REDUCING SEVERITY OF PRESSURE TRANSIENTS IN WATER SUPPLY

NETWORKS-A CASE STUDY

Suranji Rathnayaka1, Benjamin Shannon1, Sourghali Vahid2, Mike Guo3, Duncan.Sinclair3, Jayantha
Kodikara1
1. Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
2. South East Water Corporation, Lynbrook, VIC, Australia
3. South East Water Corporation, Heatherton, VIC, Australia

HIGHLIGHTS
We measured pressure in Rosedale Grove section in South East Water to examine the magnitude of
likely pressure transients.
We developed a pressure transient hydraulic model for the same network for which a pressure monitoring
program was undertaken.
Using measured data and the hydraulic model, two scenarios were evaluated that can assist in reducing
the severity of likely transient pressures.
The results indicated that implementing either of these scenarios or both, the severity of pressure
transients could be reduced, and thereby risks of pipe failure could also be reduced.

INTRODUCTION
Pressure transients in drinking water supply system could occur when existing steady-state conditions of the
pipe system is altered by system operational changes such as a pump-start-up. It is identified that the
pressure transients are one of the main factors that contribute to pipe failures. They could also cause serious
health risks when the pressure inside the pipe goes below the atmospheric pressure potentially allowing
external water to ingress into the potable water. Hence, investigating magnitudes and locations of pressure
transients in pipe networks is important to minimise pipe failures and to reduce potential health risks.

METHODOLOGY
Rosedale Grove pressure zone is identified as one of the network sections in South East Water that is
susceptible for severe pressure transients during pump operations. As part of the Advanced Condition
Assessment and Pipe Failure Prediction Project,

a comprehensive study was undertaken to examine the

likely pressure transients in this section. The pressure was monitored using Radcom high speed pressure
transient data logger installed at selected locations for a period of 1 month simulating two different
operational scenarios (see Figure 1 for the pipe network and monitoring sites). Subsequently, a pressure
transient model was developed for full section (including the reticulation system) using wave characteristic
based Surge2010 (KYPIPE) computer program. The transient wave propagation speed was calculated using
Equation 1. The model was calibrated and validated against measured pressure data. A sensitivity analysis
was conducted to examine the sensitivity of the model for unknown parameters such as properties of a surge
tank. Then, the model was run to simulate different operational scenarios that may help reduce the severity
of likely pressure transients.

c=

Ef
(1 + K RE f D/E c w )

[Equation 1]

Where Ec is the elastic modulus of the conduit in N/m2, Ef is the elastic modulus of the fluid in N/m2, is the
liquid density in kg/m2, KR is the coefficient of restraint for the longitudinal pipe movement, D is the pipe
diameter in meters, and w is the pipe wall thickness in meters.

RESULTS
The pressure monitoring program indicated that severe pressure transients developed during pump start-up
and shut-down. The pressure rises after pump start-ups as high as 180kPa were measured at site 12 located
nearly 0.8km downstream of the main pump station. Slightly less pressure transients magnitudes were
measured at other 3 monitoring sites located further downstream of the site 11 and the main pump station.
The pressure dropped from 646 kPa to 190 kPa at site 12 during a pump shut-down event. Similar pressure
drops were measured at site 13 and site 14 during the pump shut-down events. One pump shutdown event
caused the pressure to become negative (to a minimum -100kPa) at site 15. Possibly due to the collapse of
vapour cavities generated due to low pressure, during the pressure recovery phase pressure rise of around
410kPa above the operational steady-state was measured. Although loss of pressure due to creation of
vapour cavities is possible, no customer complaints were received perhaps due to running of the pump
operations in the night time. All pressure fluctuations mentioned above were measured while scenario 2 was
implemented in the field (all cross connections were kept open as shown in figure 2 so that pressure
transients propagated along 600mm main entered reticulation before it dissipated through the surge tank and
due to pipe friction). However, when scenario 1 was implemented, pressure fluctuations were significantly
low in comparison to scenario 2.
The model was validated by using selected data from a pump start-up event occurred in 29/07/2014.
Different combinations of valve opening times (5s, 20s, 60s), initial pump control valve opening ratios (25%,
40%) and initial gas volumes for surge tank/air vessel (2m3, 8m3,16m3) were used to run the models to
obtain best match with field data (sensitivity analysis). The best prediction of the field measured pressure
data was obtained for the valve opening times of 5s, initial pump control valve opening ratio 40%, and the
assumption of 2m3 initial gas volume of the surge tank (See Figure 3 for the prediction for site 13 and site
14). It appears that a lower value of initial pump control valve opening ratio and a higher valve opening time,
and a higher initial gas volume in surge tank/ air vessel tend to provide lower pressure transient magnitudes.
Although all five sites showed good agreement with the magnitudes of field measured pressure transients,
the wave shape did not match sufficiently well in site 15. The validated model was used to see the
effectiveness of surge tank/ air vessel and cross connections to investigate the possible mitigation of the
occurrence of pressure transients. The model runs indicated that the presence of the surge tank and
implementation of scenarios 1 shown in figure 2 led to reduction of the severity of pressure transients.

CONCLISIONS
Severe pressure fluctuations were measured during pump started-ups and shutdowns in the selected pipe
network section. Significant pressure fluctuations were measured due to the collapse of vapour cavities when
pressure dropped and subsequently recovered during transient events. Two scenarios simulated highlighted
that the way pressure transients are dissipated can significantly differ depending on the configurations of the

network

and valve closure status The pressure transient model predicted the field measured pressure

fluctuations accurately, and showed that surge thank was effective in reducing the severity of pressure
fluctuations.

Figure 1. Pipe network and pressure monitoring sites

Figure2. Difference between scenario 1, and 2.

Table 1. Information about pressure monitoring sites and a summary of pressure monitoring program

Site
number

Site information

Installation

Maximum
pressure
/kPa

Steadystate
pressure
before
maximum
pressure.
/kPa

Minimum
pressure
/kPa

Outlet tap

1186

N/Aa

-38

PRV

646

466

190

Site 11

Main pump station

Site 12

Upstream of pressure
reducing valve, 0.8km from
main pump station

Site 13

1.8km downstream from

main pump station

Hydrant

621

451

134

Site 14

2.2 km downstream from

main pump

Hydrant

503

356

54

Site 15

2.5 km downstream from

main pump station, highest
location of the system

Hydrant

704

255

-106

As logger was installed between pump and pump control valve it did not measure any transients. It
measured only steady-state pressure head provided by pump operation.

Figure 3. Model prediction of pressure transients