Week 9 - Water Losses and Control
Week 9 - Water Losses and Control
1
20-03-2020
A survey by the International Water Services Association (IWSA) in 1991, observed range of
water losses as:
As per United States Agency for International Developing (USAID) 2008 assessment, the
global average water loss was estimated around 35 % accounting for 48.6 Billion Cubic Meter
(BCM) per year.
Image Source: Farley M, Wyeth G, Ghazali Z, Istandar A, Singh S (2008) The manager’s non-revenue water handbook:
a guide to understanding water losses. https://www.who.int/docstore/water_sanitation_health/leakage/ch04.htm
2
20-03-2020
Image Source: Singh, M.R., Mittal, A.K., Upadhyay, V. (2011) Benchmarking of North Indian urban water utilities, Benchmarking An International Journal 18(1):86-106
Bassi N. and Kumar M. D. (2012) Addressing the Civic Challenges: Perspective on Institutional Change for Sustainable Urban Water Management in India, Environment and Urbanization ASIA, 3(1) 165–183
3
20-03-2020
Image Source: Selek et al (2018). Management of Water Losses in Water Supply and Distribution Networks in Turkey. Environmental Science
4
20-03-2020
The percentage of time per year during which the network is pressurized.
The number of service connections and the location of customer meters (weak points).
10
5
20-03-2020
Direct and indirect financial loss (cost of pumping, treating, storage and loss of revenue on water supplied)
11
12
6
20-03-2020
13
14
7
20-03-2020
15
16
8
20-03-2020
17
Source: Performance Indicators for Water Supply Services, IWA Manual Best Practice, first edition, IWA Publishing, London, 2000
18
9
20-03-2020
19
20
10
20-03-2020
Apparent Losses
Source: Guidance Notes on Apparent Losses and Water Loss Reduction Planning (2016)
21
Apparent Losses
Source: Guidance Notes on Apparent Losses and Water Loss Reduction Planning (2016)
22
11
20-03-2020
Apparent Losses
Source: Guidance Notes on Apparent Losses and Water Loss Reduction Planning (2016)
23
Non-Revenue Water:
Represents the volume of water for which no revenue is generated. Thus it is taken as
the difference of volume of water delivered into a network (system input volume)
and billed authorized consumption, whether metered of not.
24
12
20-03-2020
25
Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI): It is the ratio of CARL to UARL, and considered
to represent the quality of the infrastructure management in terms of leakage control.
ILI = CARL/UARL (Ideal value is one)
26
13
20-03-2020
27
28
14
20-03-2020
29
30
15
20-03-2020
31
Hybrid Systems:
These uses a combination of both, static and dynamic leak detections systems. A static leak
detection system may be used to detect leaks while a dynamic leak detection system to
pinpoint leak locations.
32
16
20-03-2020
33
34
17
20-03-2020
Step-Testing
This technique is based on systematically reducing the size of the network by closing
valves one by one on pre-selected sections of pipe, and monitoring flow changes. A large
drop in flow rate indicates a leak in the section of pipe which has just been closed.
It is designed by identifying the test area and sections of pipe network and valves, and
installing flowmeters (if not there) on the input main to each area.
Traditional approach of step testing is to progressively shut valves, working back towards
the meter, and then returning to open valves when the test is over. This technique is less
popular now because of interruptions to supply.
The recent and popular technique is to use a series of short steps, isolating sections of the
DMA for a short time only. It requires a remote meter reading device (radio or mobile
phone), positioned at the meter, for transmitting flow rates to the site operators, who can
immediately see the results of the valve closure, speed up the operation, and reduce the
time the valves are left open.
Source: https://www.who.int/docstore/water_sanitation_health/leakage/ch10.htm#b3-9.3%20Equipment%20for%20leak%20detection%20and%20location
35
36
18
20-03-2020
37
38
19
20-03-2020
Sounding Surveys
Listening electrical and mechanical devices are used to listen for leak noises on valves, hydrants, stop-
taps or at the ground surface above the line of the pipe. These devices are generally accurate and
highly sensitive to the leak noises.
A sounding survey can be carried out either as the follow-up stage to a leak detection exercise, or as a
blanket survey of the whole DMA.
Sounding surveys are carried out using various types of
equipment, such as:
A simple acoustic listening stick
An electronic listening stick (amplified)
A ground microphone
A leak noise correlator
39
40
20
20-03-2020
Leak Positioning
For a leak between the two points with
measured leak signals, the cross-correlation
function in leak noise correlator will have a
distinct peak and the corresponding time shift
(Δt) will correspond to the difference in arrival
times between measured leak signals.
The time lag depends on the propagation
velocity of sound (c) in the water pipe, and may
be given by:
Δt = (L2-L1)/c = (D-L1-L1)/c = (D-2L1)/c
Thus, the leak location from the sensor:
L1 = (D - c.Δt)/2
41
pipes relatively close to the surface, and with complex loops and bends.
42
21
20-03-2020
Helium is safe and fast for leak detection, but its sticky molecules
spread out under the asphalt or concrete once they rise to the surface
coming out of the ground in natural gas wells. Therefore, it may
become difficult to narrow down the leak location. Also, helium is
costlier than hydrogen.
Hydrogen mixture moves easily through the layers between the leak
and the surface, and is usually detected within 3 ft of the leak location.
This along with the low price of hydrogen, make it the most used tracer
gas for leak detection. Image Source: https://traceandaccessexperts.co.uk/services/tracer-gas-
leak-detection/
43
44
22
20-03-2020
Image Source: Zaman et. al. (2020). A review of leakage detection strategies for pressurised pipeline in steady-state, Engineering Failure Analysis, 109, 104264
45
Image Source:
https://www.who.int/docstore/water_s
anitation_health/leakage/ch10.htm#b3-
9.3%20Equipment%20for%20leak%20de
tection%20and%20location
46
23
20-03-2020
Image Source: Zaman et. al. (2020). A review of leakage detection strategies for pressurised pipeline in steady-state, Engineering Failure Analysis, 109, 104264
47
48
24
20-03-2020
49
50
25
20-03-2020
51
All of the stand post connections and connections to public sector/government organizations are unbilled, while all
other connections are charged for water bills. It was observed that on an average of 0.44 m3/s water is lost through the
leakage on transmission and distribution mains, while 0.15 m3/s is lost through the leakage on service connections. In
addition, approximately 16 MLD water is lost through leakage and overflow from storage tanks. Further, a rough
estimate suggested that nearly 30 MLD water is being utilized as unauthorized consumption.
Using the IWA/AWWA water audit pro-forma, estimate the apparent, real and total losses and NRW for the utility.
Assume no error in data handling. If unavoidable annual real losses are 4% of total volume pumped, determine the
Infrastructure leakage Index (ILI) for the utility.
52
26
20-03-2020
53
54
27
20-03-2020
55
56
28
20-03-2020
Solution:
MNF = 600 L/s
Legitimate Night Flow (LNF) = 80 L/s
Losses at night (at 23 m pressure) = MNF-LNF = 600-80 = 520 L/s
57
58
29
20-03-2020
59
30