EPANET Model

[Jazlyn]

Hi,

I am working on modelling a water system from scratch and am not familiar with the EPANET software. I have been working on this model for months and cannot get it to run. It really is a simple system so I'm not sure where I'm going wrong. There are three pump stations in the system, and there are major elevation changes in very short distances for the pipelines. I drew it to scale in AutoCAD and then imported it into EPANET and am wondering if that's what's causing my "one or more errors in input file" error code. I'm also not sure where I'm going wrong with my controls, and how I am referencing an undefined link for each one. I was wondering if someone could take a look at my .net file and help me get it to run or give me some direction.

Thank you so much in advance!

 

[fel3]

Jazlyn…

I finally had a little time to begin looking at your model. Here are the first things I found that need correcting:

All of the CONTROLS have errors:
- In the first four rules, Pump 500 and Pump 510 do not exist, Tank 3 does not exist, and the word "PUMP" in the controls description should not be there
- In the next four rules, Tank CanterburyTank does not exist and the word "PUMP" in the controls description should not be there
- In the following four rules, Tank MayoTank does not exist and the word "PUMP" in the controls description should not be there
- In the last four rules, Tank MayoTank does not exist
- (the only tanks in this model are 7, 16, 21, and 27)
- I deleted all 16 RULES, then reran the model. EPANET then told me about the PRV (below) and several discontinuities, which I didn't get to yet.

Under PUMPS, MayoPump2 is missing the pump horsepower (i.e., there should be a number following the keyword POWER). However, I suspect that MayoPump2 should have the same HEAD curve as MayoPump 1.

Under VALVES, Valve 15 (a PRV) has a setting of 0 ft, which is several thousand feet too low. I suspect it should be at least 4900 ft.

All pipes have a roughness coefficient of 100, which is likely to be too low. Most systems I come across use values in the 120 to 150 range, although lower values are appropriate in some situations.

Well1Res and Well2Res have a head of 4650 ft and Tank 7 has a head that can vary from 4650 ft (4646 ft elev + 4 ft min) to 4670 ft (4646 ft elev + 24 ft max). However, the Q-H curve specified for the pumps in between (Well1Pump and Well2Pump) indicate a TDH ranging from 867 ft at 40 gpm down to 663 ft at 120 gpm. Given that the suction and discharge pipes have VERY short lengths and the diameters are appropriate for this flow range, it's obvious to me that something is amiss. I suspect that the heads for Well1Res and Well2Res are FAR too high (i.e. too high by many hundreds of feet). It is also possible that the TDH values for the well pumps are too high. However, if your Hwy 89 is in California's Sierra Nevada (for example), deep, low production, hard rock wells might explain this.

There is probably more, but this should be a good start.

Fred

==========
"Is it the only lesson of history that mankind is unteachable?"
--Winston S. Churchill