10/6/2014 Implementing a Unidirectional Flushing Plan

http://uimonline.com/index/webapp-stories-action?id=1267&utm_source=UIM%20Enews%20OPT%20INS&utm_medium=Reachmail&utm_campa 1/3
Featured Articles | News | Washington Report | Financial Report | Email the Editors | Webinars | UIM Conference | CTAM | Calendar | Archives search
< All stories in this section
Courtesy Flush
Implementing a Unidirectional Flushing Plan to Reduce
Water Use and Improve System Operations
By Lara Kammereck & Daniel Reisinger Sep 29, 2014
Water utility managers are always looking for proven methods to improve operations, enhance the water
system and improve service standards. Precipitation, microbiological activity or corrosion can all form
deposits on the pipe walls of the water distribution system over time. These accumulations can cause
unwanted tastes, odors or discolorations of the water, reduce chlorine residual and may limit the pipes
conveyance capacity.
Water main flushing is an effective method to remove these accumulations. There are two main flushing
methods that are generally used: conventional flushing and unidirectional flushing (UDF). This paper
presents the benefits of UDF, a discussion of how to establish a UDF program and operational
considerations for the program.
Conventional Flushing
The conventional flushing method consists of opening hydrants in the different targeted areas and
discharging the water until the accumulations are removed and the water becomes clear. This method of
flushing is easy to conduct by maintenance and operations crews, but requires a large amount of water and
may not completely clean the pipe network. The graphic in Figure 1 shows how the water flows to an open
hydrant using the conventional flushing method. The water moves freely from all directions to an open
hydrant. Since there is less flow in a given pipe, velocities may be too low to adequately clean, or scour, the
pipes.
Unidirectional Flushing
Unidirectional isolates each pipeline to create flow in a single direction to quickly and efficiently clean the
pipe. The cleaned mains may have improved water clarity or color, reduced turbidity and improved chlorine
residual. The graphic in Figure 2 shows how the water flows through an isolated pipeline in a single direction
by closing valves and using specific hydrants. By concentrating flow, UDF creates higher velocities that are
better able to clean the pipe. Major advantages of this method are:
Improved cleaning of accumulated deposits on pipes;
Requires less water than conventional flushing; and
Reduces the impact on customers.
Sand, gravel, plastic, biofilms and other accumulated materials can be removed by flushing. Flushing times
of a half hour or less are typical, which can equate to substantial water savings. Therefore, UDF can be an
important component of a water use efficiency or conservation program. The reduced flushing time also limits
the impact on the utilitys customers. An additional benefit of UDF is that it incorporates the use of a large
number of valves and hydrants providing for a simultaneous valve exercising and hydrant testing program.
The major disadvantage of UDF is the planning to develop the flushing program and additional crew time to
inspect the required valves and hydrants prior to the flushing. It may also require more hydrants to be flushed
than in a conventional program.
Free E-Newsletter | Free Print Subscription | Free iPad Subscription | Unsubscribe
10/6/2014 Implementing a Unidirectional Flushing Plan
http://uimonline.com/index/webapp-stories-action?id=1267&utm_source=UIM%20Enews%20OPT%20INS&utm_medium=Reachmail&utm_campa 2/3
Creating a UDF Program
A UDF program should be well planned prior to implementation to ensure an efficient program and that safe
conditions for operators and the public are provided. There are a number of reliable resources available for
designing a UDF program, including the American Water Works (AWWA) Unidirectional Flushing DVD
(2002), AWWA Research Foundation reports (Ellison, D. (2003), Friedman, Melinda and Holt, David (2003),
and Hasit, Yakir J., et al. (2004)), journal articles and conference proceedings, and helpful guides (British
Columbia Water & Waste Association (2004), Brand (Undated), and others). An outline of the steps and key
criteria are summarized in the following section.
UDF Plan Creation
A UDF plan is typically a series of maps that document the flushing sequences that are needed to clean the
distribution system. Each flush targets a specific pipeline by opening a hydrant or hydrants and opening or
closing system valves to isolate the pipeline of interest. UDF sequences are created using a series of simple
heuristic rules. These parameters are not absolute, but do provide general limitations on the extent of
flushing to be performed.
Begin from a clean water source;
Flush from larger to smaller pipes;
Limit flushing lengths to an average of 1,500 ft;
Maintain minimum pressures within the system;
Consider stormwater infrastructure, traffic control and other constraints to ensure efficient and safe
execution.
To ensure that clean source water is used, flushing series typically radiate out from a treatment plant, well, or
water reservoir/tank. The flushing series are commonly grouped, called a flushing zone to divide the system
by pressure zone, represent different clean sources, or for operational considerations (public notification,
scheduling crews, etc.).
Electronic tools and hydraulic modeling are not required to create a UDF plan; however, CAD, GIS and
hydraulic models can aid in the efficient creation of the plan. Commercial water distribution modeling
software has created UDF specific tools to aid in the setup of UDF sequences and produce field-ready
output. To use these tools, specific numerical criteria should be set based on the literature, as described in
the next section.
Numerical Flushing Criteria
Flushing criteria aim to ensure that there is sufficient velocity to scour each pipe, while maintaining safe
conditions for operators and the public. Numerical flushing criteria are typically used for velocity, minimum
pressure and flushing volume.
Velocity
The AWWA and other literature sources recommend that velocities of greater than 5 ft per second be
achieved, with a minimum velocity of approximately 2 ft per second. However, Melinda Friedman and David
Holt, in their report, Establishing Site Specific Flushing Velocities, found that velocities between 2 ft per
second and 4 ft per second may provide similar benefit to higher velocities in pipes that had previously been
flushed with the UDF method.
According to Friedman and Holt, a utility should consider if there are self-cleaning mains that routinely
reach the 2 feet to 4 feet per second pipes, as these mains may be excluded from the UDF program. Large
diameter mains may also warrant special consideration, as they may be unable to achieve the necessary
flushing velocities. Additionally, other cleaning methods may prove to be more effective on large diameter
mains or those with substantial build-up/corrosion.
Pressure
Minimum service pressures should be maintained at all times, as set by the policies or criteria of the utility,
regulating agency or fire marshal. Field measurement may be used to confirm that there are sufficient
pressures at or near the flushing hydrant. A hydraulic model may be used to determine the minimum service
pressures throughout the system during flushing.
Volume
10/6/2014 Implementing a Unidirectional Flushing Plan
http://uimonline.com/index/webapp-stories-action?id=1267&utm_source=UIM%20Enews%20OPT%20INS&utm_medium=Reachmail&utm_campa 3/3
Media Kit . Advertising . Classifieds . About BMI . Contact BMI
Flushing volumes should be large enough to allow sufficient scouring and water turnover. Literature
recommends flushing a minimum of two pipe volumes. Additionally, a maximum flushing volume may be
established to accommodate operational constraints. However, visual inspection or measurements, such as
turbidity, should be always be used to confirm that adequate water quality has been restored before ending
the flushing sequence.
Operational Considerations for a UDF Plan
To conduct safe and effective flushing, the UDF plan must take into account operational considerations.
Since a large number of valves and hydrants are used, it is likely that the cooperation of multiple
departments, agencies and customers will be needed. Major operational considerations include:
Manage discharge of flushed water to avoid localized flooding, adverse water quality, and other site-
specific considerations (de-chlorination may also be required);
Establish traffic control for the safety of operators and drivers;
Public notification of flushing activities to nearby customers who will or may be impacted;
Addressing inaccurate system information, such as missing valves and hydrants; and
Recording data to improve future flushing efficiency.
Critical customers may require advanced planning and additional public notification. These customers may
include hospitals, medical and dental offices, industrial sites and customers with special needs. Flushing may
be required at night or on weekends to meet the needs of these customers.
It is recommended that flushing crews maintain records of the flushing activities. The information may be
used to update system maps where inaccurate system information was found, identify infrastructure for
maintenance, such as a stuck valve and improve future flushing efficiency. Recording the actual flushing
time, hydrant flow or velocity and pressure can also provide valuable information for planning future flushing.
Unidirectional flushing quickly and efficiently cleans the pipes to improved water clarity or color, reduced
turbidity and improved chlorine residual. System valves are opened and closed to isolate a pipeline during
flushing, which improves cleaning and reduces water use. Creating a UDF plan allows the systematic
planning needed for an efficient program and safe conditions for operators and the public. The UDF plan may
consider multiple criteria, including velocity, pressure, length and volume. Operational considerations should
also be included in the planning and execution of the UDF program.
Lara Kammereck, P.E., PMP, is a civil engineer with Carollo Engineers.
Dan Reisinger, P.E., is a lead water resources engineer with Carollo Engineers.
< All stories in this section
0 Comments Trenchless Technology Login

Sort by Best Share

Start the discussion

Be the first to comment.
Subscribe

Add Disqus to your site

d
Privacy

Favorite