Modeling One and Twophase Water Hammer Flows - Advances in Control and Automation of Water Systems - page 48

population). Dateline for Field Tests and Lab. model data collection have been
started at 12:00 a.m., 10/02/07 until 05/02/09. Requirments data have been col-
lected from the “PLC” of Rasht city water treatment plant.
Case Study --The pipeline was included water treatment plant pump station (in
the start of water transmission line), 3.595 km of 2*1200 mm diameter pre-stressed
pipes and one 50,000 m³ reservoir (in the end of water transmission line). All of these
parts have been tied into existing water networks. This method provided a suitable
way for detecting, analysis and records of transient flow (down to 5 milliseconds).
Transient flow has been solved for pipeline in the range of approximate equations.
These approximate equations have been solved by numerical solutions of the nonlin-
ear Navier-Stokes equations in Method of Characteristics (MOC) [9]. The laboratory
model specification data is shown in Table 3.1 and Figure 3.1.

tABle 3.1 Laboratory Model Technical specifications.

Laboratory Model Technical specifications
pipe diameter

Notation d Value 22 Dimension

mm

surge tank cross section area A 1.521*10-³ m²

pipe cross section area a .3204*10-³ m²

pipe thickness t 0.9 mm

fluid density ρ 1000 kg/ m³

volumetric coefficient K 2.05 GN/ m²

fluid power P * *

fluid force F * *

friction loss hf * *

frequency W * *

fluid velocity ν * m/s

Max fluctuation Ymax * *

flow rate q * m³/s

pipe length L * m

period of motion T * *

Surge tank and reservoir elevation difference y * m

surge wave velocity C * m/s

* Laboratory experiments and Field Tests results

If liquid density and pipe cross section are constant, the instantaneous velocity is
the same in all sections. These rigidity assumptions result in an easy-to-solve ordinary
differential equation; however, its application is limited to the analysis of surge. Newton's