1996
DOI: 10.1061/(asce)0733-9496(1996)122:3(214)
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of Methods for Predicting Deficient-Network Performance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
95
0
16

Year Published

2007
2007
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 188 publications
(111 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
95
0
16
Order By: Relevance
“…The demand satisfaction ratio, derived by pressure-driven analysis (see e.g. Gupta and Bhave 1996;Giustolisi et al 2008;Gorev and Kodzhespirova 2013;Kovalenko et al 2014;Ciaponi et al 2015), is the ratio of the flow delivered to the flow required (Ackley et al 2001;Tanyimboh et al 2003;Kalungi and Tanyimboh 2003;Tanyimboh and Templeman 2010). The demand satisfaction ratio is also known as the available demand fraction (see e.g.…”
Section: Formulation Of the Optimization Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The demand satisfaction ratio, derived by pressure-driven analysis (see e.g. Gupta and Bhave 1996;Giustolisi et al 2008;Gorev and Kodzhespirova 2013;Kovalenko et al 2014;Ciaponi et al 2015), is the ratio of the flow delivered to the flow required (Ackley et al 2001;Tanyimboh et al 2003;Kalungi and Tanyimboh 2003;Tanyimboh and Templeman 2010). The demand satisfaction ratio is also known as the available demand fraction (see e.g.…”
Section: Formulation Of the Optimization Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Differently from the usual problem of analysis of water networks where it is assumed a-priori the ability of the system to satisfy the demand, Qdemand, and flow losses are evaluated as a fixed percentage of the circulating flow, in this case both these quantities cannot be assumed known, and must be evaluated as a function of the network response. Indeed, the ability to serve the users has been expressed as a function of hydraulic head according the following expression (Gupta & Bhave, 1996) (8) where h is the water head respect to the ground level, hdemand is the water head needed to assure to the consumers their demand, Qdemand, and hmin is the minimum water head to be assured in order to have a discharge greater than zero. In this case hdemand can be assumed to be equal to the average building height plus 3÷7 m (in order to account for the head losses due to domestic water system), whilst n is a model coefficient controlling the shape of the head dependent demand and to be assumed into the recommended range between 0.5 and 2.0.…”
Section: Flow Equationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The evaluation of the hydraulic reliability requires multiple analyses of the distribution system under both normal and subnormal operating conditions. This requires pressure-dependent modelling (Bhave 1981;Germanopoulos 1985;Gupta and Bhave 1996;Ackley et al 2001). Pressure-dependent modelling differs from demand-driven modelling in that pressure-dependent modelling treats the available flow at a demand node as a function of the nodal pressure (e.g.…”
Section: Hydraulic Reliability Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%