldbehandedouttothe
publicduringthestudy(ifrequested). Thisminimizes
therisksofmis-communication.
Iftheinjectionsiteorinstallationofmetersrequires
excavation,thestudyteammustobtainthenecessary
permitsandapprovals. Thisisespeciallyimportantif
anyofthesitesareinaresidentialneighborhoodor
nearabusystreetorroad. Careshouldbetakeninall
casestoprovideadequatetrafficcontrol. Safetyisof
paramount consideration.
3.2ExecutingaTracerStudy
Theteamshouldfirstbecomefamiliarwiththe
detailedstudydesigndocumentsdiscussedinSection
3.1.6. Basedonthesedocuments,thereareseveral
tasksthatneedtobecompletedduringtheexecution
phaseofatracerstudy.Thesetasksinclude:
Procurement,setup,testing,anddisinfectionof
study equipment (including pumps, storage
tanks,chemicals,reagents,tubing,connectors,
andcontinuoustracermonitoringstations).
Installationoffieldequipmentandtesting(both
flowandtracermonitoringequipmentto
confirmstudy-specificdistributionsystem
operationandflowstability).
Tracerdosageandinjectionduration
calculations.
Dryrunsandplannedtracerinjectionevents.
Real-timefieldassessments,sampling,and
analysis.
Equipment demobilization, initiation of data
collection,reduction,andverificationprocess.
Thesespecificexecutionsubtasksarefurtherdis-
cussedinthefollowingsub-sections.
Atailgatesafetymeetingbeforecommencementofany
fieldworkisthebestmethodtoincreaseawareness.
3.2.1Procurement,Setup,Testingand
DisinfectionofStudyEquipment
FieldequipmentidentifiedunderSection3.1.5andits
subsectionsshouldbeprocuredonatimelinesuch
thattheitemsarriveseveralweeksbeforetheplanned
study date, especially the monitoring and injection
equipmentthatmayrequireassembly.Anearly
arrivalwillensurethattheequipmentcanbeproperly
configuredandtestedbeforefielduse.
Unlesspre-calibratedflow-pacedinjectionequipment
ispurchased(orifthestudydoesnotrequireinjection
equipmentasinthecaseofusingnaturally/
normallyoccurringtracers),thestudyteamshould
obtainanappropriateinjectionpumpsetup. Figure3-
3showsapictureofatracerinjectionsystemusedby
EPAforfieldtests.Thissetupshouldbecalibratedin
thelabtocomputethespeed-specificdosagerate
usingthetracersolution. Ifappropriate,aflow-
calibrationtubeshouldalsobefabricatedtoconfirm
theflowinthefield. Figure3-3alsodepictsaflow-
tubeusedbyEPA.
Figure 3-3. Tracer Injection Setup (Storage Tank,
Calibration Tube and Feed Pump).
storage tank
calibration
tube
feed pump
3-11
Concurrently,ifapplicable,theteamshouldinitiate
thefabricationoftheautomatedtracermonitoring
stations. Thesestationsaretypicallyequippedwitha
probeformeasuringthetracer(orasurrogateparam-
etersuchasconductivity),associateddatalogger,and
batteries(forpoweringtheprobeandthedatalogger).
Ifaccuratemeasurementofflowthroughtheauto-
matedmonitoringstationisneeded,itshouldbe
augmentedwithahousehold-stylewatermeterand
logger.Theequipmentshouldbehousedinasecure
lockboxtoprotectitduringthefieldstudy.Figure3-
2showsanautomatedmonitoringstationusedby
EPAandGCWWtoconductatracerstudy.Theentire
setupshouldbetestedinthelabtoensureproper
operationandbatterycapacitytomaintainuninter-
rupted operation.
Thegrabsampling,laboratoryequipment,tracer
storage tanks, transportation equipment, and
arrangementsshouldbeprocuredandsetup. The
field equipment hookup, including interconnec-
tionsbetweenthetracerstoragetank,injection
pump,andflow-tube,shouldbeleaktested. The
equipmentusedforinjectionshouldbeproperly
disinfectedandtestedpriortofielddeploymentto
ensure that no microbiological contamination
resultsfromthefieldtests.
Ifultrasonicflowmetersareprocuredforfield
deployment,theequipmentshouldbesetupinalab
environment to confirm the individual component
operationandapproximatebatterylife. Theexisting
flowanddataacquisitionsystemstobeusedinthe
fieldstudyshouldbesampledfordataaccuracyand
field communication.
Duringthelabtestingphaseofthefieldequipment,
theentirefield(andbackup)crewshouldfamiliarize
themselveswithproperoperatingproceduresforthe
equipmenttheyaredesignatedtooperate.
Oneprocedureforequipmentdisinfectionisto
prepareapproximately50gallonsof50ppmchlorine
disinfectantsolution. Thissolutionisthenre-
circulatedthroughtheinjectionpumpsetupforabout
15minutes. Thereafter,continuouslyflushthe
injectionpumpusingde-ionizedwaterforabout15
minutes. Collectawatersampleattheendofthe
flushcycleandsenditforbacteriologicalanalysis
(ColiformandE.coli)toinsurethatthedisinfection
procedurewassuccessful. Forthepurposesof
sampling,usesterilesamplebottleswithade-
chlorinatingagent(e.g.,sodiumthiosulfate). Thede-
chlorinatingagentisaddedtoremoveanyresidual
chlorineorotherhalogenthatmaycontinuethe
disinfectionprocessinthesampleandyieldincorrect
testresults.
3.2.2InstallationofFieldEquipmentand
Testing
Priortothecommencementoffieldactivity,abrief
tailgatehealthandsafetymeetingshouldbe
conductedatthebeginningofeachdaytoremindthe
crewofpotentialjobhazards. Mobilizationoffield
equipmentforexcavations(ifrequiredforinstalling
mainflowmeters)shouldbeinitiatedtoallowforthe
flowmonitoringdevicestobeinstalledpriortothe
scheduledinjectionevent(s). Thistimelagwillvary
accordingtotheneedsofthespecificstudyandcould
rangefromseveraldaystoseveralweeks. Theearly
installationofflowmeterswillallowthestudyteam
tocaptureactualfieldflowdataforperformingany
revisionstotracerdosagecomputationsandprelimi-
naryhydraulicmodelinganalysis. Theflowmeter
installationlocationshouldmeetthemanufacturers
recommendationsforupstreamanddownstream
straightlengthsofundisturbedpipe. Theexcavations
shouldbeperformedinaccordancewiththeHSPP.
Appropriatedrainagefortheexcavatedpitsshouldbe
arrangedincaserainisforecastduringthestudy
period.
Themeasuredfieldflowdatashouldbeutilizedto
confirmthestabilityandrangeofflowattheinjection
locationandothermajorbranchesofthesystemwhere
flowismonitored. Itmaybenecessarytooperatethe
distributionsystemunderspecifiedconditionsin
ordertoachieveoptimumresultsduringthestudy.
Theoperationalchangesthatmayberequired
include: scheduledcyclingoftanklevels,pumps,
andvalves.Timerequiredforthedeploymentofthe
automatedmonitoringstationspriortothestartofthe
tracertestsisdependentuponseveralfactors,includ-
ingthenumberofmonitoringstations,thedistances
betweenstations,theeaseofattachingthestationsto
thesamplinghydrants,andtheeffortrequiredto
calibratethemonitoringequipment. Iffeasibleand
consistentwithnormaloperatingpolicies,thesystem
shouldbeoperatedtoavoidfrequentabruptchanges
inflowsuchaswouldbeassociatedwithapumpthat
wascyclingonandoffveryrapidly.
Adayortwopriortotheexecutionofthetracer
injectionevent,thestudyteamshouldfullydeploy
thecontinuousmonitoringstations(ifused). These
stationsshouldbehookedupatthedesignated
samplinglocationsanddatalogsshouldbechecked
toensuredataarebeingcollected. Flowthrougha
monitoringstationshouldbesufficienttominimize
thetimedelayindetectingtheinjectedtracer
betweenthemainandthesamplinglocation. Experi-
encehasshownthat1to2gallonsperminute(gpm)is
usuallysufficient. Thefieldcrewshouldalsotestthe
coverageandreliabilityoffieldcommunication
devices(suchascellularphones)inthedesignated
studyarea.
3-12
3.2.3TracerDosageandInjectionDuration
Calculations
Factorsaffectingtheamountoftracerrequiredforthe
studyincludethedurationoftheinjection,theflow
rateinthereceivingpipe,andthetargetconcentra-
tioninthedistributedwater.Thistargetconcentra-
tionshouldbeconsistentwithdrinkingwater
standards. Forexample,iffluorideisbeinginjected
(intoasystemthatdoesnotfluoridate)withasecond-
aryMCLof2mg/L,areasonabletargetconcentration
levelis80%oftheMCL,i.e.,1.6mg/L. Theinjection
rateshouldbesettomeetthatgoal.
Usingtheprincipleofmaterialbalance,theresulting
tracerconcentrationinareceivingpipedownstream
ofthepointofinjectioncanbecalculatedasfollows:
QD = QU +QT
(Equation3-1)
(CB QU )+(CT QT )
(Equation3-2)
CD =
QD
Where
Q
D
=flowdownstreamofinjectionpoint,L
3
/T
Q
U
=flowupstreamofinjectionpoint,L
3
/T
Q
T
=flowoftracersolution,L
3
/T
C =concentrationoftracermaterialdownstream
D
ofinjectionpoint,M/L
3
C
B
=backgroundconcentrationoftracermaterialin
distributedwater,M/L
3
C
T
=tracerconcentration,M/L
3
Equation 3-1 represents continuity and Equation 3-2
represents conservation of mass. As written, these
equations are independent of units for mass (M),
length (L), and time (T) as long as consistent units are
used for computations. However, when tracer
concentrations, injection rates, and injection
duration are used to calculate the required volume of
tracer material purchased, units for flow, concentra-
tion, and time must be commensurate or appropriate
conversion factors must be employed.
Forsometracers,theallowableconcentrationinthe
distributedwatermaybecontrolledbyoneofthe
dissolvedionsthatarepartofthetracer.Forexample,
ifcalciumchlorideistheselectedtracer,theconcen-
trationofthechlorideioninthedistributedwater
controlstheamountoftracerthatmaybeinjected.
Injectiondurationdependsuponthesizeandcom-
plexityofthedistributionsystem,andthemodeling
objectivesofthestudy.Atypicaldurationcanrange
fromonehourinasmallorbranchedsystem,toeight
hoursormoreinalarger,loopedsystem.Some
studieshavereportedsuccesswithaseriesofpulses.
However,ifthedurationoftheinjectionistooshort
ortheseriesofpulsestooclosetogetherintime,itis
difficulttoseparatethetracerfrontsastheytraverse
differentpathsatdifferentvelocitiesthroughthe
loopedsystems. Thepresenceoftankscanalso
impacttheneededtracerdurationsinceactivefilling
anddrawingcandampentheresultingtracerconcen-
trationasitmovesthroughthesystem.
Theinjectionequipmentshouldbelocatedcloseto
themaininordertominimizethetracertraveltimeto
themain. Alternatively,thetraveltimeshouldbe
compensatedforduringtheappropriatephasesofthe
study evaluation.
3.2.4DryRunsandPlannedTracerInjection
Event(s)
Beforetheplannedfull-scaletracerinjectioneventis
actuallycarriedout,theprojectteamshouldconsider
conductingasmallerdurationdryruninjectionto
confirmthesystemoperationandexpectedlevelsof
tracerconcentration. Ifcontinuousmonitorsaretobe
usedinthestudy,thenduringthedryrunsomeorall
ofthemonitorsshouldbeinstalledandtested. The
timinganddurationofthedryrunshouldbesuchthat
theinjectedpulseshouldbeshortandclearthe
systemwellbeforetheactualeventisinitiated.
Thedryrunservesasafinalsystemscheckand
providesthestudyteamanopportunitytomakeany
necessarylastminutechangespriortotheactual
study.Thereafter,theactualfull-scaleinjectionevent
should be conducted as planned.
3.2.5RealTimeFieldAssessments,Sampling,
andAnalysis
Whiletheinjectioneventisongoing,thestudyteam
shouldcarefullymonitorthetracerconcentrationat
theimmediatedownstreamlocationoftheinjectionto
ensurethattherearenosignificantdeviationsinthe
expectedversusobservedconcentrationsinthefield.
Fieldcrewsshouldcommunicatedirectlywiththe
systemoperations. Itiscriticalthatthefieldperson-
nelareawareofanychangesinsystemoperationsthat
mayaffectthestudy.Unanticipatedchangesinwater
demandmaycausethetracerconcentrationtoexceed
targetconcentrationlevels. Insuchanevent,thefield
crewshouldbetrainedtotakemeasurestominimize
anyadverseeffects. Thepreventivemeasuresmay
includelowering(orstopping)theinjectionrate,or
achievingappropriatedilutionbymeansofrerouting
waterthroughthedistributionsystem(asappropriate).
Furthermore,anysuchtracerconcentration
exceedancesshouldbeconfirmedbyperformingfield
grabsampleanalysistomakesurethattheexceedance
isrealandnotaninstrumentanomaly. Untilthe
3-13
resultsareconfirmed,itisbesttoerronthesafeside
andtakepreventivemeasurestomaintainwaterquality.
Periodically,thefieldcrewshouldtakegrabsamples
and inspect the continuous monitoring stations to
ensurethattheequipmentisoperatingproperly.The
grabsamplesshouldbeappropriatelyhandledand
analyzedinthefieldortransportedtothelaboratory
forfurtheranalysis. Thesamplingandmonitoring
effortshouldcontinuewellpasttheconclusionofthe
injectioneventuntilthetracerisexpected(and
observed)tohavemovedoutofthesystem. Thismay
takeaperiodof24to48hoursormoreaftercomple-
tionoftheinjectionevent.
Duringthecourseofthesamplingevent,itisvery
usefultoexamineandassessthefielddataonanear
real-timebasis. Questionsthatshouldbeasked
includeAretheresultsreasonable?Isthetracer
movingthroughthesystemataspeedconsistentwith
predictions? Basedonthisassessment,modifica-
tionsmaybemadeintermsofinjectionrate,grab
samplingfrequency,orstudyduration.
3.2.6EquipmentDe-Mobilization,Initiationof
DataCollection,Reduction,and
VerificationProcess
Afterthescheduledinjectionevent(s)arecompleted,
thefieldcrewshoulddownloadthedata(including
flowandtracerconcentrations)fromthevarious
monitoringdevices. Thedatashouldbespotchecked
againstfieldgrabsamplingdatatoensurethatthere
arenotimeanomaliesorgapsinthedatalogandthe
readingsmatchrelativelywell.
Afterthefieldsamplingeventsarecompleted,the
crewshouldde-mobilizetheequipment,removethe
automatedmonitoringstations,refillanyexcavations,
andrestorethesystemoperationstotheirnormal
conditions.
Downloadeddatafromthefieldshouldbeprocessed
accordingtotheQAPPandusedforfurthermodeling
andanalysis. Theuseoffielddataincalibrationand
validationofhydraulicandwaterqualitymodelsis
discussedfurtherinChapter4.
3.3TracerStudyCosts
Ingeneral,thecostofconductingatracerstudyis
proportionaltothestudyareasize,numberof
monitoring sites, study duration, sophistication and
amountofequipment,andcomplexityofpost-study
analysis. Ifastudyincorporatesaninjectedtracerand
theuseofcontinuousmonitors,itcanbemuchmore
expensiveinitiallythanastudyusinganaturaltracer
andgrabsamples. However,theinjectionequipment
andcontinuousmonitoringequipmentcanbereused
atvariouslocations. Thesearethecosttradeoffs
betweenpurchaseofautomatedmonitoringequip-
mentandlaborassociatedwithgrabsampling. In
somecases,alargerdatasetderivedfromanauto-
matedmonitorisnecessaryforadetailedanalysis.
Costdatapresentedinthissectionareintendedto
providethebasisforthistypeofanalysis. Forthe
purposesofthischapter,theoverallcostshavebeen
brokendownintotwodistinctcategories: equipment
andlabor.Materialcostsareonlyafractionofthe
total,andtherefore,havebeencombinedandin-
cludedwithequipmentcostsforsimplicity.
Table3-2liststypicalequipmentandmaterialcosts
forthoseitemsthatmaybeusedintracerstudies. The
unitcostscanbeeasilyscaledtotheneedsofa
specificstudy.Chemicaltracercosts,including
analyticalcosts,wereprovidedearlierinTable3-1.
Costsmayvarywidelyamongstudies. Forexample,
ifitisnecessarytopurchaseorrentastoragetankora
Table 3-2. Equipment Costs
Equipment&Material UnitCost($)
Injectionpump $1,000- $5,000
Flowmeter(ultrasonicmeterfor
mainpipes)
$7,000- $9,000
Excavation,riggingandbackfill
(equipmentrentalpersite)
$1,500
Labchemicals,batteriesand
plumbingsupplies(lumpsum*)
$1,000- $5,000
Automatedmonitoringbox(self
constructed)
<$200
OnlineconductivityISE,meter
andlogger
$800- $1,500
Automatedmonitoringstation
waterflowmeter
$600- $800
Onlinefluoridemeter $5,000- $10,000
Safetyequipment(e.g.,vests,
firstaidkits,raingear,and
flashlights)
$500- $1,000
Communicationequipment(e.g.,
radiosandGPS)
$500- $1,000
Hydrantequipment(e.g.,
wrenches,caps,andhoses)
$1,000- $2,000
Transportation(e.g.,rental
vehicles)
$500- $2,000
Tracerstoragetanks(depending
uponvolumeandmaterial)
$500- $1,000
3-14
truck,costswillbehigherifthesetypesofitemsare
notreadilyavailable. Ifthestudyteamelectsto
analyzesamplesin-houseratherthanusinganoutside
laboratory,theteamshouldbalancethecostoflabor,
andthecostofadditionalreagentsandchemicals
againstthecostofperformingtheanalysesatan
outsidecommerciallaboratory.Laborcostsmaybe
evenmorevariablethanequipmentandmaterialcosts
andareafunctionofthesizeandcomplexityofthe
study.Inordertoprovideaneasybasisforcompari-
son,thelaborcostsarepresentedinlaborhours(Table
3-3)andincludeacombinationofengineersand
technicians. Laborhourshavebeenestimatedforlow,
medium,andhigh-endstudies. Theseestimatesare
obtainedfromactualfieldstudies,asdescribedbelow.
Thisapproachshouldallowutilitiestomakesite-
specificcostestimates.
Table 3-3. Representative Labor Hours
for a Range of Studies
Activity Low-End Medium High-End
Planning 27 274 480
Setup - 150 520
Fieldstudy 51 604 370
Laboratory
analysis
8 160 120
Post-study
assessment
24 212 740
Total 110 1,400 2,230
Atypicalexampleofalow-endtracerstudyis
providedbytheSweetwaterAuthoritydistribution
systeminSouthernCalifornia(seesecondsidebarin
Section3.1.4.5,page3-6). TheSweetwatersystem
coversaserviceareaof28squaremiles. Theutility
wasabletotakeadvantageofanaturallyoccurring
tracerandusedgrabsamplestakenat28existing
dedicatedsamplingsitesoveraperiodof5days. A
studyperformedinthe21-square-mileCheshire
serviceareaoftheSouthCentralConnecticut
RegionalWaterAuthorityin1989(seesecondsidebar
inSection3.1.4.1onpage3-4)providesanexample
ofamedium-leveltracerstudy.Inthiscase,the
normalfluoridefeedwasshutoffforaperiodof7
days(andthenturnedbackon)andgrabsampleswere
takenatintervalsofafewhoursat23sitesovera
periodof14days. Anexampleofahigh-endstudyis
providedbyatwo-phasedfieldinvestigationcon-
ductedintwosuburbanareasofGCWW.Thefirstarea
isasmall(<1squaremile)dead-endsystem,andthe
secondarea,a12-square-milepressurezone. A
calciumchloridetracerwasinjectedandmonitored
using a combination of automated conductivity
metersandgrabsamples. Inthesmallerarea,20
meterswereusedandmonitoringwasconductedover
a24-hourperiod. Inthesecondarea,33meterswere
usedandtwoseparatetracerinjectionswerecon-
ductedoveraperiodof5days. Includingboth
studies,atotalof725grabsamplesweretakenand
analyzedforconductivity,chloride,andcalcium.
Flowwasmonitoredatfourlocationsusingultrasonic
flowmeters.
Table3-3presentsestimatedlaborhoursforthese
typesofstudies. Theyaredividedintotheplanning
phase(asdescribedinSection3.1);setup,fieldwork,
andlaboratoryanalysisthattogethermakeupthe
executionphase(seeSection3.2);andthepost-study
modeling,assessment,andreportphase. Asillus-
tratedinthistable,thereisasignificantvariationin
thelaborhoursrequiredtoconductatracerstudy.For
example,thelow-endlaborcostsresultedduetothe
followingstudycharacteristics:naturallyoccurring
tracerwasused,nonewequipmentwaspurchased,
existingroutinemonitoringsiteswereused,andonly
alimitedpost-studyassessmentwasmade. The
medium-sizedstudyincludedthefollowingcharacter-
istics: achemicalthatwasroutinelyadded(fluoride)
tothewaterdistributionsystemwasusedasthetracer
(byshuttingitoff),thestudyrequiredamuchlonger
periodtocomplete,andsinceitwasthefirstmajor
tracerstudyinthedistributionsystem,itrequired
significant planning. The high-end study included
thefollowingcharacteristics: itwasthefirstmajor
tracerstudyemployingwide-scaleuseofcontinuous
monitors; a non-naturally occurring, non-routinely
addedchemicalwasinjectedasatracer;andsignifi-
canttimewasrequiredforacquiringandinstallingthe
equipment. Forpurposesofthisstudy,averydetailed
post-studydataassessmentinvolvingprocessingof
tracerstudydata,pipenetworkmodelcalibrationand
reportpreparationrequiredsignificantlaborexpendi-
tures. Examplesofmodelcalibrationeffortsassoci-
atedwithtracerstudiesarepresentedinChapter4.
3.4Summary,Conclusionsand
Recommendations
Tracersandtracingtechniqueshavebeenusedfor
manyyearsinanumberofengineeringapplications
toestimatestreamvelocityandretentiontimein
waterandwatersupplyunitprocesses.Morerecently,
tracershavebeenusedforcalibratingdrinkingwater
distributionsystemhydraulicandwaterquality
models. Forthepurposesofthisdocument,itis
assumedthattracerstudiesareusedtocalibrateand
validatenetworkmodels. Thecalibratedandvali-
datednetworkmodelsarethenusedtoestimateother
parameterssuchaswaterageandtraveltimes.
However,thedatafromatracerstudycanbedirectly
usedtoestimatesomespecificparameterssuchas
waterage(DiGianoetal.,2005). Acomprehensive
3-15
summaryofpotentialusesandregulatoryapplications
fortracerstudiesisprovidedinthefirstsubsectionof
thischapter.Drinkingwatertracersmightinclude
chemicalsthatareinjectedintoawaterdistribution
pipe,thetemporaryshutoffofachemicaladditive
currentlybeingaddedtotreatedwater(suchas
fluoride),orsignificantchangesinconcentrationof
disinfectants,DBPs,ornaturalcompounds. Thetracer
methodology selected would significantly impact the
overallcostsofthestudy.Probably,themostexpen-
siveoptionwouldbetoinjectachemicaltracer,
monitoritusingleasedorpurchasedonlineinstru-
mentation,andconductthestudyusingcontractor
staff.Theleastexpensiveapproachwouldbetotake
advantageofanaturaltracer,monitortheprogressof
thetracerbygrabsampling,andconductthestudy
usingprimarilyin-housestaff. Onceatracerinjec-
tionmethodologyhasbeenselected,carefulplan-
ningandexecutionwillensurethesuccessofthestudy.
Whenplanningatracerstudy,ifthespecificsteps
outlinedinthischapterarefollowed,theyshould
greatlyincreasethepotentialforasuccessfulstudy.
Thesestepsinclude:establishingclearstudyobjec-
tives,formingastudyteam,definingthestudyarea
characteristics,carefullyselectinganappropriate
tracer,selectingtheproperfieldequipment,develop-
ingkeyplanningdocuments,andensuringthatthe
publicandaffectedagenciesarenotified. Applica-
tionofadistributionandwaterqualitymodelduring
theplanningstageishighlyrecommendedtosimulate
theapproximatebehaviorthatwillbeexpected
duringtheactualtracerevent.
Duringtheexecutionphaseofthestudy,thefollow-
ingissuesshouldbeaddressed: procurementof
equipmentandmaterials;setup,testinganddisinfec-
tionoftheprocuredequipment;availabilityof
analytical instrumentation and laboratory facilities;
and,finally,theinstallation,testing,andoperationof
fieldequipment. Duringtheexecutionphase,itis
importanttoreviewandunderstandhowtracer
dosagesandinjectiondurationaretobeimplemented.
Dryrunsarehighlyrecommendedasameansof
debuggingtheprocedurespriortoafullstudy.
Distributionsystemtracerstudieshavebeenconducted
forover15years,butrecenttechnologydevelopments
haveimprovedtheefficiencyofthesestudiesand
providepromiseforgreatlyexpandedapplicationsin
thefuture. Specificcomponentsthatwillfuelthis
expanded use include the following: continuous
monitorsthatcanbeeasilyadaptedforuseindistribu-
tionsystemsarebeingdevelopedandtested,inpartin
responsetowatersecurityconcerns;automatedmeter
reading(AMR)equipmentisbeinginstalledbymany
utilitiesandcouldprovidemoredetailedtemporaland
spatialconsumptiondataforhydraulicmodels;
advancedanalysissoftwareisevolvingthatwill
facilitatetheuseoflargeamountsofcontinuousdatain
calibratingdistributionsystemmodels;andwith
increasedavailabilityofthesetechnologies,costsare
expectedtodecreasesothatlargerutilitiescanaffordto
purchaseandroutinelyusetheequipment,andconsult-
ingengineerscanaffordablyoffertheseservicesto
smallerutilities.
Duringthefieldstudy,itisimportantthatthestudy
teambeabletoassesstheprogressofthetracer,inreal
time,asitpropagatesthroughthesystem. Concise
andconsistentcommunicationsbetweentracerstudy
teammembers,testcoordinator,andwaterutilitystaff,
iscriticalalalltimesduringthetest.
Inthefuture,itishighlylikelythatadvancescur-
rentlyonthehorizonwillresultinsignificant
increaseduseofbothonlinetracer(orwaterquality)
monitorsandflowmonitoringinstrumentation. As
theon-linetechnologybecomesmorewidelyusedin
drinkingwater,theuseofnetworkwaterquality
modelswillalsobemorewidelyaccepted. Online
monitoring in conjunction with water quality
modelingwillprovideanin-depthunderstandingof
themannerinwhichwaterqualitychangescanbe
monitoredinadrinkingwaterdistributionsystem.
Also,giventhecurrentclimateofconcernover
distributionwaterqualityfrombotharegulatoryand
securityviewpoint,itisreasonabletoassumethat
therewillbeincreasedinterestinapplyingthistypeof
technologyinthewaterindustry.
3-16
References
Boccelli,D.L.,F.Shang,J.G.Uber,A.Orcevic,D.
Moll,S.Hooper,M.Maslia,J.Sautner,B.Blount,and
F.Cardinali. TracerTestsforNetworkModel
Calibration.Proceedings,ASCE-EWRIAnnual
Conference. 2004.
Boccelli,D.,andJ.Uber.IncorporatingSpatial
CorrelationinaMarkovChainMonteCarloAp-
proachforNetworkModelCalibration.Proceedings,
sourcesCongress,Anchorage,AK. 2005.
Boulos,P.F.,W.M.Grayman,R.W.Bowcock,J.W.
Clapp,L.A.Rossman,R.M.Clark,R.A.Deininger,and
A.K.Dhingra. HydraulicMixingandFreeChlorine
ResidualsinReservoirs,Journal of AWWA,88(7):48-
59. 1996.
Clark,R.M.,W.M.Grayman,R.Males,andA.F.Hess.
Modeling Contaminant Propagation in Drink-
ingWaterDistributionSystems,Journal of Environ-
mental Engineering, ASCE,119(2):349-364. 1993.
Clark,R.M.,W.M.Grayman,J.A.Goodrich,R.A.
Deininger,andA.F.Hess.FieldTestingDistribution
ofWaterQualityModels,Journal of AWWA,
83(7):67-75. 1991.
Clark,R.M.,G.Smalley,J.A.Goodrich,R.Tull,L.A.
Rossman,J.T.Vasconcelos,andP.F.Boulos.Manag-
ingWaterQualityinDistributionSystems: Simulat-
ingTTHMandChlorineResidualPropagation,
Journal of Water Supply Research and Technology
Aqua,43(4):182-191. 1994.
Clark,R.M.,andJ.A.Coyle. MeasuringandModel-
ingVariationsinDistributionSystemWaterQuality,
Journal of AWWA,82(8):46-53. 1990.
DiGiano,F.A.,andG.Carter.TracerStudiesto
MeasureWaterResidenceTimeinaDistribution
SystemSuppliedbyTwoWaterTreatmentPlants.
Proceedings,AWWAAnnualConference.2001.
DiGiano,F.A.,W.Zhang,andA.Travaglia.Develop-
mentofthemeanresidencetimefromtracerstudiesin
distributionsystems.Journal of Water Supply:
Research and Technology - Aqua54:1-14.2005.
EPA.The Stage 2 DBPR Initial Distribution System
Evaluation Guidance Manual. 2003a.
EPA.Drinking Water Advisory: Consumer Accept-
ability Advice and Health Effects Analysis on Sodium.
Availableat:http://www.epa.gov/safewater/ccl/pdfs/
reg_determine1/support_cc1_sodium_dwreport.pdf.
2003b.
Ferguson,B.A.andF.A.DiGiano.Impactoftempo-
raryswitchesfrommonochloraminetofreechlorine
onwaterqualityindistributionsystems.Proceed-
ings,AWWAAnnualConference.2005.
Grayman,W.M.,R.A.Deininger,A.Green,P.F.Boulos,
R.W.Bowcock,andC.C.Godwin.WaterQualityand
MixingModelsforTanksandReservoirs,Journal of
AWWA,88(7):60-73. 1996.
Grayman,W.M.,L.A.Rossman,C.Arnold,R.A.
Deininger,C.Smith,J.F.Smith,andR.Schnipke.
Water Quality Modeling of Distribution System
Storage Facilities.AwwaRFandAWWA.Denver,CO.
2000.
Grayman,W.M.UseofTracerStudiesandWater
QualityModelstoCalibrateaNetworkHydraulic
Model,Current Methods,1(1):38-42,HaestadPress,
Waterbury,CT.2001.
Grayman,W.M.,L.A.Rossman,R.A.Deininger,C.D.
Smith,C.N.Arnold,andJ.F.Smith.Mixingand
AgingofWaterinDistributionSystemStorage
Facilities,Journal of AWWA,96(9):70-80. 2004.
Hatcher,M.D.,W.M.Grayman,C.D.Smith,andM.
Mann. MonitoringandModelingoftheSweetwater
AuthorityDistributionSystemtoAssessWater
Quality.Proceedings,AWWAAnnualConference.
2004.
Maslia,M.L.,J.B.Sautner,C.Valenzuela,W.M.
Grayman,M.M.Aral,andJ.W.Green,Jr.Useof
Continuous Recording Water-Quality Monitoring
EquipmentforConductingWater-DistributionSystem
TracerTests:TheGood,theBadandtheUgly.
Panguluri,S.,R.Krishnan,L.Garner,C.Patterson,Y.
Lee,D.Hartman,W.Grayman,R.ClarkandH.Piao.
UsingContinuousMonitorsforConductingTracer
StudiesinWaterDistributionSystems.Proceedings,
Sautner,J.B.,M.L.Maslia,C.Valenzuela,W.M.
Grayman,M.M.Aral,andJ.W.Green,Jr.Field
TestingofWaterDistributionSystemsatU.S.Marine
CorpsBase,CampLejeune,NorthCarolina,in
SupportofanEpidemiologicalStudy.Proceedings,
3-17
AWWA.Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 20
th
Edition. Editedby:
LenoreS.Clrsceri,ArnoldE.Greenberg,andAndrew
D.Eaton,AmericanPubicHealthAssociation/AWWA/
WaterEnvironmentFederation,pp2-44to2-45.
1998.
Teefy,S.M.,andP.C.Singer.PerformanceTesting
andAnalysisofTracerTeststoDetermineCompliance
ofaDisinfectionSchemewiththeSWTR.Journal of
AWWA,82(12):88-98. 1990.
Teefy,S.M.Tracer Studies in Water Treatment
Facilities: A Protocol and Case Studies.AwwaRF
andAWWA,Denver,CO.1996.
Boulos,andR.M.Clark. KineticsofChlorine
Decay,Journal of AWWA,89(7):54-65. 1997.
Vasconcelos,J.,P.Boulos,W.Grayman,L.Kiene,O.
Wable,P.Biswas,A.Bahri,L.Rossman,R.Clark,and
J.Goodrich. Characterization and Modeling of
Chlorine Decay in Distribution Systems.AwwaRF.
1996.
3-18
Chapter4
CalibrationofDistributionSystemModels
Waterdistributionsystemmodelscanbeusedina
widevarietyofapplicationstosupportdesign,
planning,andanalysistasks. Sincethesetasksmay
result in engineering decisions involving significant
investments,itisimportantthatthemodelusedbean
acceptablerepresentationoftherealworldandthat
themodelerhaveconfidenceinthemodelpredic-
tions. Inordertodeterminewhetheramodelrepre-
sentstherealworld,itiscustomarytomeasure
varioussystemvalues(e.g.,pressure,flow,storage
tankwaterlevels,andchlorineresiduals)duringfield
studiesandthencomparethefieldresultstomodel
predictions. Ifthemodeladequatelypredictsthefield
measurementsunderarangeofconditionsforan
extendedperiodoftime,themodelisconsideredtobe
calibrated. Iftherearesignificantdiscrepancies
betweenthemeasuredandmodeleddata,further
calibrationisneeded. Therearenogeneralstandards
fordefiningwhatisadequateorwhatisasignificant
discrepancy.However,itisrecognizedthatthelevel
ofcalibrationrequiredwilldependontheuseofthe
model. Agreaterdegreeofcalibrationisrequiredfor
modelsthatareusedfordetailedanalysis,suchas
designandwaterqualitypredictions,thanformodels
usedformoregeneralplanningpurposes(e.g.,master
planning).
Allmodelsareapproximationsoftheactualsystems
thatarebeingrepresented. Inanetworkmodel,both
themathematicalequationsusedinthemodelandthe
specificmodelparametersareonlynumericalapproxi-
mations. Forexample,theHazen-Williamsequation
usedtodescribefrictionheadlossisanempirical
relationshipthatwasderivedbasedonlaboratory
experiments(WilliamsandHazen,1920).Further-
more,theroughnessparameter(C-factor)usedinthe
Hazen-Williamsequationthatmodelersassigntoeach
pipeisnotknownwithtotalcertaintybecauseitis
notfeasibletoexamineandtesteverypipeinthe
system.Thegoalincalibrationistoreduceuncer-
taintyinmodelparameterstoalevelsuchthatthe
accuracyofthemodeliscommensuratewiththetype
ofdecisionsthatwillbemadebasedonmodel
predictions.
Thetypesofmodelcalibrationassociatedwithwater
distributionsystemanalysiscanbecategorizedin
severalways. Thenomenclaturedependsuponthe
adjustedparametersandthetechniqueemployed. In
general,calibrationcanbecategorized(orreferenced)
asfollows:
Hydraulicandwaterqualitymodelcalibration.
Theconceptofcalibrationcanbecomparedtofine
tuninganoldfashionedtelevision(TV)set. Oneknob
ontheTVisusedfortuningthechannelwhileother
knobsareadjustedtoimprovecolor,sharpness,contrast,
andhue. However,incalibratinganetworkmodel,there
arefarmoreknobstoadjustasillustratedinFigure4-1.
Adjustment knobs
Field data
Initial model results
Model results after calibration
Figure 4-1. Conceptual Representation of Calibration.
Someoftheknobsmaybeusedtoadjustroughness
coefficientsforpipes,otherknobstoadjustdemands
assignedtonodes,whilestillotherknobsmaycontrol
valvepositions,pumpcurves,orotherparametersthat
arenotknownwithcompletecertainty.Calibratinga
modelisanarduoustaskbecausetherearemanyknobs
thatcanbeadjusted.Findingthecombinationof
parametersthatresultsinthebestagreementbetween
measuredandmodeledresultsisdifficult. Thisprocess
iscomplicatedbythefactthattheremaynotbeasingle
bestsetofparameters. ExtendingtheTVanalogy,the
knobsmaybeadjustedinordertogetthebestreception
foronechannel. However,whenthechannelischanged,
theknobsmayneedtobeadjustedtoimprovethe
receptionforthenewchannel.Similarly,withanetwork
model,asetofparametersmaygivethebestmatchfor
onesetofdatawhileotherparametersmaygivebetter
resultsforanothersetofdata.Therefore,itisrecom-
mendedthatamodelerfirstcalibratethemodelusing
oneormoresetsoffielddataandthenvalidateitwith
anindependentsetoffielddata.
4-1
Static(steadystate)ordynamic(extended
period simulation) calibration.
Manual or automated calibration.
Hydrauliccalibrationreferstotheprocessofadjust-
ingtheparametersthatcontrolthehydraulicbehavior
ofthemodel. Similarly,waterqualitycalibration
relatestotheprocessofadjustingparametersusedin
thewaterqualityportionofthemodel. Staticor
steady-statecalibrationrelatestocalibrationofa
modelthatdoesnotvaryovertime,orusingdatathat
iscollectedrepresentingasnapshotintime.Dynamic
orEPScalibrationusestime-varyingdatainthe
calibrationprocess. Manualcalibrationreliesupon
theusertoinvestigatetheeffectsofarangeof
possibleparametervalues. Automatedcalibration
employsoptimizationtechniquestofindthesetof
parametersthatresultsinthebestmatchbetween
measuredandmodeledresults.
Itshouldbenotedthatthespecificapplication
methodandavailabilityofsomeofthesetechniques
willvarydependinguponthesoftwareusedfor
modelingandtheavailablenetworkmodelinforma-
tion. Therefore,onlythegeneraltechniquesem-
ployedineachofthesetypesofcalibrationare
discussedinthefollowingsections. Then,some
examplecasestudiesarepresentedtoillustratetheir
use. Thefinalsectioninthischapterdiscussesfuture
trendsincalibrationandthepossibilityofgeneral
calibration standards.
4.1HydraulicandWaterQuality
ModelCalibration
Hydrauliccalibrationisessentialforanymodel
simulationtobemeaningful. Furthermore,the
distributionsystemwaterqualitymodelsworkin
concertwiththehydraulicmodelandutilizetheflow
and velocity information calculated by the hydraulic
model. Thus,ifthehydraulicmodelisnotproperly
calibratedandresultsininaccurateflowandvelocity
estimates,thewaterqualitymodelwillnotperform
correctly.Infact,waterqualitymodelingisvery
sensitivetotheunderlyinghydraulicmodel. Fre-
quently,ahydraulicmodelthathasbeencalibrated
sufficientlyforapplicationssuchasmasterplanning
mayrequireadditionalcalibrationbeforeitis
appropriateforuseinwaterqualitymodeling. The
followingsubsectionsdescribetheparametersand
techniquesemployedforhydraulicandwaterquality
model calibration.
4.1.1HydraulicModelCalibration
Hydraulicbehaviorreferstoflowconditionsinpipes,
valvesandpumps,andpressure/headlevelsat
junctionsandtanks. Parametersthataretypicallyset
andadjustedincludepiperoughnessfactors,minor
losses,demandsatnodes,thepositionofisolation
valves(closedoropen),controlvalvesettings,pump
curves,anddemandpatterns.Whenintiallyestablish-
ingandadjustingtheseparameters,careshouldbe
takentokeepthevaluesfortheparameterswithin
reasonablebounds. Forexample,iflocalexperience
showsthattheroughnessfactorfora20-yearold
ductileironpipetypicallyfallswithinarangefrom
100to130,avaluethatisnotwithinorclosetothat
rangeshouldnotbeusedjusttoimprovetheagree-
mentbetweenthemeasuredandmodeleddata. Useof
unreasonablevaluesmayleadtoabettermatchfor
onesetofdata,butwilltypicallynotprovidearobust
setofparametersthatwouldapplyinothersituations.
Propercalibrationrequiresthatadjustmentsbemade
tothecorrectparameters. Acommonmistakeoccurs
whenadjustmentsareincorrectlymadeinonesetof
parametersinordertomatchthefieldresultswhilethe
parametersthatareactuallyincorrectareleftun-
touched. Thisprocessisreferredtoascompensating
errorsandshouldobviouslybeavoided. Field
verificationofsuspectparameters(e.g.,openorclosed
valves)canreduceconfusioncreatedbycompensat-
ingerrors.
Anexampleofcompensatingerrorsisanadjustmentin
roughnessfactorsinordertocompensateforaclosed
isolationvalveinthesystemthatisrepresentedasopen,
orpartiallyopen,inthemodel. Inthiscase,unreason-
ablylowvaluesfortheHazen-Williamsroughness
coefficientsaretypicallyintroducedinordertoforcea
largeheadlossinthepipesthatareactuallyclosed.
Thoughthismayresultinapproximatingthepressure
measurementsmadeinthefield,itwillintroduceother
errorsinflowandvelocitycalculations. Compensating
errorsmayalsoresultfromincorrectlyadjusting
demandsorotherparameters.
4.1.2WaterQualityModelCalibration
Subsequenttothepropercalibrationofahydraulic
model,additionalcalibrationofparametersinawater
qualitymodelmayberequired. Thefollowing
parametersareusedbywaterqualitymodelsthatmay
requiresomedegreeofcalibration:
InitialConditions:Definesthewaterquality
parameter(concentration)atalllocationsinthe
distributionsystematthestartofthe
simulation.
ReactionCoefficients:Describeshowwater
qualitymayvaryovertimeduetochemical,
biologicalorphysicalreactionsoccurringinthe
SourceQuality:Definesthewaterquality
characteristicsofthewatersourceoverthetime
periodbeingsimulated.
4-2
Table 4-1. Calibration/Input Requirements for Water Quality Models
Thedetailsofcalibrationdependupon
thetypeandapplicationofthewater
qualitymodel. Calibrationrequire-
mentsforeachtypeofmodelingare
describedbelowandsummarizedin
Table4-1.
Waterage:Noexplicitwater
quality calibration can be
performedbecausethereareno
reactioncoefficients. Estimates
ofinitialwaterageintanksand
reservoirsaredesirableinorder
toshortenthelengthofthe
simulation. Sourcewaterageisusuallysetto
zeroforallsources.Wateragecanbeespecially
sensitivetoinflow-outflowratesfortanks,
mixingcharacteristicsoftanks,andtraveltimes
indead-endpipes.
Whenmodelingatank,animportantparameteristhe
initialageofthewaterinthetankatthestartofthe
simulation. Thisvaluecannotbemeasuredinthefield
butcanbeestimatedbydividingthetankvolumeby
thevolumeofwaterthatisexchangedeachday.
Frequently,modelerswilljustassumethattheinitial
ageiszeroandrunthemodelforalongperioduntilit
hasreachedadynamicequilibrium.Thisoccurswhen
theinitialwaterinthetankhasbeenflushedout
entirelythroughthefillanddrawprocess.Thefollow-
ingfigure(Figure4-2)showstheeffectsoftheinitial
waterageonthemodeledresults.Asillustrated,a
goodinitialestimateforwaterage(120hoursinthis
case)resultsinamuchshortertimeperioduntilthe
dynamicequilibriumisreached.Infact,inthiscase
whentheinitialagewasinputaszerohours,themodel
didnotevencomeclosetoreachingdynamicequilib-
riumduringthesimulationperiodandwouldhave
requiredamuchlongerrundurationtoreachthesame
point.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Hours
W
a
t
e
r

a
g
e

(
h
o
u
r
s
)

Initial age 0 hours Initial age 120 hours
Figure 4-2. Effects of the Initial Water Age on the
Modeled Results.
ModelApplication
Initial
Conditions
Reaction
Coefficients
Source
Quality
Waterage YES NO UsuallyNO
Sourcetracing YES NO UsuallyNO
Conservativeconstituent YES NO YES
Reactiveconstituent YES YES YES
Sourcetracing: Noexplicitwaterquality
calibrationcanbeperformedbecausethereare
noreactioncoefficients. Estimatesofinitial
conditionsintanksforpercentageofwater
comingfromasourcearedesirableinorderto
shortenthelengthofthesimulation. Valuesfor
sourcesareusuallysettozeroforallsources
exceptforthespecificsourcebeingtraced.
Conservativeconstituents:Noexplicitwater
qualitycalibrationcanbeperformedbecause
therearenoreactioncoefficients. Estimatesof
initialconditionsintanksforconcentrationsof
the conservative constituents can usually be
determinedfromfielddataandaredesirablein
ordertoshortenthelengthofthesimulation.
Valuesforsourcesaresettothetypical
concentrationsfoundinthesource.
Reactive constituents: For reactive constituents,
boththeformofthereactionequationandthe
reactioncoefficientsmustbeprovided. When
modelingchlorineorchloraminedecay,the
mostcommonformulationisafirstorderdecay
equation including both bulk and wall decay
coefficients.Valuesforthesecoefficients
typicallyrequirelaboratoryandfieldanalysis
andcalibrationinordertomatchmodelresults
totheconcentrationsmeasuredinthefield.
Correspondingly,THMs,agroupofDBPs
formedwhenwaterischlorinatedor
chloraminated,generallyincreasein
concentrationwithtime(Vasconcelosetal.,
1996). Thisprocessisfrequentlyrepresentedas
afirstordergrowthfunctionthatasymptotically
approachesalimitingvaluerepresentativeof
maximumconcentrationreachedwhenallofthe
NOMhasreactedorallofthechlorinehasbeen
consumed. Boththelimitingvalueandtherate
ofgrowthmustbedeterminedinthiscase.
Waterqualitymodelingisverysensitivetothe
hydraulicrepresentationofthesystem.Toreiterate,
hydrauliccalibrationthatmaybesufficientforsome
hydraulicsimulationmayrequireadditionalcalibra-
tionwhenusedasabasisforwaterqualitymodeling.
4-3
4.2StaticCalibrationand
Dynamic Calibration
Justaswaterdistributionsystemmodelscanberun
inasteady-stateoranextendedperiodmode,
calibrationcanbeperformedineitherastaticmode
usingasteady-statemodelorinadynamicmode
usinganextendedperiodmodel. Acommon
approachistoperformastaticcalibrationfirst
followedbyEPS,toenhancethestaticcalibration
throughadynamiccalibration. Theoptionsand
proceduresforthesetwotypesofcalibrationare
describedbelow.
4.2.1Steady-StateCalibrationMethods
Thetwomostcommonapproachesusedincalibrat-
ingasteady-statehydraulicmodelareC-factortests
andfire-flowtests.Forwaterqualitymodelsof
chlorine/chloramines,atestprocedureforestimating
bulkandwalldemandmaybeemployed. Inallof
thesecases,fielddataiscollectedundercontrolled
conditionsandthenappliedtodeterminethemodel
parametersthatresultinthebestfitofthemodelto
thefielddata.
4.2.1.1 C-FactorTests
C-factortests(sometimescalledheadlosstests)are
performedtoestimatetheappropriateC-factorstobe
usedinahydraulicmodel. TheC-factorrepresents
theroughnessofthepipeinthewidelyusedHazen-
Williamsfrictionequation.Typically,suchtestsare
performedonasetofpipesthatarerepresentativeof
therangeofpipematerials,pipeage,andpipe
diametersfoundinthewatersystemthatisbeing
studied. Theresultsofthetestsarethenusedtoassign
C-factorsforotherpipesofsimilarcharacteristics.
Inafieldtest,ahomogeneoussectionofpipebetween
400and1,200feetlongisinitiallyisolated. Subse-
quently,flow,pipelength,andheadlossaremeasured
inthefield.Typically,nominalpipediametersare
TheunderlyingconceptforaC-factortestisthatall
factorsintheHazen-Williamsfrictionequationcanbe
measuredinthefieldandtheequationcanthenbe
solvedfortheunknownC-factor.Itcanalsobeused
toaccountforminorlossesthatoccurthroughdistri-
butionsystemcomponents(e.g.,valves,fittings). The
followingequationistheHazen-Williamsequation
(Equation2-3)arrangedtosolveforroughness.
C=8.71VD
-0.63
(H/L)
-0.54
(Equation4-1)
where
C=roughnessfactor
V=velocityinfeetpersecond
D=pipediameterininches
H=headlossinfeet
L=pipelengthinfeet
Flowed
Fire Hydrant #1
Length
X
Hydrant
Fire Hydrant #2
Flow
Pitot Gage
Closed Valve
Figure 4-3. Schematic of Standard Two-Gage C-
Factor Test Setup.
Differential
pressure gage Flowed
Pitot Gage
Fire Hydrant #1
Length
X
Hydrant
Fire Hydrant #2
Flow
Closed Valve
Small diameter hose
Figure 4-4. Schematic of Parallel Hose C-
Factor Test Setup.
takenfromsystemmapsandthesevaluesareused
alongwithflowratetocalculatevelocity.Thereare
twoalternativemethodsfordeterminingheadlossin
thepipesection: atwo-gagemethod(Figure4-3)and
aparallelhosemethod(Figure4-4). Withthetwo-
gagemethod,pressureisreadathydrantslocatedat
theupstreamanddownstreamendofthesectionand
usedalongwithelevationdifferencebetweentheends
tocalculateheadloss. Withtheparallelhosemethod,
asmall-diameterhoseisusedtoconnectthetwo
hydrantstoadifferentialpressuregagetodirectly
measurethedifferenceinpressure.Thetwoend
hydrantsshouldbespacedfarenoughapartandthere
shouldbesufficientflowsothatthereisapressure
dropofatleast15poundspersquareinch(psi)fora
two-gagetestora3-psipressuredropforaparallel
hosetest(McEnroeetal.,1989). Inbothcases,a
hydrantdownstreamofthetestsectionisopenedto
induceflowandasufficientpressuredrop. Multiple
downstreamhydrantsmayalsobeemployedtoinduce
agreaterflowandlargerpressuredrop.Typically,a
pitotgage(asshowninFigures4-3and4-4)is
attachedtotheflowinghydrantstomeasuretheflow
rate. Itisimportanttoensurethatallflowbetween
hydrantsisaccountedfor(i.e.,anyconnectionsthat
maybleedwaterintooroutofthetestsection). The
two-gagemethodisthemorecommonlyused
approach.Theparallelhosemethodrequiresmore
4-4
specializedequipment,butisinherentlymore
accurateandmaybeusedwhenalargepressuredrop
cannotbeachieved.Notethatthevalveisclosed
downstreamoftheflowinghydrant.
Asnotedabove,anassumptionismadethatthepipe
diameterhasnotdiminishedfromitsoriginalnominal
diameterduetotuberculationonthepipewalls. If
thatassumptionisnotvalid,thecalculatedC-factors
willbelowerthanexpected. IfverylowC-factorsare
calculatedbasedonafieldC-factortest,itisrecom-
mendedthatfurtheractionsbetakeninorderto
determinetheeffectivediameterofrepresentative
pipes.Theseactionscouldincludedirectinspection
ofsamplepipesoruseofcalipersinsertedintothe
pipetomeasuretheeffectivepipediameter.
4.2.1.2 Fire-FlowTests
Fire-flowtestsareroutinelyperformedbywater
utilitiestodeterminetheabilityofthesystemto
deliverlargeflowsneededtofightfires. Insucha
test,firehydrantsareopened,theflowthroughthe
hydrantsmeasuredandpressuresmeasuredatadjacent
hydrants(seeFigure4-5).Thehighdemandscaused
bytheopenhydrantsleadtohighflowsandincreased
headlossinpipesintheareaaroundthehydrants.
Undertheseconditions,thesystemisstressedandthe
capacityofthesystemtodelivertheseflowsisvery
sensitivetotheroughnessofthepipes.
Thesefire-flowtestscanalsobeveryeffectiveasa
calibrationmethodology.Inthiscase,inadditionto
thestandardinformationroutinelycollectedaspartof
afire-flowtest(flowsandpressures),informationis
collectedonthegeneralstateofthesystemsuchas
pumpandvalveoperation,tankwaterlevels,and
generalsystemdemand. Thedistributionsystem
modelisthenrununderthesystemconditions
observedduringthetestandadjustmentsmadein
roughnessfactors(orotherparameters)sothatthemodel
adequatelyrepresentsthedatameasuredinthefield.
P=42 psi
P=55 psi
Q=400 gpm
P=36 psi P=52 psi
Figure 4-5. Fire-Flow Test Setup.
Figure 4-6. A Hydrant Being Flowed with a Diffuser
as Part of a Fire-Flow Test.
Figure4-6illustratesanexamplesetupforafire-flow
test. Thediffuserattachedtothehydrantinthefigure
includesapitotgageusedtomeasuretheflow. The
cagediffusestheflowandpreventsanyobjectsinthe
streamfrombeingprojectedoutathighspeed.
InthecaseshowninFigure4-5,onlyasinglehydrant
isopened,withtheflowmeasuredatthathydrantand
pressuremeasurementsmadeatfourhydrants.
Additionalhydrantsmaybeflowedandmonitoredas
partofafire-flowtestforcalibration(seeCaseStudy
inSection7.7).
4.2.1.3 ChlorineDecayTests
Chlorinebulkreactionandwallreaction(ordemand)
testingprocedurescanbeusedtodeterminethe
reactionparametersusedinwaterqualitymodels.
Bottletestsmeasuretherateofchlorinereactionthat
occursinthebulkflowindependentofwalleffects.
Thisprocedureisperformedbyfirstmeasuringthe
chlorineatarepresentativelocationsuchasinthe
effluentfromawatertreatmentplant. Thenseveral
bottlesarefilledwiththesamewaterandkeptata
constanttemperature. Separatebottlesaresubse-
quentlyopenedatintervalsofseveralhours(ordays)
andthechlorinecontentismeasured. Theresulting
recordofchlorineatdifferenttimesisusedtoestimate
thebulkreactionrate.SeeAWWA(2004)foramore
completeprotocolforthistest.
Thepurposeofthechlorinedecayfieldtesting
procedureistoestimatethechlorinewalldemand
coefficientforrepresentativepipesinthedistribution
system. Themethoddescribedhereinvolvesthe
measurementofchlorineconcentrationsinapipe
segmentundercontrolledflowconditionsanduseof
theresultingchlorinemeasurementstodeterminethe
wallreactionrateforthatpipesegment. Themethod
isdesignedtobecomplementarywithC-factortesting
sothatitcanbeconductedinconjunctionwithaC-
factortest.Themethodisconsideredtobeexperimental
4-5
andfeasibleonlyforpipesthatareexpectedtohave
relativelyhighwallreactionvalues,suchassmaller
diameterunlinedcastironpipes.Forthesmaller
diameterunlinedcastironpipes,pipesectionswitha
lengthintherangeof1,500to2,000feetwillbe
requiredtoestimatewalldemand. Forothertypesof
pipesthattypicallyhavelowwalldecayfactors(e.g.,
plasticandnewpipes),therequiredlengthofthepipe
maybesolongastomakethistestimpractical. Other
factorsthatshouldbeconsideredinselectingsites
Abilitytomeasureflowinthepipe.
Abilitytovalveoffthepipesegments.
Presenceofareasonablechlorineresidual
(preferably>0.4mg/L)attheupstreamendof
thepipesegment.
Abilitytovaryflowinthepipeovera
reasonableflowrange(e.g.,fora6pipe,a
rangeofflowsof100to500gpmwouldbe
desirable).
Abilitytoestimatetheactualpipediameterfor
thepipesegment.
Fortheselectedpipesegment,majorlateral(s)and
downstreamsegmentsshouldbevalvedofftocontrol
flowinthepipe.Twoorthreesamplingpointsshould
beestablishedalongthesegmentofinterest(up-
stream,downstream,andanoptionalmidpoint).
Typically,thesewouldbetapsonfirehydrants.Prior
tothetesting,thetapsshouldberunforseveral
minutestocleanouttheline. Theapproximatetravel
timethroughthepipeshouldbecalculatedand
chlorinemeasurementstakenfromupstreamto
downstreamsothatapproximatelythesameparcelof
waterissampledateachstation. Flowmeasurements
canbemadeatanylocationwithinthesegment.
Thetestshouldberepeatedforthreeflowvalues:a
lowflowrate,amediumflowrate,andahighflow
rate. Duringeachflowtest,chlorineresidualshould
bemeasuredateachofthetwoorthreesampling
points. Sincerelativelysmallvariationsinchlorine
concentrationareexpected,agoodqualityfield
chlorinemetershouldbeemployedandthreerepli-
catesshouldbetakenateachsamplingpointforeach
flowtest. Followingthefieldanalysis,aspreadsheet
canbeusedtobackcalculatetheresultingwall
reactioncoefficients,orawaterdistributionmodel
canbeusedtodeterminethewallreactioncoefficient
throughtrialanderror.
4.2.2DynamicCalibrationMethods
Dynamiccalibrationmethodsareassociatedwiththe
useofanEPSmodel. Thedynamiccalibration
methodsinclude: (1)comparisonofmodeledresults
Ifmeasuredandmodeledrecordsoftankwaterlevels
donotagreewell,therelationshipbetweenthetwo
tracescanprovidecluesastothepotentialproblems.
Intheexampledepictedbelow,thetimingofthefill
anddrawcyclesinthemeasuredandmodeledresults
arequiteclosebutthemodeledandmeasureddepthof
thefillcyclesvarysignificantly.Thissuggeststhatthe
systemdemandsmaybeinerror,resultinginan
incorrectamountofflowenteringthetank.
Inthesecondexampleillustratedbelow,themagnitude
ofthechangeinwaterlevelisquitecloseinthe
modeledandmeasuredresults,butthetimingofthefill
anddrawcyclesdiffer.Thisistypicallycausedby
errorsinthepumpingcontrolsinthemodel,resulting
inpumpsbeingturnedonandoffatthewrongtime.

tomeasurementsmadeinthefieldovertime,and(2)
tracerstudies. Inbothcases,modelparametersare
adjustedsothatthemodeladequatelyreproducesthe
observedbehaviorinthefield. Tracerstudiesare
discussedindetailinChapter3.
Comparisonofmodeledandmeasureddatacanbe
usedforcalibrationofbothhydraulicandwater
qualitymodels. Themostcommonlymeasured
hydraulicdataaretankwaterlevels,flows,and
pressures. Frequently,thisinformationisroutinely
reportedthroughSCADAsystemstoadatabaseand
canbeextracted. Inothercases,continuousflow
metersorpressuregagesmustbeinstalledtocollect
dataduringatestperiod. Generally,tankwaterlevel
dataandflowmeasurementsarethemostusefulform
ofdataforcalibratinganextendedperiodmodel.
Underaveragewateruseconditions,temporal
variationsinpressuremeasurementstypicallyvary
overarelativelysmallrangeandthenonlyin
responsetovariationsintankwaterlevels.Asaresult,
theyarelessusefulincalibratingmodelparameters.
Ifpressuremeasurementsaregoingtobeusedfor
4-6
dynamiccalibration,thesystemmustbestressedby
conductingfire-flowtestsduringthetestingperiod.
Theprimarymodelparametersthatareadjusted
duringdynamiccalibrationare:demandpatterns,
pumpschedulesandpumpcurves,controlvalve
settings,andtheposition(openorclosed)ofisolation
valves.
Dynamiccalibrationproceduresusingtracerstudy
dataisdiscussedviaacasestudyinSection4.4of
thischapter.Dynamiccalibrationcanalsobeusedfor
calibratingwaterqualityparameters,suchasthewall
demandcoefficientforcomputingchlorineresiduals.
Generally,waterqualityfieldstudiesareperformedin
conjunctionwithfieldhydraulicstudiesorwitha
tracerstudy.Forchlorinemodels,measurementsof
chlorinearetakenatfrequentintervalsinthefieldat
representativesites. Thesemayincludededicated
samplingtaps,hydrants,tankinlet/outlets,orother
accessiblesites. Continuouschlorinemetersmayalso
beused. Duringthemodelcalibrationprocess,the
modelisfirstcalibratedforhydraulicparameters,and
waterqualitycoefficientsaresubsequentlyadjusted
sothatthemodelresultsmatchthefielddata.
4.3ManualCalibrationand
Automated Calibration
Theaforementionedprocessofadjustingmodel
parameterssothatthemodelreproducesthehydraulic
and/orwaterqualityresultsmeasuredinthefieldcan
involveasignificantamountofeffortinlargeor
complexsystems.Asdiscussedearlierinthischapter,
therearemanyparametersthatcanbeadjustedinthe
modelandthecombinationsofpossibleparameter
valuescansometimesappeartobequiteoverwhelm-
ing. Typically,amanualtrialanderrorapproachis
used.Themostinfluentialparameterscanbeidenti-
fiedbasedonsensitivityanalysisandthenadjustedto
seeiftheyimprovetheresults. Thisprocessis
continueduntilanacceptablelevelofcalibrationis
achieved or until budgetary constraints dictate
closure. Itisnotunusualformany(dozensoreven
hundreds)separatemodelrunstobemadeinthis
process.
Anextensiontothemanualcalibrationprocessisan
automatedapproachthatallowsthecomputerto
searchthroughdifferentcombinationsofmodel
parameters(witharealmofrealisticvalues)andto
selectthesetofparametersthatresultsinthebest
matchbetweenmeasuredandmodeledresults. The
developmentofthistypeofprogramhasbeenthe
topicofmanystudiesoverthepast25years(Walski
etal.,2003).
Automatedmethodsrequireaformaldefinitionofan
objectivefunctionformeasuringhowgoodaparticu-
larsolutionis.Generally,thevalueofasolutionis
measuredbyastatisticthatreflectsthedeviation
betweenmeasuredandmodeledresultsinflowand
pressure. Acommonlyusedobjectivefunctionis
minimizationofthesquarerootoftheweighted
summationofthesquaresofthedifferencesbetween
observedandpredictedvalues. Theweightingisused
toestablisharelationshipbetweentheerrorsassoci-
atedwithflowandpressure. Forexample,theuser
maychoosea1-psierrorinpressurepredictiontobe
equivalentinvaluetoa10-gpmerrorinflow.
Inmostautomatedmethods,theuseralsogroups
pipesbycommoncharacteristics,suchasage,
material,andnodes,intocommondemandcharacter-
isticssuchasresidentialorcommercial.Theuserthen
specifiesarangeofallowablevaluesforpiperough-
nessfactorsorarangeofmultipliersappliedtothe
existingroughnessfactors.Similarly,arangeof
allowabledemandmultipliersisalsospecified,asare
potentialpipeswhereanexistingisolationvalvemay
beclosed. Theoptimizationroutineisthenapplied
andtheroughness,demands,andisolationvalve
positionsareselectedthatresultintheminimumerror.
Thoughmanualcalibrationstillremainsthepredomi-
nantmethodology,automatedcalibrationmethodsare
becomingmoreavailableincommercialmodeling
packages. Itislikelythatastheautomatedcalibra-
tionmethodsarerefined,thetechnologywillexpand
forroutineusewithEPShydraulicandwaterquality
models.
4.4CaseStudies
Inordertoillustratesomeofthecalibrationmethods
describedearlierinthischapter,twocasestudiesare
presentedinthissubsection. Thetwocasestudiesare
similaringeneralmethodologybutdifferinthe
overallscaleandspecificsofthestudyarea. Inboth
cases,thedistributionsystemmodelthatwasusedas
astartingpointforthecalibrationexercisewaspartof
askeletonizedmodelextractedfromunspecified
portionsoftheGCWWdistributionsystem.
Mostlargerurbanwatersystemsgenerallyhaveat
leastaskeletonizedmodeloftheirdistribution
system. Itshouldbenotedthat(asdiscussedin
Chapters2and3ofthisreport)askeletonizedmodel
denotesamodelthatincludesonlyamajorsubsetof
actualpipesratherthanallpipesinthedistribution
system. Theextractedsystemmodelwasmodified
andconvertedtoEPANETformatforuseinthis
project. Themodificationsincluded:additionofkey
pipes,updatestoconsumerdemanddata,andan
interconnectionbetweenthecasestudyareaandthe
fullsystembyafixedgradenode(reservoir). These
portionsofthebasemodelhadbeenpreviously
calibratedusingvariousdynamiccalibrationmethods
andwereusedforroutinewaterutilitywork. Forthe
4-7
purposesofcalibration,separatefieldstudieswere
conductedineachstudyarea.
Inbothfieldstudies,afood-gradeconservativetracer
(calciumchloride)wasintroducedintothesystemand
itsmovementthroughthesystemwasmonitoredby
bothgrabsamplingandcontinuousmonitoring(CM)
stations installed at key locations in the distribution
systems. TheCMstationswereinstalledathydrants
whichwereleftpartlyopenforthedurationofthe
studytominimizetraveltimebetweenthemainand
samplinglocation. Eachopenhydrantwasaddedasa
newdemandnodeintheEPANETnetworkmodel.
Additionally,severalultrasonicflowmeterswere
installedtoprovidecontinuousflowmeasurementsat
keylocations.Thegeneralprocedures,methodology,
andinstrumentationusedinthesefieldstudiesare
consistentwiththosepresentedinChapter3.
4.4.1Case1-Small-Suburban,Dead-End
System
Thissystemispartofalargerpressurezone. Itwas
selectedbecauseoftherelativelycompactsizeand
simplestructure,fedbyasinglesupplypipewithno
additionalstorage. Asaresult,themovementofthe
tracerwasrelativelyrapidthroughthesystemandit
couldbemonitoredwithcontinuousmetersplacedat
severallocations. Thegenerallayoutofthissub-
system,thelocationoftheinjectionsite,andthemon-
itoringlocationsforthisstudyareshowninFigure4-7.
Thecalciumchloridetracerwasinjectedastwo
pulses,atwo-hourpulsefollowedbya2.5-hour
periodofnoinjectionandthenfollowedbyahigher
concentrationpulseoftwohoursduration. The
injectionrateandtheresultingconcentrationofthe
tracerinthedistributionsystemjustdownstreamof
Compliancewithstateandfederalregulationsduringa
tracerstudyisobviouslyquiteimportant. Inorderto
ensurethatthetracerwillnotexceedallowablelevels,
itisnecessarytomonitorinformationsuchastherate
ofinjectionofthetracer,theflowinthereceivingpipe,
andtheresultingconcentrationinthereceivingpipe.
Frequently,asafetyfactorfortheinjectionrateis
includedtoaccountforuncertainty.Inthisfieldstudy,
thetracerinjectionratewasverylowandtheflow
meterontheinjectionpumpprovidedapproximate
values. Chlorideconcentrationsweremonitoredata
suitablelocationapproximately100feetdownstream
oftheinjectionpointwithatraveltimeofapproxi-
mately10minutes. Duetounexpectedvariationsin
flowthroughthepipe,delayinmeasurements,and
CM07
CM09
CM12
CM16
CM20
CM19
CM18
CM17
CM15
CM14
CM13
CM10
CM11
CM01
CM06
CM05
CM08
CM02 CM03 CM04
Flow gage
Conductivity meter (CM 1-20)
Injection point
Figure 4-7. Schematic Representation of
Small-Suburban Dead-End System.
theinjectionpointwerecarefullymonitoredtoensure
that the resulting chloride concentration did not
exceedthesecondarymaximumcontaminantlevel
(MCL)of250mg/Lforchloride.
Themovementsofthetracerpulsesweremonitored
by using both manual sampling and continuous
conductivity meters located throughout the distribu-
tionsystem. Additionally,fourultrasonicflowmeters
wereinstalledinthestudyareatoprovidecontinuous
flowmeasurementsatkeylocationswithinthe
Inpreparationforthecalibrationprocess,theconduc-
tivityreadingswereconvertedtochlorideconcentra-
tions using a relationship developed in the laboratory.
Figure4-8showstherelationshipbetweenconductiv-
ityandchlorideandthebest-fitlinearandpolyno-
mialrelationshipsbetweenthem. Thisconversionwas
necessarybecauseconductivityisnotatrulylinear
parameterand,asaresult,cannotbesimulated
exactly inawaterdistributionsystemmodel. The
converted continuous concentration readings were
thencomparedtothemanuallycollecteddatafor
qualitycontrolpurposes. Figure4-9showsthe
resultingchloridedatasetthatwasusedatone
locationasabasisforevaluatingmodelpredictionsas
partofthecalibrationprocess.
Thepreliminaryresultsindicatedsomediscrepancy
betweentheEPANET-modelpredictedvaluesandthe

relatedcomputations(associatedwithtracertravel

time),chloridevaluesexceedingthetargetlevelwere

experiencedforabriefperiodbeforetheinjectionrate
Figure 4-8. Empirical Relationship Between
wasadjusted.
Chloride and Conductivity.
4-8
Level1

Level2

Level3

Level4

Figure 4-10. Comparison of Model Versus Field Results
for Continuous Monitor Location CM-18 at Various
Calibration Stages.

ofthejunction(wherethemodelpredictionsare
comparedwiththefieldvalues),bothconcentration
andpredictedtimeoftracerarrivalmightnotbein
perfectagreementduetolocalvariationindemands,
localflowvelocities,anddilutionimpacts. Thesharp
tracerfrontsobservedinthisfieldstudymadeit
difficulttoemployquantitativestatisticalmeasures
(e.g.,meanerror,standarddeviation,rootmeansquare
error). Therefore,agraphical(visual)approachwas
consideredtobemoresuitableformodelcalibration

Figure 4-9. Sample Chloride Data Used at One
Station for Calibration.
actualfield-measuredvalues,indicatingtheneedfor
modelrefinementandre-calibrationtoimprovethe
predictioncapabilityoftheEPANETmodel.There-
fore,EPANETmodelingwasperformedtoevaluate
thefollowingfourlevelsofmodelrefinements:
Level1(priortocalibration): Askeletonized
EPANETmodelwasusedwiththeoriginal
hourlydemandpatternprovidedbyGCWWand
atime-stepinjectionpatternof60minutes.
Level2: ThesameasLevel1,butarefined10-
minutetime-steppatternforinjectionwasused
alongwiththeconversionoftheoriginalhourly
demandpatternsto10-minutepatterns.
Level3: ThesameasLevel2witharefined
demandpatternforeachnodeusingthefield-
measuredflowdata,additionofdemandnodes
representingwaterdemandofthepartiallyopen
hydrants,adjustmentforalargeindustrialuser
ofwaterinthestudyarea(basedondata
obtainedduringthestudy),andtheresidential
waterbillinginformationprovidedbyGCWW.
Level4: ThesameasLevel3withadetailed
all-pipe(non-skeletonized)EPANETmodel.
Theresultsofthefour-stagemodelrefinementand
calibrationprocessareshowninFigure4-10fora
continuous monitoring location (CM-18) located on
themainfeederpipe. Asillustrated,theimprove-
mentsinthedemandestimatesandinclusionofthe
systemdetailsintheall-pipemodelresultedinavast
Duringthecalibrationandrefinementprocess,various
modelinputssuchasflow,demand,andpipe
characteristicswereadjustedtoimprovethemodel
prediction. TheEPANETmodelwasconsideredtobe
calibratedfortheareawhenthefielddatamatchedthe
model-predictedoutputtoanacceptabledegreebased
onvisualobservation. Dependinguponthelocation
improvementinthemodelspredictionabilityforthat
monitoringlocation. Similarresultswerefoundfor
mostmonitoringlocationsonthemainpipe.
4-9
inthisapplication. Forexample,ifthepredictionof
thearrivaltimeforthetracerdiffersbyevenafew
minutesfromtheobservedarrivaltime,useofthese
standardmeasuresoferrorcouldresultinahigh
number,eventhoughthepredictioncouldbeviewed
graphicallyasverygood.
Thecalibrationoftheloopedportion(referringto
theportionofthenetworkonthebottomrighthand
sideofFigure4-7)ofthisnetworkprovedtobemore
difficultandtheresultsforsomemonitoringlocations
ontheloopedpipingwerelesssatisfactory.Themost
problematic were continuous monitoring locations
CM-02andCM-04. MonitoringstationCM-02was
locatedneartheconfluenceoftwoseparateloops,
with the actual monitored connection being slightly
offsetfromthejunctionnode. Examinationofthe
modelresultsshowedthatflowreachedthatjunction
frombothdirectionsandsmallvariationsinthe
amountofflowineachoftheloopsresultedinvery
differenttraveltimes.AsillustratedinFigure4-11,
thiscomplextravelpatternalongwiththeoffset
locationofthemonitoringstationresultedinpoor
predictionoftraveltimetothatstation. Also,
monitoringstationCM-04islocatedattheendofa
dead-endpipesectionandtraveltothisnodeis
stronglyinfluencedbydemandsattheveryfarendof
thedead-endsection.AsillustratedinFigure4-11,
thisresultedinapoormatchofthepeakconcentra-
tionduringthesecondpulse. Itisalsopostulatedthat
dispersion,whichisnotrepresentedinEPANET,may
havehadaninfluenceonthepeakconcentrationdue
totheverylowvelocitiesinthedeadendpipe. In
somecases,thiscouldalsobecausedbyinaccurateC-
factorsasappliedtothedistributionsystem. However
(asillustratedinFigure4-11),formonitoringlocation
CM-03locatedinthemainpartoftheloopingsystem,
themodelandfieldagreementwasquitegood.
Case1dataillustratesthat,dependinguponthelevel
ofrefinementandcalibration,thereisasignificant
variationinthecapabilityofamodeltoaccurately
representthesystem. Ingeneral,thepartsofthe
networkthatareconfiguredastrees(mainstemwith
branches)aremoreeasilycalibratedbymaking
adjustmentsindemands. Forloopingpartsofthe
systemandatdead-ends,resultsareverysensitiveto

CM-02
CM-03
CM-04
Figure 4-11. Calibration of Looped Portion.
smallvariationsindemandsandsystemconfigura-
tion,leadingtothepossibilityofsignificantpredic-
tionerrorsatsomelocations.Uncertaintyindemand
estimatescanbeamajorsourceoferrorinthemodel
estimates.
4.4.2Case2-Large-SuburbanPressureZone
SimilartoCase1,afieldstudyandcalibration
exercisewascarriedoutinalarge-suburban,pressure
zone. Thisareawasselectedinordertodemonstrate
theapplicationoftracerstudiesandcalibration
techniquesinamorecomplexarea. Theselectedarea
containedmultiplepumpsandtanks. Theselected
distributionsystemareaisrepresentativeofrelatively
complex,well-griddedsystemsfoundinmanylarger
watersystems. Thelayoutofthesystem,thelocation
oftheinjectionsite,andthemonitoringlocationsare
showninFigure4-12.
Twoseparatetracerstudieswereperformedinthis
zone.Thefirststudywasusedtofurthercalibratethe
skeletonizedmodelreceivedfromthewaterutility.
Thesecondstudyservedasavalidationeventtotest
theveracityofthecalibratedmodel.Inthecalibration
event,thetracerwasintroduceddirectlyintothemain
feedlineservicingtheentirearea(characterizedby
higherflow/higherpressure).Inthevalidationstudy,
thetracerwaspulsed. Atotalof34continuous
conductivitymeterswereinstalledinthesystem.
Fourflowmetersweretemporarilyinstalledtoprovide
flowmeasurementsatkeylocations.
Duringthecalibrationstudy,thecalciumchloride
tracerwasinjectedintothemainfeedlineservingthe
4-10

Figure 4-13a. Modeled Flows Compared to Measured
Flows Before Calibration.

Figure 4-13b. Modeled Flows Compared to Measured
Flows After Calibration.
EPANETmodeltoaccommodateforthisdevelop-
ment.Anotherpossibilityforthediscrepancywas
thatthedemandinthisregionwassignificantly
higherthantheaverageresidentialdemandmodeled
inthearea.Tosimulatethispossibility,asensitivity
analysiswasperformedinwhichthemodeleddemand
inthisregionwasdoubled.Themodel-predicted
resultsimprovedsignificantlyforthisregionbasedon
thesethreeadjustments.
InRegion2(CM52,CM53,CM55andCM56),an
oppositephenomenontothatinRegion1was
observed.Thefielddataindicatedthatthetracer
arrivedseveralhoursafterthemodelsprediction.
Onepossibleexplanationwasthatthisregionhad
lowerdemandthantheaverageresidentialdemand
modeledinthisarea.Theflowmeterdataupstreamof
thislocationsupportedthistheoryastheEPANET
predictedflowinthispipewasmuchhigherthanthe
fieldobservedflow(seeFigure4-13a).Tosimulate
thispossibility,thelocaldemandinthisregionwas
reducedby30percentinthemodel.Theresultant
flowmatchedtheflowmeterdata(seeFigure4-13b).
Also,similartoRegion1,itwasfoundthatapotential
flowpathhadagainbeenleftoutdueto
skeletonizationofthemodel,whichaffectedCM52.
Thispipelinkwasaddedtothemodelusingthe
appropriatepipeparameters. Distributionmains
betweenCM55andCM53werealsofoundtohave
beenupgradedsincetheEPANETnetworkmodelwas
Injection Point
Flow Monitoring Location
Continuous Monitoring Sample Location
CM-54
CM-53 Region 2
CM-52
CM-51 CM-41
CM-42 Region 1
CM-56
CM-45
CM-55 CM-50
CM-43
CM-44
Q21
CM-49 CM-46
CM-47
CM-57 CM-48
CM-37
CM-61
CM-59 CM-40
CM-58
CM-64 CM-32
Q23
CM-36
Q22
CM-60
CM-31
CM-33
CM-62
Q20
CM-39
CM-63 Region 3
CM-35
CM-34
CM-38
Figure 4-12. Schematic Representation of Case 2
Study Location.
areaforaperiodof6hours.Inthevalidationstudy,
thetracerwaspulsedbyfillanddrawcyclesina
storagetankatthesamelocation.Inbothcases,a
targetchlorideconcentrationof190mg/Lorlower
wassetinordertosafelynotexceedthe250mg/L
secondaryMCLforchloride.
Duringthecalibrationprocess,initialEPANET
modelsimulationswerereviewedindetailto
determinetheflowpatternsaroundvariousmoni-
toringlocationsandtoattempttoidentifycauses
fordiscrepanciesintheobservedandpredicted
values.Acarefulexaminationoftheareasof
significantdiscrepanciesindicatedthatthesewere
primarilylimitedtothreegeographicsub-regions
withintheskeletonizednetwork.Inadditionto
thesethreesub-regions,therewereafewisolated
locationswherethepredictedtracerpatterndidnot
matchtheobservedtracerpatternfromthefield
study.Themodelingteamcarefullyexaminedeach
oftheseregionsandaddressedthezonalissues
accordingly.Thethreesub-regionsareshownin
Figure4-12.
InRegion1(CM42,CM43,andCM44),thefielddata
indicatedthatthetracerarrivedatthesecontinuous
monitoringlocationsseveralhoursbeforethemodels
prediction.Oncloserinspection,itwasfoundthata
potentialflowpathexistedwhichwasnotincludedin
theskeletonizedmodel.Whilethepipediameterwas
small,itsignificantlyalteredthehydraulicwaterflow
pathtothatregion.Thismissingpipe-linkwasadded
tothemodel,usingtheappropriatepipeparameters.
Furthermore,themodelingteaminvestigatedtheGIS
databasetoseeiftherewereanysubstantialchanges
intheseareassincethetimewhentheoriginalwater
demandpatternsweredevelopedfiveyearsago.The
updatedGISinformationindicatedapresenceof
recenthousingdevelopmentinthatregion.There-
fore,additionaldemandnodeswereenteredintothe
4-11

Figure 4-14a. Chloride Concentration for Calibration
Event at Continuous Monitor Location CM-59.

Figure 4-14b. Chloride Concentration for Validation
Event at Continuous Monitor Location CM-59.
developedforthisarea.TheEPANETmodelpipesfor
thislocationwereupdatedusingthenewerinforma-
tion.Themodel-predictedresultsimprovedsignifi-
cantlyforthisregionbasedonthesethreeadjustments.
InRegion3(CM34andCM35),thefielddata
indicatedthatthetracerarrivedatlocationsCM34
andCM35severalhoursafterthemodelspredicted
arrivaltime.However,thefield-verifiedtracerarrival
timematchedthepredictedtracerarrivaltimeat
locationCM33whichisslightlyupstreamofthese
locations. Also,areviewofthewaterflowpatternin
thisregionindicatedthatthewatertraveledfrom
CM33towardsCM34andCM35(atalltimes). Based
onthedemandsintheEPANETmodel,thepipe
lengths,andtheregionalwaterflowinformation,the
delayintracerarrivalatCM34andCM35couldnot
beexplained. Acloserinspectionoftheregion
revealedacomplexgridofinterconnectedpipesin
thisregion,whichwereskeletonizedastwoparallel
pipes. Thisskeletonizationeliminatedanumberof
differentpossiblehydraulicflowpathsbetweenCM
33andCM34/CM35. Also,intheEPANETmodel
inputs,itappearedthatthedemandclosetoCM34
andCM35wassetartificiallyhigher(toaccountfor
theoveralldemandintheskeletonizationprocess).
Thismodelsetupresultedinthepredictedfastertracer
arrivaltimesatCM34/CM35thanthoseobservedin
thefield.Toaccountforthisanomaly,afewpipe
segmentsfromthemasterplanwereaddedtothe
skeletonizedmodelofthisregiontobettersimulate
theactualgriddemandsnearCM34andCM35. This
modeladjustmentresultedinbetterpredictionofthe
tracerarrivaltimes.
Duringthecalibrationprocess,asdemandswere
adjusted,amassbalancewasperformedforeachhour
toensurethatthenetwaterdemandinthestudyarea
remainedthesame,i.e.,theincreaseinthedemandat
certainnodeswasbalancedbythereduceddemandat
othernodestoeliminateanynetimpactonwater
demand. Inthefinalrefinements,amultiplierof2.0
wasusedforthebasedemandinRegion1,anda
multiplierof0.7forthebasedemandinRegion2.
Theserefinementsshowedsomeimprovementinthe
modelsabilitytocorrectlypredictthetracerarrival
timeandconcentration. Thesecalibrationefforts
resultedinarelativelywell-calibratednetworkmodel.
However,somelocalproblemsremained,especiallyin
loopedareasandareasthatwerebranchedofffromthe
mainlines.
ThesubstantialchangesmadetotheEPANET
skeletonizedmodelrepresentingthelargearea
necessitatedavalidationprocess. Therefore,the
calibratedEPANETmodelinputfilefromthefirst
eventwasusedtovalidatethemodelscapabilityto
predicttheresultsduringthesubsequenttracer
addition. Forthepurposesofthisvalidation,thedata
fromthesecondsetofpulsedinjectionswasmodeled
usingthecalibratedEPANETnetworkmodelforthe
studyareatoseehowthepredictedresultscompared
with the continuous monitoring data collected during
thisevent. Themodeledandmeasuredconcentrations
arecomparedinFigure4-14afortheEPANET
calibration. AsimilarcomparisonisshowninFigure
4-14bforthevalidationstudy.
Additionallyforthepurposesofthisanalysis,the
EPANETpredictionsfromthevalidationeventwere
comparedwiththefieldresultsforeachmonitoring
siteandeachsitewasgivenagradeasfollows:
Verygoodmatch(within20percentofthe
actualconcentrationandwithin1hourofthe
actualtracerarrivaltime)
Moderatematch(within30percentofthe
actualconcentrationandwithin5hoursofthe
actualtracerarrivaltime)
Poormatch(greaterthan30percentofthe
actualconcentrationorgreaterthan5hoursof
theactualtracerarrivaltime).
Ofthe34monitoringsitesinthisstudyareaforthe
validationevent,15receivedagradeofverygood
match,14wereinthemoderatematchcategory,and5
receivedthelowestgradeofpoormatch. Ingeneral,it
wasfoundthatbettermatchesoccurredonlargerpipes
servinglargepopulations,whilethepoorestmatches
occurredinmorelocalizedloopsservingfewer
4-12
customers. Theseresultsare,ingeneral,quitesimilar
totheresultsobtainedforthecalibrationevent,and
mostproblemsrepeatedlyoccurredatthesame
locationsforbothevents. Thevalidationevent
resultsconfirmthefactthatthecalibratedEPANET
networkmodelcannowbeusedtopredictthe
outcomeofaseparateeventtothesamedegreeof
accuracy.
4.5FutureofModelCalibration
Calibrationcontinuestobeamajorfocusofmost
modelingefforts.Itcanprovideamodelthatmaybe
usedwithgreaterconfidenceandproduceresultsthat
arecommensuratewiththeimportantdecisionsthat
aremadebasedontheapplicationofthemodel.
However,thereissignificantroomforimprovements
in calibration methodologies and in developing a
standardizedsetofcalibrationprotocols.Thishasled
toanactiveresearchprograminthisareathatis
expectedtocontinueintothefuture.
4.5.1CalibrationStandards
Thefollowingissuesareraisedfrequentlyinthefield
of distribution system modeling:
extentofcalibrationneededforvarious
applications, and
standardsforcalibration.
Thoughtheseareveryreasonablequestions,straight
forwardanswersareusuallynotreadilyavailable.
Thereisgeneralagreementinthemodelingprofession
thattheamountanddegreeofcalibrationrequiredfor
amodelshoulddependupontheintendeduseofthe
model(EngineeringComputerApplicationsCommit-
tee[ECAC],1999).Someapplicationssuchasdesign
andwaterqualityanalysistypicallyrequireahigh
degreeofcalibration,whileotheruses,suchasmaster
planning,canbeperformedwithamodelthathasnot
beencalibratedtosuchahighstandard. However,
therearenouniversallyacceptedstandards.
IntheUnitedKingdom,thereareperformancecriteria
formodelingdistributionsystems(WaterAuthorities
AssociationandWRc,1989). Theseareexpressedin
termsoftheabilitytoreproducefield-measuredflows
andpressureswithinthemodel,asshownbelow.
Flow
1. 5percentofmeasuredflowwhenflowsare
morethan10percentoftotaldemand
(transmissionlines).
2. 10percentofmeasuredflowwhenflowsare
lessthan10percentoftotaldemand
(distribution lines).
Pressure
1. 0.5m(1.6ft)or5percentofheadlossfor85
percentoftestmeasurements.
2. 0.75m(2.31ft)or7.5percentofheadlossfor
95percentoftestmeasurements.
3. 2m(6.2ft)or15percentofheadlossfor100
percentoftestmeasurements.
In1999,theAWWAEngineeringComputerApplica-
tionsCommitteedevelopedandpublishedasetof
draftcriteriaformodeling. Thesewerenotintended
astruecalibrationstandards,butratherasastarting
pointfordiscussiononmodelingneeds.Thesecriteria
aresummarizedinthefollowingtable(Table4-2).
Table 4-2. Draft Calibration Criteria for Modeling (based on ECAC, 1999)
Intended
Use
Levelof
Detail
Typeof
Simulation
Numberof
Pressure
Readings
1
Accuracyof
Pressure
Readings
Numberof
Flow
Readings
Accuracyof
Flow
Readings
Long-Range
Planning
Low Steady-State
orEPS
10%ofNodes 5psifor
100%Readings
1%ofPipes 10%
Design Moderateto Steady-State 5%- 2%of 2psifor90% 3%ofPipes 5%
High orEPS Nodes Readings
Operations LowtoHigh Steady-State
orEPS
10%- 2%of
Nodes
2psifor90%
Readings
2%ofPipes 5%
Water
Quality
High EPS 2%ofNodes 3psifor70%
Readings
5%ofPipes 2%
1
Thenumberofpressurereadingsisrelatedtothelevelofdetailasillustratedinthetablebelow.
LevelofDetail NumberofPressureReadings
Low 10%ofNodes
Moderate 5%ofNodes
High 2%ofNodes
4-13
Atthispoint,thereisnoclearmovementtoward
establishingcalibrationstandards. However,itis
likelythattheneedforfurtherguidanceinthisarea
willincreaseastheextentandsophisticationof
modeling continues to expand.
4.5.2TechnologicalAdvances
Researchiscontinuingintwoareasthatstrongly
influencethelikelihoodofimprovedcalibrationof
waterdistributionsystemsmodels:monitoring
technology and optimization techniques. The
available optimization techniques (and those under
development)havebeenbrieflydiscussedinthis
chapterandinChapter2. Activeresearchand
development areas include optimization techniques
forwaterqualitycalibration,EPSmodels,anduseof
tracerdata. Areasofresearch,development,and
experimental applications in monitoring technology
includelessexpensivemetersthatcanbeinserted
intopipesinthedistributionsystemandautomated
monitoringforuseinconjunctionwithtracerstudies
(asdiscussedinChapter3).
4.6SummaryandConclusions
Waterdistributionsystemmodelscanbeusedfora
numberofpurposes. Manyoftheseusesresultin
engineering decisions that involve significant
investments.Itisthereforeimportantthatthemodel
representtherealworld.Calibrationtechniquescan
beusedtoensurethatthemathematicalrepresentation
ofthesystem,ormodel,adequatelysimulatesthe
system.
Calibratingamodelisadifficulttaskbecausethere
aremanyparametersthatcanbeadjustedandfinding
thecombinationofparametersthatresultinthebest
agreementbetweenmeasuredandmodeledresultsis
oftenchallenging. Itisrecommendedthatthemodel
becalibratedusingonesetormoreoffielddataand
subsequentlyvalidatedwithanindependentsetof
fielddata.
Calibrationofwaterdistributionsystemmodelscan
beviewedinmanydimensions. Hydrauliccalibration
isusedtoadjusttheparametersassociatedwith
hydraulicsimulations,whilewaterqualitycalibration
isappliedtoreactionratesandotherparametersthat
controlthewaterqualitysimulation.Staticorsteady-
statecalibrationmethodsareusedwithsteady-state
modelsanddatacollectedatinstantaneoussnapshots
intime,whiledynamiccalibrationisconductedwith
extended-periodsimulationmodelsandtime-series
data. Manualcalibrationtechniquesinvolve manual
applicationofmodelsinatrial-and-errormode,while
automatedcalibrationusesthepowerofthecomputer
tosearchawiderangeofsolutionsandtoselectthe
setofparametersthatbestachieveastatedobjective.
Automatedmethodscanreducemuchofthetedium
Duringthecalibrationprocess,itisimportantto
eliminatevarioussourcesoferrorsinmodeling. Asa
firstpass,amodelershouldcheckfortypographical
errors,accuracyofaffectedpipinglayoutandmaterial,
generalsystemflow,velocityvalues,anddistribution
systemdemands. Thereafter,oneshouldlookintoother
sourcesoferrorssuchasskeletonization,valveposi-
tion,geometricnodeplacementanomalies,SCADA
dataerrors,andpumpperformance.
associatedwithcalibrationbutrequirethemodelerto
formallydefineaquantitativeobjectivefunctionfor
measuringhowwellthemodelmatchesthefielddata.
Suchautomatedmethodsarebecomingmoreavail-
ableincommercialmodelingpackages.
Twocasestudiesarepresentedinthischapter.The
casestudiesdifferintermsoftheoverallscaleofthe
studyarea.Inbothcases,thedistributionsystem
modelthatwasusedasastartingpointforthe
calibrationexercisewaspartofaskeletonizedmodel.
Theresultsdemonstratetheneedforadequatemodel
calibration.
Theextentofcalibrationandcalibrationtechniques
areamajorissueinmostmodelingefforts. Thereis
significantpotentialforimprovementsincalibration
methodologies and in standardization of calibration.
Thishasledtoanactiveandcontinuingresearch
programinthisimportantarea.
4-14
References
AWWA.Computer Modeling of Water Distribution
Systems (M32).AWWA,Denver,CO.2004.
ECAC.CalibrationGuidelinesforWaterDistribu-
tionSystemModeling.Proceedings,AWWAImTech
Conference,NewOrleans,LA. April18-21,1999.
McEnroe,B.M.,D.V.Chase,andW.W.Sharp.Field
TestingWaterMainstoDetermineCarryingCapac-
ity.MiscellaneousPaperEL-89,U.S.ArmyEngineer
WaterwaysExperimentStation.Vicksburg,MS.
1989.
Boulos,andR.M.Clark. Characterization and
Modeling of Chlorine Decay in Distribution Systems.
AWWAandAwwaRF,Denver,CO.1996.
Walski,T.M,D.V.Chase,D.A.Savic,W.M.Grayman,
S.Beckwith,andE.Koelle.Advanced Water Distri-
bution Modeling and Management. HaestadPress,
Waterbury,CT.pp268-278. 2003.
WaterAuthoritiesAssociationandWRc.Network
Analysis A Code of Practice. WRc,Swindon,UK.
1989.
Williams,G.S.,andA.Hazen.Hydraulic Tables. John
Wiley&Sons,NY.1920.
4-15
Chapter 5
Monitoring Distribution System Water Quality
Monitoringawatersupplysystemanditsvarious
componentsfacilitatesthegatheringofdataaboutthe
stateofthesystem(physical,operationalandwater
quality). Ifthestateofthesystemhasminimal
changesintimeorspace,asimplemonitoringsystem
maybesufficienttodefineandmanagethesystem
characteristics. However,ifthereispotentialfor
significantvariationinthestateofthesystem,the
monitoringsystemmustbeadequatelydesignedto
capturethatvariability.Thereafter,dependingupon
thetypeandmagnitudeofvariability,anappropriate
responsecanbeprovidedtorestorethenormal
systemstate. Thischapterwillfocusonmonitoring
waterquality-relatedparametersinadistribution
system.
Inadistributionsystem,waterqualitymayvarydue
tofactorssuchasnormalpatternsinwaterconsump-
tion,seasonalvariations,sourcewaterquality,
componentsofthedistributionsystem,operationof
thesystem,retentiontimeinstorage,traveltimein
thepipingsystem,ortheconditionofthesystem
itself. Variabilitymayalsoresultfromunusual
occurrences, such as intentional/accidental intrusions
ofcontaminants,orchemicalprocessessuchas
nitrification. Designofawaterqualitymonitoring
programmusttakeintoaccountboththenatureofthe
variabilityandthemannerinwhichmonitoringdata
willbeused. Inotherwords,theobjectiveofthe
monitoringprogrammustbedefinedalongwith
appropriateoutputorreportingrequirements.
Ingeneral,monitoringsystemscanbedefinedbased
ontheusesorneedsofthemonitoringprogram,the
generaltypeofmonitoringtobeperformed(manual
grab sampling and/or continuous automated online
monitoring),orthespecificmonitoringequipment
characteristics. Itisimportanttofirstestablishaclear
objective(s)formonitoring.Thereafter,depending
upontheavailabilityoffunding,need,andexpertise,
oneshouldselecttheappropriatesampling
technique(s)andmonitoringequipment. Oncean
appropriatemonitoringsystemhasbeenselectedand
implemented,itisimportanttooperateandmaintain
theprogramtoachieveoptimalresultsandbenefits.
However,thesystemshouldbeflexibleenoughso
thatitcanbemodifiedincaseitdoesnotmeetthe
original objective(s).
Thischapterdiscussesthevariousdriversorobjec-
tivesformonitoringfollowedbyasummaryof
availablemonitoringtechniques.Anoverviewof
monitoringequipmentispresentedfollowedby
guidelines for establishing monitoring requirements
(e.g.,selectionofparameters,numberandlocationsof
monitors,andmonitorcharacteristics). Someguid-
anceforengineeringandevaluatingremotemonitor-
ingsystemsisalsopresented,alongwithsomeEPA-
sponsoredmonitoringcasestudies. Thechapter
concludeswithasummaryandalistingofreferences.
Therecentstudiesinvolvingtheuseofonlinecontinu-
ousmonitoringsystemshaveresultedinlargestreams
ofdatathatdocumenttheminute-by-minutechanges
inwaterqualitythatexistatvariouspointsinthe
waternetworks. Theapplicationofthistechnology
hasthepotentialforprovidingnewinsightsastohow
waterdistributionsystemsmaybeoperatedand
designedtoimprovewaterquality.However,these
systemswillrequirearelativelyhighlevelofsophisti-
cationintermsofdatamanagement,includingthe
capabilitytogeneratereal-timereports,graphicaland
visualrepresentationofinformation,andcompliance
reportsformeetingdrinkingwaterstandards. Someof
thesedatastreamsmaywellrevealexcursionsinwater
qualitythatconstituteviolationsofcurrentorfuture
drinkingwaterstandards,orasecurity-relatedinci-
dent. Thistypeofinformationmayputpressureon
drinkingwaterutilitiesandregulatoryagenciestotake
remedialaction,possiblyonanemergencybasis,even
whensuchactionsmaynotbefullyjustified(or
warranted).However,carefulplanningandnegotia-
tionswithappropriateregulatoryauthoritiestodefine
thesepotentialexcursionsandthepropercorrective
actiontobetakenwouldpreventanymisunderstand-
ingsandminimizeoreliminatethepotentialfor
unjustifiedenforcementorresponseactions.
5.1EstablishingMonitoring
Objective(s)
Inordertodefineandimplementaneffectivemonitor-
ingplan,clearobjectivesmustbeestablished.
Collectingdatajustforthesakeofaccumulating
informationisnotcosteffective. Indrinkingwater
systems,thereareseveralspecificreasonstocollect
dataand,typically,themonitoringsystemistailored
tomeetoneormoreoftheseneeds. Theobjectivesof
monitoringdistributionsystemscanbebroadly
classifiedintothefollowingfiveuses:
regulatory driven monitoring,
security related monitoring,
processcontrolrelatedmonitoring,
5-1
Table 5-1. Federal Distribution System Water Quality Monitoring Requirements
Regulation Monitoring Requirement(s)
TCR Samplesmustbecollectedatsitesthatarerepresentativeofthewaterquality
throughoutthedistributionsystembasedonasiteplanthatissubjecttoreviewby
theprimacyregulatoryagency.
Theminimumnumberofsamplesthatmustbecollectedpermonthdependsonthe
populationservedbythesystem.
Foreachpositivetotalcoliformsample,therearerepeatsamplingrequirements,
additionalanalyses,andanincreasednumberofroutinesamples.
SWTRandIESWTR DisinfectantresidualsmustbemeasuredatTCRmonitoringsites.
LCR Allsystemsservingapopulation>50,000peoplemustdowaterqualityparameter
(WQP)monitoring.
ThenumberofsamplesitesforPb/CuandWQPmonitoringisbasedonsystemsize.
DBPR2 TheIDSErequirementofDBPR2inturnrequirestheestablishmentofaStandard
TheSMPwillrequireoneyearofdataonTHMsand MonitoringProgram(SMP).
HaloaceticAcids(HAAs).Thenumberofsamplinglocationsisbasedonutilitysize
andsourcecharacteristics.Modelingcanreducesamplingrequirements.
waterqualitycharacterization(e.g.,general,
baseline,orotherresearch-relatedmonitoring),
and
multi-purpose(acombinationofabove)useof
monitoring data.
Thefollowingsubsectionspresenttheoverallscope
ofeachofthesefiveobjectives.
5.1.1 Regulatory Driven Monitoring
Variousfederal,state,orothergovernmentalagencies
haveregulationsthatspecifydistributionsystem
monitoringrequirements. Anoverallreviewoffederal
regulationsimpactingdistributionsystemswas
presentedinChapter1. Thespecificfederaldistribu-
tionsystemmonitoringrequirements(existingand
proposed)aresummarizedinTable5-1.Insome
cases,stateshaveimposedmorestringentcriteriaand
monitoringrequirements.
5.1.2 Security Related Monitoring
Assessmentsperformedbyutilitiesandvarious
researchstudieshaveidentifiedthatwaterdistribu-
tionsystemsarevulnerabletointentional(oracciden-
tal)contamination. Inadditiontohardening
systemsinordertodeterintentionalcontamination,
monitoringaspartofanearlywarningsystem(EWS)
hasemergedasalogicalapproachtocopewith
potentialcontaminationevents. Therearenoexisting
orproposedstandardsforsuchmonitoring. However,
itiswellrecognizedthatmonitorswillneedtobe
sufficientlysensitivetoabroadrangeofpotential
contaminantsandappropriatelylocatedtodetecta
contaminationeventwithinareasonabletime.
Additionally,asdetailedinEPAsResponseProtocol
Toolbox(EPA,2003-2004),monitorsmustbean
integralpartofanemergencyresponsemanagement
planinordertobeeffective. Extensiveresearchand
developmentisunderwayonmonitordevelopment,
calibration,andplacementinresponsetotheper-
ceivedsecuritymonitoringneeds.
Currently,EPAhasanongoingtestprogramtoevalu-
atethepotentialofsensorsmonitoringroutineonline
waterqualityparameters,suchaspH,oxidation
reductionpotential(ORP),freechlorine,totalorganic
carbon(TOC),conductivity,andturbidity,toserveas
rapid detection devices for detecting contamination
eventsindistributionsystems. Onlinemonitorswere
selectedbecauseresponsetimeiscriticalforachieving
theobjectiveofprovidingearlywarning. Bothbench-
andpilot-scalestudiesarebeingconductedatthe
WaterAwarenessTechnologyEvaluationResearchand
Security(WATERS)CenterwithintheEPAsTestand
Evaluation(T&E)FacilityinCincinnati,Ohio. The
bench-scalerunsaredesignedtoidentifythedetection
thresholdofeachsensorforspecificcontaminants.
Thepilot-scalerunsaredesignedtoevaluateoverall
responseoftheselectedsensorsbyinjectingknown
quantities of potential contaminants into the distribu-
tionsystemsimulator(DSS). Forthispurpose,several
pilot-scaleDSSshavebeenfabricatedandusedfor
thesetestruns. Thesensordataarecollectedcontinu-
ouslyandarchivedelectronicallytoestablishstable
baselineconditionsandtoalsorecordsensorresponses
toinjectedcontaminants. Grabsamplesarecollected
periodicallybeforeandafterinjectionofcontaminants
toconfirmthesensorresults.
5-2
5.1.3 Process Control-Related Monitoring
Monitorscanalsobeusedinadistributionsystemto
providereal-timeornearreal-timeinformationon
waterqualitythatcanthenbeusedtocontroltreat-
mentprocessesatatreatmentplantorinthedistribu-
tionsystem. Theuseofcontinuouschlorinemonitors
inthedistributionsystemtocontroldisinfectantfeed
ratesattheplantoratin-distributionsystembooster
chlorinationstationsareexamplesofthistypeof
monitoring(Uberetal.,2003).
5.1.4 Water Quality Characterization
Informationfromlong-termmonitoringofdistribution
systemscanbeusedtodevelopbaselinetrendsin
waterqualityforthatsystem. Suchinformationis
usefulinevaluatingawatersupplysystemandfor
planningupgradesormodificationstosystemdesign
or operation.
Additionally,ifthisinformationisappropriately
distributed,itbuildsconsumerconfidenceandhelps
tokeepcustomersuptodateaboutthewaterquality
sothattheycanusethisinformationtomakedeci-
sionsaboutprotectingtheirhealth. Currently,there
arenostandardsorguidelinesforthistypeofmonitor-
ing. However,forthisinformationtobeusefuland
cost-effective,aregularprogramforexaminingand
analyzingthecollectedinformationisessential.
5.1.5 Multi-Purpose Use of Monitoring Data
Monitoringcanbeanexpensiveundertakinginterms
ofcapitalcosts,aswellasoperationandmaintenance
(O&M)costs,includinglabor.Costsincludethe
purchaseandupkeepofequipment,laboratory
analysis,labor,andconsumablesupplies.The
investment in monitoring and automated monitoring
systemsisjustifiableiftheresultingdataareusedfor
morethanoneobjective. Forexample,ifdata
collectedforsecuritypurposescanalsobeusedfor
processcontrol,itshouldbeeasytojustifypoten-
tially large investments in automated monitoring
equipment. Monitoringsystemsshouldbeproperly
designedinordertomeetmulti-purposerequirements.
5.2MonitoringTechniques
Thetwomajorfactorsindesigningandimplementing
aneffectivemonitoringprogramaresampling
techniquesandequipmentselection. Thissection
focusesonavailablemonitoringtechniques. Samples
canbecollectedandanalyzedintwoways:grab
samplesand/orbyautomatedonlinemonitoring.
Automatedmonitors(continuousordiscrete)are
sometimessupplementedwithautomatedsamplers
thatcancollectbothdiscreteandcompositewater
samplesforfurtheranalysisatalaterdate/time. Grab
samplesarecollectedmanuallyandanalyzedinthe
fieldorinthelaboratory.Grabsamplesarelabor-
intensiveincomparisontoautomatedsamplingand
providesnapshotinformationaboutthesystematthe
timeofsamplecollection. Automatedmonitoring
usesonlineinstrumentation,anddataiscollectedby
meansofsensorsandautomateddataloggers. They
canalsobetiedtoaSCADASystem.High-end
monitorsrequireahighercapitalexpenseforthe
purchaseandmaintenanceofsensors,dataacquisi-
tion,datacommunication,datastorage,anddata-
processinghardwareandsoftware.However,thistype
ofmonitoringprovidesacontinuoustime-series
profileofchangesinwaterquality.Bothautomated
andgrabsamplingcanbeincorporatedintoacompre-
hensivemonitoringplan. Thesetechniquesare
furtherdiscussedinthefollowingsubsections.
5.2.1 Manual Grab Sampling
Historically,routinewaterqualitymonitoringin
distributionsystemshasbeencarriedoutthrough
manualgrabsamplesfollowedbyanalysisinthefield
orinthelaboratory.Essentially,allregulatory
monitoringisstillcarriedoutbythismethod. For
example,samplesrequiredforlargecommunitywater
supplysystemsundertheSWTRaremanually
Theequipmentroutinelyrequiredinamanualgrab
samplingprogramincludesfieldsamplingequipment
(e.g.,chlorinemeter),safetyequipment(vests,raingear,
andflashlights),andlaboratoryequipment. Consum-
ablesuppliesincludesamplingcontainers,reagents,
andmarkingpens. Oneshouldidentifytheneedsand
availability of equipment and supplies and investigate
varioussourcesforequipment. Becauseequipment
malfunctionorlossispossible,someredundancyin
equipmentisappropriate. Someimportantfunctionsto
considerwhenestablishingafieldsamplingprogram
Establishasystematicandorganizedmethodfor
allsamplinganddatarecording. Takenotesto
documentallaspectsoftheprocess.
Providetrainingtosamplingcrewsandspecify
thesetrainingrequirementsinthesampling
programplan.
Contingency planning is important; therefore,
considerthepotentialforequipment
malfunction,illnessofcrewmembers,
communicationproblems,severeweather,
malfunction,andcustomercomplaints.
Establishacommunicationsprotocolto
coordinateactions. Ameansofcommunication
isneededtorespondtounexpectedevents.
Alternativesincluderadios,cellularphones,
walkie-talkies,oracoordinatorinavehicleto
circulateamongfieldcrews.
Calibratefieldanalyticalequipmentbeforeand
during the sampling activity.
5-3
collectedatsiteswithinthedistributionsystemand
testedfordisinfectantlevelsinthefield.Samplestaken
tosatisfytherequirementsoftheTCRarealsomanually
collectedinthefieldandsubsequentlyanalyzedinthe
laboratory.Manualsamplingis labor-intensiveandthe
numberofsamplesthatcanbecollectedislimitedby
availabilityofpersonnelandanalysiscosts.However,
theyarespecifiedbysomeregulations. Potentially
importanteventsthatmayoccurbetweentheroutine
grabsamplesmaybelost(e.g.,processupset). Also,
thereisapotentialfordismissingunusualgrab
samplingresultsassometypeofmanualmonitoring
error(Hargesheimeretal.,2002).
5.2.2 Automated/Online Monitoring
Asstatedinthereport,OnlineMonitoringfor
DrinkingWaterUtilities(Hargesheimeretal.,2002),
Thereisanevolutionfromgrab-samplemonitoring
toonlinemonitoringassampling,analysis,data
processing,andcontrolfunctionsbecomemore
automated.Onlinemonitoringrequiresamechanism
formovingthesamplewaterfromthedistribution
systemtoaninstrument,appropriateinstrumentation
foranalyzingthewater,amechanismforcommunicat-
ingtheresults,andameansofassessingtheresultsof
the monitoring. Additionally, the instrumentation
mustbeperiodicallycalibratedandmaintainedfor
quality control/quality assurance.
Inthepast,distributionsystemonlinemonitorswere
typicallyhousedinacontrolledenvironmentwith
samplelinesfromthedistributionsystemtothe
instrument. Thisresultedinmostinstrumentation
beinglocatedatfacilitiessuchastanksandpump
stations. Theinstrumentationwassometimescon-
nectedtoaSCADAsystemsothatresultscouldbe
communicatedtoacentraloffice.Morerecently,
someinstrumentationisavailablethatisdesignedfor
installationinmanholesorfordirectinsertioninto
watermains.
TheAmericanSocietyofCivilEngineers(ASCE),in
concertwithotherleadingorganizations,enteredinto
acooperativeagreementwiththeEPAtodevelop
standardsdocumentsandguidanceaimedatenhancing
thephysicalsecurityofthenationswaterandwaste-
water/stormwatersystems. Underthisagreement,
ASCEisleadingtheefforttodevelopguidelinesfor
designing an online contaminant monitoring system
(OCMS). TheInterimVoluntaryGuidelinesfor
DesigninganOCMSwerepublishedinDecember
2004(ASCE,2004). Thisdocumentprovidescompre-
hensiveinformationonseveraltopics,including
rationaleforOCMSandsystemdesignbasics,selec-
tionandsitingofinstruments,dataanalysis,anduseof
distribution system models.
5.3MonitoringEquipment
Overview
Ingeneral,monitorscanbecategorizedbythetypes
ofparameters(contaminants,agents,andcharacteris-
tics)thatthemonitorisusedtomeasure. Forestab-
lishingwaterquality,themonitorsaredesignedto
measureoneormoreparametersthatrepresent
physical,chemical,and/orbiologicalcharacteristics
ofthesystem. Typically,inmanualgrabsampling
programs,hand-heldphysicaland/orchemical
parametermeasuringdevicesareused. Thesehand-
helddevicesarecarriedtothesamplinglocation
alongwithappropriatecontainerstocollectwater
samplesforperformingmorecomplexchemicaland
biologicalanalysesinalaboratory.Theonline
samplingdevicesaremorecomplexdevicesthatare
designedtoautomaticallymeasure,record,and
displayspecificphysical,chemical,orbiological
parameters. Abriefoverviewofthesedevicesis
presentedinthefollowingsubsections.
5.3.1 Physical Monitors
Physicalmonitorsareusedtomeasurethephysical
characteristicsofthewaterinadistributionsystem.
Theyincludeavarietyofinstrumentationthat
measuresvariousmacrocharacteristics,suchasflow,
velocity,waterlevel,pressure,andotherintrinsic
physicalcharacteristics. Examplesofintrinsic
physicalcharacteristicsincludepH,turbidity,color,
conductivity, hardness, alkalinity, radioactivity,
temperature,fluorescence,UV254,andORP.In
general,physicalmonitorstendtoberelatively
inexpensive, quite durable, and readily available.
5.3.2 Chemical Monitors
Chemicalmonitorsareusedtodetectandmeasure
inorganicororganicchemicalsthatmaybepresentin
thewater.Awiderangeofchemicalsmaybeof
interest,andalargevarietyoftechnologiescanbe
used. Aspecifictechnologyormultipletechnologies
mustbeproperlyselectedforaparticularchemicalor
agroupofchemicalsofinterest. Examplesof
chemicalmonitorsinclude,butarenotlimitedto
residualchlorinemonitor,TOCanalyzer,andgas
chromatograph/massspectrometer(GC/MS). Typi-
cally,thesamegeneraltypeoftechnologymaybe
available in either automated online monitoring
capabilityortosupportmanualgrabsampleanalysis.
5.3.3 Biological Monitors
Biologicalmonitors(biomonitors)includebio-
sensorsandbio-sentinels. Bio-sensorsdetectthe
presenceofbiologicalspeciesofconcern,suchas
someformsofalgaeorpathogens. Thegeneral
operatingprinciplesofbio-sensorsmayinclude
photometry,enzymatic,and/orsomeformofbio-
chemicalreaction. Thebio-sentinelsusebiological
5-4
organismsassentinelstodeterminethelikely
presenceofchemicaltoxicityinawatersample.
Ingeneral,bio-sentinelscannotbeusedtoidentify
thepresenceofaspecifictoxiccontaminantrather
onlythatthereissomeformoftoxiccontaminant
present. Mostbio-sentinelsoperatebyobservingthe
behaviorofselectedorganisms. Examplesofsuch
organismsinclude:fish,mussels,daphnia,het-
erotrophicbacteria,andalgae. Whenthesentinel
organismsensesthepresenceoftoxicity,itreactsin
someunusualmanner.Bio-sentinelinstruments
respondtothesereactionsandnotethatanunusual
eventisoccurring. Thisapplicationissomewhat
analogoustotheuseofindicatororganisms(e.g.,total
coliforms)toindicatethewaterqualityinthedistri-
bution system.
Whilebio-sensorscanbedirectlyappliedindistribu-
tionsystemswithoutpretreatmentofthesample,the
bio-sentinelsaretypicallyusedinsourcewaters. This
isbecausemostorganismsaresensitivetothe
presenceofchlorine(orotherdisinfectants)inthe
water.Therefore,ifabio-sentinelisproposedtobe
usedfordistributionsystemmonitoring,thewater
mustbede-chlorinatedpriortoenteringthebio-
sentinelinstrument. Dechlorinationmayaffect
detectionreliabilityandthechemicalcharacteristics
ofthewater.Also,thebio-sentinelsrequireapro-
tectedhousingenvironmentalongwithsomesortof
nutritionalsupplytokeepthesentinelorganismalive
and healthy.
5.4EstablishingMonitoring
Requirements
Selectionofthetypes,numbers,andlocationsof
monitorsisdependentonthenatureofthemonitoring
programdesired.Theserequirementsdependupon
the overall monitoring objectives and the distribution
systemsite-specificrequirements. Forexample,a
monitorusedforregulatorypurposesmayneedto
monitordifferentconstituentsthanoneusedaspartof
aprocesscontrolorsecuritysystem. Similarly,a
differentmonitormaybeneededforautilitythatuses
chlorineasthedisinfectantcomparedtoonethatuses
chloramine. Thesite-specificmonitoringrequire-
mentscanbeevaluatedandrepresentedinthe
followingterms:
monitoringparameters,
numberandlocationofmonitors,
nonitorcharacteristics(e.g.,detectionlimits,
samplingfrequency,cost,falsenegatives/false
positives), and
amenabilitytoremotemonitoringandSCADA
integration.
Theserequirementsarefurtherdiscussedinthe
following subsections.
5.4.1 Monitoring Parameters
Theparameterstobemonitoreddependstronglyupon
thespecificuseofthemonitoranduponutility-
specificsituations. Forregulatorypurposes,the
regulationstypicallyspecifytheminimumsetof
parametersthatmustbesampled. Foreachsystem,the
regulating authority typically also specifies the
monitoringlocationsandfrequency.Autilitymay
choosetoanalyzethewaterforadditionalparameters
and/orincreasethefrequencyofmonitoringinorder
toaddressotherwaterqualityconcerns.
Forsecuritymonitoring,therearenoregulationsor
standards. Utilitiescanchoosewhetherornotthey
wanttoperformsuchmonitoringandselectthe
parameterstheywillmonitor.Generally,such
monitoringwillbelimitedbybudgetsandby
technology.Researchanddevelopmentisbeing
conductedonsecuritymonitoringsystems,in
conjunction with event detection platforms, that
measurestandardparameters,suchasTOC,pH,
turbidity,conductivity,chlorine,ORPandtempera-
ture. Forbothprocesscontrolandsecurity-related
monitoring,instrumentresponsetimeiscritical.
Therefore,onlinemonitorsaretypicallyusedinthese
typesofapplications. Theparametersmonitoredvary
widelydependinguponthetypeofprocessand/or
security monitoring.
Thegoalofonlinemonitoringforsecuritypurposesis
toautomaticallyanalyzethedatatodetermine(1)
whetherthereisanindicationofunusualcontamina-
tioninthesample;and(2)whatthelikelycontami-
nantis,basedonthewaterqualitysignatureofthese
parameters.
5.4.2 Number and Location of Monitors
For selecting monitoring locations in distribution
systems,therearetworelateddecisions:(1)howmany
monitorstoplaceinthesystem,and(2)whereto
placethem. Thenumberofmonitorsisgenerally
controlledbythemonitoringobjective(e.g.,regula-
toryrequirement)orbybudgetaryfactors,whilethe
locationofmonitorsisamorecomplexissuethatcan
beaddressedinmanyways. Forexample,forcompli-
ancewiththeTCRandtheSWTR,therearespecific
requirementsastothenumberofsamplesthatmustbe
taken. Formostotheruses,thenumberofsampling
points(orthenumberofmonitorsinstalled)is
controlledbybudgetaryandfinancialconstraintsand
throughcomparisontothebenefitsassociatedwith
themonitors. Thefollowingsubsectionssummarize
anapproachthatcanbeusedwhentheestablished
objectivesdonotclearlydefinethenumberand
locationofmonitors.
5-5
EPAsresearchincontaminationwarningsystems(CWSs)attheT&EFacilityis
developingdatabasedonbench-andpilot-scaleexperimentsthatrevealhow
traditionalwaterqualityparameters,ifmonitoredonline,canserveastriggers
forcontaminationevents. Figure5-1showstheresponseofseveralinstruments
totheinjectionofsecondarywastewaterintoaDSS.
Figure 5-1. Wastewater Injection: Free Chlorine and Associated Grab
Sample Results.

5.4.2.1 Number of Monitors
Toselecttheoptimumnumberofmonitorsfora
distributionsystem,theoreticallyonecanperforma
simplecost-to-benefitanalysis.Iftheoveralllife
cyclebenefitsofeachmonitorexceeditslifecycle
costs,analysiswouldsuggestthatthemonitoris
justified.Lifecyclecostsrepresentboththecapital
andoperationalcostsforthemonitors.Depending
uponthelocation-specificrequirements,asthe
numberofmonitorsincrease,theremaybeeconomies
ofscaleortheunitcostmayactuallyincrease
disproportionately. Theunitcostsincreasewhenthe
additionalmonitorsareplacedinlessconvenient
locationswhereservicingand/ordatacommunication
costsarehigher.Frequently,budgetaryconstraints
mayalsolimitthenumberofmonitorsthatcanbe
deployed,evenifbenefits
justifytheircosts.
Figure5-2isagraphical
representationofbenefits
associatedwithincreasingthe
numberofmonitorsina
distribution system. This
graph illustrates that typically
afterabasicnetworkof
monitorshasbeenestablished
foradistributionsystem,the
incremental benefits gained
by installing additional
monitorsfollowthelawof
diminishingreturns. The
actualdevelopmentofsucha
graphisdifficultbecauseof
the need to explicitly quantify
benefits. Inthecaseofwater
security-related monitoring,
onecouldmeasurethevalue
basedonpopulationor
sensitivefacilities(e.g.,
hospitals)protectedbyuseof
onlinemonitors.Forother
typesofmonitoringsitua-
tions, quantification of
benefitsismoredifficult.
Thoughaformalcost-benefitanalysismaynotbe
feasible,thisdiscussionprovidesageneralframework
thatcaninformallyguidethedesignofamonitoring
network.
5.4.2.2 Optimal Monitor Locations
Historically,monitors/sensorshavebeenplacedin
distributionsystemstomeetregulatoryrequirements.
Theirlocationshavebeendeterminedbasedonease
ofaccessandageneralintuitiveassessmentof
representativelocations. Leeetal.(1991)proposeda
methodforlocatingmonitors,basedontheconceptof
coverage,whichisdefinedasthepercentageoftotal
demandthatissampledbyasetofmonitors. Various
otherresearchersfurtheraddressedthisissueusing
alternativemathematicalmethods(Kessleretal.,
1998). Thoughwidelycited,thesemethodologies
haverarelybeenappliedinactualpractice.However,
followingtheattacksofSeptember11,2001,therehas
B
e
n
e
f
i
t
s
NumberofMonitors
beenarenewedinterestinthedevelopmentof
monitoringtechnologyandplacementofmonitorsin
thedistributionsystemasamechanismfordetecting
intentional contamination of distribution systems.
Manycurrentstudiesareapplyingoptimization
techniquestodeterminetheoptimalplacementfor
monitorsindistributionsystemsbasedonadefined
objectivefunction. Ostfeld(2004)andOstfeldand
Figure 5-2. Theoretical Example of Benefits from
Salomons(2004)providereviewsofpastworkinthis
Monitors. areaandpresentexamplemathematicalformulations
5-6
A17
th
centuryItalianeconomist,VilfredoPareto,
developedamethodforcomparingalternatives. Based
onhiswork,asituationisdefinedasbeingPareto-
optimalifbyreallocationyoucannotmakesomeone
betteroffwithoutmakingsomeoneelseworseoff. This
canbeappliedtoevaluatingmonitorsbyexaminingthe
diagram(Figure5-3)wherevariousmonitoringoptions
arecomparedintermsoftheircostandsomemeasureof
effectiveness. JustlookingatalternativesAandB,we
cansaythatAisbetterthanBbecauseitcostslessand
ismoreeffective. Bycomparingallpotentialalterna-
tives,wecandefineaParetofront. Allalternatives
locatedonthatfrontarebetterthanalternativeslocated
totherightandbelowthefront. Thisprovidesauseful
conceptual mechanism for evaluating alternative
monitoringschemes.Foradditionalinformationonthe
workofPareto,seeJohansson(1991). Formoredetails
ontheapplicationofParetosconceptsintheareaof
optimizationrelatedtowaterdistributionsystem
analysis,seeWalskietal.,2003).
Figure 5-3. Pareto-Optimal Cost Effectiveness
Diagram.
Cost
E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
Paretofront
1
2
3
4
5
6
A
B
usinggeneticalgorithmsolutiontechniques. Their
methodologyfindsanoptimallayoutofanearly
warningdetectionsystemcomprisedofasetof
monitoring stations aimed at capturing contamination
fromexternalsources,nodes,ortanksunderEPS
conditions. Berryetal.(2004)developedanoptimi-
zationprogramthatconsidersthemaximumvolume
ofcontaminatedwaterexposureataconcentration
higherthanadefinedsafelevel. Themethodusesan
integer programming optimization technique to place
alimitednumberofperfectsensorsinthepipesor
junctionsofawaternetworksoastominimizethe
expectedamountofexposuretothepublicbefore
detection,assumingtheattackoccursonatypicalday.
Watsonetal.(2004)usemixed-integerlinearpro-
grammingmodelsforsensorplacementoverarange
ofdesignobjectives. Usingtwocasestudies,they
Bahaduretal.(2003)describesanapproachusing
PipelineNetinwhichGISdataandhydraulicmodel
resultsareusedtoguidethemanualplacementof
monitorsinordertofulfillsomegeneralcriteria. Ina
casestudyconductedwithpersonnelatawaterutility,
25potentialmonitoringsiteswereidentifiedand
subsequentlyreducedtotwobestsitesusingtheGIS/
PipelineNetframework.Thisapproachismoreclosely
relatedtothetraditionalmethodsforlocatingmoni-
torscomparedtotheoptimizationtechniquesde-
scribedinthissection.
showedthatoptimalsolutionswithrespecttoone
designobjective(e.g.,populationexposed)are
typicallyhighlysub-optimalwithrespecttoother
designobjectives(e.g.,timefordetection).The
implicationisthatrobustalgorithmsforthesensor
placementproblemmustcarefullyandsimultaneously
consider multiple, disparate design objectives.
Ingeneral,theoptimizationmethodsdescribedabove
areexperimentalapproachesthathavebeenapplied
onlytohypotheticalorsmallwatersystemsandare
basedonassumptionsabouttheavailabilityof
monitoring technology, ability to define explicit
objectivefunctions,andlimitedincorporationofthe
variabilityofwatersystemoperation. Further
researchanddevelopmentisneededbeforethis
technologyisreadyforroutineuse.
5.4.3 Monitor Characteristics
Thefollowingcharacteristicsofmonitorsmustbe
evaluatedpriortoselectinganappropriatedevice:
Minimumdetectionlimit(MDL)The
minimumdetectionlimitisthelowest
concentrationorvalueatwhichthemonitorcan
dependably detect the constituent of interest.
TheMDLcanvaryfordifferentconstituents,
differenttechnologies,orfordifferent
implementationsofthesametechnologyand
constituent.
Falsenegatives/falsepositivesTwoformsof
errorsassociatedwithamonitorarefalse
positivesandfalsenegatives.Afalsepositive
existswhenamonitorreports,incorrectly,thatit
hasdetectedaconstituentwherenoneexistsin
reality.Afalsenegativeexistswhenamonitor
reports,incorrectly,thataconstituentwasnot
detectedwhen,infact,itwaspresent. False
positivescanleadtounneededresponses,and
repeatedfalsepositiveswillleadtoalackof
confidenceintheinstrument. Lackofdetection
associatedwithafalsenegativeresultsinno
responsetoarealcontaminationeventandcan
exposeconsumerstocontaminantsinthe
system.
5-7
Theheightenedlevelofconcernovertheneedto
protectwaterdistributionsystemshasledtothe
initiationofresearchintothedevelopmentofCWSsfor
bothsourceandfinishedwaters(Clarketal.,2004a).
CWSsareintendedtoreliablyidentifylowprobability/
highimpactcontaminationeventsinsourceordistrib-
utedwater.TheInternationalLifeSciencesInstitute
(ILSI)developedareport(ILSI,1999)focusedonthe
developmentofenvironmentalwarningsystems(EWSs)
forsourcewater.Thesamedevelopmentprinciples
applytodistributionsystems. EWSsappliedto
distributionsystemsarecommonlyreferredtoasCWSs.
ThefollowingdesignrequirementsforEWSswere
identifiedbyILSIintheirreport:
provideswarninginsufficienttimetorespondto
acontaminationeventandpreventexposureof
the public to the contaminant,
capable of detecting all potential contamination
threats,
remotelyoperable,
identifiesthepointatwhichthecontaminantwas
introduced,
generatesalowrateoffalsepositiveandfalse
negative results,
provides continuous, year-round surveillance,
producesresultswithacceptableaccuracyand
precision,
requireslowskillandtraining,and
beaffordabletothemajorityofpublicwater
systems.
AkeyaspectofaneffectiveEWSwillbetheneedforit
tooperateinaremotemonitoring andreportingmode.
SamplingfrequencyTherateatwhicha
monitoranalyzesandreportsavalueisthe
samplingfrequency.Thismayvaryfromafew
secondsorlessforaninstrumentsuchasa
pressuregagetoanhourormoreforinstruments
thattakelongerperiodstoperformtheanalysis
suchasagaschromatograph. Forgrab
sampling,thisdelaymaybeevenhigher.Some
instrumentscanbesetfordifferentsampling
frequencies. Morefrequentsamplingmayresult
inhigheroperatingcosts,shorterbatterylife,
increaseddatastoragerequirements,or
increased communication needs.
AmenabilitytoSCADAintegrationThe
monitorsabilitytobeonlineandintegrated
intosomesortofSCADAorremotedata
acquisitionsystemiscriticalifmultipleremote
locationsaremonitoredsimultaneously.Most
currentonlinemonitorshaveanalog(e.g.,4-20
mA,1-20V)ordigitalsignal(e.g.,RS232,
RS485)outputsthatprovidetheabilityto
remotelycollectandstoredataatacentral
locationforanalysis.
OperationandmaintenancerequirementsThe
operationalrequirementsofmonitorscanvary
significantlyandmaystronglyimpactthe
selectionprocess. Issuesincludetheelectrical
needs,expendablematerialneeds(e.g.,
reagents,wearrelatedcomponents),temperature
andhumidityrequirements,needstohandle
wastestreamsfromthemonitor,andother
factorsrelatedtothehousingofthemonitor.
Similarly,themaintenancerequirementsofthe
monitorswillalsoimpacttheselectionprocess.
Issuessuchashowfrequentlyatechnicianmust
servicethemonitorinthefieldandthelevelof
expertiserequiredtoservicethedeviceare
important considerations when evaluating
monitors.
CombinationsofmonitorsTheabilityofa
monitoringsystemtoreliablydetecta
contamination event generally increases with
multiplemonitorsworkingintandem. For
example,asinglemonitorthatreportsasignal
slightlyabovethenoiselevelmayeasilybe
dismissed. However,ifmultiplemonitorsat
severallocationsincloseproximityorseveral
instrumentsatthesamelocationmonitoringfor
differentparametersalldetectapotentialevent,
amoreforcefulandrapidresponseislikely.An
ongoingareaofresearchisthedevelopmentof
dataminingalgorithmsthatcandifferentiateor
detectasignalabovebackgroundlevelsthatare
notnormallyobservedinthemonitoredsystem.
CostsThecostofmonitoringsystemscan
varyoverseveralordersofmagnitude. Asingle
simpleinstrumentmonitoringforaphysical
parametersuchasconductivitymaycostless
than$1,000. Thecostofamulti-parameter
physicalmonitoristypicallyinthe
neighborhoodof$10,000. Morecomplex
instrumentssuchasaTOCmonitororaGC/MS
costintherangeof$25,000to$90,000. The
costofmorecomplexinstrumentsora
monitoring station containing multiple
instrumentscaneasilyexceed$100,000in
capitalcost. Installationandongoing
maintenancecostsarefrequentlysite-specific
andvaryaccordingtoenvironmental
conditions.
5.4.4 Amenability to Remote Monitoring and
SCADA Integration
Foracomprehensivenetwork-widewaterquality
remotemonitoringprogram,itisessentialtoensure
thatthesystemanditsmonitoredcomponentsare
amenabletoremotemonitoringandSCADAintegra-
5-8
tion. TheSCADAcomponentaddstheelementof
controltothemonitorednetwork. Mostutilitieshave
somesortofSCADAfunctionalitytoautomateand
monitorthekeywatertreatmentand/ordistribution
operations. Thecontrollogicistypicallytriggered
basedonaspecifiedtimeand/orevent. Forexample,
thepumpsmaybesettofilladistributionsystemtank
atmidnightandwhenthetanklevelmonitordetects
thatthetankisfull(aneventreportedthroughthe
SCADAsystem),thecontrollogictoturnoffthe
pumpsisinitiated. Thistypeofcontrollogiccanbe
enhancedtoperformcontrolfunctionsbasedon
detectionofwaterqualitychangeinthedistribution
system. However,toachievethisfunctionality,one
needstounderstandthefollowingthreemajor
componentsofaremotemonitoringand/orcontrol
system(orSCADA):
onlinesamplinginstruments(e.g.,pH,ORP)
and/orcontroldevices(e.g.,pump,valves),
SCADAorremotemonitoringnetwork,and
fieldwiringandcommunicationsmedia.
Thesecomponentsarediscussedbrieflyinthe
following subsections.
Electricpowerisgenerallyrequiredforoperatingthese
components. Ifelectricpowerisnotreadilyavailable
atthedesiredlocationwhereamonitoristobein-
stalled,considerthecostsforinstallingasuitable
powerapparatus(e.g.,asolarpanel,batterypack).
5.4.4.1 Online Sampling/Control Devices
Onlinesampling/controldevicescanbethemost
expensivecomponentofaSCADAsystem.The
sensors,switches,monitors,andcontrollersusedina
SCADAsystemmayvarywidely,dependinguponthe
parametersthatneedtobecontrolledand/orobserved.
Thecostforonlinesamplingdevicescanrangefroma
fewhundreddollarstoover$100,000. Controlunits
suchassamplefeedpumpsorshut-offvalvesareless
expensive(Pangulurietal.,1999). Costsassociated
withmaintenanceandcalibrationoftheonline
sensorswhenplanningtheacquisitionandimplemen-
tationofaremotemonitoringnetworkshouldalsobe
considered.
5.4.4.2 SCADA or Remote Monitoring Network
LargerutilitiestypicallyusesometypeofSCADA
systemforwaterdistributionsystemcontrolthatcan
easilybeintegratedtoincludeonlinesampling
instrumentationinacost-effectivemanner. Also,
recentadvancesinelectronichardwareandsoftware
technologieshaveresultedinseveralcost-effective
SCADAalternativesforsmallersystems. Amicropro-
SensorsandTransducers: Asensorrespondstoa
physicaland/orchemicalstimulus,suchasthermal
energy,flow,light,chemical,pressure,magnetism,or
motion. Atransducertakesthemeasuredphysicaland/
orchemicalphenomenon(e.g.,pressure,temperature,
humidity,andflow)andconvertsittoanelectrical
signal. Ineachcase,theelectricalsignalsproducedare
proportionaltoaphysicaland/orchemicalquantity
beingmeasuredbasedonapre-definedrelationship.
Theelectricalsignalsgeneratedbytransducersoften
requireconditioning. Dependinguponthetrans-
ducer,asignalconditionercanbeusedtoperformone
ormoreconditioningfunctions,suchasnoisefiltration,
amplification, linearization, isolation, and excitation.
cessor-basedsmartSCADAsystemcanbeusedin
remotelocationsbysmallsystemoperatorswhere
directonlinecommunicationisexpensive. Smart
systemshavehigherinitialcosts,butoverallcostsare
reducedsincethecommunicationcosts(e.g.long-
distancephonecosts)arenegligiblebecausemostof
theburdenistransferredfromthemaincomputerto
theindividualSCADAunitattheremotesite
(Pangulurietal.,1999).NewerSCADAunitsare
fairlyinexpensive,withcapitalcostsrangingbetween
$500(PCcard-basedunitsandremotedatacollection
nodes)and$5,000(independentPC-basedfull
SCADAunits).
Thedataacquisitionhardwareprocessesthedigital
and analog inputs/outputs from various online
samplingandcontroldevices. Formonitoring
systems,thehardwaretypicallyprocessestheanalog
datameasuredfromvariousinstrumentsandtransfers
ittoacomputersystemfordisplay,storage,and
analysis. Inamonitoring/controlsystem(SCADA)
scenario,thehardwarewouldprocessbothanalogand
digitalinputs(typicallyfromafielddevice)and
outputs(toperformcontrolfunctionality). The
applicationsoftwareprovidestheoperatorthe
display,control,andanalysis(trendsandreports)of
collected data.
5.4.4.3 Field Wiring and Communication Media
Dependinguponavailability,cost,userpreference,
andtherelativelocationofthesensorstothedata
acquisitionsystem,thecommunicationmediacanbe
eitherwired(e.g.,direct,phoneline)orwireless(e.g.,
radio,cellular). Infieldenvironments,distributed
input/output(I/O)istypicallyemployed. Aremote
dataacquisitionhardwareunitemployedatthefield
location performs the appropriate signal conditioning
andtransmitsthedatatoacentralhub.Morerecently,
meshorgridcomputingsystemsareusedinremote
locationstoaddredundancyincasesoflinkfailures.
Thefieldwiringbetweenthesensorandtheremote
dataacquisitionhardwareunitisusuallydirect
wire.
5-9
Dependingupontheareacoveredandavailability,in
somecasesitmaybepreferabletousesomeformof
radiocommunicationdevices. Theavailableradio
communicationdevicesoperatemostlyinthevery
highfrequency(VHF)orultrahighfrequency(UHF)
range. TheVHFfrequenciesrangebetween30-300
megahertz(MHZ)andtheUHFfrequenciesrange
between300-1,000MHZ. InU.S.,mostofthe
availableVHF/UHFradiofrequenciesarelicensed.
The unlicensed bands available include the industrial,
scientificandmedicaldevicechannelswithfrequency
rangesbetween902-928and2,400-2,484MHZ.
Theunlicensedbandsdonothaveanyconnectionor
monthlyfeerequirements.
Typically,directwireandphoneline(including
cellular)communicationmediaareinexpensive. The
primarylimitationsassociatedwithselectingthe
communication media include installation and
operatingcosts,whichcanvarybetween$200(fora
simpletelephoneorcellularmodem)andseveral
hundreddollarsforasatellite-basedsystemper
location. Ongoingmonthlyoperatingcostscanrange
from$25foraphonelinetoapproximately$200per
monthforsatellite-basedserviceswithintheU.S(per
monitored location).
5.5EngineeringandEvaluatinga
RemoteMonitoringSystem
Onceallofthebasicrequirementshavebeenestab-
lished(e.g.,objectives,parameters,location)as
outlinedintheprevioussection(Section5.4)andthe
requirementsindicateaneedforasystem-wideremote
monitoringprogramforwaterquality,thefollowing
additionalsite-specificneedsshouldbeevaluatedfor
waterqualitymonitoringinadistributionsystem
(Pangulurietal.,1999):
Whatarethecomplexitiesofthedistribution
system(size,location)?
Whatlocationsarebestsuitedforsamplingand/
orcontrolsysteminstallation?
Issufficientflowandwaterpressureavailable
foronlineinstruments?
IsthereanexistingSCADAsystemavailable?
Whattypesofcommunicationmediaare
available at the selected locations?
Howmanyparametersaregoingtobe
monitored and/or controlled at each location?
Whatothersite-specificinformation(e.g.,
availabilityofpower,access,security)willbe
needed?
Additonalfactorstobeconsideredare(Haughtand
Panguluri 1998):
systemfeatures(e.g.,easeofoperation,
customization, networkability, operator
security),
cost(initial,training,serviceagreements,and
operationandmaintenance),and
vendorsupport(hardwareandsoftware
upgradesandremotediagnosis).
Itisimportantthateachsiteisevaluatedindividually
forappropriateSCADAsystemselection.Thecostof
SCADAsoftwarehasplummetedoverthepastfew
years. Forexample,thecostofonecommercially
availablegraphical(Windows-based)SCADAsoftware
packagehasdroppedfrom$30,000intheearly1990s
to $2,000 today.
Priortoselectingandimplementingaremotemonitor-
ingnetwork,oneshouldevaluatetheoptionscare-
fully.Engineeringaremotemonitoringsystemisa
difficulttaskthattypicallyinvolvesmanyfactors:
multi-dimensional objectives, changing needs, rapid
Besidestheaforementionedimmediateneeds(e.g.,ease
ofoperation,customization,networkability),SCADA
systemfeaturesinclude:
Scalability:Thisallowsforfuturegrowthwith
respecttoadditionofI/Oblockswithmore
channelsoradvancecapabilities. TheseI/O
channelsareusedtocommunicatewithvarious
fieldmonitoringinstruments(sensors)andcontrol
devices.
LocalMemory: TheSCADAhardwaremustalso
containsufficientlocalmemorytostorethe
monitoreddataforextendedperiodsoftimein
caseofcommunicationfailures.
Remoteoperationanddiagnosis: Intheeventof
brownoutsorblackouts,thefieldSCADAunits
shouldnormallyself-bootuponresumptionof
powersupply.ThefieldSCADAunitsshouldalso
allowforremotediagnosis.
Call-outfeature:Thisfeatureallowsthesystems
softwaretonotifyappropriatepersonnelif
problemsdevelopwithatreatmentsystemor
waterquality.Thisfeaturecangreatlyenhance
operatorresponseinemergencysituationsand
preventcostlyshutdownsandlossofwaterand/or
waterquality.
OpenDatabaseConnectivity(ODBC): This
featureallowsforopencommunicationwithother
databasesandtoolsthatcanbeintegratedto
provideadditionalfeatures. Thedatathencan
alsobeusedfornetworkmodeling.
5-10
technological change, conflicting technical claims,

andbudgetaryconstraints. Thefollowingsubsection
presentsgeneralmethodsforevaluatingandassessing
alternativesfollowedbyasetofspecificcriteriafor
evaluating alternative monitoring systems.
5.5.1 Remote Monitoring System Evaluation
Inordertojustifyaremotemonitoringsystemandto
selectthebestmonitoringsystem,itwouldbeidealif
onecouldevaluatethebenefitsderivedfrommonitor-
ingandcomparethemtocostsandchoosethesystem
thatmaximizesnetbenefitssubjecttobudgetary
constraints. Dependingontheusesofthemonitoring
data,monitoringbenefitsmaybeassociatedwith:
reducedrisksfromanintentionaloraccidental
contamination event,
improvedunderstandingofthevariationin
waterqualityofadistributionsystem,
enhancedoperationifthedataareusedaspart
ofaprocesscontrolsystem,and
increasedcomplianceiftheinformationisused
forregulatorypurposes.
5.6MonitoringCaseStudies
EPAhasconductedresearchintotheuseofremote
monitoring and control technology alternatives for
manyyears.Theseprojectshaveinvolvedbothwater
treatmentsystemsandwaterdistribution(Clarketal.,
2004b). Theagencysfirstresearchprojectthat
incorporatedreal-timemonitoringataremote
locationwasconductedattheT&EFacility.The
initialresearchwasfocusedonevaluatingSCADA
systemsforsmalldrinkingwaterpackageplants. The
goalwastodemonstratethatSCADAsystemscould
beusedtomonitorandcontrolseveralsmallplants
remotelyfromacentralizedlocationatonetime
(HaughtandPanguluri,1998). Thefollowingcase
studiesrepresentsomeofthehighlightsofthe
researchandcollaborationwithdifferentwater
utilities.
5.6.1 Rural Community Application
InMay1991,EPAprovidedfundingtosupporta
researchprojecttitledAlternativeLowMainte-
nanceTechnologiesforSmallWaterSystemsin
RuralCommunities(Goodrichetal.,1993). This
project involved the installation of a small drinking
watertreatmentpackageplantinarurallocationin
WestVirginia.Theprimaryobjectiveofthisstudy
wastoevaluatethecost-effectivenessofpackage
plant technology in removing and disinfecting
microbiological contaminants. The secondary
objectivesofthisprojectincluded:remotemonitor-
ingandautomationofthesystemtominimizethe
O&Mcosts,assessmentofthecommunitysaccep-
tanceofsuchasystem,abilitytopay,andtheeffect
ofthedistributionsystemonwaterqualityatthe
tap. Thefollowingisabriefsummaryoftheoverall
project.
ThetreatmentsystemwaslocatedinruralCoalwood
(McDowellCounty),WV,approximately12miles
fromtheMcDowellCountyPublicServicesDivision
office. Priorto1994,anaeratorcombinedwithaslow
sandfilterwasbeingusedforwatertreatmentatthis
site. Thiscombinedunithadbeenoperationalfor
over30yearsandneededsubstantialrepairs. The
waterflowedbygravityfromanabandonedcoalmine
toanaeratorbuiltoverasix-foot-diameterslowsand
filter.Ahypochlorinatorprovideddisinfectionofthe
treatedwater,andthewaterflowedbygravitythrough
thedistributionsystemtotheconsumer. Thevolume
ofwaterfromtheminewasconsideredsufficientfor
thesmallruralcommunity.
Basedonareviewofexistingtechnology,EPA
determinedthatapackagedultrafiltration(UF)system
wouldbeideallysuitedforthislocation. In1992,a
UFunitwaspurchasedandinstalledatthissite. In
1996,EPAdeveloped,installed,andtestedaremote
monitoringsystematthesite. Thesystemused
commerciallyavailablehardwarealongwithEPA-
developedsoftware.Thesoftwarewasnotuser-
friendlyandtheoverallcostofownershipwasvery
high. Therefore,in1998,EPAupdatedtheSCADA
systemwithascalablecommerciallyavailableoff-the-
shelf,user-friendlySCADAsystem.Thetotalcost
(including instrumentation, technical support,
training,andset-up)wasapproximately$33,000.
EPAinstalledsimilarSCADAsystemsatBartleyand
BerwindsitesinMcDowellCounty,WV,forremote
monitoringofwaterquality.
5.6.2 Washington D.C. Remote Monitoring
Network
Followinganumberofcoliformviolations,EPAs
Region3officedirectedtheWashingtonD.C.Water
andSewerAuthority(WASA)toimplementanumber
ofcorrectiveactionsforitswaterdistributionsystem
(Clarketal.,1999). Remotemonitoringofwater
qualityparameterswithinthedistributionsystemwas
identifiedasbeingonepossiblemethodforidentify-
ingwaterqualityproblems. Consequentlyin1997,
EPAinitiatedastudytoinstallaremotenetworkat
variouslocationsinWashingtonD.C.tomonitor
waterqualitywithinthedistributionsystem(Meckes
etal.,1998). TheWASAstaffteamedwithEPAto
select appropriate locations within the distribution
systemforinstallationofonlinesamplingstations.
Followingaresomeofthestudyobjectives:
developmentofmethodstomonitorreal-time
waterqualityatvariouslocationswithinthe
5-11
distribution system,
fieldevaluationofsensorsandremote
monitoring technologies for inclusion in the
network,
developmentofeffectivemethodstopublish
real-timedatathatenhancedconsumer
confidence,
evaluationofcostsassociatedwith
implementingsuchsystems,and
identification of potential problems and
suggestionsforremedialactionswhen
implementingremotemonitoringnetworks.
Freechlorine,pH,temperature,andturbiditywere
selectedasthemonitoredparametersbasedonthe
availabilityofonlinesensortechnologies. The
selectionwasbasedonthepremisethatthesewere
parameterswhichcouldbereliablymonitored
continuouslyandtheselectedinstrumentsrequired
limitedmaintenance. Additionally,WASAusedtheir
SCADAsystemtotrackvariousoperatingparameters
withinthedistributionsystem. Duringtheevalua-
tion,itwasclearthatuseoftheexistingSCADA
systemtomanagethemonitoreddataprovidedclear
advantagesoverotheravailablesystems. Usingthe
existingSCADAsystemminimizedlong-termon-site
supportcosts.
Aftersuitablelocation(s)wereidentified,customized
samplingandmonitoringsystemswerebuilt. The
remotemonitoringsysteminWashingtonD.C.was
implementedinthreephases. Inthefirstphase,a
remotemonitoringsystemwasinstalledattheFort
Reno#2tank(Figure5-4),whichprovidedsecurity
andeasyaccesstothedistributionsystem.Subse-
quently,basedoninitialsuccessatthislocation,two
othersites(BryantStreetandBluePlains)were
selected and added
totheremote
monitoring network
inthesecondphase.
Thethirdphase
involved the
developmentofa
Web-basedapplica-
tion to publish the
real-timedatain
ordertoenhance
consumerconfi-
dence.
Figure5-5showsthe
relationship between
theSCADAsystem
andthetransmission
ofthedata. Al-
Figure 5-4. Fort Reno #2
Remote Sampling System.
thoughWASAsSCADAsystemusedaproprietary
operatingsystem,itprovidedapersonalcomputer
(PC)linkwhichwasusedtodumpdataintoaregular
PCforfurtherprocessing. Thehardware-basedfeature
enabledtightsecurity;anauthorizedendusercould
onlycopytherelevantdatapublishedonthePCand
couldnotdirectlyaccesstheSCADAsystem.This
featurealsoeliminatedanypotentialinterference
betweenthesamplingsystemdataandotherdistribu-
tionsystemoperationsdata. Unfortunately,theEPA
fundingforthisstudywasterminatedand,asaresult,
thesystemsandtheWebsitearecurrentlynotopera-
tional. Theoverallproject,however,diddemonstrate
thatsuchsystemscouldbedevelopedandoperated.
Figure5-6showssomeoftheoutputdatafortheFort
Renotankwhichindicatesthelossofdisinfectant
chlorinelevelsatnight.Clearly,thistypeofinforma-
tioncanbeusedtoimprovesystemoperationsto
bettermaintainthewaterquality.
5.6.3 Tucson Water Monitoring Network
BasedonagrantreceivedfromtheEPAsEnvironmen-
talMonitoringforPublicAccessandCommunity
Figure 5-5. WASA Remote Monitoring System Layout and Data
Transmission Scheme.
5-12
Figure 5-6. Monitoring Data for Fort Reno Tank.
Tracking(EMPACT)Program,thecityofTucson
implementedacomprehensivewaterqualitymonitor-
ingprogram.ThecitysEMPACTgoalsincludedthe
following: implementing enhanced monitoring of the
utilitys potable distribution system, providing the
communitywithnearreal-timewaterqualityinforma-
tiononTucsonWatersWebsite
(www.cityoftucson.org/water),andcreatingcommu-
nitypartnershipstobetterinformwaterconsumers
aboutwaterqualityandresourceissues.Thewater
quality monitoring and data collection tools provided
throughEMPACTalsoenablestheutilitytotrackand
respondtoreal-timechangesinsystemwaterquality.
TucsonWatersdistributionsystemconsistsofone
centraldrinkingwaterdistributionsystemthatserves
themajorityofthecustomersandtenisolated
drinkingwaterdistributionsystems.Alleleven
drinkingwaterdistributionsystemscoveraservice
areaof300squaremilesandserve680,000customers
intheTucsonmetropolitanarea.Thetwotypesof
sourcewaterthatsupplythecentraldistribution
systemarenativegroundwaterandrenewable
rechargedsurfacewaterfromtheColoradoRiver. The
sourcewaterthatsuppliesthetenisolateddistribution
systemsisgroundwater.
Forthepurposesofmonitoring,thecentraldistribu-
tionsystemisdividedintotenwaterqualityzones
andeachisolateddistributionsystemisconsideredan
individualwaterqualityzone.Figure5-7showsthe
zonemap.Awaterqualityzoneisdefinedasanarea
ofthedistributionsystemthatissimilarinwater
qualitycharacteristics,waterpressure,geographical,
andpoliticalboundaries.Eachwaterqualityzonehas
asetnumberofdedicatedsamplingstationsand
points-of-entry(POE). Thededicatedsampling
stationsmonitorthequalityofthedrinkingwaterin
thedistributionsystembeforedeliverytothecus-
tomer.ThePOEsareusuallyindividualwellsthat
representthewaterqualityofasinglewellorinafew
cases,combinedPOEsystemsthatrepresentthe
collectiveblendedwaterqualityfromagroupofwells
thatdirectlysupplyTucsonsdrinkingwater.
Intotal,thereare262dedicatedsamplingstationsand
approximately154activePOEslocatedwithinthe
multipledistributionsystems.Inaddition,22online
waterqualitystations(formonitoring:chlorine
residual,totaldissolvedsolids,pH,andtemperature)
arelocatedthroughoutthecentraldistributionsystem
atstrategiclocations,suchasreservoirs,wellsites,
andboosterstations,asoneoftheprimaryobjectives
oftheEMPACTprogram.
Figure 5-7. City of Tucson Water Quality Zone Map.
Figure5-8depictsacontinuouswaterquality
monitoringstation.Themonitoringfrequencyranges
fromtri-annually(forgrabsamplelocations)toevery
60seconds(forcontinuousmonitoringstations),
depending on the location and specific monitoring
programthatisbeingutilizedforthatlocation.
Thecomprehensivewaterqualitymonitoringprogram
encompassestheentiredistributionsystem. Source
watersaremonitoredandsampledaccordingtothe
ArizonaDepartmentofWaterResourcesandthe
Figure 5-8. Continuous Water Quality Monitoring Station.
5-13
ArizonaDepartmentofEnvironmentalQuality
(ADEQ)regulations,whilethedrinkingwateris
monitoredaccordingtoEPAandADEQregulations
anddrinkingwaterstandards.Drinkingwaterisalso
evaluatedagainstasetofconsumer-establishedwater
qualitygoals. Special-purposesamplesaretakento
characterizeandtrackchangingtrendsinwater
qualityforbothsourcewateranddrinkingwater.All
datasetsareutilizedtotrackandmonitorchangesin
waterqualitytolearnthebaselinewaterquality
operatingparameterlevelsandalsotobeableto
identifyandreactappropriatelywhenacontamina-
tioneventoccurs.Mostoftheanalysisisconducted
bytheutilityswaterqualitylaboratoryandallthe
resultsaretrackedthroughtheWaterQualityManage-
mentDivision.
All262dedicatedsamplinglocationsaremonitored
atleastonceeachmonthfortotalcoliformand
chlorineresidual,while26otherparametersare
monitoredonceeverythreemonths. Basedonthe
waterqualitymeasurementscollectedeachmonth
fromthese262samplinglocations,thetrendsinwater
qualityconditionsaredeterminedforeachwater
qualityzoneandforthedistributionsystemasa
whole.Thisinformationcanbefoundontheafore-
mentionedWebsiteintheWaterQualitysection
underTucsonsWaterQualityandWaterQualityin
MyNeighborhoodlinks.Thewaterqualityinforma-
tiondisplayedontwointeractivemapsshowsdata
chartsandtablesforeachlocationthatissampled
undertheWaterQualityprogram.Inaddition,the
informationprovidedtoallTucsonwatercustomersin
theannualwaterqualityreportorconsumerconfi-
dencereportisbasedonPOEmonitoringdata.
5.7SummaryandConclusions
Distributionsystemmonitoringisintendedtoidentify
thespatialandtemporalvariationsinwaterquality
thattakeplaceinadrinkingwatersystem. Monitor-
ingdatacanbeusedtosatisfyvariousobjectives,
suchasregulatoryrequirements,securityrequire-
ments,orprocesscontrolrequirements. Thecostsof
implementingsuchasystemcanbestbejustifiedif
theresultingdatacanbeusedformorethanoneofthe
aforementioned objectives.
Amonitoringprogramcanimplementeitherroutine
grabsamplingorcontinuousmonitoring. Acom-
bined approach, utilizing both continuous and grab
samplingdata,mayprovetobeveryeffectiveasthe
basisforacomprehensivesystem-widemonitoring
plan. Inthepast,distributionsystemonlinemonitors
weretypicallyhousedinacontrolledenvironment
withsamplelinesfromthedistributionsystemtothe
instrument. Thisresultedinmostinstrumentation
beinglocatedatfacilitiessuchastanksandpump
stations. Theinstrumentationwassometimescon-
nectedtoaSCADAsystem,sothatresultscouldbe
communicatedtoacentraloffice.Recently,some
instrumentationhasbeendesignedforinstallationin
manholesorfordirectinsertionintowaterdistribu-
tionsystempipes.
Vulnerabilityassessmentsperformedbyutilitiesand
variousresearchstudieshaveidentifiedthatwater
distributionsystemsarevulnerabletointentionalor
accidental contamination. In addition to hardening
systemstomakeitmoredifficulttocontaminatea
system,monitoringaspartofaCWShasemergedasa
logicalapproachtocopewithpotentialcontamina-
tionevents. Monitorscanalsobeusedinadistribu-
tionsystemtoprovidereal-timeornearreal-time
informationonwaterquality.Thedatacanthenbe
usedtocontroltreatmentprocessesatatreatmentplant
orinthewaterdistributionsystem.However,thistypeof
programmaynotbepracticalforsmallsystems.
SCADAiswidelyusedinindustrialenvironmentsand
bylargerwaterutilitiestocontrolandmonitortheir
individualfacilityoperations.However,water
utilitiestypicallydonotuseavailableSCADA
systemsforconventionalwaterqualitymonitoring.
Waterutilitiestypicallymonitorwaterquality
parametersbyperforminggrabsamplingonasched-
uledorrandombasisthatprovidesaperiodicsnap-
shotoftheoverallsystem. Currentdrinkingwater
regulationsrequireallpublicwatersystemsto
implementwaterqualitymonitoringfortotalcoliform
toensurethatgoodqualitywaterisprovidedto
consumers(EPA,1996).Sincetheregulationsdonot
clearlyspecifythatreal-timemonitoringofwater
qualityisrequired,utilitieshavebeenreluctantto
installandoperatesuchdevices.
Aftertheeventsof9/11,utilitieshavebecomemore
interestedinthepotentialforcontinuouswater
qualitymonitoring. SCADAsystemscanassistinthis
function by constantly monitoring water quality
withindrinkingwaterdistributionsystems. These
systemscanpotentiallyreducetheriskofsecurity
relatedthreatsorevennon-securityrelatedthreats,
anddetectundesirablewaterqualitychangeswithina
system(Meckesetal.,1998).
Usersshouldevaluatemonitoringdataappropriatelyfor
errorsandinconsistenciesbeforecommencingactions
basedonacquireddata. Eachcomponentinamonitor-
ingsystemisapotentialsourceoferror.Forexample,a
remotemonitoringsystemcouldhavedataerrorsforone
ormoreofthefollowingreasons:instrumenterrorsand
spikes,SCADAdataerrorsrelatedtosystemfailure,
backfillingduetocommunicationfailure,timingerrors,
ormissingdata. Itisimportanttovalidatedataand
understandroutinechangesinwaterqualitydueto
system-specificoperations.
5-14
Monitoring equipment should be chosen appropri-
atelyafterestablishingthemonitoringrequirements.
Theindividualmonitorcharacteristics,costs,and
amenabilitytoSCADAintegrationarekeytoeffective
implementation. Eachsystemshouldbeindividually
examinedandengineeredforimplementation.
References
ASCE. Interim Voluntary Guidelines for Designing
an Online Contaminant Monitoring System. Pub-
lishedbyAmericanSocietyofCivilEngineers,
Reston,VA.2004.
Bahadur,R.,W.Samuels,W.M.Grayman,D.Amstutz,
andJ.Pickus. PipelineNet: AModelforMonitoring
IntroducedContaminantsinaDistributionSystem.
mentalResourcesCongress,Philadelphia,PA.2003.
Berry,J.,W.Hart,C.Phillips,andJ.Uber.AGeneral
Integer-Programming-BasedFrameworkforSensor
PlacementinMunicipalWaterNetworks.Proceed-
ings,ASCE-EWRIWorldWater&Environmental
ResourcesCongress,SaltLakeCity,UT.2004.
ClarkR.M.,W.M.Grayman,S.G.Buchberger,Y.Lee,
andD.J.Hartman. DrinkingWaterDistribution
Systems: AnOverviewinWater Supply Systems
Security. EditedbyL.W.Mays,McGraw-Hill,NY,pp
4.1-4.49. 2004a.
Clark,R.M.,S.Panguluri,andR.C.Haught. Remote
MonitoringandNetworkModels: TheirPotentialFor
ProtectingU.S.WaterSupplies,inWater Supply
Systems Security,editedbyL.W.Mays,McGraw-Hill,
NY,pp14.1-14.22.2004b.
Clark,R.M.,G.S.Rizzo,J.A.Belknap,C.Cochrane.
WaterQualityandtheReplacementandRepairof
DrinkingWaterInfrastructure:TheWashington,DC
CaseStudy. Journal of Water Supply Research and
Technology - Aqua,48(3):106-114. 1999.
EPA.Drinking Water Regulations and Health
Advisories.OfficeofWater,EPA822-B-B-96-002.
October,1996
EPA.ResponseProtocolToolbox.Overviewand
Modules1through6. Canbedownloadedat: http://
cfpub.epa.gov/safewater/watersecurity/
home.cfm?program_id=8#response_toolbox. 2003-
2004.
Themonitoringcasestudiespresentedinthischapter
demonstratethemannerinwhicheffectivemonitoring
systemscanbeimplementedinsmall,medium,and
largedistributionsystems. Ifthedataareusedfor
respondingtoacontaminationthreat,itisimportant
tounderstandthemovementofwaterinthesystem.
Goodrich,J.,J.Adams,andB.Lykins,Jr.Ultrafiltra-
tionMembraneApplicationforSmallSystem.EPA
NationalRiskManagementResearchLaboratory.
1993.
Haught,R.C.,andS.Panguluri. Selectionand
ManagementofRemoteTelemetrySystemsfor
MonitoringandOperationofSmallDrinkingWater
TreatmentPlants.Proceedings,FirstInternational
SymposiumonSafeDrinkingWaterinSmallSystems,
May10-13,1998,Washington,D.C.USA.1998.
Hargesheimer,E.,O.Conio,andJ.Popovicova
(Editors). Online Monitoring for Drinking Water
Utilities.AwwaRFCRSProAqua.2002.
InternationalLifeSciencesInstitute(ILSI). Early
Warning Monitoring to Detect Hazardous Events in
Water Supplies.ILSIPress,WashingtonD.C.1999.
Johansson,P. An Introduction to Modern Welfare
Economics. CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge,
UK. 1991.
Kessler,A.,A.Ostfeld,andG.Sinai.Detecting
Accidental Contaminations in Municipal Water
Networks.Journal of Water Resources Planning and
Management,ASCE.124(4):192-198. 1998.
Lee,B.,R.Deininger,andR.Clark.Locating
MonitoringStationsinWaterDistributionSystems.
Journal of AWWA,83(7):60-66. July1991.
Meckes,M.C.,J.S.Mattingly,G.J.Papadopoulos,M.
Dosani,andS.Panguluri.RealTimeWaterQuality
MonitoringofaWaterDistributionSystemUsing
RemoteTelemetry.Proceedings,AWWADistribution
SystemSymposium,Austin,Texas.September20-22,
1998.
Ostfeld,A.OptimalMonitoringStationsAllocations
forWaterDistributionSystemSecurityinWater
Supply Systems Security,editedbyL.W.Mays,
McGraw-Hill,NY,pp16.1-16.15.2004.
5-15
Ostfeld,A.,andE.Salomons.OptimalLayoutof
EarlyWarningDetectionStationsforWaterDistribu-
tionSystemsSecurity. Journal of Water Planning
and Resources Management,ASCE.130(5):377-385.
2004.
Panguluri,S.,R.C.Haught,M.C.Meckes,andM.
Dosani,1999. Remotewaterqualitymonitoringof
drinkingwatertreatmentsystems.Proceedings,
AWWAWaterQualityTechnologyConference,
Denver,CO.November1999.
Uber,J.,F.Shang,M.Ploycarpou,andZ.Wang.
FeedbackControlofBoosterChlorinationSystems.
Waterbury,CT.2003.
Watson,J.,H.J.Greenberg,W.E.Hart.AMultiple-
ObjectiveAnalysisofSensorPlacementOptimization
inWaterNetworks.Proceedings,ASCE-EWRIWorld
Water&EnvironmentalResourcesCongress,Salt
LakeCity,UT.2004.
5-16
Chapter6
GeospatialTechnologyfor
WaterDistributionSystems
Section 6.1 provides a brief summary of the history and development of geospatial data management
based on information extracted from many sources. This history is included in order to provide a context
for the current geospatial data management methodologies in use today by utilities. Readers who are
already familiar with the history may choose to skip Section 6.1 of this chapter.
Geospatialdataidentifiesthegeographiclocationand
characteristicsofnaturalorconstructedfeaturesand
boundariesontheearth.Thisinformationmaybe
derivedfromvarioussourcesofdata,including
remotesensing,mapping,andsurveyingtechnolo-
gies. Moresimply,geospatialdataisanyinformation
inorontheearththathasawherecomponent. This
canbeahouseaddress,astreetintersectiononamap,
apumpstationwithacoordinatelocationstoredina
facilitieslist,orthelocationofthesamplingtapona
diagramofapumpstation. Thus,everyobjecthasa
geospatialdatacomponentbasedonitslocation.
Geospatialdataprovidesamechanismforincorporat-
inggeographiclocationsofvariousfunctionsand
facilitiesinadistributionsystemsanalysis. Thecost
ofincorporatingmapdataintothewaterdistribution
systemsdisciplineisdecreasing,whichenablesa
wideraudienceofuserstoperformpowerfulspatial
analysesovertime,suchasmasterplandevelopment,
pipebreakanalysis,andlocationalinformationon
sensitivesubpopulations(e.g.,nursinghomes,
schools). Asthesetoolsanddatasetsbecomemore
commonlyusedandsharedamongengineers,new
efficiencieswillberealizedthatwillhaveapositive
impactonwaterdistributionsystemmanagement.
Watersystemsarebynaturequitegeographically
extensiveandthelocationofaparticularcomponent
orfeaturemaysignificantlyaffectitsperformance.
Sourcewatershedscancoverhundredsorthousandsof
squaremiles. Similarly,distributionsystemscan
covervastareas. Theoperationofawatersystem
entailsmovingwaterfromonelocationtoanother.
Elevation(Z),thethirddimensionoflocation(along
withtheXandYdimensionsofaCartesiancoordi-
natesystem),isanimportantfactorindesigningand
operatingawatersystem. Thisillustratesthatthe
managementofawatersystemisinherentlya
geospatial issue.
Becauseofthespatialnatureofwatersystems,many
aspectsofmanagingawatersystemconsistofusing,
managing,anddisplayinggeospatialdata. Thishas
ledtoavarietyofmechanismsrangingfrommapsand
plans to sophisticated, computerized database
managementsystems.Thefollowingisalistofsome
ofthecomputerizeddatasystemsthatwaterutilities
typicallyuseformanagingtheirspatialdata. These
systemswillbediscussedingreaterdetaillaterinthis
chapter.
GISGeographicInformationSystem.
CADDComputer-AidedDesignandDrafting.
AM/FMAutomatedMapping(orAsset
Management)/Facilities Management.
CISCustomerInformationSystem.
G
IS
C
A
D
D
GPS
SC
A
D
A
G
IS
C
A
D
D
GPS
SC
A
D
A
A
M
/F
M
CIS
D
E
M
A
M
/F
M
CIS
D
E
M
DEMDigitalElevationModel.
GPSGlobalPositioningSystem.
SCADASupervisoryControlAndData
Acquisition.
LIMSLaboratoryInformationManagement
System.
LISLandInformationSystem.
RDBMSRelationalDatabaseManagement
System.
SDMSSpatialDataManagementSystem.
6-1

6.1 History of Geospatial Data
Management
Geospatialdataisofinterestinmanyprofessional
fieldsandeachofthesefieldshasapproachedthe
issueofusingandmanaginggeospatialdataina
differentmanner.Examplesincludethefollowing:
Cartographersconcentrateonmakingmaps.
Surveyorsemphasizeaccuratecaptureof
locationalinformationonnaturalandmanmade
landfeatures.
Engineersusespatialdatatodrawconstruction
plansand,morerecently,useitasinputfor
varioustypesofmodels.
Plannersusemapsandspatialdatatoassess
growthandtodeterminethesuitabilityofland
tosupportaparticulartypeofdevelopment.
Peopleinthepublicworksareaareconcerned
withmanagingassetssuchasstreets,sewers,and
waterlines,whichallhaveaspatialcomponent.
Fieldssuchasthemilitary,engineering,mining,
and hydrology are interested in topographic
(elevation) data.
Asaresultofthesevaryinginterestsinspatially
arrayeddata,thetoolsandmethodologiesfor
managingthesedatahaveevolvedfrommany
directionsandrecentlytherehasbeenasignificant
movetowardsintegratingthebasicconcepts. Abrief
historyofgeospatialdatamanagementispresented
below,organizedbythevariousdisciplinesthathave
influencedthisfield. Theneedsofthewaterindustry
inthespatialarenacrosseachoftheseareas. Geo-
spatialdatamanagementinthewaterindustrywillbe
discussedingreaterdetailinalatersectionofthis
chapter.
6.1.1Mapping,Surveying,andRemoteSensing
Mappingistheoldestofthegeospatialdisciplines.
Examplesofmapsdatebackmanymillenniums.A
wallpainting,datingbacktoaround6200B.C.in
Turkey,depictsthepositionsofthestreetsandhouses
ofthetowntogetherwithsurroundingfeaturessuchas
thevolcanoclosetothetown. TheBabylonians
producedclaytabletscontainingmapsthatdateback
toaround1000B.C. Otherearlymapswereprepared
bytheEgyptiansandChinese(OConnorand
Robertson, undated).
Manyoftheadvancesinmapmakingareattributedto
theGreeks. Around350B.C.,Aristotlearguedthat
theearthwasasphereandaround250B.C.,Era-
tosthenesaccuratelycalculatedthecircumferenceof
theearth.In140A.D.,Ptolemyseight-volumeGuide
to Geographywaswrittenandprovidedthebasic
principlesofcartography.Itintroducedtheconceptof
mapprojectionsandattemptedtomaptheknown
world,givingcoordinatesofthemajorplacesina
systemakintothepresentdaylatitude-longitude
system.Thisdocumentservedasthedefinitive
referenceongeographyforoverathousandyearsand
waslatertranslatedintoLatinandprintedin1475.
The16thcenturysawtheintroductionofglobesand
manyimprovementsinthemathematicalbasisof
cartography.GerardusMercatordevelopedawall
mapoftheworldin1569on18separatesheets(see
Figure6-1). IntheMercatorprojection,linesof
longitude,linesoflatitude,andrhomblinesall
appearasstraightlinesonthemap.Thisprojection
wasagreataidtonavigatorsandisstillinusetoday.
Withthebasisofcartographywellinhandalmost500
years ago, the cartographic methodologies continued
toevolve.Additionally,emphasiswasplacedon
methodsofaccuratelyestablishingthecoordinatesof
placesofinterest. Thisledtothefieldofsurveying
and,morerecently,thefieldofremotesensing.
Figure 6-1. Mercators Map of the World in 1569
(Whitfield, 1994).
Surveyingisthescienceandartofmeasuring
distancesandanglesonornearthesurfaceofthe
earth. Itisanorderlyprocessofacquiringdata
relatingtothephysicalcharacteristicsoftheearthand
inparticulartherelativepositionofpointsandthe
magnitudeofareas. Evidenceofsurveyingand
recordedinformationexistsfromfivethousandyears
agoinplacessuchasChina,India,Babylon,and
Egypt(QueenslandGovernment,undated). Some
keyinventionsintheareaofsurveyingincludethe
following:
KnottedropesMeasuringdevicedeveloped
bytheEgyptiansandusedinconstructionof
thepyramids.
LevelsMechanismdevelopedbythe
Egyptianscomposedofahangingplumbbob
usedtoestablishalevelsurface.
6-2
MagneticcompassDevicefordetermining
northdirection.DevelopedbyChinesecirca
200B.C.andcomposedofamagnetic
lodestone.LaterusedbyChinesefor
navigation.
Theodolite-Aninstrument,graduatedin360
degrees,usedinthemid-1500sbyan
Englishman,LeonardDigges,tomeasure
angles.
AlidadeandPlanetable-Sightingmechanism
andflattabledevelopedin1590formapping
thesurfacefeaturesoftheearth.Attributedto
JeanPraetorius.
QuadrantandSextant-Thequadrantisan
apparatusdevelopedin1730byJohnHadley
formeasuringanglesofcelestialbodies.This
ledtothedevelopmentofthesextant,whichis
aprecisioninstrumentmadefrombrassor
aluminumthatisusedforoceannavigation
wherecelestialobservationsaretakentoplota
ships position.
Transit-Thetransitisusedtomeasurevertical
andhorizontalanglesandmayalsobeusedfor
leveling;itschiefelementsareatelescopethat
canberotated(transited)aboutahorizontaland
aboutaverticalaxis,spiritlevels,and
graduatedcirclessupplementedbyVernier
scales. AttributedtoW.J.YounginPhiladelphia
in1831.
ElectronicDistanceMeasurement(EDM)
Startinginthe1950s,electronicdistance
measuringinstrumentsweredevelopedand
havenowlargelyreplacedtraditionalmethods
formeasuringdistance. Horizontaldistances
aremeasuredusingavarietyofinstrumentsthat
employalaserbeamaimedatareflectorstation.
Low-costinstrumentsthatemploysoundwaves
orinfraredbeamsarealsoavailable.
GPS-TheuseofGPSinsurveyingproceduresis
themostrecentandrevolutionarychangeto
influencelandmeasurement. GPSwasdesigned
andbuiltandisoperatedandmaintainedbythe
U.S.DepartmentofDefense.Originallycalled
theNavstarGPS,itwasfirstbrainstormedatthe
Pentagonin1973. In1978,thefirstoperational
GPSsatellitewaslaunched;bythemid-1990s,
thesystemwasfullyoperationalwith24
satellites.ThebasicprinciplebehindGPSisthe
measurementofdistancebetweensatellitesand
thereceiver.Thedistancetoatleast3satellites
mustbeknowninordertofindoutaposition.
Satellitesandreceiversgenerateduplicateradio
signalsatexactlythesametime. Assatellite
signalstravelatthespeedoflight(186,000
milespersecond),theyonlytakeafew
hundredthsofasecondtoreachtheGPS
receiver.Thisdifferenceandthespeedatwhich
thesignaltravelsisusedintheequationtofind
outthedistancebetweentheGPSreceiverand
thesatellite(RadioShack,2004).GPSisnow
alsobeingusedtoprovideinformationon
elevations.
Localgovernmentsfrequentlystoresurveyinforma-
tiononparcelsinanLIS.Thisinformationcan
includepropertyownership,constructiondate,land
assessment,andlandtaxation.Thisinformationmay
belinkedtoacomputerizeddatabasesystemfor
storingthegeographiccoordinatesoftheparcels.
Remotesensingreferstoimageryfromairplanesor
satellites.Someearlyexamplesofremotesensing
include:aerialphotographyfromaballoonin1859
byGaspardFelixTournachoninanattemptto
conductalandsurvey;useoflightcamerasattached
topigeonsinBavariain1903tomonitortroop
positions;photographsofSanFranciscofollowingthe
1906earthquakebyGeorgeLawrencefromakite;and
theworkofaphotographerwhoaccompaniedWilbur
Wrightononeofhisfirstdemonstrationflightsin
1909.Moreseriousaerialphotographywasconducted
duringWorldWarIandIIandduringtheColdWar
period.
Aerialphotographyhasbecomeastapleiteminthe
developmentofmapsanddocumentationoflanduse
changes.TheNationalAerialPhotographyProgram
(NAPP)isaninteragencyFederaleffortcoordinated
bytheUSGS,whichusesNAPPproductstorevise
maps.Otheragencieshavevariedusesforthese
photographs,whicharetakenona5-to7-yearcycle
andproducedtorigorousspecifications.TheNAPP
effortencompassestheentirelower48statesand
Hawaii.Thephotosareacquiredfromairplanesflying
atanaltitudeof20,000feetusinga6-inchfocal
lengthcameraresultinginascaleof1:40,000.Each
9-inchby9-inchphoto(withoutenlargement)covers
anareaofslightlymorethan5milesonaside.The
NAPPeffortbeganin1987andreplacedtheNational
HighAltitudePhotography(NHAP)programwhich
wasinitiatedin1980.Strictspecificationsregarding
sunangle,cloudcover,minimalhaze,stereoscopic
coverage,andimageinspectionwerefollowedandall
NAPPphotographyiscloud-free(USGS,undated).
Satelliteremotesensingcanbetracedtotheearly
daysofthespaceage(NationalAeronauticsand
SpaceAdministration[NASA],undated). OnApril1,
1960,theTelevisionandInfraredObservation
Satellite(TIROS1)waslaunched,whichprovedthat
satellitescouldobserveEarthsweatherpatterns.In
1966,theEnvironmentalScienceServicesAdminis-
6-3

tration(ESSA)SatellitesIandIIgavetheUnited
Statesitsfirstglobalweathersatellitesystem.In1972,
NASAbegantheLandsatserieswiththelaunchofthe
EarthResourcesTechnologySatellite1,whichwas
laterrenamedLandsat1byNASA. Figure6-2
illustratesanimagederivedfromLandsat. Subse-
quently,U.S.governmentalsatellites,suchasLandsat
7,arestillgatheringconsistentlycalibratedimagery
oftheearthundertheEarthObservationSatellite
(EOSAT)program.Satellitesofothergovernments
(SPOT-France)andprivatesatellites(GE,Digital
Globe)haveexpandedtheroutineavailabilityof
imagery,andfurtherenhancedtheresolutionofthe
data collected.
Figure 6-2. Landsat Thematic Mapper Images of
the Missouri River Floodplain Near Glasgow,
Missouri. (USGS, 1993).
6.1.2CADD
Overthepastquarterofacentury,CADDhasrevolu-
tionizedthewayinwhichengineersandarchitects
performtheirwork. ThebasisforCADDwaslaidby
IvanSutherlands1963Ph.D.thesisatMassachusetts
InstituteofTechnology(MIT)titled,Sketchpad:A
Man-machineGraphicalCommunicationsSystem
(Sutherland,2003). Sutherlandusedalightpento
createengineeringdrawingsdirectlyontheCathode
RayTube(CRT).Histhesislaidoutvirtuallyallof
thegraphicalhumaninterfaceissues. Sketchpad
pioneeredtheconceptsofgraphicalcomputing,
TheacronymsCAD,CADD,CAM,andCAEreferto
computeraidedmethodologiesusedinvariousfields
ofengineering.CADcanstandforcomputeraided
draftingorcomputeraideddesign. CADDcan
meancomputeraideddesignanddraftingorcom-
puteraideddraftinganddesign.CAErefersto
computeraidedengineeringandCAMrefersto
computeraidedmanufacturing. ThefieldsofCAD,
CAMandCAEoverlapandarefrequentlylumpedinto
asinglefieldofCAD/CAM/CAE.
includingmemorystructurestostoreobjects,rubber-
bandingoflines,theabilitytozoominandoutonthe
display,andtheabilitytomakeperfectlines,corners,
andjoints.ThiswasthefirstGUIlongbeforetheterm
wascoined.
Inthelate1960sandearly1970s,severalcompanies
werefoundedthatdevelopedandcommercializedthe
conceptsofCADD. Inthe1980s,Autodesk(makerof
AutoCAD)andBentleySystems(Microstation)were
foundedandledtothewideravailabilityofCADDon
personalcomputers.Laterinthatdecade,Parametric
TechnologyCorp.produceda3-dimensionaldesign
system.
6.1.3GIS
GISrepresentscomputerizedsystemsforthestorage,
retrieval,manipulation,analysis,anddisplayof
geographicallyreferenceddata(Mark,1997a).
ThoughthetermGISwasfirstcoinedbyRoger
Tomlinson,directoroftheCanadaGISintheearly
1960s,manyoftheconceptsofGISlieintheearlier
fieldsofmappingandcartography.Thereareseveral
fieldsandinstitutionsthatcontributedtotheGISarea
inanon-linearmanneroverthepast40years,
resultingintheverypowerfulandwidespreaduseof
GIStoday.Figure6-3showsthetypicalinputsand
resultsofcurrentGISpackages.
ThedevelopmentoftheGeographicBaseFile/Dual
IndependentMapEncoding(GBF-DIME)filesby
theU.S.CensusBureauinthe1960swasthefirst
large-scaleuseofdigitalmappingbythegovern-
ment. Thissystemledtotheproductionofthe
Census Topologically Integrated Geographic
EncodingandReferencing(TIGER)files.Important
geographicworkwasalsobeingdoneatuniversi-
tiesthroughoutthe1950sand1960s. Agrid-based
mappingprogramcalledSynagraphicMapping
(SYMAP),developedattheLaboratoryforCom-
puterGraphicsandSpatialAnalysisattheHarvard
GraduateSchoolofDesignin1966,waswidely
distributedandservedasamodelforlatersystems.
OutputfromSYMAPwasonalineprinter.A
companionprogramcalledSYMVUallowedfor
mappingoftopographicandotherdatausingapen
plotter.
6-4
Figure 6-3. Typical Inputs and Results of Current GIS Packages.
Fromanapplicationviewpoint,muchofGISmodel-
ingtechnology,asitisusedtoday,islargelyan
outgrowthofplanningapproachesthatarebasedon
theworkofIanMcHarg,asarticulatedinhisbook
Design with Nature (McHarg,1969). Hismanual
methodsinvolvedoverlayingagridontheareatobe
studied,comparingandcombiningvaluesfor
differenttypesofattributesinagridcelltodetermine
thesuitabilityofeachgridcellforvarioususes.
Attributescouldincludecharacteristicssuchasland
slopeandsoilattributes.
Hedemonstratedthisprocessinhisbookbycreating
mapsofdifferentattributesontransparencieswiththe
darknessproportionaltothedegreetowhichthat
attributewouldsupportaparticularuse. Forexample,
significantlyslopinglandwouldberepresentedas
darkareasbecauseitisdifficulttobuildunderthese
circumstances. Thenthereadercouldphysically
overlaythetransparenciesandselectthelighterareas
whichweremostappropriatefordevelopment. When
computerized,thisbecamethebasisofthecommon
overlayanalysisofGIStechnology,whichservedas
thebasicmodelingtechnologyofGISformanyyears.
AnothersourceforGIStechnologywascomputerized
photogrammetryandsurveying.Intheearly1960s,
thedesiretomanipulatespatialdatainacomputerled
tosuchwell-knowncivilengineeringprogramsas
CoordinatedGeometry(COGO),developedatMITfor
calculatingsurveyinganalysesoncoordinatedata.At
thesametime,theconceptoftheDigitalTerrain
Model(DTM)wasdeveloped,inwhichthecomputer
wouldbeusedtostoreadigitaldatabaserepresenting
theearthssurface(seethenextsubsectionformore
detailsonDTM).
Inthepastdecade,developmentwithintheGIS
communityhasbeenprimarilyassociatedwith
commercialenterprisesthatdevelopandmarketGIS
software. CompaniessuchasESRI,Smallworld,
Intergraph,Bentley,MapInfo,andAutoCADdomi-
natetheGISfieldtoday.Earlyimportantpublic
domainoracademicGISpackagessuchasGeographic
ResourcesAnalysisSupportSystem(GRASS),
developedbytheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineersand
ClarkUniversity,havebeenlargelyreplacedbythe
commercialsoftwarepackages.
6.1.4DEMs
DEMsandDTMsrefertorepresentationofground
surfacesinacomputer.Overthepast40years,they
6-5

havebeenusedtosupportapplicationssuchas
highwaydesign,sewerdesign,hydrologicanalysis,
mining calculations, and military applications (such
aspartofaguidancesystemformissiles). Various
methodsutilizingregular/irregulargridsandtriangu-
latedirregularnetworks(TIN)(Mark,1997b)have
beenemployedtoprovideefficientrepresentationsof
surfaces. DEMshavebecomearegularfeatureof
todaysGISpackages.DEMdatabasesarereadily
availableformostoftheU.S.fromUSGSandother
sources. Figure6-4depictsaDTMoutput.
Figure 6-4. Digital Terrain Model of Mount St. Helens after
Eruption in 1980 (R. Horne, 2004).
6.1.5DatabaseManagementSystems
Spatialdataiscomposedoftwoformsofinformation:
geographiccoordinatesandattributeinformation. As
anexample,inordertorepresentawatermain,
geographicinformationdescribesthecoordinatesof
thestartandendofthepipeandanycurvesorbends
inthepipe. Attributeinformationmayincludethe
pipediameter,length,material,age,andotherdataof
interest.Typically,attributedataarestoredina
relationaldatabasesystemthatmaybepartofaGISor
anassetmanagementsystem. TheRelational
Databasemodelfordatabasedesignwasinventedby
Dr.E.F.Cobbin1969andpublishedinComputer
World in1985.Arelationaldatabasesystemis
composedofaseriesoftablesthatarerelatedthrough
keywords. Thismodelisconsideredtobehighly
efficientandminimizeserrors.
6.1.6FacilityManagement
Facilitiesmanagement(orassetmanagementasitis
frequentlycalledtoday)pertainstouseofcomputer
databaseandmappingtechnologytostoreand
manageinformationrelatedtophysicalassetsina
watersystem. Inthe1980s,thetermAM/FMwasused
todescribetheautomationofmappingandthe
managementoffacilitiesrepresentedonthosemaps.
ThistypicallyinvolvedtheintegrationofCAD
technologyanddatabasemanagementtechnology.In
additiontothewaterindustry,AM/FMwasusedby
theelectricandgasindustry,telecommunications
industry,andotherindustriesthatmaintained
physicalnetworks. Inthe1990s,thefocusoffacili-
tiesmanagementbothshiftedandexpandedto
encompassabroadermanagementofgeographic
spatiallyarrayeddatathatareusedandmaintainedby
thevarioustypesofutilities. Thisshiftbroughta
closerinterdependencetotheGISfieldandfrequently
thisbroaderareaisnowreferredtoasAM/FM/GIS
(Cesario,1995)orevenmorebroadlyasGeospatial
Information Technology.
6.2 GIS Principles
Understanding the basic principles behind geographic
informationsystemsisdifficultbecauseofthebreadth
ofthefield,therapidchangeintechnology,andthe
lackofstandardizationforterminology.Thissection
providesageneraloverviewofthemostsignificant
GISprinciples.
6.2.1GISFeatures
AGISiscomposedofagroupofobjectsorfeatures
thathavebothalocationaldescriptionandadescrip-
tionoftheircharacteristicsorattributes. Forexample,
awatertankcanbeidentifiedbyitslocationinterms
oflatitude-longitudeorothercoordinatesystemsand
itscharacteristics,suchasdiameter,height,andtype
ofconstruction.Similarly,apipecanbedescribedby
itsroute,diameter,length,material,andage.More
importantly,theseattributescanbestored,updated,
andanalyzedinadatabaseovertime.
Geographicfeaturesarestoredinthreegeneralways:
vector,raster,orTIN.Thoughageographicfeature
canfrequentlybestoredinmorethanoneway(e.g.,as
avectororasraster),typicallythereisapreferredway
tostoreeachpieceofinformation. Underthegeneral
areaofvectorrepresentation,featurescanbestoredas
points,lines,orpolygons. Figure6-5illustratesthe
threetypesoffeaturesinanexamplemapofawater
POLYGON
LINE
POINT
Figure 6-5. Map of Pressure Zone Showing Three
Types of GIS Vector Data.
6-6
distributionsystempressurezone. Pointsaregeo-
graphically represented as a single set of coordi-
natesintwoorthreedimensions. Alinecanrepresent
eitherasingle,straight-linesegment,identifiedbythe
coordinatesofthetwoendpoints,oraseriesof
connectedlinesegmentstorepresentacurvedline. A
polygonisdefinedbyaclosedsetoflinesegments
andidentifiestheareacontainedwithinthedefined
outer boundary.
Rasterdatamostcommonlyreferstoasetofdatathat
hasbeendefinedintermsofaregularsquareor
rectangulargridsystemthatistiedtoageographical
coordinatesystem. Eachgridcellcanhaveoneor
morecharacteristicsassignedtoit. Asanexampleof
arasterdataset,Figure6-6illustrateslanduse
informationderivedfromasatellitethatisrepresented
asarasterdatabase.Othermethodologiesforstoring
rasterdataincludescanlinesandotherregulargrid
cell configurations.
Figure 6-6. Regional Land Cover Characterization
as a Raster Database (USGS, 1992).
ThethirdgeneraltypeofGISfeatureistheTIN
structure. Asthenameimplies,aTINstructureis
composedofaseriesofirregularly-sizedtriangular
cells. TINismostfrequentlyusedasamechanismfor
storingtopographicalinformation,thoughitcanalso
beusedtostoreotherdiscreteorcontinuousspatial
datafields. TheapplicabilityoftheTINstructurefor
storingtopographicalinformationliesinthesimple
geometricaxiomthatthreepointsdefineaplane,as
illustratedinFigure6-7. Asshown,acontinuous
surfacecanberepresentedbyafacetedsetoftriangles
withthesidesoftrianglesrepresentingtopographical
elementssuchasstreams,ridges,anddrainagedivides
(Graymanetal.,1975).
TheresolutionandaccuracyofaTINdatabase
generallydependsuponthesizeofthetriangles
relativetothedegreeofdetailinthesurfacebeing
represented.Variousmathematicaltechniquescanbe
usedtoconstructaTINrepresentationwiththemost
commonlyusedmethodforconstructingaTINfroma
seriesofpointsknownasDelaunaytriangulation
(namedafteraRussianmathematicianwhoinvented
theprocedurein1934).
WithinaGIS,featuresareorganizedasseparatelayers
inamanneranalogoustotheoriginalconcept
developedbyIanMcHargover35yearsago. When
viewingGISdata,layerscanbeturnedonoroffor
movedforwardorbackwardinordertobetterunder-
standorviewthespatialrelationships.
6.2.2Topology
AnimportantcharacteristicofGISistheconceptof
topology.Topologymaybedescribedasthe
locationalinterrelationshipbetweenfeatures. Terms
suchasadjacency,intersection,andconnectivityare
alltopologicalcharacteristicsthatdescribehow
individualfeaturesinteract. Whenwelookatamap,
oureyesandmindconstructthetopologicallinkages
betweenfeatures. Observationssuchasthe
MississippiRiverformingtheboundarybetween
IllinoisandMissouri,theMonongahelaRiverand
AlleghenyRiverintersectingtoformtheOhioRiver,
orthatahighwayintersectionbetweenInterstate95
andInterstate10iscompletelycontainedwithinthe
stateofFloridaareallstatementsoftopology.GIS
Figure 6-7. Triangulation of Elevation (Z) Data.
6-7

constructs the topological relationship between
individualfeatures,andthiscapabilityisusedin
variousanalysesandmodelingtasks.
6.2.3MapProjections,Datum,andCoordinate
Systems
Mapprojections,datum,andcoordinatesystems
providethemechanismforestablishingaunique
geographiclocationforapointontheearthssurface.
Asscientistshaveknownforcenturies(oreven
millennia),theearthisapproximatelyaspheroid,or
inreality,anellipsoid.However,whenweareviewing
mapsorutilizingspatialdatainaGIS,theearthis
representedasaplanar(flat)system. Formapsor
planscoveringsmallerareas,thedistortionintro-
ducedbyignoringthecurvatureintheearthssurface
isgenerallyinsignificant.However,formapsand
planscoveringlargerareas,thisdistortionwouldbe
unacceptable. Withthewideavailabilityofregional
ornationalGISdatabases,thenecessityforaccurately
determiningcoordinatesisparamount.
Themechanismforconvertingalocationontheearth
surfacetoaflatsurfaceisperformedusingamap
projection. Amapprojectionisamathematical
relationshipforperformingthisconversion.Thereare
manyprojectionsorrelationshipsthatcanbeusedto
makethisconversion.Someofthemorecommonly
used projections include:
StatePlaneCoordinates(SPC),
UniversalTransverseMercator(UTM),
AlbersEqualArea,
LambertConformalConic,and
SpaceObliqueMercator.
Ineachprojection,theearthisdividedintoaseriesof
zones. Abest-fit,separate,planarcoordinatesystem
isestablishedforeachzone. Whenexamininganarea
thatstraddlesmultiplezones,suchasuseoftheSPC
systemwithametropolitanareathatisinmultiple
states,coordinateconversionsareneededinorderto
viewtheentireareainasingle,consistentcoordinate
system.
Afinalimportantissueinunderstandingprojections
andcoordinatesystemsistheconceptofadatum.
Becauseofthecomplexityoftheshapeoftheearth
andtheinabilitytoexactlydescribeitmathemati-
cally,theearthhasbeenhistoricallymodeledbya
best-fitellipsoid.Theparametersofthatellipsoidare
definedbykeydatumpointslocatedonorinthe
earth. Formanyyears,theNorthAmericanDatum,
developedin1927(NAD27)thatusesapointonthe
earthssurfaceinMeadesRanch,Kansas,asan
anchor,wasthemajorstandard.Mostprojectionsfor
NorthAmericausedthisdatum.
Withimprovedmathematicsandmeasurementsofthe
earth,theNorthAmericanDatumof1983(NAD83)
wasdevelopedwithadatumlocatedwithintheearth.
Thishasbecomethenewstandardforprojections.As
aresult,apointhavingaparticularcoordinateusing
theNAD27datummaybeshiftedbytensorhundreds
offeetfromapointwiththesamecoordinateusing
theNAD83datum.Ifthisisnotproperlyaccounted
forinaGISsystem,amapthatusedtheNAD27datum
wouldnotproperlyoverlayonamapusingthe
NAD83datum. ThereareseveralGISutilities
availablethatwillproperlyconvertdatasetsfromone
projectionanddatumintoanother,aswellassome
newerGISprogramsthatre-projectdatasetswith
differentcoordinatesystemson-the-fly.Ineither
case,itistheresponsibilityoftheGISusertoknow
theprojectionanddatumassociatedwitheachdata
sourceandtomaketheappropriatedefinition.
6.2.4GISDatabaseDesign
GISconceptsandsoftwareprovideanopportunity
andaplatformforutilizingspatialdata.However,in
ordertoeffectivelystore,analyze,anddisplaythe
data,theymustbearrangedinanorganizedmanner.
Factorsthataffectdatabasedesigninclude:thegoals
oftheGISimplementation,theshort-andlong-term
plansfortheGIS,thetypeandnumberofusersforthe
particular application, any existing industry-wide
standards,andotherapplication-specificfactors.
Zeiler(1999)discussestheissuesassociatedwith
databasedesign. Variousindustrygroupsareattempt-
ingtodefinegenericdatastructuresforaparticular
industry(suchasthewaterutilityindustry)inorderto
facilitatedatatransferandcommonusageofaGISin
thatindustry(Griseetal.,2000).
6.2.5ManagementofGIS
IntheearlydaysofGISdevelopment,theGISwas
typicallydeveloped,managed,andusedbyacentral
coreofafewpeopleatagovernmentalorprivate
organization.WiththegrowthandacceptanceofGIS,
therearenowfrequentlymanyGISstationsusinga
specificGISatanagency,utilityorconsortiumof
utilities. Managementofsuchasystemandcontrols
onthemannerinwhichchangesintheGISaremade
areveryimportantissues.
GISinstallationsmaybeclassifiedasapersonal(or
local)systemoranenterprisesystem. Inapersonal
system,theGISisusedandmanagedbyanindividual
orasmallgroup. Ontheotherhand,anenterprise
systemmaybeusedbydozensofusersdistributed
throughoutanagencyandmanylocations. Though
manyofthemanagementissuesmaybesimilarin
thesetwoscalesofoperation,theenterprisesystem
presentsamorechallengingsituationintermsof
6-8
managingthesystem. Issuessuchaspersonnel(user)
assignmentforchangingdataorbackingupthe
systemandinterconnectivitybetweenstationsand
usersmustbecarefullyspelledoutinordertoinsure
theintegrityofthesystem.
Acommonmanagementmodelforlargesystems
involvingmultipleusersandlocationsisthecombi-
nationofacentralenterpriseGISwithmultiplelocal
GISinstallations. Acentralcoreofmanagers,who
controlanymodificationstothedatabaseand
maintainitsintegrity,maintainsthecentralsystem.
Localstationscaneitheraccesstheenterprisesystem
onaread-onlybasisorcandownloadcopiesofallor
partofthedatabasefortheirlocaluseandmodifica-
tion. Specificprotocolsarethenusedifchanges
madeatthelocallevelaretobeincorporatedintothe
enterprisesystem. Theseprotocolsmayinclude
assignedresponsibilityatthelocalleveltoselected
layerswithintheenterprisesystem. Thisformof
managementisrelativelycommonwithacounty-wide
ormulti-utilityagencymanaginganenterpriseGIS
andawaterutilitymaintainingresponsibilityforthe
watersystemlayerswithintheGIS.
6.3 Geospatial Data Management
in the Water Industry
Becauseofthespatialextentandnatureofwater
supplysystems,managementofgeospatialdataisan
importanttask. Thisisaccomplishedthroughaseries
ofsystemsundertheoverallumbrellaofSDMSused
tocollect,store,andemploythesespatialdata. In
somecases,thesevarioussystemsareintegrated;in
othercases,theyareindependentsystems.
6.3.1CADD
CADDsystemshavelongservedasthebasisfor
designingwaterdistributionsystemsandfacilities
andformanagingmapsofthewatersystem. Most
utilitiesandconsultingengineersusecommercial
packagessuchasAutoCAD,Intergraphor
MicroStation. TheCADDsystemmaybeorganized
aroundacollectionofmapsorplanswithalocal
coordinatesystemforeachplanormayutilizea
regionalcoordinatesystemsuchasSPC. Manywater
utilitiesusewaterdistributionsystemmodelsthatare
integratedwithCADDpackages.
6.3.2GIS
GIShasmadesignificantinroadsinsupplementingor
replacingCADDpackagesatmanywaterutilities.GIS
capabilitiestostore,accessandmapdataareleading
toincreasedusageofGISinareassuchasplanning,
facilitiesmanagement,andmanagementofcustomer
andwaterqualitydata.Somewaterutilitiessharea
GISdatabasewithotherentities,suchascityor
countygovernments,andotherutilities,suchasgas,
electric,andtelephone.Atmanyutilities,GIS
technologyhasalsosubsumedthecapabilitiesthat
wereformerlyclassifiedasAM/FMsystems. Simi-
larly,GISsystemsmayincludeanLISasameansof
storinglandproperty,parcel,andownershipinforma-
tionandgeographicdescriptions.DEMsarealsoa
regularfeatureinGISpackages. Theyprovidea
mechanismforstoringtopographicalinformation. In
thepastfewyears,integrationofGISwithwater
distributionsystemmodelshasbeenasignificantarea
ofresearchanddevelopmentinthewaterindustry.
6.3.3CIS
CISprovidesamechanismforstoringandusing
informationonwaterconsumptionbycustomers.The
geographiccomponentinaCISisanaddressand/ora
geographiccoordinate. AMRsystemsfacilitate
collectionofconsumptiondatathatcanbestoredin
databases. StandardGISaddressmatchingcapabili-
tiesfacilitateconversionofaddressestogeographic
coordinates. AgeographicallyenabledCISprovides
anexcellentmechanismforautomaticallyrecording
currentconsumptiondatatobeusedinwaterdistribu-
tionsystemmodels.
6.3.4SCADA
SCADAsystemstypicallyincludecapabilitiesto
remotelyaccessinformationonthestateofthewater
system,tomanuallyorautomaticallycontrolcompo-
nentssuchaspumpsandvalves,andtostoreand
displaycurrentorhistoricaltime-seriesdataabout
systemoperation. Awiderangeofcommercial
SCADAhardware/softwaresystemsisavailableand
canbetailoredtothespecificneedsofthewater
utility.EachcomponentthatisreferencedinaSCADA
systemcanhaveauniquegeographicidentifierthat
canbeusedasalinkagetoaGISorotherspatialdata
managementsystems. Researchanddevelopmentis
underwayrelatedtointegratingSCADAsystemsand
hydraulic/waterqualitydistributionsystemmodelsso
thatthesemodelscanbeusedinreal-timeoperation
andemergencies.
6.3.5LIMS
LIMSarecomputerizedsystemsformanagingsamples
inalaboratory.Suchsystemstypicallyincludea
mechanismforstoring,managing,displaying,and
trackingsamples. Sincetheoriginofasamplemust
beidentifiedbothspatiallyandtemporally,this
informationprovidesameansofassociatingLIMS
datawithotherspatialdatabasemanagementsystems.
6.3.6SupportTechnology
Othertechnologicaladvancesrelatedtospatial
databasemanagementthatareusedbywaterutilities
includeGPSandRDBMS. GPSisawidelyused
technologyinsurveyingandcanbeusedfortagging
fielddatawithageographiccoordinate. RDBMSisa
6-9
generalmethodologyforefficientlystoringinforma-
tionasaseriesofrelated2-dimensionaltables. Most
moderndatabasemanagementsystemsassociated
withGIS,LIMS,andothersystemsutilizetheRDBMS
structure.
6.4 Integration of Geospatial Data
Management and Modeling
Theconceptofintegratingwaterdistribution
systemmodelingwithgeospatialdatabasemanage-
mentsystemshasbeenevolvingoverthepast
quarterofacenturyandcontinuestobeamajor
focusofdevelopmentinthewaterindustrytoday.
Earlywaterdistributionsystemmodelswerestand-
aloneentities. Intheveryearlymodels,inputwas
providedbypunchcardsandoutputwasinthe
formofprintedtabularinformation. Thiscumber-
someI/Ogavewaytoinputviaterminalsinthe
1980sandGUIsinthe1990s. The1990salsosaw
thefirstcommercialintegrationofwaterdistribu-
tionsystemmodelswithCADDfollowedby
integrationwithGISinthe2000s.
Thebasisforintegratingwaterdistributionsystem
modelswithgeospatialdatacanbetracedbacktoan
earlystudythatinterfacedaplanninglevelsewer
designmodelwithaTIN-basedGIScalledADAPT
(ArealDesignAndPlanningTool)(Graymanet.al.,
1975). Thisapproachwascalledgeo-basedmodel-
ingandwassubsequentlyappliedtovariousother
waterengineeringsituationssuchashydrologic
modeling(MalesandGates,1979). Inthesesystems,
ageo-basednetworkrepresentingsewerlinesor
streamswasintegratedwithGISelevation,landuse,
andsoildata.Thisnetworkdirectlyinterfacedwith
designandsimulationmodels.
Inthe1980s,thesamegeo-basedmodelingconcept
wasappliedtowaterdistributionsystemanalysis
throughaseriesofEPAresearchprojects.TheWater
SupplySimulationModel(WSSM)integratedageo-
based,link-nodesystemtoseveralmodelsincludinga
hydraulicmodel,asteady-statewaterqualityandcost
allocation model, and various display and editing
routines(ClarkandMales,1985). Subsequently,
WSSMwasexpandedtoincludeaninterfacetoGIS
filesusingAutoCAD. USGSdigitallinegraph(DLG)
filesofroadnetworksandDEMswereusedwithin
AutoCADtocreateadetailedrepresentationofthe
waterdistributionsystem. Theresultingdatabasewas
usedtogenerateaninputfilefortheWadisohydrau-
licmodelwhoseengineworkedasaprototypefor
EPANET.
Inthepast10years,commercialvendorsofnetwork
modelingsoftwareworkinginconjunctionwith
CADDandGISvendorshaveledtheintegrationof
modelingsoftwareandspatialdatabasetechnology.
Inthemid1990s,hydraulic/waterqualitymodels
werebuilttooperatewithinAutoCAD.Morerecently,
commercialmodelingsystemshavebeenreleasedasa
versionthatarefullyintegratedandoperatewithin
theGISenvironment.Commercialproductsinclude
WaterGEMS(HaestadMethods/BentleySystems)and
InfoWater(MWHSoft).
6.4.1ModelIntegrationTaxonomy
Thetermintegrationcanrefertoawiderangeof
capabilitiesrelatedtouseofnetworkmodelsin
conjunctionwithaspatialdatabasesystem.Shamsi
(2001)providesataxonomyofthreelevelsformodel-
databaseintegration.Thesearedescribedasinter-
change,interface,andintegration.
Interchangeprovidesamechanismfortransferring
databetweenaspatialdatabasesuchasGISanda
model. Withinterchange,thereisnodirectlinkage
betweenthetwosystems.Rather,theyarerun
separatelyandinformationisextractedfromone
systemandstoredinanintermediatefilethatis
subsequentlyaccessedbytheothersystem.Inthe
directionofdatabasetomodel,informationstoredin
aGISisusedtogenerateacompleteorpartialdataset
thatisusedasinputtothemodel. Intheother
direction,outputfromamodelisusedasinputintoa
GISinordertodisplaytheresultsofthemodel
application. Mostcommercialwaterdistribution
modelingpackagescaninterchangedatawithCADD
andGISplatforms.
Aninterfaceinvolvesadirectconnectionbetweenthe
databaseandthemodelinordertotransferinforma-
tionineitherdirection. Asisthecaseininterchange,
thetwosystemsstilloperateindependently,butin
thiscase,thereisadirectlinkagesothatintermediate
filesarenotnecessary.Protocolsandstructuresmust
beestablishedandcompatiblewithinthetwosystems
inordertosupportthisinterface.Currenttrendsare
directedtowardsopenarchitectureinwhichinforma-
tiononthedatastructuresformodelsandGISare
designedtodatastructures. Forexample,H2OMap
andWaterCADarestandalonesoftwarepackages
whichcandirectlyinterfacewithdatainCADDand
GISplatforms.
Trueintegrationisthemostsophisticatedofthethree
methods. Ideally,thetwosystemsworktogether
seamlesslyasasingleentity.Insuchintegration,
eitherthemodelcanoperatewithinthespatial
databasesoftwareorthespatialdatabasecapability
canbepartofthemodel. Forexample,WaterCADand
H2ONETsoftwarepackagesareintegratedand
operatewithinAutoCAD. InfoWaterandWaterGEMS
softwarepackagesareintegratedtooperatewithin
ArcGIS.
6-10
6 links 3 nodes
Figure 6-8b. Typical Representation of a Pipe Section in a
Network Model.
6.4.2IssuesinIntegratingGISandWater
DistributionSystemModels
Asanevolvingtechnology,therearestillissuesin
trulyintegratingGIStechnologywithwaterdistribu-
tionsystemmodels. Theseissuesprimarilyrevolve
aroundthelevelofdetailrequiredinthetwosystems
andtheproceduresforupdatingthemodelandthe
database.
Inmostcases,awaterutilityGISisusedformany
purposes including mapping, facility management,
planning,andmodelingsupport. Asaresult,there
maybeagreatdealofdetailintheGIS. Forexample,
itmayincludehydrants,shutoffvalves,watermeters
andhouseholdconnections,airreleasevalves,and
otherappurtenances. Ontheotherhand,typically,
waterdistributionsystemmodelsdonotexplicitly
includemanyofthesecomponents. Thisisshown
graphicallyinFigure6-8. Inthiscase,onlyjunction
nodesandpipesareincludedinthemodelrepresenta-
tion. Asaresult,theGISrepresentationincludes17
linksand11nodes,andthemodelrepresentation
includes6linksand3nodes. Thedisparitybetween
thetworepresentationscanincreasebyanotherorder
ofmagnitudeifwatermetersandcustomerconnec-
tionsareincludedintheGIS. Variousapproachesare
takentodealwiththissituation.
Averydetailedmodelisconstructedthat
includesalloftheelementsintheGIS.This
solutioncanresultinaverylargemodelwithan
excessivenumberofnodesandlinks.
TheGISrepresentationgoesthrougha
consolidation (skeletonization) procedure to
eliminateunneedednodesandtoaggregatethe
resultinglinksinordertoconstructthemodel
representation.Thoughthisresultsinamore
appropriatemodel,itaddsanintermediatestep
betweentheGISandthemodel.Additionally,
aftertheconsolidationprocess,thereisno
longeraone-to-onecorrespondencebetween
GISandmodelfeatures. Thislackof
correspondenceleadstoissuesrelatedtostoring
modeloutputintheGISandupdatingthemodel.
Multiple representations are maintained within
theGISfordifferentuses. Thedetailed
representationisthecomplete,basecaseand
usedforfacilitymanagementwhilethe
skeletonizedversionisusedformodeling.This
approachhasthelimitationthatrequires
changesininformationtobemadeinmultiple
databases.
Thebasiclink-nodenetwork(asusedinthe
model)ismaintainedasthebasecaseintheGIS
andassociatesothercomponents(suchas
hydrants)withlinksratherthanstructurally
embeddingtheminthenetwork.
17 links 11 nodes
Figure 6-8a. Typical Representation of a Pipe Section in GIS.
Inanyoftheoptionsdescribedabove,proceduresfor
updatingtheGISareessential.Therearemanyissues
associatedwithGISupdatingsuchasauthorizationof
specificuserstomakechanges,natureofthechanges
aspermanentorpartofawhat-ifmodelingscenario,
andfrequencyofreplicationofthetwodatabasesif
separatemodelandGISfilesaremaintained. Allof
theseshouldbecarefullyspelledoutpriortodesign-
ingandimplementingaGIS.
6.5 Use of GIS in Water Utilities -
Case Studies
ThissectionpresentsthepotentialusesofGISinthe
waterutilityindustry.CasestudiesfromtheLasVegas
ValleyWaterDistrict(LVVWD)andDenverWaterare
presented.
6.5.1UseofGISatLVVWD
Between1989and2004,LasVegasgrewfasterthan
anyothermetropolitanareaintheU.S. Asaresult,
LVVWDhasmorethandoubleditsservicearea
populationduringthisperiod. In1989,theservice
areapopulationwas558,000andin2004itroseto
1,209,000,representinganincreaseof651,000people
servicedbyLVVWD(JacobsenandKamojjala,2005).
Figure6-9isaGISrepresentationoftheLVVWD
distributionsystemgrowthbetween1989and2004.
Toaddressavarietyofissuesrelatedtothisrapid
growth,LVVWDintegratedthefunctionsofmaster
planning, operational planning, and development
reviewbyintegratingitsGISdatawithmodeling,
SCADA,andenterprisedata(suchasCIS,AM/FMand
LIMS). Figure6-10presentstheconceptualrelation-
shipmodelofthesefunctionsandpotentialintegra-
tionbenefits(Jacobsenetal.,2005).
Duringtheprocessofintegration,LVVWDdeveloped
aone-to-onerelationshipbetweentheGISspatialdata
anditsnetworkmodel(JacobsenandKamojjala,
2005). Anexampleofthisone-to-onerelationshipis
6-11
Figure 6-10. Conceptual Relationship Model for

Integration.
showninFigure6-11. Dependingonthesizeofthe
network,developingsucharelationshipandsubse-
quent data integration has both advantages and
Figure 6-9. LVVWD Distribution System Growth.
disadvantages.
ID 286814
Figure 6-11. One-to-One Relationship Between GIS and Network Modeling Data.
6-12
Theadvantagesincludeeaseofsearchandretrieval
withotherdata/applications,andeaseofimportation,
development,andmaintenance. Foralargenetwork
model,thedisadvantagesincludeanincreaseinthe
runtimeofthenetworkmodelduetotheadditionof
detailedcomponentsandrelativelyslowwaterquality
simulations. Tominimizethis,LVVWDhastakenan
all-pipescapableapproachwherethedistribution
systemisdividedaccordingtoexistingpressurezones
andattachedtoanoperationalbackbonenetwork
(skeletonized). Eachofthezonemodelscanbe
attachedseamlesslytothebackbonenetworkfor
detailed hydraulic and water quality modeling.
ExamplesofhowGISdataareusedbyLVVWDona
day-to-daybasisarepresentedbelow.
6.5.1.1 PressureComplaintResolution
Onceapressurecomplaintisreceivedfromacus-
tomer,theGISdataissearchedforparcelandaccount
information,togetherwithmodeledandmeasured
pressuredatainthevicinityofthecomplaint. Figure
6-12showsanexamplesearchwindow.Dependingon
theresultsoftheanalyses,acrewmaybedispatched
totracefieldpressuresandabnormalconditionsfrom
thewatersupplysourcetothecustomerlocation,and
toinstallhydrantpressurerecorderstocapture
dynamicvariations. Uponretrievaloffieldinforma-
tion,modelandfieldresultsarecomparedtoidentify
possibleproblems. Figures6-13and6-14present
examplesresultingfromthissearch(Jacobsenand
Kamojjala,2005).
6.5.1.2 WaterMainBreakAnalysis
Duringawatermainbreak,itiscriticaltoquickly
identifythedistributionsystemvalvesthatmustbe
closedinordertominimizewaterloss,potential
flooding,orpossiblecontamination. Repairsmustbe
performedquicklysothatservicecanberesumed.
Figure6-15illustratestheprocedureforrapidly
identifyingthevalvestobeisolatedutilizingtheGIS
andmodelingtools. Alistofaffectedcustomersis
generatedforappropriatenotification(Figure6-16).
Ananalysisisperformedtoevaluatetheimpacton
existingservices. Figure6-17showsacomparisonof
pressuresafterashutdownandidentifiesalower-
pressureareaaftertheshutdown. Responseto
emergencies,suchasmainbreaks,canbeprovided
quicklyandaccuratelyusingintegratedGIStools
(JacobsenandKamojjala,2005).
6.5.2Geo-codingforDemandForecastingand
AllocationatDenverWater
BetweenJanuary1997andDecember2000,Denver
Waterconductedatreatedwaterstudytoevaluatethe
transmission,pumpingandstoragesystemfor
capacityandtheneedfornewfacilitiesforcapital
planningandoperations. DenverWatermade
extensiveuseofGIStoolsfordemandforecastingand
Figure 6-12. Pressure Complaint Resolution GIS Parcel/Account Search Window.
6-13
Parcel/Account Information
Select Hydrant for
Pressure Measurements
Figure 6-13. Pressure Complaint Resolution Parcel and Hydrant Location.
Modeled and Measured Pressures at Hydrant
As-Built Pipes in Model
Figure 6-14. Pressure Complaint Resolution Model and Field Pressure Comparison.
6-14
Figure 6-15. Water Main Break Analysis Valve Isolation.
Affected Accounts
Figure 6-16. Water Main Break Analysis Impacted Customer List.
6-15
Before Shutdown
After Shutdown
Figure 6-17. Water Main Break Analysis Comparison of Junction Pressures - Before and After Shutdown.
6-16
allocationaspartofthisanalysis. Specifically,
existingdemandswerespatiallyallocatedusing
addressgeo-coding(Strasseretal.,2000).
DenverWaterhasbeenacompletelymetered
systemsince1992. Historicconsumptiondatais
availablefrom1993tothepresent. Consumption
datawasextractedfromthebillingsystem,and
importedintoanMSAccessdatabaseforusein
varioustasksincludingthetreatedwaterstudy.
Theextracteddataincludedbothcustomeraddress
andcustomerclassinformation(e.g.,singlefamily,
multi-family,commercial,industrial,andpublic).
Thecustomerclassinformationallowedthe
demandinformationtobeaggregatedbycustomer
class. Becausetheserviceareawaslarge(over250
squaremiles),itwasimportanttoidentifythe
locationoftheconsumptiondemandpoints. This
iswheretheuseofGISbecameveryimportant
(Strasseretal.,2000).
DenverWaterusedtheaddressgeo-codingfeature
availablewithinArcInfowhichallowedforeach
customerordemandpointtobeidentifiedonabase
map. Usingthisprocess,adotisplacedonthebase
maprepresentingeachcustomerthatcouldbe
positivelygeo-coded. Thematchratewasover93
percent. Thoseaccountsthatcouldnotbegeo-coded,
mostlylargeaccountsrepresentingmastermeter
accounts,andwholesalecustomers,wereenteredin
thesystemmanually.Resultsfromthegeo-coding
processforonepressurezoneareillustratedinFigure
6-18. Aqualitycontrolcheckwasperformedonthe
resultsofthisgeo-codingprocessbyreconciling
consumerdemandswithDenverWatersannual
statisticalreport(Strasseretal.,2000).
6.6 Summary
Useandmanagementofgeospatialdataisanimpor-
tantaspectofthedesignandoperationofwater
systems. Thiscanbeaccomplishedthrougharangeof
systemsundertheoverallumbrellaofSDMSutilized
tocollect,store,andusethespatialdata. This
umbrellacoversnotonlythebroadtopicsofGISand
CADDthatarewidelyrecognizedasgeospatialdata
systems,butalsosystemssuchasSCADAandLIMS
thathaveaspatialcomponentassociatedwithall
data.
Theareaofspatialdatabasemanagementiscontinu-
ingtoevolvewithinthewaterindustry.Justasthe
capabilities of the various individual components
withintheSDMSumbrellacontinuetoexpand,the
integrationofthevarioussystemsisanactiveareaof
development. Waterdistributionsystemanalysisisa
significantbeneficiaryoftheseimprovementsand
integration. Asaresult,modelscanbebuiltmore
quicklyandingreaterdetail. Informationonfacili-
tiesanddemandscanberoutinelyupdated. The
resultsofamodelapplicationcanberapidlydis-
playedandviewedalongwithotherspatialdata.The
prospectofreal-timeapplicationofmodelstoassistin
systemoperationunderroutineconditionsorunder
emergencyconditionsisgettingcloser.
Figure 6-18. GIS Geo-coding - Metered Sales Demand
Allocation Procedure.
6-17

References
Clark,R.M.,andR.M.Males. SimulatingCostand
QualityinWaterDistribution.Journal Water
Resources Planning and Management,ASCE.
111(4):454-466. 1985.
Cesario,A.L. Modeling, Analysis, and Design of
Water Distribution Systems.AWWA,Denver,CO.
1995.
Grayman,W.M.,R.M.Males,W.E.Gates,andA.W.
Hadder.LandBasedModelingSystemforWater
QualityManagementStudies.Journal of Hydrau-
lics,ASCE,HY5. May1975.
Grise,S.,E.Idolyantes,E.Brinton,B.Booth,andM.
Zeiler.WaterUtilitiesArcGISDataModels.ESRI
Press,Redlands,CA. 2000.
Horne,R. Galleryof3DEMTerrainImages.http://
www.visualizationsoftware.com/3dem/gallery.html.
2004.
JacobsenL.,andS.Kamojjala. FullSystemModels
andGISIntegration.AWWAAnnualConferenceand
Exposition,SanFrancisco,June2005.
JacobsenL.,S.Kamojjala,andM.Fang. Integrating
HydraulicandWaterQualityModelswithOther
UtilitySystems:ACaseStudy.AWWAInformation
ManagementandTechnologyConference,Denver,
April2005.
Males,R.M.,andW.E.Gates.ADAPT:ADigital
TerrainModel-BasedGeographicInformation
System.Symposium,LaboratoryforComputer
Graphics&SpatialAnalysis,HarvardUniversity,
Cambridge,MA. 1979.
Mark,D.M.,N.Chrisman,A.U.Frank,P.H.McHaffie,
andJ.Pickles. TheGISHistoryProject.UCGIS
SummerAssembly,BarHarbor,ME.http://www.
geog.buffalo.edu/ncgia/gishist/bar_harbor.html.
1997a
Mark,D.M. TheHistoryofGeographicInformation
Systems: InventionandRe-InventionofTriangulated
IrregularNetworks(TINs).Proceedings,GIS/LIS97.
http://www.geog.buffalo.edu/ncgia/gishist/
GISLIS97.html.1997b.
McHarg,I.L. Design with Nature. Publishedforthe
AmericanMuseumofNaturalHistorybytheNatural
HistoryPress. 1969.
NASA.EarthObservatoryRemoteSensing.http://
earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library/RemoteSensing/
remote.html. Undated.
OConnor,J.J.,andE.F.Robertson.TheHistoryof
Maps. http://geogdata.csun.edu/geogcourses/
history_of_maps.html. Undated.
QueenslandGovernment. MapsandCompasses
TheHistoryofSurveying.http://education.qld.
gov.au/curriculum/area/maths/compass/html/survey-
ing/suhis.html. Undated.
RadioShack. AGuidetotheGlobalPositioning
System(GPS).http://support.radioshack.com/
support_tutorials/gps/gps_main.htm. 2004.
Shamsi,U.M. GISandModelingIntegration.CE
News,13(6). 2001.
Strasser,A.,N.Diallo,andE.J.Koval.Development
&CalibrationofDenverWatersHydraulicModelsfor
aTreatedWaterStudy.AWWANationalConference,
Denver,Colorado,2000.
Sutherland,I.E. Sketchpad:AMan-machine
GraphicalCommunicationsSystem.Reprinted
versionoforiginal1963thesisissuedasareportby
CambridgeUniversity.UCAM-CL-TR574.Cam-
bridge,UK. http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/TechReports/
UCAM-CL-TR-574.pdf. 2003.
USGS. NationalAerialPhotographyProgram
(NAPP). http://edc.usgs.gov/guides/napp.html.
Undated.
USGS. ScientificAssessmentandStrategyTeam
(SAST)StudyoftheMoberlyQuadrangle.http://
edc.usgs.gov/sast/moberly.html.1993.
USGS. NationalLandCoverCharacterization
(NLCD)DatabaseProgram.http://landcover.usgs.
gov/images/glensfalls_web.jpg. 1992.
Whitfield,P. The Image of the World: 20 Centuries of
World Maps.PomegranateArtbooks,SanFrancisco,
CA,144p. 1994.
Zeiler,M.Modeling Our World. ESRIPress,
Redlands,CA. 1999.
6-18
Chapter 7
Real-World Applications
Planning, Analysis, and Modeling Case Studies
Thepreviouschaptersofthisreferenceguideshow-
casedseveraltoolsforanalyzingwaterqualityin
drinkingwaterdistributionsystems. Someofthese
chaptersalsohaverelevantcasestudiesthatrelateto
theindividualtopicofdiscussionforthatchapter.
Thischapterfocusesonthebroaderapplicationof
multipletoolstoanalyzereal-worldsituations. The
typesofapplicationspresentedhereinclude:recon-
structionofhistoricalcontaminationevents,analysis
ofwaterborneoutbreaksofinfectiousdiseases,
regulatorycompliance,monitoringsystemslocation,
andsecurity.Eachreal-worldapplicationispresented
asanindividualcasestudyandtheportionsrelatedto
waterqualityandanalysishavebeenhighlighted
alongwithsomespecificsontechniquesusedinthe
analysis.
7.1AnalysisofWaterborne
OutbreakGideon,Missouri
Thiscasestudyisfocusedonevaluatingthedistribu-
tionofmicrobiologicallycontaminatedwaterina
distribution system. The supporting investigations
forthiscasestudywereprimarilysponsoredbythe
EPA,CDC,andtheStateofMissouri.
Key Phrases to Characterize Case Study:water
borneoutbreakanalysis,salmonella,tankcontamina-
tion,hydraulicandwaterqualitymodeling,exposure
modeling,contaminationassessment,andflushing.
7.1.1 Gideon Case Study Overview
FromNovember1993throughJanuary1994,the
MissouriDepartmentofHealth(MDOH)hadidenti-
fied31casesoflaboratory-confirmedsalmonellosis
infectionsassociatedwithawaterborneoutbreakin
Gideon,Missouri(Clarketal.,1996). TheState
PublicHealthLaboratoriesidentified21ofthese
isolatesasdulcitolnegativeSalmonella serovar
Typhimurium. Salmonellaisapathogenicbacterium
thathasbeenclassifiedintoseveralserotypes
(commonsetofantigens).Salmonellaserovar
Typhimurium isamongthemostcommonSalmonella
serovarscausingsalmonellosisintheU.S. Fifteenof
the31laboratoryculture-confirmedpatientswere
hospitalized (including two patients hospitalized for
othercausesandwhodevelopeddiarrheawhileinthe
hospital). These15patientswereadmittedto10
differenthospitals. Sevennursinghomeresidents
exhibitingdiarrhealillnessdied;fourofthese
patientswerecultureconfirmed(theotherthreewere
notcultured). Twoofthepatientshadpositiveblood
cultures. InterviewsconductedbytheMDOHduring
thisperiodsuggestedthattherewerenofoodexpo-
surescommontoamajorityofthepatients. However,
alloftheillpersons,includingtheculture-confirmed
patients,hadconsumedmunicipalwaterwhich
supportedtheassociation. TheMDOHreportedtheir
suspiciontotheMissouriDepartmentofNatural
Resources(MDNR).
7.1.2 The Gideon Water System Setup
TheGideonmunicipalwatersystemwasoriginally
constructedinthemid-1930sandobtainedwaterfrom
twoadjacent,1,300ftdeepwells. Thewellwaters
werenotdisinfectedatthetimeoftheoutbreak. After
theoutbreakemergency,chlorinationwasinitiated,
andlaterapermanentchlorinationsystemwas
installed. Thedistributionsystemconsistedprimarily
ofsmall-diameter(2-,4-,and6-inch)unlined,steel
andcastironpipe. Tuberculationandcorrosionwere
majorproblemsinthedistributionpipes. Rawwater
temperatureswereunusuallyhighforagroundwater
supplysystem(58F),becausethesystemoverliesa
geologicallyactivefault. Underlowfloworstatic
conditions,thewaterpressurewascloseto50psi.
However,underhighfloworflushingconditionsthe
pressuredroppeddramatically.Thesesharppressure
dropswereevidenceofmajorproblemsintheGideon
distributionsystem. Themunicipalsystemhadtwo
elevatedtanks. Onetankwasa50,000gallon(gal)
tank(referredtoassmalltank)andtheotherwasa
100,000galtank(referredtoaslargetank).
Initially, another 100,000 gal privately owned tank
wassuspectedtobethecauseoftheoutbreak(asit
wasinastateofdisrepair)andconnectedtothecity
watersystem.However,subsequentinvestigations
revealedthatthisprivatetankwasconnectedviaa
backflowpreventionvalvetothecitywatersystem
thatwaslaterconfirmedtobefunctional. Further-
more,theSalmonella foundinasamplecollectedata
hydrantmatchedtheserovarofthepatientisolate
whenanalyzedbytheCDClaboratory(comparing
deoxyribonucleicacid[DNA]fragmentsusingpulse
fieldgelelectrophoresis). Althoughthesamplesfrom
the private tank sediment also contained Salmonella
serovarTyphimurium dulcitol negative organisms, the
isolatedidnotprovideanexactDNAmatchwiththe
othertwoisolates. NoSalmonella isolateswerefound
elsewhereinthesystem. Therefore,thesubsequent
EPAfieldinvestigationsandmodelingeffortsfocused
onthetwomunicipaltanksasthesourceofcontami-
nation.
7-1
7.1.3 EPA Field Study
OnJanuary14,1994,anEPAfieldteam,inconjunc-
tionwiththeCDCandtheStateofMissouri,initiated
afieldinvestigationthatincludedasanitarysurvey
andmicrobiologicalanalysesofsamplescollectedon
site. Asystemevaluationwasalsoconductedin
whichEPANETwasusedtodevelopvariousscenarios
toexplainpossiblecontaminanttransportinthe
Gideonsystem. PriortotheGideonoutbreak,a
similarwaterbornediseaseoutbreakinCabool,
Missouri,andsubsequentadvancementsinwater
qualitymodelingfirmlyestablishedtheuseofwater
qualitymodelstoanalyzesuchevents.
Thekeyanalysiswasfocusedonaflushingprogram
conductedearlierbytheutilityinresponsetotaste
andodorcomplaints. Asequentialflushingprogram
wasconductedonNovember10,1993,involvingall
50hydrantsinthesystem. Theflushingprogramwas
startedinthemorningandcontinuedthroughthe
entireday.Eachhydrantwasflushedfor15minutes
atanapproximaterateof750gallonsperminute
(gpm). Itwasobservedthatthepumpatoneofthe
wellswasoperatingatfullcapacityduringthe
flushingprogram(approximately12hours),which
wouldindicatethatthemunicipaltanksweredis-
charging during this period.
Duringtheevaluation,itwashypothesizedthatthe
tasteandodorproblemsmayhaveresultedfroma
thermalinversionthathadtakenplaceduetoasharp
temperaturedroppriortothedayofthecomplaint. If
stagnantorcontaminatedwaterwerefloatingonthe
topofatank,athermalinversioncouldhavecaused
thiswatertobemixedthroughoutthetankandtobe
dischargedintothesystemresultingintasteandodor
complaints(Fenneletal.,1974). Asaconsequence,
the utility initiated the aforementioned city-wide
flushingprogram. Turbulenceinthetankfromthe
flushingprogramcouldhavestirredupthetank
sedimentsthatweresubsequentlytransportedintothe
distributionsystem. Itislikelythatthebulkwater
and/orthesedimentswerecontaminatedwithSalmo-
nellaserovarTyphimurium. DuringtheEPAfield
visit,alargenumberofpigeons(birddroppingsare
knowntocontainSalmonella)wereobservedroosting
ontheroofofthe100,000galmunicipaltank.
7.1.4 Distribution System Evaluation
TheEPAstudyteamevaluatedtheeffectsofdistribu-
tionsystemdesignandoperation,demand,and
hydrauliccharacteristicsonthepossiblepropagation
ofcontaminantsinthesystem. Giventheevidence
fromthelabsamplesandtheresultsfromthevalve
inspectionoftheprivatetank,itwasconcludedthat
themostlikelycontaminationsourcewasbird
droppingsinthelargemunicipaltank. Therefore,the
analysisconcentratedonpropagationofwaterfrom
In1991,ajointworkshopsponsoredbytheEPAand
AwwaRFrecommendedtheapplicationofwaterquality
modelingtechniquestoevaluatewaterbornedisease
outbreaks. Thefirstopportunitytoattemptthistypeof
applicationaroseasaresultofanoutbreakthatoccurred
betweenDecember15,1989,andJanuary20,1990,in
Cabool,Missouri,population2,090(Geldreichetal.,
1992). Duringtheoutbreak,residentsandvisitorsto
Caboolexperienced243casesofdiarrhea(85bloody)
andsixdeaths. Theillnessanddeathswereattributedto
thepathogenicagentE. coli. serotypeO157:H7. Atthe
timeoftheoutbreak,thewatersourcewasuntreated
groundwater.Shortlyaftertheoutbreakwasidentified,
EPAwasinvitedtosendateamtoconductaresearch
studywiththegoalofdeterminingtheunderlyingcause
oftheoutbreak.
Exceptionallycoldweatherpriortotheoutbreak
contributedtotwomajorwatersystemlinebreaksand43
watermeterreplacementsthroughoutthecityarea. The
sewagecollectionlinesinCaboolwerelocated(forthe
mostpart)awayfromthedrinkingwaterdistribution
linesbutdidcrossorwereneartowaterlinesinseveral
locations. Atthetimeoftheoutbreak,stormwater
drainedviaopenditchesalongthesidesofthestreets
androads. Duringheavyrainfalls,sewagewasobserved
tooverflowmanholecovers,andtooverflowstreetsin
severallocations,parkinglotsandresidentialfounda-
tions.
TheDynamicWaterQualityModel(DWQM),developed
byEPA,wasappliedtoexaminethemovementofwater
andcontaminantsinthesystem(Graymanetal.,1988).
Steady-statescenarioswereexamined,andadynamic
analysisofthemovementofwaterandcontaminants
associatedwithmeterreplacementandthelinebreaks
wasconducted.Typicaldemandpatternsweredeveloped
fromavailablemeterusageforeachserviceconnection,
anditwasfoundthatthewaterdemandwas65percentof
theaveragewellproduction,indicatinginaccurate
meters,un-metereduses,andahighwaterlossinthe
system.
Themodelingeffortrevealedthepatternofillness
occurrencewasconsistentwithwatermovementpatterns
inthedistributionsystemassumingtwowaterline
breaks. Itwasconcludedthatsomedisturbanceinthe
system,possiblythetwolinebreaksor43meterreplace-
ments,allowedcontaminationtoenterthewatersystem.
Analysisshowedthesimulatedcontaminantmovement
covered85percentoftheinfectedpopulation.
TheapplicationofDWQMprovedtobeavitalstepin
completingtheanalysisoftheoutbreak. Thenext
opportunitytoapplywatermodelingtechniquesoc-
curredin1994asaresultofawaterborneoutbreakin
Gideon,Missouri(Clarketal.,1996). Intheintervening
period,EPAhaddevelopedEPANETandGideon
provided an opportunity to test its application.
7-2
thelargemunicipaltankinconjunctionwiththe
flushingprogram. Otherpossiblesourcesofcontami-
nation,suchascrossconnectionswerealsostudied.
Thesystemlayout,demandinformation,pump
characteristiccurves,tankgeometry,flushingpro-
gram,andotherinformationneededforthemodeling
effortwereobtainedfrommapsanddemographic
informationandnumerousdiscussionswithconsult-
ingengineersandcityandMDNRofficials.EPANET
wasusedtoconductthecontaminantpropagation
study(Rossmanetal.,1994).
TheEPANETnetworkmodelwascalibratedby
simulatingflushingatthehydrantsassuminga
dischargeof750gpmfor15minutes. TheCfactors
(piperoughnessseeChapter4)wereadjusteduntil
theheadlossinthemodelmatchedheadlosses
observedinthefield. Afterthecalibration,the
hydraulicmodelwassimulatedfor48hours. Thereaf-
ter,theflushingprogramwassimulatedstartingat8a.m.
onday3,bysequentiallyimposinga750gpm
demandoneachhydrantfor15minutes. Utilizingthe
TRACEoptioninEPANET,thepercentagesofwater
frombothmunicipaltankswerecalculatedateach
nodeoveraperiodof72hours.
Duringthesimulationoftheflushingprogram,the
pumpatoneofthewellswasoperated(asprevi-
ouslyobserved)atfullcapacity,whichwasover
800gpm,andthenrevertedtocyclicoperation.
Thesimulationresultsshowedthatthetank
elevation fluctuated for both municipal tanks, and
both the tanks discharged during the flushing
program. Attheendoftheflushingperiod,nearly
25percentofthewaterfromthelargemunicipal
tankpassedthroughthesmallmunicipaltank
whereitwasagaindischargedintothesystem. The
modelpredicteddramaticpressuredropsduringthe
flushingprogram. Basedontheinformation
available,itwasfeltthatthesemodelingresults
replicated the conditions that existed during the
flushingprogramcloselyenoughtoprovideabasis
forananalysisofwatermovementinthesystem.
Datafromthesimulationstudy,themicrobiological
surveillancedata,andtheoutbreakdatawereutilized
toprovideinsightintothenatureofbothgeneral
contaminationproblemsinthesystemandthe
outbreakitself. Thewatermovementpatternsshowed
themajorityofthecollectedsamplesthatweretotal
coliformandfecalcoliform(FC)-positiveoccurredat
pointswithinthezoneofinfluenceofthesmalland
largetanks. Duringboththeflushingprogramandfor
largepartsofnormaloperation,theseareaswere
predominatelyservedbytankwater,whichconfirmed
thebeliefthatthetanksarethesourceofthefecal
contaminationsincetherewerepositiveFCsamples
priortochlorination. Figure7-1showsthecompari-
sonofearlyconfirmedcasesofSalmonellapositive
sampleversustheestimateddistributionoftankwater
duringthefirstsixhoursoftheflushingprogram.
Figure 7-1. Comparison of Early Confirmed Cases of
Salmonella Positive Sample Versus the Estimated
Distribution of Tank Water During the First 6 Hours
of the Flushing Program.
20% or more of Small Tank water
20% or more of Large Tank water
Gideon Schools reflects increase in absentee level
Hydrant with confirmed Salmonella
Residences with confirmed case
Homes called as part of CDC survey
7.1.5 Case Study Summary and Conclusions
DatafromtheCDCsurveyoftheoutbreak,incombi-
nationwiththeEPANETsimulatedwatermovement,
wereutilizedtoestablishthepossiblesourceof
contamination. AnoverlayoftheCDCdataonthe
watermovementsimulationsshowedthattheareas
servedbythesmallandlargetanks(duringthefirst
sixhoursoftheflushingperiod)coincidedwiththe
earliestrecordedinfectiouscases. Furthermore,the
earliestrecordedcasesandthepositiveSalmonella
hydrantsamplewerefoundintheareathatwas
primarilyservedbythelargetank,butoutsidethe
smalltanksareaofinfluence.
Theinvestigatorsconcludedthatduringthefirstsix
hoursoftheflushingperiod,thewaterthatreachedan
infectedresidentandtheGideonSchool(theearliest
reportedinfections)wasalmosttotallyfromthelarge
tank. Basedontheresultsofthestudy,itappeared
thatthecontaminationhadbeenoccurringovera
7-3
periodoftime,whichisconsistentwiththepossibil-
ityofbirdcontamination. Itislikelythatthecon-
taminantwaspulledthroughthesystemduringthe
flushingprogram. TheapplicationofEPANETtothe
outbreakprovedtobeavitalpartofthestudy.
7.2Reconstructing Historical
ContaminationEvents-Dover
Township(TomsRiver),NJ
Thiscasestudyisfocusedonevaluatingthedistribu-
tionofchemicallycontaminatedsourcewaterina
distribution system. The supporting investigations
forthiscasestudywereprimarilysponsoredbythe
ATSDR.Theinvestigationsinvolvedseveralother
organizations. Themajorcontributorsincludedthe
NewJerseyDepartmentofHealthandSeniorServices
(NJDHSS),theMultimediaEnvironmentalSimula-
tionsLaboratoryattheGeorgiaInstituteofTechnol-
ogy,EPAsNationalRiskManagementResearch
Laboratory,andtheU.S.GeologicalSurvey.
Key Phrases to Characterize Case Study:historical
reconstruction,hydraulicandwaterqualitymodeling,
exposuremodeling,contaminationassessment,source
tracing,sourcecontribution,modelcalibration,
sensitivity analysis, genetic algorithm.
7.2.1 Case Study Overview
InAugust1995,respondingtoanevaluationre-
questedbytheATSDR,theNewJerseyDepartmentof
Health(nowNJDHSS)determinedthatthechildhood
cancerincidencerateinDoverTownship(andthe
TomsRiversection)washigherthanexpectedforall
malignantcancerscombined(brainandcentral
nervoussystemcancer,andleukemia,Berry,1995).In
March1996,NJDHSSandATSDRdevelopedaPublic
HealthResponsePlan(PHRP)describingactions
theseagencieswouldtaketoinvestigatetheunex-
pectedincreaseinchildhoodcancersandenvironmen-
talconcernsinDoverTownship(NJDHSSand
ATSDR,1996).ThePHRPincludedalistofseveral
evaluations. Oneofthekeyevaluationswasto
identify potential environmental exposure pathways
relativetotwoNationalPrioritiesList(NPL)sitesin
DoverTownship(Figure7-2)Ciba-GeigyandReich
Farm. Figure7-2alsoshowsthetwopublicwater
supplywellfields(ParkwayandHolly)thatwere
identifiedaspotentialroutesofexposure. Thesewell
fieldsarenotonlylocatedinthevicinityofthe
aforementionedNPLsites,butarealsoinareaswhere
thestatisticallyhigherchildhoodcancerrateswere
established.
Theensuingevaluationsrevealedthepresenceofa
previously unidentified compound, styrene acryloni-
trile(SAN),inthegroundwaterfromtheParkwaywell-
fieldthatcouldbetracedtotheReichFarmNPLsite.
Figure 7-2. Investigation Area, Dover Township, Ocean
County, NJ (modified from Maslia et al., 2001).
Similarly,asearchofhistoricalrecordsrevealed
contamination (primarily semivolatile organics
[SVOCs])oftheHollywellfieldsthatcouldbe
tracedtotheCiba-GeigyNPLsite. Furthermore,
oneofthehypothesesfortheepidemiologiccase-
controlstudywasthatthehighercancerincident
ratewasrelatedtothehigherexposuretopublic
water supplies with documented contamination (the
ParkwayandHollywellfields).ToassistNJDHSS
withthecontaminateddrinkingwaterexposure
assessmentcomponentoftheepidemiologicstudy,
ATSDRdevelopedawaterdistributionmodelfor
thestudyareausingtheEPANETsoftware.This
networkmodelwasusedtosimulatehistorical
characteristicsofthewaterdistributionsystem
servingDoverTownshipfrom19621996.Because
therewasalackofhistoricalcontaminant-specific
dataduringmostoftheperiodrelevanttothe
epidemiologicstudy,themodelingeffortfocused
onestimatingthepercentageofwaterthatastudy
subjectmighthavereceivedfromeachwellthat
suppliedwatertotheimpactedarea. Thefollowing
subsectionspresentabriefoverviewofthewater
distribution modeling effort (both hydraulic and
waterquality)followedbyasummaryoffindings
and conclusions.
7-4
PriortotheATSDRsanalysisofwellfieldcontamina-
tioninDoverTownshipandthepotentiallinkagesto
childhooddiseases,anotherstudyinWoburn,Massa-
chusetts,heraldedtheeraofsuchanalyses. Though
boththemodelandgraphicalpresentationsareprimi-
tivebytodaysstandards,theywereeffectiveinprovid-
ingaquantitativebasisforassessingthespreadof
contaminantsinthedistributionsystem. Thefollowing
isabriefdescriptionoftheWoburnanalysis.
InMay1979,theMassachusettsDepartmentofEnviron-
mentalQualityEngineeringdiscoveredthattwowells
(WellsG&HintheBZoneSeeFigure7-3)in
Woburn,Massachusettswerecontaminatedwithtoxic
chemicals. Subsequentanalysisshowedthatpartsofthe
city experienced elevated levels of childhood leukemia
andotherillnessesattributedtodrinkingwaterderived
fromthesewells. Thiseventresultedinlegalaction,a
diversesetofscientificstudiesthatarestillongoing,
andthepublicationofabookentitledA Civil Action
(Harr,1995).Earlysteady-statedistributionsystem
hydraulicandwaterqualitymodelswerealsousedasa
meanstotrackthemovementofthecontaminatedwater
inthedistributionsystemunderarangeofoperating
anddemandconditions(Murphy,1986).Theaccompa-
nyingfigureisoneexampleofaplotresultingfromthis
earlymodelingeffort. AsshowninFigure7-3,basedon
themodeling,thecitywasdividedintothreezonesfor
eachscenariotheAzonethatreceivednowaterfrom
thecontaminatedwells,theBzonethatreceivedallof
itswaterfromthecontaminatedwells,andtheCzone
thatreceivedsomeofitswaterfromthecontaminated
wells.
Figure 7-3. Distribution System Zones Woburn, MA
(May 1969).
7.2.2 Overall Modeling Approach
Becauseofthelackofhistoricalhydraulicandwater
qualityinformation,thewaterdistributionsystemwas
characterizedusingdatagatheredduringanextensive
fieldinvestigationin1998.The1998fieldinvestiga-
tionconsistedoftwocomponents:(1)determining
spatiallocationsofdistributionsystemfacilities
(wells,tanks,pump,andhydrants)and(2)equipping
hydrants with continuous-recording digital data
loggersandmonitoringsupplysources(wells,pumps,
andtanks)tomeasuresystemresponsesduringwinter
demand(March)andsummerdemand(August)
periods. Twenty-five hydrants located throughout the
distributionsystemwereequippedwithdataloggers
tosimultaneouslycollectinformationonsystem
response(Masliaetal.,2000). Thecollectedresponse
dataincludedon-offcyclingofgroundwaterwells,
highserviceandboosterpumpoperations,pressure
variations,storagetankwater-levelfluctuations,and
total production.
Adetailedall-pipehydraulicnetworkmodelwas
developed and calibrated to present-day conditions
(1998)usingthefieldinvestigationresults.The
reliabilityofthecalibratedmodelwassuccessfully
demonstratedthroughawaterqualitysimulationof
thetransportofanaturallyoccurringconservative
element(barium)andacomparisonoftheresultswith
datacollectedinMarchandApril1996at21schools
and6pointsofentrytothewaterdistributionsystem.
Thereafter,todescribethehistoricaldistribution
systemnetworksspecifictotheDoverTownshiparea,
databasesweredevelopedfromdiversesourcesof
information.Thesedatasourcesincludedwaterutility
pipelineinstallationrecords,quarterlybillingrecords,
NJDHSSgroundwaterwellrecords,andannualwater
utilityreportstothestateboardofpublicutilities.
ThesedatawereappliedtoEPANETandsimulations
wereconductedforeachmonthofthehistorical
periodJanuary1962throughDecember1996(420
simulations). Aftercompletingthose35-year/420-
monthanalyses,source-traceanalysissimulations
wereconductedtodeterminethepercentageofwater
contributedbyeachwellorwellfieldoperating
duringeachmonthforallstudysubjectlocations.
Areviewofthehistoricalnetworkconfiguration
revealedthatthewaterdistributionsystemcomplex-
ityincreasedsignificantlyduringthisperiod. The
modelinputswereappropriatelyadjustedtoaccount
forthesehistoricalchanges. Forexample,the1962
waterdistributionsystemwasrepresentedwithan
approximatepeakproductionof1.3million
gallonsperday(MGD)producedfromthreewellsthat
servednearly4,300customers(population~17,200).
Bycontrast,in1996,thewaterdistributionsystem
hadanapproximatepeakproductionof13.9MGD
producedfrom20wellsthatservednearly44,000
7-5
customers(population~89,300). Appropriate
adjustmentsweremadetomodeledpipesegments,
storagereservoirs,andoperationaldetails.Graymanet
al.(2004)presentamoredetailed
accountoftheEPANETmodel
inputadjustments. Produc-
tiondataforthe420-
month historical
periodisgraphi-
cally represented
inFigure7-4.
Figure 7-4. Three-Dimensional Representation of Monthly
Production of Water, Dover Township Area, NJ (from
Maslia et al., 2001).
Toperformanextendedperiodsimulation(EPS)of
thedistributionofwaterforeachofthe420monthsof
thehistoricalperiod,informationwasrequiredon
networkconfiguration,demand,andoperationaldata.
However,operationaldatapriorto1978wereunavail-
able,requiringthedevelopmentofsystemoperation
parametersdesignatedasmasteroperatingcriteria
(MOC).TheMOCisbasedonhydraulicengineering
principlesnecessarytosuccessfullyoperatedistribu-
tionsystemssimilartotheoneservingtheDover
Townshiparea(Table7-1).From1978forward,for
selectedyears,operatorsofthewaterutilityprovided
informationonthegeneralizedoperatingpracticesfor
atypicalpeak-demand(summer)andnon-peak
demand(fall)day.Theseguidelineswereusedin
conjunctionwiththeMOCtosimulateatypical24-
hourdailyoperationofthewaterdistributionsystem
foreachmonthofthehistoricalperiod.
Themodelparameterofinterestfromtheepidemio-
logicstudyperspectivewastheproportionate
contributionofwaterfromwellsandwellfieldsto
locations throughout the historical pipeline networks.
Thus,thedistributionofwaterdeliveredtopipeline
locationswastheitemofinterestratherthanthe
specificoperationsofthewells,storagetanks,and
pumps(WSTP)thatdeliveredthewater.Normally,
detailedWSTPoperationalinputswouldberequired
forEPANETsimulation.However,tosimplifythe
simulationmethodologyandreducedatarequire-
ments,asupply-node-link(SNL)methodof
idealizingtheWSTPcombinationwasdeveloped. In
theSNLsimulationmethod,anequivalentamountof
waterissuppliedtothedistributionsystem(basedon
estimatedmonthlydemandsandthetypicaldaily
operationofthesystems). Todemonstratethatthe
surrogateSNLsimulationmethodsuppliesthe
distributionsystemwithanequivalentamountof
waterwhencomparedtothereal-worldWSTP
simulationmethod,bothsimulationmethodswere
appliedtothepresent-day(1998)waterdistribution
systemforconditionsexistinginAugust1998.The
resultsobtainedfromthesesimulationsproduced
nearlyidenticalflowsinthemodeledsystem.
7.2.3 Simulation Techniques
UsingtheEPANETnetworkmodeldevelopedforthe
DoverTownshiparea,hydraulicmodelingwas
conductedwherebyaveragenetworkconditionswere
simulatedforeverymonthofthehistoricalperiod
Table 7-1. Master Operating Criteria Used to Develop
Operating Schedules for the Historical Water Distribution
System, Dover Township Area, NJ (from Maslia et al.,
2001)
Parameter Criteria
Pressure
1
Minimumof15psi;maximumof110
psiatpipelinelocations,including
networkendpoints
Waterlevel Minimumof3ftabovebottom
elevationoftank;maximumequalto
elevationoftopoftank;ending
waterlevelshouldequalthestarting
waterlevel
Hydraulicdevice
on-linedate
June1ofyearinstalledtomeet
maximum-demandconditions
On-and-offcycling:
Manualoperation
Wellsandhigh-serviceandbooster
pumpscannotbecycledon-and-off
from2200to0600hours
On-and-offcycling:
Automatic
operation
Wellsandhigh-serviceandbooster
pumpscanbecycledon-and-offat
anyhour
Operatinghours Wellsshouldbeoperated
continuouslyforthetotalnumberof
productionhours,basedon
productiondata
2
1
Generally,forresidentialdemand,minimumrecommended
pressureisabout20psi.However,forsomelocationsin
theDoverTownshiparea(mostlyinareasneartheendof
distributionlines),lowerpressuresweresimulated.
2
SeeMasliaetal.(2001)forproductiondata(AppendixB)
andhoursofoperation(AppendixD)
7-6
(420simulations).Thesesimulationswerecompleted
underbalancedflowconditionsthatutilizedhydrau-
licengineeringprinciplesandconformedtotheMOC
(Table7-1).Thereafter,usingtheresultsofthe
monthlynetworkhydraulicsimulations,waterquality
simulations(source-traceanalysis)wereconductedfor
eachwatersource(pointofentry)ofthenetworkin
ordertodeterminethemonthlyproportionate
contributionofsourcewateratalllocationsinthe
DoverTownshipareaservicedbythewaterdistribu-
tionsystem.
EPANETisadynamicwaterqualitymodelthathas
theabilitytocomputethepercentageofwater
reachinganypointinthedistributionsystemover
timefromaspecifiedlocation(source)inthe
network.Toestimatethisproportionatecontribu-
tionofwater,asourcelocationisassignedavalue
of100percent.Theresultingsolutionprovidedby
thewaterqualitysimulatorinEPANETthen
becomesthepercentageofflowatanylocationin
thedistributionsystemnetwork(forexample,a
demandnode)contributedbythesourcelocationof
interest. Forthepurposesofthisanalysis,asource-
traceanalysiswasconductedforeverymonthofthe
historicalperiod.Sourcenodeswereassigneda
valueof100percentinordertoestimatethe
proportionate contribution of water to locations in
thehistoricaldistributionsystemnetworks. These
initial conditions were fully propagated through
mostofthedistributionsystembeforeretrieving
theproportionatecontributionresults(Masliaetal.,
2000). Accordingly,foreachmonthlyhistorical
networkmodel,24-hourdemandandoperational
patternsweredefinedandthesepatternswere
repeatedforapproximately1,200hourstoreacha
stateofstationarywater-qualitydynamics(dynamic
equilibrium). Formostoftheanalyses,hydraulic
timestepsof1hourandwater-qualitytimestepsof
5minuteswereusedwithinEPANET.Forsome
monthlysimulations,thewater-qualitytimesteps
werereducedto1minutetoensurethatthemass
balancesummedto~100percent(rangeof98to
101percentduetonumericalapproximations).
Withrespecttotheschedulingofgroundwaterwell
operations,theEPANETmodelwassettoutilize
patternfactorscorrespondingtothehourlyoperations
ofsupplywells.Thesepatternfactorsalongwiththe
operationalextremesofstoragetankwaterlevelswere
manuallyadjustedduringeachofthe420monthly
networksimulationstoachievebalancedflow
conditions.Thisapproachtosimulationwasdesig-
natedasthemanualadjustmentprocess. Asecond
simulation approach designated as the genetic
algorithm(GA)approachwasalsoutilizedtoachieve
balancedflowconditionsforeachofthe420monthly
networksofthehistoricalperiod.Thisapproach
requiredthedevelopmentofaninnovativemethodol-
ogyknownastheprogressiveoptimalitygenetic
algorithm(POGA),whichisanautomatedobjective
simulationtechnique(Araletal.,2004a,b).TheGA
simulations utilized the balanced flow conditions
obtainedbythemanualadjustmentprocessasstarting
conditions. TheGAtechniquewasusedtoaddress
the following key questions:
Ifabalancedflowoperatingconditionwas
achievedusingthemanualadjustmentprocess,
wastheresultingoperatingconditiontheonly
waythesystemcouldhavebeensuccessfully
operated?
Could alternative or additional operating
conditionsbedefinedsuchthatsystem
operationswouldalsobesatisfactoryoreven
optimal?
Thus,thePOGAmethodologywasusedinconjunc-
tionwithEPANETtosimulatealternativeand
possiblyoptimalwaterdistributionsystemoperations
andtoassesstheeffectsofvariationsinsystem
operationsontheresultsoftheproportionatecontri-
bution simulations.
7.2.4 Simulation Results and Conclusions
Figure7-5showstheaerialdistributionofsimulated
proportionatecontributionresultsforallmodelnodes
(pipelinejunctions)forthemonthofJuly1988,using
theParkwaywellfieldasthepointofentry(source
point). The simulated proportionate contribution
resultsaredividedintosixintervals(1to10percent,
10to25percent,25to50percent,50to75percent,
75to90percent,and90to100percent)andacoloris
assignedtoallnodeswithineachinterval(resultsare
not shown for negligible proportionate contributions
oflessthan1percent).
Simulatedproportionatecontributionresultscanalso
beviewedintermsofselectedpipelinelocationsand
thecombinationofwellsorwellfieldsthatcontribute
watertothatlocation.Fivegeographicallydistinct
pipelinelocationsareselectedfromthehistorical
networkstorepresentthespatialdistributionof
proportionate contribution results. These locations
areidentifiedonFigure7-5aslocationsA,B,C,D,
andE.Thesimulatedproportionatecontributionof
waterforJuly1988correspondingtoeachpipeline
locationisshowngraphicallyonFigure7-6. The
simulation results demonstrated that the contribution
ofwaterfromwellsandwellfieldsvariedbytimeand
location.However,theresultsalsoshowedthatcertain
wellsprovidedthepredominantamountofwaterto
locationsthroughouttheDoverTownshiparea.
Additionally,althoughthepatternfactorsforsome
hoursofoperationsshowedmarkeddifferences,the
simulatedproportionatecontributionsofwaterusing
7-7
Figure 7-5. Areal Distribution of Simulated Proportionate
Contribution of Water from the Parkway Wells (22, 23, 24,
26, 28, 29) to Locations in the Dover Township Area, NJ,
July 1988 Conditions (from Maslia et al., 2001).
A
B
C
D
E
Figure 7-6. Simulated Proportionate Contribution of Water
from Wells and Well Fields to Selected Locations, Dover
Township Area, NJ, July 1988 Conditions (from Maslia et
al., 2001).
patternfactorsderivedfromtheapplicationofthe
POGAmethodologyshowedlittledifferencethrough-
outtheDoverTownshipareawhencomparedto
corresponding proportionate contribution of water
simulatedusingthemanualadjustmentprocess. The
resultsofsensitivityanalysesconductedusingthe
historical reconstruction process indicated the
following:
Therewasanarrowrangewithinwhichthe
historicalwaterdistributionsystemscould
havesuccessfullyoperatedandstillsatisfy
hydraulic engineering principles and the
MOC.
Dailyoperationalvariationsoveramonthdid
not appreciably change the proportionate
contributionofwaterfromspecificsources.
Therefore,thereconstructedhistoricalwater
distributionsystemsweredeterminedtobethemost
plausibleandrealisticscenariosunderwhichthe
19621996 historical water distribution systems
wereoperated. Thehealthscientistsconducting
the case-control epidemiologic study used the
resultingpercentageofwaterderivedfromthe
differentsourcestoderiveexposureindicesfor
each study subject.
Theresultsfromthecase-controlstudyshowedthat
therewasanassociationbetweenprenatalexposureto
contaminatedcommunitywaterandleukemiain
femalechildren(NJDHSS,2003).Forexample,female
leukemiacaseswere5timesmorelikelytohave
occurredwhenexposedduringtheprenatalperiodto
ahighpercentageofParkwaywellwaterthanwere
controlchildren. Thecontrolchildrenarethose
livinginthestudyarea,butwerenotexposedtothe
waterfromthecontaminatedwellfields. These
findingswouldnothavebeenpossiblewithoutthe
resultsderivedfromtheinnovativewaterdistribution
systemmodelingefforts.Theseeffortshaveledto
developingnewmethodsforevaluatingtheaccuracy
ofmodelingresultsandexposureclassification
techniquesthatarecriticalcomponentsofepidemio-
logicstudies.Someoftheinnovationsdocumented
bytheDoverTownshiphistoricalreconstruction
analysisare:
Anewapproach,proportionatecontribution
analysis,wasdevelopedthatutilizedwater
distributionsystemmodelingandsource
tracingtoquantifyexposureonamonthlybasis
foralllocationshistoricallyservedbythe
Through the use of an innovative genetic
algorithmapproach(POGA),historicalwater
distributionsystemoperatingscheduleswere
7-8
1
9
7
0
1
9
7
1
1
9
7
2
1
9
7
3
1
9
7
4
1
9
7
5
1
9
7
6
1
9
7
7
1
9
7
8
1
9
7
9
1
9
8
0
1
9
8
1
1
9
8
2
Individual3
1.60E+06
1.80E+06
2.00E+06
1.40E+06
I
n
t
a
k
e
,

g
1.20E+06
1.00E+06
8.00E+05
6.00E+05
4.00E+05
2.00E+05
0.00E+00
Year
Figure 7-7. Estimated Upper 97.5 Percent Credibility
Limit for Annual Perchlorate Intake by One Plaintiff
(Grayman, 2004).
ThecityofRedlandsliesintheSanBernardinovalleyofCalifornia,approximately60mileseastofcentralLos
Angeles. In1981,aroutineanalysisforchlorinationbyproductsrevealedthepresenceoftrichloroethylene
(TCE)inasampleofwaterfromtheRedlandswatersystem. Subsequentwaterqualityanalysesrevealedthata
numberofwellssupplyingthecitywerecontaminatedwithTCE. In1997,theperchlorateanion(ClO
4
)was
alsodetectedinseveralwells. In1996,thefirstofaseriesoflawsuitswasfiledinCaliforniaStateCourt
allegingthatthesourceofthesecontaminantswasamanufacturingfacilitylocatedup-gradientfromthemost
seriouslycontaminatedwells.
Oneoftheselawsuitsclaimedthatplaintiffswereharmedbyexposuretotoxicchemicalsthatwereimproperly
disposedofatthemanufacturingsiteandfoundtheirwayintogroundwaterthatwassubsequentlyextracted
throughthecityswellsanddeliveredtowatercustomers,includingtheplaintiffs.Theplaintiffsburdenof
proofrequiresthemtoestablish,amongotherthings,thattheywereactuallyexposedtocontaminatedwaterat
theirhomes,placesofwork,orotherlocationsandthattheamountsofcontaminantsthatenteredtheirbodies
astheresultoftheseexposuresweresufficienttocauseharmtothem.
Toestablishthisproof,expertsfortheplaintiffs
reconstructedthehistoricalconditionsinthewater
distributionsystemoftheCityofRedlandsovera
periodfromthemid1950stothelate1990susing
theEPANETmodel.Aspartoflitigation,several
forensicreconstructionsofwaterqualityinthe
Redlandswaterdistributionsystemwereperformed.
Thereconstructioninvolvedestimatesofboth
humanexposuretotoxiccontaminantsandwhole-
bodyintakesofthesechemicals. Estimatesof
exposuresandintakeswereexpressedascredibility
intervals,whichwerecalculatedusingMonteCarlo
simulationtechniques.Asanexampleoutputfrom
theanalysis,Figure7-7illustratestheestimated
upper97.5percentcredibilitylimitofone
plaintiffsexposuretoperchlorate.Similarinforma-
tionwasdevelopedtodescribethelower2.5
percentcredibilitylimitforeachofthetestplain-
tiffsinthecase(Graymanetal.,2004).
synthesized. Sensitivity analyses indicated
that operating system changes did not
appreciably change the proportionate
contributionofwatertoDoverTownship
locations.
Theassociationbetweenexposureanddisease
wouldnothavebeenpossiblewithout
developing the integrated approach using
environmental science, engineering
evaluations, and epidemiologic analyses.
Historicalreconstructionofenvironmentalexposureis
notaneasytask.Theproceduresandresultssumma-
rizedherein(andthedetailedanalysesinMasliaet
al.,[2001])representoneofthemostcomprehensive,
well-documented,andquality-controlledstudiesofits
kind.Anotherexampleofpublicexposureassessment
usingmodelingisrelatedtotheCityofRedlands,
California.
7.3ApplicationofWater
DistributionSystemModeling
inSupportofaRegulatory
Requirement
ThenewDBPR2regulationthatisproposedfor
promulgationinthenearfuturerequiresallwater
utilitiesthathaveadisinfectantresidualinthe
distributionsystemtoperformanIDSEunlessthey
obtainasmall-systemor40/30waiver(EPA,2003).
SystemsthatcancertifyTTHMandHAA5compli-
ancedatatobelessthanorequalto40g/Lfor
TTHMand30g/LforHAA5arenotrequiredto
performanIDSE. ThegoaloftheIDSEistoidentify
compliancemonitoringsitesthatmayhavehighDBP
levelsindistributionsystems.Utilitiesmaychooseto
performanSMPthatinvolvesextensivemonitoring.
Alternativelytheymaychoosetoperformasystem-
7-9
specificstudy(SSS)thatuseshistoricaldata,distribu-
tionsystemmodels,orotheranalysescombinedwith
minimalmonitoringtoevaluateTTHMandHAA5
levelsthroughoutthedistributionsystemasthebasis
toselectfuturecompliancemonitoringsites. This
casestudydemonstrateshowahydraulic/water
qualitydistributionsystemmodelcanbeappliedto
satisfytheIDSErequirementsofanSSS.
Key Phrases to Characterize Case Study:Regula-
torymodeling,IDSE,waterqualitymodeling.
7.3.1 IDSE Requirements Overview
TheIDSEguidancemanualspellsoutaseriesof
suggestedminimumrequirementsfortheuseofa
calibratedwaterdistributionsystemhydraulicmodel
toperformanSSS.Ingeneral,thewaterdistribution
systemmodelshouldbemorecomprehensiveforthe
purposeofanSSSthanmodelstypicallyusedfor
long-rangecapitalimprovementprogramanalysis
(e.g.,masterplanning).Acalibratedhydraulicmodel
intendedfordetaileddistributionsystemdesign(e.g.,
forsystemimprovements)oroperationalstudiesis
likelytobeadequate. Becausesystemsarealways
changing(e.g.,populationgrowth,industrydevelop-
mentinnetworkarea,agingofmains),itisimportant
thatthemodelgenerallyreflectsystemconditionsand
demandatthetimeoftheIDSESSS.Amodelthathas
notbeenupdatedorcalibratedinthelast5to10
yearsisunlikelytobeadequateforanSSS.The
guidelinesprovidedinthedraftguidancemanualare
summarizedbelow:
EPSmodelthathasbeenrecentlycalibrated
using generally accepted methods.
Anall-pipemodelorskeletonizedmodelthat
includes(a)atleast50percentoftotalpipe
lengthinthedistributionsystem,(b)atleast75
percentofthepipevolumeinthedistribution
system,(c)all12-inch-diameterandlarger
pipes,(d)all8-inchandlargerpipesthat
connectmajorfacilities,(e)all6-inchandlarger
pipesthatconnectremoteareasofadistribution
system,and(f)allactivecontrolvalvesorother
systemfeaturesthatcouldsignificantlyaffect
theflowofwaterthroughthedistribution
system.
Waterdemandshouldbeallocatedamongthe
nodesofthemodelinamannerthatreflectsthe
actualspatialdistributionofsuchdemand
throughoutthesystem.
Asystem-specific,diurnal(24-hour)demand
patternshouldbeappliedtotheoverallsystem
demand.
Themodelshouldaccuratelysimulateseasonal
systemconfigurationsandoperationalchanges.
Oncethemodelisestablished,itisthenruninEPS
modeuntilaconsistent,repeatingtemporalpatternof
waterageisestablishedatallnodesofthemodel.
Generally,themodelshouldberununderhighDBP
formationconditions(typicallysummermonths)to
estimateresidencetimes. Basedonthemodeledwater
ageresults,preliminarymonitoringsitesareidentified
nearlocationsthatsatisfythesamplingsiterequire-
ments.Samplingsitesareselectedtorepresent:
High-TTHMSites:HighTTHMvaluesare
expected at high-residence-time locations.
Theselocationscanbeidentifiedbyreviewing
themodeledwaterageateachnodeinthe
model. Thesesitesaregenerallydownstreamof
storagefacilitiesandinremotelocations.
However,theregulationdoesnotrequire
extremesornon-representativesitestobe
sampled.
High-HAA5Sites:Thecriteriaandprocedure
forselectinghighHAA5sitesusingahydraulic
modelaregenerallythesameasthosedescribed
aboveforselectinghigh-TTHMsiteswithone
importantdifference:thesiteschosento
representhighHAA5shouldhaveadisinfectant
residualsufficienttosuppressbacteriawhich
candegradeHAAs.
Average-Residence-TimeSites: Average-
residence-timesitescanbeselectedfromsites
withresidencetimesclosetotheflow-weighted
meanofallnodalresidencetimes.
Near-Entry-PointSites:Modeledwateragecan
beusedtoidentifylocationsinthenearvicinity
toentrypointsintothewatersystem.
Requirementsforthenumberofmonitoringsiteshave
notyetbeenfinalized. Asaresult,thiscasestudy
demonstratesthegeneralusageofmodelsforIDSE
andreliesuponthe2003draftguidanceissuedby
EPAtoillustratetheusageofmodels.
7.3.2 Example Application of Modeling in the
IDSE Process
Thefollowingexampleisahypotheticalcasestudy
basedinlargepartonanactualwaterdistribution
system. Thesystempurchasesdisinfectedgroundwa-
terandservesapproximately15,000people. Water
entersthedistributionsystemfromtwoseparate
interconnectionstoawholesaleutility.Theaverage
demandis2.2MGD.Anorthinterconnectionoperates
intermittently and provides approximately 80 percent
ofthedemand,whilethesouthinterconnection
operatesatalltimesandprovidestheremaining20
percentofthesystemdemand.Thereisa1.5-million-
gallonstoragetank.InordertocomplywiththeStage
2requirements,thedraftproposedDBPR2statesthat
atotalofsixsitesarerequiredforautilityofthissize
7-10

Figure 7-8. Average Water Age in the Distribution
System Over Last 24 Hours of a 2-Week Simulation.
usinggroundwater:onerepresentingasiteneartothe
predominantentry,onerepresentingasitewith
averageresidencetime,twositesrepresentinghigh
TTHMconditions,andtworepresentinghighHAA5
conditions.
Thewaterutilitywaterdistributionsystemmodelhas
beenusedextensivelyinthepastforbothhydraulic
andwater-qualitystudies.Itisaskeletonizedmodel
thatincludesall8-inch-diameterandlargerpipesand
allmajorfacilities.Thepipesinthemodelrepresent
74percentofthetotallengthofpipeinthesystem
and86percentofthetotalvolume.Themodelhas
beenpreviouslycalibratedbasedontwotracerstudies
andhasbeenshowntohaveexcellentagreementwith
observedfieldresults.Demandshavebeenassigned
tonodesbasedonactualmeterreadings,andinforma-
tionfromtheSCADAsystemhasbeenusedtoconstruct
atypicaldiurnalwaterusepattern.Themodelisbeing
operatedinanEPSmodetosimulatea12-dayperiod.
Themodelhasalsobeencalibratedforuseinsimulat-
ingchlorineresidualinthedistributionsystem.
Aseriesofrunsofthemodelwereperformedtohelp
understandthemovementofwaterandwaterquality
transformationsinthesystem.Specificsimulations
includedwaterageandchlorineresidual.Theresults
ofthewater-agemodelrunareshowninFigure7-8.
Thisplotshowstheaveragewateragethroughoutthe
distributionsystemoverthelast24hoursofthe2-
weeksimulation.Thisperiodwasselectedtoavoid
theuncertaintyassociatedwithassigninginitialwater
ageinthesystem.Theplotillustratesthenodesinthe
vicinity of the predominant northern interconnection
thatreceivewaterwithanaverageageoflessthan2
hours.Asalsoshown,theaveragewaterageincreases
significantlyforareasthatarefurtherfromthe
interconnections.Thedemandflow-weightedaverage
wateragefordeliveredwaterwascalculatedtobe27
hours.However,wateragecanalsovaryquite
significantlyoverthecourseofadayinwater
systems,largelyduetotheimpactsofstoragetanks.
ThisisillustratedinFigure7-9,whichdepictsthe
minimumwaterageateachnodeoverthesame24-
hourperiod.ThisisalsoshownintheplotinFigure
7-10forNodeJ-456inthevicinityofthetank.The
IDSEguidancedoesnotrequireutilitiestoexplicitly
considertheeffectsoftanksondiurnalvariationsin
waterage,andthusontheformationofDBPs.IfNode
J-456wasselectedasrepresentativeofhighDBP
becauseofitshighwaterage,itwouldbeexpected
thattheDBPswouldonlybehighduringthepartof
thedaywhenwaterisbeingdischargedfromthetank.
Themodelwasalsousedtodeterminethechlorine
residualthroughoutthesystem.Figure7-11contains
aplotoftheminimumchlorineresidualthroughout
thesystem.Itisimportanttonoteareaswithhigh

Figure 7-9. Minimum Water Age in the Distribution System
Over Last 24 Hours of a 2-Week Simulation.
7-11

Figure 7-11. Minimum Chlorine Residual in
Distribution System Over Last 24 Hours of a 2-Week
Simulation.

Figure 7-10. Diurnal Water Age at Node J-456.

Figure 7-12. Zones Representing Potential
Monitoring Locations for IDSE Based on Modeling.
residencetimeandlowresidualforhigh-TTHMsites
andhighresidencetimeandhighresidualforhigh-
HAA5sites.Thisinformationcanbeusedtoavoid
selectingmonitoringsitesthataretobeusedas
representativeofhighHAA5concentrations.The
currentabilitytoaccuratelymodelHAA5ina
distributionsystemislimited.However,researchhas
shownthatdepressedchlorineresidualcanresultin
biodegradationofHAA5,thusloweringtheHAA5
concentrationsevenforolderwater.Figure7-11also
showsasmallareainthesouthwesternportionofthe
systemthatthemodelpredictstopotentiallyexperi-
encechlorineresidualslessthan0.2mg/Lofchlorine.
Basedonthemodelingresults,variouszoneswere
definedinthedistributionsystemrepresentingareas
thatareappropriatefordifferenttypesofcompliance
monitoringrequirements(Figure7-12).Inactualuse,
informationgeneratedbythemodelwouldbe
supplementedbyhistoricalfielddata.Thezones
shownintheplotinclude:
1. Nodesinthevicinityofthepredominantnorth
connectionwithwateragelessthan2hours
representativeofnearentrylocations;
2. Nodeswithaveragewaterageintherangeof21
to33hoursthatrepresentlocationsthat
approximatetheaverageresidencetimeof27
hours;
7-12
3. Nodeswithresidencetimesthatexceedtwice
theaveragewaterage(>54hours)andhavea
minimumchlorineresidualexceeding0.20mg/L
representingpotentialhigh-HAA5sites;and
4. Othernodeswithresidencetimesthatexceed
twicetheaveragewaterage(>54hours)
representingpotentialhigh-TTHMsites.
Asillustratedbythecaseexample,ifadetailed,
calibratedEPSmodelisavailable,themodelrepre-
sentsanefficientmeansofdefiningthecompliance
monitorlocationsasrequiredundertheforthcoming
regulation.
7.4UseofWaterDistribution
SystemModelsinthe
PlacementofMonitorsto
Detect Intentional
Contamination
Theincreasingconcernoverthepotentialforinten-
tionalcontaminationofawaterdistributionsystem
hasledtointerestintheplacementofmonitorsto
detectcontaminationandtoserveaspartofarapid
detectionsystem. Designofsuchmonitoringsystems
mustincludedecisionsonthetype,numberand
locationforthemonitors. Waterdistributionsystem
modelscanplayasignificantroleinthedecision
makingbyprovidingaquantitativemechanismfor
determiningthemovementofacontaminantthrough
thedistributionsystemandtestingtheeffectiveness
ofamonitoringsystemdesign.
Toillustratethisapplication,aredteam-blueteam
conceptisused(Graymanetal.,2005). Thered
team-blueteamconceptispartofwargaming
thatiswidelyusedtodayasamechanismfor
training and development and testing of security
plans. Theredteamactsastheaggressorandthe
blueteamactsasthedefenders. Eachteamhas
differenttypesandamountsofinformationavail-
abletothemanddifferentrulesorconstraintsthat
theymustfollow.Inthiscasestudy,network
modelsareusedintwomodestoassistinevaluat-
ing monitoring networks:
1. Aspartofaredteam-blueteamexerciseto
demonstratetheeffectivenessofmanual
selectionoflocationofmonitorsaspartofa
CWS.
2. Aspartofanoptimizationmodeltoselectthe
bestlocationsformonitorsbasedonastated
metricformeasuringtheeffectivenessofthe
monitoringsystem.
Key Phrases to Characterize Case Study:Water
security, contamination, optimization, monitor
placement
7.4.1 Red Team-Blue Team Exercise
Inthissimulatedexercise,theredteamattacksawater
distributionsystembyaddingaharmfulchemicalto
thewater.Theredteamisprovidedwithlimited
informationonthedistributionsystem,anumberof
potentiallocationswheretheycaninjectacontami-
nant,andpredeterminedinformationonthecharacter-
isticsofthecontaminant(quantityandlethalityofthe
contaminant).Theblueteamrepresentsthewater
utilityandattemptstoprotectthewatersystemby
installingthreemonitorsaspartofaCWSthatdetects
contaminants. Itisassumedthattheyhaveextensive
informationonthedesignandoperationofthe
distributionsystembutnofirminformationonwhere
theattackersmaychoosetointroducethecontami-
nantorthenatureofthecontaminationscenario.
Thewaterdistributionsystemnetworkusedinthis
exerciseisaskeletonizedversionofamajorpressure
zoneofawaterdistributionsysteminCalifornia
approximating the conditions (design and operation)
inthemid1990s.Thesystemisfedbytwosources;
onethatoperatescontinuouslyandonethatoperates
onlyduringtheday.Therearethreestoragefacilities
locatedinthenetwork.Thisnetworkisoneofthe
examplenetworksprovidedaspartoftheEPANET
model.Thesimulationperformedintheexerciseisa
24-hourEPSstartingat7AM.Themodelrepresenta-
tionofthenetworkisshowninFigure7-13. This
figurealsoillustratestherelativenodaldemands,and
thetypicalflowdirectionsandmagnitudeduringthe
day.Thisplotisgivenonlytotheblueteamto
providethemwithinformationonthedesignand
operationofthesystem. Theredteamisprovided
Figure 7-13. Water Distribution System Characteristics.

7-13

Figure 7-15. Contaminant Concentration Just Downstream
of Contaminant Introduction Location (Node 121).

Figure 7-16. Contaminant Concentration Far Downstream
of Contaminant Introduction Location (Node 143).

nodelocated1500feetimmediatelysouthofthe
injectionpointisshown.Asexpected,thecontami-
nantmovedveryrapidlyandreachedthisnodeinless
thananhouraftertheinjection. Ifamonitorwas
locatedatthisnode,andrapidanalysisandre-
sponseoccurred,itcouldbeveryeffectiveasan
earlywarningformostofthedistributionsystem.
Figure 7-16 illustrates concentrations resulting
fromthesamecontaminantintroductionlocation.
Thisnodeislocatedneartheeasternedgeofthe
distribution system approximately 2.5 miles
downstream of the contaminant introduction
location.Asillustrated,theconcentrationofthe
contaminantremainedaboutthesamebutthetravel
timetothispointwasapproximately7hours.For
thisinjectionscenario,amonitorlocatedatthis
pointwouldberelativelyineffectiveasawarning
deviceformostofthedistributionsystembecause
ofthesignificanttimelag.
Figure 7-14. Allowable Contaminant Introduction Locations.
onlywithamapofthedistributionsystemshowing
eightpotentialsitesthatcanbeusedtointroducea
contaminant(Figure7-14).
Followingtheselectionofpointsofattackbythered
teamandselectionofmonitorlocationsbytheblue
team,thecontaminantintroductionissimulatedusing
theEPANETmodel.Themovementandconcentration
ofthecontaminantsarethenviewedgraphicallyby
animatingthemovementofthecontaminantinthe
distributionsystemintheEPANETmodel.Thetime
historyofcontaminantconcentrationsisalsoviewed
atselectednodesinthedistributionsystem.The
effectivenessofmonitorsisillustratedbygraphing
theconcentrationsofthecontaminantsatmonitoring
nodesandassessingwhether(andhowquickly)the
monitorswillservetheirpurposeofdetectingthe
contaminant. Figures7-15and7-16showthe
concentrationsresultingfrom8hoursofcontamina-
tionatnode123startingat11a.m.
InFigure7-15,theresultingcontaminationata
Intheexercise,mostredteammemberstendtoselect
contamination introduction locations that they
perceivewouldresultinthemostwidespreadimpacts.
Themostoftenselectedsiteswerethoseneartothe
watersources.Littleattentionisgenerallygivento
theamountofdilutionthatwouldresultataparticu-
larlocation.Blueteammemberstendtoselect
monitoringlocationsthatcoverawiderangeof
locations.Frequently,thethreeallowablemonitors
willbelocatedinthenorth,central,andsouthern
portionsofthedistributionsystem.
7.4.2 Application of Optimization Model
The optimization model used in this demonstration
isamethodologydevelopedbyOstfeldand
Salomons(2004).ThemodellinksEPANETanda
geneticalgorithminanoverallframeworkfor
optimally allocating monitoring stations, aimed at
detecting deliberate external contamination into
waterdistributionsystemnodes.Themodel
operatesunderextendedperiod(unsteady)hydrau-
lics and water quality conditions. The optimization
routinedeterminesthemonitorplacementtodetect
contaminantsinordertominimizetheexposureof
7-14
customersaboveanallowableminimumconcentra-
tion.Thealgorithmcanbeusedtostudycontami-
nationoffixedduration,quantity,orlocationor
can simulate contamination under stochastic
conditions.Thereareseveralmodelparametersthat
canbespecifiedtocontrolthenumberofmonitors,
the allowable contaminant introduction locations, the
characteristicsoftheevent,andwhethertheevent
characteristicsanddemandsaretobeconsideredas
stochastic variables.
Inoneapplicationofthemodel,itwasassumedthat
thepollutantcouldbeintroducedatanysinglenode
ofthedistributionsystematanytime,allwiththe
same injection probability. The following additional
assumptionsweremade:
Themaximumcontaminationexposurevolume
tothepublicabovewhichanalarmsignalofthe
monitoringstationsisrequiredis25gallons.
Thewaterisconsideredcontaminatedabove1
mg/L.
Thepollutantflowdischargeis2kg/minfor5
minutes(i.e.,atotalof10kgofasolutionof100
percentisintroducedwithinatotalof5minutes).
Thepollutantflowdischargeofthe
contaminantintroducedandtheconsumer
demandsaredeterministic.
Themonitoringstationsareprovidingreal-time
dataanddetectionalarms.
Allmonitoringstationshaveadetection
sensitivityof1mg/L.
3monitorsaretobeplaced.
Themodelsuggestsplacingmonitorsatnodes143,
181,and213withadetectionlikelihoodof0.4354
(i.e.,thereisaprobabilityofabout44percentthatthe
contaminantwillbedetectedpriortotheconsump-
tionofmorethan25gallonsataconcentrationhigher
than1mg/L).Thelocationofthemonitorsisshown
inFigure7-17.Asillustrated,theselectedmonitor
locationswererelativelyevenlyspacedaroundthe
network.
Otherevaluatedscenarioslookedatadifferent
numberofallowablemonitors,theallowablecontami-
nant introduction locations, the critical exposure
threshold, and representation of contaminant quantity
andnodaldemandsasstochasticvariables.Though
theexactoptimallocationsvariedslightlybetween
thedifferentruns,typicallythemonitorswereplaced
throughoutthenetwork.However,theeffectivenessof
themonitoringnetwork,asmeasuredbythedetection
likelihooddoesvaryconsiderablybetweenscenarios.

Figure 7-17. Monitoring Locations Selected by the
Optimization Model.
7.4.3 Case Summary
Theredteamblueteamexerciseservesasagood
mechanismfordemonstratingboththedynamicsof
contaminantmovementinthedistributionsystemand
thepotentialeffectivenessofmonitors.Applicationof
theoptimizationmodel,bothasademonstration
procedureandasapracticaltool,providesamethod
thatmovesthemonitorplacementfromapurely
intuitiveprocesstoaquantitativeprocedure.Boththe
exerciseandtheoptimizationtoolshowtheimpor-
tanceinminimizingdelaysinthedetection,notifica-
tion,andresponseprocess. Evenanaddeddelayofan
hourortwocanleadtoasignificantincreaseinthe
numberofcustomersthatwouldbeimpactedbya
contamination event.
7.5CaseStudyUseof
PipelineNetModel
Thiscasestudyfocusesontheapplicationofthe
PipelineNetmodel,whichincorporatesbothGISand
theEPANETmodeldiscussedinthepreviouschapters
ofthisreferenceguide. Thesupportinginvestigations
wereprimarilysponsoredbytheAwwaResearch
Foundation(AwwaRF)andEPAwithworkperformed
byaconsultingfirm(SAIC)andassistancefromwater
utilitypersonnel (RonHunsinger,BillKirkpatrick,
DaveRehnstrom)workingattheEastBayMunicipal
UtilityDistrict(EBMUD),Oakland,CA. Thetextand
figuresareadaptedfromAwwaRFreport2922
preparedbyBahaduretal.(2003).
Key Phrases to Characterize Case Study: hydraulic
andwaterqualitymodeling,placementofmonitors,
exposure modeling, contamination assessment,
contamination response tools, geospatial analysis.
7-15
7.5.1 Overview
PipelineNetisanEPANET/ArcView
1
-basedmodel,
andusesthesamehydraulicengineasEPANET.The
EPANETportionofthemodelcansimulatethefate
and transport of potentially introduced contaminants
inawaterdistributionsystem.TheArcView(orthe
GISlayer)portionofthemodelcanrelatethe
geospatialcomponentsofthesimulatedimpact. The
GISlayerallowsforgeo-featuresandmapdisplay
withanoverlayofmodeloutput. Thisfeatureis
particularlyusefulinapplicationssuchasemergency
response,determiningoptimalplacementofsampling,
and monitoring instruments.
AwwaRFandEPAjointlyfundedaprojectto
develop techniques to locate monitoring points in a
distribution system, determine appropriate timing
andfrequencyofmonitoring,andestablishmoni-
toring techniques and relevant water quality
parameters. Forthispurpose,afullycalibrated
extendedperiodsimulation(EPS)networkmodel
hypotheticallyrepresentingaportionofEBMUD
wasdevelopedusingPipelineNet. Thisstudyarea
networkmodelrepresents16ofthe123pressure
zonesintheoverallEBMUDdistributionsystem.
Thestudyareacontained27tanks,748milesof
pipes,62pumpsand17,997pipesegmentswith
diametersequaltoorgreaterthan2inches. Figure
7-18showsapartialviewofthehypothetical
networkofpipelines.
7.5.2 Model Calibration
Thenetworkmodelwascalibratedbycomparing
theobserved(SCADAdata)andsimulated
(PipelineNetmodel)waterlevelin25tankslocated
inthestudyarea. Theprimaryfocusofthecalibra-
Figure 7-18. Hypothetical Water Distribution System
Showing Pipelines.
1
RegisteredTrademarkofESRI
tionwastomatchtheshapeoftheobservedwater
levelinthetanks.Themodelcalibrationwas
performedfora24-hourtimeintervalusingdata
measuredonJuly1,2001. Tofurtherenhance
calibration,thepumpcharacteristiccurveswere
usedtoachieveagoodcomparisonbetween
simulatedandobservedtanklevels. Theflowvalue
ofthecharacteristiccurvewaschangedasneces-
sarytoreflectfieldconditions. Eachpumpwas
operatedwithtimecontrols.
7.5.3 Monitoring Site Location Methodology
Ahierarchicalselectionprocesswasdevelopedto
locatemonitoringstationsinthedistributionsystem.
Athree-stepapproachwasemployedbasedonmodel
inputs,outputs,andGISlayers(seeFigure7-19).

Figure 7-19. Conceptual Diagram Showing the Ranking

and Prioritization Methodology.
Inthefirststep(sourceprioritizationfactor),allthe
elementsofthewaterdistributionsystemare
assumedtobeavailableformonitoring. This
universeisthenreducedtoasmallersetbasedon
accessibility (location) and amenability (e.g.,
eliminatingdeadends,crosses,tees,junctionswith
differentpipematerial)tomonitoring.Initially,all
nodesareconsideredavailableformonitoringand
areassignedascoreof1. Subsequently,allthe
nodes,whichareeithernotamenableornot
accessible,areassignedascoreof0. Thisreduced
thenumberofpipesavailableformonitoringfrom
17,997to14,938. Therefore,onlythe14,938
nodeswithascoreequalto1areconsideredfor
Step2(describedbelow).
Inthesecondstep(distributionsystemresponse
factor),thePipelineNetmodelisruntoquantifythe
distributionsystemresponseintermsofflow,veloc-
ity,andpressure. Concentrationofwaterquality
parameterscouldalsobeconsideredinthisranking
procedurebutwasnotincludedasafactorinthiscase
study. Eachsystemresponseparameterhasequal
7-16
weightingandisassignedaninitialscoreof1for
everypipe.Thereafter,basedontherun,thescores
arere-assignedvaluesrangingbetween1and10,
whereascoreof10wouldindicateahigherlevelof
concern. Foranygivenparameter,theusercan
determinethedistributionofscoresovertheparam-
eterrange. Forexample,ascorerangeof10to1
couldbedistributedoveraflowrangeof0.001to100
gpm. ThePipelineNetmodelandBahaduretal.
(2003)providesomeguidanceforassigningscores,
buttheusercanselectanyscorebasedontherequire-
mentsoftheanalysis.
Inthethirdstep(criticalfacilitiesandpopulation
densityfactor),userdefinedbufferzones(polygons)
arecreatedaroundcriticalfacilitylocations.In
addition,areasoflow-,medium-,andhigh-population
densityaredelineatedbythecreationofpolygons.
Pipesclosesttothecriticalfacilitiesand/ornearhigh
populationdensityareasareassignedascoreof10.
ThetotalscoreforeachpipebasedonSteps2and3
arecomputed. ThesefinalscoresarelinkedtotheGIS
pipelinelayer.Theusercanidentifyareaswhere
monitoringstationsshouldbeplacedbasedonthe
displayofpipeswithhighscores. Figure7-20shows
thepipesinthehypotheticalnetworkwithscores
greaterthan27overlaidwithcriticalfacilityloca-
tions.Themethodologyoutlinedaboveforselecting
thelocationofmonitoringstationsisasubjective
procedurethatrequiresinputandjudgmentfrom
waterutilitypersonnel. Itwouldnotresultina
commonsolutionforalldistributionsystemsbutcan
incorporatethespecificneedsandobjectivesofthe
participating water utility.
Figure 7-20. Hypothetical System Showing High Score
Areas (>27) Overlain with Hospitals and Schools.
7.5.4 Response and Mitigation Tools
Inadditiontothemonitoringsitelocationmethodol-
ogy,threeadditionaltoolsweredevelopedaspartof
thiscasestudytoenhancethecapabilityof
PipelineNetintheareasofemergencyresponse,
mitigation,andnormaloperations.Thesethreetools
arebrieflydescribedinthefollowingsubsections.
7.5.4.1 Consequence Assessment Tool
TheconsequenceassessmenttoolofPipelineNet
provides the ability to quickly identify and quantify
thepopulation,infrastructure,andresourcesatrisk
fromacontaminantevent. Foradefinedcontami-
natedarea,thistoolcancalculate:
totalpopulationatrisk,
numberoftapscontaminated,
milesofpipecontaminated,
totalnumberofhospitalsandbedsforeach
hospital, and
totalnumberofschoolsandstudentpopulation.
7.5.4.2 Isolation Tool
TheisolationtoolofPipelineNetprovidestheability
tochangethestatus(openorclosed)ofanypipein
thedistributionsystem.Aftercompletingawater
quality simulation and examining the contaminant
distributionfromtheevent,thistoolcouldbeusedto
closeoffoneormorepipestocontroltheflowof
water.Themodelwouldthenbere-run,reflecting
thesenewhydraulicconditions,andtheoutput
examinedtodetermineifthismitigationstepwas
successfulinlimitingtheareaofcontamination.
7.5.4.3 Spatial Database Display Tool
PipelineNetsspatialdatabasedisplaytoolcan
overlaytheEPANETmodeloutputwithvarious
geospatialproperties. Thespatialdatabasedisplay
toolofPipelineNethasnineteencriteriatochoose
from. Theuserscanselectanycombination(s)ofthe
availablecriteria. Forillustrationpurposes,Figure7-
21showsthedisplayofthreecriteria:oversizedpipes
(diameter>30inches),currentmonitoringlocations,
andlowvelocity(velocity<0.001FPS)pipes.
7.5.5 Case Summary
ThecasestudydemonstratesthatthePipelineNet
modelcanbeusedtoperformavarietyofpractical
analysestolocatemonitoringsystems. Three
additional tools are available that enhance
PipelineNetscapabilityintheareasofemergency
response,mitigation,andnormaloperations. How-
ever,toeffectivelyutilizethePipelineNetmodel,the
utilitymusthaveacalibratedEPSEPANET-based
networkmodelandutility-specificGISdata. Atthe
7-17
Figure 7-21. Display of Low-Velocity Pipes, Oversized
Pipes, and Current Monitoring Stations Using the Spatial
Database Display Tool.
timethisreferenceguidewasbeingwritten,themodel
isslatedtoundergoadditionalenhancementsto
improve the following: contaminant database,
consequenceassessment,inclusionoftimeoftravel,
conversionfromArcView3.2toArcGIS,andestab-
lishmentoflinkstoSCADAdata.
7.6UseofThreatEnsemble
VulnerabilityAssessment
(TEVA)ProgramforDrinking
WaterDistributionSystem
Security
Inresponsetotheincreasedfocusonthevulnerability
ofdrinkingwatersystemstotheintentionalintroduc-
tionofchemical,biological,orradiologicalcontami-
nants,EPAisdevelopingtheThreatEnsemble
VulnerabilityAssessment(TEVA)Program.TEVA,
whencompleted,willbecapableofanalyzingthe
vulnerabilitiesofdrinkingwaterdistributionsystems,
measurepublichealthandeconomicimpacts,and
designandevaluatethreatmitigationandresponse
strategies.TEVAisaprobabilisticframeworkfor
assessingthevulnerabilityofawaterutilitytoa
varietyofcontaminationattacks. MonteCarlo
simulationsgenerateensemblesofscenarios,and
statisticsareanalyzedtoexplorethefeasibilityof
scenarios,identifyvulnerableareasofthewater
distributionnetwork,andanalyzethesensitivityof
themodeltovariousparameters.
TheTEVAteamincludesseveralindividualsfrom
variousorganizations.ThekeyEPATEVAleadsare:
ReganMurray,RobertJanke,andJimUber.
Key Phrases to Characterize Case Study: hydraulic
andwaterqualitymodeling,placementofmonitors,
vulnerability assessment, exposure modeling,
contamination assessment, contamination response
tools, probabilistic analysis, economic impact
assessment,threatmitigationstrategies.
7.6.1 TEVA Overview
TEVAincorporatesaprobabilisticframeworkfor
analyzingthevulnerabilityofdrinkingwaterdistri-
butionsystems. Figure7-22outlinesthemajor
componentsoftheframework:thestochasticmodel-
ingofscenarios,theanalysisofpotentialimpacts,and
theassessmentofthreatmitigationstrategies.To-
gether,thesethreecomponentspresentanintegrated
viewofthevulnerabilityofauniquedistribution
systemtoawidevarietyofcontaminationthreatsand
thepotentialforawaterutilitytodecreasethis
vulnerabilitythroughasetofmitigationstrategies.
Preliminarydesignandimplementationhasbeen
completedforacoresetofcomponents. Alonger-
termresearcheffortisbeingplannedfortheother
components.
StochasticModelingScenarios
EnsembleDatabase
1 2 N
ImpactAnalysis
ThreatMitigationAnalysis
AssessmentofRisk
ReductionStrategies
Identificationof
Vulnerable
Populations,
Regions,and
Services
Evaluationof
Countermeasures
PublicHealth
Impacts
EconomicImpacts
SelectScenario
SimulateScenario
Figure 7-22. Threat Ensemble Vulnerability
Assessment Framework.
Withoutspecificintelligenceinformation,onecannot
predictexactlyhowaterroristgroupmightsabotagea
watersystem.Therefore,TEVAisbasedonaprobabi-
listicanalysisofalargenumberoflikelythreat
scenarios.Whilethenumberofpossiblevariationson
7-18
scenariosisnearlyinfinite,thevulnerabilityofthe
systemcanbeassessedbyselectingalargeenough
setoflikelyscenarios.TEVAcreatesathreaten-
semble,orasetofcontaminationscenarios,basedon
varyingthetypeofcontaminant,theamountand
concentrationofthecontaminant,thelocationofthe
contaminant introduction into the distribution
system,andthedurationofthecontaminationevent.
Thevulnerabilityofthesystemisbasedonan
assessmentoftheentirethreatensemble. The
followingsubsectionspresentanoverviewofthe
aforementionedthreekeymodelingelements.
7.6.1.1 Stochastic Modeling
Thestochasticmodelingelementinvolvesthreesteps:
selectionofthethreatensemble,simulationofthe
ensemble,andstorageoftheoutputintheensemble
database. Thethreatensembleisacollectionof
scenariosthatwillbesimulated. Onescenariomay
represent,forexample,theinjectionofa55-gallon
drumcontainingabiotoxinmixtureintoonenodeof
aparticulardistributionsystemwith1,000nodes.
Thisscenariocanberepeatedforeachofthe1,000
nodes,generatingathreatensembleof1,000sce-
narios. Onecouldvaryotherparameters,suchas
contaminant type, quantity, concentration, location,
orduration,togenerateotherthreatensembles.
Currentworkisdetermininghowtobestselectalarge
enoughthreatensembleinordertoaccuratelyassess
vulnerability.Whilealargernumberofscenarioswill
allowfortheconsiderationofmorethreats,con-
straintsoncomputationtimerequirethatthenumber
ofscenariosbeminimized.
Next,eachscenariointhethreatensembleissimu-
latedusinganetworkhydraulicandwaterquality
model. InTEVA,anEPANETbasednetworkmodelis
generatedwithallnecessarydataforrunningthe
simulations. TheEPANETmodelcurrentlyincludes
firstorderdecayofconstituents. Soontobecom-
pletedupgradestoEPANETwillallowmodelingof
thefateandtransportofmultipledissolvedconstitu-
entsindistributionsystems(Uberetal.,2004a).
Theseupgradeswillpermitthemodelingofreactions
atthepipewallandinthebulkflowandenablethe
inclusionofchemicalreactionproducts,thereby
resultinginmoreaccurateestimatesofhuman
exposureandhealthrisk. Theresultsofthestochastic
modelingofthethreatensemblearestoredinthe
ensembledatabase,allowingforlateranalysisofthe
dataintheothercomponentsofTEVA.
7.6.1.2 Impact Analysis
TheImpactAnalysiselementusesthedatastoredin
theensembledatabasetoestimatelikelypublichealth
impactsandeconomicimpacts. Publichealthimpacts
includeinjuries,disease,illness,anddeaths. People
canbeexposedtocontaminantsfromingestionof
water,inhalationofvolatilizedchemicalsorparticles,
and/orcontactwiththeskin.Dependingonthe
contaminant,specificdose-responsemodelscanbe
employedtoestimatethevarioushealthendpoints.
Formanythreatagents,reliabledataforsuchmodels
arelacking,andtheensuinguncertaintyintheresults
mustbeunderstood. Forcontagiousdiseases,
dynamicmodelsofdiseasetransmissionalsomustbe
includedinordertoaccuratelyassesshealthimpacts.
Economicimpactsincluderestorationcosts(cleanup,
treatment,remediation,anddecontamination),denial
ofservicecosts(providingalternativesourcesof
water),andothercosts,suchasmedicalcosts(hospi-
talization,vaccines). Psychologicalcostsrelatedto
consumerslossoftrustinthewatersupplysystemare
verydifficulttoestimate. Thedistributionofimpacts
willbecalculatedfromtheensembledatabase,
therebyprovidinganestimateoftheexpectedimpacts
fortheensembleofthreatscenarios.
7.6.1.3 Threat Mitigation Analysis
TheThreatMitigationelementexploresvarious
mitigationstrategiessuchastheuseofearlywarning
systems(sensorsanddataanalysistools),operational
approaches(chlorineboosters,back-upequipment),
andemergencyresponsemethods(isolationofpartof
thesystem,publicnotification).Arangeofmitiga-
tionstrategiescanbeevaluatedwiththeTEVA
simulationsusinghealthriskandeconomicimpact
analysestorankandselectthebestalternativefora
setofscenarios(Uberetal.,2004b).Thiswillenablea
quantitativeanalysisofthebenefitsofimplementing
variousstrategies.
7.6.2 Application of TEVA to a Water
Distribution System for Optimal
Monitoring
TheTEVAcomputationalframework(Murrayetal.,
2004,Uberetal.,2004b,Murrayetal.,2005)has
beenappliedtothreesizesofdistributionsystems,
eachdifferinginpopulationbyapproximatelyone
orderofmagnitude. Theresultsshownforthiscase
studyillustratethatTEVAhasthepotentialtohelp
waterutilitiesassessthecontaminantstowhichthey
aremostvulnerable,identifythemostvulnerable
regionsoftheirdistributionsystems,andselectthe
mostappropriatemitigationstrategiesfortheirsystem.
Manydifferentformsofcontaminationmonitoring
systemshavebeenproposed,usingwaterquality
sensors,compositeorgrabsampling,andvarious
numbersandlocationsofsensors. Anycontamination
monitoringandsurveillanceprogramwillbebudget
constrained. Optimizingtheplacementofafixed
numberofmonitoringstationsplaysanimportantrole
inthedesignofthemonitoringsystem. Selectingthe
bestlocationsforconductingaroutinesampling
7-19
programtoserveasamonitoringandsurveillance
programfordetectionofintentionalcontamination
canbeconsideredanintegerlinearprogramming
probleminwhichaquantityisoptimizedsubjecttoa
setofconstraints(Berry2005). Formaloptimization
methodsandheuristicmethodshavebeenappliedto
solvesuchproblems.Inthiscasestudy,aGreedy
heuristicalgorithmisusedtolocatemonitoring
stations,givenadefinedbudgetornumberof
monitoringstations,inordertominimizehealth
impacts. ThefollowingisanexampleofusingTEVA
toevaluateandoptimize(inalimitedfashion)the
designofacontaminationmonitoringsystemfora
waterdistributionsystem.
7.6.2.1 Simulation Overview
Forthepurposesofthisanalysis,anall-pipes
EPANETnetworkmodelforthesampledistribution
systemwasgenerated. Thereare1,062milesofpipe
representedinthisnetworkmodel. Thissystem
containsapproximately12,000nodes,hasanaverage
dailydemandofapproximately20milliongallons,
andanestimatedpopulationof130,000. Approxi-
mately6,000potentialsamplinglocationswere
selectedrandomlyfromthenearly12,000nodesby
consideringthateachnodehada50percentprobabil-
ityofinclusion. Thispruningwasusedtomakethe
problemlesscomputationallyintensiveandempha-
sizethatanoptimalplacementofmonitoringstations
willlikelybedifficultgivenlegal,financial,or
logisticalconstraintsforplacingandmanaging
monitoring stations.
Tosimulateacontaminationscenario,manyparam-
etersmustbespecified,includingcharacteristicsof
the contaminant, the contaminant-introduction
scenario,andtheconsumptionpatternsofthe
population. Inordertorepresenttherangeofpossible
parametervalues,theTEVAcomputationalframework
usessimulationtovaryparameters,suchascontami-
nanttype,quantity,concentration,location,rate,or
duration,togeneratethreatensembles(collectionsof
manythreatscenarios)whichcollectivelycanbe
analyzedforhealthimpactstatistics. Allnodes(a
groupingofserviceconnections)inthedistribution
system are considered equally likely introduction
points. Biologicalandchemicalcontaminantscanbe
considered, and contaminant introduction can last
fromafewminutestohourstodays. Forthepurposes
ofthisanalysis,abiologicalagentwasconsideredas
thecontaminantandtheintroductiondurationwas24
hours,atarateof8.675litersperhour,andamassrate
of1.45x10
11
organismsperminute.
Thehealthimpactsareaffectedbyfactorssuchas
dose-responserelationships,lethaldoses,time-to-
onsetofsymptoms,timeforeffectivemedical
intervention,andthetimedelayfortransportingand
analyzingsamplesinlaboratories. Healthimpactsto
apopulationwillincreasewithanincreaseinthetime
requiredtoimplementaneffectiveresponsefora
known contamination event. Considering these
factors,modelingandsimulationanalyses,suchas
thosepresentedhere,mustbeperformedonacontami-
nantspecificbasis. Thehealthimpactstatisticscan
includemeaninfections/illnessesormeanfatalities.
Infection/illnessisafunctionofthedoseoforganisms
orcontaminantingestedandtheprobabilityofillness
causedbythatdose,asdeterminedfromthecontami-
nantdose-responsecurve(inthiscase,Salmonella).
Meaninfections/illnessesarestatisticallydetermined
fromtheprobabilisticanalysisofallthreatscenarios.
Maximuminfectionsresultedfromintroductionatthe
nodedeliveringthemaximumhealthimpacts.
Althoughtherewasoneworstcasenode,therewere
approximately60threatscenarios(contaminant
introductionlocations),whichdeliveredatleast50
percentofthemaximumlethality.Themaximum
numberoflethalitieswasapproximately13,000.
InthisTEVA-simulatedanalysis,thebenefitsoftwo
compositegrabsamplingprogramswereevaluated
(dailyandevery48hours)andcomparedtothe
benefitsprovidedbyasystemofreal-time(inline,
contaminantspecific)sensors. Thebenefitsofthe
samplingormonitoringprogramsaremeasuredbythe
hypotheticalreductioninpublichealthimpacts. In
thisanalysis,samplelocationdesignsarebasedon
minimizingthemeannumberoffatalitiesfor2
samplingfrequencies: 24hoursand48hours. Six
sampling/sensorstationplacementscenarioswere
evaluatedinthisanalysis: 5,10,15,20,30,and40
locationsforeachprogram. TheGreedyalgorithm
usedinthisanalysiswillprovideanoptimalsolution
forminimizingpublichealthimpacts.
Forthepurposesofthisanalysis,thegrabsamplesare
consideredtobefilteredsamples. Filteredsamples
representcompositedsamplesthathavebeencol-
lectedandconcentratedthroughafiltrationdeviceto
better enable the collection and analysis of biological
organisms. Also,real-timewaterqualitymonitorsare
assumedtodetectchemicalcontaminantsorbiologi-
calorganismsthroughthechangeinwaterquality,
suchasdeterminedbythereductionofchlorine
residualorincreaseinturbidity.Thesereal-timeand
sampling-basedanalysesareconsideredideal,
meaningthatdetectionlimitswerezeroandthe
biologicalcontaminantwasalwaysdetected.
7.6.2.2 TEVA Analysis Approach
Thisanalysisconsidersattacksateverynon-zero
demandnode,totalingapproximately10,000. Only
non-zerodemandnodesareconsideredbecausethey
representserviceconnectionsthatareusingwater
fromthedistributionsystemonaregularbasisand,
7-20
48 HourSamplingFrequency (12HourDelay)
24 HourSamplingFrequency (12HourDelay)
Real-Time Monitoring(HourlyMonitoring)12 Hour Delay
Real-Time Monitoring(HourlyMonitoring)4 HourDelay
90000
80000
Figure 7-24. Comparison of 24-Hour, 48-Hour, and Real-
Time, Continuous Contamination Monitoring Systems for
the Reduction in the Maximum Number of Infections for a
24-Hour Contaminant Attack.
M
a
x
i
m
u
m

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

I
n
f
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
(
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

P
e
r
s
o
n
s
)

70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
0 5 10 15 20 30
NumberofSampling/SensorStations
40
therefore,couldpossiblybeusedforcontaminant
introduction. Statistically analyzing the approxi-
mately10,000threatscenariosprovidesanestimateof
thehypotheticalhealthimpactsintermsofaverage
healthimpacts(e.g.,fatalitiesorillnesses)and
maximumimpacts. Averageimpactscouldbe
expectedtoresultifasaboteurhadnoknowledgeof
wherebesttoattackandsimplyrandomlychosea
nodelocationforcontaminantintroduction. Maxi-
mumhealthimpactscorrespondtoarelativelysmall
setofcontaminantintroductionnodelocations(threat
scenarios)thatmaximizehealthimpactstothe
associatedreceptors.
Thecontaminantsweremodeledastracers,i.e.,freeof
hydrolysis,chlorination,pipewall,orbiofilmreac-
tions,whichwouldlargelydecreasethecontaminants
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
0 5 10 15 20 30 40
NumberofSampling/SensorStations
48HourSamplingFrequency(12HourDelay)
24HourSamplingFrequency(12HourDelay)
Real-TimeMonitoring(HourlyMonitoring)12HourDelayInResponse
Real-TimeMonitoring(HourlyMonitoring)4HourDelayinResponse
M
e
a
n

I
n
f
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

(
N
o
.

o
f

P
e
r
s
o
n
s
)

Figure 7-23. Comparison of 24-Hour, 48-Hour, and Real-
Time, Continuous Contamination Monitoring Systems for
the Reduction in Mean Infections for a 24-Hour
Contaminant Attack.
effectivenessincausingharmtopublichealth(an
extendedversionofEPANETisundergoingtestingto
allowmulti-speciesmodelingofcontaminants).
Contaminantsaremodeledusingamassinjection
rate,zerovolumeadded,whichconsequentlydoesnot
influencethehydraulicpropertiesofthenetwork,i.e.,
flowincrease,decrease,orreversalofflow.
Hydraulicandwaterqualitysimulationswererunfor
192hours. Thedisease-causingagentorcontaminant
wasconsideredtobeahypothetical,biological
contaminantthatisexpectedtocauseinfection(50
percentofthetime)inanadultwhen10,000ormore
oftheorganismsareingested. Theincubationperiod
wasassumedtobe24hours,andthetimeforeffective
treatmentwas48hoursaftertheonsetofsymptoms.
After72hours,peopleeitherrecoveredordied. A
sigmoidaldose-responsecurvewasassumedforthe
ingestionoforganismswiththeuntreatedfatalityrate
at16percentofthoseinfected.
7.6.2.3 TEVA Analysis Results
Figure7-23comparesthereductioninmeaninfec-
tionsprovidedbyaroutine24-hourfilteredsampling
program,aroutine48-hourfilteredsamplingprogram,
andareal-time,continuous,monitoringprogram.
Similarly,Figure7-24comparesthereductioninthe
maximumnumberofinfectionsofthesame3monitor-
ingprograms. Again,thisscenarioassumescontami-
nation by an individual who understands distribution
systemsandhastheknowledgeandresourcesto
determinethemaximumimpactlocation(s).
Itisassumedthatthecomputersimulationsandthe
monitoring/surveillanceprogramsaresuccessfulin
reducingpublichealthimpactsbypreventingfurther
consumptionafterdetection. Theresultsshowthat
thereisnotasignificantdifferencebetweendaily(24-
hour)samplingand48-hoursamplingintermsof
reducinghealthimpacts. Asexpected,thecontinuous
monitoringprogramdetectstheincidentmuchearlier
thanthedailysamplingprogram. Figure7-23shows
an80percentreductioninmeaninfectionsis
achievedusing40real-timemonitors,ascomparedto
havingzeromonitors. Theresultsshowthatitis
importantthatthereal-timeprogrambeintegrated
witharesponseprotocol. Acomparisonofthetwo
real-time,continuousmonitoringcases(12-hourdelay
versus4-hourdelayinnotifyingthepublic)illustrates
theimportanceofresponsetime. Shorteningthetime
neededtoimplementaneffectiveresponsetoreduce
furtherexposureiscriticalforreducingthenumberof
additional infections.
Theresultsofthiscasestudyalsoillustratethat,for
thisdistributionsystem,strategicallyplacingjust5or
10sampling/sensorstationsaspartofamonitoring
andsurveillancesystemcanhaveasignificanteffect
onreducingpotentialhealthimpactsfromintentional
contamination.
7-21
7.6.3 Case Summary
TEVAisanintegratedsystemintendedtoprovidethe
capability for analyzing the vulnerabilities of
drinkingwaterdistributionsystemsandtomeasure
thepublichealthandeconomicimpacts. TEVAcan
beusedtodesignandevaluatethreatmitigationand
responsestrategiesrelatedtoeventsofintentional
introduction of chemical, biological, or radiological
contaminantsintodrinkingwaternetworks. Monte-
Carlosimulationsgenerateensemblesofthreat
scenariostoidentifyvulnerableareasofthewater
distributionnetwork.TEVAisbasedontheuseofan
allpipesEPANETnetworkmodel.
7.7FieldTestingofWater-
DistributionSystemsin
SupportofanEpidemiologic
Study
Thiscasestudyisfocusedontheuseofinformation
collectedaspartoffieldstudiestoassistinthe
calibrationofahydraulicandwaterqualitymodel
ofadistributionsystem. Theinformationpresented
in this section is based on an ongoing investigation
bytheATSDRattheU.S.MarineCorpsBase,Camp
Lejeune,NC(CampLejeune). Thesedataarebeing
collected to support an ongoing epidemiologic
studyatCampLejeune. Theresultingcalibrated
modelisneededtoperformahistoricalreconstruc-
tionofthewatersystemfortheperiodofinterest.
This case study highlights the field methodologies
employedtogeneratetheinformationproposedfor
useinthecalibrationofthemodel.
Key Phrases to Characterize Case Study:field
studies,historicalreconstruction,hydraulicandwater
quality modeling, model calibration.
7.7.1 Case Study Overview
ATSDRisconductinganepidemiologicstudyto
determineifthereisanassociationbetweenexposure
tocontaminateddrinkingwaterandbirthdefects
amongchildrenofwomenwholivedatCampLejeune
whiletheywerepregnantbetween1968and1985.
Becauseofthepaucityofhistoricalwaterdistribution
systemoperationaldata,informationbasedonthe
operationofpresent-daywaterdistributionsystems
willbeusedforhistoricalreconstruction. Present-day
systemoperationswillbemodeledusingwater-
distributionsystemmodels.Tocalibratethemodels
againsthydraulicandwaterqualityparameters,field
testingisbeingperformedtogatherdataandinforma-
tiononhydraulic,fateandtransport,andoperational
characteristicsofthewaterdistributionsystems
(Masliaetal.,2005;Sautneretal.,2005). The
specificfieldactivitiesarediscussedlaterinSection
7.7.2.
Figure 7-25. Water Distribution Systems Serving U.S.
Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, NC.
CampLejeuneencompassesanareaofabout164
squaremiles,andislocatedinJacksonville,Onslow
County,NorthCarolina,borderingtheAtlanticOcean.
Thefocusoftheepidemiologicstudyisonexposure
fromwater-distributionsystemsthathistorically
servedthemilitarybaseshousingCampJohnson,
TarawaTerrace,HolcombBoulevard,andHadnot
Point(seeFigure7-25).Presently,therearetwo
operatingwatertreatmentplants(WTPs)thatprovide
waterforthedistributionsystemsofinteresttothe
epidemiologicstudy:(1)theHolcombBoulevard
WTPthatservicestheCampJohnson,TarawaTerrace,
andHolcombBoulevardareasofthedistribution
system,and(2)theHadnotPointWTPthatservices
theHadnotPointareaofthedistributionsystem.
HadnotPointwastheoriginalWTPandatonetime,
servicedtheentirebase.TheHolcombBoulevard
WTPpresentlyservicestherestofthemilitary
housingareas.Athirdplant,theTarawaTerraceWTP,
historicallyservicedtheTarawaTerraceandCamp
Johnsonareas,butthisplantwasshutdownand
replacedbyagroundstoragetankatTarawaTerrace
thatreceiveswaterdirectlyfromtheHolcomb
BoulevardWTP.
Systempressuresrangefromabout5568psi
throughoutthedistributionsystems. Astopogra-
phyisveryflat,rangingfromsealeveltolessthan
40ft,hydraulicheadsrangefrom140160ft
resultinginaverymildhydraulicgradient. There
arenineelevatedstoragetanksintheHolcomb
BoulevardandHadnotPointWTPserviceareas.
Therangeinwaterlevelfluctuationfortheel-
evatedstoragetanksissmall;generally16ft.
ExcellentmappinginformationandadetailedGIS
provide good information on the location and
characteristicsofthewatersystemfacilities.
SCADAdataareavailablethatprovidecontinuous
7-22
Figure 7-26. Continuous Recording Pressure Logger
Mounted on Brass Shutoff Valve and Hydrant
Adapter Cap Used for Fire-Flow and C-Factor Tests.
informationonplantdischargesandtankwater
levels. However, individual buildings and resi-
dencesarenotmetered.
7.7.2 Field Work
Avarietyoffieldactivitiesarebeingperformedto
provideabetterunderstandingoftheoperationof
thewatersystemandtoprovideinformationthat
canbeusedtocalibrateadetailedwaterdistribu-
tionsystemmodel. Todate,theseactivitieshave
included:
conductingC-factorandfire-flowtests,
recordingsystempressuresandstoragetank
waterlevelsovertime,
tracerandassociatedtraveltimetests,and
recordingcontinuousflowinformationatkey
locations.
Severalofthesefieldactivitieswereperformedin
tandeminordertoprovideanintegratedunderstand-
ingofthesystemoperationandperformance.
7.7.2.1 C-Factor and Fire-Flow Tests
C-factortestsandfire-flowtestswereconductedin
August2004atvarioussitesatCampLejeune.
Continuouspressureloggers(Figure7-26)setto
recordpressureat1-minuteintervalswereattachedto
hydrants. Standardanalogpressuregageswerealso
usedasbackupduringthetests.Hydrantflowswere
measuredusingpitotgagesinstalledonhydrantsthat
wereflowedduringthetests. Oneofthepitotgages
wasintegratedwithadiffuserandcagetobothdiffuse
theflowfromthehydrantandtotrapanysolidsto
preventdamagefromtheflow(seeFigure4-6in
Chapter4).Theotherpitotgagewasastandardgage
attachedtothehydrant.
StandardC-factortestingprocedureswereusedto
measuredataneededtocalculatetheHazen-Williams
C-factorsforeightsectionsrepresentingavarietyof
pipematerialsanddiameters.
Fire-flowtestsarefrequentlyusedintheprocessof
calibratingahydraulicwaterdistributionsystem
model.Oneormorehydrantsareopenedandflowed
toincreaseflowsinthedistributionsysteminthe
vicinityofthehydrants. Sincefrictionlossesincrease
exponentially,thehigherflowscanresultina
significantloweringofthehydraulicgradeline
(HGL). Incalibratingthemodel,themodelisapplied
undertheflowandoperationalconditionsexperi-
encedduringthefire-flowtestandthepressuresor
hydraulicgradelineobservedinthefieldarecom-
paredtothemodelresults. Iftherearesignificant
differencesbetweenthemodelandfieldresults,
adjustmentsaremadeinmodelparametersinorderto
reducethedifferencesorcalibratethemodel. Inthe
simplestconfiguration,asinglehydrantisflowedand
pressurereadatanothersinglehydrant.Analterna-
tiveapproachwasusedatCampLejeunetoimprove
thelaborefficiencyandtocollectmoredata. Con-
tinuousrecordingpressuregageswereinstalledatup
tosixhydrantsintheareabeingtested.Additionally,
pitotgageswereinstalledontwohydrantsthatwere
designatedashydrantstobeflowed. Pressurewas
measuredunderseveralconditions:(1)staticcondi-
tionsatstartoftesting,(2)whileeachofthetwo
hydrantswasflowedseparately,(3)whileboth
hydrantswereflowedtogether,and(4)staticcondi-
tionsattheendoftesting. Theresultsofsuchatestat
onesiteareshowninFigure7-27andTable7-2.
7.7.2.2 Tracer Test and Continuous
Measurements
AfieldtestwasconductedMay2427,2004,inthe
HadnotPoint(CampLejeune)distributionsystem
consisting of three activities: (1) injecting liquid
CaCl ,35percentbyweight,intothetransmission
2
mainonthedistributionsystemsideoftheWTPto
achieve an elevated conductance and chloride
concentration, and recording conductivity and
chloride concentration using continuous recording
Figure 7-27. Location of Fire Hydrants Used in Fire-Flow
Test at Site H02.
7-23
Table 7-2. Field Data Collected During Fire-Flow Test at Site H02
FF-H02-P0
Pressure, Psi
FF-H02-P1
Pressure, Psi
FF-H02-P2
Pressure, Psi
FF-H02-P3
Pressure, Psi
FF-H02-Q1
Flow, gpm
FF-H02-Q2
Flow, gpm
Staticcase
(start)
53.1 50.7 56.2 52.6 0 0
Hydrant1
flowed
41.4 37.3 46.8 42.9 773 0
Hydrant1+2
flowed
29.7 24.5 36.5 32.7 631 579
Hydrant2
flowed
43.9 40.7 48.1 44.1 0 747
Staticcase
(end)
53.5 51.2 56.5 52.9 0 0
1.0psi=6.8948kPa;1gpm=0.0639L/S
water-quality monitoring data loggers, (2) injecting
asodiumfluoridesolutionintothetransmission
main to achieve an elevated fluoride concentration
and monitoring fluoride concentration in the
distribution system, and (3) monitoring distribution
systempressureswithcontinuousrecordingdata
loggersattachedtoselectedhydrantsandflowsand
tankwaterlevelsfromSCADAdata.Inadditionto
continuously recording tracer concentrations and
conductivity,grabsampleswerecollectedfor
qualityassuranceandqualitycontrol(QA/QC)
purposes.SampleswereanalyzedattheHadnot
PointWTPbyATSDRstaffandthenalsoshipped
totheFederalOccupationalHealth(FOH)environ-
mentallaboratoryinChicago,Illinois,foranalysis.
Twenty-sevenhydrantswereselectedintheHadnot
Pointareaasmonitoringlocations.Formonitoring
conductivity and chloride and fluoride concentra-
tions,ninehydrantswereequippedwiththeHoriba
W-23XDdualprobeiondetector(Figure7-28).For
monitoring conductivity, nine hydrants were
equippedwiththeHoribaW-21XDsingleprobeion
detector,thusprovidingatotalof18monitoring
locations for continuously recording conductivity
data.Forpressuremeasurements,ninehydrants
wereequippedwithcontinuousrecordingDixon
PR300pressuredataloggers(Figure7-26).
Resultsfromthechlorideinjectionwereusedto
estimatearrivaltimesofthetraceratdifferent
locationsthroughouttheHadnotPointWTParea.
Ofspecialinterestaretheextremelylongarrival
timesinexcessof16hoursinthenorthwestern
partoftheoftheHadnotPointWTParea(Figure7-
29,loggersC01,C02,andF01).Additionally,a
comparisonofarrivaltimesofthecalciumchloride
traceratloggerlocationC04witharrivaltimesat
loggersF04,F05,andF02,ledinvestigatorsto
considerthattheremayhavebeenundocumented
closedvalvesinthedistributionsystem(theclosed
valvesdidnotaffectC-factormeasurements). Post-
testfieldverificationbywaterutilitystaffcon-
firmedthelocationsofclosedvalves,asindicated
bythesymbolinFigure7-29.
7.7.3 Additional Test Procedures
AsecondtracertestwasconductedintheHolcomb
BoulevardWTPareainSeptember-October2004. In
thistest,thenormalfluoridefeedwasturnedofffora
periodofaweekandthenturnedbackonand
Figure 7-28. Horiba W-23XD Dual Probe Ion
Detector Inside Flow Cell.
7-24
6.6
C04
9.7
C06
1.8
F05
2.5
F04
6.6
C04
19.5
F01
26.2
C01
26.3
C02
3.5
F02
3.4
C03
0.3
F03
3.6
F07
12.1
C09
4.5
C08
11.7
F09
5.3
C07
2.1
F08
9
F06
EXPLANATION
WaterPipeline
WaterBody
Roads
BaseBoundary
StorageTanks
Elevated- controlling
Elevated
Ground- rawwater
Ground-treatedwater
ATSDRDataLogger
Front arrival time(hours)
Logger ID
F- Fluoride, Chloride
C- Conductivity
Figure 7-29. Arrival Times of the Calcium Chloride Tracer
at Monitoring Locations in Hadnot Point WTP Area, May
25, 2004.
monitoredforanotherweek.Ninelocationsinthe
distributionsystemwereequippedwiththeHoribaW-
23XDcontinuousrecording,dualprobeiondetector
datalogger.Minimallaborwasrequiredinsupportof
thistest. Additionally,16magneticflowmetershave
beeninstalledthroughoutthesystemandwillbeused
inconjunctionwithfuturetracerteststoprovide
additional calibration information.
References
Aral,M.M.,J.Guan,M.L.Maslia,J.B.Sautner,R.E.
Gilig,J.J.Reyes,andR.C.Williams,Optimal
ReconstructionofHistoricalWaterSupplytoa
DistributionSystem:A.Methodology.Journal of
Water and Health,2(3):123-136,2004a.
Aral,M.M.,J.Guan,M.L.Maslia,J.B.Sautner,R.E.
Gilig,J.J.Reyes,andR.C.Williams.OptimalRecon-
structionofHistoricalWaterSupplytoaDistribution
System: B.Applications.Journal of Water and
Health,2(3):137156,2004b.
Bahadur,R.,W.B.Samuels,andJ.Pickus.Case Study
for a Distribution System Emergency Response Tool.
PublishedbyAWWAResearchFoundation.2003.
Berry,M.Letter(unpublished)toSteveJones,
ATSDRRegion2fromMichaelBerry,Environmental
HealthService,NewJerseyDepartmentofHealth.
August31,1995.
7.7.4 Case Study Summary
Thiscasestudypresentsresultsfrompreliminary
field-testactivitiesusedtogatherhydraulicandwater
qualitydataatCampLejeune.Fieldteststodatehave
included:(a)recordingsystempressuresandstorage
tankwaterlevels,and(b)conductingC-factor,fire-
flow,tracer,andtraveltimetests.Thetestdataare
beingusedtoassistwithhydraulicandwaterquality
modelcalibration.Theyarealsobeingusedtoplan
andcarryoutamorerefined,detailedfieldtestof
waterdistributionsystemsservingmilitarybase
housing.Theseactivitieswillassistinproviding
much-neededmodelparameterdataforcalibrating
modelsofthepresent-daywaterdistributionsystem.
Thepresent-daymodelsareneededasafirststepin
reconstructinghistoricaloperationsduringtheperiod
between1968and1985,aspartofanongoing
epidemiologicstudyofchildhooddiseasesatCamp
Lejeune.
7.8ChapterSummary
Thecasestudiespresentedinthischapterillustrate
thevariouswaysinwhichthetoolspresentedin
thisreferenceguidecanbeused. Thecasestudies
alsodemonstratethat,foreachapplication,a
specific analysis methodology needs to be devel-
oped depending upon the study objectives and
available data.
Berry,J.,L.Fleischer,W.E.Hart,C.A.Phillips,andJ.
P.Watson.SensorPlacementinMunicipalWater
Networks.Journal of Water Planning and Resources
Management.ASCE,vol.131. 2005.
Clark,R.M.,E.E.Geldreich,K.R.Fox,E.W.Rice,C.H.
Johnson,J.A.Goodrich,J.A.Banik,F.Abdesaken.
TrackingaSalmonellaserovartyphimurium
outbreakinGideon,Missouri:RoleofContaminant
Propagation Modeling. Journal of Water Supply
Research and Technology Aqua.Vol.45,No.4,pp
171-183. 1996.
EPA.Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts Rule, Initial Distribution System Evalua-
tion. Draft Guidance. 2003.
Fennel,H.,D.B.James,andJ.Morris. Pollutionofa
StorageReservoirbyRoostingGulls.Journal of
Society of Water Treatment Exam. 23:5-24. 1974.
7-25
Geldreich,E.E.,K.R.Fox,J.A.Goodrich,E.W.Rice,
R.M.Clark,andD.L.Swerdlow.Searchingfora
WaterSupplyConnectionintheCabool,Missouri
DiseaseOutbreakofEscherichiacoli0157:H7.
Water Research84:49-55. 1992.
Grayman,W.M.,R.M.Clark,andR.M.Males.
ModelingDistributionSystemWaterQuality:
DynamicApproach.Journal of Water Resources
Planning and Management,ASCE,114(3). May
1988.
Grayman,W.M.,R.M.Clark,B.L.Harding,M.L.
Maslia,andJ.Aramini. ReconstructingHistorical
ContaminationEvents.Water Supply Systems
Security. EditorL.Mays. PublishedbyMcGraw-Hill,
NY.pp10.1-10.55. 2004.
Grayman,W.M.,A.Ostfeld,andE.Salamons.Red
Team-BlueTeamExerciseforLocatingMonitorsin
DistributionSystems.Proceedings,ASCE-EWRI
WorldWater&EnvironmentalResourcesCongress,
Anchorage,AK. 2005.
Harr,J.A Civil Action. PublishedbyRandomHouse.
NY.1995.
Maslia,M.L.,J.B.Sautner,andM.M.Aral.Analy-
sisofthe1998Water-DistributionSystemServingthe
DoverTownshipArea,NewJersey:Field-Data
CollectionActivitiesandWater-DistributionSystem
Modeling.AgencyforToxicSubstancesandDisease
Registry,Atlanta,GA.2000.
Maslia,M.L.,J.B.Sautner,M.M.Aral,R.E.Gillig,J.
J.Reyes,andR.C.Williams.HistoricalReconstruc-
tionoftheWater-DistributionSystemServingthe
DoverTownshipArea,NewJersey:January1962
December1996.AgencyforToxicSubstancesand
DiseaseRegistry,Atlanta,GA.2001.
Maslia,M.L.,J.B.Sautner,C.Valenzuela,W.M.
Grayman,M.M.Aral,andJ.W.Green,Jr.Useof
Continuous Recording Water-Quality Monitoring
EquipmentforConductingWater-DistributionSystem
TracerTests:TheGood,theBad,andtheUgly.
Murphy,P.J.WaterDistributioninWoburn,Massa-
chusetts.TheEnvironmentalInstitute,Universityof
Massachusetts. Amherst,MA. 1986.
Murray,R.,R.Janke,andJ.Uber.TheThreat
EnsembleVulnerabilityAssessmentProgramfor
DrinkingWaterDistributionSystemSecurity.
mentalResourcesCongress,SaltLakeCity,UT.2004.
Murray,R.,J.Uber,andR.Janke.AModelfor
EstimatingtheAcuteHealthImpactsResultingfrom
ConsumptionofContaminatedDrinkingWater.
NJDHSS.Case-ControlStudyofChildhoodCancers
inDoverTownship(OceanCounty),NewJersey.
NJDHSS,DivisionofEpidemiology,Environmental
andOccupationalHealth. Trenton,NJ. 2003.
OstfeldA.,andE.Salomons. AStochasticEarly
WarningDetectionSystemModelforDrinkingWater
DistributionSystemsSecurity.Proceedings,ASCE-
EWRIWorldWater&EnvironmentalResources
Congress,SaltLakeCity,UT.2004.
Rossman,L.A.,R.M.Clark,andW.M.Grayman.
ModelingChlorineResidualsinDrinkingWater
DistributionSystems.Journal of Environmental
Engineering, 120(4):803-820. July/August 1994.
Sautner,J.B.,M.L.Maslia,C.Valenzuela,W.M.
Grayman,M.M.Aral,andJ.W.Green,Jr.Field
TestingofWater-DistributionSystemsatU.S.Marine
CorpsBase,CampLejeune,NorthCarolina,in
SupportofanEpidemiologicStudy.Proceedings,
Uber,J.,L.Rossman,andF.Shang.Extensionsto
EPANETfortheFateandTransportofMultiple
Interacting Chemical or Biological Components.
mentalResourcesCongress,SaltLakeCity,UT.
2004a.
Uber,J,R.Janke,R.Murray,andP.Meyer.AGreedy
HeuristicsModelforLocatingWaterQualitySensors
inaWaterDistributionSystem.Proceedings,ASCE-
EWRIWorldWater&EnvironmentalResources
Congress,SaltLakeCity,UT.2004b.
Waterbury,CT.2003.
7-26

Anc Epa

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Anc Epa

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

AReferenceGuideforUtilities

A Reference Guide for Utilities

A Reference Guide for Utilities

A Reference Guide for Utilities

A Reference Guide for Utilities

Figure 2-2. A Flow Chart for Estimating Future Water

Figure 2-3. EPANET Graphical Output Showing

Figure 2-4. Sample EPANET Time Series Plots of Flow,

A Reference Guide for Utilities

A Reference Guide for Utilities

A Reference Guide for Utilities

A Reference Guide for Utilities

technological change, conflicting technical claims,

A Reference Guide for Utilities

A Reference Guide for Utilities

A Reference Guide for Utilities

A Reference Guide for Utilities

Figure 6-10. Conceptual Relationship Model for

A Reference Guide for Utilities

Figure 7-13. Water Distribution System Characteristics.

Figure 7-19. Conceptual Diagram Showing the Ranking

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen