Analysis of methodologies for determination of the economic pipe diameter
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Relatório |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | RBRH (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2318-03312019000100402 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT The design of water distribution systems includes, above all, the determination of the pipe size that meets the requirements of the system and brings reduced annual costs of installation and operation. Among the existing methodologies for the economic pipe diameter determination, Bresse’s equation is still common among designers. This work aims to analyze the efficiency of Bresse’s equation, the MBPW and the MLVPC, comparing them with the MREC. We recommend that the designers do not use the MBPW and the MLVPC. When referring to water distribution systems of small size, it is possible to use the equation of Bresse, as long as it is used with a proper value for its coefficient k. For HDPE, we propose k = 1.17 or k = 1.18. For PVC DEFOFO and GFRP, we suggest the range of 1.19 to 1.23 and 1.29 to 1.32, respectively. Regarding the water distribution systems of bigger dimensions, we recommend the use of MREC as the methodology for the economic pipe diameter determination, due to the impossibility of finding an appropriate value for the Bresse’s equation coefficient. |
id |
ABRH-1_803519645f8dedbdb4b30879a0bed662 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S2318-03312019000100402 |
network_acronym_str |
ABRH-1 |
network_name_str |
RBRH (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Analysis of methodologies for determination of the economic pipe diameterEconomic pipe diameterBresse’s equationWater distribution systems designABSTRACT The design of water distribution systems includes, above all, the determination of the pipe size that meets the requirements of the system and brings reduced annual costs of installation and operation. Among the existing methodologies for the economic pipe diameter determination, Bresse’s equation is still common among designers. This work aims to analyze the efficiency of Bresse’s equation, the MBPW and the MLVPC, comparing them with the MREC. We recommend that the designers do not use the MBPW and the MLVPC. When referring to water distribution systems of small size, it is possible to use the equation of Bresse, as long as it is used with a proper value for its coefficient k. For HDPE, we propose k = 1.17 or k = 1.18. For PVC DEFOFO and GFRP, we suggest the range of 1.19 to 1.23 and 1.29 to 1.32, respectively. Regarding the water distribution systems of bigger dimensions, we recommend the use of MREC as the methodology for the economic pipe diameter determination, due to the impossibility of finding an appropriate value for the Bresse’s equation coefficient.Associação Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos2019-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/reportinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2318-03312019000100402RBRH v.24 2019reponame:RBRH (Online)instname:Associação Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos (ABRH)instacron:ABRH10.1590/2318-0331.241920180148info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGama,Cléber Henrique de AraújoSouza,Vladimir Caramori Borges deCallado,Nélia Henriqueseng2019-08-06T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S2318-03312019000100402Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/rbrh/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||rbrh@abrh.org.br2318-03311414-381Xopendoar:2019-08-06T00:00RBRH (Online) - Associação Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos (ABRH)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Analysis of methodologies for determination of the economic pipe diameter |
title |
Analysis of methodologies for determination of the economic pipe diameter |
spellingShingle |
Analysis of methodologies for determination of the economic pipe diameter Gama,Cléber Henrique de Araújo Economic pipe diameter Bresse’s equation Water distribution systems design |
title_short |
Analysis of methodologies for determination of the economic pipe diameter |
title_full |
Analysis of methodologies for determination of the economic pipe diameter |
title_fullStr |
Analysis of methodologies for determination of the economic pipe diameter |
title_full_unstemmed |
Analysis of methodologies for determination of the economic pipe diameter |
title_sort |
Analysis of methodologies for determination of the economic pipe diameter |
author |
Gama,Cléber Henrique de Araújo |
author_facet |
Gama,Cléber Henrique de Araújo Souza,Vladimir Caramori Borges de Callado,Nélia Henriques |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Souza,Vladimir Caramori Borges de Callado,Nélia Henriques |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Gama,Cléber Henrique de Araújo Souza,Vladimir Caramori Borges de Callado,Nélia Henriques |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Economic pipe diameter Bresse’s equation Water distribution systems design |
topic |
Economic pipe diameter Bresse’s equation Water distribution systems design |
description |
ABSTRACT The design of water distribution systems includes, above all, the determination of the pipe size that meets the requirements of the system and brings reduced annual costs of installation and operation. Among the existing methodologies for the economic pipe diameter determination, Bresse’s equation is still common among designers. This work aims to analyze the efficiency of Bresse’s equation, the MBPW and the MLVPC, comparing them with the MREC. We recommend that the designers do not use the MBPW and the MLVPC. When referring to water distribution systems of small size, it is possible to use the equation of Bresse, as long as it is used with a proper value for its coefficient k. For HDPE, we propose k = 1.17 or k = 1.18. For PVC DEFOFO and GFRP, we suggest the range of 1.19 to 1.23 and 1.29 to 1.32, respectively. Regarding the water distribution systems of bigger dimensions, we recommend the use of MREC as the methodology for the economic pipe diameter determination, due to the impossibility of finding an appropriate value for the Bresse’s equation coefficient. |
publishDate |
2019 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-01-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/report |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
report |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2318-03312019000100402 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2318-03312019000100402 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/2318-0331.241920180148 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
RBRH v.24 2019 reponame:RBRH (Online) instname:Associação Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos (ABRH) instacron:ABRH |
instname_str |
Associação Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos (ABRH) |
instacron_str |
ABRH |
institution |
ABRH |
reponame_str |
RBRH (Online) |
collection |
RBRH (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
RBRH (Online) - Associação Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos (ABRH) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||rbrh@abrh.org.br |
_version_ |
1754734701932707840 |