Upload
rolf-garry-sullivan
View
221
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Exploring Regional Water System Interconnections in the Triangle
95TH Annual Conference | November 2015 | Raleigh Convention Center, Raleigh, NC
Jeff Cruickshank, Hazen and Sawyer Steve Brown, Town of Cary
2
Presentation Outline
Project Background
Technical Aspects
Modeling Examples
Conclusions
3
• Interlocal effort begun in 2009 to coordinate planning and further development of the regional water supply to meet future needs
• Local government led initiative – demonstrate that local leadership can solve regional water planning challenges
What is the Jordan Lake Partnership?
4
Long term sustainable and secure regional water supply for the
Research Triangle area.
Purpose of the Partnership
5
Apex
Cary
Chatham County
Durham
Hillsborough
Holly Springs
Morrisville
Orange County
OWASA
Pittsboro
Raleigh
Sanford
Wake County
Who are the Partners?
6
Water Service Areas
7
Water System Connections
8
• A secure, sustainable water supply for the region
• Promote water conservation and efficiency
• Model cooperation and communication
• Provide a forum to address mutual interests and work through challenges
• Ensure regional/basin-wide ability to meet long term water supply needs
The Partnership does not…• Make ANY policy decisions
What are the Goals?
9
Partnership Next Steps
• Plan future infrastructure investments
• Western Intake, treatment and transmission facilities
• Regional interconnections
• Broaden focus of regional collaboration
• Emergency response planning
• Water efficiency education
• Water shortage indicators
10
JLP Interconnection Project: Phase 1
Mapped all 42 interconnections for the first time
Used GIS for pressure-zone level of detail
Tabulated key information about each system:
• production capacity
• demand
• tank overflows and volume
Described each system’s:
• facilities
• vulnerabilities
• limitations
11
Phase 1 Map
12
Phase 2: Interconnection ModelingScope and Approach
Began by compiling laundry list of modeling requests
Consolidated requests into 13 modeling projects
Specified two-way transfers for all projects
Considered sustainable flows for long durations
Outlined an incremental approach for building combined model to provide info as project progressed
13
Phase 2 Approach: Identify Limitations
Pressure Zone Pumps or PRVs
Pipe Capacity
Supplying System
Interconnect
Receiving
System
Control Valve or Pumps
Production Capacity
Interconnect
14
Modeling Approach:Extended Period Simulations
Steady state not good enough for sustainability and full impacts
Extended period simulations check pumps & tanks over time
Multiple connections analyzed simultaneously – interactions
Steady State EPS
15
Model Demands Agreed Upon by JLP
5-month summer average for supplying systems
Maximum week in receiving systems
Diurnal patterns applied to demands in each system
16
10 Modeling Projects in Phase 2 Scope
Each provides information requested by Partners
All determine limitations on sustainable flows with current infrastructure
Most include testing improvements to increase transfer capacity to achieve specified targets
Nearly all involve two-way transfers
Projects ordered to build combined model incrementally
17
Hydraulic Model Status for Phase 2Partner Model
?Demands Updated
InfrastructureUpdated
LastCalibration
SoftwareUsed
Apex Yes 2005 2005 2005 WaterCAD
Cary Yes 2008 2008 2008 InfoWorks
Chatham County Yes 2011 2011 2013 WaterGems
Durham Yes 2008 2014 2008 WaterGems
Hillsborough Yes 2002 2013 2013 WaterMax
Holly Springs Yes 2012 2012 2012 InfoWater
Morrisville Included in Cary
Orange County No N/A N/A N/A N/A
OWASA Yes 2011 2011 2011 WaterCAD
Pittsboro Yes 2010 2010 200 WaterCAD
Raleigh Yes 2014 2014 2014 InfoWater
Sanford Yes 2007 2007 2007 InfoWorks
18
Technical Challenges
Maintaining unique IDs for model elements
Designating active pipes to model 2016 conditions
Debugging vestiges of model conversions - units
Adding interconnection details
19
Project 1: Convert and CombineModels of Cary and Durham
• Converted InfoWorks and WaterGEMS models to EPANET and imported into new InfoWater model
• 39,000 pipes
• 5 modeling tasks
Durham
Cary
Main Zone(568)
SE HighZone(615)
WesternPressure
Zone(540)
CentralPressure
Zone(641)
SouthernPressure Zone
(595)
High Zone(700)
20
57,000 pipes
8 modeling tasks
OWASA
Durham
Cary
Main Zone(568)
SE HighZone(615)
640 Zone
CentralPressure
Zone(641) Southern
Pressure Zone(595)
High Zone(700)
740 Zone
WesternPressure
Zone(540)
Project 2: Add OWASA
21
Project 3: Add Hillsborough
58,500 pipes
3 modeling tasks
OWASA
Durham
CaryMain Zone
(568)
SE HighZone(615)
Central Zone(737)
High Zone(700)
North Zone(814)
South Zone(832)
Hillsborough
Closed valves between
Hillsborough and OWASA
22
Project 4: Add Apex and Holly Springs
63,000 pipes
3 modeling tasks
Hillsborough
Durham
OWASA
Cary
Apex
Holly Springs
814
737
832
740
640
700
568
615
540
641
595
616
585
23
ChathamNorth
ChathamAshburyChatham
Southwest
Hillsborough
OWASA
Durham
Cary
Apex
Holly Springs
Chatham County
US 64
Project 5: Add Chatham County
65,000 pipes
2 modeling tasks
24
Project 6: Add Raleigh
137,000 pipes
120 mgd demand
8 WTPs
25
Example Project: Move Water Between Cary and OWASA Through Durham
642 568
540 641
615568
641
642
540
615
From Cary to OWASA From OWASA to Cary
26
Identifying Pipes Limiting TransfersHead Loss in 2-foot increments
27
5.9 mgd Sustainable Flow from OWASA through Durham to Cary & Apex
5.74 mgdBy gravity
4.2 mgd by gravity at I-40 meter
616 ZoneApex
5.74 mgdMax Week
641 Zone
Cary26.2 mgdMax Week
540 Zone
3.1 mgdDavis BPS
2.8 mgdIntermittent
NC 55 BPS
1.7 mgd by gravity at NC 54 meter
Durham28.9 mgdMax 5-mo
568 Zone
Jones Ferry WTP
13.7 mgd
28.9 mgd Durham WTPs
OWASA6.83 mgdMax 5-mo
640 Zone
26.0 mgd Cary/Apex WTP
28
Pressures Changes with Flow fromOWASA through Durham to Cary & Apex
In OWASA
• 27 psi max drop near Durham
In Durham
• 10 psi max rise near OWASA
• 22 psi max drop near Cary
In Cary
• 16 psi max rise near DurhamPressure Change
29
Predicted Tank Performance Shows Transferred Flows are Sustainable
Red: OWASA Green: Cary Blue: Durham
30
Interconnection Modeling Summary
Bridged the gap between thinking about interconnection transfers to seeing how they work
Explored and quantified sustainable flows
Tested interconnections without affecting costumers
Developed operating procedures – no surprises
31
Potential Benefit: Reduce Water Supply Costs By Sharing Surplus Capacity
32
AWWA Supports Regional Approaches
33
Acknowledgements
Jordan Lake Partnership:
Steve Brown, Co-author
Sydney Miller, Project Manager
Hazen Modeling Team:
Jinggy Espinosa
Todd Davis
Kevin Widderich
Wayne Zhang