Water System Design-libre

7/25/2019 Water System Design-libre

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/water-system-design-libre 1/59

1

Technion – Israel Institute of Technology

Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering

ISE – International School of Engineering

014208 – Design Principles of Water Supply Systems

Final Project for Spring 2011/2012

Instructor and Advisor: Jeremy Blank

Submitted by:

Levi Frolich - 332378413

Ari Teger – 327130605Submitted on: 07/08/2012



2

ContentsIntroduction .................................................................................................................................................. 6

Objective ................................................................................................................................................... 6

Major Constraints ..................................................................................................................................... 6

Methodology ............................................................................................................................................. 6

Major Reference Sources .......................................................................................................................... 6

Design Criteria ........................................................................................................................................... 6

Climate ...................................................................................................................................................... 7

Topography ............................................................................................................................................... 7

Water Sources ........................................................................................................................................... 8

Coastal Aquifer ...................................................................................................................................... 8

Desalination Plants................................................................................................................................ 8Regulations ................................................................................................................................................... 8

Storage Regulations .................................................................................................................................. 8

Water Quality and Treatment ................................................................................................................... 9

Pressure Regulations ................................................................................................................................. 9

Pipe Thickness ........................................................................................................................................... 9

Usage and Population Projection ............................................................................................................... 10

Example Calculation of Projected Water Demand ................................................................................. 10

Design Flow Parameters ............................................................................................................................. 10

Design Flow for Monthly and Daily Demand .......................................................................................... 10

Design Flow for Hourly Demand ............................................................................................................. 10

Design (Peak) Flows ................................................................................................................................ 11

Example Calculation of Hourly Design Flow........................................................................................ 11

Water Balance and Tank Level .................................................................................................................... 11

Daily Demand .......................................................................................................................................... 11

Example Calculation of Daily Design Demand for Water Balance ...................................................... 11

Hourly Demand ....................................................................................................................................... 12

Hourly Supply .......................................................................................................................................... 12

Water Level ............................................................................................................................................. 12

Example water balance chart: ............................................................................................................ 12

Costs ............................................................................................................................................................ 13



3

Energy Costs ............................................................................................................................................ 13

Costs of Physical Items ............................................................................................................................ 14

Water Costs ............................................................................................................................................. 15

Specifics for the Project .............................................................................................................................. 15

Background ............................................................................................................................................. 15

Yavne ................................................................................................................................................... 16

Ben Zakai ............................................................................................................................................. 16

Kevutzat Yavne .................................................................................................................................... 17

Beit Gamliel ......................................................................................................................................... 17

Population and Water Usage Predictions ................................................................................................... 18

Yavne ....................................................................................................................................................... 18

Population Prediction ......................................................................................................................... 18

Water Demand Prediction .................................................................................................................. 18

Design Flow ......................................................................................................................................... 18

Ben Zakai ................................................................................................................................................. 18

Population Growth Prediction ............................................................................................................ 18


Design Flow ......................................................................................................................................... 19

Kevutzat Yavne ........................................................................................................................................ 19

Population Prediction ......................................................................................................................... 19


Design Flow ......................................................................................................................................... 20

Beit Gamliel ............................................................................................................................................. 20

Population Growth Prediction ............................................................................................................ 20


Design Flow ......................................................................................................................................... 20

Summary of Settlement Information ...................................................................................................... 21

Demographic and Topographical Information .................................................................................... 21

Annual Water Demand in m3/year ..................................................................................................... 21

Peak Daily Demand Projection for 2045 (for water balance) in m3/day ............................................. 21

Peak Hourly Demand Projection for 2045 (for design) in m3/hour .................................................... 21

Design Alternatives ..................................................................................................................................... 21



4

Alternative 1—Base Alternative ............................................................................................................. 23

Alternative 2 ............................................................................................................................................ 25

Alternative 3 ............................................................................................................................................ 27

Alternative 4 ............................................................................................................................................ 29

Comparison of Alternatives ........................................................................................................................ 31

Comparison Results ................................................................................................................................ 31

Comparison Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 33

The Recommended Alternative .................................................................................................................. 33

Route ....................................................................................................................................................... 34

Block Diagram ......................................................................................................................................... 35

Pipe Diameters ........................................................................................................................................ 36

Pipe Thickness ......................................................................................................................................... 36

Design Stages .......................................................................................................................................... 36

Costs ........................................................................................................................................................ 37

Longitudinal Cross Section and Piezometric Head Analysis .................................................................... 40

Pipe 1................................................................................................................................................... 40

Pipe 2................................................................................................................................................... 41

Pipe 3a ................................................................................................................................................. 41

Pipe 3b ................................................................................................................................................ 42

Pipe 3c ................................................................................................................................................. 43

Water Balance and Reservoir/Tank Level Graphs .................................................................................. 43

Reservoir 1 .......................................................................................................................................... 44

Reservoir 2 .......................................................................................................................................... 45

Tank 1 .................................................................................................................................................. 46

Tank 2 .................................................................................................................................................. 47

Tank 3 .................................................................................................................................................. 48

Resistance Curves ................................................................................................................................... 48

Bill of Quantities ...................................................................................................................................... 50

Annual Cost Breakdown .......................................................................................................................... 51

Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 52

Linear Programming System Solution ..................................................................................................... 52

Full Water Balance for Recommended Alternative ................................................................................ 56



5

Reservoir 1 .......................................................................................................................................... 56

Tank 1 .................................................................................................................................................. 57

Tank 2 .................................................................................................................................................. 58

Tank 3 .................................................................................................................................................. 59



6

Introduction

Objective

The purpose of this project is to design a water supply network that provides suitable water in the most

economical and robust way to the various sectors (private, industrial and agricultural) of the following

four settlements: Yavne, Kevuztat Yavne, Ben Zakai and Ben Gamliel.

Major Constraints

The following are major considerations that must be taken into account in the design of the system:

1) Existing water sources in the area which include the desalination plant in Ashdod and

Palmachim and coastal aquifer wells

2) The geographical and topographical nature of the area

3) The projected population growth and land use for the next 35 years

4) The required water quality and other regulations as demanded by the law

5) The network includes both supply to consumers and reservoirs for storage

6) The typical pipe size diameters available on the market and other cost considerations likepumps, energy costs, etc.

Methodology

1) Collecting of data from governmental and non-governmental sources

2) Contacting representatives from each settlement to fill in missing information and supplement

gathered data from the field

3) Processing the data to fully understand the design problem

4) Offering multiple alternative solutions to the problem

5) Performing a full hydraulic and economic analysis of the solutions and recommending the best

alternative

Major Reference Sources

1) CBS

2) Wikipedia

3) Contact people and websites for each yishuv

4) Mekorot and IEC

5) Course notes and consultation with course advisor

6) Israel Meteorological Society

7) Google Maps and Google Earth

8) Amudanan.co.il

Design Criteria

Design year: 2015 (Systems operational)

Design period: 30 years

Pumping Units Efficiency: 80%

Interest Rate: 5%



7

Climate

All of our settlements share the climate of the center of Israel. In general, Israel has a Mediterranean

climate characterized by long, hot, dry summers and short, cool, rainy winters, as modified locally by

altitude and latitude. The climate is determined by Israel's location between the subtropical arid

characteristic of Egypt and the subtropical humidity of the Levant or eastern Mediterranean. The semi-

arid center receives more rainfall than the south but less than the north 1. The humidity is fairly high

during the summer and the temperatures range between averages of 10 degrees Celsius to 30 degrees

Celcius. Rainfall ranges between 0mm and about 125 mm2.

Topography

The shfela region containing all of the settlements under investigation is the transitional region between

Isael’s etal hills ad the oastal plai. Ou settleets ae i the este pat of the egio lose to

the coastal plain. The elevations range from 20 m above sea level to 60 m above sea level. The Ashdod

desalination plant is on the coast, and therefore at sea level. The topography allows for a relatively easy

laying of pipes, in that there are no vast land obstacles to traverse (eg. deep valleys, high mountains,

etc). The landscape has a gentle upwards slope but is relatively smooth so the water must be pumped

more than just the minimum head and dynamic losses but there is no need to dig tunnels or pump

excessively just to overcome topographical difficulties.

1 US Library of Congress: http://countrystudies.us/israel/36.htm

2 Israel Meteorological Service: http://ims.gov.il/IMS/CLIMATE

0

10

20

30

40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

T e m p e r a t

u r e [ C ]

Month

Average Daily Maximum and Minimum Temperature

[C]

Average Daily MaximumTemperature [C]

Average Daily Minimum

Temperature [C]

0100

200

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

R a i n f a l l [ m

m ]

Month

Average Monthly Rainfall [mm]

Average Monthly Rainfall [mm

http://countrystudies.us/israel/36.htm



http://ims.gov.il/IMS/CLIMATE







8

Water Sources

Coastal Aquifer

All four settlements are located above the coastal aquifer3, which is a major source of water in

the Shfela region. The aquifer extends from the foothills of the Carmel in the north to the north of the

Sinai Desert in the South. Its area within the borders of Israel is 1,900 square kilometers, its length is 130kilometers and its width ranges from 10 kilometers in the north to 30 kilometers in the south. The

aquifer is phreatic and composed of sand and sandstone. The base is made of clay and marl. In the past

the aquifer has provided between 400-600 MCM of water per year. The capacity of the aquifer is

assumed to be around 4 BCM. Over the years there has been an increase in the amount of chlorides

leaching into the aquifer, which has reached 130,000 tons per year. In addition, there is a concern that

with the increase of use of treated effluent, there has been an increase of sodium infiltration into the

aquifer.4 There are also grave concerns of overdrawing of the aquifer that will cause invasion of saline

seawater.

Desalination PlantsThere are two desalination plants that could provide water to the settlements, at Palmachim

and Ashdod. Though Palmachim is close enough to be a viable option to provide water to Yavne, Ashdod

is closer to the other settlements and is about the same distance from Yavne as Palamichim.

Consequently, the decision was made to only consider supply from Ashdod, although if there was a

pressing reason, the Palmachim plant could theoretically be used.

Regulations

Storage Regulations

There are two types of regulations that were taken into consideration when the water storage

vessels were designed: storage regulations and firefighting regulations. For the storage regulations it is

necessary that each settlement has a tank or reservoir capable of storing 1/3 of the peak daily flow. For

example, Beit Gamliel is projected to have a peak daily flow of 2,737 m3. Therefore, the tank adjacent to

the settlement must hold at least:

In addition, for firefighting regulations, there must always be at least 100 m3 of water in storage at all

times of the day.

3 Weinberger, Gavriel. The Natural Water Resources Between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River .

Jerusalem: Israel Hydrological Service, 2012. 35-37. Print.4http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CEgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fol

d.sviva.gov.il%2FEnviroment%2FStatic%2FBinaries%2FArticals%2Fwater_source_1.ppt&ei=esTET9XSCPPU4QTn6Oi

PCg&usg=AFQjCNE56rK2luyp8HcfPaIBjrjkzNNbAw&sig2=Wyho1HXtSdkUZXT4Og1RMw

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CEgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fold.sviva.gov.il%2FEnviroment%2FStatic%2FBinaries%2FArticals%2Fwater_source_1.ppt&ei=esTET9XSCPPU4QTn6OiPCg&usg=AFQjCNE56rK2luyp8HcfPaIBjrjkzNNbAw&sig2=Wyho1HXtSdkUZXT4Og1RMw










9

Water Quality and Treatment

Water should be supplied after being treated to make sure that it is safe, healthy and palatable.

Safety involves removing toxins, pathogens, excess salinity, or any other harmful substances. Health

requires making sure that the water contains beneficial minerals like magnesium, calcium, etc. Aquifer

water usually contains a high mineral content (sometimes too high requiring softening) but is subject to

contamination of pollutants, invasion of saline water, or pathogenic outbreaks. The treatment for this

type of water would focus on chlorination or UV disinfection and testing for pathogens and toxins.

Desalinated water membranes filter out bacteria and viruses but they also leave almost no minerals in

the supply. This is not as good for the consumer and can be harmful to the distribution network.

Treatment for desalinated water also involves (prophylactic) chlorination and the addition of beneficial

minerals. The quality requirements for palatability involve aspects like taste, turbidity, color, etc. The

exact details of treatment and the costs involved are beyond the scope of this project and course

although these costs can be significant and shouldn’t e igoed he plaig a distiutio sste.

Pressure Regulations

A water distribution system must meet requirements for maximum and minimum pressure

head. There must be at least 30 meters of pressure head at the supply node to ensure that water will

reach the consumer even on the upper floors with enough pressure to prevent damage to the system

ad ate aste. Alog pipes that do’t otai a suppl ode, etes of head ust e aitaied to

prevent air pockets in the system. The maximum pressure allowed in the distribution system (within the

settlement itself) is 60 meters of head.

Pipe Thickness

There are two requirements for pipe thickness in a water supply system. One is for safe handling

and manufacture and one is to prevent failure in the pipe due to excessive pressure. Each requirement

has a thickness design formula, and the thickness chosen is the maximum of the two.

The handling requirement formula is:

Where:

The pressure requirement formula is:

Where:



10

The allowable stress is 50% of the yield stress of the pipe material. For a steel pipe, the yield stress is3,656 kg/cm2.

Usage and Population ProjectionWhenever possible, specific data about planned expansions were used to predict the growth of

settlements and cities examined in this project. For example, in Yavne there are public plans for new

neighborhoods with exact numbers of dwelling units to be added. In contrast, a representative in Beit

Gamliel stated explicitly that there are no plans for expansion of any kind. Even when no expansion was

planned, it was decided that the system should be designed to accommodate at least nominal growth

typical of the settlements in the area. For the settlements with no planned growth, a 4% increase forevery 10 years was applied to the current water usage and population.

Example Calculation of Projected Water Demand

The current annual water consumption in Beit Gamliel is about 608,903 m3. Using a compounded

growth formula to project the annual consumption to 2045 is done as follows:

Design Flow Parameters

Design Flow for Monthly and Daily Demand

Average monthly water demand, Q m, is 8.3% (

) of the annual water demand

Average daily water demand, Q d, is 0.27% (

) of the annual water demand

Q m max=1.32*Q m

Q d max=1.48*Q d

Design Flow for Hourly Demand

For areas with both domestic and agricultural/industrial water demand, the calculation of the

peak hourly demand must take into account the different usage patterns. Domestic use peaks in themorning and the evening, whereas agricultural/industrial use is constant throughout the work hours.

Therefore, to calculate the domestic peak hourly demand, using the rule of consumption of 8% of peak

daily domestic demand. To calculate the peak hourly agricultural/industrial demand, the peak daily

agricultural/industrial demand was calculated and then divided by ten, on the assumption that there are

about ten working hours in a day.



11

Design (Peak) Flows

In order to ensure that the supply system can handle the maximum demand, the pipes are

designed according to the peak hourly flows. To determine the peak hourly flows, the projected annual

water demand for each settlement in each sector was calculated (this is described in detail in the section

on water demand projection). This number is multiplied by the coefficient of the peak daily demand and

the coefficient of the peak hour demand. This results in the greatest water hourly usage that the system

should ever have to cope with.

Example Calculation of Hourly Design Flow

In Kvutsat Yavne, the projected annual domestic water consumption is 224,973 m 3 and the annual

agricultural usage is 168,729 m3. The following equation was used to calculate the hourly design flow for

domestic and agricultural use:

Projected Hourly Design for Domestic Use

1.48 is the coefficient for peak daily consumption. 1/365 = 0.0027 which divides the total annual

consumption over the days of the year giving the average daily consumption. 0.08 is 8% which is

the water consumed during the peak hour and 224,973 is the projected water demand for 2045.

Projected Hourly Design for Agricultural Use

1.48 is the coefficient for peak daily consumption. 1/365 = 0.0027 which divides the total annual

consumption over the days of the year giving the average daily consumption. 1/10 = 0.1 which

divides the consumption over the constant use during work hours and 168,729 is the projected

agricultural consumption for 2045.

Water Balance and Tank LevelThe water balance is a tracking method by which the amount of water in the system is

accounted for as the hours in the day pass. The system does not supply the exact amount of water

necessary at any given moment, but rather it supplies at a constant rate and not necessarily at all hours

of the day. However, the demand is not constant but is characterized by ebbs and flows. As a result,

tanks are necessary to hold the excess water so it can be supplied for any demand. Consequently, it is

crucial to determine how much water requires storing at any given moment to properly design the most

appropriate tank size. It is also important to know the water level to make sure that it never drops

below the minimum necessary to meet firefighting regulations.

Daily Demand

Projected daily demand was calculated in a similar manner to the projected peak flow. The

annual consumption is first projected to 2045. Afterwards, it is divided by 365 to receive the average

daily flow and then finally, multiplied by the peak daily consumption factor.

Example Calculation of Daily Design Demand for Water Balance

Projected Daily Design Demand for Domestic use



12

1.48 is the coefficient for peak daily consumption. 1/365 = 0.0027 which divides the

total annual consumption over the days of the year giving the average daily consumption.

224,973 is the projected annual domestic demand for 2045.

Hourly Demand

To determine the cumulative demand, the 24 hour day was divided into hourly segments, each

corresponding to a certain percentage of water demand. In the early morning and late evenings, the

water demand is small, and therefore they represent a smaller percentage of the daily water demand,

whereas during peak hours (such as in mid-morning) the percentage is a lot larger. The total daily

demand is therefore broken up per hour by multiplying the total daily demand by its hourly percentage.

Hourly Supply

The hourly supply was calculated differently for the desalinated water supply and the well

supply. The wells are limited to a constant 200 m3/hr. per well. Depending on the total demand, the

hours of required pumping was determined and whenever possible, the pumping was set to occur

during off-peak hours. For the desalinated water, the total daily demand was divided by 24 or by 9 and

then it was determined if it was more economical to pump during off-peak hours but to pay for a larger

reservoir/tank or if it was preferable to pump 24 hours a day to reduce the reservoir/tank size.

Water Level

The water level is determined by first determining if the reservoir/tank will be emptying or filling

based on whether the demand is greater or less than the supply in any given hour. Then, a base level is

set such that there minimum water level will always be maintained. The water level is calculated by

addig the houl suppl ad sutatig the houl dead to the peious hou’s ate leel. The

maximum water level is used to determine the necessary reservoir/tank size from water supply

considerations. After that, it must be compared with the other regulations and the larger of the two is

the ultimate reservoir/tank size.

Example water balance chart:

Hours

Demand

percentage

Domestic

Demand

Percentage

Agriculture/Industry

Total

Domestic

Demand

Total

Agricultural

Demand

Total

Hourly

Demand

Well 2

Supply Mekorot

Total

Supply

Filling

Tank

Emptying

Tank tank level

2 1.1% 0% 6 0 6 113 0 113 107 0 96

3 1.2% 0% 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 6 95

4 1.4% 0% 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 7 94

5 1.9% 0% 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 10 93

6 6.3% 10% 32 41.1 73 0 0 0 0 73 86

7 6.6% 10% 33 41.1 74 0 0 0 0 74 79



13

Costs

Energy Costs

Energy costs used were an average annual cost calculated according to the energy costs that

came into effect as of April 1st, 2012 as published on the Israel Electric Company website. The rates used

are for business customers and with the VAT. The table of rates as published on their website is as

follows:

In English,

RATES

Season Hour Agurot(after tax)

Agurot(before

tax)Summer On-peak 121.97 105.15

Mid 48.2 41.55

Off-peak 30.04 25.9

Winter On-peak 113.18 97.57



14

Mid 65.01 56.04

Off-peak 34.58 29.81

Fall/Spring On-peak 48.63 41.92

Mid 37.99 32.75

Off-peak 29.73 25.63

BusinessDays

Fri. andBefore

Holidays

ShabbathandHolidays

Summer Peak 10-17 - -

Mid-Peak

7-10, 17-21 - -

Off-Peak

21-07 all day all day

Winter Peak 16-22 - 17-19

Mid-Peak

06-08 16-20 19-21

Off-Peak

22-06 20-16 21-17

Spring/Fall Peak 06-20 - -

Mid-Peak

20-22 06-20 17-21

Off-Peak

22-06 20-06 21-17

From these rates, the average cost for pumping 24 hours a day is $0.1595 an hour. The average cost for

pumping only during off-peak hours is $0.791. Both of these rates used a conversion rate of 3.8 for ILS to

USD.

Costs of Physical ItemsThe cost of pipelines was calculated using the formula:

The cost of the pumping station was calculated using the formula:

The cost of water storage tanks was calculated using the formula:

The cost of earth reservoirs was calculated using the formula:

List of Possible Pipe Diameters:

Diameter[in] $/m

6 105.708

8 143.392

10 182.3

12 222.432

14 263.788

16 306.368

18 350.172

20 395.2

24 488.928

30 638.7

32 691.072

36 799.488

40 912.8

48 1154.112

54 1347.948

68 1843.072

Number ofhours

pumping

HourlyCost Average

Cost ($)

1 30.04 0.082 30.04 0.083 30.04 0.084 30.04 0.085 30.04 0.086 30.04 0.087 30.04 0.088 30.04 0.08

9 52.93 0.0910 57.70 0.0911 68.37 0.1012 68.37 0.1113 69.37 0.1114 71.56 0.1215 77.27 0.1216 77.27 0.1317 77.27 0.1318 77.27 0.1419 77.27 0.1420 77.27 0.1421 87.73 0.1522 90.35 0.1523 90.35 0.1624 94.03 0.16



15

Water Costs

Desalinated water used in some alternatives is purchased from the plant at a rate of $0.5/m 3.

Well water is acquired only at the cost of pumping the water and delivering it to the consumer. Although

in real life, both types of water would likely require some form of treatment like disinfection, softening

chlorination or mineral addition, we will neglect these costs.

Specifics for the Project

Background



16

Yavne

The modern city of Yavne was established on December 22, 1948 by 22 immigrants from

Bulgaria. The city grew in population due to immigration from North Africa, Yemen, Iran and Europe and

i the s, fo Ethiopia. I the ’s a poga as stated hich a person could buy a half a

dunam of land and build a private house. This encouraged the movement of young people and career

army and police officials to the area which elevated the socio-economic level of the population and

housing prices began to rise. Between 1983 to 1995, Yavne doubled in size to its current population of

32,986 people5. Yavne is located in the southern coastal region five kilometers from the Mediterranean

Sea, encompassing 16.4 square kilometers with an average elevation of 30 meters above sea level.6

Ben Zakai

Ben Zakai is a small religious moshav located in the center of Israel in the Shfela or Judean

Foothills region. It was established in 1950 by the Poel Mizrachi organization mainly by immigrants from

Tripoli. It is located next to the city of Yavne and is under the jurisdiction of the Hevel Yavne Regional

Council. The average elevation of the moshav is about 29 meters above sea level. 7

5 CBS

6 http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%99%D7%91%D7%A0%D7%94

7 http://www.hevel-yavne.org.il/benzakai.asp

http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%99%D7%91%D7%A0%D7%94



http://www.hevel-yavne.org.il/benzakai.asp







17

Kevutzat Yavne

Kevutzat Yevne (also known as Kibbutz Yavne) is located in the Shfela region of Israel, six

kilometers east of Ashdod. Founded in 1929 by religious German immigrants, it moved to its present

location in the winter of 1940. It is under the jurisdiction of the Hevel Yavne Regional Council. It is an

average elevation of 55 meters above sea level. It is considered one of the most financially successful

kibbutzim in Israel8.

Beit Gamliel

Beit Gamliel is a small religious moshav located in the Shfela region of Israel, between the cities

of Yavne and Rechovot. It was founded in 1949 by the Poal Mizrachi organization and included

Holocaust survivors from Romania, Hungary and the Czech Republic. Several families came from North

Africa, Algeria and Tunis. It is under the jurisdiction of the Hevel Yavne Regional Council. It has an

average elevation of 28 meters above sea level9.

8 http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%91%D7%95%D7%A6%D7%AA_%D7%99%D7%91%D7%A0%D7%94

9 http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%91%D7%99%D7%AA_%D7%92%D7%9E%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%90%D7%9C

http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%91%D7%95%D7%A6%D7%AA_%D7%99%D7%91%D7%A0%D7%94



http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%91%D7%99%D7%AA_%D7%92%D7%9E%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%90%D7%9C







18

Population and Water Usage Predictions

Yavne

Population Prediction

The current population of Yavne is 32,986 people. According to the master plan for the next tenyears, Yavne will add 12,250 residential units.10 It is assumed that after this building boom, there will be

a lull in construction. Thus by the year 2045, 16,000 units will be probably be built in Yavne. According to

the CBS, the average number of people per household from 1995 to 2008 increased from 4.1 to 3.4.11 It

can be assumed that this number will stabilize around 3.2 people per household based on the national

average12. Thus, it can be calculated that over the next 30 years the population will grow to around

84,200 people.

Water Demand Prediction

Calculating the water demand must take into account several factors. While the system has

reported significant water losses, part of the master plan includes renovating and upgrading the system,

which should reduce water losses over time. As residential units are added and the population grows, all

accompanying sectors in Yavne (like industry, agriculture etc.) will grow as well proportionally.Therefore, the total water purchased per capita is a fair predictor of water demand. Due to the trend of

reduced per capita usage and the prediction for reduced water losses in the distribution system, the

assumption is that the per capita usage purchase will reach 125 m3 per person per year. Therefore, in

2045 the total water demand should be 10,525,000 m3 per year. As part of the master plan, Yavne is

constructing a sewage treatment facility with the intention of selling the effluent for agricultural use and

for irrigation of public parks and gardens. This should offset some of the predicted increase giving a

predicted usage of about 10,654,404 m3 per year.

Design Flow

.

Ben Zakai

Population Growth Prediction

Ben Zakai currently has a population of about 900 people13 and contains 207 hectares of

agricultural land. The typical growth trend for moshavim in the area is around 4% every ten years 14. This

would mean that by 2045 the moshav will expand to around 1,036 people. According to the mayor,

there are no plans to expand the moshav by adding household units or agricultural area so a very

modest growth is to be expected.

10 http://www.yavnecity.co.il/nextdecade.pdf

11 http://cbs.gov.il/reader//?MIval=%2Fpop_in_locs%2Fpop_in_locs_h.html&Name_h=%E9%E1%F0%E4

12 http://cbs.gov.il/reader/cw_usr_view_SHTML?ID=634

13 http://cbs.gov.il/reader//?MIval=%2Fpop_in_locs%2Fpop_in_locs_h.html&Name_h=%E1%EF+%E6%EB%E0%E9

14 Kevutzat Yavne Contact Person

http://www.yavnecity.co.il/nextdecade.pdf



http://cbs.gov.il/reader/cw_usr_view_SHTML?ID=634







19


According to their chief engineer, they currently use 200,000 m3 of water per year for household

and agricultural use. All of the water used is fresh water supplied to them by Mekorot. About 90,000 m 3

of the water is used for agricultural purposes and the other 110,000 m3 is used in households. The

modest population growth prediction would allow us to assume that the water usage may only increase

slightly due to higher household density or a small addition of approved or unapproved structures

placed in residential or agricultural areas. However, the mayor also stated that the Moshav has plans to

start receiving treated sewage water to replace some of the fresh water usage. Because the mayor knew

no specific details regarding the timeframe or amount of water that would be supplied it seems

imprudent to include this possibility in our considerations for future water requirements.

Due to the lack of potential for serious growth and the fact that sources of water may be added

in the future, the best estimate of water needs for the given timeframe is the amount of water currently

consumed in the moshav. However, to account for possible modest growth, the system will be designed

for a usage of 228,478 m3 of water per year.

Design Flow .

Kevutzat Yavne

Population Prediction

Kevutzat Yavne currently has a population of about 942 people15 and contains 360 hectares of

agricultural land. The typical growth trend for moshavim in the area is around 4% over ten years 16. This

would mean that by 2045 the moshav will expand to around 1,060 people. In this area as well, this

seems reasonable because there are no plans to expand the kibbutz by adding household units oragricultural area so a very modest growth is to be expected.


According to the Kevutzat Yavne representative, the kibbutz uses 150,000 m3 per year for

industry and livestock and 200,000 m3 per year for domestic consumption. The kibbutz also uses 3

million cubic meters of treated effluent for agricultural purposes. The modest population growth

prediction would allow us to assume that the water usage may only increase slightly due to higher

household density or a small addition of approved or unapproved structures placed in residential or

agricultural areas. The kibbutz has no plans to expand its residential or agricultural areas by adding

structures or agricultural plots.According to the modest growth expectations of 4% for every 10 years, the 2045 water demand

for domestic, industrial and agricultural usage is 399,399 m3 per year. We talked to the kibbutz

representative and he told us that the peak hourly demand for industrial use is 100,000 m 3/hour.

Therefore, will project this amount based on nominal growth of 4% for every 10 years.

15 http://www.cbs.gov.il/ishuvim/ishuv2009/bycode.xls

16 Kevutzat Yavne Contact person

http://www.cbs.gov.il/ishuvim/ishuv2009/bycode.xls






20

Design Flow

.

Hourly Design Flow for Domestic Use

Hourly Design for Industrial Use

Total Hourly Design Flow

Beit Gamliel

Population Growth Prediction

Beit Gamliel currently has a population of about 900 people17 and contains 267 hectares of

agricultural land. The typical growth trends for moshavim in the area is around 4% over ten years 18. This

would mean that by 2045 the moshav will expand to around 1,011 people. In this area as well, this

seems reasonable because there are no plans to expand the moshav by adding household units or

agricultural area so a very modest growth is to be expected.


According to the Beit Gamliel representative, the moshav uses 508,903 m3 per year for

agriculture and 100,000 m3 per year for domestic consumption. The kibbutz also uses 200,000 cubic

meters of treated effluent for agricultural purposes. The modest population growth prediction would

allow us to assume that the water usage may only increase slightly due to higher household density or a

small addition of approved or unapproved structures placed in residential or agricultural areas. The

kibbutz has no plans to expand its residential or agricultural areas by adding structures or agricultural

plots.

According to the modest growth expectations of 4% for every 10 years, the 2045 water demand for

domestic, industrial and agricultural usage is 684,934 m3 per year.

Design Flow

.

Hourly Design Flow for Domestic Use

Hourly Design for Agricultural Use

Total Hourly Design Flow

17 http://www.cbs.gov.il/ishuvim/ishuv2009/bycode.xls

18 Kevutzat Yavne Contact person







21

Summary of Settlement Information

Demographic and Topographical Information

Name Average Elevation

[m]

Current

Population (2012)

Projected

Population (2045)

Demographic

Trend

Yavne 30 32,986 84,200 Significant growthBen Zakai 30 900 1,036 Modest to no

growth

Kevutzat Yavne 60 942 1,060 Modest to no

growth

Beit Gamliel 30 899 1,011 Modest to no

growth

Annual Water Demand in m3/year

Settlement Current (2012) Water Demand Projected (2045) Water Demand

Domestic Agricultural/Industrial Total Domestic Agricultural/Industrial Total

Yavne 3,917,087 206,162 4,123,250 9,975,000 525,000 10,654,404Ben Zakai 110,000 90,000 200,000 123,735 101,238 228,478

Kevutzat

Yavne

200,000 150,000 350,000 224,973 168,730 399,399

Beit

Gamliel

100,000 508,903 608,903 112,486 562,432 684,934

Total 5,282,153 11,967,215

Peak Daily Demand Projection for 2045 (for water balance) in m3/day

Settlement Domestic Agricultural/Industrial Total

Yavne 40,466 2,129 42,575

Ben Zakai 502 411 913

KevutzatYavne

912 684 1,596

Beit Gamliel 456 2,281 2,737

Total 44,445 3,376 47,821

Peak Hourly Demand Projection for 2045 (for design) in m3/hour

Settlement Domestic Agricultural/Industrial Total

Yavne 3,189 168 3,357

Ben Zakai 40 40 80

Kevutzat

Yavne

72 112 184

Beit Gamliel 36 225 261

Design AlternativesIn order to compare alternatives a base alternative was created and then certain aspects were

changed to allow for easy comparison between the alternatives. This way, it was easy to see which

aspects of each alternative are the most cost effective, thus allowing for the building of the most

efficient design.



22

Every city only required one pressure zone. For the smaller settlements this was obvious,

however, for Yavne, which is much larger, due to its relatively flat topography, only one pressure zone

was necessary.



23

Alternative 1—Base Alternative

In the first alternative, all of the water is supplied by the (planned) Ashdod desalination plant. This is the

simplest alteatie i that thee is ol oe ate soue oeted to the most straightforward

network of pipes. The water from the desalination plant exits to a large reservoir. A large pump pumps

the water through a large-diameter pipeline until a juncture. This design ensures that at this juncture

there is enough head for the water to arrive at Kibbutz Yavne, which is at a higher elevation than the

other settlements, thus there is no need for another pump at the junction. There, the pipe splits into

two pipes. The smaller, southern pipeline is dedicated to supply of water to Kibbutz Yavne. The northern

pipeline supplies water to Ben Zakai, continues to Yavne and then ends in Beit Gamliel. At the end of

each branch there is a tank (in Kibbutz Yavne and Beit Gamliel). In order to provide constant head of 30

m to the consumers there are small pumps at each tank. All pumps operate 24 hours a day because the

cost of having a smaller tank outweighed the increase of the cost of energy of pumping during peak

hours.

Pipe Length [Km] Starting

Elevation [m]

End Elevation

[m]

1 5.8 0 30

2 5.1 30 60

3a 2.0 30 36

3b 2.7 36 303c 2.0 30 30

Structure Number Volume [m3]

Reservoir 1 15781

Tank 1 9390

Tank 2 495



24

Ashdod

DesalinationPlant

+0m

Pipe 1

Flow: 3882

m3/hr

Pipe 3a

Flow: 3698

m3/hr

Kibbutz Yavne

Demand: 184

m3/hr

+55m

Pipe 2

Flow: 184

m3/hr

Pipe 3b

Flow: 3618

m3/hr

Beit Gamliel

Demand: 261

m

3

/hr+30m

Ben Zakai

Demand: 80

m3/hr

+36m

Yavne

Demand: 3,357

m3/hr

+30m

Pipe 3c

Flow: 261

m

3

/hr

Reservoir 1

+0m

Tank 2

+60m

Tank 1

+30m



25

Alternative 2

In this alternative as well, all of the water is supplied by the (planned) Ashdod desalination plant.

However, in this alternative, the pipe splits into three pipelines at the major juncture (a more complex

system). One pipe goes north straight to the west end of Yavne. The pipe that goes south supplies water

to the north end of Kibbutz Yavne. The central line supplies water to Ben Zakai, the east end of Yavneand then ends in Beit Gamliel. The pumping scheme and tank configuration is same as in the base

alternative, with the addition of one tank and pump at the western side of Yavne.


Elevation [m]

End Elevation

[m]

1 5.8 0 30

2 5.1 30 60

3a 2.0 30 36

3b 2.7 36 30

3c 2.0 30 30

4 4.2 30 48


Reservoir 1 15781

Tank 1 4208

Tank 2 527

Tank 3 8229



26

Ashdod

Desalination

Plant

+0m

Pipe 1

Flow: 3882

m3/hr

Pipe 3a

Flow: 2019

m3/hr

Pipe 2

Flow: 184

m3/hr

Pipe 3b

Flow: 1939

m3/hr

Beit Gamliel

Demand: 261

m3/hr

+30m

Ben Zakai

Demand: 80

m3/hr

+36m

Yavne

Demand: 1,678

m3/hr

+30m

Pipe 3cFlow: 261

m3/hr

Pipe 4

Flow: 1,679

m3/hr

Yavne

Demand: 1,679

m3/hr

+30m

Reservoir 1

+0m

Tank 1

+30m

Tank 3

+30 m

Kibbutz Yavne

Demand: 184

m3/hr

+55m

Tank 2

+60m



27

Alternative 3

This alternative deviates from the base alternative in that the all four settlements receive their water

from wells, as opposed to the desalination plant. Yavne requires nine wells while the other settlements

only need one. Each well supplies up to 200 m3/hour and there is a tank in each settlement to enable

water balance. At each settlement, a pump is necessary to provide the minimum head to theconsumers, 24 hours a day.


Reservoir 1 15781

Reservoir 2 14050

Tank 1 1560

Tank 2 961

Tank 3 2496



28

Ashdod

Desalination

Plant

+0m

Kibbutz Yavne

Demand: 184

m3/hr

+55m

Beit Gamliel

Demand: 261

m3/hr

+30m

Ben Zakai

Demand: 80

m3/hr

+36m

Well 1

Flow: 200

m3/hr

+60m

Well 3Flow: 200

m3/hr

+30m

Well 2

Flow: 200

m3/hr

+36m

Reservoir 1

+45m

Tank 1

+60m

Tank 2

+30m

Tank 3

+30m

Yavne

Demand: 3,357

m3/hr

+30m

Well 4-12

Flow: 200

m3/hr

+30m



29

Alternative 4

In this alternative, all of the water is supplied by the (planned) Ashdod desalination plant. The water is

pumped to a large reservoir built in Kibbutz Yavne, the highest location among the settlements in this

supply network. From there, the water will be supplied by gravity to the other settlements. The pipe

design ensured that there would be less than 5 m of head loss throughout the pipe system from KibbutzYavne to the other settlements, therefore guaranteeing the necessary minimum head. The supply

pipeline will go first to Ben Zakai, then to Yavne and finally to Beit Gamliel.


Elevation [m]

End Elevation

[m]

1 10.3 0 60

2a 7.1 60 36

2b 2.7 36 30

2c 2.0 30 30


Reservoir 1 15781

Reservoir 2 15781



30

Ashdod

Desalination

Plant

+0mPipe 1

Flow: 3882

m3/hr

Beit Gamliel

Demand: 261

m3/hr

+30m

Ben Zakai

Demand: 80

m3/hr

+36m

Yavne

Demand: 3,357

m3/hr

+30m

Kibbutz Yavne

Demand: 184

m3/hr

+55m

Reservoir 2

+60m

Pipe 2a

Flow: 3698

m3/hr

Pipe 2b

Flow: 3618

m3

/hr

Pipe 2c

Flow: 261

m3/hr

Reservoir 1

+0m



31

Comparison of AlternativesIn order to perform a comparison of alternatives, the pipe system was optimized in Excel® using

a linear programming method. The cost of energy used to overcome head losses was balanced with the

cost of larger diameter pipes to create the optimal system with the lowest annual cost. The operation

and maintenance costs were also taken into account. Afterwards, the annual cost of operating all of the

pumps in the system was determined based on the flow, dynamic head requirements and average

energy cost based on number of daily pumping hours. The cost of constructing pumping stations,

eseois ad ate taks as also iluded ased o the euatios desied i the ethodolog

section above. All costs were converted to equivalent annual costs for the sake of comparison.

Comparison Results

The results of the comparison were as follows:

Alternative 2

Item $/yr

Desalinated

water

$ 5,896,797.00

Pipes $ 2,274,929.71

Reservoir $ 10,589.46

Pump 1 $ 19,285.40

Pump 2 $ 88,659.99

Pump 4 $ 78,620.89

pump 5 $ 9,222.55

Tank 1 $ 58,321.94

Tank 2 $ 35,693.33

Tank 3 $ 7,797.51

Total $8,479,917.77

Alternative 1

Item $/yr

Desalinated

water

$ 5,896,797.00

Pipes $ 2,333,520.61


Pump 1 $ 19,364.06

Pump 2 $ 161,768.81

Pump 4 $ 27,292.31

Tank 1 $ 64,236.38

Tank 2 $ 7,448.83

Total $ 8,521,017.46

Alternative 3

Item $/yr

Desalinated

water $ -

Pipes $ -


Pump 1 $ 258,685.83

Pump 2 $ 18,138.25

Pump 3 $ 43,797.52Pump 4 $ 27,292.31

Tank 1 $ 16,445.27

Tank 2 $ 11,173.32

Tank 3 $ 23,634.85

Pumps 4-12 $ 1,058,323.86

Well cost $1,764,914.85

Total $ 3,231,779.56

Alternative 4

Item $/yr

Desalinated

water $ 5,896,797.00

Pipes $ 2,405,832.39

Reservoir 1 $ 10,589.46

Reservoir 2 $ 14,119.45

Pump 1 $ 20,340.72

Pump 2 $ 17,558.77

Total $ 8,365,237.78



32

$0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000

Alternative 1

Alternative 2

Alternative 3

Alternative 4

Alternative Costs [1000$]



33

Comparison Analysis

Alternative 1,2 and 4 are quite similar in their annual costs. The cost to buy the pipe networks

and pump the water is within $200,000 for each alternative even though the pipe routes are different

and the pumping scheme is varied. Adding an extra pipe line as was done in alternative 2 adds costs in

the form of extra pipe but this is compensated by savings in the form of smaller diameter pipes across

the system. Therefore, regardless of route, the cost to build the system remains roughly comparable. It

was concluded that the cost of building a water supply network is fixed within a certain range regardless

of optimization. However, the main expense for those alternatives is the cost of the desalinated water

purchased in large amounts every year. This cost alone added about five million dollars to each

alternative. Alternative 3 avoids that cost by supplying water from the coastal aquifer. This is to be

epeted eause desaliated ate is’t the ost eooial ethod of supplig ate ut it offes

many other benefits especially in an arid environment with overdrawn natural freshwater resources.

Wells also have a hidden costs and inherent unreliability in the form of possible contamination,

excessive salinity, and government regulation and pumping restrictions. All alternatives contain storage

tanks that meet water supply and firefighting regulations.

Summary of Analysis:

Regardless of the route, the cost of the pipe system remained almost the same

Purchase of desalinated water is the most significant cost

Energy costs for wells are the most significant cost

A robust should not rely only on one water source, especially wells

Therefore the Recommended Alternative should:

Draw mainly from well water, avoiding the cost of desalinated water

The wells should only operate during off-peak hours, where possible The possibility of accessing desalinated water should exist

The Recommended AlternativeIn light of the realizations mentioned above, it was decided that the best alternative was

actually a combination of alternative 1 and alternative 3. Alternative 1 is the most basic and reliable pipe

distribution network that can provide desalinated water if demand exceeds well supply for any reason

whether it is well contamination, well pump failure or government mandated pumping restrictions.

Barring these circumstances, the wells can provide the settlements with high quality water at a much

lower cost than desalinated water. This alternative will provide economical water supply combined withredundancy and robustness. It is’t ideal to hae a pipe sste ith o ate i it so a small flow and

minimum head should be provided at all times. It was decided not to include these costs in the total

system costs because relative to the other costs involved it is assumed to be negligible. The following

diagram shows the progression from the base alternative to the recommended alternative.



34

Route

BaseAlternative

Alternative 2

Alternative 3Recommended

Alternative

Alternative 4

RecommendedAlternative


Elevation [m]

End Elevation

[m]

1 5.8 0 30

2 5.1 30 60

3a 2.0 30 36

3b 2.7 36 30

3c 2.0 30 30


Reservoir 1 15781

Reservoir 2 14050

Tank 1 1560

Tank 2 961

Tank 3 2496



35

Block Diagram

Ashdod

Desalination

Plant

+0m

Pipe 1

Pipe 3a

Kibbutz Yavne

Demand: 184

m3/hr

+55m

Pipe 2

Pipe 3b

Beit Gamliel

Demand: 261

m3/hr

+30m

Pipe 3c

Reservoir 1

+0m

Tank 1

+60m

Tank 3

+30m

Yavne

Demand: 3,357

m3/hr

+30m

Ben Zakai

Demand: 80

m3/hr

+36m

We

Flow

m3/

+60

Well 2

Flow: 200

m3/hr

+30m

Well 3

Flow: 200

m3/hr

+36m

Reservoir 2

+45m

Tank 2

+30m

Well 4-12

Flow: 200

m3/hr

+30m



36

Pipe Diameters

After solving the linear programming model using Excel, the optimal pipe diameters for the

system (when running at full capacity of desalinated water) is as follows:

Pipe Name Diameter Length [km]

Pipe 1 5.8Pipe 2 5.1

Pipe 3a 2.0

Pipe 3b

6

0.6

2.1

Pipe 3c 6 2.0

Pipe Thickness

The minimum pipe thickness was checked according to the formulas mentioned above. Pressure

thickness was checked according to the maximum pressure in the system (7.5 bar) although most of the

system is subjected to pressures far below that. The handling thickness was greater than the pressure

thickness for every pipe in the system so that will be the determining requirement.

Diameter Thickness Requirements

Diameter

[in]

Diameter

[mm]

Handling

[in]

Handling

[mm]

Pressure

[in]

Pressure

[mm]

24 609.6 0.1 2.54 0.05 1.25

32 812.8 0.13 3.39 0.07 1.67

36 914.4 0.15 3.81 0.07 1.88

40 1016 0.17 4.23 0.08 2.08

48 1219.2 0.2 5.08 0.10 2.50

Design Stages

As mentioned earlier, most of our settlements have little projected growth over the next three

decades. Therefore, the most cost effective and practical way of building the system is to only have one

initial design stage. The project is designed to be operational in 2015 and be effective until 2045. This

coincides with the lifespan of most of the components of the system meaning that there should be no

reason for large-scale overhaul and replacement of any of the components beyond reasonable wear and

tear and statistically expected failure. The lifespan of the various components are as follows:

Component Lifespan (years)

Pipelines and water

tanks40

Reservoirs 25



37

Costs

This alternative contains just the pipe purchase and O&M costs from alternative 1 along with all of the

costs from alternative 3. The cost of purchasing desalinated water should be zero in the ideal scenario

where all water is supplied by wells from the coastal aquifer. The well purchase cost and the energy cost

are the most significant because the wells require pumping to a tank or reservoir and then another

pump must supply minimum supply head 24 hours a day. All costs listed below are in US dollars per

annum.

Pump Stations and

Pumping Wells 15

Civil Engineering Works 50



38

Tanks

Tank 1 $ 17,262.55

Tank 2 $ 12,109.21

Tank 3 $ 24,352.98

Total $ 53,724.74

Pumping Stations

Reservoir 1 $ 19,364.06

Reservoir 2 $ 10,959.65

Tank 1 $ 4,954.18

Tank 2 $ 4,236.43

Tank 3 $ 5,898.39Total $ 45,412.71

Reservoirs

Reservoir 1 $ 14,119.45

Reservoir 2 $ 13,168.59

Total $ 27,288.04

WellsName Purchase O&M Total

Well 1 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59

Well 2 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59

Well 3 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59

Well 4 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59

Well 5 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59

Well 6 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59

Well 7 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59

Well 8 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59

Well 9 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59Well 10 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59

Well 11 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59

Well 12 $ 122,143.41 $ 26.17 $ 122,169.59

Total $ 1,466,035.06

Grand Total $ 5,243,437.66

Pipes

Name Purchase O&M Total

1 $ 323,328.28 $ 1,134.48 $ 324,46

2 $ 152,284.31 $ 534.33 $ 152,81

3a $ 111,492.51 $ 391.20 $ 111,883b $ 127,847.09 $ 448.58 $ 128,29

3c $ 225,119.11 $ 789.89 $ 225,90

Total $ 943,36

Energy Costs

Reservoir 1 $ -

Reservoir 2 $ 247,726.17

Pump 1 $ 22,338.13

Pump 2 $ 13,901.82Pump 3 $ 37,899.13

Well 1 $ 9,631.24

Well 2 $ 3,631.61

Well 3 $ 12,745.48

Well 4 $ 262,192.64

Well 5 $ 262,192.64

Well 6 $ 262,192.64

Well 7 $ 262,192.64

Well 8 $ 262,192.64

Well 9 $ 262,192.64

Well 10 $ 262,192.64

Well 11 $ 262,192.64

Well 12 $ 262,192.64

Total $ 2,707,607.35



39

$0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000

Alternative 1

Alternative 2

Alternative 3

Alternative 4

Recommended Alternative

Alternative Costs [1000$]



40

Longitudinal Cross Section and Piezometric Head Analysis

Note that the piezometric head analysis is relevant only for when the pipes are flowing at full

capacity. Ideally, this should never occur but a full analysis must be performed in case the pipes do need

to be put into service. If the pressure head is checked along the elevation profiles below, it can be seen

that the pressure head is always higher than the elevation head at every point along the pipe so flow will

always continue in the desired direction.

Pipe 1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

H e a d ( m )

Length (Km)

Pipe 1



41

Pipe 2

Pipe 3a

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

H e a d ( m )

Length (Km)

Pipe 2



42

Pipe 3b

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

H e a d ( m )

Length (Km)

Pipe 3a

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

H e a d ( m )

Length (Km)

Pipe 3b



43

Pipe 3c

Water Balance and Reservoir/Tank Level Graphs

There are two graphs for each reservoir/tank; the first depicts the cumulative supply and

demand as a function of time. The second graph shows the water level in each tank as a function of

time.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

H e a d ( m )

Length (Km)

Pipe 3c



44

Reservoir 1

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

0 5 10 15 20

W a t e r [ m 3 ]

Time of Day

Reservoir 1 Supply and Demand

Cumulative Demand

Cumulative Supply

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

0 5 10 15 20

W a t e r L e v e l

[ m 3 ]

Time of Day

Reservoir 1 Water Level



45

Reservoir 2

T

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

0 5 10 15 20

W a t e r [ m 3 ]

Time of Day

Reservoir 2 Supply and Demand

Cumulative Demand

Cumulative Supply

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

0 5 10 15 20

W a t e r L e v e

l [ m 3 ]

Time of Day

Reservoir 2 Water Level



46

Tank 1

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

0 5 10 15 20

W a t e r [ m 3 ]

Time of Day

Tank 1 Supply and Demand

Cumulative Demand

Cumulative Supply

0

200

400600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

0 5 10 15 20

W a t e r L e v e l [ m 3 ]

Time of Day

Tank 1 Water Level



47

Tank 2

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

0 5 10 15 20

W a t e r [ m 3

]

Time of Day


Cumulative Demand

Cumulative Supply

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 5 10 15 20


Time of Day

Tank 2 Water Level



48

Tank 3

Resistance Curves

In order to purchase pumps for the system, it is necessary to find pumps that will work optimally

at the predicted flows. This is accomplished by plotting the resistance (unit length head losses) as a

function of flow for a specific pipe diameter and Hazen-Williams coefficient. Afterwards, it is assumed

that a pump exists that will work optimally at the predicted maximum flow and the curve for that pumpis plotted over the resistance curve. It is sometimes preferable to use multiple pumps installed in

parallel to save money when the demand is low and to add redundancy to the system. It was decided

not to design the system in this manner because for the majority of our settlements, even the peak flow

is quite small. Furthermore, it was decided not to take these costs into account when designing the

system because it is assumed that there are pumps within the settlements that can provide this

redundancy. The following are a few examples of resistance curves for select pipes in the desalinated

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

0 5 10 15 20

W a t e r [ m 3 ]

Time of Day


Cumulative Demand

Cumulative Supply

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

0 5 10 15 20


Time of Day

Tank 3 Water Level



49

water supply system. The resistance curves are different because each pipe has a different diameter but

the pump curve is the same for all of them because they are all attached to the same pump at the

system origin.

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

H e a d [ m ]

Flow [m3/hr]

Resistance Curve-Pipe 1

Resistance Curve

Pump Curve

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

H e a d [ m ]

Flow [m3/hr]

Resistance Curve-Pipe 3a

Resistance Curve

Pump Curve

0

2

4

6

8

10

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

H e a d [ m ]

Flow [m3/hr]

Resistance Curve-Pipe 3b

Resistance Curve

Pump Curve



50

Bill of Quantities

Code Description Unit Price Unit O&M Factor Quantity Unit Price

Pr Project 1 - - - - - $ 41,758,648.04

Pi Pipes - $/m 1.0075 - - $ 15,508,532.94

Pi.24 24" diameter pipe 488.93 $/m 1.0075 5,100 m $ 2,512,234.30

Pi.32 32" diameter pipe 691.07 $/m 1.0075 600 m $ 417,753.02




Pu Pumping Stations - $ - - $ 743,596.55

Pu.r1 Pumping Station-Adjacent to Reservoir 1 317070.9 $ - 1 - $ 317,070.92

Pu.r2 Pumping Station-Adjacent to Reservoir 2 179455.5 $ - 1 - $ 179,455.47

Pu.t1 Pumping Station-Adjacent to Tank 1 81120.65 $ - 1 - $ 81,120.65



Re Reservoirs - $/m3 - - m

3 $ 446,819.55

Re.01 Reservoir 1 - 15,781 m3 14.65 $/m

3 - 15,781 m

3 $ 231,194.55

Re.02 Reservoir 2 - 15,781 m3 15.35 $/m

3 - 14,050 m

3 $ 215,625.00

Ta Water Tanks - $/m3 - - m

3 $ 879,699.00

Ta.01 Water Tank 1 - 1,560 m3 181.19 $/m

3 - 1,560 m

3 $ 282,660.00

Ta.02 Water Tank 2 - 961 m3 206.33 $/m

3 - 961 m

3 $ 198,279.00

Ta.03 Water Tank 3 - 2,496 m3 159.76 $/m

3 - 2,496 m

3 $ 398,760.00

We Wells -Purchase & Installation - $/well 1.0075 - wells $ 24,180,000.00

We.01 Wells of 200 m3/hr supply 2000000 $/well 1.0075 12 wells $ 24,180,000.00



51

Annual Cost Breakdown

The largest annual costs for this supply system when the water is supplied by wells are the

energy costs. The water is essentially supplied by electricity in the form of dynamic head used to lift the

water from the aquifer. If the water was supplied from the desalination plant, the purchase of the water

would be the dominant cost. All of the other costs are for items purchased at the outset and then paidfor over the lifespan of the system (35 years). Even combined, the purchase costs are slightly less than

the recurring annual energy costs. Because the system contains only one design stage, the payments are

constant throughout the whole lifetime of the system.

17.99%

0.52%

0.87%

1.02%

51.64%

27.96%

Cost Breakdown-Percentage

Pipes

Reservoirs

Pumping Stations

Tanks

Energy Costs

Wells

$943,369.77

$27,288.04

$45,412.71

$53,724.74

$2,707,607.35

$1,466,035.06

Cost Breakdown - Values

Pipes

Reservoirs

Pumping Stations

Tanks

Energy Costs

Wells



52

Appendix

Linear Programming System Solution

Pipe 1

Fixed

Flow 3882 m3/hr

Total Length 5.8 km

Alternatives

D D HWC v

Dynamic Head

loss Length Head Loss Investment Cost PMT Cost

[inch] [mm] [m/sec] [m/km] [km] [m] [$] [$/yr]

2 50.8 105 532.03 4462668.093 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

3 76.2 110 236.46 568346.886 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

4 101.6 115 133.01 128946.242 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

6 152.4 120 59.11 16542.951 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

8 203.2 120 33.25 4075.317 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

10 254 125 21.28 1274.606 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

12 304.8 125 14.78 524.521 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

14 355.6 125 10.86 247.590 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

16 406.4 125 8.31 129.215 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

18 457.2 125 6.57 72.811 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

20 508 130 5.32 40.533 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

24 609.6 135 3.69 15.554 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

30 762 135 2.36 5.247 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

32 812.8 135 2.08 3.832 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

36 914.4 135 1.64 2.159 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

40 1016 140 1.33 1.208 5.80 7.01 5294240 $323,328.28

48 1219.2 140 0.92 0.497 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

54 1371.6 140 0.73 0.280 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

68 1727.2 140 0.46 0.091 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

80 2032 150 0.33 0.036 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

100 2540 155 0.21 0.012 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

Totals 5.80 7.01 5294240 $323,328.28

Pipe 2

Fixed Flow 184 m

3

/hr

Total Length 5.1 km

Alternatives

D D HWC v

Dynamic Head



2 50.8 105 532.03 15743.684 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

3 76.2 110 236.46 2005.050 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00



53

4 101.6 115 133.01 454.905 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

6 152.4 120 59.11 58.361 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

8 203.2 120 33.25 14.377 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

10 254 125 21.28 4.497 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

12 304.8 125 14.78 1.850 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

14 355.6 125 10.86 0.873 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

16 406.4 125 8.31 0.456 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

18 457.2 125 6.57 0.257 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

20 508 130 5.32 0.143 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

24 609.6 135 3.69 0.055 5.10 0.28 2493532.8 $152,284.31

30 762 135 2.36 0.019 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

32 812.8 135 2.08 0.014 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

36 914.4 135 1.64 0.008 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

40 1016 140 1.33 0.004 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

48 1219.2 140 0.92 0.002 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

54 1371.6 140 0.73 0.001 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

68 1727.2 140 0.46 0.000 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

80 2032 150 0.33 0.000 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

100 2540 155 0.21 0.000 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

Totals 5.10 0.28 2493532.8 $152,284.31

Pipe 3a

FixedFlow 3698 m

3/hr

Total Length 2 km

Alternatives

D D HWC v

Dynamic Head



2 50.8 105 532.03 4078856.774 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

3 76.2 110 236.46 519466.270 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

4 101.6 115 133.01 117856.234 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

6 152.4 120 59.11 15120.176 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

8 203.2 120 33.25 3724.819 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

10 254 125 21.28 1164.983 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

12 304.8 125 14.78 479.410 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

14 355.6 125 10.86 226.296 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

16 406.4 125 8.31 118.102 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

18 457.2 125 6.57 66.549 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

20 508 130 5.32 37.047 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

24 609.6 135 3.69 14.216 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

30 762 135 2.36 4.796 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

32 812.8 135 2.08 3.502 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00



54

36 914.4 135 1.64 1.973 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

40 1016 140 1.33 1.104 2.00 2.21 1825600 $111,492.51

48 1219.2 140 0.92 0.454 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

54 1371.6 140 0.73 0.256 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

68 1727.2 140 0.46 0.083 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

80 2032 150 0.33 0.033 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

100 2540 155 0.21 0.011 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

Totals 2.00 2.21 1825600 $111,492.51

Pipe 3b

FixedFlow 3618 m

3/hr

Total Length 2.7 km

Alternatives

D D HWC v

Dynamic Head



2 50.8 105 532.03 3916945.438 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

3 76.2 110 236.46 498845.914 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

4 101.6 115 133.01 113177.898 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

6 152.4 120 59.11 14519.977 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

8 203.2 120 33.25 3576.962 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

10 254 125 21.28 1118.739 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

12 304.8 125 14.78 460.380 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

14 355.6 125 10.86 217.313 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

16 406.4 125 8.31 113.413 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

18 457.2 125 6.57 63.907 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

20 508 130 5.32 35.577 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

24 609.6 135 3.69 13.652 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

30 762 135 2.36 4.605 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

32 812.8 135 2.08 3.363 0.60 2.02 415758.1031 $25,391.06

36 914.4 135 1.64 1.895 2.10 3.98 1677634.99 $102,456.03

40 1016 140 1.33 1.061 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

48 1219.2 140 0.92 0.436 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

54 1371.6 140 0.73 0.246 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

68 1727.2 140 0.46 0.080 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

80 2032 150 0.33 0.032 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

100 2540 155 0.21 0.010 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

Totals 2.70 6.00 2093393.093 $127,847.09

Pipe 3c

FixedFlow 261 m

3/hr



55

Total Length 2 km

Alternatives

D D HWC v

Dynamic Head



2 50.8 105 532.03 30080.286 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

3 76.2 110 236.46 3830.900 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

4 101.6 115 133.01 869.153 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

6 152.4 120 59.11 111.507 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

8 203.2 120 33.25 27.469 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

10 254 125 21.28 8.591 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

12 304.8 125 14.78 3.535 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

14 355.6 125 10.86 1.669 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

16 406.4 125 8.31 0.871 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

18 457.2 125 6.57 0.491 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

20 508 126 5.32 0.289 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

24 609.6 127 3.69 0.117 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

30 762 135 2.36 0.035 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

32 812.8 135 2.08 0.026 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

36 914.4 135 1.64 0.015 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

40 1016 140 1.33 0.008 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

48 1219.2 140 0.92 0.003 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

54 1371.6 140 0.73 0.002 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

68 1727.2 140 0.46 0.001 2.00 0.00 3686144 $225,119.11

80 2032 150 0.33 0.000 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

100 2540 155 0.21 0.000 0.00 0.00 0 $0.00

Totals 2.00 0.00 3686144 $225,119.11

Junction J-1

FixedDemand 0 m

3/hr

Elevation 30 m

Min Head 32 m

Calculated Head 68.21 m

Junction J-3

FixedDemand 80 m

3/hr

Elevation 36 m

Min Head 66 m


Junction J-2

FixedDemand 184 m

3/hr

Elevation 60 m

Min Head 62 m


Junction J-4

Fixed Demand 3357 m3/hr

Elevation 30 m

Min Head 60 m




56

Junction J-5

Fixed Demand 261 m3/hr

Elevation 30 m

Min Head 32 m


Full Water Balance for Recommended Alternative

Reservoir 1

Pump 24 hr

Hours

Demand

percentage

Domestic

Demand

Percentage

Agricultrue/In

dustry

Total

Domestic

Demand

Total

Agricultur

al

Demand

Total

Hourly

Demand

Well

Suppl

y

Meko

rot

Total

Suppl

y

Filling

Tank

Empt

ying

Tank

tank

level

24 451

0 1.1% 0% 468 0 468 1800 0 1800 1332 0 1783

1 1.0% 0% 426 0 426 1800 0 1800 1374 0 3157

2 1.1% 0% 468 0 468 1800 0 1800 1332 0 4489

3 1.2% 0% 511 0 511 1800 0 1800 1289 0 5778

4 1.4% 0% 596 0 596 1800 0 1800 1204 0 6982

5 1.9% 0% 809 0 809 1800 0 1800 991 0 7973

6 6.3% 10% 2682 0 2682 1800 0 1800 0 882 7091

7 6.6% 10% 2810 0 2810 1800 0 1800 0 1010 6081

8 7.6% 10% 3236 0 3236 1800 0 1800 0 1436 4645

9 8.0% 10% 3406 0 3406 1800 0 1800 0 1606 3039

10 7.0% 10% 2980 0 2980 1800 0 1800 0 1180 1859

11 5.5% 10% 2342 0 2342 1800 0 1800 0 542 1317

12 5.4% 10% 2299 0 2299 1800 0 1800 0 499 818

13 2.0% 10% 852 0 852 1800 0 1800 949 0 1766

14 1.9% 10% 809 0 809 1800 0 1800 991 0 2758

15 1.9% 10% 809 0 809 1800 0 1800 991 0 3749

16 3.0% 0% 1277 0 1277 1800 0 1800 523 0 4271

17 4.1% 0% 1746 0 1746 1800 0 1800 54 0 4326

18 6.1% 0% 2597 0 2597 1800 0 1800 0 797 3529

19 6.6% 0% 2810 0 2810 1800 0 1800 0 1010 2519

20 6.8% 0% 2895 0 2895 1800 0 1800 0 1095 1424

21 6.3% 0% 2682 0 2682 1800 0 1800 0 882 541

22 5.5% 0% 2342 0 2342 1800 0 1800 0 542 0

23 1.7% 0% 724 0 724 1175 0 1175 451 0 451

Total 100% 100% 42575 0 42575

4257

5 0

4257

5

4257

5

8515

0

1277

25

Regulatio

ns

1404

9.75 Max

1405

0



57

Tank 1

Pump Only in off Peak

Hours

Demand

percentage

Domestic

Demand Percentage

Agricultrue/Industry

Total

Domestic

Demand

Total

Agricultural

Demand

Total

Hourly

Demand

Well

Supply Mekorot

Total

Supply

Filling

Tank

Emptying

Tank

tank

level

24 434

0 1.1% 0% 10 0 10 200 0 200 190 0 624

1 1.0% 0% 9 0 9 200 0 200 191 0 815

2 1.1% 0% 10 0 10 200 0 200 190 0 1005

3 1.2% 0% 11 0 11 200 0 200 189 0 1194

4 1.4% 0% 13 0 13 200 0 200 187 0 1381

5 1.9% 0% 17 0 17 196 0 196 179 0 1560

6 6.3% 10% 57 68.4 126 0 0 0 0 126 1434

7 6.6% 10% 60 68.4 129 0 0 0 0 129 1305

8 7.6% 10% 69 68.4 138 0 0 0 0 138 1168

9 8.0% 10% 73 68.4 141 0 0 0 0 141 1026

10 7.0% 10% 64 68.4 132 0 0 0 0 132 894

11 5.5% 10% 50 68.4 119 0 0 0 0 119 775

12 5.4% 10% 49 68.4 118 0 0 0 0 118 658

13 2.0% 10% 18 68.4 87 0 0 0 0 87 571

14 1.9% 10% 17 68.4 86 0 0 0 0 86 485

15 1.9% 10% 17 68.4 86 0 0 0 0 86 400

16 3.0% 0% 27 0 27 0 0 0 0 27 372

17 4.1% 0% 37 0 37 0 0 0 0 37 335

18 6.1% 0% 56 0 56 0 0 0 0 56 279

19 6.6% 0% 60 0 60 0 0 0 0 60 219

20 6.8% 0% 62 0 62 0 0 0 0 62 157

21 6.3% 0% 57 0 57 0 0 0 0 57 100

22 5.5% 0% 50 0 50 200 0 200 150 0 250

23 1.7% 0% 16 0 16 200 0 200 184 0 434

Total 100% 100% 912 684 1596 1596 0 1596 1596 3192 4788

Regulations 526.68 Max 1560



58

Tank 2


Hour

s

Demand

percentag

e

Domestic

Demand

Percentage

Agricultrue/Industr

y

Total

Domestic

Demand

Total

Agricultura

l Demand

Total

Hourly

Deman

d

Well 2

Suppl

y

Mekoro

t

Total

Suppl

y

Fillin

g

Tank

Emptyin

g Tank

tank

level

24 464

0 1.1% 0% 6 0 6 200 0 200 194 0 658

1 1.0% 0% 5 0 5 200 0 200 195 0 853

2 1.1% 0% 6 0 6 113 0 113 107 0 961

3 1.2% 0% 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 6 955

4 1.4% 0% 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 7 948

5 1.9% 0% 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 10 938

6 6.3% 10% 32 41.1 73 0 0 0 0 73 866

7 6.6% 10% 33 41.1 74 0 0 0 0 74 791

8 7.6% 10% 38 41.1 79 0 0 0 0 79 712

9 8.0% 10% 40 41.1 81 0 0 0 0 81 631

10 7.0% 10% 35 41.1 76 0 0 0 0 76 555

11 5.5% 10% 28 41.1 69 0 0 0 0 69 486

12 5.4% 10% 27 41.1 68 0 0 0 0 68 418

13 2.0% 10% 10 41.1 51 0 0 0 0 51 367

14 1.9% 10% 10 41.1 51 0 0 0 0 51 316

15 1.9% 10% 10 41.1 51 0 0 0 0 51 265

16 3.0% 0% 15 0 15 0 0 0 0 15 250

17 4.1% 0% 21 0 21 0 0 0 0 21 230

18 6.1% 0% 31 0 31 0 0 0 0 31 199

19 6.6% 0% 33 0 33 0 0 0 0 33 166

20 6.8% 0% 34 0 34 0 0 0 0 34 132

21 6.3% 0% 32 0 32 0 0 0 0 32 100

22 5.5% 0% 28 0 28 200 0 200 172 0 273

23 1.7% 0% 9 0 9 200 0 200 191 0 464

Total 100% 100% 502 411 913 913 0 913 913 1826

273

9

Regulation

s 301.29 Max 961



Tank 3


Hours

Demand

percentage

Domestic

Demand

Percentage

Agricultrue/Industry

Total

Domestic

Demand

Total

Agricultural

Demand

Total

Hourly

Demand

Well

Supply Mekorot

Total

Supply

Filling

Tank

Emptying

Tank

tank

level

24 1331

0 1.1% 0% 5 0 5 200 0 200 195 0 1526

1 1.0% 0% 5 0 5 200 0 200 195 0 1721

2 1.1% 0% 5 0 5 200 0 200 195 0 1916

3 1.2% 0% 5 0 5 200 0 200 195 0 2111

4 1.4% 0% 6 0 6 200 0 200 194 0 2305

5 1.9% 0% 9 0 9 200 0 200 191 0 2496

6 6.3% 10% 29 228.1 257 137 0 137 0 120 2376

7 6.6% 10% 30 228.1 258 0 0 0 0 258 2118

8 7.6% 10% 35 228.1 263 0 0 0 0 263 1855

9 8.0% 10% 36 228.1 265 0 0 0 0 265 1591

10 7.0% 10% 32 228.1 260 0 0 0 0 260 1331

11 5.5% 10% 25 228.1 253 0 0 0 0 253 1077

12 5.4% 10% 25 228.1 253 0 0 0 0 253 825

13 2.0% 10% 9 228.1 237 0 0 0 0 237 587

14 1.9% 10% 9 228.1 237 0 0 0 0 237 351

15 1.9% 10% 9 228.1 237 0 0 0 0 237 114

16 3.0% 0% 14 0 14 0 0 0 0 14 100

17 4.1% 0% 19 0 19 200 0 200 181 0 281

18 6.1% 0% 28 0 28 200 0 200 172 0 454

19 6.6% 0% 30 0 30 200 0 200 170 0 624

20 6.8% 0% 31 0 31 200 0 200 169 0 793

21 6.3% 0% 29 0 29 200 0 200 171 0 964

22 5.5% 0% 25 0 25 200 0 200 175 0 1139

23 1.7% 0% 8 0 8 200 0 200 192 0 1331

Total 100% 100% 456 2281 2737 2737 0 2737 2737 5474 8211

Regulations 903.21 Max 2496

Water System Design-libre

Documents

Transcript of Water System Design-libre