A comparison of UK domestic water services sizing methods with each other and with empirical data

Abstract

Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users to access the University's research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on NRL are retained by the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. Single copies of full items can be reproduced, displayed or performed, and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, title and full bibliographic details are given, as well as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata page. The content must not be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any format or medium without formal permission of the copyright holder. The full policy is available online: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/policies.html This document may differ from the final, published version of the research and has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies. To read and/or cite from the published version of the research, please visit the publisher's website (a subscription may be required.) AbstractEvidence suggests that DCWS sizing methods in many countries around the world tend to overestimate the actual peak water volume flow rate. Oversizing DWS systems does waste materials and money, but it also increases the length of time that it takes for water to pass through the system which can increase water temperatures with the associated risks that presents. This paper compares the three commonly used UK DCWS sizing methods and reveals variance in the methods, the design flow rates calculated and the amount of diversity applied by each method. BS EN 806 1 returns the lowest design flow rates of the three methods and also applies significantly greater diversity.Empirical DCWS volume flow rate data from two case study buildings revealed that all three UK sizing methods significantly overestimated the peak water volume flow rates but that BS EN 806 1 Page 2 of 26 was the closest. Additional empirical data from seven more buildings has been used to validate the data from this study and add confidence to the findings. This research provides useful evidence to help engineers select the most appropriate UK DCWS sizing method and to anticipate the likely range and fluctuation of DCWS flow rates.Keywords DWS, domestic water service, DCWS, domestic cold water service, DHWS, domestic hot water service, water, loading unit, volume flow rate, probability, oversizing Engineers tend to be conservative by nature and generally err on the side of caution to ensure that there is never any cause for customer complaint about their designs. This is understandable but there can be negative consequences if the full implications of such decisions are not fully understood. This paper reveals significant oversizing compared to empirical data from each of the three UK DWS sizing methods and highlights the reasons for this. The practical application of this paper lies in the presented results data and analysis whi...

Stochastic simulation model of water demand in residential buildings

“…The method proposed by Hunter 1 is widely used in countries such as the United States, England, and Japan; the methods based on the squareroot application are used in countries such as Germany, Brazil, and the Netherlands. Webster 2 and Tindall and Pendle 3 conducted field studies in which they compared the flow values obtained in the field with those obtained with the Hunter method; the values obtained with the Hunter method were substantially higher than those of the collected field data.…”