Discolouration is one of the biggest causes of customer complaint associated with potable water. The flushing of systems has been widely identified as an appropriate pro-active means of removing material from distribution networks and hence controlling discolouration. Such flushing involves creating aggressive hydraulic forces within the network such that the materials that contribute to discolouration are mobilised and removed. Understanding of the causes and mechanisms leading to discolouration are poor. Previous work has been presented on the characterisation of material and particles collected at hydrants during flushing trials in the UK. From this data it was hypothesised that the materials causing discolouration originated from cohesive layers on pipe walls, and that once disturbed the material is maintained as a permanent suspension even under the most quiescent of networks conditions. The work presented in this paper attempts to validate the hypothesis that the discolouration materials originate from cohesive layers, and investigate the nature and variability of such layers within live distribution systems.
The study involved the aggressive flushing of a long discrete length of cast iron pipe with known discolouration problems. The results showed a progressive generation of material over the length of the pipe, confirming that the material originated from a uniformly distributed cohesive source. This was followed by a sequence of flushing operations for the systematic cleaning of a complex network area, encompassing a mixture of pipe materials and ages. All measured turbidity traces showed exponential decay with time. Such exponential decay may be predicted by a model based on a change in layer strength with degree of erosion. Hydraulic forces appear to be a key factor governing the availability and mobilisation of material. Iron is the dominant material mobilised from all the pipes. There is no direct trend between the amount or the composition of the material mobilised from the different pipes.
Pipes in distribution systems often become tuberculated because of internal corrosion, sliming, and scaling. This condition frequently leads to an increase in the roughness of the pipe wall and in a reduction of the pipe diameter. Such changes lead to reduced hydraulic capacity of the pipes within distribution systems. Most model calibration is undertaken by adjusting roughness coefficients alone; the reduction in pipe diameter is often neglected. This may have a significant effect on the prediction of the correct flow velocity. The calibrated models often correctly predict the pressure distribution and the flow balance at each node in the system; however, the representation of the flow paths and velocity distribution may not be well predicted. As a consequence, the prediction of the travel time may be inaccurate. Water age is a function of the travel time, and water age is known to have a significant effect on water quality and on the way in which water quality changes within distribution systems. This article describes the relationship between pipe roughness and effective pipe diameter based on a series of fieldwork measurements and a modeling study. On the basis of the system studied, it is shown that to accurately model measured pressure response, flow, and velocity, an increase in effective roughness height of 1 mm (0.04 in.) is equivalent to a 2‐mm (0.08 in.) reduction in effective diameter. Therefore, the change in diameter caused by turberculation of the pipe wall is an important parameter, and such changes, together with changes in roughness, should be taken into account in any mathematical model, particularly those in which consideration is given to water quality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.