Você está na página 1de 187

Design of Water Supply and Distribution System for Northville 9

Del Mundo, Neil Rusty V.


Fatalla, Jayvee C.
Noveda, Rudy Kim M.
Orgimen, Evelyn B.
Technological Institute of the Philippines
Quezon City

2014

Approval Sheet

The design project entitled "Water Supply and Distribution System for Northville 9" prepared by Neil Rusty
V. del Mundo, Jayvee C. Fatalla, Rudy Kim M. Noveda, and Evelyn B. Ogrimen of the Civil Engineering
Department was examined and evaluated by the members of Student Design Evaluation Panel, and is
hereby recommended for approval.

Engr. Ronnie C. Estores


CE Project Adviser

Engr. Allan B. Benogsudan


Chair

Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................................................................5
Chapter 1:

Project Background..................................................................................................................6

1.2 Project Objectives...................................................................................................................................7


1.2.1 General objective:...........................................................................................................................7
1.2.2 Specific objectives:..........................................................................................................................8
1.3 The Client................................................................................................................................................8
1.4 Project Scope and Limitations................................................................................................................8
1.4.1 Scope..............................................................................................................................................8
1.4.2 Limitations.......................................................................................................................................8
1.5 Project Development..............................................................................................................................8
Chapter 2:

Design Inputs............................................................................................................................9

2.1 Preliminary Report..................................................................................................................................9


2.1.1 Topography....................................................................................................................................10
2.1.2 Existing Water Supply Arrangement.............................................................................................10
2.1.3 Need for the Project......................................................................................................................11
2.2 Project Layout.......................................................................................................................................12
2.2 Sources.................................................................................................................................................14
2.2.1 Groundwater source..........................................................................................................................14
2.2.1.1 Water Quality..............................................................................................................................14
2.2.1.2 Position of the facility.................................................................................................................14
2.2.2 Surface water source.........................................................................................................................15
2.2.2.1 Water Quality..............................................................................................................................15
2.2.2.2 Position of the facility.................................................................................................................15
Chapter 3:

Constraints, Trade-offs and Standards...................................................................................17

3.1 Design Constraints...............................................................................................................................17


3.1.1 Economic (Cost)............................................................................................................................17
3.1.2 Sustainability (Consistent Supply)................................................................................................17
3.2 Trade-offs..............................................................................................................................................17
3.2.1 Raw Designers Ranking...............................................................................................................18
3.2.2 Initial Verdict..................................................................................................................................24
3.3 Design Standards.................................................................................................................................25
Chapter 4:

Design of Structure.................................................................................................................26

4.1 Methodology.........................................................................................................................................26
4.2 General Design Process.......................................................................................................................26
4.3 Trade off based on the design of Source.............................................................................................27
4.3.1 Design on Groundwater................................................................................................................27
4.3.2 Design on Surface Water..............................................................................................................32
4.4 Validation of Economic and Sustainability Constraints........................................................................35
4.4.1 Estimate Base on Economic.........................................................................................................35
4.4.2 Estimate Base on Economic.........................................................................................................36
4.5 Influence of Multiple constraints, standards and trade-offs in the final design....................................38
4.5.1 Water Supply Source: Ground water and Surface water..............................................................39
4.5.2 Distribution System: Loop System and Combination of Loop and Branch System.....................39
CHAPTER 5:

Final Design........................................................................................................................44

References:.....................................................................................................................................................46
Appendices......................................................................................................................................................47
Appendix A: Design Criteria........................................................................................................................48
Appendix B: Codes and Notations.............................................................................................................49
RURAL WATER SUPPLY DESIGN MANUAL VOLUME I.....................................................................49
Appendix C: Computation of Population and Demand..............................................................................56
Appendix D: Manual Computation of Discharge using Hardy-Cross Method............................................57
Appendix E: Manual Computation of Discharge using Nodal Method.......................................................61
Appendix F: Computation Using Epanet....................................................................................................63
Groundwater...........................................................................................................................................63
Surface Water.........................................................................................................................................99
Appendix G: Pipe Assignment..................................................................................................................139
Groundwater.........................................................................................................................................139
Surface water.......................................................................................................................................141
Appendix H: Estimate of Source..............................................................................................................143
GroundWater........................................................................................................................................143
Surface Water.......................................................................................................................................144
Appendix I: Estimate of Distribution.........................................................................................................145
Loop System........................................................................................................................................145
Combination of Loop and Branch System...........................................................................................146
Appendix J: Water Quality Test................................................................................................................147
Ground Water.......................................................................................................................................147

Surface Water.......................................................................................................................................147
Appendix K: Other Figures.......................................................................................................................148
Preliminary Report...............................................................................................................................148
Appendix L: Epanet..................................................................................................................................149
Description...........................................................................................................................................149
Capabilities...........................................................................................................................................149
Applications..........................................................................................................................................150
Reference.............................................................................................................................................150

LIST OF FIGURES
Table 2-1: Pumping Rates of Pumping Stations.............................................................................................11
Table 3-1: Raw Designer's Ranking (Water Source: Groundwater Against Surface Water)..........................18
Table 3-2: Raw Designer's Ranking (Water Distribution: Loop system and the combination of loop and
branch system)................................................................................................................................................21
Table 3-3: Initial estimate of Loop System material costs..............................................................................21
Table 3-4: Initial estimate of Combination of system material costs...............................................................22
Table 3-5: Initial estimate of Loop System material costs..............................................................................22
Table 3-6: Initial estimate of Combination of system material costs...............................................................22
Table 3-7: Initial estimate of Loop System sustainability costs.......................................................................23
Table 3-8: Initial estimate of Combination of system sustainability costs.......................................................23
Table 3-9: Initial estimate of Loop System sustainability costs.......................................................................24
Table 3-10: Initial estimate of Combination of system sustainability costs.....................................................24
Table 4-1: Designers ranking for Water supply source..................................................................................35
Table 4-2: Estimate of Groundwater (Economic)............................................................................................35
Table 4-3: Estimate of Surface water (Economic)..........................................................................................35
Table 4-4: Estimate of Groundwater (Sustainability)......................................................................................36
Table 4-5: Estimate of Surface water (Sustainability).....................................................................................36
Table 4-6: Designers ranking for distribution system......................................................................................37
Table 4-7: Sustainability of distribution system in ground water source.........................................................37
Table 4-8: Sustainability of distribution system in surface water source........................................................38
Table 0-1: Final Discharge on each Pipes......................................................................................................57
Table 0-2: Solution on Computation of Discharges........................................................................................58
Table 0-3: Solution on Computation of Discharge (2nd Distribution).............................................................59
Table 0-4: Computation on Pipe Discharges..................................................................................................61
Table 0-5: Demand for Northville 9 (Ground water - Loop System)...............................................................64
Table 0-6: Tabulation of Computed Velocities for Northville 9 (Groundwater Loop System).........................71
Table 0-7: Tabulation of Computed Headloss (Groundwater - Loop System)................................................79
Table 0-8: Tabulation of Velocities for Northville 9 (Groundwater - Combined System).................................88
Table 0-9: Tabilation of Headloss for Northville 9 (Groundwater - Combined System)..................................94
Table 0-10: Tabulation of Demand for Northville 9 (Surface water - Loop System).....................................100
Table 0-11: Tabulation of Velocities for Northville 9 (Surface water - Loop System)....................................107
Table 0-12: Tabulation of Headloss for Northville 9 (Surface water - Loop System)....................................115

Table 0-13: Tabulated Velocties for Northville 9 (Surface water - Combined System).................................129
Table 0-14: Tabilation of Headloss for Northville 9 (Surface water - Combined System)............................134
Table 0-15: Pipes Running on Road Lots for Loop System on Groundwater..............................................139
Table 0-16: Pipes Running on Alleys............................................................................................................139
Table 0-17: Pipes Running on Road Lots for Combined Loop with Branch System on Groundwater.........140
Table 0-18: Pipes Running on Alleys for Combined Loop with Branch System on Groundwater................140
Table 0-19: Pipes Running on Road Lots for Loop System on Surface water.............................................141
Table 0-20: Pipes Running on Alleys for Loop System on Surface water....................................................141
Table 0-21: Pipes Running on Road Lots for Combined Loop with Branch System on Surface water.......142
Table 0-22: Pipes Running on Road Lots for Combined Loop with Branch System on Surface water.......142
Table 0-23: Groundwater as Source Estimate..............................................................................................143
Table 0-24: Surface water as Source Estimates...........................................................................................144
Table 0-25: Distribution System using Loop Estimates................................................................................145
Table 0-26: Distribution System using Combination Estimates....................................................................146

CHAPTER 1:

PROJECT BACKGROUND

1.1 The Project


The project is a design of water supply and distribution system. It is located in subdivision of Heritage
Homes, Meycauayan, Bulacan. The designers goal is to design a water supply and distribution system
which will be able to efficiently sustain the everyday water supply needs of the future residents since their
means of supply are through shallow wells and water supply trucks only. The community is owned by the
Municipality of Meycauayan, Bulacan.
The community has a total area of 54, 312 square meters. A total of 631 units. The residential piece of land
includes amenities like elementary school, church, military camp and barangay hall. All units are assumed
to be residential so the project is intended only to design the water supply and distribution system for
domestic use and shall therefore conform to the standards stated within the governing Codes of the
Philippines in relation to water supply and distribution system.
The designer consider multiple constraints such as economical and sustainability in order for them to
satisfy what the client wants. The client is concerned about the duration so that the residents will not be
having a hard time in their water supply. Several steps were execute that conforms to the codes and the
standards. Trade- offs were provided in the design so that the designer must know what to consider.

Figure 1-1. Site Development Plan


1.2 Project Objectives
The design team for the water supply and distribution system for the project, Heritage Homes,
Meycauayan, Bulacan, aims to achieve the following objectives:
GENERAL
The design project is intended to provide the students the knowledge and skills of making use of
Hydrology and Hydraulic Principles to design a water supply and distribution system which will be
able to efficiently sustain the everyday water supply needs of the target consumers.
SPECIFIC
Design a detailed water supply and distribution system that caters to the required water quantity
demand of the community (considering the future demand due to population growth) in accordance
with the codes and standards.
To evaluate the influence of the multiple constraints which is the demand of the client together with
the trade- offs, codes and standards that is used that will come up with the most economical design.
Provide the estimated cost of the project to see that the design is economically reasonable.
1.3 The Client
The client of the project is the Barangay San Isidro, City of San Jose Del Monte Bulacan located at the far
end of the city that almost bordering the Rizal Province (particularly Rodriguez, Rizal) headed by Barangay
Chairman Marcial G. Gannaban.
1.4 Project Scope and Limitations
The design team shall provide and focus only on the following stated below:

Design with accordance with the codes and standards.


A detailed design and plan layout resulted from trade- offs to provide the best engineering solution for
the water development system upon the clients approval.
Detailed structural layout of the layered materials using EPANET.
Strategic planning of the layout of the water pipelines from the nearest source to the individual
households presented by a detailed drawing.
Estimated cost and quantity of materials to be used in the design including manpower and construction
scheduling.

The following shall not be covered by the services of the design team:

Conduct the bacteriological testing of water.


Inspect and provide the quality of materials required for the final design.
1.5 Project Development
The design project has undergo various phases as shown in Figure 1-2. The project started with the
conceptualization of the structure including the pipelines, storage and others so that we can be able to
visualize the design structure. Followed by the identification of such constraints like economic, sustainability
etc. that will affect the design of the structure. On the other hand, the designer propose a trade-offs wherein
we can be able to choose the more appropriate in our design. Then evaluation of the multiple constraints
and trade-offs and design standards on the final design so that the design will be correct. In selecting the
best system for the design project, the designer compared trade-offs with multiple constraints and use
engineering practice to measure such performance.

Conceptualization

Consideration of
Multiple
Constraints, Trade
offs and Standards

Design Scheme

Final Design
Output

Figure 1-2. Project Development Flowchart

CHAPTER 2:

DESIGN INPUTS AND STANDARDS

2.1 Description of the Structure


The municipality of Meycauayan is located at the Northeast portion of Manila. It is bounded by the
municipalities of Sta. Maria and Marilao to the west and Norzagaray to the north, all of Bulacan,
municipality of Rodriguez, Rizal to the southeast, and the cities of Quezon and Caloocan to the south. The
City is approximately 42 kilometres away from Manila.

Figure 2-1. Location of the Project


(Source: Google Earth)

The following figures, tables and illustrations below will show the technical aspects to be considered in the
design configurations. This portion will describe and provide the needed facts to be deliberated by the
design team in order to establish a design fit for the condition and environment of the location. This
includes the site development of the location, elevation map, zoning map, boundary map, land use,
possible water sources, soil characteristics, slope map and most especially the demography or the number
of population.
2.1.1 Elevation Map

Figure 2-2. Elevation Map of Bulacan

2.1.2 Need for the Project


The community is currently using a communal faucet as their source of water. The communal faucet is the
immediate action of the water district for the sudden unsuitability of the water coming from the built artesian
wells for domestic water use. It is connected from the looped water line outside the community. Figures on
the preliminary report of the location are presented in Appendix K.
The area to be served is about 128,090 sq. m. The population counts about 8,127, with 1,783 families. The
growth rate of the community is about 3 4 % based on the homeowners of the said location.

2.2 Project Layout


The Northville 9 resettlement area is designed with eighty seven blocks (87), with each consists of a
minimum number of seven (7) houses to a maximum number of fifty (50) houses.

Figure 2-1: General layout of Northville 9


2.2 Sources
Based on the report given, there are two possible sources on the location classified as groundwater and
surface water. With these sources we will be able to determine the variance when it comes to the design of
a water supply and distribution system.
2.2.1 Groundwater source
Groundwater classified as a well is proposed to be set up inside the community of Northville 9.

2.2.1.1 Water Quality


A test for the quality of water is required for setting up as source of potable water. For the Northville 9
ground water quality test, the result showed that the groundwater is possible to be used as water for
domestic uses. The water quality result is attached in Appendix I.
2.2.1.2 Position of the facility
The ground water source that will be designed for the Northville 9 is to be located at an open lot, merely at
the center of the community as shown in Figure 2-5. The open lot is located beside the central school
inside Northville 9 and surrounded by houses.

Figure 2-2: Location of the Proposed Pumping Station for Northville 9

Figure 2-3: Pumping Station for the Well (perspective)


2.2.2 Surface water source
For the development of the water source using surface water, it will also be in accordance to the standard
set by LWUA, NWRB together with the CWD. In adopting surface water the Angat River is used since it is
near the location, shown in Figure 2-7.
2.2.2.1 Water Quality
Same as of the groundwater, a test for the quality of water is required for setting up a facility for the use of
surface water as source of potable water. The result from the water quality test of Angat River showed that
the surface water is possible to be used as water for domestic uses. The water quality result is attached in
Appendix I.
2.2.2.2 Position of the facility
There will be a need of a water facility that will hold the water for basic treatment and then distribute to the
consumers. The location of the water facility is 138 meters from the entrance of the project location. The
position of the facility is adjacent to the Angat River passing along the area of Barangay Iba Oeste.

Figure 2-4: Location of the Proposed Water Facility for Northville 9

Figure 2-5: Water Facility for Northville 9 (perspective)

Chapter 1: Constraints, Trade-offs and Standards

3.1 Design Constraints


A constraint is a condition that a solution to a problem must satisfy. It is also the possible factors that can
affect and limit the project design, these constraints are always present in any projects, but not all
constraints affect the project all at the same time, it may be considered based on different situation or plot.
Constrains began to arise because of certain things a project is subjected to. It may be in the economic,
environmental, cultural, societal, social, political, ethical and professional, health and safety, and
manufacturability and sustainability.
3.1.1 Economic (Cost).
In the design and construction of community water systems, economics are extremely important. This
dictates that the source of supply should be selected so that little maintenance for the operational factors
will be required to furnish an adequate supply of water to the community.
Economic constraint has a great effect on the designing of water supply together with its distribution. The
design comprises between the two source of water supply which is (1) Ground Water and (2) Surface
Water. In considering the ground water as source the cost of construction for well and pumping station
together with distribution line is integrated as per the Surface Water the cost for operation (treatment and
pipe lines).
With respect to the distribution system the two systems will be designed and considered as a trade-off
design and compare which is more economical for the (1) distribution with loop system and (2) the
combination of loop and branched system. The two would be estimated in terms of cost of construction
and operation.
3.1.2 Sustainability (Consistent Supply).
The Project design must meet the demand or the flow on each pipe that would sustain the demand and
supply pattern. In the design a pump is introduced as a medium to sustain the flow in each pipe that is
needed. Pump is introduced in both Groundwater and Surface Water which is the source down to the
design distribution system which is the loop
3.2 Trade-offs
A trade-off, by definition, is an exchange that occurs as a compromise. The trade-off is used as a
systematic approach to decide on what solution to apply for the constraints that had been identified on the
project design.
The computation for the raw designers ranking is presented on the appendix portion of this project design.
The computation on the economic conformance to the criteria is based on the cost estimate produced in
the design from a certain trade-off and sustainability constraint will be based on the consistency based on
the conformance with the demand and supply pattern. The over-all rank is the sum total of the products
from the magnification of the criteria and the conformance of each trade-off.

3.2.1 Raw Designers Ranking


Using the model on trade-off strategies in engineering design (Otto & Antonson, 1991), the importance of
each criterion (on scale of 0 to 5, 5 with the highest importance) was assigned and each design
methodologys ability to satisfy the criterion (on a scale from -5 to 5, 5 with the highest ability to satisfy the
criterion) was likewise tabulated. The designers computed the ability to satisfy the criterion using this
procedure.
Computation of ranking for ability to satisfy criterion of materials:
PERCENT DIFFERENCE=

( HIGHER VALUELOWER VALUE )


GOVERNING VALUE

EQ. 3.1

SUBORDINATE RANK =GOVERNING RANK ( DIFFERENCE ) 10

EQ. 3.2

The governing rank is the subjective choice of the designer. In assigning the value for the criterions
importance and the ability to satisfy the criterion, the designers would subjectively choose any desired
value. This subjective value depends on the initial estimate, say for economic criterion, which the designer
can initially select. The subordinate rank in Eq. 3.2 is a variable that corresponds to its percentage distance
from the governing rank along the ranking scale.

Figure 3-6: Ranking Scale for Percent Difference


As shown in Figure 3.1 the distance is determined by multiplying the percentage difference by the number
of scale that is 10. The product will be the number of stride/interval from the governing value.
Table 3-1: Raw Designer's Ranking (Water Source: Groundwater Against Surface Water)
Ability to Satisfy the Criterion
Criterion's
(scale from -5 to 5)
Decision Criteria for
Importance
Sections
Surface Water Source
(scale of 0 to 5) Groundwater Source
(Well Pumping Station)
(Treatment Facility)
1. Economic (Cost)

5.0

3.0

2.Sustainability
(Consistency of Supply)

5.0

2.0

45.0

23.00

*Reference: Otto, K. N. and Antonsson, E. K., (1991). Trade-off strategies in engineering design. Research in Engineering Design, volume 3, number 2,
pages 87-104.Retrieved from http://www.design.caltech.edu/Research/Publications/90e.pdf on March 11, 2013

In Table 3-1, the designers set the criterions importance for the economic constraints (cost) as five (5) with
the reason that the cost for the design is much observed. In sustainability (consistency of supply) it is rank
as four (4) because the consistency of supplying water demand is also been observed. The economic
constraints are much emphasized by the designer due to the clients request rather than the sustainability
constraints of the design.
Economic (Cost)
Based on the table shown (Table 3-1) the initial result for the raw rankings based on trade-off with respect
to economic constraints, the design of ground water as source dominates with the initial estimate on the
table below the cost of well construction is much cheaper compared to the surface water which is the river.
The selection final design with respect to the trade-off would be based on the costs on which design is
cheaper to construct. The cost includes the materials and other related parameters of the design. The two
designs would be again validated on the following chapter.
Sustainability (Consistency of the supply)
As shown in the table above initially the ground water has a capacity of satisfying the variation of the
demand pattern by the use of a submersible pump. The pump is integrated with its cost with respect to its
pumping rate. In the initial ranking the use of submersible pump installed in ground water well at a given
pump rate that can satisfy the water demand is much less costly than the other pump initially.
3.2.1.1 Initial estimates of the design source based on Economic constraints (Cost):
Table: Initial estimate of the ground water design
Source
Cost per Construction per well
Ground Water

10,000,000.00

Table: Initial estimate of the surface water design


Source
Cost per Construction(treatment facility)
River

12,000,000.00

Computation for the Designers ranking (Economic: Surface Water)


Higher cost value: Surface Water = 12,000,000.00
Lower cost value: Ground Water = 10,000,000.00
Governing rank = 5
DIFFERENCE=

( 12,000,00010,000,000 )
=1.67
12,000,000

SUBORDINATE RANK =5( 1.67 ) 10=3.33 3

Figure 3-7: Percentage Difference Line Graph for Sustainability: Surface Water
3.2.1.2 Initial estimates of the design source based on Sustainability constraints (Consistency of
supply):
Table: Initial estimate of pump cost based on ground water
Type
Material Costs
Submersible Pump

160,000.00

Table: Initial estimate of pump cost based on surface water


Type
Material Costs
Booster Pump

200,600.00

Computation for the Designers ranking (Sustainability: Surface Water)


Higher cost value: Surface Water = 200,600.00
Lower cost value: Ground Water = 160,000,000.00
Governing rank = 5
DIFFERENCE =

( 200,600160,000 )
=20.23
200,600

SUBORDINATE RANK =5( 20.23 ) 10=2.977 2

Figure 3-8: Percentage Difference Line Graph for Sustainability: Surface Water

Table 3-2: Raw Designer's Ranking (Water Distribution: Loop system and the combination of loop
and branch system)
Ability to Satisfy the Criterion
(scale from -5 to 5)
Criterion's
Decision Criteria for
Groundwater Source
Surface Water Source
Importance
Sections
(Treatment Facility)
(scale of 0 to 5) (Well Pumping Station)
Loop
Combined
Loop
Combined
System
System
System
System
1. Economic (Cost)

5.0

3.0

5.0

3.0

2.Sustainability
(Consistency of Supply)

4.0

3.0

4.0

3.0

45

27

45

27

*Reference: Otto, K. N. and Antonsson, E. K., (1991). Trade-off strategies in engineering design. Research in Engineering Design, volume 3, number 2,
pages 87-104.Retrieved from http://www.design.caltech.edu/Research/Publications/90e.pdf on March 11, 2013

The table above shows that the designers emphasized the economic constraints in designing the
distribution system by setting the criterions importance as five (5). The designers aim that the design is
economically cheaper than the other. On the other hand the sustainability of the designs has another
importance with the designers. The sustainability of the designs also affects the cost of the design that is
why the designers tend to rank it as four (4).
Economic (Cost)
Based in the table above as initial estimates the loop system on both water sources is much cheaper in
value rather than the combination of the two systems. According to the initial estimates the material costs
on combination of two systems has a great difference with respect to the loop system. The initial estimates
would be validated in the following chapters.
The parameters in selecting the design based on economic constraints are the design that has a low
monetary value with respect to its materials and construction costs.
Sustainability (Consistency of the supply)
In the result of the initial estimates of the distribution of supply system the loop systems satisfy the
sustainability constraints of the design regardless with the rate of pump to be used and the costs of the
pump to be used. The initial estimates well then be validated to prove the authentication of the result on the
previous chapter.

3.2.1.3 Initial estimates of the distribution system in ground water based on Economic constraints
(Cost):
Table 3-3: Initial estimate of Loop System material costs
Type
Material Costs
Loop System Layout
788,824.00
Table 3-4: Initial estimate of Combination of system material costs
Type
Material Costs
Combo System Layout

919,376.80

Computation for the Designers ranking (Economic: Combination of system layout)


Higher cost value: Surface Water = 919,376.80
Lower cost value: Ground Water = 788,824.00
Governing rank = 5
DIFFERENCE=

( 919,376.80788,824.00 )
=1.65
919,376.80

SUBORDINATERANK =5( 1.65 ) 10=3.35 3

Figure 3-9: Percentage Difference Line Graph for Sustainability: Combination of System
3.2.1.4 Initial estimates of the distribution system in surface water based on Economic constraints
(Cost):
Table 3-5: Initial estimate of Loop System material costs
Type
Material Costs
Loop System Layout

803,544.00

Table 3-6: Initial estimate of Combination of system material costs


Type
Material Costs

Combo System Layout

934,096.80

Computation for the Designers ranking (Economic: Combination of system layout)


Higher cost value: Surface Water = 934,096.80
Lower cost value: Ground Water = 803,544.00
Governing rank = 5
DIFFERENCE=

( 934,096.80803,544.00 )
=1.62
803,544.00

SUBORDINATE RANK =5( 1.62 ) 10=3.38 3

Figure 3-10: Percentage Difference Line Graph for Sustainability: Combination of System
3.2.1.5 Initial estimates of the distribution system in ground water based on Sustainability
constraints (consistency of supply):
Table 3-7: Initial estimate of Loop System sustainability costs
Type
Material Costs
Loop System Layout

948,824.00

Table 3-8: Initial estimate of Combination of system sustainability costs


Type
Material Costs
Combo System Layout

1,079,376.80

Computation for the Designers ranking (Sustainability: Combination of system layout)


Higher cost value: Surface Water = 1,079, 376.80
Lower cost value: Ground Water = 948,824.00
Governing rank = 5
DIFFERENCE=

( 1,079,376.80948,824.00 )
=1.375
948,824.00

SUBORDINATE RANK =5( 1.375 ) 10=3.6 3

Figure 3-11: Percentage Difference Line Graph for Sustainability: Combination of System
3.2.1.6 Initial estimates of the distribution system in surface water based on Sustainability
constraints (consistency of supply):
Table 3-9: Initial estimate of Loop System sustainability costs
Type
Material Costs
Loop System Layout

1,004,144.00

Table 3-10: Initial estimate of Combination of system sustainability costs


Type
Material Costs
Combo System Layout

1,134,696.00

Computation for the Designers ranking (Sustainability: Combination of system layout)


Higher cost value: Surface Water = 1,134,696.00
Lower cost value: Ground Water = 1,004,144.00
Governing rank = 5
DIFFERENCE=

( 1,134,696.001,004,144.00 )
=1.13
1,004,144.00

SUBORDINATE RANK =5( 1.13 ) 10=3.87 3

Figure 3-12: Percentage Difference Line Graph for Sustainability: Combination of System
3.2.2 Initial Verdict
The result from the raw designers ranking will be implemented in the construction of the proposed project.
Looking at the criteria of the project, greater magnification is given to the economic, and fair importance is
given in the sustainability constraint of the project. It is because of the greater need of clean water for
human consumption and it is the prior concern of the design, just next to it will be the sustainability of the
design.

The location is found with two potential sources, the ground water and the surface water. Groundwater
often generally referred as wells while surface water are body of water such as river, lakes, streams and
others that sometimes can be man-made. The two are present with the said location, the availability and
the possibility to be used is also considered good for supplying the locations in need.
Based on the data on raw designers ranking the designers will come up with the initial design that will
govern.
The data above has been based with the consideration of multiple constraints that effects the design. In the
design of water supply as source the ground water ranks high based on economic and sustainability.
Whereas in the distribution system the loop system ranks high on both sources which is the ground water
and surface water in consideration to multiple constraints set.
3.3 Design Standards
The project design is all about water resources engineering and is specifically proposing a water supply
system which will disseminate domestic water on households of a certain area covered by the designed
system. The design is based on the three (3) volumes of the Rural Water Supply Manuals: Design Manual
(Volume 1); which introduces the key concepts and considerations involved in the design of small
waterworks facilities, Construction Supervision Manual (Volume 2); which presents the considerations,
requirements, and procedures involved in supervising a waterworks project, and Operation and
Maintenance Manual (Volume 3); which focuses on the small water system as a public utility, and shows
how to effectively manage and sustainably operate a small utility.
The Water Code of the Philippines (P.D. 1067) and its implementing rules and regulations incorporate the
basic water policies. The following are the basic water policies being implemented:
1. The authority and responsibility for the control, conservation, protection, development, and regulation of
the utilization of the countrys water resources belong to the state. These water resources include, among
others, groundwater, surface water, and water in the atmosphere.
2. Priorities in the use and development of water resources shall reflect current water usage and also be
responsive to the changing demands for water occurring under developing conditions.
3. All water development projects shall be undertaken on a multipurpose concept, using the river basin, or
closely related river basin approach. Single-purpose projects shall be implemented only when they are
compatible with the multipurpose concept and can be incorporated into the contemplated basin-wide
development program.
4. The identifiable beneficiaries of water resources development projects shall bear an equitable share of
repayment costs, commensurate with the beneficial use to be derived from the project.
5. A continuing program of basic data collection, manpower development, and research shall be maintained
since these are indispensable components of water resources development.

6. The NWRB shall formulate the guidelines, procedures, programs, rules and regulations to implement the
policies on water resources.

Chapter 2: Design of Structure


4.1 Methodology
The water supply and distribution system was design in accordance with the average daily demand at the
location mentioned on previous chapter. The water supply source is design as groundwater and surface
water. Whereas, the distribution lines is made up of Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) pipes and fittings. The
distribution system are design using the Nodal method and the Hardy cross method with the aide of
EPANET. The design for both supply source and distribution system is in accordance with the Rural Water
Supply Manual as discussed on the previous chapter.
4.2 General Design Process
The general design process is the design process that

Figure 4-13: Design Process


4.3 Trade off based on the design of Source
In evaluating the constraints set by the client the designers come up with the two sources of water supply
which is available on the location, the Ground water and the Surface water. Northville 9 is adjacent to Angat
River. Whereas the availability of ground water is in the location is high.
4.3.1 Design on Groundwater
The design of well that the designers implemented is a deep well specifically, a telescopic type of well
which is compose of screen, submersible pump and motor and casing. The designers implement the said
type of well in order to satisfy the geotechnical property of the location without compromising the water
distribution for the end users. A chlorinator is installed along the pipe which is serves as disinfectant and
treatment. Figure on the components and design of a well is shown on Appendix.

The volume of water that would pump up by the well is based on the computed demand as shown in
Chapter 2. The rate of the pump is based on the pump curve (website) which can be define using the pump
specification. The designers compute the rate of pump by trial and error using EPANET on which pump rate
is appropriate to sustain the peak and average daily demand at Northville-9. The Hydraulic Analysis from
the well pump to the pipe lines and finally to the end user is computed manually by two method which is the
nodal and hardy cross and through the aide of the computer software which is the EPANET.
The integrity of the ground water quality together with other coliforms and minerals are tested as shown in
water quality test in Chapter 2. The test is conducted in order to determine if the ground water is safe to use
for drinking as set as standard by the PNSDW and in order to integrate the cost of treatment that would
take place. The figure below shows the design of ground water well that the designers adopt.

Figure 4-14: Proposed Well Design

4.3.1.1 Design of Distribution System using Loop System for Groundwater


For the design of distribution system using loop system the designers intended to use the following
diameter of the pipe in order to satisfy the inflow outflow together with the discharge needed in every
tapping point of the end users. The main line which is the 200mm pipes are connected through the
pumping station whereas the other pipes are connected using the reducer and valve in order to anticipate
the probable problems in leaking, clogging and intrusion of solids. Flushing point is installed at every end of
the pipe in order to flow off the solid coliforms and unwanted color within the pipe.
The designers did not include the layout for the tapping point from the mainline to the house but the
designers subjected to use PVC pipe as a tapping to the end users. The designers use an antenna type
of connection rom the mainline to the tapping point. Below is shown the design of distribution line from the
pump house and the tabulated data on lengths of pipes per Block and per Alley together with the pipe
diameter.
The following plan in Figure 4-4 shows the distribution of pipes and fittings based on color and legend. The
tabulated values of the pipes are listed in Appendix G.
4.3.1.2 Design of Distribution System using the Combination of Loop and Branch System for
Groundwater
For the design using the combination of Loop and Branch the designer first classify the block that has a low
demand. On that particular block a Branch type of system is used in order to avoid major head loss that
may result with low discharge. Each end of every branch system has an end cap in order to avoid
unwanted leaking through each pipes. Flushing point is also installed at each end of pipes with the same
purpose as the previous design. Reducer and valve is introduced at every interconnection of pipes with
different diameters. The mainline has a diameter of 200mm and interconnected on the pump house while
other pipes are interconnected to the mainline to the end users. Below shown the design for the
combination of Loop and Branch System together with other pipes data.
The following plan in Figure 4-5 shows the distribution of pipes and fittings based on color and legend. The
tabulated values of the pipes are listed in Appendix G.

Figure 4-15: Looped System of Pipes for Groundwater

Figure 4-16: Loop with Branch System Distribution of Pipes for Groundwater
4.3.2 Design on Surface Water
For the design of surface water the designer choose to tap water from the adjacent river using an open
channel which connects the river and the reservoir. The designers use a submersible pump from the
reservoir through the chlorinator down to the mechanical treatment. From mechanical treatment it will flow
through the cistern and then pump up using booster pump. Between the pipes from the cistern to the
booster pump a post chlorinator is introduced before pumping out to the end user. The mechanical
treatment satisfy the area adjacent to the river and the location.

Figure 4-17: Water Facility (perspective)


The designers also introduced a check valve, strainer, and valve and pressure gage before the
interconnection of the service line through the surface water mainline. Strainer is introduced in order to
avoid the intrusion of unwanted solid through the service line. Whereas, the pressure gages is installed in
order to determine if the water can flow throughout the service line of NV9.
In the design of distribution system both of the two is considered the Loop system and the Combination of
the Loop and Branch system. The design of pipe is check using the software EPANET. Below shown the
Design of water supply using Surface Water together with the distribution system using Loop System and
Combination of Loop and Branch System.
4.3.2.1 Design of Distribution System using Loop System
The following plan in Figure 4-6 shows the distribution of pipes and fittings based on color and legend. The
tabulated values of the pipes are listed in Appendix G.
4.3.2.2 Design of Distribution System using the Combination of Loop and Branched
The following plan in Figure 4-7 shows the distribution of pipes and fittings based on color and legend. The
tabulated values of the pipes are listed in Appendix G.

Figure 4-18: Loop System Distribution of Pipes for Surface water

Figure 4-19: Loop with Branch System Distribution of Pipes for Surface water
4.4 Validation of Economic and Sustainability Constraints
After designing the trade-off in here the designers validate those designs in accordance with the effect of
multiple constraints. In here the designers validate based on the raw designers ranking as shown in
previous chapter. The final design to be adopt by the designer would be based on the result on the result of
the validation that will show.
Table 4-11: Designers ranking for Water supply source
Decision Criteria for
Sections

Criterion's
Importance
(scale of 0 to 5)

Ability to Satisfy the Criterion


(scale from -5 to 5)
Groundwater Source
Surface Water Source
(Well Pumping Station)
( Reservoir & Facility)

1. Economic (Cost)

5.0

4.0

2. Sustainability (Operation
and Maintenance)

5.0

4.0

40

32

4.4.1 Estimate Base on Economic


Table 4-12: Estimate of Groundwater (Economic)
GROUND WATER(ECONOMIC)
I. DRILLING OF ONE (1) PRODUCTION WELL
II. MASONRY WORKS
III. CONSTRUCTION OF PUMP HOUSE
IV. ELECTRO-MECHANICAL EQUIPMENTS
V. WATER TREATMENT EQUIPMENTS
VI. CONTIGENCIES (10% OF Direct Cost)
TOTAL COST OF PROJECT:

4,200,000.00
327,890.00
418,927.00
3,476,355.00
373,280.00
929,548.00
9,726,000.00

Table 4-13: Estimate of Surface water (Economic)


SURFACE WATER(ECONOMIC)
3,523,823.44
53,040.00
409,742.44
5,000,000.00
898,660.59
26,959.82
9,912,226.29
4.5.1.1 Computation for the Designers ranking (Economic: Surface Water)
I. MASONRY WORKS
II. CONSTRUCTION OF PUMP HOUSE
III. ELECTRO-MECHANICAL EQUIPMENTS
V. WATER TREATMENT EQUIPMENTS
VII. CONTIGENCIES (10% OF Direct Cost)
VIII. LABOR COSTS
TOTAL COST OF PROJECT:

Higher cost value: Surface Water = 9,912,226.29.30

Lower cost value: Ground Water = 9,726,000.00


Governing rank = 5
PERCENT DIFFERENCE=

9,912,226.299,726,000.00
x 10=0.191 roundup 1.
9,726,000.00

SUBORDINATE RANK =51=4


The governing rank is to be subtracted to percent difference and then plot with the percent difference line
graph which is scaled from -5 to +5. As shown in the figure below.

Figure 4-20: Percentage Difference Line Graph for Economic: Surface Water
4.4.2 Estimate Base on Economic
Table 4-14: Estimate of Groundwater (Sustainability)
GROUNDWATER(SUSTAINABILITY)
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
I. PUMP
SUBMERSIBLE PUMP
1
160,000.00
SUBMERSIBLE MOTOR
1
210,000.00

Table 4-15: Estimate of Surface water (Sustainability)


SURFACE WATER(SUSTAINABILITY)
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
BOOSTER PUMP
SUBMERSIBLE PUMP
SUBMERSIBLE MOTOR

1
1
1

39,742.44
160,000.00
210,000.00

4.5.1.1 Computation for the Designers ranking (Economic: Surface Water)


Higher cost value: Surface Water = 409,742.44
Lower cost value: Ground Water = 370,000,000.00

AMOUNT
160,000.00
210,000.00
370,000.00

AMOUNT
39,742.44
160,000.00
210,000.00
409,742.44

Governing rank = 5
Percent Difference=

409,742.44370,000.00
x 10=1.07 roundup 1.
370,000.00

SUBORDINATE RANK =51=4


The governing rank is to be subtracted to percent difference and then plot with the percent difference line
graph which is scaled from -5 to +5. As shown in the figure below.

Figure 4-21: Percentage Difference Line Graph for Sustainability: Surface Water
Table 4-16: Designers ranking for distribution system

Decision Criteria for


Sections

Criterion's
Importance
(scale of 0 to 5)

Ability to Satisfy the Criterion


(scale from -5 to 5)
Groundwater Source
Surface Water Source
(Well Pumping Station)
(Reservoir & Facility)
Loop
Combined
Loop
Combined
System
System
System
System

1. Economic (Cost)

5.0

3.0

5.0

4.0

2. Sustainability (Consistent
Supply)

5.0

3.0

5.0

2.0

40

24

40

Table 4-17: Sustainability of distribution system in ground water source


GROUND WATER
COMBINATION OF SYSTEMS
LOOP SYSTEM

20

DESCRIPTION
1. PIPES
2. PUMPS
TOTAL COSTS:

DESCRIPTIO
AMOUNT
N
1266.98 1. PIPES
2,761,048 2. PUMPS
TOTAL
2,762,314.98 COSTS:

AMOUNT
568202.58
2,761,048.00
3,329,250.58

Computation for the Designers ranking (Economic: Combination of Systems)


Higher cost value: Loop System = 3,329,250.58
Lower cost value: Combination of Systems= 2,762,314.98
Governing rank = 5
3,329,250.582,762,314.98
Percent Difference=
x 10=2.05 roundup 2.
2,762,314.98
Subordinate Rank: 5-2 = 3
Table 4-18: Sustainability of distribution system in surface water source
SURFACE WATER
COMBINATION OF SYSTEMS
LOOP SYSTEM
DESCRIPTIO
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
N
AMOUNT
1. PIPES
1,958,456.31 1. PIPES
1,132,863.76
2. PUMPS
409,742.44 2. PUMPS
409,742.44
TOTAL
TOTAL COSTS:
2,368,198.75 COSTS:
1,542,606.2
Computation for the Designers ranking (Economic: Loop of Systems)
Higher cost value: Loop System = 3,329,250.58
Lower cost value: Combination of Systems= 2,762,314.98
Governing rank = 5
Percent Difference=

2,368,198.751,542,606.2
x 10=3.48 roundup 3.
2,368,198.75
Subordinate Rank: 5-3= 2

4.5 Influence of Multiple constraints, standards and trade-offs in the final design

The multiple constraints, standards and trade-off affect and influence the decision in choosing the final
design. The constraints provide limitations on the design as well as selections of methodology and other
type designs. The trade-off set in source which is the ground water and surface water together with the
trade-off in distribution system which is the loop and the combination of loop and branch system.
In accordance with the economic constraints the surface water and ground water is being compared with
respect to its cost in construction and materials. On the other hand, the two types of distribution system, the
loop and the combination of loop and the branch has also been evaluated based on the cost of materials
such as pipes and fittings without sacrificing the standards set in the said design.
With respect to the sustainability constraints of both sources the designers compared the rate of the pump
to be used. The pumps are compared according to its costs and ability to sustain the variation of the
demand and discharges needed. With regards to the distribution line the designers integrate the rate of the
pump on each water supply sources together with the two type of distribution system set and compared
with respect to its cost value.
4.5.1 Water Supply Source: Ground water and Surface water
The designers presented two sources of water supply in Northville 9 the ground water and the surface
water. The two sources are assessed and compared based on its construction and material cost, based on
its sustainability on how the two sources would satisfy the demand variations.
4.5.2 Distribution System: Loop System and Combination of Loop and Branch System
The designers also presented two types of distribution system from the source to the end users. These are
the loop system and the combination of loop and branch system. The two systems are compared based on
its material costs together with its ability to sustain the sufficient flow on each pipes with respect with the
effect of the minor and major head losses.
4.5.2.1 Economic Constraints
As a guide to the designers on what trade off to choose on both water supply and distribution system the
data is plot with respect to its construction and material costs. Both trade-offs are estimated based on its
individual designs, material components and parameters. The graph below shows the comparison of two
sources: ground water and surface water

Ground Water
Surface Water

Figure 4-22: Cost Difference between Groundwater and Surface water


The evaluation for the two sources (table) has a cost difference of186, 226.29 Php. which is in favor of
ground water. The reason is that the surface water requires a larger area for the facility compared with the
ground water. On the other hand the design of ground water is a direct pump system which means that
there is no booster pump needed in where the surface water has.
With regard on the distribution system, both systems are estimated based on cost with respect to its pipe
materials, pipe diameter and fittings. It has been estimated based on its design layout: loop system and
combination of two design systems which is the loop and the branch system. The difference in cost is the
plotted below.

Loop System
Combination of Loop
and Branch System

Figure 4-23: Difference based on economic constraints in ground water

Loop System
Combination of Loop
and Branch System

Figure 4-24: Difference based on economic constraints in surface water


As shown in the figure above the combination of loop and branch system obtains a lower cost rather than
the loop system. The reason is that the loop system has a greater number of pipes rather than the
combination of loop and branch. Loop system passes on each road blocks in order to avoid head loss due
to its parallel design of pipe and connections of pipes at each ends. Due to that design, the number of pipes
and fittings are greater in number rather than the combination of the two systems.

4.5.2.2 Sustainability Constraints


One of the bases of the designers in choosing the final design is the sustainability of the design. The two
trade-offs on source is plotted based on its sustainability to meet the demand requirement on each pipes.
The two is compared based on the rate of the pump that is installed and then integrated with the cost of the
pump that is installed.

Ground Water

Surface Water

Figure 4-25: Graph of two sources based on sustainability constraints


Based on the figure above the ground water obtains the low value of sustainability that has been integrated
as cost. The reason is that the designers adapt a design which is direct distribution type of well at a pump
rate of 150 gpm. The cost still varies due to the two type of pump installed in the surface water. In the
design of the surface water a submersible and booster pump is installed at a rate of 16 gpm and 90 gpm
respectively.
The two pumps are integrated as cost and joined together then compared to the cost of a
pump installed in ground water well.
With the aide of the raw designers ranking and validations of the two water source trade-off the designers
has now a basis to be consider on what to adapt in the final design of water supply.

Loop System

Loop and Branch

Figure 4-26: Graph of two distribution system in ground water and surface water based in
sustainability
Likewise in the distribution system the designers compared its sustainability based on the rate of the pump
itself together with the design layout of each distribution system. The two systems will be integrated based
on the cost of pipe and fittings layout on each pipe together with the rate of the pump installed on each
distribution system. The figure above shown the plotted values in distribution system compared.
In the graph above, the verdict based on estimates with respect to sustainability of the distribution system
design with respect to the ground water the both systems are capable in sustaining the demand pattern of
the location. Whereas with respect to the costs integrated to its sustainability design the use of combination
layout has less value in surface water as source whereas in ground water as source the design of loop
system is appropriate design to meet the constraints set.
To sum it up, using ground water as the water source is more economic friendly compared to surface water
because the latter requires a larger area compared to the former. It also does not require a booster pump
that will help in lessening the cost.
With regard to the distribution system, the combination of loop and branched system is more economic
friendly compared to loop system alone. Because the loop system will require greater number of pipes
compared to the combination of loop and branched system. It will also help in avoiding head loss because
of the parallel design of pipes and its connections.
While in terms of sustainability, based on the graphs above, it shows that both the distribution systems are
capable in sustaining the water demand of the location.
The Trade-offs in source of water supply and the trade-off in distribution system have advantages and
disadvantages on both constraints.

CHAPTER 5:

Final Design

As discussed in the previous chapter the design of a water supply and distribution system must be in
accordance with the multiple constraints, trade-off and standards. After assessing the trade-off based on
source and distribution system with respect on its economic and sustainability constraints and ranking it
based on designers raw ranking the designers come up with the final design to be implemented. Both
designs (Design of source and design for distribution system) have satisfied the constraints and the
standard set by the client.
In the design, the designers found out that the use of ground water as source is more economical and
sustainable for the design period of five years. Whereas with the design of water distribution system the
designers found out that the loop system satisfies more the constraints set. The final design for ground
water as source and combination of loop and branch system as type of distribution system can be seen in
Appendix A and in figure and table below.
With respect to the figures and tables provided on the previous chapter, it shows that using ground water is
more advisable to be used as the main water source of Northville 9 in terms of cost. And since both
distribution systems could sustain the water needs of the community, therefore, we conclude that the
community could use ground water as their main water source with the use of the loop system as the
distribution system since both are satisfying the economic and sustainability criteria required for the
implementation of this project design.
The tables and figures above have shown the Final Design of the Water Source and the Distribution
System:
Final Design for ground water as source:

Figure 5-1: Components and Design of a Well

Figure 0-27: Groundwater design of pipes using Loop System


Table 0-19: Pipes Running on Road Lots for Loop System on Groundwater
ROAD LOT/BLOCK
Road lot 1/Block 2
Road lot 2/Block 9
Road lot 3/Block 10
Road lot 4/Block 14 17

PIPE
LENGTH
(in linear
meters,
Lm)
63
125
115
184

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
200
200
200
150

Road lot 5/Block 18


Road lot 6/Block 19

25
188

150
200

Road lot 7/Block 20 22


Road lot 8/Block 23
Road lot 9/Block 7
Road lot 10/Block 31
Road lot 11/Block 28 30
Road lot 12/Block 35 37
Road lot 13/Block 34 36
Road lot 14/Block 41
Road lot 15/Block 40

60
207
97
99
104
112
100
125
96

100
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150

ROAD LOT/BLOCK
Road lot 16/Block 45
Road lot 17/Block 46
Road lot 18/Block 50
Road lot 19/Block 48
49
Road lot 20/Block 59
Road lot 21/Block 51
58
Road lot 22/Block 63
Road lot 23/Block 62
Road lot 24/Block 66
Road lot 25/Block 74
Road lot 26/Block 75
Road lot 27/Block 77
Road lot 28/Block 76
Road lot 29/Block 87
Road lot 30/Block 88

PIPE
LENGTH
(in linear
meters,
Lm)
162
8
228
52

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
150
200
200
200

225
86

150
150

146
80
138
138
220
44
162
65
158

100
150
100
150
150
150
100
100
100

Table 0-20: Pipes Running on Alleys


ALLEY
Alley 1
Alley 2
Alley 3
Alley 4
Alley 5
Alley 6
Alley 7
Alley 9
Alley 10
Alley 11
Alley 12
Alley 13
Alley 14
Alley 15
Alley 18
Alley 19
Alley 20
Alley 21
Alley 22
Alley 23
Alley 24
Alley 25
Alley 26
Alley 27

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
92
24
37
31
26
90
138
24
29
30
35
79
98
111
115
29
110
114
115
114
123
127
110
109

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
100
75
75
75
75
100
100

75
75
75
100
100
100
75

100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

ALLEY
Alley 30
Alley 31
Alley 32
Alley 33
Alley 34
Alley 35
Alley 36
Alley 37
Alley 38
Alley 39
Alley 40
Alley 41
Alley 42
Alley 43
Alley 44
Alley 45
Alley 46
Alley 47
Alley 48
Alley 49
Alley 50
Alley 51
Alley 52
Alley 53

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
53
64
97
57
97
54
97
28
85
97
97
97
55
55
55
55
55
55
39
42
45
50
55
60

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75

ALLEY
Alley 28
Alley 29

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
76
59

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
100
75

ALLEY
Alley 54
Alley 55

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
33
33

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
75
75

References:
Reference Books for the Design and Computations:
(APA), American Psychological Association. (2013). Retrieved from APA Style: http://www.apastyle.org
Otto, K. N., & Antonsson, E. K. (1991). Trade-off Strategies in Engineering Design: Researches in
Engineering Design (Vol. 3).
Rural Water Supply Design Manual Volume 1(VOLUME I: DESIGN MANUAL.)
Annex B, Using EPANET, pg.174-200
Annex C, Design Criteria and Standards, pg.201
Rural Water Supply Design Manual Volume 2(CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION MANUAL.)
Water Code of the Philippines (Implementing Rules and Regulation)
Plumbing Code of the Philippines
Department of Health. (2007, March 9). Philippine National Standards for Drinking Water (Administrative
Order No. 2007-0012). DOH.
Local Water Utilities Administration. (1975). Inspectors Construction Manual. LWUA.
American Water Works Association. (1986). Principles and Practices of Water Supply Operations (Vol. 3):
Introduction to Water Distribution. AWWA.
On-Site Wastewater Treatment: Educational Materials Handbook. National Small Flows Clearinghouse.
West Virginia University, 1987.
Reference for pump curve (data used in EPANET):
GRUNDFOS PRODUCT GUIDE
SP Submersible pumps, motors, and accessories 60 Hz
GRUNDFOS PRODUCT GUIDE
BoosterpaQ Hydro MPC
Booster sets with 2 to 6 pumps
60 Hz
Reference for elevations/topomaps:
Google Earth (allowed by Rural Water Supply Volume I Design Manual pg.129)

"Another source is the Google Earth (http://earth.google.com) internet site which makes it possible to view
and print aerial images of the area being designed. Aside from the aerial images of houses, streets, rivers
and other objects, Google Earth also gives spot elevations."

Appendices

Appendix A: Design Criteria


Annex C, pg.201, Design Criteria and Standards
DEMAND PROJECTIONS
Design Period
10 years
Minimum Demand
0.3 ADD
Average Day Demand (ADD)
Design Population x per capita consumption/1 NRW
Maximum Day Demand (MDD)
1.3 ADD
Peak Hour Demand (PHD)
3 x ADD for < 1,000 served population
2.5 x ADD for > 1,000 served population
6. Non-Revenue Water
15% for a new system
7. Households per Public faucet
4 6 HHs
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

1. Level II
2. Level III

1. Pump THD
2. Pump Capacity

PER CAPITA WATER CONSUMPTION


50 60 lpcd
Domestic
:
Institutional
:
Commercial
:

80 100 lcpd
1.0 m3/day or actual
0.80 m3/day or actual

DESIGN OF PUMP
Depth of Pumping water level + maximum reservoir high
water level + friction losses
Max Day Demand / operating hours

DESIGN OF DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM


1. Minimum line pressure
3 meters
2. Maximum line pressure
70 meters
3. Maximum velocity of flow in
Transmission Line
pipes
Distribution Pipes

=
=

3.0 m/s
1.5 m/s

Appendix B: Codes and Notations


RURAL WATER SUPPLY DESIGN MANUAL VOLUME I
Government and Other Organizations
LWUA Local Water Utilities Administration
NWRB National Water Resources Board (formerly NWRC)
NWRC National Water Resources Council
Acronyms and Abbreviation
AC
alternating current
ADD
average daily demand
AL
allowable leakage
BOD
Biological Oxygen Demand
CAPEX capital expenditure
CBO
Community-Based Organization
cc
cubic centimeter
CIP
cast iron pipe
cm
centimeter
COD
chemical oxygen demand
CPC
Certificate of Public Conveyance
CT
Contact Time
cumecs cubic meters per second
dam
dekameter
Dep
depreciation expenses
D or diam diameter
dm
decimeter
Elev
elevation
EV
equivalent volume
F/A
Force/Area
g
grams
G.I. pipe Galvanized iron pipe
GPM
gallons per minute
HGL
hydraulic grade line
hm
hectometer
HP
horsepower

HTH
IDHL
kg
kgf
km
kPa
KPIs
LGUs
Lm
Lpcd
Lps
m
2
m
3
m
3
m /d
MaxNI
MDD
mg/l
mm
mld
mm/hr
MOA
2
N/m
NGO
NPSH
NPSHa
NPSHr
NRW
NTU
O&M
OD
Opex
Pa
PE pipe
PEER
PNS
PNSDW
psi
PVC pipe
PWL
ROI
RR
RWSA
SCBA
SMAW

High-Test Hypochlorite
Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health
kilograms
kilogram force
kilometer
kilopascals
Key performance indicator
Local Government Units
linear meter
liters per capita per day
liter per second
meter
square meter
cubic meter
cubic meters per day
maximum allowable net income
maximum day demand
milligrams per liter
millimeter
million liters per day
million liters per hour
Memorandum of Agreement
Newtons per square meter
Non-Government Organization
net positive suction head
net positive suction head available
net positive suction head requirement
non-revenue water
Nephelometric turbidity unit
operation and maintenance
outside diameter
operational expenses
Pascal
polyethylene pipe
property and equipment entitled to return
Philippine National Standards
Philippine National Standards for Drinking Water
pounds per square inch
polyvinyl chloride pipe
pumping water level
return on investment
revenue requirements
Rural Water & Sanitation Association
self-contained breathing apparatus
shielded metal arc welding

SSWP
SWL
TDH
TDS
VC
VIM
Wc
Wcm
WHP
WL

Small-Scale Water Provider


static water level
total dynamic head
total dissolved solids
volume container
variation in mass
container
container + material
water horsepower
water level

SCOPES:
This Chapter presents the major considerations in the design of successful small water
supply systems such as are appropriate to serve the populations in rural areas and small
towns in the Philippines.
A

THE PHILIPPINE WATER SECTOR EXPERIENCE


Demand Based Design
Phased Design
Use of Updated Technology
Operational Autonomy
Tariff Design and Public Consultation
Institutional Development Practices
Monitoring System

CONSIDERATIONS FOR A SUSTAINABLE SYSTEM


Technical Considerations
Financial Considerations
Social Considerations
Environmental Considerations

THE WATER SYSTEM DESIGN PROCESS


Service Level
Water Demand Projections
Facilities Designs
Capital Investment and O&M Costs
Tariff Design
Design Iterations
Plans and Design Specifications

D DESIGN OUTPUTS
Engineers report
General Layout

Detailed Plans
Specifications
Bill of Quantities and Cost Estimates

WATER DEMAND
This Chapter describes the method of determining the water volumes needed by a new small water utility
project to supply the population it intends to cover.
Water demands are influenced by the following factors:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Service levels to be implemented;


Size of the community;
Standard of living of the populace;
Quantity and quality of water available in the area;
Water tariffs that need to be shouldered by the consumers;
Climatological conditions;
Habits and manners of water usage by the people

SERVICE LEVEL DEFINITIONS


Water service levels are classified in the Philippines under three types3, depending on the method by which
the water is made available to the consumers:

Level I (Point Source) This level provides a protected well or a developed spring with an outlet,
but without a distribution system. The users go to the source to fetch the water. This is generally
adaptable for rural areas where affordability is low and the houses in the intended service area are
not crowded. A Level I facility normally serves an average of 15 households within a radius
of 250 meters.

Level II (Communal Faucet System or Stand Posts) This type of system is composed of a source,
a reservoir, a piped distribution network, and communal faucets. Usually, one faucet serves four to
six households within a radius of 25 meters. It is generally suited for rural and urban fringe areas
where houses are clustered in sufficient density to justify a simple piped system. The consumers
still go to the supply point (communal faucet) to fetch the water.

Level III (Waterworks System or Individual House Connections) This system includes a
source, a reservoir, a piped distribution network, and individual household taps. It is generally
suited for densely populated urban areas where the population can afford individual connections.

DESIGN PERIOD
Ten-year design period
Advantages The water system facilities are capable of meeting the demand over a longer period.
No major investment cost is expected during the 10year design period.
Disadvantages The higher initial capital cost will require initial tariffs to be set higher.

DESIGN POPULATION
1

Projecting Annual Municipal And Barangay Growth Rates


1+GR

P present

P past =

Pn=

Projecting Municipal And Barangay Populations


1+GR

Po

3 Projecting the Population Served


Determining the actual potential users involves but is not limited to the following activities:
a
b
c
d

Preparation of base maps;


Ocular inspection to gain familiarity with the physical and socio-economic conditions of the
potential service area. Note that population densities must be estimated;
Delineation of the proposed service area (where the pipes are to be laid);
Determination and assessment of the level of acceptance by the residents of the planned
water system. A market survey is recommended, in which one of the questions to be asked
is if the respondent is willing to avail of the service, and how much is the respondent willing
to pay per month for a Level II or a Level III service;
Assessment of the availability and abundance/scarcity of alternative water sources, such
as private shallow wells, dug wells, surface waters, etc.

WATER CONSUMPTIONS
1

Unit Consumptions
Unit consumption for domestic water demand is expressed in per capita consumption per day. The
commonly used unit is liters per capita per day (lpcd). If no definitive data are available, the unit

consumption assumptions recommended for Level II and Level III domestic usages in rural areas
are as follows:

Level II Public Faucets: 50 - 60 lpcd (Each public faucet should serve 4 - 6 households)
Level III House Connections: 80 - 100 lpcd

If there are public schools and health centers in the area, they will be supplied from the start of
systems operation and be classified as institutional connections.
Commercial establishments can also be assumed to be served, after consultation with the
stakeholders, within the 5-year period. The unit consumptions of institutional and commercial
connections are, in terms of daily consumption per connection, usually expressed in cubic meters
per day (m3/d). Unless specific information is available on the consumptions of these types of
connections, the following unit consumptions for commercial and institutional connections can be
used.

Institutional Connections: 1.0 m3/d


Commercial Connections: 0.8 m3/d

This unit consumption can be assumed to be constant during the design period under
consideration, unless available information indicates otherwise.
2

Total Consumption
The total consumption is the sum of the domestic, institutional and commercial consumptions
expressed in m3/d.
a. Domestic Consumption:
The year-by-year total domestic consumption is projected by applying the projected unit
consumption to the projected population to be served for each year. The served population is
estimated by employing the market survey results and the planners judgment of the potential of
the area.
b. Institutional and Commercial Consumption:
After having considered the possible timing and number of institutional and commercial
connections, the projected yearly consumptions for each category are estimated by applying the
corresponding projected unit consumptions as presented in the preceding section.

NON-REVENUE WATER (NRW)


Non-revenue water is the amount of water that is produced but not billed as a result of leaks, pilferages,
free water, utility usages, etc. An allowance should be made for this category; otherwise, the designed
source capacity would not be sufficient to supply the required consumption of paying customers.
In actual operation, the NRW should be a cause of concern and should be subject to measures to keep it
as low as possible. For planning purposes, however, a conservative approach should be adopted. The

water demand projection should assume that the NRW of the new system will be fifteen percent (15%) of
the estimated consumptions. The plans figure can be increased up to a total of 20% at the end of 10 years.
These assumed NRW figures require good maintenance of utilities, pro-active leakage prevention, and no
illegal connections for 100% recovery of supplied water.
WATER DEMAND
The water demand is a summation of all the consumptions given in the preceding sections and will
determine the capacity needed from the source/s. The average daily water demand, also known as the
average day demand, is calculated (in m3/day or lps) from the estimated water consumptions and the
allowance for the NRW (expressed as a percentage).
A system with consumption of 2 lps with a 15% NRW will have an average day demand equal to
2.4 lps=
1

2 lps
(1NRW )

Demand Variations and Demand Factors

Water demand varies within the day and also within the year. This demand variation is dependent on the
consumption pattern of the locality and is measured by four demand conditions which are:

Minimum day demand: The minimum amount of water required in a single day over a year.
Average day demand: The average of the daily water requirement spread in a year.
Maximum day demand: The maximum amount of water required in a single day over a year.
Peak hour demand: The highest hourly demand in a day.

Uses of the Demand Variations

Minimum day demand: The pipe network system is analyzed under a minimum demand
condition to check on possible occurrence of excessive static pressures that the system might
not be able to withstand. No point in the transmission and distribution system should be
subjected to pressure more than 70 m.

Average day demand: Annual estimates and projections on production, revenues, non-revenue
water, power costs, and other O&M costs are based on the average day demand.

Maximum day demand: The total capacity of all existing and future water sources should be
capable of supplying at least the projected maximum day demand at any year during the design
period. The design of treatment plants, pump capacity and pipelines considers the maximum
day demand supply rate as an option in the optimization analysis.

Peak hour demand: The pipeline network should be designed to operate with no point in the
system having pressure below 3 meters during peak hour conditions. If there is no reservoir,
the power ratings of pumping stations should be sufficient for the operation of the facilities
during peak hour demands.

Appendix C: Computation of Population and Demand


WATER DEMAND COMPUTATION:
Residential Water Consumption
Home Uses

Daily water use per person


Gallons

Percent

Toilet

32

45

Bathing/Personal Hygiene

21

30

Laundry/Dishes

14

20

Drinking/Cooking

Total

70

100

Reference: On-Site Wastewater Treatment: Educational Materials Handbook. National Small Flows
Clearinghouse. West Virginia University, 1987.
After getting the water consumed per individual, multiply it to the total number of consumers to get the
water demand per day of the whole community.
Years
1990
2000
2010
2020
2030

Population
59042
81113
101068
127620
145647

GR
WD
3.71%
2.75%
1.03% 560000gallons/day= 2119.8296 m3/day
2.36% 8933400 gallons/day= 33816.58169 m3/day
1.33352 10195290 gallons/day= 38593.35272

Northville 9

WD

2010

8000

3.71%

Consumed per individual

70 gallons/day=0.26m3/day

2020

11516

3.71%

Number of people

8000=30.28328m3/day

2030

16577

3.71%

Total consumption

560,000 gallons/day = 2119.8296m3/day


204400000 gal/year = 773738 m3/year

1 gal =
1 gal =

3.78541 li
0.00378541 m3

Appendix D: Manual Computation of Discharge using Hardy-Cross Method

Figure 0-28: Phase 2 (Left Portion of Northville 9)

Table 0-21: Final Discharge on each Pipes


Pipe
Q
Pipe
Q
74
2.2
86
3.2
75
2.2
87
1.7
76
2.2
88
1.7
77
2.2
89
0.2
78
2.2
90
0.1
79
1.1
91
-1.3
80
1.6
92
0.4
81
-0.4
93
0.4
82
1.2
94
2.2
83
0.1
95
1.1
84
0.2
96
1.4
85
-2.1
97
-1.6
Table 0-22: Solution on Computation of Discharges

Pipe
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109

Q
-1.1
0.1
0.4
1.7
2.2
0.5
-0.5
-1.5
1.9
2.9
2.9
-1.3

Pipe
110

Q
0.4

n
n-1

1.85
0.85

Pipe

kQ

kQ

74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96

340
232
882
890
176700
177072
167017
169865
110428
165011
165185
2373
8560
203917
200302
200549
1847
8300
695
690
267
227
155

2.17
1.09
1.09
1.09
1.09
1.09
1.09
1.09
1.16
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.09
1.09
1.09

657.06
249.83
948.84
957.83
190129.77
190529.49
179710.61
182775.07
125276.73
255165.79
255433.86
3669.48
13236.06
315328.70
309737.49
310120.45
2856.22
12835.33
1075.29
1066.39
258.16
251.01
155.74

1425.811
272.314
1034.240
1044.029
207241.454
207677.140
195884.564
199224.826
145321.002
426126.867
426574.547
6128.034
22104.225
526598.923
517261.609
517901.151
4769.894
21434.996
1795.740
1780.864
313.540
266.385
181.864

2.17
2.17
2.17
2.17
2.17
1.07
1.62
-0.41
1.16
0.05
0.17
0.05
3.20
1.66
1.67
0.17
0.05
0.17
0.52
0.52
2.17
1.06
1.62

Pipe
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110

K
66
239
882
576
186929
234
211
209
212
237
214
202
220
534

Q
1.09
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.09
1.09
1.09
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67

kQ
66.91
245.48
1364.16
890.96
289057.69
251.98
227.31
224.91
328.50
366.13
330.50
312.86
340.49
825.33

kQ
77.351
616.289
2278.145
1487.898
482726.338
274.658
247.771
245.151
548.589
611.432
551.928
522.480
568.626
1378.302

Table 0-23: Solution on Computation of Discharge (2nd Distribution)


n
n-1

Q
-0.53
0.05
0.05
0.52
1.67
2.17
1.07
-0.41
0.17
3.20
1.66
1.66
0.17
0.52
1.85
0.85

Pipe

kQ

kQ

74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94

340
232
882
890
176700
177072
167017
169865
110428
165011
165185
2373
8560
203917
200302
200549
1847
8300
695
690
267

2.17
2.17
2.17
2.17
2.17
1.07
1.62
-0.41
1.16
0.05
0.17
0.05
3.20
1.66
1.67
0.17
0.05
0.17
0.52
0.52
2.17

1425.81
447.90
1701.13
1717.34
340873.08
187171.86
251556.56
169865.21
125276.73
13024.06
36265.72
201.65
23026.08
314360.21
309848.38
44161.91
136.68
1827.78
397.63
394.34
515.71

1425.811
970.280
3685.100
3720.503
738421.942
199794.149
407286.203
169865.208
145321.002
656.710
6092.871
11.091
73761.870
523085.130
517664.734
7445.649
6.388
308.162
206.022
204.316
1117.173

2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.1
1.6
-0.4
1.2
0.1
0.2
-1.0
3.2
1.7
1.7
0.2
0.1
-1.3
0.4
0.4
2.2

Pipe
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110

K
227
155
66
239
882
576
186929
234
211
209
212
237
214
202
220
534

Q
1.06
1.62
-0.53
0.05
0.05
0.52
1.67
2.17
1.07
-0.41
0.17
3.20
1.66
1.66
0.17
0.52

kQ
238.53
233.55
65.95
18.84
65.28
329.47
289057.69
451.79
223.31
209.02
46.64
636.93
329.48
311.90
48.49
305.20

kQ
252.686
378.135
65.952
0.950
3.051
170.704
482726.338
978.769
238.366
209.023
7.836
2040.350
548.245
518.993
8.175
158.131

Q
1.1
1.4
-1.6
-1.1
0.1
0.4
1.7
2.2
0.5
-0.5
-1.5
1.9
2.9
2.9
-1.3
0.4

Appendix E: Manual Computation of Discharge using Nodal Method

Figure 0-29: Phase 2 (Left Portion of Northville 9)


Table 0-24: Computation on Pipe Discharges
Pipe #

L (m)

d (mm)

d (m)

q(l/s)

q (m/s)

74

28.93

150

0.15

0.040

0.04

0.00

9.81

3.14159

hf
(m3/s)
0.0201

Pipe #

L (m)

d (mm)

d (m)

q(l/s)

q (m/s)

75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110

19.75
75.01
75.72
71.35
71.50
67.44
68.59
44.59
66.63
66.70
28.02
101.07
82.34
80.88
80.98
21.81
98.01
59.15
58.66
22.74
19.32
13.19
5.61
20.30
75.04
49.01
75.48
19.92
17.97
17.78
18.07
20.14
18.18
17.21
18.73
45.40

150
150
150
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
100
100
50
50
50
100
100
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
50
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150

0.15
0.15
0.15
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.10
0.10
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.05
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15

0.023
0.027
0.027
0.034
0.040
0.035
0.040
0.034
0.035
0.039
0.031
0.034
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.032
0.038
0.033
0.037
0.025
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.027
0.029
0.031
0.039
0.028
0.028
0.029
0.030
0.029
0.031
0.033
0.041
2.202

2.17
0.84
0.75
0.06
-0.02
0.06
-0.02
0.06
0.05
-0.03
0.25
0.11
-0.06
-0.06
-0.06
0.18
0.05
0.22
0.10
1.27
1.16
1.05
0.96
0.87
0.56
0.31
0.03
0.68
0.60
0.51
0.43
0.46
0.33
0.20
0.08
0.00

0.22
0.08
0.08
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.03
0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.13
0.12
0.11
0.10
0.09
0.06
0.03
0.00
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.05
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00

9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81

3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159
3.14159

hf
(m3/s)
23.2745
15.5492
12.5130
23.0912
3.0248
22.4678
2.9017
14.4308
15.4152
6.1902
4.4857
3.4356
27.4317
26.1755
26.2078
1.8684
0.7693
1.0280
0.2362
9.9771
7.3547
4.1140
1.4627
4.5140
7.4256
1.5887
7.0050
2.8063
1.9709
1.4593
1.0906
1.3447
0.6678
0.2472
0.0535
0.0000

Appendix F: Computation Using Epanet


Groundwater
Loop System

Figure 0-30: Nodal Plan for Northville 9 (Groundwater - Loop System)

Table 0-25: Demand for Northville 9 (Ground water - Loop System)

Figure 0-31: Pipe Plan for Northville 9 (Groundwater - Loop System)

Table 0-26: Tabulation of Computed Velocities for Northville 9 (Groundwater Loop System)

Table 0-27: Tabulation of Computed Headloss (Groundwater - Loop System)

Loop and Branch System

Figure 0-32: Nodal Plan of Northville 9 (Groundwater - Combined system)

Table 0-28: Tabulation of Velocities for Northville 9 (Groundwater - Combined System)

Figure 0-33: Pipe Plan for Northville 9 (Groundwater - Combination System)

Table 0-29: Tabilation of Headloss for Northville 9 (Groundwater - Combined System)

Surface Water
Loop System

Figure 0-34: Nodal Plan for Northville 9 (Surface water - Loop System)

Table 0-30: Tabulation of Demand for Northville 9 (Surface water - Loop System)

Figure 0-35: Pipe Plan for Northville 9 (Surface water - Loop System)

Table 0-31: Tabulation of Velocities for Northville 9 (Surface water - Loop System)

Table 0-32: Tabulation of Headloss for Northville 9 (Surface water - Loop System)

Loop and Branch System

Figure 0-36: Nodal Plan for Northville 9 (Surface water - Combined System)

Figure 0-37: Nodal Plan for Northville 9 (Surface water - Combined System)

Table 0-33: Tabulated Velocties for Northville 9 (Surface water - Combined System)

Table 0-34: Tabilation of Headloss for Northville 9 (Surface water - Combined System)

Appendix G: Pipe Assignment


Groundwater
Loop System
Table 0-35: Pipes Running on Road Lots for Loop System on Groundwater
ROAD LOT/BLOCK
Road lot 1/Block 2
Road lot 2/Block 9
Road lot 3/Block 10
Road lot 4/Block 14 17

PIPE
LENGTH
(in linear
meters,
Lm)
63
125
115
184

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
200
200
200
150

Road lot 5/Block 18


Road lot 6/Block 19

25
188

150
200

Road lot 7/Block 20 22


Road lot 8/Block 23
Road lot 9/Block 7
Road lot 10/Block 31
Road lot 11/Block 28 30
Road lot 12/Block 35 37
Road lot 13/Block 34 36
Road lot 14/Block 41
Road lot 15/Block 40

60
207
97
99
104
112
100
125
96

100
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150

ROAD LOT/BLOCK
Road lot 16/Block 45
Road lot 17/Block 46
Road lot 18/Block 50
Road lot 19/Block 48
49
Road lot 20/Block 59
Road lot 21/Block 51
58
Road lot 22/Block 63
Road lot 23/Block 62
Road lot 24/Block 66
Road lot 25/Block 74
Road lot 26/Block 75
Road lot 27/Block 77
Road lot 28/Block 76
Road lot 29/Block 87
Road lot 30/Block 88

PIPE
LENGTH
(in linear
meters,
Lm)
162
8
228
52

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
150
200
200
200

225
86

150
150

146
80
138
138
220
44
162
65
158

100
150
100
150
150
150
100
100
100

Table 0-36: Pipes Running on Alleys


ALLEY
Alley 1
Alley 2
Alley 3
Alley 4
Alley 5
Alley 6
Alley 7
Alley 9
Alley 10
Alley 11
Alley 12
Alley 13
Alley 14
Alley 15
Alley 18
Alley 19
Alley 20
Alley 21

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
92
24
37
31
26
90
138
24
29
30
35
79
98
111
115
29
110
114

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
100
75
75
75
75
100
100

75
75
75
100
100
100
75

100
100

ALLEY
Alley 30
Alley 31
Alley 32
Alley 33
Alley 34
Alley 35
Alley 36
Alley 37
Alley 38
Alley 39
Alley 40
Alley 41
Alley 42
Alley 43
Alley 44
Alley 45
Alley 46
Alley 47

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
53
64
97
57
97
54
97
28
85
97
97
97
55
55
55
55
55
55

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75

ALLEY
Alley 22
Alley 23
Alley 24
Alley 25
Alley 26
Alley 27
Alley 28
Alley 29

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
115
114
123
127
110
109
76
59

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
75

ALLEY
Alley 48
Alley 49
Alley 50
Alley 51
Alley 52
Alley 53
Alley 54
Alley 55

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
39
42
45
50
55
60
33
33

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75

Loop with Branch System


Table 0-37: Pipes Running on Road Lots for Combined Loop with Branch System on Groundwater
ROAD LOT/BLOCK
Road lot 1/Block 2
Road lot 2/Block 9
Road lot 3/Block 10
Road lot 4/Block 14 17
Road lot 6/Block 19
Road lot 8/Block 23
Road lot 10/Block 31
Road lot 11/Block 28 30
Road lot 12/Block 35 37
Road lot 13/Block 34 36
Road lot 14/Block 41
Road lot 15/Block 40

PIPE
LENGTH
(in linear
meters,
Lm)
63
125
115
184
188
207
99
104
112
100
125
96

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
200
200
200
100
200
150
150
150
150
150
150
150

ROAD LOT/BLOCK
Road lot 16/Block 45
Road lot 17/Block 46
Road lot 18/Block 50
Road lot 20/Block 59
Road lot 22/Block 63
Road lot 24/Block 66
Road lot 25/Block 74
Road lot 26/Block 75
Road lot 27/Block 77
Road lot 28/Block 76
Road lot 29/Block 87
Road lot 30/Block 88

PIPE
LENGTH
(in linear
meters,
Lm)
162
8
228
225
146
138
138
220
44
162
65
158

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
150
200
150
150
100
100
150
150
100
100
100
100

Table 0-38: Pipes Running on Alleys for Combined Loop with Branch System on Groundwater
ALLEY
Alley 1
Alley 6
Alley 7
Alley 8
Alley 9
Alley 13
Alley 14
Alley 15
Alley 18
Alley 20
Alley 21
Alley 22
Alley 23
Alley 24
Alley 25

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
92
90
138
13
24
79
98
111
115
110
114
115
114
123
127

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
100
75
75

75
75
75
100
75
75
75
75
75
75

ALLEY
Alley 26
Alley 27
Alley 28
Alley 30
Alley 31
Alley 32
Alley 33
Alley 34
Alley 35
Alley 36
Alley 38
Alley 39
Alley 40
Alley 41

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
110
109
76
53
64
97
57
97
54
97
85
97
97
97

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75

Surface water
Loop System
Table 0-39: Pipes Running on Road Lots for Loop System on Surface water
ROAD LOT/BLOCK
Road lot 1/Block 2
Road lot 2/Block 9
Road lot 3/Block 10
Road lot 4/Block 14 17

PIPE
LENGTH
(in linear
meters,
Lm)
63
125
115
184

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
200
200
200
150

Road lot 5/Block 18


Road lot 6/Block 19

25
188

150
200

Road lot 7/Block 20 22


Road lot 8/Block 23
Road lot 9/Block 7
Road lot 10/Block 31
Road lot 11/Block 28 30
Road lot 12/Block 35 37
Road lot 13/Block 34 36
Road lot 14/Block 41
Road lot 15/Block 40

60
207
97
99
104
112
100
125
96

100
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150

ROAD LOT/BLOCK
Road lot 16/Block 45
Road lot 17/Block 46
Road lot 18/Block 50
Road lot 19/Block 48
49
Road lot 20/Block 59
Road lot 21/Block 51
58
Road lot 22/Block 63
Road lot 23/Block 62
Road lot 24/Block 66
Road lot 25/Block 74
Road lot 26/Block 75
Road lot 27/Block 77
Road lot 28/Block 76
Road lot 29/Block 87
Road lot 30/Block 88

PIPE
LENGTH
(in linear
meters,
Lm)
162
8
228
52

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
150
200
200
200

225
86

150
150

146
80
138
138
220
44
162
65
158

100
150
100
150
150
150
100
100
100

Table 0-40: Pipes Running on Alleys for Loop System on Surface water
ALLEY
Alley 1
Alley 2
Alley 3
Alley 4
Alley 5
Alley 6
Alley 7
Alley 9
Alley 10
Alley 11
Alley 12
Alley 13
Alley 14
Alley 15
Alley 18
Alley 19
Alley 20
Alley 21
Alley 22
Alley 23

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
92
24
37
31
26
90
138
24
29
30
35
79
98
111
115
29
110
114
115
114

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
100
75
75
75
75
100
100

75
75
75
100
100
100
75

100
100
100
100

ALLEY
Alley 30
Alley 31
Alley 32
Alley 33
Alley 34
Alley 35
Alley 36
Alley 37
Alley 38
Alley 39
Alley 40
Alley 41
Alley 42
Alley 43
Alley 44
Alley 45
Alley 46
Alley 47
Alley 48
Alley 49

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
53
64
97
57
97
54
97
28
85
97
97
97
55
55
55
55
55
55
39
42

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75

ALLEY
Alley 24
Alley 25
Alley 26
Alley 27
Alley 28
Alley 29

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
123
127
110
109
76
59

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
100
100
100
100
100
75

ALLEY
Alley 50
Alley 51
Alley 52
Alley 53
Alley 54
Alley 55

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
45
50
55
60
33
33

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
75
75
75
75
75
75

Loop with Branch System


Table 0-41: Pipes Running on Road Lots for Combined Loop with Branch System on Surface water
ROAD LOT/BLOCK
Road lot 1/Block 2
Road lot 2/Block 9
Road lot 3/Block 10
Road lot 4/Block 14 17
Road lot 6/Block 19
Road lot 8/Block 23
Road lot 10/Block 31
Road lot 11/Block 28 30
Road lot 12/Block 35 37
Road lot 13/Block 34 36
Road lot 14/Block 41
Road lot 15/Block 40

PIPE
LENGTH
(in linear
meters,
Lm)
63
125
115
184
188
207
99
104
112
100
125
96

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
200
200
200
100
200
150
150
150
150
150
150
150

ROAD LOT/BLOCK
Road lot 16/Block 45
Road lot 17/Block 46
Road lot 18/Block 50
Road lot 20/Block 59
Road lot 22/Block 63
Road lot 24/Block 66
Road lot 25/Block 74
Road lot 26/Block 75
Road lot 27/Block 77
Road lot 28/Block 76
Road lot 29/Block 87
Road lot 30/Block 88

PIPE
LENGTH
(in linear
meters,
Lm)
162
8
228
225
146
138
138
220
44
162
65
158

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
150
200
150
150
100
100
150
150
100
100
100
100

Table 0-42: Pipes Running on Road Lots for Combined Loop with Branch System on Surface water
ALLEY
Alley 1
Alley 6
Alley 7
Alley 8
Alley 9
Alley 13
Alley 14
Alley 15
Alley 18
Alley 20
Alley 21
Alley 22
Alley 23
Alley 24
Alley 25

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
92
90
138
13
24
79
98
111
115
110
114
115
114
123
127

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
100
75
75

75
75
75
100
75
75
75
75
75
75

ALLEY
Alley 26
Alley 27
Alley 28
Alley 30
Alley 31
Alley 32
Alley 33
Alley 34
Alley 35
Alley 36
Alley 38
Alley 39
Alley 40
Alley 41

PIPE LENGTH
(in linear meters,
Lm)
110
109
76
53
64
97
57
97
54
97
85
97
97
97

PIPE DIAMETER
(in millimeters,
mm)
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75

Appendix H: Estimate of Source


GroundWater
Table 0-43: Groundwater as Source Estimate

SUMMARY
I. DRILLING OF ONE (1) PRODUCTION WELL
II. SITE DEVELOPMENT(Masonry and Fencing Works)
Materials
Labor
III. CONSTRUCTION OF PUMP HOUSE
Materials
Labor
IV. ELECTRO-MECHANICAL EQUIPMENTS
Materials
Labor
V. WATER TREATMENT EQUIPMENTS
VI. MERALCO UTILITY SOURCE
VII. CONTIGENCIES (10% OF Direct Cost)
TOTAL COST OF PROJECT:

4,200,000.00
327,890.00
238,190.00
89,700.00
418,927.00
271,427.00
147,500.00
3,476,355.00
3,436,355.00
40,000.00
373,280.00
500,000.00
929,548.00
10,226,000.00

Surface Water
Table 0-44: Surface water as Source Estimates
DESCRIPTION
UNIT

QTY

UNIT PRICE

MASONRY WORKS
CHB
Cement
Sand
Gravel
Lime

Pcs
Bags
cu.meter
cu.meter
cu.meter

2080
2201.572
129.208
210
1.6

8.00
220.00
4700.00
11500.00
350.00

16640.00
484345.84
607277.60
2415000.00
560.00

PIPES(GI PIPE)
150mm
200mm

Pcs
Pcs

5
2

5000.00
5500.00

25000.00
11000.00

REINFORCEMENT
10mm Bar

Pcs

120

142

17040.00

Unit
Unit

1
1

160,000.00
2,761,048.00

160000.00
2761048.00
210000.00

5,000,000.00

5,000,000.00

PUMP
Submersible Pump
Booster Pump
Submersible Motor
Water Treatment
Equipments
TOTAL COSTS:

LS

AMOUNT

11707911.44

Appendix I: Estimate of Distribution


Loop System
Table 0-45: Distribution System using Loop Estimates
DESCRIPTION
1. PVC Pipe
200mm
150mm
100mm
75mm
2. Fittings
2.1 Valve
200mm
150mm
2.2 Reducer/Valve
200mmx150mm
150mmx75mm
100mmx75mm
150mmx100mm
200mmx100mm
200mmx75mm
2.3 End Cap
200mm
75mm
2.4 Flushing Point
200mm
150mm
75mm
2.5 Tee
200mm
150mm
100mm
75mm
2.6 Elbow(90Bend)
150mm
200mm
2.7 Strainer
2.8. Check Valve
TOTAL COST:

QTY

UNIT

UNIT
COST

262
619
719
597

pcs
pcs
pcs
pcs

441.97
319.20
275.00
230.81

2
4

pcs
pcs

2,863.69
2,361.44

5727.38
9445.76

6
6
10
5
3
1

pcs
pcs
Pcs
Pcs
Pcs
Pcs

10,424.00
13,667.06
11,500.00
12,000.00
14,039.55
14,000.05

62544
82002.36
115000
60000
42118.65
14000.05

2
1

Pcs
Pcs

10,109.72
8,862.82

20219.44
8862.82

2
4
4

Pcs
Pcs
Pcs

10,442.02
7,772.54
7,593.87

20884.04
31090.16
30375.48

5
10
1
6

Pcs
Pcs
Pcs
Pcs

737.61
568.35
400.25
352.62

3688.05
5683.5
400.25
2115.72

2
2
1
1

Pcs
Pcs
Pcs
pcs

1,077.61
906.42
5,073.14
2,863.69

2155.22
1812.84
5073.14
2863.69
1,174,9

AMOUNT
115796.14
197584.8
197725
137793.57

62.06

Combination of Loop and Branch System


Table 0-46: Distribution System using Combination Estimates
DESCRIPTION
QTY UNIT UNIT COST
1. PVC Pipe
200mm
201
pcs
441.97
150mm
620
pcs
319.20
100mm
368
pcs
275.00
75mm
781
pcs
230.81
2. Fittings
2.1 Valve
200mm
1
pcs
2,863.69
150mm
4
pcs
2,361.44
100mm
1
pcs
2,003.73
2.2 Reducer/Valve
200mmx150mm
1
pcs
10,424.00
150mmx75mm
12
pcs
13,667.06
100mmx75mm
2
pcs
11,500.00
150mmx100mm
5
pcs
12,000.00
200mmx100mm
2
pcs
14,039.55
200mmx75mm
4
pcs
14,000.05
2.3 End Cap
100mm
2
pcs
10,109.72
75mm
17
pcs
8,862.82
2.4 Flushing Point
200mm
1
pcs
10,442.02
150mm
4
pcs
7,772.54
100mm
2
pcs
7,593.87
2.5 Tee
200mm
2
pcs
737.61
150mm
8
pcs
568.35
100mm
2
pcs
400.25
2.6 Elbow(90Bend)
150mm
1
pcs
1,077.61
100mm
1
pcs
906.42
2.7 Strainer
1
pcs
5,073.14
2.8. Check Valve
1
pcs
2,863.69
TOTAL COST:

AMOUNT
88835.97
197904
101200
180262.61

2863.69
9445.76
2003.73
10424
164004.72
23000
60000
28079.1
56000.2
20219.44
150667.94
10442.02
31090.16
15187.74
1475.22
4546.8
800.5
1077.61
906.42
5073.14
2863.69
1,168,374.46

Appendix J: Water Quality Test


Ground Water

Figure 0-38: Water Quality Result from the Groundwater


Surface Water

Figure 0-39: Water Quality Result from Surface Water

Appendix K: Other Figures


Preliminary Report

Figure 0-40: Artesian Well Condition

Figure 0-41: Communal Faucet Notice and Condition

Appendix L: Epanet

Software That Models the Hydraulic and Water Quality Behavior of Water Distribution Piping Systems
Description
EPANET is software that models water distribution piping systems. EPANET is public domain software that
may be freely copied and distributed. It is a Windows 95/98/NT/XP program. EPANET performs extended
period simulation of the water movement and quality behavior within pressurized pipe networks.
Pipe networks consist of pipes, nodes (junctions), pumps, valves, and storage tanks or reservoirs. EPANET
tracks:

the flow of water in each pipe,


the pressure at each node,
the height of the water in each tank, and
the type of chemical concentration throughout the network during a simulation period,
water age,
source, and
tracing.

Capabilities
EPANET's Windows user interface provides a visual network editor that simplifies the process of building
piping network models and editing their properties and data. EPANET provides an integrated computer
environment for editing input data. Various data reporting and visualization tools are used to assist in
interpreting the results of a network analysis. These include

color-coded network maps,


data tables,
energy usage,
reaction,
calibration
time series graphs,
profile plots
contour plots.

EPANET provides a fully equipped, extended-period hydraulic analysis package that can:

Simulate systems of any size


Compute friction head loss using the Hazen-Williams, the Darcy Weisbach, or the Chezy-Manning
formula
Include minor head losses for bends, fittings, etc.
Model constant or variable speed pumps
Compute pumping energy and cost
Model various types of valves, including shutoff, check, pressure regulating, and flow control

Account for any shape storage tanks (i.e., surface area can vary with height)
Consider multiple demand categories at nodes, each with its own pattern of time variation
Model pressure-dependent flow issuing from sprinkler heads
Base system operation on simple tank level, timer controls or complex rule-based controls

In addition, EPANET's water quality analyzer can:

Model the movement of a non-reactive tracer material through the network over time
Model the movement and fate of a reactive material as it grows (e.g., a disinfection by-product) or
decays (e.g., chlorine residual) over time
Model the age of water throughout a network
Track the percent of flow from a given node reaching all other nodes over time
Model reactions both in the bulk flow and at the pipe wall
Allow growth or decay reactions to proceed up to a limiting concentration
Employ global reaction rate coefficients that can be modified on a pipe-by-pipe basis
Allow for time-varying concentration or mass inputs at any location in the network
Model storage tanks as being complete mix, plug flow, or two-compartment reactors

Applications
EPANET helps water utilities maintain and improve the quality of water delivered to consumers. It can be
used to:

design sampling programs,


study disinfectant loss and by-product formation,
conduct consumer exposure assessments,
evaluate alternative strategies for improving water quality, such as altering source use within multisource systems,
modify pumping and tank filling/emptying schedules to reduce water age,
use booster disinfection stations at key locations to maintain target residuals, and
plan cost-effective programs of targeted pipe cleaning and replacement.
plan and improve a system's hydraulic performance,
assist with pipe, pump, and valve placement and sizing,
energy minimization,
fire flow analysis,
vulnerability studies, and
Operator training.

Reference
Website: http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/wswrd/dw/epanet.html

Appendix M: Using EPANET

A
n
n
e
x
B

Using
EPANE
T
B-I
INTRODUCTION
EPANET

TO

EPANET is a computer program that performs extended period simulation of hydraulic


and water quality behavior within pressurized pipe networks. A network consists of
pipes, nodes (pipe junctions), pumps, valves and storage tanks or reservoirs.
EPANET tracks the flow of water in each pipe, the pressure at each node, the height
of water in each tank throughout the network during simulation period comprised of
multiple time steps.

Models constant or
Hydraulic
Modeling
variable speed pumps;
Capabilities

Computes pumping
energy and cost;
Full feature and accurate hydraulic
Models various types of
modeling is a prerequisite for doing
valves including shutoff,
effective water quality modeling.
check,
pressure
EPANET contains a state-of-the-art
regulating, and flow
hydraulic analysis engine that includes
control valves;
the following capabilities:
Allows storage tanks
Places no limit on the size of the
to have any
network that can be analyzed;
shape (i.e., diameter
Computes friction headless using
can vary with height);
Hazen-Williams, Darcy-Weisbach,
Considers
multiple
or Chezy-Manning formulas;
demand categories at

Includes minor head losses for


nodes, each with its
bends and fittings;
own pattern of time

variation;
Models pressure-dependent flow
issuing from
emitters
(sprinkle heads) can base system
operation on both simple tank
level or timer

controls and on complex rulebased controls.


Physical
Components
Junctions are
points
in
the
network where links join together and
where water enters or leaves the network.
The basic (and most important) input
data
required for junction
are:
1. Elevation above some reference
(usually main sea level);
2. Water
Demand.
The output results computed for junctions
at all time periods of a simulation are:
1. Hydraulic
heads;
2. Pressure - always in positive sign
and at least 7 m (equivalent to 2storey house) at peak hour.
Reservoirs are nodes that represent an
infinite external source to the network.
They are use to model such things as lakes,
rivers, groundwater aquifers and tie-ins to
the system.
The primary input properties are:
1. Hydraulic head (equal to water
surface elevations if the reservoir is
not under pressure);

Page
Annexes

A.8

2. Because reservoir is a boundary


point of a network, its head and water
quality cannot be affected by what
happens within the network. This will be
dependent on the water resource study.
Tanks - are nodes with storage capacity, where
the volume of stored water can vary with time
during simulation.
The basic (and most important) input data
required for junction are:
1.

Bottom Elevation (where water level is


zero);
2. Diameter
(or
shape
if
noncylindrical);
3. Initial, minimum, and maximum water
levels;
4. And initial quality.
The Principal outputs computed over time are:
1. Hydraulic
heads
elevation);
2. Water quality.

(water

surface

Pipes are links that convey water from one


point in the network to another. EPANET
assumes that all pipes are full at all times.
The principal hydraulic input parameters
are:
1. Start and end of nodes;
2. Diameter;
3. Length;

Pumps are the links that impart energy to a


fluid thereby raising its hydraulic head. The
principal input parameters are:
1. Start and end of nodes;
2. Pump curve (the combination of
heads and flows that the pump can
produce).
The computed output includes flow and head
gain.
EPANET will not allow a pump to operate
outside the range of its pump curve. As with
pipes, a pump can be turned on and off at
present times or when certain condition exist in
the network (to be discuss in Data-Control
Menu). A pump operation can also be described
by assigning it a pattern of relative speed
setting.
Valves are links that limit the pressure or
flow at a specific point in the network. The
principal input parameters are:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Start and end of nodes


Diameter
Setting
Status

The computed output includes:


1. Flow rate
2. Headloss
Different types of valves included in
EPANET:

4. Roughness coefficient (to determine


headloss);
5. Status (open, closed, or contain
check valve).
The computed output for pipes includes:
1. Flow rate
2. Velocity
3. Headloss
Annexes

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV)


Pressure Sustaining Valves (PSV),
Pressure Breaker Valve (PBV)
Flow Control Valve (FCV)
Throttle Control Valve (TCV)
General Purpose Valve (GPV)

Page A.9

Step-by-Step
Application

Sample

Problem

EPANET Project file contains all of the information used to model a network. This paper shows an
example using EPANET in analyzing and simulating for extended period a rural barangay (village)
using an appropriate water demand and demand variation for the population and other
characteristics of the service area.
Given the pipe and junction data for the network as shown in Figure A.1, determine the flow rate in
each line and pressure at each junction node using EPANET.
Figure A.1: Network Representation of Service Area

The system is a conventional system using a water storage tank, distribution pipelines and a
nearby spring as source of drinking water. A 23 cu m elevated concrete tank is located within the
village with bottom elevation of 18 m and height of 3.6 m. The nearby spring water source
at elevation 40 m supplies water with a constant flow of
2.50 liters per second during the day. All the distribution pipes have a roughness
coefficient C = 120. Hazen-Williams formula is used during the calculations. Minor losses are
neglected. The water demands are tabulated below:

Page
Annexes

A.10

Table 1: Water Demand


Location No. HH HH Size

Junc J1
Junc J2
Junc J3
Junc J4
Junc J5
Junc J6
Junc J7
Tank1
Total
Notes:

Served
Pop.

Public
Faucet

Total Day
Demand

NRW

ADD

MDD

PHD

Spring Source
14
35
53
67
32
35

5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5

77
193
292
369
176
193

3
7
11
13
6
7

4,620
11,580
17,520
22,140
10,560
11,580

30%
30%
30%
30%
30%
30%

0.076
0.191
0.290
0.366
0.175
0.191

0.099
0.248
0.377
0.476
0.228
0.248

0.190
0.478
0.725
0.915
0.438
0.478

236

5.5

1300

47

78,000

30%

1.289

1.676

3.224

1.0 Per Capita Water Consumption,

60 lpcd

2.0 Average HH per PF = 5


3.0 Average

4.0 Maximum

Day Demand, ADD x 1.30, l/sec.

5.0 Peak Hour Demand, ADD x 2.50, l/sec.

Day Demand (ADD); l/sec.

It is not accurate to assume a constant demand in the village. The base demands (ADD) shown in
Table 1 correspond to the average day demands. For a rural area with less than 1000 service
connections, the Peak-Hour-Demand multiplier is 2.5 x Average-Day- Demand.
During the hydraulic simulation, nodal and link outputs should be compared and modified until
results are acceptable, and satisfy some basic design parameters listed below:

Annexes
Page A.11

Water Velocity range : 0.4 m/s to 3 m/s

Pipe Friction headloss: 0.5 m/km to 10 m/km

Pressure: 70 m to 7 m (100 psi to 10 psi)

Using the example previously given, following is a step-by-step application of EPANET:

Page
Annexes

A.12

Annexes
Page A.13

Page
Annexes

A.14

Annexes
Page A.15

Page
Annexes

A.16

Annexes
Page A.17

Page
Annexes

A.18

Annexes
Page A.19

Page
Annexes

A.20

Annexes
Page A.21

Page
Annexes

A.22

Annexes
Page A.23

Page
Annexes

A.24

Annexes
Page A.25

Page
Annexes

A.26

Annexes
Page A.27

Page
Annexes

A.28

Annexes
Page A.29

Page
Annexes

A.30

Annexes
Page A.31

Page
Annexes

A.32

Annexes
Page A.33

359

Page
Annexes

A.34

360