Design of a Water Supply and Distribution System for Northville 9

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: Designer’s 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 designer’s 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 client’s 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 O’este.

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 designer’s 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 methodology’s 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 VALUE−LOWER 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 criterion’s 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

5.0

3.0

2.Sustainability (Consistency of Supply)

4

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 Designer’s 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=

( 12,000,000−10,000,000 ) =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 Designer’s 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 =

( 200,600−160,000 ) =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

5.0

3.0

5.0

3.0

2.Sustainability (Consistency of Supply)

4

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 Designer’s 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=

( 919,376.80−788,824.00 ) =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 Designer’s 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=

( 934,096.80−803,544.00 ) =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 Designer’s 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=

( 1,079,376.80−948,824.00 ) =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 Designer’s 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=

( 1,134,696.00−1,004,144.00 ) =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 designer’s 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 country’s 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 ½” 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: Designer’s 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)

4

5.0

4.0

2. Sustainability (Operation and Maintenance)

4

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 Designer’s 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=

9,912,226.29−9,726,000.00 x 10=0.191 roundup¿ 1. 9,726,000.00

SUBORDINATE RANK =5−1=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 Designer’s 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=

409,742.44−370,000.00 x 10=1.07 roundup¿ 1. 370,000.00

SUBORDINATE RANK =5−1=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)

4

5.0

3.0

5.0

4.0

2. Sustainability (Consistent Supply)

4

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 Designer’s 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 3,329,250.58−2,762,314.98 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 Designer’s 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=

2,368,198.75−1,542,606.2 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

1

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

1

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

Loop System Combination of Loop and Branch System

1

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 ½” 75 75 75 100 100 100 75 ½” 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). Inspector’s 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

B    

CONSIDERATIONS FOR A SUSTAINABLE SYSTEM Technical Considerations Financial Considerations Social Considerations Environmental Considerations

C       

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  Engineer’s 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 =¿

2

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

e

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 planner’s 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 plan’s 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 (1−NRW )

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.

2

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

3

5

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

K

Qₐ

kQₐ˙⁸⁵

kQₐˡ˙⁸⁵

Q

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

Qₐ 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

kQₐ˙⁸⁵ 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

kQₐˡ˙⁸⁵ 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

K

Qₐ

kQₐ˙⁸⁵

kQₐˡ˙⁸⁵

Q

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

Qₐ 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

kQₐ˙⁸⁵ 238.53 233.55 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

kQₐˡ˙⁸⁵ 252.686 378.135 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)

F

q(l/s)

q (m/s)

g

π

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)

F

q(l/s)

q (m/s)

g

π

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 ½” 75 75 75 100 100 100 75 ½” 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 ½” ½” 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 ½” 75 75 75 100 100 100 75 ½” 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 ½” ½” 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) 150mmØ 200mmØ

Pcs Pcs

5 2

5000.00 5500.00

25000.00 11000.00

REINFORCEMENT 10mmØ 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 200mmØ 150mmØ 100mmØ 75mmØ 2. Fittings 2.1 Valve 200mmØ 150mmØ 2.2 Reducer/Valve 200mmx150mm 150mmx75mm 100mmx75mm 150mmx100mm 200mmx100mm 200mmx75mm 2.3 End Cap 200mmØ 75mmØ 2.4 Flushing Point 200mmØ 150mmØ 75mmØ 2.5 Tee 200mmØ 150mmØ 100mmØ 75mmØ 2.6 Elbow(90˚Bend) 150mmØ 200mmØ 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 200mmØ 201 pcs 441.97 150mmØ 620 pcs 319.20 100mmØ 368 pcs 275.00 75mmØ 781 pcs 230.81 2. Fittings 2.1 Valve 200mmØ 1 pcs 2,863.69 150mmØ 4 pcs 2,361.44 100mmØ 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 100mmØ 2 pcs 10,109.72 75mmØ 17 pcs 8,862.82 2.4 Flushing Point 200mmØ 1 pcs 10,442.02 150mmØ 4 pcs 7,772.54 100mmØ 2 pcs 7,593.87 2.5 Tee 200mmØ 2 pcs 737.61 150mmØ 8 pcs 568.35 100mmØ 2 pcs 400.25 2.6 Elbow(90˚Bend) 150mmØ 1 pcs 1,077.61 100mmØ 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

E

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