How the impacts of burst water mains are influenced by soil sand content

Abstract

Abstract. Society relies on infrastructure, but as infrastructure systems are often collocated and interdependent, they are vulnerable to cascading failures. This study investigated cross-infrastructure and societal impacts of burst water mains, with the hypothesis that multi-infrastructure failures triggered by burst water mains are more common in sandy soils. When water mains in sandy soils burst, pressurised water can create subsurface voids and abrasive slurries, contributing to further infrastructure failures. Three spatial data investigations, at nested scales, were used to assess the influence that soil sand content has on the frequency and damage caused by burst water mains (1) to roads in the county of Lincolnshire, (2) to other proximal water mains in East Anglia and (3) to other proximal infrastructure and wider society across England and Wales. These investigations used infrastructure network and failure data, media reports and soil maps, and were supported by workshop discussions and structured interviews with infrastructure industry experts. The workshop, interviews and media reports produced a greater depth of information on the infrastructure and societal impacts of cascading failures than the analysis of infrastructure data. Cross-infrastructure impacts were most common on roads, built structures and gas pipes, and they occurred at a higher rate in soils with very high sand contents.

Improving pipe failure predictions: Factors affecting pipe failure in drinking water networks

“…resulting in pipes being unsupported and sagging (Brink et al, 1982). Farewell, Jude and Pritchard, (2018) reported that pipe failures in sandy soil had a spatio-temporal relationship with previous failures, suggesting loss of water under pressure can lead to washout of sandy soils and further failures. They also reported that trenching during construction of roads provides preferential hydrological pathways which can lead to washout cavities in sandy soil conditions.…”

“…Goulter and Kazemi (1988) revealed that 22% of failures occurred within one meter of the previous failure and 42% of these failure occurred within 1 day of the first failure. This pattern is typically attributed to the aging deteriorating pipe and the potential for the first failure to disturb the surrounding environment through washing and eroding bedding conditions, altered soil moisture conditions weakening soil and the disturbance of the pipe during repair operations (Farewell et al, 2018;Farrow et al, 2017).…”

Using generalized additive models to investigate the environmental effects on pipe failure in clean water networks

“…Pipe failures can amass considerable financial costs from wasted water processing, proximal property and infrastructure damage, service interruption for consumers and network repairs. A comprehensive overview of the impacts of water mains failure has been previously undertaken 2 . The implications of pipe failure are significant, and with an estimated 35% future increase in UK water demand by 2050, in addition to water stress from environmental risks under future climates 3 , water companies are being challenged by the industry regulator to reduce water lost through pipe failures.…”

Enhancing the value of adaptation reporting as a driver for action: lessons from the UK

“…Increasing interest in the ARP process is now emerging from academia, policymakers and practitioners in the UK, as well as internationally from countries considering the use of policy instruments to promote organizational adaptation as a means of providing evidence to inform, evaluate and support national and local climate change policy development (BM&F Bovespa, 2018;C40 Cities, 2018;Ernst and Young, 2015;Jude et al, 2017;Street, Hayman, & Wilkins, 2017;Sun, He, Rummy, & Lauzon, 2015). In addition to research discussing and investigating the ARP process (Jude et al, 2017;Tangney, 2017), ARP reports have provided supporting evidence for, and been referenced in, numerous reports investigating climate risks to infrastructure (Ferranti et al, 2017;Murrant, Quinn, & Chapman, 2015;Murrant, Quinn, Chapman, & Heaton, 2017;Palin et al, 2013), complex infrastructure risks (Farewell, Jude, & Pritchard, 2018), and evidence needs supporting adaptation policy-making and planning (Kelly, 2013;Tang & Dessai, 2012;Tangney, 2017). Reporting authorities have also actively participated in research investigating the reporting process and the use of climate projections in adaptation planning (Tang & Dessai, 2012).…”