Asset Management Planning for Pipe Renewal
14
Asset Management Planning for Pipe Renewal Peter Kraft Treated Water Planning
description
Asset Management Planning for Pipe Renewal. Peter Kraft Treated Water Planning. PROBLEM. PIPE FOOTAGE. YEARS. PROBLEM. HOW MUCH?. WHERE?. (Macro). (Micro). Ductile Iron. Grey Cast Iron. Spun Cast Iron. Pit Cast Iron. 2010. 2015. 2020. 2025. 2030. 2035. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of Asset Management Planning for Pipe Renewal
Asset Management Planning for Pipe Renewal
Peter KraftTreated Water Planning
1881
1885
1889
1893
1897
1901
1905
1909
1913
1917
1921
1925
1929
1933
1937
1941
1945
1949
1953
1957
1961
1965
1969
1973
1977
1981
1985
1989
1993
1997
2001
2005
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
PIPE
FO
OTA
GE
YEARS
PROBLEM
HOW MUCH?
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Spun Cast Iron
Pit Cast Iron
WHERE?
Grey Cast IronDuctile Iron
(Macro) (Micro)
PROBLEM
Life Cycle & Statistical Modeling Risk Modeling
Years
All Pipe
Pipe Cohorts
50
100
15019
00
1950
2000Pi
pe F
oota
ge (m
i)PIT CISP CICADIPVC
Years
Foot
age
Pipe
PROBLEM: How Much?
CATEGORIES Installation Dates
100% Life Expectancy
50% Life Expectancy
10% Life Expectancy
Pit Cast Iron 1890 – 1940 100 yrs 125 yrs 150 yrs
Spun Cast Iron 1940 – 1965 75 yrs 88 yrs 100 yrs
Spun Cast Iron w/ Leadite Joint
1940 – 1960 50 yrs 58 yrs 65 yrs
Grey Cast Iron 1965 - 1975 75 yrs 88 yrs 100 yrs
Cement Asbestos
1955 – 1978 65 yrs 72 yrs 80 yrs
Ductile Iron 1965 – Present
80 yrs 90 yrs 100 yrs
PVC 1975 – Present
80 yrs 103 yrs 125 yrs
Steel 1925 – Present
50 yrs 63 yrs 75 yrs
Pipe Cohorts
Years
Pipe
Foo
tage
(mi)
PIT CISP CICADIPVC
2010
2025
2050
50
25
70
PROBLEM: How Much?
Years
Combined Life Expectancy Projection
Planned 2020
Current 2011
Perc
enta
ge o
f Tot
al S
yste
m
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
1%
2%
3%
% D
istrib
ution
Sys
tem
SOLUTION: How Much?
RISK = Likelihood of Failure (LOF) X Consequence of Failure (COF) High COF
High LOF
Low COF
Low LOF
Highest Risk
Lowest Risk
SOLUTION: Which Pipe?
Consequence of Failure
SENSITIVE CUSTOMERS 2010 PAVING STREET MORATORIUM POPULATION DENSITY HIGHWAY FLOODING NUMBER OF TAPS PER PIPE
AGE MATERIAL
Likelihood of Failure
PRESSURE BREAKS JOINT TYPE RAIL INTERSECTION
SOLUTION: Which Pipe?
HIGH to EXTREME MID to HIGH LOW to MODERATE0
50
100
150
200
250
4
55
230
MIL
ES
RISK LEVEL
Distribution Replacement ModelRisk Results
SOLUTION: Which Pipe?
MAIN_107593RISK = 1224BREAKS = 2INSTALL = 1950MATERIAL = CINUM TAPS = 25CONFLICT = 2010 CITY PAVING
BENEFIT: Pipe Renewal Selection
Sensitive Customer: Hospice
PIPEAGE: 86 Years Old(1) BREAK: Jan 11th 2001PRESSURE: 80-100 psiLENGTH: 584 ft
BENEFIT: Identifying Vulnerability
BENEFIT: Pro-active Planning & Coordination
Asset Management Planning Process
ENGINEERING Institutional Knowledge & Input Corrosion Section – ongoing assessment of leaks ARG – maintenance of GIS distribution system
O&M Field Knowledge & Input Leak Detection Condition Assessment R&R Project Work
IT EAMS Data Tracking & Integration Ongoing upkeep of enterprise databases
PUBLIC AFFAIRS Institutional Knowledge & Input Sensitive Customer Identification & Tracking Input for risk modeling regarding social consequences Communication w/ customers about aging system and rate increase
PLANNING Institutional Knowledge & Input Long Term Renewal Planning Life-Cycle Modeling Risk Modeling Annual R&R Candidate Selection
FINANCE Cost accounting for breaks as well as R&R projects Financial Modeling for long term planning - i.e. bond rating, rate increase, revenue stability)
BENEFIT: Interdivisional Effort
QUESTIONS?
