GIS / Hydraulic Model Integration 2008 ESRI UC

1. GIS / Hydraulic Model Integration2008 ESRI UC Will Allender, GISP Planning and Engineering Asset Systems Planning August 6, 2008

2. GIS / InfoWater Integration Agenda • Overview of Colorado Springs Utilities • Goals and objectives • Modeling types • Data requirements for modeling • System comparisons • Data and process flow • Lessons learned and next steps

3. GIS / InfoWater Integration Overview and background • 4 service utility - 500 square miles • 122,000 water meters – 380,000 population • 208,000 water mains – 2000 miles • 22,000 hydrants – 66,000 valves • Water – Raw, potable and non-potable • AutoCAD-based model (H2ONet)  InfoWater • ESRI/Librarian GIS  SDE geodatabase

4. GIS / InfoWater Integration Goals and objectives • Overarching goal - Integrate GIS with InfoWater • Define target level of integration • Inter-system data element mapping • Inter-system data element comparison • Analyze data quality between systems • Establish data improvement processes • Reporting of quality improvements

5. GIS / InfoWater Integration Goals and objectives • Why integrate at all? • Eliminate manual data entry – gain efficiencies • Cross-system update • Data availability to the enterprise • Eliminate spreadsheet data transfer • Allows for complete model • Provide connection to customer consumption • Data validation – feedback loop

6. GIS / InfoWater Integration Modeling types • Skeletonized/reduced vs. all-pipes model • Skeletonized is a simplified view of the system • Improves model performance for large systems • All-pipes allowable due to PC/IT improvements • System model vs. daily model • System model includes existing and future • Model is updated on-demand by the engineer • Daily model is an operational model • Real time updates • Existing infrastructure

7. GIS / InfoWater Integration Data requirements for modeling GIS Gravity main Fitting Hydrant Line valve Change of condition Meter station Control valve Storage facility Pump Production well Hydraulic model Pipes (links) Junctions (nodes) Valves Tanks Pumps Reservoirs

8. GIS / InfoWater Integration Data requirements for modeling • Pipes (links) • Location (SHAPE field) • Modeling properties • Length • Diameter • Roughness • Material type • Age (based on year installed) • Type (hydrant lateral vs. not)

9. GIS / InfoWater Integration Data requirements for modeling • Junctions (fittings, hydrants, line valves) • Location (x,y) • Modeling properties • Demand (customer count and consumption) • Elevation • Valve type or fitting type • Age (general information)

10. GIS / InfoWater Integration Data requirements for modeling • Valves (specifically pressure control valves) • Location (x,y) • Modeling properties • Elevation • Pressure settings • Age (general information)

11. GIS / InfoWater Integration Data requirements for modeling • Tanks • Location (x,y) • Modeling properties • Diameter and volume • Base elevation • Min/max/initial water level • Age (general information)

12. GIS / InfoWater Integration Data requirements for modeling • Pumps • Location (x,y) • Modeling properties • Type • Elevation • Horsepower • Design head and design flow • Age (general information)

13. GIS / InfoWater Integration Data requirements for modeling • Reservoirs (Wells at Colorado Springs Utilities) • Location (x,y) • Modeling properties • Type • Head • Pattern (depending on pump) • Depth • Capacity

14. GIS / InfoWater Integration System comparisons • Linear feature comparisons • Point feature comparisons

15. GIS / InfoWater Integration Linear system comparison • 2 versions of same pipe • 3 line segments • 4 vertices

16. GIS / InfoWater Integration Linear system comparison

17. GIS / InfoWater Integration Linearsystem comparison • Explode model pipes into line segments • Convert segments to centroids (w/ attributes) • Spatial join (limit20’) • Compare attributes

18. GIS / InfoWater Integration Linear system comparison

19. GIS / InfoWater Integration Linear system comparison

20. GIS / InfoWater Integration Linear system comparison

21. GIS / InfoWater Integration Linear system comparison

22. GIS / InfoWater Integration Pipe roughness coefficient • Rule-based

23. GIS / InfoWater Integration Pipe roughness • Clustering in old part of city • 3256 model pipes have roughness < 100 • Custom C-value from engineer will need to be preserved

24. GIS / InfoWater Integration Linear system comparison Results of linear comparison • 5944 locations where pipes diameters do not match (2.6%) • 1440 locations – diameter delta > 4” • 5101 locations where install date do not match • 2731 locations where date delta > 10 years • Hydraulic model material attribute does not support a useful comparison • Roughness coefficient of 3256 old pipes is custom • Only auto-update new pipes • 1907 geometric network junctions

25. GIS / InfoWater Integration Node comparison results Junctions comparison • Hydrant - 12,546 in the model • 98 as-built hydrants not co-located in GIS • Elevation Tanks • 41 total • Already cleaned up to 100% match Pumps, valves and reservoirs • No significant comparable attributes • Small number – visit manually

26. GIS / InfoWater Integration Elevation data comparison

27. GIS / InfoWater Integration Issues and next steps • Date fields – InfoWater stores dates as YYYY, GIS stores dates as MM/DD/YYYY • All coded domain must be decoded for interpretation • LID or LinkID – to be determined and quite problematic • Diameters – search and replace all NULLs and 0’s with valid values • Feature elevations – derive in GIS • Pump flow rates are entered in comment field – inconsistent • Preserve custom model attribution • Demand allocation is a full project • Data QA is an “exploratory process”

28. GIS / InfoWater Integration Questions? Will Allender • wallender@csu.org Special thanks to Penn State • Dr. Patrick M. Reed – Technical Advisor • Dr. Doug Miller – Academic Advisor