Water System Planning Guideline

WATER SYSTEM PLANNING GUIDELINE
Section Index
Version 1 September 2014
Overall Section Index and Version 1

Welcome to Sydney Water’s Section 0:
Document Control
Pages 1-2
September 2014
Water System Planning Guideline
Section 1: Introduction to the Guideline Version 1 Pages 1-25
(WSPG).
September 2014
It replaces the planning section Section 2: Water System Planning Version 1 Pages 1-47
September 2014
and other relevant parts from the
Section 3: Water Demand and Growth Version 1 Pages 1-37
WSAA Water Supply Code of September 2014
Australia (SW Version) and similar System Hydraulics
Section 4: Version 1 Pages 1-17
purpose internal documents. (Pressure) September 2014
Section 5: Infrastructure Planning Version 1 Pages 1-46

September 2014
Water System Planning
Guideline
Section 1: Introduction to the Guideline
Version 1
September 2014
SYDNEY WATER Section 1: Introduction to the guideline
Contents
1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 4
1.1.1 Purpose and aim .................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1.2 Objectives and audience......................................................................................................................... 4
1.1.3 Planners’ responsibilities ........................................................................................................................ 4
1.2 Scope of the guideline ............................................................................................... 6

1.2.1 Scope ..................................................................................................................................................... 6
1.2.2 Omissions............................................................................................................................................... 6
1.2.3 Fire-fighting ............................................................................................................................................ 7
1.3 Fit with other documents .......................................................................................... 8

1.3.1 History ................................................................................................................................................... 8
1.3.2 Other planning documents and WSPG .................................................................................................... 8
1.3.3 Future ...................................................................................................................................................10
1.4 Drivers for change .................................................................................................. 11

1.5 Document structure ................................................................................................ 12
1.6 Context .................................................................................................................. 13
1.6.1 Definitions.............................................................................................................................................13
1.6.2 Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................................17
1.6.3 Document control and governance ........................................................................................................19
1.6.4 Roles and responsibilities ......................................................................................................................19
1.6.5 Training and competencies ....................................................................................................................20
1.6.6 References ............................................................................................................................................20
1.6.7 Attachments and/or appendices ............................................................................................................23
1.6.8 Document control .................................................................................................................................24
1.6.9 Revision control chart ............................................................................................................................24
Appendix A: WSPG-Development and update process ........................................................ 25
Figures
Figure 1 - 1Water planning information (Schematic) 10
Tables
Table 1 - 1 Drivers for change 11
Table 1 - 2 WSPG structure and content 12
WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

BMIS Document Number: AMQ0562.01 Version: 1 Date: September 2014
Document Owner: Position Strategy Manager, Servicing & Asset Strategy Page 2 of 25
Section 1- Introduction to the guideline

1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 Purpose and aim
The purpose of the Water System Planning Guideline is to guide planners in the planning of water
and recycled water systems.
The aim of the guideline is to provide a water supply system that meets Sydney Water’s obligations
under our Act, Operating Licence and Customer Contract for:
• water quality
• continuity of supply
• pressure
• a successful and efficient business.
1.1.2 Objectives and audience

The objectives of this document are to:
• facilitate efficient and consistent planning of water infrastructure within Sydney Water
• provide a consolidated guideline for planning work
• provide guidance on System Integrated Planning (integrating drivers such as growth,

renewals and reliability)
• provide justifications for the adopted requirements and criteria
• include updated and new planning criteria from recent reviews.

The audience includes:
• internal planners
• external planners carrying out water planning work for, or on behalf of, Sydney Water.
1.1.3 Planners’ responsibilities

In addition to applying the information and guidelines provided throughout this document, planners
will be responsible to add value by:
• reviewing the function of assets to ensure they are fit for purpose
• continually searching for opportunities to improve the system, even if considered outside
the original scope

• challenging criteria with the aim of improving performance or financial viability.
To further emphasise these responsibilities, the following is from the book, Water Distribution
Systems: Simulation and Sizing (Reference 30):
‘During the work of running the model to determine pipe sizes, the engineer needs to
reflect occasionally on how the project is meeting its goals. Is the project improving service
to 100 customers at a cost of $10 million? Is the project such that it can be upsized or
extended marginally to solve some other problem? Since the project was proposed, has
another project been constructed that makes this project deferrable...
In some instances, an engineer may identify a completely different type of solution than the
one originally proposed at the beginning of the study.’
The water system is continually improved by planners fulfilling their role and adding value. This, of
course, makes it difficult to fully define a planning brief at the start of the project. This needs to be
taken into account when estimating timeframes and budgets for planning projects.

1.2 Scope of the guideline

1.2.1 Scope
This document covers planning of drinking and recycled water network systems (delivery,
distribution, reticulation).
It mainly focuses on planning for:
• infill or greenfield developments
• renewal of existing assets
• reliability
• system monitoring
• water quality and pressure management.
The scope covers major planning projects (eg Sydney-wide) all the way through to minor projects
(eg renewal of small-sized mains). The planner needs to match the requirements of this guideline
with the scale of the project, realising that many minor projects may not require much planning.
1.2.2 Omissions
It does not cover:
• planning for water treatment facilities, ie treatment processes. However, it recognises that the
treatment plant is part of a total system
• planning for the total water cycle, ie incorporating wastewater and stormwater systems.
However, it recognises that these other systems may form the source of supply for some water
systems
• fire-fighting (Refer to Clause 1.2.3 below)
• the detailed process of how to use the water modelling system (Reference 55)
• anything other than planning, such as detail design or operational activities.

1.2.3 Fire-fighting
The Sydney Water manual Supply of Water for Fire-Fighting Purposes, in Section 8.1 Legal, states
that:
‘There is no specific requirement placed on Sydney Water in the Act, the Operating Licence of the
Customer Contract to make water available for fire-fighting purposes. However, there is a general
obligation on Sydney Water to provide a water supply system not prone to failure and would meet
the community needs, including fire-fight activities.’
And:
‘…Sydney Water does not guarantee that water supplies for fire-fighting purposes will be available
at all times and under all conditions.’
Therefore, Sydney Water does not assess fire-fighting demands when planning the water system.
Sydney Water also does not specifically provide capacity for bushfire events. However, Sydney
Water has developed rules regarding minimum pipe size requirements for new areas (Refer to
Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1)) and plans for a reliable
system.
Sydney Water (Liveable City Solutions - Urban Growth) also provides a pressure advisory report
under an IPART-approved structured fee. The report will be useful in the design of domestic and
fire services from Sydney Water mains. The relevant Australian Standards also recommend
regular operational and maintenance regimes plus independent certification to be arranged by the
owners.
The report considers the current system configuration, demands and level of development, plus
additional customer advised demands. However, due to the rate at which development occurs,
likelihood of mains renewals and possibilities of changes in demand, the report will be valid only for
12 months. Sydney Water also has the prerogative to make network changes that would improve
operating performance and to perhaps beneficially re-allocate supply to service growth. Advised
results cannot be used to indicate a permanent mains configuration or pressure condition.

1.3 Fit with other documents

1.3.1 History
The oldest document found on rules for water supply is The Water and Sewerage of Sydney, 1939,
compiled by F.J.J Henry (Reference 52) who by that time had served 50 years at the Water Board.
It advised that the basis of storage aimed at in Sydney is two maximum days’ supply for each
surface zone and one maximum day for elevated reservoirs.
The oldest existing planning document is the Water Investigations Sub-Branch Staff Handbook,
1968 (Reference 6). It advised that the handbook was issued for the guidance of officers engaged
in investigation work.
TIPS 5 (Reference 5) was introduced in 1986 and focused on planning for water pumping stations
(WPS), rising main and reservoir components of a system, as well as how staging of these
components would be managed. The major change of approach that was introduced in TIPS 5 was
that both the reservoir and input system (WPS and rising main) should be considered as a total
system with a combined capacity to maintain reserve storage at the end of any cycle of days of
high demand. Before 1986, planning criteria had required both the reservoir and the input system
to have a capacity equal to the ultimate maximum day demand of the water supply zone.
In 2002, various draft guideline documents were created, including the Water network analysis and
design manual’, in four chapters. These were never finalised.
A Design Criteria Guidelines Supplement (Reference 9) was developed in 2010 to update

information in the WSA Code 2002 (WSA-03-2002-2.2).
A booster guideline (References 7 and 8) was developed in 2004 and in 2010 to complement the
new technology available for booster pumping stations. This document was merged into the Water
Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
1.3.2 Other planning documents and WSPG

This guideline merges:
• previous drafts of guideline documents
• the planning and other relevant sections from the Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney
Water Edition (Reference 1). The remaining WSAA Code (Water) will be used for design and
construction information

• Technical Information Policy & Strategy TIPS 5 (Reference 5). Most of the requirements from
this document are shown in Section 5: Infrastructure Planning.
• Design Criteria Guidelines Supplement (Reference 9). Refer to Design Demand Rates for
Water Assets (SAP) (Reference 2).
The main documents now used for planning are:
• this guideline
• Water and recycled water system growth servicing strategy (GSS) criteria and guidelines 2012
(Reference 27) for growth servicing strategic planning only. The GSS is not a detailed
servicing strategy and as such, does not consider multiple options for optimisation to solve
capacity issues. The GSS focuses on providing an insight into the long-term strategy based on
the latest growth projections
• Sustainability Planning Manual (Reference 18). This manual provides guidance for project
teams and managers in interpreting and balancing relevant social, environmental, technical
and financial considerations, in consultation with stakeholders.
Figure 1 shows information used for water system planning.
Not shown on the diagram is the recently developed procedure Strategic Infrastructure Planning
(Reference 57). The procedure outlines a series of key activities to be followed and is applied to
SAS staff and service providers who are part of a team that develops servicing or asset strategies.

Guidelines
(Main documents)
Growth
Servicing Water System Sustainability
Planning
Strategy Planning Guideline Manual
Guideline**
Procedures
Main Drivers
(Main documents)
Growth
Detail planning (project
management procedure)
Water Modelling
Water System Planning Procedures
Renewals E.g. Strategic, Detail
Growth Servicing
Strategy
(project management
procedure)
Reliability
WSAA
and Technical std/
DESIGN
procedures
CONSTRUCTION
** for Growth Servicing

Strategic Planning only
Figure 1 - 1Water planning information (Schematic)

Inconsistencies between any of these documents should be resolved or agreed by the relevant
parties and, if appropriate, this guideline should then be updated.
1.3.3 Future
Possible future work may include merging this guideline with the Water and recycled water system
growth servicing strategy (GSS) criteria and guidelines 2012 (Reference 27).

1.4 Drivers for change

The planning context has changed in the last few decades. Table 1 - 1 shows the major
drivers of the ideas and requirements in this guideline.
Table 1 - 1 Drivers for change
Game changers Implications for planning
More infill growth compared to Need to develop better information on how to plan for and integrate
greenfield growth (infill growth all drivers, including growth, renewals and reliability.
is expected to be about 70%)
Existing areas are now subject to much more planning, where more
Aging infrastructure. More and more mains eventually will require renewal. Any planning for
renewals planning compared growth areas needs to consider future renewals. Any planning for
to the past renewals needs to include the growth component (renewals may
sometimes fully cater for future growth in the area).
Opportunities arise to re-assess reliability in the system.
Many candidates for renewals A ‘resizing/reconfiguration’ requirement is generally required when

have changed their function planning in existing systems.
since they were built
In some cases, the function has changed so much that the
candidate for renewal is no longer required.
Monitoring and controls are Much better data (on pressures, flows etc) and controls now exist.
now much more sophisticated The data helps better define the current system and enables a
than a decade or more ago refined approach to driving the existing assets harder. Also, assets
are more able to be controlled in real time (assists in emergencies).
Pressure changes Sydney Water has introduced more than 180 pressure reducing
valve (PRV) zones. These need to be taken into account when doing
infill growth or renewal planning.
Demand management and Current baseline demands are lower than they were before 2003. It
other issues (for example is possible that bounce-back of demands may occur. Therefore,
industrial decline, the changing monitoring of this issue is required as well as undertaking a
nature of development, etc) sensitivity analysis when planning.
have reduced both maximum
and average day demands
since 2000 by about 20%.
There are now better Concepts such as risk cost can be introduced into the planning
information and techniques for process to assist in improving consistency when reviewing reliability.
analysing risks
Introduction of improved Water Better sizing of infrastructure and analysis for reliability is possible.
Modelling System
Factors of safety can now be relaxed in some way given the level of
detail in the models as well as accuracy of results (considerably
greater connectivity). The information available (eg customer count)
can now be used for better risk and economic evaluation.

1.5 Document structure

The guideline has been divided into five sections to facilitate the update, review and release
process. The structure follows the planning process in principle, explained briefly in Table 1 - 2.
Table 1 - 2 WSPG structure and content
Number Title Content
The introduction to the document contains general planning

objectives, scope with exclusions, changes in the planning
Introduction to the
Section 1 context and a brief history of other planning documents. It also
Guideline
provides information on governance, roles and responsibilities,
along with definitions and references.
This section provides detail on the different planning phases and
Water System
integrates the drivers of growth, renewals and reliability into
Section 2 Planning
planning. It also provides water quality, monitoring and energy
requirements for planning.
This section provides guidance on how to consider system
Water Demand and
Section 3 demands for growth and reliability planning. It also provides
Growth
default demand rates.
This section describes pressure requirements (drinking water
System Hydraulics
Section 4 and recycled water for existing and new systems). It also
(Pressure)
provides guidance on how to manage system pressure issues.
This section provides information on system optimisation at the

Infrastructure
Section 5 asset level. It incorporates TIPS 5, with additional information on
Planning
reservoirs, pumps, water mains, valves etc.

1.6 Context
1.6.1 Definitions
The definitions listed below are complementary to the Glossary of Terms provided in the Water
Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition, (Reference 1).
Term Definition
Base model A hydraulic model that describes a water system at a particular time including all
infrastructure and operational controls as planned or designed.
BASIX BASIX-the Building Sustainability Index, Ensure homes are designed to use
less potable water and be responsible for less greenhouse gas emission by
setting energy and water reduction targets for house and units.
BI Data Extracted information from corporate data warehouse that contains IICATS
historical data
Consequence cost The cost of the impact or inconvenience.
Consequence cost = cost ($/property/day) x days impacted (days) x number of

properties.
Design pressure Design pressure has a factor of safety added to the operating pressure. This is
used in the design phase.
Limiting pressures, both maximum and minimum, that the designer allows for in
the design of a safe and suitable pipeline system. These pressures are used to
determine:
• A suitable pipe material to meet expected operating pressures for the

duration of the system life
• Structural requirements associated with the pipeline pressure
• Pipes network arrangement to service customers in terms of elevation

(acceptable range of residual pressures) and distance (acceptable minimum
residual pressure after headlosses)
For design pressure criteria refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney
Water Edition (Reference 1).
Diurnal pressure A daily variation in system pressure between periods of high and low water
variation usage (normally between day and night, or between any high and low demand
period) at any location.
Downtime The mean time to repair.
Dual water supply Refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
system
Failure rate The number of failures each year.

Term Definition
Flexibility This is a design attribute that considers uncertainty. Flexible designs fall into
three major categories: those that enable the system to change its size, those
that enable changes in function or capability, and those that protect against
particular failures or accidents (Reference 50)
Full supply level This is the level at the top of the operating storage.
(FSL)
Head Pressure expressed in terms of the height of a column of water (in metres head).
The head is a factor of 9.81 (nominally 10) lower than the equivalent value in
kPa, eg 800 kPa = 80 m head.
An indication of pressure loss in pipelines due to friction commonly expressed in

Headloss
metres
Hydraulic grade line Refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
(HGL)
HGL = pipe level above the datum (metres) + pressure (metres). The datum is
usually zero metres (AHD) Australian height datum (AHD).
Likelihood Chance of something happening.
Main tap The point of connection of the property to Sydney Water’s water supply main.
Maintainability This is a design attribute that reflects the ease, accuracy, safety, and economy
of performing maintenance actions (Reference 33)
Maximum minute Maximum demand that a system or part of a system is required to supply in any
demand one minute of the year (also called peak minute demand). It is often expressed
as a daily rate.
Mean Failure Rate Mean Failure Rate is the average failure rate with which an element fails or an
event occurs over a specific period of time.
Minimum minute Minimum demand that a system or part of a system is required to supply in any
demand one minute of the year. It is often expressed as a daily rate.
Minimum operating This is the level at the top of the dead storage (or bottom of reserve storage). It
level (MOL) is the lowest level in the reservoir that enables water to flow from the reservoir
without air entrapment.
Net hectare Gross hectare less areas occupied by reserves, parks and those set aside for
special uses (includes roads)
Operability This is a design attribute that considers the ease and success for operations
staff to maintain the system within its performance requirements.

Term Definition
Operationally Operationally adjusted RSL are set by certain constraints like- pressure
adjusted RSL limitations in the zone, water quality, reservoir structural integrity, the availability
of alternative supply paths, reservoir is covering multiple supply zones etc.
This is generally at a higher level than the required design RSL (based on
demand).
Operating pressure Refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
Operating storage This is part of the reservoir that is used for economical running of the input
system, eg the water pumping station (WPS) and rising main. The reservoir
normally cycles within this storage.
Amount of storage provided to accommodate diurnal fluctuations in demand and

to cater for demands exceeding the maximum allowable inflow rate and
required to optimise running of the total system, eg the water treatment plant,
water pumping stations, rising mains, distribution and transfer mains. The
reservoir normally cycles within the operating storage range defined by the
maximum upper window level and the minimum low window level under
automatic IICATS control.
Pumped system Refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
Reliability The extent of the system or component to perform its required functions under
stated conditions for a specified period of time:
• includes abnormal operation (that can be foreseen)
• the ‘stated conditions’ or reliability levels are negotiated and defined with
stakeholders (customers and regulators)
• increased reliability can be provided by the inclusion of redundancy and

operation flexibility
• the consequence of a reliability failure can be reduced by things such as a

reserve pump, additional valves etc.
In relation to the overall robustness of the system, reliability can be seen as the
probability of success
Resilience The ability to recover from, or adjust easily, to rare or extreme events, or
change:
• Recovery from an extreme event with greater understanding/learning.
Reserve storage Refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
level (RSL)
Reserve storage Refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
Reservoir capacity This will be equal to the operating storage plus the reserve storage.
Reticulation main Refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).

Term Definition
Sensitivity analysis The 10% demand sensitivity was derived from reviewing some delivery system
maximum days that showed an average 5% difference year to year for the Water
Wise period. At a zone level, this sensitivity is likely to be higher (some higher,
some lower).
Service pressure Refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
Shutdown block An analysis that occurs when a section of water main/asset/facility between
analysis valves is isolated. It is for the purpose of measuring the consequence.
System An integrated set of elements that accomplish a defined objective.
Supportability This is a design attribute that considers the personnel, logistics and spares
available to service maintenance activities.
Transfer main Refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
Trunk main/network A combination (network) of larger diameter water mains (≥DN 375) necessary to
ensure an adequate supply of water to, and within, reticulation networks
(systems) and generally not available for connection.
Refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
Water Wise Rules Water Wise rules are simple common sense everyday actions to replace drought
restrictions in Sydney, the Illawarra and the Blue Mountains. Water Wise
commenced on 22 June 2009. They are:
• Watering, including with sprinklers and irrigation systems, is allowed any
day before 10 am and after 4 pm to avoid the heat of the day.
• All hand-held hoses must have a trigger nozzle.
• No hosing of hard surfaces such as paths and driveways. Washing
vehicles is allowed.
• Fire hoses may be used for fire-fighting activities only.

1.6.2 Abbreviations
Acronym Definition
AC Asbestos cement
ADD Average day demand
ADWG Australian Drinking Water Guidelines
AICV Automatic inlet control valve
AVV Anti-vacuum valve
BASIX Building Sustainability Index
BEP Best efficiency point
BI Business intelligence
BI Data Extracted information database from IICATS
BR Break rate/s
BTS Bureau of Transport Statistics
CBD Central business district
CICL Cast iron cement (mortar) lined
CV Control valve
DCV Delivery control valve
DDF Daily demand factor
DICL Ductile iron cement (mortar) lined
DP&E The Department of Planning & Environment
DV Dividing valve
ECC Emergency Control Centre
EICV Emergency Inlet Control Valve
FR Failure rate
FSL Full supply level (of a reservoir)
GSS Growth servicing strategy
HGL Hydraulic grade line
HYDRA Sydney Water’s geographical information system
I&C Instrumentation and control

Acronym Definition
IECV Inlet emergency control valve
IICATS Integrated Instrumentation, Control, Automation and Telemetry System
MDD Maximum daily demand (that occurs during a given period)
MDP Maximum demand period
MFF Mean failure rate
MHD Maximum hour demand
ML Megalitre
ML/day Megalitres per day
MMD Maximum minute demand
MNF Minimum night flow
MOL Minimum operating level
MWD Maximum week demand
NPSH Net positive suction head
NPV Net present value
NRW Non-revenue Water
OASIS Overflow Abatement Customer Information System. Mapinfo table containing

property details including population projections
PRV Pressure reducing valve
RSL Reserve storage level
RTU Remote terminal unit
RV Reflux valve
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SOC System Operations Centre
SP Service pressure
SV Stop valve, also sluice valve
TIPS Technical Information Policy & Strategy; a series of SW’s internal instructional
documents
UBL Unavoidable background leakage
UFW Unaccounted for Water

Acronym Definition
VSD Variable speed drive
WFP Water filtration plant
WMS Water modelling system
WPS Water pumping station
WSAA Water Services Association of Australia Limited
1.6.3 Document control and governance

This guideline is an electronically controlled document and is subject to the AMQMS Document
and Records Management Standard Administrative Procedure under the BMIS system, for
electronic management of documents. Documents referenced by this guideline and controlled by
procedures under other content management systems will continue to be managed under those
systems, unless specifically transferred to SWIM. 1.6.4 below lists the main responsibilities that
apply specifically to this guideline.
The review period and process for this manual is as required on a needs basis. For the ‘Process
diagram’ to update the document information, refer to Appendix A:.
1.6.4 Roles and responsibilities

Position Title Responsibility
SaAS • Accountable for the guideline
• Audit the implementation of the guideline
EES • Responsible for guideline review and update
• Responsible for the WSAA Code and design criteria
documents, including content.
• Responsible for the technical specifications, including
content
• Coordinates development for the review of technical
specifications
• Ensures document formatting is consistent and the
template has been applied
Networks • Responsible for the operation of the water system to meet
its performance requirements
• Provides operational input and advice on system
resilience and reliability
• Develops contingency plans based on system capacity
and resilience
Hydraulic System Services • Responsible for monitoring and remote operation of
Sydney Water’s water and wastewater assets, on a 24 x
7 basis via the System Operations Centre (SOC)
• Operation of the trunk water system to achieve optimum
performance within agreed operational parameters to
achieve least $/ML cost
• Forecasting daily demand and scheduling treated water

flows and trunk water system operations

• Optimisation of energy usage in system optimisation
• Provides operational input and advice on system
resilience and reliability
• Develops contingency plans based on system capacity
and resilience
Document Author • Responsible for drafting documents
• Responsible for reviewing/incorporating ‘change requests’
and managing the review cycle
• Ensures that all relevant stakeholders have been
consulted
Document Reviewer • Responsible for reviewing the content of the document
Document Controller • Responsible for ensuring correct document formatting is
applied to documents
• Ensures appropriate reviews have been selected
1.6.5 Training and competencies

Include those who need to be aware of this document and/or trained in any procedures/equipment.
Process/Procedure Business Unit/Position
Planning SaAS, EES, Urban Growth, Service Delivery – Networks, Project
and Services (Hydraulic System Services)
1.6.6 References
Reference
Document type Title
number
Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition – Latest

1 ACP0028
version
2 AMQ0038 Design Demand Rates for Water Assets (SAP)
3 AMQ0057.doc Leakage Management Plan 2010-15
Calculation & Reporting - Corporate Waterbalance From

4 AMQ0059.doc
Storages
5 AMQ0071 Water Supply System Design - TIPS 5
6 AMQ0107 Water Investigations Sub-branch - Staff Handbook No 32, 1968
Guidelines for selection of small self-contained water booster

7 AMQ0109 (Archived)
stations, April 2004 (draft)
Guidelines for selection of small self-contained water booster

8 AMQ0109 (Archived)
stations, July 2010 (final draft)

9 AMQ0138 Design Criteria Guidelines Supplement, April 2010
10 AMQ0138.05 BASIX Water Savings Monitoring – December 2009
Review of the Programs to Minimise Inadvertent Ingestion of

11 AMQ0140 Recycled Water in Residential Recycled Water Systems,
January 2010
Sewage Pumping Station Code of Australia, WSA 04-2005-2.1,

12 ACP0029
Sydney Water Edition-2012
13 AMQF0029 System Reliability Decision Framework
14 AMQ0573(draft) Asset Hierarchy
AMQ0138
15 Design Criteria Guidelines Supplement, April 2010
(archived)
16 AMQ0138 Water Design Diurnal Curves.xls
17 AS4536 Australian standard for Life cycle costing
18 BMIS0144 Sustainability Planning Manual
19 BMIS0161 Options Library - Average Water Use Model
20 BS ISO 15686-5 Life Cycle Costing
21 HSP0070 Flow Isolation and/or Flow Management (FIFM)
22 HSS0009 Instrumentation and Control Standards TOG_TS01
23 HSS0005 Flow Monitoring Station Standards TOG_TS05
24 QMAF0021 Operational Risk Management Procedure
25 QMAF0021 Risk Management - Operational Risks
26 QMAF0018 Corporate Risk Register, Sydney Water
Water and recycled water system growth servicing strategy

27 DM-AP-00021263
criteria and guidelines 2012
28 SWIM (196891) Reliability Technical Supplement
29 WPIMS5293 The Standard Operating Procedure: Investigating, Measuring

and Reporting Water Pressure

30 Book Water Distribution Systems: Simulation and Sizing, 1990, Lewis

Publishers, Thomas M. Walski, Johannes Gessler, John W.
Sjostorm
31 Draft System Integrated Planning - Framework (SaAS)
32 Handbook INCOSE. Systems Engineering Handbook v2.0, 2000
Systems Engineering and Analysis, Blanchard and Fabrycky,

33 Handbook th
5 Edition
34 iConnect Sydney Water Act 1994
35 iConnect Operating Licence 2010-2015
36 iConnect Energy Management
https://elogin.ads.swc/wps/myportal/iConnect/SydneyWater/?C
DF=CT_006061
http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~dbeale/ESMDCourse/Chapter2.ht
37 Internet
m#Summary
38 Internet Australian Drinking Water Guidelines
http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelines/publications/eh34
39 Internet Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling
40 Internet Variable Speed Driven Pumps – Best Practice Guide, British

Pump Manufacturers Association and GAMBICA Association
Ltd:
http://www.bpma.org.uk/filemanager_net/files/gpg344_variable_
speed_best_practice_for_pumps.pdf)
41 One hard copy (with Australian Pump Technical Handbook

Milan Rubcic) or
available to buy
42 Deemed to comply construction drawings for water flowmeters

– currently in draft stage
43 HSS00051 Flow Monitoring Station Standards TOG_TS05
44 HSS00092 Instrumentation and Control Standards (General) TOG_TS01
45 HSS00082 Water Distribution System related Instrumentation and Control

Standards TOG_TS02
46 HSS00061 Potable Water Pressure Monitoring Standards TOG_TS04

47 WPIMS5293 Water Pressure Investigation, Measurement and Reporting

SOP
48 Sydney Water web site ‘Water Efficiency Report’
49 Contact the Energy ‘Energy Smart Asset Resource’ (workbook/tool, under

team at development)
energy@sydneywater.c
om.au
50 Book Flexibility in Engineering Design, Richard de Neufville and

Stefan Scholtes, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2011.
51 Document The Water and Sewerage Supply of Sydney, F.J.J Henry,

Sydney Water, 1939.
52 SWIM (365931) The Water Supply and Sewerage of Sydney, 1939
53 iConnect IICATS I&C Standards
54 iConnect IICATS Water System Volume 1 – Functional Design

Specification
55 SWIM WMS QMS documents
56 Document Economic Appraisal Guidelines – Guidance on climate change

for asset and infrastructure assessments. Treasury Circular,
NSW TC 10/12, 15 September 2010
57 Procedure Strategic Infrastructure Planning
SWIM (288415)
1.6.7 Attachments and/or appendices

Attachment/Appendix Title
number
Appendix A WSPG-Development and Update Process

1.6.8 Document control

Title: Water System Planning Guideline, Section 1: Introduction to the Guideline
Current review date: Review Period: 1 year Registered file:
June 2015 Risk Rank = High 2014/00004985
BMIS file name: AMQ0562.1
Document owner: Craig Crawley - Strategy Manager, Servicing & Asset Strategy
Prepared by: Chris Moore - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Farhana Rifat - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Fernando Gamboa - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Paul De Sa - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Tony Cartwright - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Major Stakeholders Consulted: Anil Jaiswal - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Bob Wickham - Urban Growth
Chris Salkovic - Service Delivery
Craig Crawley - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Daryl Gilchrist - Engineering & Environmental Services
David Gough - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Frank Kanak - Service Delivery
Peter Fisher - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Richard Schuil - Engineering & Environmental Services
Sum Tong - Engineering & Environmental Services
Approval and Endorsement See Section 0
1.6.9 Revision control chart

Version Date revised Brief description of change
number
1 September 2014 New Document

SYDNEY WATER Section 1: Introduction
Appendix A: WSPG-Development and update process

Process

BMIS Docum ent Number: AMQ0562.01 Version: 1 Date: September 2014
Guideline
Section 2: Water System Planning
Version 1
September 2014
SYDNEY WATER Section 2: Water System Planning
Contents
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 5
2.1.1 Introduction to systems ........................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Introduction to system integrated planning............................................................................. 6
2.1.3 Risk assessment and risk management .................................................................................... 7
2.1.3.1 General .............................................................................................................................................. 7
2.1.3.2 Qualitative and quantitative risk assessments..................................................................................... 7
2.2 Water system planning phases ................................................................................... 10

2.2.1 Define objectives ....................................................................................................................10
2.2.2 Generate options ....................................................................................................................11
2.2.3 Select criteria ..........................................................................................................................16
2.2.4 Screen options ........................................................................................................................17
2.2.5 Perform detailed options assessment .....................................................................................17
2.2.6 Recommend the preferred option ..........................................................................................17
2.2.7 Monitoring and review ...........................................................................................................18
2.3 System water quality ................................................................................................. 19
2.3.1 Background .............................................................................................................................19
2.3.2 Issues ......................................................................................................................................19
2.3.3 Planning for water quality.......................................................................................................22
2.4 System monitoring ..................................................................................................... 24
2.4.1 General ...................................................................................................................................24
2.4.2 The water system hierarchy ....................................................................................................24
2.4.3 Water level, flow and pressure monitoring-applications ........................................................25
2.4.4 Water level, flow monitoring ..................................................................................................26
2.4.4.1 System boundaries ............................................................................................................................26
2.4.4.2 Reservoirs .........................................................................................................................................27
2.4.4.3 Pumping stations ..............................................................................................................................27
2.4.4.4 Automatic control valves ...................................................................................................................27
2.4.5 Water pressure gauges ...........................................................................................................28
2.4.6 Flow monitoring for demand verification ...............................................................................28
2.4.7 General information required for flow meter selection ..........................................................29
2.4.8 IICATS I & C standards for water distribution system assets ...................................................29
2.5 Energy management .................................................................................................. 31
2.6 Context ..................................................................................................................... 32
2.6.1 Definitions, abbreviations and references ..............................................................................32
2.6.2 Attachments and/or appendices .............................................................................................32

2.6.3 Document control ...................................................................................................................32

2.6.4 Revision control chart .............................................................................................................33
Appendix A: Example of water system deficiencies............................................................. 34
Appendix B: Ideas for generating and improving options ................................................... 35
Appendix C: Operating and Capital Solutions..................................................................... 36
Appendix D: Penrith North Supply Zone example ............................................................... 39
1.1 Define objectives ........................................................................................................................39
1.2 Generate options ........................................................................................................................40
1.3 Select criteria ..............................................................................................................................41
1.4 Screen options (capacity) ............................................................................................................41
1.5 Perform detailed options assessment .........................................................................................41
1.6 Recommend the preferred option ..............................................................................................43
1.7 Monitoring and review ...............................................................................................................44
Appendix E: Energy efficiency and Renewable Energy - list of key measures ........................ 46
Figures
Figure 2 - 1 Systems concept 6
Figure 2 - 2 Reliability problems - series 37
Figure 2 - 3 Examples of reliability solutions for system design 38
Figure 2 - 4 Schematic of Penrith North Supply Zone renewal 39
Tables
Table 2 - 1 Risk cost formula used in a quantitative assessment 8
Table 2 - 2 Monitoring of flows across a boundary 27
Table 2 -3 Automatic control valves 27
Table 2 -4 List of methods 35
Table 2 -5 Risk cost and risk score of each shutdown block element 45
Table 2 -6 Comparison of solutions for shutdown block analysis 45
Table 2 - 7 Energy Efficiency Options – Shorter Term Benefits 46
Table 2 - 8 Renewable Energy/Fuel Switching Options – Generally Longer Term Benefits 47

Section 2: Water system planning

2.1 Introduction
This chapter provides information on how to undertake system planning. It focuses on:
• the requirements of system integrated planning and how it is incorporated into

Sydney Water’s planning phases, especially the ‘generate options’ phase. This
provides the opportunity for cost reduction and system improvements
• system water quality issues and planning requirements
• system monitoring requirements for pressure and flow
• initial information on energy consideration.
2.1.1 Introduction to systems

‘A system is an assemblage or combination of functionally related elements or parts forming
a whole’ – Systems Engineering and Analysis, Blanchard and Fabrycky (Reference 33).
A system can be a water supply system, a climate system, a transport system, a human, or
a combination of all. These systems sit within a surrounding environment and interact with
each other as shown in Figure 2 - 1 .
When planning a new water supply system, consideration is required of climate, customers,
and regulators, other stakeholders, eg Sydney Catchment Authority (SCA), that are external
to the water supply system. A set of requirements is provided for the water supply system to
interact effectively with other systems.
For an existing water supply system, the original function of the asset and the system it sits
within may have changed over many years and thus it may be prudent to re-configure the
water system rather than just re-size the asset. The change creates a new system definition.
This guideline assists in developing and evolving the water supply system.

Figure 2 - 1 Systems concept
2.1.2 Introduction to system integrated planning

System integrated planning is defined as an approach where synergies within and between
drivers such as growth, renewals and reliability are identified and addressed. New concepts
in the approach include:
• improving the reliability analysis (where required) by performing:
o shutdown block analyses
o qualitative and quantitative risk assessments where relevant. The assessments

should include scenarios for both planned and unplanned operation and/or
maintenance
• taking future renewals into account in the planning phase (where required) by finding the:
o remaining life expectancy within the planning horizon.
The purposes of system integrated planning are to ensure that:
• the drivers such as growth, renewals and reliability are reviewed in planning
• the right amount of planning happens for each growth/reliability project or renewal
candidate
• planning requirements for projects are foreseen and scheduled.
The System Integrated Planning - Framework (Reference 31) provides details on the
implementation of system integrated planning, such as a simplified flow logic process.

This section incorporates the system integrated planning approach into the ‘water
system planning phases’. Sydney Water’s planning phases are based on the decision-
making phases contained in the Sustainability Planning Manual (Reference 18).
2.1.3 Risk assessment and risk management
2.1.3.1 General
Risk assessments (qualitative or quantitative) may need to be undertaken at different stages

of planning. The categories to be assessed would typically include financial, environmental,
energy, customer service and regulatory compliance. Any assessments should include input
from key stakeholders (including strategists, system operators etc) to ensure that the
potential risks are raised, assessed and managed.
In relation to water quality, the risk assessment shall follow the risk assessment process
outlined in the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (Reference 38) and the Australian
Guidelines for Water Recycling (Reference 39) respectively, where relevant.
2.1.3.2 Qualitative and quantitative risk assessments
Qualitative risk assessments develop a risk score from information on likelihood and
consequence. Risks are then ranked according to the risk score.
When developing controls (mitigation solutions), it is worth considering those controls that
partially reduce the risks, especially if a large capital saving can be achieved. This involves a
typical trade off situation, ie, trying to balance the reduction in risk with the capital cost of the
various solutions.
To consider the value for money of projects, a quantitative risk assessment can be used.
This assessment uses the concept of risk cost, and together with the cost of the mitigation
solution, the planner can derive a benefit to cost ratio. This ratio enables a ranking of
mitigation solutions based on value for money (formulae shown below in Table 2-1).
A management review is used to make the final decision and this review uses all information
available, including results of both the qualitative and quantitative risk assessments.
For more information on qualitative risk assessments, refer to the Operational Risk
Management Procedures; Risk Management - Operational Risks and Sydney Water’s
Corporate Risk Register (References 24, 25 and 26 respectively).
For more information on quantitative risk assessments, refer to the Reliability Technical
Supplement (Reference 28). The basic formulae used are shown below in Table 2-1.

Table 2 - 1 Risk cost formula used in a quantitative assessment
Risk Cost ($NPV) = Risk Cost ($ each year) x 12.97
Where:
a) 12.97 = 1/(1+0.075) + 1/(1+0.075) 2 +….1/(1+0.075) 50 (present value analysis)
b) 0.075 is equal to the assumed discount rate of 7.5% and
c) 50 is the assumed number of years of analysis
Risk Cost ($ each year) = Mean Failure Rate (each year) x Consequence Cost ($)
Benefit/Cost = Risk Cost Reduction/Mitigation Cost
The following simple example explains how risk cost can be used. It has been taken from
NSW Treasury Circular (Reference 56). A further more detailed example of how risk cost
can be used for a water main renewal is in Appendix D:.
‘Example: Climate Change Adaption Project

Sea level rise is a gradual long term process and its potential future impacts on
government assets will require considered case by case assessments by
responsible agencies addressing the issue as part of their strategic planning/risk
assessment framework.
Planning and management of public assets likely to be affected by long term sea
level rise, taking account of expected asset life and need, might cover for example:
• upgrade of existing assets where and when justified, or undertaking relocation

(including progressive relocation over time) where feasible and appropriate - for
example when an asset is approaching the end of its economic life, or when
potential future sea level impacts determine;
• assessing at the appropriate time through economic appraisal methods whether

engineering or other works may be appropriate, including assessment of
whether the particular infrastructure is expected to be relevant in 50 or 100 years
(in light of technological change, changes in community needs, etc); and

avoiding, redesigning, or upgrading future investments likely to be exposed to

high risks.
For adaptation of an existing asset or for assessment of a new asset, as far as

possible the estimated benefits (damages avoided) should be compared with the
costs of asset adaptation. Where the likely damages avoided are uncertain, as they
nearly always are, they should be expressed in terms of expected damage costs
avoided.
For example if there is a 1 in 20 chance of a $10 million damage event in the year,
the expected damages are $10m * 0.05 = $0.5 million per annum. Allowing an asset
life of 50 years, in a simple case, this could be $0.5 million for each year 1 to 50.
Using the central discount rate of 7% [assumption at the time], the present value
(PV) of these damages avoided equals:
PV = $0.5m / 1.07 + $0.5m / 1.072 …+$0.5m / 1.0750 = $6.9 million
Accordingly a capital expenditure on adaptation could be justified if it is less than

$6.9 million. It would not be justified if the expenditure exceeded $6.9 million.’

2.2 Water system planning phases
The water system planning phases cover planning for:
• greenfield developments
• infill developments
• upgrading existing assets/systems
• renewals
• reliability projects.
Sydney Water’s planning phases (with the addition of the monitoring and review phase) are:
1. define objectives
2. generate options
3. select evaluation criteria

4. screen options
5. perform detailed options assessment

6. recommend preferred option
7. monitoring and review.
The phases are not necessarily sequential and iterations are often required.
The focus of incorporating the requirements of system integrated planning into Sydney
Water’s planning phases is to generate appropriate options to improve the system/s as a
whole. More detail on the planning phases is provided below, especially the ‘generate
options’ phase.
2.2.1 Define objectives
Problem/opportunity statements are provided for the project.
Problem/opportunity statements may not be limited to a specific issue, as surrounding

system problems/opportunities may also be identified. This is to ensure that any developed
solution gives the best value for the total system. This implies that defining the scope of any
planning study at the start of the project is difficult, especially with complex water systems. It
may be necessary to review these statements as planning proceeds.
The following focus areas are supplied to assist in developing objectives:

• Provide capacity to service future growth and integrate staging requirements.
• Ensure system performance standards for pressure and water continuity meet Operating
Licence standards.
• Ensure water quality performance meets Operating Licence standards.
• Embed redundancy into systems and assets, including reviewing possible emergency
conditions that a total system may experience, including the failure of a bulk water
supply.
• Account for renewals into any future system design.
• Ensure reliability, maintainability, supportability, operability and resilience of the system.
• Ensure flexibility of the system for future uncertainties.
• Ensure energy management is reviewed.
• Account for environmental and heritage Impact.
• Ensure monitoring and control provisions comply with IICATS I & C standards.
• Ensure least life cycle cost.
• Achieve transparency of investment and planning decisions.
• Reduce risk while achieving a significant return on investment.
• Undertake a system-wide criticality and vulnerability review.
• Provide for future decommissioning.
• Embrace customer needs.
2.2.2 Generate options
This is the most critical planning phase. It is here that many considerations must be taken
into account to ensure the system is improved with each planning study. It is here that
planners especially add value. Details are shown below.
Generate options by following these key steps, which take growth, renewals and reliability
into account during the planning phase of a project.
Step 1 – Develop the existing water system/s model
Develop an existing system’s water model (if the base model is not available). Ensure that:

• the existing system model is updated with demand and any system or operational
changes. Check with the Network operators regarding any known deficiencies, faulty
(closed) valves, customer complaints or special enquiries, pump performance tests
• controls are validated and adjusted if required. There are many types of controls
currently being used in the WMS, for example, time varying windows and fixed level
controls
• the existing model is validated
• surrounding water systems and trunk models are available to check for reliability
scenarios.
Step 2 – Develop the future water system/s model
Develop the future system/s water model for different planning horizon/s. Ensure all known
future demands and system changes are considered, including those for surrounding water
systems.
In order to consider major greenfield development, adjacent to an existing area, the

planner needs to assess the adequacy of the existing system capacity to serve the
growth. It will require assessing the system capacity and operating characteristics at
potential connection points, over different planning horizons (years).
Future demand for planning should be calculated based on the criteria in Section 3: Water
Demand and Growth of this guideline.
Step 3 – Determine system deficiencies
To determine system deficiencies:
• Use the existing system/s water model to assess current deficiency or constraints (ie
water quality, pressure and maintaining capacity) of the system. Check with the ‘network
or treatment operators’ regarding any known deficiencies and reliability issues.
• Use the future system/s water model to assess the future deficiency, in terms of
capacity, water quality etc, of existing assets in the system to service the new
development.
Deficiencies can be determined at a functional level based on whether the water system
provides the required level of service or level of efficiency.
Some water system deficiency issues are outlined in Appendix A:.

Step 4 – Develop possible options
Options for a preferred solution will need to take into account growth, renewals and
reliability, as well as any inadequacies.
Developing options to satisfy specific design requirements and provide the best solution may
require some form of iteration to take into account the drivers for growth, renewals and
reliability, which would include factors such as cost, value, reliability, maintainability,
resilience etc. This approach enables planners and decision-makers to develop better
performing, more reliable and low life cycle cost solutions. Appendix B: provides a list of
methods to generate and improve options.
Information on the individual drivers is shown below.
Growth
The planner should analyse the system for different growth/planning horizons using the
relevant hydraulic model(s). Growth/planning horizons should be defined for planning work
based on information including population projection, staging in growth, major development
phases, and other planning milestones.
Appropriate options will need to be developed for system deficiency (on existing systems), or
for new development areas to provide the required level of service.
New assets to service growth areas may impact on the proposed/expected renewal of
existing assets. In some circumstances, growth projects may render the existing assets
redundant.
Developing options for growth should also evaluate any opportunities to improve system
reliability.
Section 5: Infrastructure Planning provides criteria and requirements to determine the

new asset size.
Renewals
Identify potential renewals required within the planning horizon in the area under study
(based on residual life and/or from the short-term renewal list) and include in the planning.
The renewal of assets and facilities requires an assessment of current and future needs for
the system to evolve and continue to meet its requirements and objectives. Many older
systems have assets and facilities in service that either no longer serves their original

purpose, or the purpose has changed. A review of the system should take into account
future growth, reliability issues and other proposed renewals.
Future critical renewals within the planning horizon (say 30 years) need to be considered. A
sensitivity analysis and risk assessment can be undertaken to consider the trade-offs
between how different renewals influence each other within the system of interest and how
the renewals would be staged and integrated.
Check if existing critical assets nominated for renewals can be:
• decommissioned (fully or partially or instead build a new asset/facility somewhere

else in the system)
• re-routed (for water mains)
• relocated
• duplicated
• upsized (insufficient capacity)
• downsized (over capacity)
• consolidated (eg three mains reduced to two mains).
When developing options, each renewal candidate should be tested for decommissioning or
mothballing to quantify the consequence. If decommissioning is unacceptable the solution to
the problem can be any type of capital or operating solution. (Refer to Appendix B: on how
to generate different options).
For the renewal of reservoirs and pumping stations, reconfiguration of the system is not
often the preferred option, but should be investigated. However, consider the cost of repair
and rehabilitation solutions now and into the future, which can be small and therefore may
not justify any change to the system. Alternatively, large expenditure on major works may
justify intervention to change the system.
For water main renewals, a maintenance analysis will generally determine the length of pipe
for investigation. This can range from several pipe barrels to many kilometres. When
assessing options for water mains in complex systems, there can be many options (as
shown in the list above), which need to be tested to ensure that the best value for money
solution is found. Shutdown block analysis is also required to test the options for reliability
(Refer to Reliability below for more detail).

Reliability
A reliability assessment including shutdown block analysis shall be undertaken for planned
maintenance and unplanned events on every critical component in the system (such as
critical water mains and facilities) or for those components that are likely to change due to
reconfiguration.
This assessment may include both product and asset failures, such as climate change
events impacting on the system (eg bushfires, high winds, flooding) and external events (eg
power and telemetry outages, raw water quality/quantity issues etc).
Section 3: Water Demand and Growth provides information on demands for reliability
analysis.
A qualitative risk assessment and a quantitative risk assessment should be considered

where appropriate to evaluate each option. These are explained in Clause 2.1.3.
Determine options to address component failures. Look to address multiple component

failures with a single option. Also, look to creating bi-directional links where water can be
supplied in both directions in an emergency. These aspects may improve the economic
viability of any solutions.
Planned inspection and maintenance of critical assets is generally undertaken on a periodic

basis generally between five and 20 years depending upon the criticality of the asset, eg
reservoirs, tunnels and large diameter pipelines. These are usually taken offline for several
months during low demand periods from March to September. In some cases double
isolation (Refer to Flow Isolation and/or Flow Management (FIFM) Reference 21) is required
to ensure safe entry to the asset.
The planner shall determine the needs to maintain water supply where isolation of critical
assets and facilities is required for planned maintenance, and embed this into the system
design when creating (growth) or changing (renewals) a system.
Preferred options are chosen based on the economic benefits exceeding the cost of the
option. Value for money in reliability improvement generally comes from integration with
growth or renewal projects.
For additional concepts and generating options on reliability refer to Appendix C: and
Reliability Technical Supplement (Reference 28).

Other considerations
Other considerations in developing options include:
• resizing and/or reconfiguration. These may add additional options or affect the options
already nominated, so some degree of iteration may be required before options are
finalised (once the resized and/or reconfigured assets are obtained, further investigation
is required to determine the feasibility of staging the transition to the future system
design without impacting customers’ standard of service)
• creating options. These can be a mixture of operational and/or capital solutions. This
may also include accepting a risk and responding through developed contingency plans,
or by new contingency measures (Refer to Appendix C).
• life cycle costs. These should be used when undertaking options analysis, refer to the
ISO Life Cycle Costing (Reference 20).
• risk assessments, including developing mitigation options
• the reassessment of any criteria and requirements (if value can be obtained)
• the use of sensitivities where appropriate
• the staging of assets. A review based on an economic evaluation and operational

requirements, eg customer demand, water quality etc
• a review of the failure points for treatment and catchment systems, as the system
boundary for water systems is from the catchment to the tap. Hence, the scope may
include non-Sydney Water assets (eg our bulk water supplier)
• a consideration of the maintainability, supportability, operability and resilience during

planning. These issues need to be discussed with operators and maintainers. Refer to
Appendix C
For ideas on generating and improving options, refer to Appendix B:.
2.2.3 Select criteria
For system performance criteria information (eg demand, pressure, sizing of assets etc),
refer to Sections 3, 4, and 5 of this guideline.

For general option evaluation criteria, refer to the Sustainability Planning Manual (Reference
18).
2.2.4 Screen options
Develop a short-list from the list of options (where relevant).
2.2.5 Perform detailed options assessment

The selection of a preferred option may involve a multi-criteria analysis depending on the
complexity of the project. Steps in the analysis include:
• weighing evaluation criteria where applicable and determined on a project-by-project

basis, refer to the Sustainability Planning Manual (Reference 18).
• selecting or developing a model/tools/method for the analysis
• evaluating alternatives
• running a demand sensitivity analysis.
The planner should run a demand sensitivity analysis. This is to measure incremental cost
impacts and risks to customers. The options developed and any additional capital
expenditure required for demand sensitivity should be documented for review. In certain
circumstances, if the sensitivity analysis reveals a marked change in costs or risks to
customers, it may be necessary to revise the preferred option.
Generally, the sensitivity analysis range is equal to the demand ±10% (note in Section 1,
Clause 1.6.1). Applying it to all the options in a detailed options assessment may not be
warranted, as the preferred option may be clear in the multi-criteria analysis. Hence,
determining whether to use demand sensitivity analysis on all the options in the detailed
options assessment should be reviewed on a project-by-project basis. However, demand
sensitivity analysis is required on the preferred option for each growth/planning horizon.
2.2.6 Recommend the preferred option
Once the preferred option is known, a needs specification and functional baseline can be
defined, in order for the delivery process to be enabled.
Planners must provide a network schematic showing major asset information and valve
locations, in order that the results of the planning process can be understood by the
designers.

2.2.7 Monitoring and review
After the project has been delivered, a review is required of whether the actual system
performance matches the performance specified. This can be achieved by using existing
monitoring devices (flow meter, pressure gauge etc) and feedback from operators. If any
gaps occur, then these should be addressed.
For an example of how the planning phases are used in planning for a renewal, refer to
Appendix D:.

2.3 System water quality
2.3.1 Background
Section 2 of the 2010-2015 Sydney Water Operating Licence (Reference 35) outlines the
requirements for managing water quality. It states that ‘Sydney Water must manage drinking
water quality to the satisfaction of NSW Health in accordance with the Australian Drinking
Water Guidelines (ADWG) unless NSW Health specifies otherwise’. A similar requirement
applies to recycled water using the Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling (Reference
39).
The ADWG requires the use of a multi-barrier risk management approach to allow Sydney
Water to effectively deal with and manage water quality issues and risks from the catchment
through to the customer’s tap. From a risk perspective, microbial impacts are generally
considered the most critical to manage due to the potential immediate impacts (eg within 12
to 24 hours) and the potential to infect those who may not have consumed the same water.
To protect public health and meet regulatory requirements in relation to microbial risks,
Sydney Water generally applies the following strategy:
1. Treatment (eg filtration and disinfection) of raw water prior to entering the distribution
system to remove and/or inactivate microbial pathogens (the treatment processes also
remove/minimise other contaminants, microbial food sources, and physical material that
can assist microbial regrowth and biofilms within the distribution system, and reduce the
ability to maintain an effective disinfectant residual).
2. Maintenance of a disinfectant residual level throughout the distribution system to

minimise any microbial regrowth and minimise the impact of any re-contamination.
3. Minimise the risks of recontamination (eg reservoir roofing, disinfecting new mains,
backflow prevention, cross connections etc).
2.3.2 Issues
From an operational perspective, the design of the distribution system can have a significant
negative impact on the above strategies. This can reduce the availability and effectiveness
of management options to control water quality within the distribution system and
correspondingly increase the risk of failing to meet microbial water quality targets.

There are a number of factors that can lead to water quality deterioration within the
distribution system. These include:
• water age. Various water quality parameters will change or be impacted by the length
of time the water (each litre) stays in the supply network (eg decay or consumption of
disinfectant residual, increase in pH from leaching of cement-lined pipes etc). Very
long water ages can occur due to dead-end pockets of water such as balance
reservoirs with a single inlet/outlet main, ultimate design pipes commissioned on
initial stage demands, systems running at low demands for long periods of time or for
high quantity security during bush fire alert periods etc
• materials that come in contact with water (eg pipe material, linings, paint coatings
etc) can lead to components from leaching or corrosion products entering the water
phase
• the velocity of water, which can lead to sedimentation of particles and/or
scouring/erosion of pipe surface materials and surface biofilms
• the type of disinfectant being used (eg chlorination or chloramination) and the
potential issues associated with each (eg free chlorine residual does not last very
long, but can lead to THM formation , while monochloramine lasts longer, but can
lead to significant issues such as nitrification)
• events introducing contaminants into the distribution system (ie treatment plant
issues, broken mains, leakage from reservoir roofs, cross-connections, backflow etc)
• chemical/biological characteristics of treated water, which can interact or be impacted
by one another within the distribution system (eg if the pH changes then the
disinfection residual may not be as effective, or it may lead to precipitation of other
components etc)
• the pipe network, which can be viewed as a living ecosystem (eg containing biofilms
and various non-pathogenic microbiological flora and fauna) that needs to be
controlled by strategies such as disinfection residual, food/nutrient minimisation,
system cleanliness etc
• the inability to find points through the system to provide effective in-system water
quality management, typically disinfection residual addition (ie points where all the
water passes through, all of the time, in one direction)
• the point of system connection between new supply sources and existing system
configuration resulting in new/changed flow paths and potential taste issues
associated with mixing sources of raw water (eg desalination water and dam water)
• mixing chloraminated water with free chlorinated water.

Most of the above issues are time-dependent to varying degrees and can be managed by
minimising the water age within the system.
There will always be a limitation on how much the water age can be minimised, while still
maintaining an acceptable supply security. Consequently, the system design needs to
maximise the ability to manage water quality through the system by providing points where
the quality can be effectively monitored and impacted. In the vast majority of cases this will
involve the ability to add disinfectant residual, or in a few cases adjustment of pH, and will
largely involve key trunk mains and reservoir arrangements where all the water passes all of
the time.
Reservoirs are a considerable focus as they are large bodies of water that can account for a
significant proportion of the water age occurring in a system. If mixed effectively, the addition
of disinfection residual into these storages can be very effective as they provide disinfection
contact time prior to supplying the customers fed from their outlets. The variation in chlorine
residual is then kept to a minimum.
The placement of reservoirs within the supply zones however, can have significant water
quality advantages or disadvantages. It is generally preferred that all water to a zone is fed
first through the reservoir for easier water quality management options. Placing the reservoir
off to the side as a balance reservoir, or at the end of a pumped zone, usually leads to
negative water quality impacts that are hard to manage.
From a whole-of-system planning perspective the interaction between the system and water
filtration plant needs to be understood from two perspectives. Firstly, the stated design
capacity for a water filtration plant does not infer that it can produce this volume under all
conditions. As the raw water quality degrades, the quantity of water that can be produced will
decrease – in some conditions quite substantially, eg 50%. The size of the plant treated
water reservoir/s and system total storage to demand ratio therefore needs to be carefully
considered. Secondly, water filtration plants may not behave well under frequent production
rate changes. Thus the plant/system storage capability and operation should be checked
against plant operating contract for BOO plants and with ‘network or treatment operators’ for
Sydney Water Plants for defined permissible ramp rates and flow changes permitted per
day.
It may also be necessary to consider any risks associated with the high reliability
requirements of known key customers in areas subject to planning.
Historically, water supply planning and design have generally been based on pressure and
quantity requirements with minimal consideration given to water age or water quality

impacts. To maximise the effective management and maintenance of water quality

management, the above issues must be considered within the planning process from the
outset rather than as an add-on after commissioning.
2.3.3 Planning for water quality

Major new schemes or changes in systems (ie PRV zones, boosters) will require a water
quality/system study that investigates potential impacts on existing assets/supply areas (both
upstream and within the area). This should include water age, disinfection residual plant
capacities, and mixing capability at reservoirs etc. Any costs associated with managing
these impacts must be included with the options/scheme.
Assessment of the water supply scheme should take into consideration the existing water
quality entering the planned scheme, particularly the type (free chlorine vs chloramine), raw
water source and the typical levels of disinfectant residual present. Each type of residual
may present differing concerns for the management of water quality.
The following are requirements in the planning process:
• Perform a water age analysis for medium to large size projects. Consider the need for
additional treatment assets when water age is higher than three days from the last
treatment point. Include costing in budgets for new assets for water quality
requirements.
If disinfection plants are required as part of the distribution/reticulation system, they shall
be located so as to ensure an adequate disinfection contact time and adequate chlorine
residual prior to water delivery to properties.
• Consider, subject to an overall trade-off analysis, that the water supplied to a zone
should flow through the reservoir.
• Where new assets are required, consider the options for staging with smaller assets to
reduce water age:
o For reservoirs, consider staging and/or setting operating levels to initially utilise only
a portion of the available storage with different settings, if required, for summer and
winter.
o For mains, consider large diameter main capacity to be staged by the initial provision
of a smaller diameter main, followed by additional mains as the demand increases
and/or provision of additional treatment points and facilities.
• Review the water quality in any asset that could present a stagnant water issue, eg:

o a floating reservoir with a common inlet/outlet main off to the side of the main supply
trunk main
o a reservoir at the end of a pumped rising main (supplying the zone as well)
o standpipe style reservoirs
o mains with permanent ends to be avoided by the provision of link mains or looped
mains. Particular care shall be taken at the boundaries between supply zones, where
the dead-end length shall be minimised.
• Check for flow reversals and change in velocities and review for possible controls.
• Include input from appropriate stakeholders (area network representatives, water quality
personnel, technical support staff etc). It will help to identify any concerns involving local
system issues, risks etc that may need to be considered with respect to water quality
targets.
For additional detail on Reticulation Design for Water Quality, refer to Water Supply Code of
Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).

2.4 System monitoring

2.4.1 General
In a water supply system, the following hydraulic parameters are commonly monitored:
• Level - reservoir, chamber and channel level gauges.

• Pressure - pressure gauges.
• Flow - flow meters.
• Pump unit run hours & efficiency (RTU),
• Water Quality – Chlorine residual analysers, temperature gauges, pH analysers,
turbidity analyser
The following requirements are for permanent monitoring via IICATS. Additional temporary
monitoring is used from time-to-time to diagnose and solve network problems.
2.4.2 The water system hierarchy
A discussion of the water system hierarchy is warranted as many of the requirements for
monitoring are related to the levels and boundaries created by the hierarchy.
The water network is extensive and complex comprising a large number of pipes, reservoirs,
pumping station and valves. The network is segmented into tree-like systems and follows a
hierarchy to achieve the levels of service and practically manage the network.
There are four levels in the water system hierarchy with the lowest level being pressure
zones supplying between a few hundred to thousands of properties where the pressures will
be limited within a range. Supply zones comprise a number of pressure zones usually
supplied by one or more reservoirs. Distribution systems are a collection of supply zones
and delivery systems are a collection of distribution systems, typically supplied from a water
treatment plant.
The boundaries between the systems are maintained by closed valves. The structure of the
water system hierarchy is described in the ‘Asset Hierarchy’ document (Reference 14),
currently under review with the ADI. At each level in the hierarchy, the network is discrete
other than the primary (normal) route of supply. Secondary routes of supply also exist and
are used from time-to-time to transfer water between systems.

2.4.3 Water level, flow and pressure monitoring-applications
Typical applications of water level monitoring are contained in the IICATS standards and
include:
• monitoring that the network assets are performing as designed and configured,
including reservoirs, channels and chambers
• controlling critical assets such as automatic inlet control valves (AICVs) and pumping
stations and outflow from clear water tanks.
• providing critical data for the efficient scheduling of the network (supply, water
quality, energy management)
• providing critical data for the calibration of demand and hydraulic models
• being combined with flow meter data, providing detailed demand data for supply
zones
• being combined with a weir, flow rate in a channel.
Typical applications of pressure monitoring are contained in the IICATS standards and
include:
• monitoring that the total system and individual assets are performing as designed
and configured; including pumping stations, pressure control valves and sectioning
valves are in the correct configuration
• monitoring that levels of service targets are being met (and the operating licence is
complied with and rebates correctly given)
• providing critical data for the calibration of hydraulic models.
Typical applications of flow meters are contained in the IICATS standards and include:
• monitoring that the total system and individual assets are performing as designed
(including energy requirements) and configured, including pumping stations, pressure
control valves and sectioning valves
• controlling critical equipment such as Pressure Reducing Valves, Pressure Boosting

stations and Chemical Dosing Equipment
• monitoring the progress of urban development and demand trends

• monitoring and reporting of water loss via water balances
• monitoring and managing water loss via Minimum Night Flow measurement
• providing critical data for the calibration of demand and hydraulic models and
measuring the impact of demand management initiatives
• providing critical data for the efficient scheduling of the network assets (supply, water
quality, energy management)
• scheduling treated water production and controlling outflow from clear water tank
• custody transfer measurement between suppliers (SCA and BOO) and Sydney
Water.
• Improving knowledge and system operational behavioural understanding;
2.4.4 Water level, flow monitoring
2.4.4.1 System boundaries
The boundaries between systems at any level in the hierarchy can be at:
• treatment works
• reservoirs
• pumping stations
• automatic inlet control valves (AICVs)
• manual sectioning valves (DVs).
As a general principle, the transfer of water across boundaries should be monitored. There
are several thousand DVs, which are only used infrequently to transfer water and usually as
an emergency response. Generally, it is not economic to monitor flow through these valves.
Table 2-2 shows a guideline to be applied when deciding if the flow across a boundary will
be monitored.

Table 2 - 2 Monitoring of flows across a boundary
Transfers between systems supplying Yes

different grades of water
Outlet of treatment works Yes
Delivery system boundary Yes
Distribution system boundary Yes

Usually (not warranted for very small supply
Supply zone
zones)
Usually (not warranted for very small pressure
Pressure zone
zones)
2.4.4.2 Reservoirs
Supply zones are supplied from one or more reservoirs. The level in each reservoir will be
monitored. As reservoirs are also on the boundary between systems, the flow between
systems will be monitored at the reservoirs. Preferably the flow will be measured at the outlet
of the reservoirs. However, if this is not possible the inlet will be monitored.
2.4.4.3 Pumping stations
Typically, pumping stations pump to one set of reservoirs supplying one supply zone.
Occasionally the pumping station may pump to more than one supply zone via separate
rising mains.
The flow in each rising main will be monitored at the pumping station. The upstream and
downstream pressure at the pumps will also be monitored (both suction pressure and
delivery pressure). This information is also useful to monitor energy performance.
2.4.4.4 Automatic control valves
Automatic control valves include AICVs, PRVs and PSVs. Some valves are sited with
reservoirs, while some are located remotely within the network. The following requirements
will be applied to the following valves in Table 2 -3.
Table 2 -3 Automatic control valves
AICV Gate position (only when used partially open)
PSV Gate position and upstream pressure
PRV Upstream pressure, downstream pressure and flow.

2.4.5 Water pressure gauges

Water pressure gauges will be placed at key locations in the network as follows:
• At the critical points of pressure zones. Critical points are the points in the network where
hydraulic modelling indicates that pressure will be lowest. This can either be due to high
ground elevation and/or high headloss at high demands. A pressure gauge will be placed
in all locations where pressures are currently estimated to fall to less than 20 m at some
time in the year. At least one gauge will be placed in each area.
• At other locations on the trunk or reticulation network (usually at the highest points)
where gauges are needed (usually to ensure customers are receiving adequate
pressure).
2.4.6 Flow monitoring for demand verification
For reviews of design demands (ie to justify the next stage of assets with more realistic
demand data), flow monitoring will be required on specific property types (ie single dwelling,
multi dwelling), rather than for the whole zone.
General recommendations to selecting specific demand monitoring properties are:
• identifying pockets with the same demand patterns, such as single dwelling, multi
dwelling etc. Selecting the size of the area to be monitored depends on properties
available to extract the specific demand profile – the bigger the size the better and
diversity needs to be considered
• identifying the areas to capture customers’ changed demand behaviour (ie greenfield
areas, areas with BASIX features, rainwater tanks etc)
• identifying areas with different geographical locations, occupancy rate and lot sizes etc
• identifying at least two discrete areas, if economically justified, to provide redundancy in

case of failure of any flow meter. Consider the frequency suitable for design demand
verification
• aiming to minimise the number of dividing valves required
• avoiding, if possible, closing any valves in a zone to keep supply zone integrity intact
• choosing, if possible, existing areas with flow metres, eg pressure managed areas (PRV
or booster zones).

2.4.7 General information required for flow meter selection

Flow meters can provide both volumetric measurements and flow rate trends. Volumetric
data can be used for water balancing and leakage measurement. Flow rate trends can be
used for hydraulic analysis, operational planning and to obtain demand profiles to capture
average and maximum demands.
The selection of appropriate size and type (technology) is crucial with respect to water main
size, flow range, pressure, location, pump and budget.
Planners need to consider maintainability of the system to identify any operational

requirements for recommended system monitoring. This investigation needs to be done in
consultation with the appropriate stakeholders.
The following information can assist in the planning and detail design/selection of a flow
meter:
• Pressure requirements upstream and downstream of a metering location.
• Size and arrangement of water mains upstream and downstream of a metering location.
• Maximum and minimum flow range, with fire flow requirements (if any).
• Minimum flow velocity requirements.
• Level of meter accuracy required.
• Use and importance of data requirements.
• Meter reading and signal generating device specification and arrangement.
• Shutdown limitations or plan.
• Isolation requirements for the works.
• Recommendation for appropriate by-pass assembly with isolating valve, so that repairs
can be made without shutting off the supply on critical mains.
2.4.8 IICATS I & C standards for water distribution system assets
The Sydney Water IICATS system requires standardisation of water supply system field
monitoring instrumentation, such as flow, pressure and level monitoring devices installed on
water supply infrastructure.

IICATS I&C (Instrumentation and Control) standards are developed as a central design and
installation reference for planners, designers, consultants and contractors to refurbish
Sydney Water assets to required standards.
These standards contain technical specifications for each instrument type including the
functional, performance, physical and installation requirements as well as prequalified
suppliers for flow meter and pressure transmitters. Standards also include IICATS interface
requirements such as remote terminal unit (RTU) input/output connections and
telecommunications.
The following specific I&C standards applicable to the water distribution system assets shall
be used as reference documents:
1. Instrumentation and Control Standards (General) TOG_TS01 (Reference 44)
2. Water Distribution System related Instrumentation and Control Standards TOG_TS02

(Reference 45)
3. Potable Water Pressure Monitoring Standards TOG_TS04 (Reference 46)
4. Flow Monitoring Station Standards TOG_TS05 (Reference 43)
5. Pressure Reducing Valve Standards (Note: under development and will be available in
the near future).

2.5 Energy management

Sydney Water is pursuing strategies to improve energy efficiency, reduce energy costs and
greenhouse gas emissions. Some of the more significant measures under these strategies
include (Refer to Appendix E:):
• negotiation of long-term energy supply contracts to maintain low energy rates

• renewable energy generation
• long-term partnerships in the energy and resource sectors to achieve efficiencies
• consideration of energy-related aspects in the planning, creation, operation,
maintenance, renewal and disposal of assets
• generation of green commodities from renewable energy and greenhouse gas emission
reduction projects.
Sydney Water is also required to meet specific corporate targets (Reference 36), such as
maintaining our purchase of grid electricity to levels achieved in 1998.
For the above reasons, planners are to consult with the Energy and Eco-efficiency Group
and operations from the early stages of renewal and growth projects. The unit will assist with
formulating and implementing project measures that are consistent with Sydney Water’s
energy-related corporate targets. An ‘Energy Smart Asset Resource’ (workbook/tool, under
development) is also available from the Energy and Eco-efficiency Team. This tool will
provide the latest energy costs, usage and high level considerations requires assessing
energy at different stages of asset lifecycle. The Team should be contacted for the latest
version.
The tables in Appendix E: includes energy efficiency and renewable energy measures
(though the opportunities are not limited to the list) which should be considered when
planning for development or replacement of assets.
While some of these measures are applicable during the design phase, planners should
consider reducing energy requirements and improving energy efficiency where possible and
include the relevant information in the life cycle costing for any option.

2.6 Context
2.6.1 Definitions, abbreviations and references
Refer to Section 1: Introduction to the guideline, Clause 1.6.

Attachment/ Title
Appendix number
Appendix A: Example of water system deficiencies
Appendix B: Ideas for generating and improving options
Appendix C: Generating options for reliability
Appendix D: Penrith North Supply Zone example
Appendix E: Energy efficiency-list of most measures

Title: Water System Planning Guideline, Section 2: Water System Planning
Current review date: Review Period: 1 year Registered file:
June 2015 Risk Rank = High 2014/00004985
Prepared by: Farhana Rifat - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Chris Moore - Servicing & Asset Strategy

Major Stakeholders Anil Jaiswal - Servicing & Asset Strategy

Consulted/Reviewer: Bob Wickham - Urban Growth
Aravinda Stanley - Servicing & Asset Strategy

David Zhang - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Ed Braithwaite - Service & Asset Strategy
Gaetano Illuzzi - Engineering & Environmental Services
Graham Couchman - Engineering & Environmental Services
Gregory Appleby - Liveable City Program
Janssen Chan - Engineering & Environmental Services
Julie Horne - Engineering & Environmental Services
Mark Angles - Product & Asset Management Executive
Mark Obuchowski - Engineering & Environmental Services
Nihal Balasuriya - Networks
Persephone Rougellis - Service & Asset Strategy
Peter Cresta - Networks
Phil Duker - Treatment
Philip Woods - Liveable City Program
Richard Wajzer - Urban Growth
Robert Ius - Hydraulic System Services
Sarah Vierboom - Liveable City Program
Suganthini Niranjan - Engineering & Environmental Services
Suhanti Thirunavukarasu - Engineering & Environmental Services
Vajira Samarasinghe - Engineering & Environmental Services
Approval and Endorsement See end of ‘Section 0’ of WSPG

number
1 September New document
2014

Appendix A: Example of water system deficiencies
Pressure issues Systems with very low or high pressure during maximum hours should
be reviewed for augmentation. For desirable pressure range, refer to
Section 4: System Hydraulics.
Bottlenecks The planner should consider mains with high velocities or headloss
rates. For velocity and headloss requirements, refer to the Water
Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
However, velocity and headloss should be refined with improvement
criteria to optimise any augmentation solution. Pressure reducing or
sustaining valves may also contribute to problems and their settings
should be investigated where appropriate.
Pump capacity issues If all units in a station are running and the downstream reservoir cannot
recover this can be an indication of a capacity deficiency in the input
system (combination of pump, rising main and reservoir).
Storage capacity If a supply zone’s reservoir is supplied via gravity and its RSL is
breached, then this indicates either a storage capacity issue or inlet
supply capacity issue.
Operational issues Pressure reducing/sustaining settings, pressure management zones

and rezoning strategies may cause problems. Adjusting the operational
settings can improve a problem area, though it must not be at the
expense of other areas where it would cause failures.
Lack of reliability Full or partial back-up supply (or contingency arrangements) may not
be available

Appendix B: Ideas for generating and improving

options
Table 2 -4 provides a list of methods to help generate or improve options.
Table 2 -4 List of methods

Methods Comments
Idealised design/ If the system was destroyed, how would you re-design the system without
discontinuous constraints using today’s technology?
improvement
Forced Develop an alternative option where the assets in question are ‘forced’ to
be decommissioned.
This is to move the planners’ view of the system to a different perspective.
Seeking Try to find solutions that mitigate other existing problems.

opportunities
Value for money is obtained where a single solution mitigates multiple
problems or meets multiple requirements.
For example, a link between two zones can provide redundancy for many
component failures in both zones. Or re-routing a water main to pick up an
existing problem along the way.
Partial risk reduction An option that reduces risks to a certain level may be more cost effective
than totally removing the risk (Refer to Appendix D:).
Economical What can be built to provide a benefit to cost ratio of more than/equal to
one?
The aim is to find options that provide an economical solution.
Staged approach An option where assets are built at different times to align with demand
increases and to reduce life cycle costs
Continuously design Keep designing out problems or constraints until there is an unacceptable
out risk and value for money.
Look within the immediate and surrounding systems for small tweaks, eg
cross-connections from adjoining or trespassing mains, or small changes
to controls.
If this was your This is a question posed to redirect the planner’s perspective to the
money what would customers’ point of view, or willingness to pay.
you do?
Example: How would you feel if you were asked to pay $5 million for this
renewal? How many questions would you ask?
The planners’ response should be that everything has been challenged

and justified.
Essentially this is how we ensure value for money.
Challenge Identify an assumption that limits the number of possible alternatives

Assumptions choices. Deny the assumptions. Explore the consequence of the denial.

Appendix C: Operating and Capital Solutions

Operational Solutions
Operational solutions include:
• using accessible spare capacity across the system

• using accessible excess storage across the system
• rezoning
• contingency plans using portable PRVs, pumps, generators, layflat hose and
tinkering. The reliability of supply to customers can be improved where contingency
plans are created and practised
• temporary valve changes
• demand management
• maintenance
The following are considerations for operational solutions:
• Maintainability:
o access and egress to repair large critical assets and facilities
o time taken for maintenance crews to manually operate valves
o time to detect, respond, repair, and re-instate assets or facilities
o the ability to take critical assets offline for planned maintenance
• Supportability
o staff availability
o the availability of spares, temporary generators and pumps, internal and
external to Sydney Water
• Operability
o limitations of telemetry
o operating protocals and schedules for normal and abnormal operation
scenarios
• Resilience (for major incident and emergency responses)

o Emergency Control Centre (ECC) protocols and capability
o Contingency plans

Capital Solutions
Capital solutions include, where feasible:
• improving asset/system capacity or redundancy. This involves adding new assets or

increasing storage. For example, increasing reserve storage over and above the 1/3
maximum day demand (MDD) reserve storage, adding extra pumps in a pumping
station, having connection points for generators or mobile diesel pumps, and link
mains between systems.
• strengthening the asset. This involves increasing the capability of the existing asset,
facility or system to withstand a certain event, eg reservoir strengthening for
earthquakes.
Reliability problems
A chain of assets in a series configuration may provide poor reliability as a whole. In the
case shown in Figure 2-2, the chain has a reliability of 0.432 (0.9 x 0.6 x 0.8). The chain
itself is weaker than the weakest link (in our case – a reliability of 0.6), signalling that there
are likely to be multiple solutions required to improve the system. These may be within this
system or from another system.
Start 0.9 0.6 0.8 Finish
(* Numbers relate to the reliability of the asset)
Figure 2 - 2 Reliability problems - series
Reliability options - capital
Figure 2-3 provides a conceptual layout that includes two systems.
The following generic reliability options (shown diagrammatically as A,B,C and D in Figure 2
- 3 ) for various assets need to be considered when reviewing reliability:
• Option A - Local redundancy for a single component failure (eg back-up generator).
• Option B - System level redundancy (eg bi-directional link between systems) for
multiple component failures.
• Option C - System level redundancy for only the source of supply. Customers are still
vulnerable to many component failures if ‘B’ is not provided. Solution ‘B’ is preferred
over ‘C’ because it provides redundancy to more components (this implies that end-
to-end system design can provide very high system reliability to customers, eg
Woronora link to/from City Tunnel, Cascades link to/from Orchard Hills).
• Option D - Strengthening of an existing component for common mode failures (eg

reservoir strengthening, improving treatment capability).

Customer
Supply Source (X) D
(X)
C B
Customer
Supply Source (X)
(Y)
Figure 2 - 3 Examples of reliability solutions for system design

Appendix D: Penrith North Supply Zone example

Penrith North Supply Zone
Example of the ‘System Integrated Planning’ approach has been presented here through the
renewal of a 375 mm water main in Penrith (refer to water main ‘ED’ in Figure 2-4).
This example is set out as per Clause 2.2.1 to 2.2.7 above.
Dividing Valve (DV)
Figure 2 - 4 Schematic of Penrith North Supply Zone renewal
1.1 Define objectives

The problem that initiated the investigation was:
• An old main has reached the end of its service life (‘ED’ in is two kilometres in length
of both 300 mm AC (1935) and 375 mm CICL (1935)). Main ‘ED’ has no direct
customers.
However, there is a single outlet main from Penrith North Reservoir, which provides an
opportunity to improve reliability.
Considering the problem and opportunities around the system, the objectives are to:
• re-optimise the system
• address other possible future renewals required within the planning horizon in the
planning process
• ensure that any required asset is sized for future growth

• improve performance and reliability where economically viable
• ensure water quality requirements are met
• ensure value for money with acceptable risk.
1.2 Generate options

The baseline model and growth model have been developed to assess the system
deficiency for different drivers.
Growth
A baseline model of the Penrith North System was run for current MDD. A future model was
then run for future MDD at 2031. This included an additional 4,000 properties due to growth.
Analysis showed that at ‘F’ the pressure results were 17 m and eight metres respectively.
Renewals
To look for other options besides a like-for-like renewal, other renewals in the area have
been explored to consider in the scope. There were no other proposed renewals in the
nearby area, so other renewals are not an issue in this example.
Expanding the boundaries of planning from the immediate surrounds, other options are
generated to solve this problem using the following list:
• Decommission.
• Re-route.
• Relocate.
• Upsize/downsize/slipline.
• Consolidate.
• Seek opportunities.
However, a run of the future MDD model with the ‘ED’ decommissioned (especially as there
were no customers connected to the main) shows negative pressure of -8 m near ‘F’. This
does not meet the pressure requirements. Therefore exploring other options is required.
Different options have been generated to address the capacity and renewal issue:
• Like-for-like renewal ‘ED’ on .
• Amplifying the main ‘CF’ on from 200 mm to 375 mm would compensate for the
decommissioning of ‘ED’.
Reliability
With a new main ‘CF’ the system configuration has changed. Therefore checking the
reliability of the new system configuration is required to ensure that reliability requirements
are met.
Shutdown block analyses were undertaken of the new system configuration. This is to test
whether the risk level in the system has been escalated too high and whether there is value
for money in providing redundancy.
Shutdown block analyses, for emergency situations, are undertaken under ADD in this case.
The analyses may also use MDD or Maximum Week to test for sensitivities.

Table 2 -5 provides a qualitative risk assessment for each shutdown block. The last column
in this table shows the results of the qualitative risk assessment using Sydney Water’s
corporate risk matrix
Risk scores of three and above generally require investigation to determine any appropriate
mitigation solution, subject to value for money review and management review. The analysis
showed (refer to Table 2 -5) that ‘AB’ and ‘BC’ have high risk costs and severe and
moderate consequences with risk scores of four and five respectively. The risk is therefore
acceptable with a contingency plan, unless value for money can be achieved by a capital
solution.
For the reliability analysis, the question then becomes what combination of mitigation
solutions can provide value for money to mitigate each shutdown block.
To address reliability for the system, the options considered for the detail assessment are:
• ‘ED’ on of two kilometres of DN375 - costs $3 million.
• Amplifying the main ‘CF’ on from DN200 to DN375 for 860 m costs - $1.5 million.
• Opening the existing Dividing Valve (DV) near ‘F’ on . This supplies water from
Bringelly Rd reservoir zone. An operating cost of $10,000 has been considered
appropriate in this example.
1.3 Select criteria

System performance criteria (for demand, pressure, sizing of assets etc) are referenced in
this guideline (Section 3, 4, 5). Where requirements are specific to the Penrith North System,
they are to be included. In this case there are no further requirements specific to this system.
This example has used investment cost and risk cost as primary criteria for option
assessment.
1.4 Screen options (capacity)

The investment cost has been used to short-list two options:
• Like-for-like renewal ‘ED’ on of two kilometres of DN375 - costs $3 million.
• Amplifying the main ‘CF’ on from DN200 to DN375 for 860 m - costs $1.5 million.
As the saving for the amplification of ‘CF’ compared to the renewal of ‘ED’ was about $1.5
million or 50%, the amplification of ‘CF’ is the preferred option. The selection of the preferred
option for capacity was based on cost only as both options meet capacity requirements.
However, this does not preclude ‘ED’ to be an option for improved reliability.
1.5 Perform detailed options assessment

The next level of detail option assessment uses the result of shutdown block analysis. As all
the options meet capacity requirements risk cost has been used for the options assessment
criteria.
Table 2 -5 provides a risk cost assessment for each shutdown block. It uses the risk cost
formulae for each shutdown block to calculate the risk cost ($NPV). Detail is shown below on
how risk cost is calculated.

Running shutdown block analyses for the 600 mm mains ‘AB’ and ‘BC’, the major feeds from
Penrith North reservoir, also highlighted the benefits of amplifying the main ‘CF’. If any of
‘AB’ or ‘BC’ is out of commission, a reasonable supply of water (about average day demand)
can be supplied in emergency situations to customers north of ‘C’ through ‘CF’ from the
adjacent zone (Bringelly Road) via a dividing valve at ‘F’. A shutdown block analysis for the
preferred main ‘CF’ also showed that opening the dividing valve at ‘F’ would also be a
suitable mitigation solution.
Table 2 -6 provides benefit to cost ratios (B/C ratios) for the cost of solutions.
There are further options that could be analysed including ‘CF’, but these have not been
shown in Table 2 -6 in order to simplify this example.
How to calculate risk cost of Section ‘BC’- an example:
Assumptions
• Break rates (BR) for a 100 mm water main (CICL) – 30 breaks/100 km (for this
example).
• Number of customers affected: 3,000.
• Downtime of ‘BC’: two days (advised by operator).
• Consequence rate ($) = $500/customer/day (for this example).
Risk cost formula used in a quantitative assessment for Section ‘BC’:
Risk cost ($NPV) = risk cost ($ pa) x 12.97
Risk cost ($ pa) = mean failure rate (MFR) x consequence cost
Benefit/cost = risk cost reduction/mitigation cost
Mean failure rate (MFR):
Mean failure rate (MFR) for this example = break rate {(x/100 km) x (100 mm/diameter
(mm))} * length (km). See the Reliability Technical Supplement (Reference 28) for further
details.
FR of ‘BC’= {30/100 km x (100 mm/600 mm)} x 1.93 km = 0.096 per year
During the useful life of the main, an estimated mean failure rate is 0.096 per year.
Consequence cost:
Consequence cost = Customer days x consequence rate
= (Number of customers affected x down time) x consequence rate
= 3,000 x 2 days x $500 = $ 3 million

Risk cost (RC):
Risk cost ($NPV) = FR x consequence cost x 12.97 (theoretical factor)
= 0.096 x $ 3,000,000 x 12.97 = $3.7 million
B/C ratios:
B/C ratio = $3.7 million/$3 million = 1.23 (for option renew ‘ED’)
B/C ratio = $3.7 million/$1.5 million = 2.47 (for option amplify ‘CF’)
Analysis
The results show that the risk cost for Sections ‘AB’ and ‘BC’ are $2.8 million and $3.7
million respectively. This indicates that provision of redundancy up to these amounts would
be economical.
The analysis shows that spending $3 million to renew ‘ED’ and $1.5 million to amplify ‘CF’,
as redundancies, provides B/C ratios of 1.253 and 2.47 respectively.
Both of these options appear economical to proceed, with ‘CF’ delivering a higher B/C ratio
than ‘ED’.
However, the provision of a dividing valve from Bringelly Rd near ‘F’ also provides
redundancy, under each shutdown block analysis, with much higher B/C ratio.
The DV also provides alternative supply for outage of ‘AB’, which has the highest
consequence. This is something that renewal of ‘ED’ cannot provide.
Hence the DV near ‘F’ provides better value for money when compared with ‘ED’.
1.6 Recommend the preferred option

The preferred option for capacity is:
1. Laying a new main DN375 for 860 m (‘CF’). This option costs $1.5 million.
The preferred options for reliability to single supply from Penrith reservoir are:
1. Laying a new main DN375 for 860 m (‘CF’). This option costs $1.5 million (note that
this is the same as for the ‘capacity’ case above).
2. Using the existing dividing valve at ‘F’ for an emergency supply. This provides the
greatest value for money in terms of redundancy (when required) against the single
main supply from Penrith North Reservoir.
The overall result is therefore:
1. Laying a new main DN375 for 860 m (‘CF’ on ). This option costs $1.5 million.
2. Using the existing dividing valve at ‘F’ for an emergency supply.
The example highlights how reconfiguration of the system and testing shutdown blocks can
re-optimise the system when a renewal has been generated.

1.7 Monitoring and review

After implementation, system performance needs to be reviewed for the selected option.
This can be achieved by using existing monitoring devices (flow meter, pressure gauge etc)
and feedback from operators.

Table 2 -5 Risk cost and risk score of each shutdown block element
Shutdown Block Analysis
Penrith North Renewal
Qualitative Risk Assessment
Section Diameter Length Material Failure Mean (1 in X) Number $/dw/day Existing Downtime Customer Community Risk Cost $p.a. Risk Cost $ Likelihood Consequence Risk
(mm) (m) Rate / Failure p.a. of Redudnancy (Days) Days Consequence NPV Score
100km Rate Customers (Days) Cost ($)
(100mm)
AB 600 735 CICL 30 0.037 27.2 6000 500 0 2.00 12000 $ 6,000,000 $ 220,500 $ 2,859,885 Very Unlikely Severe 4
BC 600 1933 CICL 30 0.097 10.3 3000 500 0 2.00 6000 $ 3,000,000 $ 289,950 $ 3,760,652 Very Unlikely Moderate 5
BD 250 421 CICL 30 0.051 19.8 1000 500 0 0.25 250 $ 125,000 $ 6,315 $ 81,906 Very Unlikely Minor 6
CF 375 860 CICL 30 0.069 14.5 1000 500 0 0.50 500 $ 250,000 $ 17,200 $ 223,084 Very Unlikely Moderate 5
DF 200 2100 CICL 30 0.315 3.2 1000 500 0 0.25 250 $ 125,000 $ 39,375 $ 510,694 Unlikely Minor 5
The number of customers has been populated with estimated numbers only in all cases.
Table 2 -6 Comparison of solutions for shutdown block analysis

Benefit to cost ratio of each solution vs shutdown blocks
Solutions and cost

Renewal of 'ED' Open DV
$3,000,000 Bringelly Rd
$10,000
Shutdown Diameter Length Material Risk cost $ NPV B/C Ratio B/C Ratio
block (mm) (m)
sections
AB 600 735 CICL $2,859,885 - 286.0

BC 600 1933 CICL $3,760,652 1.3 376.1
BD 250 421 CICL $81,906 - -
CF 375 860 CICL $223,084 - -
DF 200 2100 CICL $510,694 0.2 51.1
Preferred B/C 0.0 713.1

Outcome Not economical Economical
Table 2 -6 shows that opening the DV from Bringelly Rd provides more redundancy than renewal of ‘ED’ and also provides far greater value for money.

Appendix E: Energy efficiency and Renewable Energy - list of key measures

Table 2 - 7 Energy Efficiency Options – Shorter Term Benefits
Current
Opportunity Current status economic Criteria
viability
If possible pressure, flow and power monitoring should

All new pumps and upgrades should include installation of
be integrated so the same data intervals are used and
pressure, flow and power monitoring. Monitoring is critical to be
Metering Very good (N/A) the meters log at the same time eg all on the hour.
able to measure the ongoing performance of the pump station
Suggested 15 minute logging intervals are used.
and continue to optimise its’ operational performance.
Monitoring is more important on larger assets.
Make use of gravity wherever possible rather than relying on

pumps
Gravity/Minimise head Very good (< 5 Consider the total head of different options considered.
requirements years) Can the total head be minimised.
Considering absolute lifting requirements will minimise the overall
energy input required.
Ventilation of pump Optimising fan size and operation of the fan (fan may not need to Good (< 5
Is continuous ventilation required?
stations run 24 hours). years)
Oversized pumps are inefficient. Design to typical flow with

Water and wastewater Very good (<10 System is expected to have significant diurnal or
second pump to handle peak period pumping rather than
pump sizing years) seasonal fluctuations.
operating a large pump at a fraction of capacity most of the time.
Are flows likely to increase significantly? Consider

If flows are expected to significantly increase in the future,
staging of pumps across asset life to meet increasing
consideration should be given to installing pumps optimised for Very good (<10
Modular approach demand; if increasing demand is predicted. Pump size
existing flows (to avoid installing pumps that are too large), and years)
can be optimised to current and not future demand,
modularising future installations
reducing energy use.
VSDs may be applicable with some pump applications. VSDs can

improve efficiency by adjusting pump curve, reducing frictional
Good (< 5
VSD head etc. They may be particular effective on system that have Are there system fluctuation?
years)
considerable flow fluctuations. VSDs use about 4% of pump
power to operate.

Table 2 - 8 Renewable Energy/Fuel Switching Options – Generally Longer Term Benefits
Current economic
Opportunity Current status viability (likely Criteria
payback)
In some areas (especially Ausgrid) it may be

Natural gas power
economically viable to use gas generators for Marginal (<10 years) Is there likely to be a natural gas connection to the site?
generation for pumps
powering pumps rather than importing grid electricity.
Is there a piece of land available roughly 20m x 12m free of

buildings, services and other immovable encumbrances (which is
within or adjacent to the Sydney Water site)?
Not cost effective at present, but is a much greater Weak (10 – 20

Wind small scale Is there significant topography that could affect the wind flow, ie
chance of development approval. years)
land contours rising >10 m above the turbine site within 500 m or
>15 m within 1,000 m, or cliff-lines?
Are there likely to be buildings/structures greater than 5 m high

within 500 m of the site?
Are there likely to be buildings or ground space available.
Currently not cost effective, but costs are rapidly Are there likely to be tall buildings or anything else that could cast
Marginal (10 – 15
Solar PV decreasing. Excellent option for sites with maximum significant shadows over the available roof area?
years)
demand in afternoons
Are there likely to be any reservoirs, lagoons or other areas that
need covering and are free from significant sun shadowing?
Integrated Micro If sufficient head is present a micro hydro could be Marginal (10 – 15 Site specific, a connection “behind” the sites power meter will be
hydro installed. years) required to make the project feasible.
For assistance with assessment of these options please contact the Energy and Eco-efficiency Team.

Water Planning Guideline
Section 3: Water Demand and Growth
Version 1
September 2014
SYDNEY WATER Section 3: Water Demand & Growth
Contents
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 5
3.1.1 General .................................................................................................................................... 5
3.2 System demands .......................................................................................................... 6
3.2.1 Overview.................................................................................................................................. 6
3.2.2 Temporal demand variation..................................................................................................... 6
3.2.3 Demand considerations for planning ....................................................................................... 7
3.2.4 Estimation of current demands ................................................................................................ 9
3.2.4.1 Average day demand.......................................................................................................................... 9
3.2.4.2 Maximum day demand....................................................................................................................... 9
3.2.4.3 Maximum hour demand ....................................................................................................................10
3.2.4.4 Maximum design demand period ......................................................................................................10
3.2.5 Non-revenue water (NRW) .....................................................................................................11
3.2.6 Other design demands for water system component design ..................................................12
3.2.6.1 Maximum minute demand ................................................................................................................12
3.2.6.2 Minimum minute demand .................................................................................................................12
3.2.6.3 Minimum weekly demand .................................................................................................................12
3.2.7 Reliability based demands (shutdown block analysis) ............................................................13
3.3 Growth and demand forecasting ................................................................................. 16
3.3.1 Growth ....................................................................................................................................16
3.3.2 Growth demand forecasting ...................................................................................................16
3.3.3 Future maximum day demand ................................................................................................17
3.3.4 Design demand rate review management ..............................................................................17
3.4 Context ..................................................................................................................... 19
3.4.3 Document Control ...................................................................................................................19
Appendix A: Design demand rates .................................................................................... 21
Design rates for single supply systems ...................................................................................................21
Design rates for dual water supply system (includes recycled water systems).......................................24
Supply systems with rainwater tanks .....................................................................................................27
Design Demand Rate Review Management ...........................................................................................27
Appendix B: Average day data ......................................................................................... 28
Appendix C: Definition of different demand categories ...................................................... 30
Appendix D: NRW components ......................................................................................... 31
Appendix E: Theoretical value to calculate maximum minute demand ................................ 32
Appendix F: Minimum water demand calculation .............................................................. 34

Appendix G: Demand distribution for reliability and risk based approach ............................ 35
Figures
Figure 3 - 1 Typical residential average day demand curve 7
Figure 3 - 2 Design chart - Maximum demand versus duration 32
Figure 3 - 3 Maximum demand vs duration vs gross site area 33
Figure 3 - 4 Demand distributions for different Systems 35
Tables
Table 3 - 1Guide to design demand types for system assets 8
Table 3 - 2 Dwelling-based default demand rates for planning residential water supply systems 22
Table 3 - 3 Non-residential design demands for drinking water supply planning 23
Table 3 - 4 Single dwelling design demand rates for dual water supply system planning 24
Table 3 - 5 Medium density residential design demand rates for dual water supply system Planning25
Table 3 - 6 Non-residential design demand rates for dual water supply system planning 26
Table 3 - 7 Maximum week demand sequence default factors 27
Table 3 - 8 Average day data from BASIX water savings monitoring 28
Table 3 - 9 Average day data from Rouse Hill monitoring 28
Table 3 - 10 Average day data from BASIX and Rouse Hill monitoring 28
Table 3 - 11 Assumed average day data 29
Table 3 - 12 Components of non-revenue water 31
Table 3 - 13 MDD demand factor frequency (July 2009 to April 2012) 36
Table 3 - 14 Minimum week and day factors (July 2009 to April 2012) 37

Section 3: Water demand and growth

3.1 Introduction
This section covers Sydney Water’s approach on how to consider growth and demand for
planning for drinking and recycled water.
While this document provides general guidelines and criteria applicable to most planning
scenarios, it does not limit a planner’s responsibility to exercise engineering judgement and,
if required, to adopt improved approaches.
3.1.1 General
As part of the planning process to provide customers with a total water supply system that
best meets their needs at a price they are willing to pay, each water supply scheme is
planned in stages to ensure optimal use of assets. This ensures that new facilities are only
provided where needed and augmentation done only when required. To do this effectively
we need to forecast population and demand over a planning horizon, generally 25 to 30
years.
Demands are affected by various factors including:
• water restrictions
• water conservation education campaigns
• introduction of the Building and Sustainability Index (BASIX)
• penetration of water efficient appliances and fixtures
• non-revenue water management programs
• introduction of alternative water products
• changes in development lot sizes
• pricing
• local climatic factors (rainfall, evaporation, temperature, humidity, winds, etc)
• demographics
• development types (infill/greenfield)
• type of use (indoor/outdoor/recreational)
• different demand categories (residential/commercial/industrial/special use).

3.2 System demands
3.2.1 Overview
Demands vary day-to-day and generally rise and fall with the seasons. Seasonal variation in
water demand is often due to outdoor usage. It is not uncommon for supply zones to
experience individual days where demand exceeds twice the average day demand during a
hot, dry summer period. During low demand periods (typically winter or wet and cold
periods), minimum demand for an individual day can fall below 70% of average day demand.
3.2.2 Temporal demand variation

Sydney Water typically designs water systems based on maximum system demands.
Understanding demand variation over the years, months, weeks and days is crucial to
selecting fit for purpose assets.
Diurnal patterns are unit curves used in modelling to simulate diurnal demands. These are
important mainly when sizing the reticulation network (Refer to Figure 3-1 for an example of
a typical residential diurnal curve). Different property types will have different diurnal
patterns, and in some cases it may be necessary to develop new diurnal patterns for high
water users that behave differently to other properties and have a considerable influence in
the flow distribution.
Commercial and industrial demand patterns vary markedly from residential diurnal curves.
As well as having different profiles, the peak factors for these demand types will be different
and occur at other times of the day compared to residential consumption.
In determining the maximum consumption for a particular water supply area, the planner
should consider the combined effect of different types of consumption within the zone and
determine when combined maximum demand occurs.
The Water Modelling System (WMS) database has default diurnal curves for maximum days
to be used for various demand types.

Average Day Diurnal Demand Curve

Drinking Water
2.50
2.00
Demand Factors
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
12:00 AM 6:00 AM 12:00 PM 6:00 PM 12:00 AM
Time
Figure 3 - 1 Typical residential average day demand curve
3.2.3 Demand considerations for planning

Water system assets are generally sized for a specific demand type. Table 3-1 outlines
various assets and the respective demand types (a guide only).
Considerations in calculating demands include:
• Planning of transfer infrastructure to allow receiving reservoirs to recover from

prolonged high demand events. Under some circumstances, this means that transfer
systems need analysing for a maximum design demand period. Calculation of
demand will need to consider all the demands from downstream systems in the
transfer system.
• Reticulation systems to be generally sized for maximum hour demand events to

ensure that all customers receive adequate pressure throughout the day.
• Current maximum demand sequences, maximum day and maximum hour events are
best determined from historical data.
• Care should be taken that the adopted maximum demand events are not distorted by
abnormal operations such as main breaks or temporary operational changes.
• BASIX requirements for new developments (since 2004) should be taken into
account. Latest studies on existing BASIX compliant properties showed that BASIX
reductions affect the average demand of affected dwellings more than their maximum
day demand.

• Dual supply systems need special attention. Single supply systems are more
prevalent and distribute only drinking water to customers. Dual supply systems serve
customers within the supply area with additional infrastructure to deliver recycled
water for non-drinking purposes. The production of recycled water does not always
match the demand. Consequently topping up these systems from the drinking supply
is often required and must be considered in planning.
Table 3 - 1Guide to design demand types for system assets
Demand type
System Asset Max

Week/Max
Demand Max Max Max Min
Period Day Hour Minute Minute
Raw water supply

Bulk
water
Water filtration plant
Water pumping station
Delivery
Service reservoir
system
Trunk transfer mains
Water pumping station – surface
Service reservoir – surface
Water pumping station - elevated
Service reservoir – elevated

Supply
system
Outlet mains (single reservoir zone)
Outlet mains (dual purpose)
Reticulation mains
Local booster pumps (no storage)
Flow meter
Valve/pressure reducing valve/

pressure sustaining valve

3.2.4 Estimation of current demands

The methodology for estimating current demands is described below:
3.2.4.1 Average day demand
Average day demand (ADD) components are average customer metered consumption and
non-revenue water.
To determine ADD, consider the average historical customer metered consumption for the
previous six financial years (a financial year is recommended to capture a whole summer
period), if possible. An appropriate amount of non-revenue water will need to be added to
this calculation (Refer to Clause 3.2.5).
In addition, determining ADD for major demand categories within the zone will help to
establish per property demand for the zone to apply to new growth or to determine an
estimated future maximum day demand (Refer to Clause 3.2.4.2).
3.2.4.2 Maximum day demand
Current maximum day demand (MDD) for an existing supply zone or transfer system is
determined by one of the following methods (in order of preference):
• An analysis of the last ten consecutive financial years of IICATS data to select the
day with the highest demand over 24 hours.
If the results of the last ten years are inconsistent or there seems to be apparent
anomalies, a review of the analysis or timeframe (to be either lengthened or
shortened) may be required. Examples include:
o The timeframe may include restriction periods, which in some instances may
have a high demand, eg, if watering gardens is only allowed in a supply zone
on one day of the week. However, instances like this need to be reviewed as
to the likelihood of them happening again.
o A major industry has started/closed in the last ten years
• Where suitable IICATS data is not available, ADD can be calculated from customer
billing data as described in clause 3.2.4.1 and factored with locally derived scaling
factors, with appropriate allowances for non-revenue water (Refer to clause 3.2.5).
The default demand factors outlined in Appendix A: should only be used as a last
resort, as they tend to be conservative. The planner must be aware of any significant

growth or changes in property demand in the supply zone that has occurred in the
MDD calculation period and account for that appropriately.
For a greenfield development, use the demand from a similar zone/s (where there is
similarity in customer type, lot size and population) in the vicinity. Only use the default
demand rates from Appendix A: as a last resort, as they tend to be conservative. Monitor
the actual consumption for possible future adjustment of demands for planning of further
stages of a project.
Where there is less than ten years of IICATS data, the planner shall undertake a sensitivity
analysis and risk assessment between the two methods.
3.2.4.3 Maximum hour demand
Maximum hour demand (MHD) does not necessarily occur on the same day as the MDD.
Current MHD for an existing supply zone or transfer system is determined by one of the
following methods (in order of preference):
• An analysis of the last ten years of 15 minutes of IICATS data (where not available
use hourly IICATS data) to select the maximum hour event.
Refer to clause 3.2.4.2 for comments under maximum day demand if the results are
inconsistent, or there seem to be anomalies.
• Where suitable IICATS data is not available, but MDD demand is available for the
system, use locally derived scaling factors to obtain the MHD. The default demand
factors outlined in Appendix A: should only be used as a last resort, as they tend to
be conservative.
For a greenfield development, use the demand from a similar zone/s (where there is
similarity in customer type, lot size and population) in the vicinity. Only use the default
demand rates from Appendix A: as a last resort, as they tend to be conservative. Monitor
the actual consumption for possible future adjustment of demands for planning of further
stages of a project.
3.2.4.4 Maximum design demand period
Maximum design demand period is used as the basis for determining whether a water
system can recover from a number of days of high demand. Generally, it only needs to be
used where system demand exceeds input capacity.

For existing supply zones and greenfield development, a period of eight highest consecutive
days is used. The daily demand factors are given in Appendix A:, Table 3 - 7 .
For existing delivery system assessments, collect historical demand data from Hydraulic
System Services (HSS) to determine daily demand factors.
For recycled water systems, refer to Appendix A:, Table 3 - 7 for daily demand factors.
3.2.5 Non-revenue water (NRW)

Previously known as Unaccounted for Water (UFW), Non-Revenue Water (NRW) is
consumption unaccounted for through customer metering over a set period of time (usually
the most recent financial year). For the components of NRW, refer to Appendix D:.
The volume loss due to leakage depends on the system design, construction, operation, and
maintenance practices. In urban systems the majority of leakage occurs at connections and
property water services (hence the allowance for NRW is usually based on the number of
connections/water services rather than on the length of mains). Leakage is also dependent
upon average pressure, ie generally the higher the pressure, the higher the leakage.
For more details on how Sydney Water manages water leakage to meet the Operating
Licence and Metropolitan Water Plan, refer to the Leakage Management Plan 2010-
(Reference 3).
The NRW rate that planners should use will be either:
• The existing NRW rate for the supply zone (preferred if known). Any significant
calculated NRW variation from the current financial year’s Sydney-wide NRW figure
from the “Water Efficiency Report” (or outside the range of 5-15%) should be
investigated. An inconsistency could point to operational problems that need to be
resolved, ie open boundary valves, water theft in rural areas or excessive leakage.
or
• 12% of total metered supply zone consumption where NRW can’t be calculated.
However, this value needs to be verified before use based on the year-end results
published on the web in the Water Efficiency Report (Reference 48).
No additional allowance is needed if demands are based on IICATS flow metering (eg for
bulk supply metering), as NRW is already included.

3.2.6 Other design demands for water system component design
3.2.6.1 Maximum minute demand
Maximum minute demand refers to the highest flow rate occurring over a one minute period.
Maximum minute demand is relevant to the design of in-line boosters, flow meters and
pressure reducing valves for small service areas (under 100 hectares as a guide). IICATS
records flows in 15-minute intervals or less (based on information available for the system)
which can be used to derive maximum minute demand.
In the absence of any other information from the system, refer to the design charts in
Appendix E:.
3.2.6.2 Minimum minute demand
Minimum minute demand is used in the design of flow meters, pressure reduction valves and
booster stations to ensure that assets (including bypass arrangements) can operate over the
full range of flows encountered.
Minimum minute demand usually occurs during night hours (2-4 am) when there is little or no
customer activity. It is the sum of:
1. unavoidable background leakage (UBL) below the threshold of modern detection

equipment, eg typically small weeps from joints
2. minimum residential usage, primarily due to toilet flushing at night
3. minimum non-residential usage. There will be times during the year when non-
residential activity is likely to be at, or close to zero. Do not allow for this unless there
is sufficient evidence to base an estimate.
For further understanding on how to calculate minimum water demand, refer to Appendix
F:.
3.2.6.3 Minimum weekly demand
The minimum weekly demand is required to assess system impacts such as when the
Kurnell Desalination Plant is in operation. In this case, the Potts Hill delivery system is likely
to experience its maximum pressures during this demand period
This demand may be used to study other issues, such as storage balancing and reviewing
pump efficiencies for the pumping stations along the City and Pressure Tunnels.

3.2.7 Reliability based demands (shutdown block analysis)
Approach for reliability demands
Sydney Water employs a risk based approach to the provision of redundancy. It is generally
regarded as unrealistic to have a full back-up supply available to all customers all of the time
due to the excessive cost.
There is a need to balance spending too much capital on redundancy and reducing impacts
on customers. Undertaking qualitative and quantitative risk assessments, determining the
cost of a mitigation solution, developing a benefit cost ratio for the mitigation solution and
organising a management review will ensure that cost effective mitigation solutions are
developed (refer to Section 2: Water System Planning of this guideline).
Our Operating Licence does allow for a certain number of customers to lose continuity, eg
during a mains break. The current annual target is a maximum of 40,000 customers affected
for longer than five hours.
Reliability demands
Reliability demands can be used in the design of systems for abnormal (planned and
unplanned) operating conditions. They are used to:
• Test the adequacy of existing assets.
• Develop mitigation solutions to a chosen level of service (demand scenario)
Each critical element of the system is to be tested by choosing the appropriate demand
scenario from the following list:
• Maximum Hour
• Maximum Day Demand (MDD)
• Maximum week
• Ninety percent of MDD – generally for pumping stations without the standby in
operation. Note: Above 90% of MDD represents about 1% of days in the year, or 3 to
4 days in the maximum week sequence.
• Average day demand (ADD)
• Peak hour on an average day

As an example on which demand scenario/s would be used for a shutdown block analysis
for a water main, maximum hour and peak hour on an average day would be generally
chosen in the first instance. It is unusual for testing to show that a maximum hour back up
supply is available.
When using an ADD event for testing of a shutdown block, a different likelihood and
consequence is usually developed compared to an MDD event. Thus a different risk score
and risk cost generally occurs for the two scenarios. The inclusion of two (or more) scenarios
can improve the decision making process.
The preferred mitigation solution is generally based on the demand scenario that provides
acceptable residual risk and/or value for money. It can be chosen from the above demand
scenarios as well as the following:
• Minimum day demand. This demand is usually around 0.5 – 0.8 ADD (Refer to
Appendix G:).
• Emergency demand - 100 litres/person/day.
• Drinking requirements only - 10 litres/person/day (tankering and bottled water).
• A scenario developed specifically for a project
An alternative methodology is to apply the ‘working backwards’ strategy, ie determine what

demand provides a value-for-money solution or a change in risk score.
Appendix G: shows information on demands for a number of delivery systems.
Mitigation solutions may be capital or operational (including contingency plans). (Refer to

Section 2: Water System Planning).
Discussion on criteria
It is difficult to set criteria on a Sydney-wide basis for demands that are to be provided in an
abnormal situation. A customer’s ability to be unaffected by a major asset failure may
depend on their location in the Sydney region.
As an example of this, providing a back-up supply of average day demand to customers in

the Woronora delivery system is relatively easy as a major link is already connected to the
Prospect system. However, providing a back-up supply to the customers in the Nepean
delivery system requires a long pipeline from the Macarthur system, which is very expensive.
Hence tankering and bottled water may be required for some extended failures, depending
upon the operational solutions.

In practice to date, for the planning of critical water main renewals, it has been generally
found that:
• A MDD or MHD back-up supply was generally not available. Designing a MDD or
MHD back-up supply was generally not suitable, due to the lack of existing pipework
capacity and the excessive cost to augment to meet this requirement. Generally,
reserve storage is the only available redundancy in the system.
• An ADD or the morning peak (on an average day) back-up supply was available on
many occasions, as the remaining system still in service was not operating at
maximum capacity, thus spare capacity exists.
From the above, it can be seen that reliability should be reviewed to ensure that each
customer be supplied with the best outcome available from the qualitative and quantitative
risk assessments, subject to a management review.
Other considerations
These include:
• Planned maintenance activities can extend for several months and are usually
undertaken during lower demand periods, eg tunnel and reservoir shutdowns occur
between March and September. The analysis of the previous 10 years of demands
should therefore be based on the same months of the shutdown, subject to a risk
assessment.
• Minimum day demand (the lowest recorded day without restrictions) would be an
expected target demand rate where restrictions are implemented during incidents,
subject to a risk assessment. This demand usually aligns with wet or cold days where
outdoor and washing machine usage is very low. Christmas Day is commonly a low
demand day. Recent experience (in March 2014 in the Macarthur water supply
system) suggests asking customers via the media to voluntarily conserve water did
not reduce demands significantly.
• Bottled water or tankers may be required to supply water to customers when

continuity is lost. This is not a design issue, but should be considered in risk
assessments to determine whether it is practical to respond in this way (based on the
size of the demand required). Refer to clause 3.2.7.
• Drought demand rates. While not mentioned here, these need to be developed on a
case-by-case basis.

3.3 Growth and demand forecasting

3.3.1 Growth
Population growth forecasts are a key input into the planning process and provide an insight
into future infrastructure needs as well as future capital investment needs. Sydney Water
typically sources growth information from:
• The Department of Planning & Environment, councils and property developers

(residential growth projections). Short and medium projections are sourced from the
Metropolitan Development Program (2010/11 – 2019/20 MDP Residential Forecasts).
The long-term forecast is sourced from DP&E’s population data (projections to 2036).
For major growth areas such as the South West Growth Centre (SWGC), North West
Growth Centre (SWGC), and West Dapto, more detailed growth projections can be
obtained separately from DP&E. Forecasts for Wollondilly LGA can be updated by
the planner as advised by UrbanGrowth NSW (formed through the integration of
Landcom and the former Sydney Metropolitan Development Authority).
• Employment forecasts developed by the Bureau of Transport Statistics (BTS),

councils and developers (non-residential growth projections).
• OASIS property table (an internal Sydney Water source).
3.3.2 Growth demand forecasting

To calculate ‘growth demands’ on a water system use one of these approaches:
1. Determine the per capita consumption by demand category (for the definition of
Sydney Water demand categories refer to Appendix C:) for the existing relevant
supply area and apply the relevant per capita demand* on each new development
(preferred method where possible).
*Be aware that even in situations where demand behaviour in an area is known, this may not
always reflect future consumption behaviour for new dwellings.
2. Where suitable IICATS data is not available, use the demand from similar zone/s
(where there is similarity in customer type, lot size and population) in the vicinity to
obtain MDD and MHD. The default demand factors outlined in Appendix A: should
only be used as a last resort, as they tend to be conservative.

To minimise the uncertainty of projected demand trends and to validate the assumptions on
consumption, staging of future works and monitoring of actual growth demands over time is
generally preferred.
3.3.3 Future maximum day demand

Demand forecasts are based on forecast growth to identify future system deficiencies and
develop concept augmentation options. It is important that demand forecasts:
• are determined for each supply zone or trunk system (Sydney-wide estimates cannot
be used)
• follow a consistent methodology as described below.
Current MDD must be calculated before projecting future MDD (for calculation methods refer
to clause 3.2.4). The planner must establish the current MDD for each individual supply zone
or where applicable for each pressure managed sub-zone within the project boundary.
The current MDD provides a baseline from which the demand growth will be applied and to
determine per capita consumption rates for residential categories in that zone. These
consumption rates in conjunction with the growth projections and the present MDD will allow
the planner to forecast future MDD for each planning horizon. The MHD factor determined
for the current case is also used for future demand scenarios. This may require the
alteration of the diurnal pattern so that it incorporates the current MHD to be used for future
scenarios.
Commercial and industrial growth will be considered and the rate of change will be based on
the growth/reduction shown in the employment figures produced by the BTS. Hence if x%
reduction is predicted, then x% reduction is applied to the existing non-residential properties
in the area in question.
For the definition of different levels of industrial water usage refer to Appendix C:.
3.3.4 Design demand rate review management
Sydney Water has developed the Design Demand Rates for Water Assets (SAP) -
AMQ0038 (Reference 2) to assist in the revision of design demand rates to ensure
infrastructure is appropriately sized considering the change of customer water usage and
local variability. It includes the following key processes:
1. Plan the process (including development of an implementation plan).
2. Deliver the implementation plan (including any monitoring requirements).

3. Evaluate and review (including data management and analysis of data).
4. Implement the changes.
Estimated design demand rates will be subjected to periodical future review, based on actual
demands from field monitoring.

3.4 Context

Attachment/appendix number Title
Appendix A Design demand rates
Appendix B Average day data
Appendix C Definition of different demand categories
Appendix D Components of NRW
Appendix E Theoretical value to calculate maximum minute demand
Appendix F Recommendation on how to calculate minimum water demand
Appendix G Demand distribution for reliability and risk-based approach
3.4.3 Document Control

Title: Water System Planning Guideline, Section 3: Water Demand and Growth
Current review date: Review period: 1 year Registered file:
June 2015 Risk rank = high 2014/00004985


Major Stakeholders consulted: Anil Jaiswal - Servicing & Asset Strategy

Aravinda Stanley - Service & Asset Strategy

Eldwin Gunawan - Engineering & Environmental Services
Gordon Aiken - Networks
Robert Ius - Hydraulic System Services

number
1 September New Document
2014

Appendix A: Design demand rates

Design demand rates provided in this document will replace the values in the Water Supply Code
of Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
Note that:
• the criteria below are the default values to be used for future development in the absence
of any other available information
• planning of small areas (less than 100 ha or 1,000 properties) which, on account of
diversity in demand patterns, can have higher maximum demand. Refer to Guidelines for
selection of small self-contained water booster stations, April 2004 (Reference 7).
For the definition of residential, commercial, and industrial (light and medium) demand categories,
refer to Appendix C:.
Design rates for single supply systems

Default demand rates for single supply system planning are provided:
• in Table 3-2 (Residential Demand)
• in Table 3 - 3 (Non- Residential Demand).

The demand rates contained in the tables include the leakage component.

Table 3 - 2 Dwelling-based default demand rates for planning residential water supply
systems
New release areas and major urban consolidation
Item Design criteria Units5 Drinking water
Design demands for drinking water supply network that are BASIX compliant (rainwater tanks may be
installed).
Average day 0.75
kL/dwelling/day
demand Refer to Note 1 and Note 2
Single dwelling 2.20
Max day demand kL/dwelling/day
residential Refer to Note 3
= 2.5 x maximum day
Max hour demand kL/dwelling/day = 5.500.
Refer to Note 4
Average day
kL/unit/day 0.7
demand
Town house
Max day demand kL/unit/day 1.6
(<30 units/net/ha)
= 2.2 x maximum day
Max hour demand kL/unit/day
= 3.52
Average day
kL/unit/day 0.63
Multi-unit demand
(30 - 60 Max day demand kL/unit/day 1.35
units/net/ha) = 2.0 x maximum day
= 2.7
Average day
kL/unit/day 0.53
Multi-unit demand
= 2.18
Average day
kL/unit/day 0.44
Multi-unit demand
= 1.76
Average day
kL/unit/day 0.42
Multi-unit demand
(>140 units/net/ha) Max day demand kL/unit/day 0.8
Max hour demand kL/unit/day = 2.0 x maximum day = 1.6
Note that,
1. This is the total demand and includes the rainwater supply. This criteria is to be used for shutdown block analysis
as well. Refer to Appendix B:.
2. The drinking water usage minus the rainwater supply (ie drinking water meter reading) is 0.55 kl/dwelling/day. This
criterion is to be used for average drinking water and power calculations. Refer to Appendix B:.
3. Considering water consumption with rainwater tanks use water to the same extent as in dual reticulation system,
(demands of DW ) 0.8 plus (demand of RW=outdoor + toilets) 1.4.
4. Due to lack of actual data on BASIX houses with rainwater tanks, this number is assumed based on the previous
maximum hour WSAA number in Table 2.1 (WSAA Version 2002) of 90 kL/Nha/day with a density of 16.4
dwellings per net hectare. However, current densities at Rouse Hill tend to vary around 14 to 17 dwellings per net
hectare.
5. For the conversion to Net Hectares (NHa), where no better information exists, assume 0.8 x gross hectare with a
density of 16.4 dwellings per net hectare.

Table 3 - 3 Non-residential design demands for drinking water supply planning
(new development areas)

1
Item Design criteria Units Drinking water
Design demands for drinking water supply system for non-residential development
Max day
kL/NHa/day 40
demand
Light industrial
Max hour 1.6 x Max day demand
kL/NHa/day
demand = 64
66
Max day
kL/NHa/day Moved old light Industrial into the
demand
Medium industrial medium category
Max hour
kL/NHa/day = 1.6 x maximum day
demand
Heavy industrial Demands kL/NHa/day Based on individual industrial need
41
63 kL/NHa/day
Max day
kL/NHa/day For large shopping complexes such as
demand
Suburban commercial Westfield, Centro, Roselands etc the
City Rise Commercial.
Max hour
kL/NHa/day =2.0 x maximum day demand
demand
Max day kL/
City high rise commercial* 63
demand floor ha/day
*(600 persons/ floor ha)
Max Hour kL/
=2.0 x maximum day demand
demand floor ha/day
Note that:
1. Where no better information exists, assume net hectares (NHa) = 0.8 x gross hectare.

Design rates for dual water supply system

(includes recycled water systems)
A dual water supply system supplies customers with drinking water and recycled water. Demands
need to be calculated separately for the two systems.
The following are general requirements or assumptions:
• Unless otherwise directed, both the drinking and recycled system shall be designed for
100% washing machine usage.
• Assume that cooling towers are supplied from the drinking water supply system.
Default demand rates for dual supply system planning are provided in:
• Table 3 - 4 for single dwelling of dual reticulation supply systems.
• Table 3 - 5 for Medium Density Residential of dual reticulation supply systems.
• Table 3 - 6 for non-residential development
The demand rates contained in the tables include the leakage component.
Table 3 - 4 Single dwelling design demand rates for dual water supply system planning
1 1
Drinking water Recycled water
(includes 100% of (includes 100% of
washing machine washing machine
Item Design criteria Units usage) usage)
1. Single 0.50
Average day
dwelling kL/dwelling/day 0.35
demand Refer to Appendix B:
residential
2. Single
0.80
dwelling Max day demand kL/dwelling/day 1.6
residential
3. Single = 2.7 x maximum day
= 3.6 x maximum day
dwelling Max hour demand kL/dwelling/day = 2.160
residential = 5.76
Note that:
1. Demand rates consider 100% washing machine usage on both drinking water and recycled water.
If otherwise directed by Sydney Water, to supply washing machine usage from one source only (either
drinking water or recycled water), demand for alternative source will be reduced by the demand rates
considered for washing machine usage under each scenario and the amount will be as follows:
Reduce average day rate by 0.10 kL/dwelling day
Reduce maximum day rate by 0.20 kL/dwelling/day
Reduce maximum hour rate by 0.16 kL/dwelling/day*

*As washing machine usage maximum demand occurs during morning, maximum hour demand rate (usually
during afternoon) is less than maximum day demand rate for washing machines.

Table 3 - 5 Medium density residential design demand rates for dual water supply system
Planning
2 2
Drinking water Recycled water
(includes 100% of (includes 100% of
washing machine washing machine
1
Item Design criteria Units usage) usage)
Average day
kL/unit/day 0.500 0.350
demand
1. Town house
Max day demand kL/unit/day 0.70 1.1
(<30
units/net/ha) = 2.45 x maximum
= 3.2 x maximum day
Max hour demand kL/unit/day day
= 3.52
= 1.71
Average day
kL/unit/day 0.375 0.320
demand
2. Multi-unit
(30 - 60
= 3.0 x maximum day
= 2.85
= 1.37
Average day
kL/unit/day 0.375 0.300
demand
Multi-unit
(61 - 100
units/net/ha) = 2.29 x maximum = 2.47 x maximum
Max hour day day
kL/unit/day
Demand
= 1.37 = 1.73
Average day
kL/unit/day 0.375 0.250
demand
Multi-unit
(101 - 140
units/net/ha) = 2.29 x maximum = 1.71 x maximum
Max hour demand kL/unit/day day day
= 1.37 = 0.85
Average day
kL/unit/day 0.375 0.220
demand
Multi-unit
(>140
= 1.8 x maximum day
= 0.72
= 1.37
Note that:
1. For high density multi-unit type developments the default design demand rates do not include an
allowance for irrigation of the surrounding landscape. This issue should be reviewed on a case-by-case
basis.
2. Demand rates consider 100% washing machine usage on both drinking water and recycled water.
If otherwise directed by Sydney Water, to supply washing machine usage from one source only (either
drinking water or recycled water), demand for alternative source will be reduced by the demand rates
considered for washing machine usage under each scenario and the amount will be as follows:
Reduce average day rate by 0.10 kL/dwelling day.
Reduce maximum day rate by 0.20 kL/dwelling/day.
Reduce maximum hour rate by 0.16 kL/dwelling/day.*
*As washing machine usage maximum demand occurs during morning, maximum hour demand rate
(usually during afternoon) is less than maximum day demand rate for washing machines.

Table 3 - 6 Non-residential design demand rates for dual water supply system planning
Design
Item criteria Units Drinking water Recycled water
Where possible assessed Where possible assessed

Light Max day
kL/NHa/day on individual basis on individual basis
industrial demand
or 20 kL/Ha/day or 20 kL/Ha/day
Light Max hour
kL/NHa/day = 1.6 x maximum day = 1.6 x maximum day
industrial demand
Medium Max day
kL/NHa/day on individual basis on individual basis
industrial demand
or 33 kL/Ha/day or 33 kL/Ha/day
Medium Max hour
kL/NHa/day = 1.6 x maximum day = 1.6 x maximum day
industrial demand
Heavy
Demands kL/NHa/day Assess on individual basis NA
industrial
on individual basis on individual basis
or 21 kL/Ha/day or or 21 kL/Ha/day or
31.5 kL/Ha/day* 31.5 kL/Ha/day*
Max day *For large shopping *For large shopping
Commercial kL/NHa/day
demand complexes such as complexes such as
Westfield, Centro, Westfield, Centro,
Roselands etc the City Roselands etc the City
Rise Commercial design Rise Commercial design
rate of should be used. rate of should be used.
Max hour
Commercial kL/NHa/day = 2.0 x maximum day = 2.0 x maximum day
demand
Average day Only permitted off = 1/3 maximum day
Irrigation kL/NHa/day
demand recycled system demand
Where possible assessed
Max day Only permitted off
Irrigation kL/NHa/day on individual basis
demand recycled system
or 7 kL/Ha/day
To be restricted to
Max hour Only permitted off maximum day rates.
Irrigation kL/NHa/day
demand recycled system Maximum demands to be
met by onsite storage.

Table 3 - 7 Maximum week demand sequence default factors

MDD factor for RW
MDD factor for Supply in Dual
Day DW Supply Retic
1 0.78 0.75
2 0.92 0.85
3 0.92 0.91
4 1.00 1.00
5 0.94 0.94
6 0.93 0.94
7 0.92 0.96
8 0.68 0.73
Supply systems with rainwater tanks

Sydney Water does not currently consider any allowance (reduction) for rainwater tank supply in
design maximum demands (eg maximum hour, maximum day or maximum week demands) for
single or dual water supply systems. Rainwater tanks are assumed to be fully depleted during
maximum day events.

Appendix B: Average day data

Table 3 - 8 Average day data from BASIX water savings monitoring
Dual reticulation Rainwater tank

Item *
system system
2008 - 2009
Analysable sample (number of dwellings) 123 1139
Average BASIX benchmark consumption 0.91 0.89
(kL/dw/day)
Average target potable water consumption 0.55 0.53
(ie BASIX benchmark – 40%) (kL/dw/day)
Average actual potable water consumption 0.50 0.56
(kL/dw/day)
Actual recycled water or rainwater 0.22 Not available
consumed (kL/dw/day)
Total water consumption (kL/dw/day) 0.73 Not available
Average actual potable water percentage 44.20% 36.00%
savings relative to BASIX benchmark
Table 3 - 10 shows average day data from several sources including BASIX Water Savings
Monitoring – December 2009 (Reference 10).
Table 3 - 9 Average day data from Rouse Hill monitoring
Rouse Hill area 108 and 282 Area 282 Area 108 Average of 390
reticulation data
2008 - 2009
Drinking water (kL/dw/day) 0.45 0.48 0.46
Recycled water (kL/dw/day) 0.35 0.23 0.32
Total water consumption (kL/dw/day) 0.80 0.71 0.78
Flow meters were installed in December 2008 at Rouse Hill to monitor water and recycled water
demands.
Table 3 - 10 Average day data from BASIX and Rouse Hill monitoring
Consumption based on averages * Rouse Average Final assumed

from two data sets for dual Hill value for dual
reticulation system average reticulation
system
Drinking water (kL/Dw/Day) 0.50 0.46 0.48 0.50

Recycled water (kL/Dw/Day) 0.22 0.32 0.27 0.25
Total Water (kL/dw/Day) 0.73 0.78 0.75 0.75
*Based on BASIX water savings monitoring report

Table 3 - 11 Assumed average day data
For rainwater tank system Final assumed value
Drinking water consumption (kL/dw/day) 0.55

Rain water consumption (kL/dw/day) 0.20
*
Total water consumption (kL/dw/day) 0.75
*Total water consumption consistent with dual reticulation system

Appendix C: Definition of different demand categories
Demand
categories Description
Residential Domestic demand is a major component of demand in Sydney Water's area of

operations. It can be divided into two components, indoor and outdoor use.
Indoor use includes clothes and dishwashing, cooking, toilet flushing, washing and
showering, cleaning, etc. Indoor consumption is relatively constant over the year.
Outdoor use includes garden watering, topping up swimming pools, washing
vehicles, etc. Outdoor consumption is higher in summer and varies with rainfall,
garden type and soil type.
Again based on demand variation, Residential demands are categories as Single
dwelling (Low Density-LD) and multi-unit (High Density-HD). Single dwellings are
houses, and multi-unit includes:
flats, units and apartments
semi-detached, terrace houses, townhouses etc.
Non-domestic demand is categorised into:
Non-residential
a) Industrial
b) Commercial
c) Special uses
d) Rural
a) Industrial Light industrial: refers to areas largely characterised by general and

neighbourhood business, transport, warehousing and storage industries, retailing
including medium to large sized shopping centres dominated by bulky goods
retailers (furniture, whitegoods and other homewares).
Medium industrial: refers to areas likely to have a large number of demand-
intensive industries.
Heavy industrial: Usually industries with very high water consuming processes, eg
paper mills, refineries, petro chemical factories, beverage plants, soft drink industry
etc.
b) Commercial Commercial demands include shops, shopping centres, accommodation industry,
offices and clubs. Use of air conditioning gives these industries maximum summer
loadings.
Sydney Water sources commercial projections directly from the Transport and
Population Centre.
c) Special uses Special uses include:

• Parks and gardens
• Institutions (hospitals, nursing homes, jails, etc)
• Clubs, hotels, motels
• Educational establishments (Schools, colleges)
d) Rural Demand estimates for rural properties in areas supplied by Sydney Water's system
make domestic supply the first priority; however, it also includes reasonable
allowances for market gardening or other rural activities. Such allowances are
based, where possible, on actual consumption data in similar areas with appropriate
extrapolation to allow for future growth.
Applications for rural property connections are treated on their individual merits and
the available system characteristics at the point of connection.

Appendix D: NRW components

Non-revenue water (NRW) is the sum of unbilled authorised consumption, apparent losses and
real losses. The make-up of NRW components is detailed below.
Table 3 - 12 Components of non-revenue water
Sydney Water
unmetered (Metered
but not read STPs)
properties
Sydney Water
operational use
Unbilled
unmetered Fire use and fire 1% of total supply
consumption testing
Unbilled authorised
consumption Unmetered
construction use
Stopped customer
meters
Non-
revenue
water Unbilled Sydney Water
metered metered STPs 0.05% of total supply
consumption (metered and read)
Unauthorised
consumption 0.1% of total supply
Apparent losses
Customer 2% of total billed
metering metered
inaccuracies consumption
85
Real losses Real losses Litres/connection/day
(2011/12 results)
Unbilled authorised consumption includes those components of authorised consumption that are
not billed and do not produce revenue. Apparent Losses include all types of inaccuracies
associated with customer metering, plus unauthorised consumption (theft or illegal use). Real
losses are physical water losses from the pressurised system, up to the point of measurement of
customer use. It is the annual volume lost through all types of leaks, bursts and overflows depends
on frequencies, flow rates, and average duration of individual leaks, bursts and overflows.
For details on the definition of the water balance with NRW, refer to Calculation & Reporting -
Corporate Waterbalance from Storages (Reference 4).

Appendix E: Theoretical value to calculate maximum

minute demand
Design charts
Small service areas (under 100 hectares) can experience higher maximum minute demands than
provided for by the general water supply design allowances in the default demand rates table (refer
to Figure 3 - 2 ). This may lead to pressure problems in some areas, generally for short periods of
time on high demand days.
A simulation model developed for Sydney Water by the Department of Public Works and Services
has been used to estimate maximum minute demands for a wide range of small service areas with
a wide range of residential housing types and maximum day demands.
Maximum Demand per Dwellling
0 .6000
0 .5000
w
/d
/s 0 .4000 SWC
L
d CTWS
n
a
m AS3500@50LU/dw
e
D MCS 1.2kL/d/dw
t 0 .3000
e
MCS 1.8kL/d/dw
u
n
i MCS 2.4kL/d/dw
M
m MCS 3.0kL/d/dw
u
im0 .2000 MCS 3.6kL/d/dw
x
a
M
0 .1000
0 .0000
1 10 100 1000
No. of Dwellings (dw)
Figure 3 - 2 Design chart - Maximum demand versus duration

The maximum minute demand per dwelling relationships shown in Figure 3 - 2 is the design chart
for maximum demand in small service areas under 1,000 dwellings where a maximum day demand
per dwelling has been adopted as the basis for design.

Maximum Demand vs Duration vs Gross Site Area
35
y 30
a
D
m
u 25
m
i Maximum Minut e
x
a 3 min
M
/
20
d 6 min
n
a
m15 15 min
e
D Maximum Hour
m
u 10
im
x
a
M 5
0
0.1 1 10 100
Gr oss Site Area (ha)
Figure 3 - 3 Maximum demand vs duration vs gross site area
The maximum demand/maximum day demand relationship shown in Figure 3 - 3 is the design
chart for maximum minute demands in small service areas less than 100 hectares where a
maximum day demand per hectare has been adopted as the basis of design. This method is
generally less accurate than Figure 3 - 2 and gives conservative solutions.

Appendix F: Minimum water demand calculation

The minimum instantaneous demand estimation method recommended by the International Water
Association (IWA) is shown below.
1. For populations less than 10,000, use UBL only 1, 2, 3, 4 , this is:
1.5
Minimum demand (L / s ) =
1
(20 Lm + 1.25 Nc )  P 
3600  50 
2. For populations equal or greater than 10,000, use UBL plus minimum residential usage1, 2, 3 , this
is:
1.5
Minimum demand (L / s ) =
1
(20 Lm + 1.25 Nc )  P  +
Vt
(
0.001 Po − 3 0.001 Po )
3600  50  60
Where:
Lm = length of mains (km)
Nc = number of connections to the main2
P = average pressure in the area (m)
Vt = toilet flush volume (allow three litres where it is not known)
Po = population
Notes:
1. The number of connections is not the number of properties, as vertical strata typically have
multiple properties from a single connection. A good quasi for connection count is the
number of customer meters plus the count of unmetered properties and fire services (the
latter is typically a small number that can be ignored).
2. This relationship can be used on a system of any size or age, where it is ‘well managed’.
3. Assuming minimum residential usage at night is primarily due to toilet flushing, which can
be minimal for a small system (population below 10,000).

Appendix G: Demand distribution for reliability and risk

based approach
The demand distribution for each delivery system is shown in Figure 3 - 4 .
It highlights that:
• smaller delivery systems have a higher diversification of demands, ie a higher maximum

day and a lower minimum day
• about 80-90% of daily demands are within 20% of average day demand for most delivery
systems.
Figure 3 - 4 Demand distributions for different Systems

Risk-based demands – Delivery systems

Table 3 - 13 shows data taken from demand distribution curves. The table shows the average
number of days per year that a particular demand event will occur. This data can be used in risk
assessments and economic evaluations.
Table 3 - 13 MDD demand factor frequency (July 2009 to April 2012)
Average number of days per year as a demand factor
0.7-0.8 x 0.8 – 0.9 x 0.9 -1.0 x 1.0 X
System MDD MDD MDD MDD
Warragamba 6.88 4.71 1.45 0.36
Nepean 34.7 8.33 3.26 0.36
North Richmond 11.6 5.43 1.09 0.36
Macarthur 15.2 7.60 0.36 0.36
Prospect South 120 19.2 2.53 0.36
Prospect North 17.4 6.88 1.09 0.36
Ryde 29.3 6.16 0.36 0.36
Potts Hill + Woronora 17.0 50.3 4.71 0.36

Demands for reliability

Table 3 - 14 shows data taken from the demand distribution curves. The table shows the minimum
week and minimum day demands for each delivery system. These can be used in a sensitivity
analysis to determine value for money when designing system redundancy.
Table 3 - 14 Minimum week and day factors (July 2009 to April 2012)
Demand factors of ADD
System ADD ML/d Average of min week Min day
Warragamba 2.8 0.71 0.41
Nepean 9.7 0.76 0.62
North Richmond 15.5 0.80 0.58
Macarthur 66 0.83 0.71
Prospect South 105 0.86 0.76
Prospect North 191 0.83 0.76
Ryde 190 0.83 0.64
Potts Hill + Woronora 663 0.88 0.82

Guideline
Section 4: System Hydraulics (Pressure)
Version 1
September 2014
SYDNEY WATER Section 4- System Hydraulics (Pressure)
Contents
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 4
4.1.1 General .................................................................................................................................... 4
4.2 Service pressure ........................................................................................................... 5
4.2.1 Single supply system service pressures .................................................................................... 5
4.2.2 Dual supply system pressure .................................................................................................... 7
4.2.3 Reliability planning .................................................................................................................. 8
4.3 Pressure issues ............................................................................................................. 9
4.3.1 Operational pressure variation ................................................................................................ 9
4.3.1.1 Variation in pressure .......................................................................................................................... 9
4.3.1.2 Transients/water hammer .................................................................................................................. 9
4.3.2 Chronic poor pressure problems .............................................................................................10
4.3.3 Active pressure reduction .......................................................................................................11
4.3.3.1 Pressure reduction by PRVs ...............................................................................................................11
4.4 Context ..................................................................................................................... 14

Appendix A: Different pressure profiles for water supply systems........................................ 16
Appendix B: Different controls for PRVs ............................................................................ 17
Figures
Figure 4 - 1 Concept of pressure and hydraulic grade lines in water system 4
Figure 4 - 2 Water supply systems with different pressure profiles. 16
Tables
Table 4 - 1 Service pressure (SP) limits for new single supply systems 5
Table 4 - 2 Service pressure (SP) limits for existing single supply systems 6
Table 4 - 3 Service pressure (SP) limits for new dual reticulation systems 7
Table 4 - 4 Service pressure (SP) limits for existing dual reticulation systems 8
Table 4 - 5 Shutdown service pressure ranges for system assessment (modelling) 8

Section 4- System hydraulics (pressure)

4.1 Introduction
This section covers service pressure requirements for new and existing systems.
4.1.1 General
Figure 4-1 shows the variation of pressure and hydraulic grade lines with system demand
for different demand conditions. For definitions refer to Section 1: Introduction.
Figure 4 - 1 Concept of pressure and hydraulic grade lines in water system

The different pressure profiles of a water supply system are presented in Appendix A:,
Figure 4 - 2 .

4.2 Service pressure

Service pressure requirements only apply to reticulation systems. Service pressure for a
customer is measured at the main tap. Transfer mains and those distribution mains that do
not supply directly to consumers may operate at higher or lower pressures than reticulation
mains, eg from three metres up to say 350 metres.
Where there are no customers being supplied, the allowable minimum operating pressure in
trunk and reticulation systems is three metres under normal operating conditions.
In gravity systems, maximum service pressures usually occur when the reservoir is at Full
Supply Level (FSL) under minimum demand conditions. In pumped systems, maximum
service pressures occur at maximum suction head with the pump operating at zero
discharge head. In practice, for both cases pressures in the system could go higher due to
pressure transients. For more detail on transients refer to Clause 4.3.1.2. An operating
pressure limit may be specified by Sydney Water.
The minimum pressure specified in the Operating Licence is 15 metres, however, some
exceedances of this limit are permitted. Refer to Sydney Water Operating Licence
(Reference 35). A lower minimum service pressure may be provided based on financial and
risk considerations, and is subject to Sydney Water approval.
For design pressures, refer to the Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition,
Clause 3.2 (Reference 1).
4.2.1 Single supply system service pressures

Single supply system service pressure limits in new areas are shown in Table 4-1.
Table 4 - 1 Service pressure (SP) limits for new single supply systems
Single supply (metres pressure)
Service pressure limit All areas CBDs

(except CBDs) (Refer to Note 1)
(Refer to Note 1)
Maximum (qualified – refer to Note 2) 60 60
Desirable maximum (Note 2) 50 50
Desirable minimum (Note 2) 20 25
Desirable minimum range for boosted
pressures (Note 2) for inline boosters 20-25
Desirable minimum for un-boosted

pressures (Note 4) for inline boosters 12

Single supply system service pressure limits in existing areas are shown in Table 4 - 2.
Table 4 - 2 Service pressure (SP) limits for existing single supply systems
Single supply (metres pressure)
Service pressure limit All areas CBDs

(except CBDs) (Refer to Note 1)
(Refer to Note 1)
Maximum Existing pressures Existing pressures
Desirable maximum (Note 2) The long-term aim is to The long-term aim is to
reduce to 60 m or less reduce to 60 m or less
where financially viable where financially viable
Desirable minimum (Note 2)
15 20
Desirable minimum for creating pressure

managed areas (Note 3) 25 25
Desirable minimum range for boosted 20-25

pressures (Note 2) for inline boosters
Desirable minimum for un-boosted 12

pressures (Note 4) for in-line boosters
NOTES:
1. CBD areas refer to Sydney City, Parramatta and other similar CBDs.
2. Subject to a financial evaluation – refer to the further information below:
a. For maximum pressures, the aim of the restriction in new systems to 60 m is to

maximise the life of our assets and to lessen the effect on customers’ appliances,
especially hot water systems. However, this limit is qualified as it must be balanced
against the requirement to avoid over-investment in trying to reduce high pressures in
certain areas. There are numerous existing areas with pressures of 80 metres and
above.
b. For desirable maximum pressures in new systems, the aim of having a desirable
maximum of 50 m is to align with the requirement in AS/NZS 3500.1 that the
maximum static pressure at any outlet, other than fire service outlets, within a building
does not exceed 500 kPa.
c. For the desirable minimum pressures of 20 m in new systems and 15 m in existing

systems, the aim of providing desirable limits, rather than fixed limits, is to avoid the
situation where over investment may occur. Any solutions developed should minimise
operator intervention.
d. This desirable minimum pressure for existing systems includes in-fill growth.
e. The desirable minimum pressure for commercial and industrial customers is 25 m.
3. The limit is provided for guidance to minimise the effect on existing customers. This limit
needs to be reviewed on a case by case basis.

4. Un-boosted pressures for in-line booster systems during abnormal operation. This limit needs
to be reviewed on a case by case basis.
4.2.2 Dual supply system pressure

Table 4 - 3 and Table 4 - 4 provide the service pressure limits on dual reticulation systems
for new and existing areas respectively.
Unless otherwise specified by Sydney Water, the non-drinking water supply system should
be designed with an available static head 5 m lower than the drinking water supply system,
subject to a financial evaluation and the risk assessment developed in accordance with the
2006 Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling (Reference 39).
Service pressure requirements for dual reticulation systems in CBD areas will need to be
discussed with Sydney Water.
Table 4 - 3 Service pressure (SP) limits for new dual reticulation systems
Dual reticulation (metres pressure)

Service pressure limit
Drinking water Non-drinking water
Maximum (Note 2 in 4.2.1) 60 60

(Note 1)
Desirable maximum (Note 2 in 4.2.1) 50 50
(Note 1)
Desirable minimum (Note 2 in 4.2.1 and Note 2) 20 15
Desirable minimum range for boosted pressures ( 20-25

Note 2 in 4.2.1) for inline boosters
Desirable minimum for boosted areas when pump 12

is not operating (Note 4 in 4.2.1) for inline
boosters

Table 4 - 4 Service pressure (SP) limits for existing dual reticulation systems
Dual reticulation (metres pressure)
Service pressure limit
Drinking water Non-drinking water
Maximum Existing pressures Existing pressures.

(Note 1)
Desirable maximum (Note 2 in The long-term aim is to The long-term aim is to
4.2.1) reduce to 60 m or less reduce to 60 m or less
where financially viable where financially viable
Desirable minimum (Note 1 and Note 2 in
4.2.1) 20 15
Desirable minimum range for boosted

pressures (Note 2 in 4.2.1) for inline 20-25
boosters
Desirable minimum for un-boosted
pressures (Note 4 in 4.2.1) for inline 12
boosters
NOTES:
1. These pressures may need to be lowered to maintain pressure differential between drinking and
recycled water.
2. Subject to an financial evaluation, the desirable minimum for commercial and industrial
customers is:
a. For drinking water: 25 m
b. For non-drinking water: 20 m.
4.2.3 Reliability planning

When assessing (hydraulic modelling) planned shutdowns and incidents for defining the
consequences on customers, Table 4 - 5 shows the pressure ranges that are to be used for
presentation of results (as a minimum) (Refer to Section 3: Water demand and growth).
Table 4 - 5 Shutdown service pressure ranges for system assessment (modelling)
Pressure range
(metres)
>15
3 – 15
<3

4.3 Pressure issues

4.3.1 Operational pressure variation
4.3.1.1 Variation in pressure
Significant diurnal pressure variation throughout the day may cause customer complaints. It
is important to aim to minimise customers’ pressure variation and implement mitigation
measures where economical.
4.3.1.2 Transients/water hammer
Transient pressure events occur when fluids in closed pipe systems experience changes in
velocity. They can be significant when the fluid in motion is forced to stop or change direction
suddenly. This is usually caused by fast opening and closing valves, pump units starting or
stopping where water hammer control devices are not provided (eg delivery control valves),
use of stand pipes, or power failure causing pumps to crash stop without the control valve
closing first. Transient pressure conditions can also be caused by commercial and industrial
customers when testing their fire-fighting services.
The pressure wave that ensues from a significant transient event can cause major problems,
from noise and vibration, to pipe and fitting collapse and pump unit or fitting damage. It is
possible to reduce the effects of the water hammer pulses with water hammer control
devices.
Transient analysis is mostly considered during the detail design phase to ensure that the
choice of materials, control parameters and water hammer surge protection devices are
appropriate to mitigate the risk. However, planners must recommend transient analysis
where there is:
• potential for high pressure fluctuations in the system, eg pumped mains, control
valves, PRVs
• a long main (especially where the longitudinal profile contains more than one high
point and column separation is likely to happen)
• very high pressures
• any known existing system damage due to water hammer.

The water modelling system (WMS) has a ‘transient adviser’, which can be used during the
planning phase to identify potential problem areas due to transient pressures in a system.
Full transient analysis requires specialised software.
4.3.2 Chronic poor pressure problems
There may be isolated small areas where pressures will/have become inadequate to meet
the minimum pressure requirement of the operating licence.
There may be several reasons for consistently low pressures in an area (even during low-
demand periods), including the elevation of customers’ properties relative to the reservoir
level.
The cost of any solution needs to be justified, especially when a small number of properties
are involved.
Options to rectify poor pressure problem areas for existing or new systems include:
• amplification/renewal of water main to reduce headlosses
• decreasing demand on the system (demand management)

• rezoning to an alternative supply zone, on a temporary or permanent basis
• installing link mains between reservoir zones to provide a rezoning capability

• linking mains within the reticulation system for connectivity improvements
• installing water booster pumps (for details on booster station planning criteria, refer to
Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney Water Edition, Part 1, Chapter 6: System
Pressure Management (Reference 1). For un-boosted pressure requirements for
boosted areas, refer to Clause 4-4
• installing pressure sustaining valves

• constructing an elevated reservoir (if cost-effective)
• checking for unmetered demands, fire service compliance tests and unaccounted for
leaks
• managing water carters’ access points and flow rates.
• non-asset solutions, change in system operating protocols or asset control

parameters.
All activities related to existing water pressure problems will be addressed in accordance
with the Water Pressure Investigation, Measurement and Reporting SOP (Reference 47).

4.3.3 Active pressure reduction
Active pressure control/reduction is the process of actively managing the water pressure
variation or high pressures to reduce leaks and breaks in the distribution systems.
Pressure reduction measures should be considered at the initial planning stage of the supply
network or at a later post-development stage.
Retrofitting pressure reduction measures in an area already developed can be complex to

implement due to:
• creating excessive numbers of dead-ends (which may lead to poor water quality)
• changing service levels delivered to existing customers, including pressure available
at customers’ fitting outlets
• the impact on existing private fire suppression system capability
• catering for growth
• affecting adjacent areas
• reducing the interconnectivity in the zone that may have an impact on hydraulics for
customers outside/inside the PRV zone.
Pressure reduction should be considered for areas:
• experiencing excessively high pressure

• that have a high main break history in combination with high pressure (for existing
systems)
• that have a high estimated leakage in combination with high pressure (for existing
systems).
Any proposed solution should be based on financial considerations, technical feasibility,

operational maintainability and operability and any adverse impact on existing/critical
customers within the zone of influence.
Possible measures are (not limited to) rezoning (permanent or temporary), providing a
dedicated inlet main, installation of PRVs etc. Pressure reduction criteria by PRVs are
presented below.
4.3.3.1 Pressure reduction by PRVs
A common application of PRVs is to manage high pressure or pressure variation

(reasonable variation is 20-40 m).

General planning criteria
• Pressure reduced schemes are mainly considered for areas that experience
pressures greater than 60 m on average. For existing supply areas, selection of a
site for pressure management should also consider the number of connections (more
connections are likely to lead to more leakage) and the water main break history.
• There is no practical maximum limit to the number of customers that can be pressure
managed in a zone. An area with a small number of properties would only be
considered if it were financially viable.
• Pressure management is ideally suited for areas with a high proportion of residential
customers. Areas with non-residential/large water users need special consideration.
They may have pressure dependent services within their properties that need to be
considered in the design of the scheme.
• The methodology of staging pressure management in growth areas needs special

attention due to avoid possible fragmentary approach to mains installation and sizing
of the PRVs.
• In established areas, pressure management shall be carried out according to an

integrated system approach rather than schemes selected in isolation.
Planning of a PRV should also consider addressing any specific local issues and
risks to determine the size of assets, the location, appropriate controls and whether
modulation is used.
• A financial viability check should include possible water saved and the likely long-
term reduction in water main repairs from pressure reduction (compared to a base
case), as compared to the cost of retrofitting thr PRV. However, a new system will be
less likely to incur breaks and leaks, so a wider economic appraisel would be more
appropriate.
• An economic appraisal of PRV schemes should consider the cost to each property
owner compared to the avoided cost of customers not having to fit and maintain
private PRVs on their water service to comply with AS/NZ 3500. It then needs to
compare the cost to Sydney Water of installing PRVs with the costs of individual
properties to comply with AS/NZ 3500.
Location
Ideally the largest main heading into a proposed pressure reduction area should be selected
as the main to fit a PRV. The selection process shall also consider system impacts in the

remainder of the zone to assess contingency event scenarios once the largest main into the
proposed pressure reduction area is dedicated to a PRV. The selected location should be
checked with the design teams for suitability of associated civil works. Dual PRV feeds may
need to be considered in the design for large supply areas and those with a high risk profile.
System Planning and Modelling
Information required for the sizing and control points with the pressure requirements of the
PRVs will be generated from the hydraulic models. The planner can determine what areas
are ideal for pressure reduction by comparing areas with relatively low ground levels in the
supply zone to the supply zone reservoir’s FSL.
The planner also should study the following requirements to plan a PRV zone:
• Consider pressure settings appropriate for flows ranging from current minimum hour
demands to future maximum hour demands (including growth for the area in
question). For minimum pressure in pressure reduced areas, refer to Table 4 - 2.
• Identify the critical pressure point in the zone (hydraulically most disadvantaged
location) and a point representing its average pressure, where pressure gauges will
be installed for monitoring.
• Identify any requirements for additional valves, cross connections and booster
stations.
• Assess the impact on supply pressure or existing service levels due to any boundary
breach (open dividing valve etc) or loss of interconnectivity within and outside the
zone.
• Assess the effect on water quality due to the existence of dead-end mains at the
boundaries of the pressure controlled areas, ie on both sides of boundary isolating
valves.
• Identify the method of control. Selection of pressure control should assess the impact
on fire-fighting and capability. For detail of PRV controls refer to Appendix B:.

4.4 Context
Refer to Section 1: Introduction to the guideline, Clause 1.6
Appendix A: Different pressure profiles for water supply system
Appendix B: Different controls for PRV

Title: Water System Planning Guideline, Section 4: System Hydraulics (pressure)
June 2015 Risk rank = high 2014/00004985

Prepared by: Chris Moore - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Farhana Rifat - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Major Stakeholders consulted Anil Jaiswal - Servicing & Asset Strategy
/reviewers: Bob Wickham - Urban Growth
Bob Wickham - Urban Growth, Ed Braithwaite- Service & Asset

Strategy
Gordon Aiken - Networks
Robert Ius - Project and Services
Thaya Thayanithy - Networks


number
2014

Appendix A: Different pressure profiles for water supply

systems
Break Pressure Tank

Pressure Reduced Valve Similar
Figure 4 - 2 Water supply systems with different pressure profiles.
Refer to Water Investigations Sub-branch - Staff Handbook No 32, v49 (Reference 6).

Appendix B: Different controls for PRVs

Pressure reducing valves (PRVs) can be operated by one of the following methods:
• Static pressure setting: The valve/s are given a target downstream pressure setting to maintain
and will regulate the opening of the valve to maintain that pressure. It achieves the pressure
reduction required, but is disadvantageous in that during periods of high system flow (thus high
headloss) pressures at the extreme points of the system can be lower than they should be.
Typically as a result, the setting for the valve is set conservatively higher to compensate for
these high flow events.
• Time regulated pressure setting: Under this approach different settings are programmed in the
valve for various times of the day. Typically during the night a lower pressure setting will be
applied for expected low night flows, with a higher setting being applied to peak events during
the day. The higher setting will compensate for headlosses in the system that occur during
maximum demand events, so that the most disadvantaged customer always receives the
required pressure. This type of pressure reduction may not be suitable where seasonal or
diurnal demand events are significantly different from the norm (such as winter or weekend
demands), as the valve is programmed for a specific set of events based on time.
• Flow regulated (modulating) pressure setting: This methodology of pressure reduction relies on
actual flow going through a flow meter nearby to determine the pressure setting. The valve will
be set up to regulate a higher pressure setting during peak flow events (to compensate for
headlosses within the system) and lower pressure during low flow events such as the middle of
the night.
• The combined flow and time regulation setting: This methodology is the preferred IICATS
method of regulation as this provides the greatest operational flexibility. Refer to IICATS
Pressure Reducing Valve Standards for detailed functional description. The majority of PRV
under IICATS control use this control methodology.

Guideline
Section 5: Infrastructure Planning
Version 1
September 2014
SYDNEY WATER Section 5: Infrastructure Planning
Contents
5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 5
5.2 Optimising WPS, rising main and reservoir components ................................................. 6
5.2.1 Requirements .......................................................................................................................... 6
5.2.1.1 Input capacity .................................................................................................................................... 6
5.2.1.2 Reservoir capacity .............................................................................................................................. 6
5.2.1.3 Outlet mains .....................................................................................................................................10
5.2.1.4 Design demand period ......................................................................................................................10
5.2.2 Application of design principles ..............................................................................................10
5.2.2.1 Initial design of system components ..................................................................................................10
5.2.2.2 Staging ..............................................................................................................................................11
5.2.2.3 Reservoir control levels .....................................................................................................................12
5.3 Reservoirs.................................................................................................................. 14
5.3.1 General ...................................................................................................................................14
5.3.2 Type of reservoir .....................................................................................................................14
5.3.3 General planning considerations.............................................................................................14
5.3.4 Location/site considerations ...................................................................................................16
5.3.5 Emergency inlet control valve .................................................................................................17
5.4 Pumping stations ....................................................................................................... 18
5.4.1 General ...................................................................................................................................18
5.4.2.1 Sizing Considerations.........................................................................................................................18
5.4.2.2 Pump Efficiency and other considerations .........................................................................................20
5.4.2.3 Number of pumping units .................................................................................................................21
5.4.2.4 Reliability issues ................................................................................................................................22
5.5 Water mains .............................................................................................................. 23

5.5.1 General ...................................................................................................................................23
5.5.3 Velocity and headlosses ..........................................................................................................24
5.5.4 Pipeline material friction factors .............................................................................................24
5.5.5 Minimum pipe sizes ................................................................................................................24
5.6 Flow controls ............................................................................................................. 25
5.6.1 General ...................................................................................................................................25
5.6.2 Applications ............................................................................................................................26
5.7 Context ..................................................................................................................... 27
Appendix A: Understanding 1/3 of a maximum day reserve storage ................................... 30

Appendix B: Reservoir site layout examples ....................................................................... 31
Reservoir site layouts .............................................................................................................................31
Appendix C: Example – Graphical method for staging works .............................................. 34
Appendix D: Pump types .................................................................................................. 39
Appendix E: Variable speed drives (VSD) ........................................................................... 41
Assessment of VSD opportunities ..........................................................................................................41
Appendix F: Typical network layout .................................................................................. 43
Appendix G: Valve applications......................................................................................... 45
Figures
Figure 5 - 1 Reservoir storage 8
Figure 5 - 2 Graphical method for staging works 12
Figure 5 - 3 Location of Reservoir 16
Figure 5 - 4 Schematic of hydraulic grade line for a pumped system 19
Figure 5 - 5 Pump efficiency trend over life period 21
Figure 5 - 6 Typical valves used in the Sydney Water system. 25
Figure 5 - 7 Elevated reservoir site layout with future large surface reservoir 31
Figure 5 - 8 Typical elevated and surface reservoir site layout 32
Figure 5 - 9 Typical temporary reservoir site layout 33
Figure 5 - 10 Existing Minchinbury system in 1986 34
Figure 5 - 11 Staging of Minchinbury Reservoir works 36
Figure 5 - 12 Proposed Minchinbury system in 2010 38
Figure 5 - 13 Single transfer/distribution main, minor network and dead-end branch mains (not
preferred due to low turn-over in dead-end mains) 43
Figure 5 - 14 Single transfer/distribution main, network with multiple distribution mains and branch
mains with reduced diameter dead-ends 43
Figure 5 - 15 Twin transfer/distribution mains, network with multiple distribution mains, looped
mains and link mains to minimise dead-ends, some reduced diameter dead-end mains and staging
of provision of mains 44
Tables
Table 5 - 1 Reserve storage during maximum demand week period 30
Table 5 - 2 Common valve applications in Sydney water 45

Section 5: Infrastructure planning

5.1 Introduction
This section focuses on the assets in the water system and how assets are planned to be
part of the system. It discusses factors for consideration in the selection and sizing of any
asset (reservoirs, water pumps, water mains etc) during greenfield/infill/renewals planning.

5.2 Optimising WPS, rising main and

reservoir components
5.2.1 Requirements
The planner will consider both the reservoir and input system as a total system, each
component having any capacity, provided that at the end of any cycle of days of large
demand, the adopted reserve storage remains.
5.2.1.1 Input capacity
Overall, the input system (eg treatment plants or other sources, the water pumping stations
rising mains, gravity distribution and transfer inlet mains) is to have the capacity to maintain
reservoirs level above the reserve storage level (RSL) over the chosen design period.
For a water pumping station the operating protocol shall be:
• at demand equal to or less than 90% maximum day demand – only the duty units
operate
• at demands higher than 90% of maximum day demand – all units operate including
the standby unit.
Both of the above criteria must be met in determining the requirements of system
components.
5.2.1.2 Reservoir capacity
Service reservoir storage capacity shall consist of operating storage and reserve storage.
Figure 5- 1 shows the various levels and storage components for a reservoir (for definitions,
refer to Section 1: Introduction).
The reserve storage is to be equal to one third of maximum day demand (refer to Appendix
A:), subject to a risk assessment and certain exceptions shown below. This is to ensure that
about eight hours will be available to the most critical point in a severe hot spell in a high
consumption period to remedy any failure, such as a power outage or a break in the input
system.
For the risk assessment, refer to Clause 2.1.3 and Section 2 Appendix B and C. The risk
assessment shall consider the characteristics of the zone/system to determine the risk
(consequences and frequency) to water supply continuity and pressure in the event of a
system component failure. When considering any known risk or hazard the likelihood or
magnitude of the hazard can be reduced (asset maintenance) through steps taken to
eliminate it (system redundancy) and provisions made for the residual risk (reserve storage).
In particular actual failure modes, availability of alternative supply source/s, type of mains
and duration of facility outages shall be assessed. However, there are different ways of
mitigating risks by reducing consequences or probabilities of occurrence or both, eg through
maintenance, system redundancy (reducing likelihood) or accepting some residual risk, such
as through the size of reserve storage.
Clause 5.3.3 has listed different factors to determine the service reservoir storage capacity
for a system.

RESERVOIR PARAMETERS
100% Full OVERFLOW LEVEL

Trip EICV
IECVto
to close (Typically 100mm above FSL)
(Default 75mm above FSL)
Overflow Impending Alarm
(Default 50mm above FSL) DATUM
FSL FULL SUPPLY LEVEL (FSL)
MUWL Maximum Upper Window Level
NORMAL CONTROL WINDOW

OPERATING STORAGE Operating Storage
(The storage required to optimise Range under IICATS
the running of the system)
Operationally adjusted RSL

MLWL Minimum Lower Window Level (Operational Lower Level)
Top of the reserve storage
Digital Low Level Alarm RSL RESERVE STORAGE LEVEL (RSL)
RESERVE STORAGE
Level at which the reservoir is empty

(A le vel above the top of the oulet main)
MOL 0% Full MINIMUM OPERATING LEVEL (MOL)
Tapping point on side of reservoir Through the wall
for GAUGE PRESSURE TX Outlet main
Through the floor SUBMERSIBLE HEAD (hydrostatic)

Outlet main Reservoir Level Probe.
Figure 5 - 1 Reservoir storage

Exceptions
Exceptions to specification of reserve storage of one third of the maximum day demand
requirement are:
1. Existing systems
If the 1/3 maximum day reserve storage cannot be economically provided then actual
failure modes and alternative supply should be considered to determine the risks to the
water supply, in the event of a system component failure. No net depletion of the
operating capacity over the system design period is permitted, eg where the design
period is one day, no net depletion of the operating capacity over a maximum day 24-
hour period is permitted.
2. Isolated systems
Small isolated systems (eg Helensburgh, Hargrave Hts, Saddleback, Stanwell Park) may
require greater security of supply by having more than 1/3 maximum day reserve storage
plus the operational storage. This may be because of a single supply source through
difficult terrain that will require more time to detect and repair failures. Any maintenance
requirements and identified critical customers may also have to be considered.
3. Large interconnected systems
For an individual reservoir within a large system, reserve storage may be available at
another location that has a direct feed to that zone, in which case the 1/ maximum day
reserve storage need not be provided for that reservoir (eg Prestons Reservoir supplied
from Liverpool Reservoir), provided the whole system has 1/3 maximum day reserve
storage plus operational storage.
4. Elevated reservoirs
Elevated reservoirs are normally used only for very small pumped supply systems. The
design of elevated reservoirs shall follow the same basic principles above.
Elevated reservoirs should be restricted in size to a maximum of 4 ML or 1/6 maximum

day reserve storage plus operational storage, whichever is the smaller. The shortfall in
storage should be placed, if practicable, in the supply source zone, or surrounding
zones. Otherwise the reserve storage should be in a connected surface storage.
The various failure cases (eg inlet main, WPS) for an elevated reservoir system should
be analysed, with only one system component to fail at any one time. This is to
determine if supply can be maintained to the zone from an onsite surface reservoir or an
alternative supply sources at a minimum residual head of 3 m at maximum hour

demands. If this residual head cannot be maintained, then the system should be
assessed for amplification, based on economic considerations.
Often, elevated reservoirs will be provided with only minimal reserve storage where a
basic supply to customers can be provided from an adjacent surface reservoir.
5.2.1.3 Outlet mains
These are to be sized so as to provide a minimum pressure as per Section 4: System

Hydraulics during normal operation of the system, with consideration given to maximum
pipe velocities and minimum pipe sizes, eg industrial, commercial areas etc.
5.2.1.4 Design demand period
The design demand period is the period of time a design analysis should cover in order to
size system components, eg service reservoirs, pumping stations and rising mains.
The reserve storage level (RSL) should be determined by an analysis carried out over a
design demand period, eg based on consumptions equal to maximum day demand, two or
three maximum consecutive days etc. This means the storage level will gradually fall over a
number of consecutive days until the maximum depletion (ie the RSL) is reached, after
which it will gradually recover. To determine the maximum demand period and daily demand
factors (DDF), refer to Section 3: Water Demand and Growth.
5.2.2 Application of design principles
5.2.2.1 Initial design of system components
The design of the system components is based on the requirements above and the future
maximum day demands.
Consideration should be given to staging works, eg a large reservoir storage requirement

may be split into two smaller reservoirs built at different times.
For an initial design in growth areas, the following can be used to size the system
components:
• Reservoir capacity equal to 2/3 maximum day demand, ie 1/3 maximum day reserve
storage plus 1/3 maximum day operational storage. The input system is to have a
capacity equal to the maximum day demand.
• Where long rising mains are required, consider providing a larger operational storage
and less than maximum day input system capacity.

• For elevated systems, use maximum hour input system capacity with the reservoir
capacity equal to 1/6 maximum day demand plus operational storage required for
pump control.
5.2.2.2 Staging
Consideration shall be given to staging of assets to suit development-related increased

demand, aesthetic and landscaping requirements.
A graphical method to determine staging has been presented below:
• Identify various upgrade options at various system demands to determine when the
reservoir will deplete below the RSL.
• Analysis of different demands for each augmentation option can be presented as a

line where it crosses the line of required reserve storage, project a horizontal line
until it crosses the demand growth curves and read the corresponding years in the
horizontal axis from the demand growth curves. The choice of demand growth curve
depends on whether the standby pumping unit was used in the analysis (use the
100% Maximum Day Curve if including the standby unit, or use the 90% Maximum
Day Curve if excluding the standby unit). The earlier year of the 90% and 100%
maximum day cases is chosen, as the year amplifications are required for each
option scenario.
• The most economical method of staging the amplifications is determined from a full
life cycle cost analysis (capital and system operating and maintenance costs are to
be balanced; ie weigh up the option of providing additional operating storage against
pumping station capacity, which is especially critical for long transfer mains/systems).
• Refer to Appendix C: for a worked example.

Figure 5 - 2 Graphical method for staging works

• Figure 5 - 2 shows, using the demand at which the line of the required reserve
storage is crossed, the year this is reached for the 100% or 90% maximum day
cases is read from the demand growth curves. The choice of curves depends on
whether the reserve pumping unit was used in the analysis (ie use the 100%
maximum day curve if the reserve unit was running, and the 90% maximum day
curve if the reserve unit was not running). The earliest year of the 90% and 100%
maximum day cases is chosen as the year the amplification is required.
• The most economical method of staging the amplifications is determined on a

present worth basis.
5.2.2.3 Reservoir control levels
Consideration should be given to a more flexible approach to reservoir control levels. When
there is low system demand, the reservoir control levels should be set to reduce the number
of pump starts per hour. However, this is not a critical requirement providing that the
maximum number of pump starts per hour is not more than that recommended by the pump
motor manufacturer.
As the system demand approaches the pumping capacity, the reservoir control levels can
be raised to ensure that the pumps are running earlier on a maximum day to maintain the

reservoir above the reserve storage. This would have the effect of deferring any system
amplifications.
The cut-in level for the stand by unit should be set so that it cuts-in on a 100% maximum
day, but not on a 90% maximum day.
When optimising the system, the planner needs to understand that the level controls have
many possible settings between FSL and RSL. The IICATS system can handle variable
profile control window (where the capacity is greater than 2 ML) under different seasonal
demand conditions or for abnormal operating conditions such as a bushfires. However, the
setting of these level controls in model runs should not necessarily be limited to the current
values.
Planners should note that the RSL may be adjusted in the future to cope with changing
demands or any system modifications, such as the decommissioning of an adjacent
reservoir.
Also, there can be operationally adjusted RSLs which can be set by certain constraints, e.g
pressure limitations in the zone, water quality, reservoir structural integrity, the availability of
alternative supply paths or the reserve storage in the reservoir is covering multiple supply
zones. These are generally at a higher level than the required RSL (based on demand).
Operationally adjusted RSLs are listed in Water and Recycled Water System Growth
Servicing (GSS) Strategy Criteria and Guidelines 2012 (Reference 27). If required, planners
should obtain an operationally adjusted RSL update from Hydraulic System Services (HSS).

5.3 Reservoirs
5.3.1 General
Reservoirs are primarily designed to:
• provide a buffer within the supply system to maintain supply even during extreme
diurnal demand variations
• provide reserve capacity to meet emergency demand conditions including power

outages, pipe failures etc
• supply water at the required pressure range and reduce pressure fluctuations in the
distribution system
• provide contact time for water treatment operation, such as chlorination
• ensure system reliability from reserve storage or as alternative supply.
5.3.2 Type of reservoir

Reservoirs within Sydney Water’s operating area may be classified according to:
• functionality of reservoir (dam, balance tank, pressure break tank, supply reservoir
etc)
• type (surface, underground, standpipe, or elevated)
• material (steel, reinforced concrete, prestressed concrete or earth)
• operating need - temporary or permanent.
5.3.3 General planning considerations

Reservoir requirements should be based on comprehensive risk analysis for the system,
including input from relevant operational (network and treatment) and maintenance areas in
Sydney Water.
Surface reservoirs are usually designed not to exceed 15 m in depth. However, this needs to
be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
The following factors shall be addressed in determining the service reservoir storage
capacity required for a system:
• Availability of alternative supply source(s).

• Functionality of the reservoir (delivery system/ supply zone reservoir).
• Type of demand (non-critical/recreational demand or demand for critical services

where it has impact on public health and welfares /operating licence requirements) to
be served from the reservoir.
• Life cycle cost (capital and system operating and maintenance costs are to be
balanced, ie weigh up the option of providing additional operating storage against
pumping station capacity, which is especially critical for long transfer mains/systems).
• Water quality (inlet/outlet pipework configuration, operational detention time,

mechanical mixing, disinfection residual detention time, etc).
• Operating storage capacity versus pumping station or supply capacity. Operating

storage shall cater for demands exceeding the maximum available inflow rate and
economical operation of the system.
• Reserve storage capacity needed to enable emergency maintenance work to be

carried out on the supply system.
• Ratio of estimated long-term demands to short-term demands (more economical to

provide initial storage with provision for additional storage).
• Reservoir site aspects (space limitations).
• Summer and winter operational requirements of the reservoir.
• Flow meter and control arrangements.
• Energy management.
• Maintainability.
Storage for a water supply zone can be shared across multiple interconnected reservoirs.
This is encouraged for growth areas where multiple smaller storages may provide a better
financial and water quality outcome than a single large storage.
The RSL is to be set based on the outcome of risk assessment and system analysis to
ensure that the required design service pressure is supplied to the most disadvantaged point
in the reservoir zone. For a detailed understanding of reservoir sizing and storage
requirements refer to Clause 5.2.1.2.

5.3.4 Location/site considerations
Service reservoirs shall be located to achieve a reasonable balance throughout the supply
zone between competing design requirements including pressure, water quality and cost
(refer to Clause 5.3.3).
Planner also should consider the following:
• Locate the service reservoir as close to the centre of consumption as possible, as

shown in Figure 5-3. Note that the location of a reservoir has a marked effect on the
fluctuations in pressure to portions of the distribution system.
(b) Poorly Located Reservoir
Hydraulic Grade Line
PUMP
(a) Well Located Reservoir

HGL (low demand)
HGL (low demand)
HGL (high demand)
HGL (high demand)
PUMP
Figure 5 - 3 Location of reservoir

• Ensure the maximum number of customers is served by gravity flow. Preferably
provide separate inlet and outlet pipework to maximise water turnover and to
minimise the portion of the system customers receiving direct pumped supply.
• Avoid having the reservoir ‘floating on the system’. This occurs when a service
reservoir is located at the end of a system and is connected to the network by a
common inlet-outlet pipe. The reservoir fills under these conditions when the rate of
supply exceeds demand and discharges via the same trunk main when the demand
in the system exceeds the supply rate water. This installation is prone to water quality

deterioration due to the long residence time of the stored water in both the reservoir
and the pipework. It also creates high pressure fluctuations at the beginning of the
system especially where pumping is involved.
• Provide a suitable layout for inlet/ outlet (preferably separate), scour, overflow and
reservoir bypass pipework to maximise functionality under operational/maintenance
activities.
• Any special operational requirements (i.e large vehicle access etc).
• Provide connections to cater for potential capacity upgrades.
• Avoiding flood-prone and other environmentally restricted sites.
• Aesthetic issues, including shadow effects on the surrounding areas.
Refer to Appendix B: for examples of reservoir layouts.
5.3.5 Emergency inlet control valve
For existing systems, an increase in inlet size and peak instantaneous flow may exceed the
current overflow capacity. This may lead to overtopping of the reservoir and possible
collapse or damage both to Sydney Water assets and the surrounding environment and
customers. To prevent this, an Emergency Inlet Control Valve (EICV) is commonly used.

5.4 Pumping stations

5.4.1 General
Where possible, the water supply system should be designed to supply water primarily by
gravity, within the transfer, distribution and reticulation main systems. However, variations in
topography may preclude or limit the viability of a gravity system, in which case pumping
stations may be used to provide the additional hydraulic gradient necessary to transfer water
to and/or meet the flow and pressure needs within supply areas.
This decision should also be assessed with other alternatives. Planners should evaluate the
alternatives against technical, environmental, financial, life cycle cost and other relevant
criteria to provide evidence that pumping will be the most suitable servicing solution for the
specific system.
Pumping station/s may be used to:
• supply water to reservoir
• transfer from reservoir to reservoir
• distribute water directly to the trunk or reticulation system
• boost pressure.
General functional requirements for a pump would be to:
• supply water to a surface or elevated reservoir taking into consideration system

demand
• provide adequate head.
For information on different types of pumps and variable speed drive (VSD) pumps, refer to
Appendix D: and Appendix E:.
For booster station planning and design requirements, refer to the Water Supply Code of
Australia, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 1).
5.4.2.1 Sizing Considerations
The following information is required to determine the size and type of pumping units for a
system:

• Discharge rate and variations in the discharge rate.
• Total head or pressure to deliver and the range of total heads.
• Vertical position or level at which a pump may be installed to maintain priming. This
will influence the type of pump, eg horizontal, vertical, borehole or submersible.
The total head that the pump is expected to provide is made up of the static lift (head) and
system losses. For basic understanding of total system head component, refer to the
Sewage Pumping Station Code of Australia, WSA 04, Sydney Water Edition (Reference 12),
or any other relevant sources.
Total Head
Figure 5 - 4 Schematic of hydraulic grade line for a pumped system
(Walski, et al. 2001 Figure 2.16)
Figure 5 - 4 shows the static head varies depending on the water levels between two
reservoirs and a schematic of losses in a system.
The water pumping station needs to be considered as an integral part of the supply system.
It needs to be sized and installed considering the interaction of all components including
pumping units, suction and delivery mains, and reservoirs, and associated aspects of
performance requirements, staged capital investment and ongoing maintenance costs (Refer
to Clause 5.2.2.1).
Refer to Section 3: Water Demand and Growth, Clause 3.2.3 for general guidelines
relating to the use of appropriate demand to determine pump capacity (considering reservoir
operating storage).

However, where significant operating storage can be provided, pumping station capacity
may be reduced provided that the operating storage in the service reservoir can be
replenished within the specified design period. In this situation, capital and system operating
and maintenance costs also needs to be balanced, ie weigh up the option of providing
additional operating storage against pumping station capacity, which is especially critical for
long transfer mains/systems.
Additional issues that should be considered include water quality, energy, maintainability,
operability and reliability.
5.4.2.2 Pump Efficiency and other considerations
Pumps must be planned to operate as close as possible to peak efficiency at most times.
Variable speed drives should be considered in situations where the flow and head range
vary considerably. Pumps should never operate outside the 50-120% of their best efficiency
point (BEP) capacity or in a range where they can be damaged due to cavitation.
Consider having either multiple pumps in parallel or variable speed pumps to avoid running
large pumps for very short periods per day and frequent start-stops per hour. However,
options will be subject to economic evaluation, including energy efficiency and life cycle
maintenance costs. Maintenance costs for VSD units are generally higher than for fixed
speed units. VSDs also reduce the overall pumping unit efficiency. However, a VSD unit
negates the need to install a delivery control valve if this was required for a fixed speed unit.
As systems change, due to growth, rezoning and pump deterioration etc, it is important to
undertake regular system reviews to verify that existing pumps meet the changed
requirements of the system and continue to operate within the designed pump efficiency
range.
Consider the provision of sufficient gauging and metering to enable checking of pump
efficiency. Real time monitoring of pump efficiency is a good option for large, complex
pumping stations with multiple units. Real time pumping efficiency can be obtained by
measuring differential pressure (across the suction and discharge manifold of each pump
unit) in addition to discharge flow and motor power.
Monitoring of parameters indicating pump wear can also be used to determine when a pump
needs maintenance. Efficiency trends, such as the one shown in Figure 5 - 5 below, can be
developed over the life of the pump to show impact of pump deterioration and maintenance.

Typical reduction
Figure 5 - 5 Pump efficiency trend over life period
Planners should consider recommending water hammer analysis on pumping station

connected mains (suction and rising mains) (Refer to Section 4: System Hydraulics,
Clause 4.3.1.2).
Other considerations include:
• Minimising environmental (eg flooding) and social impact (eg noise).
• Assessing surge conditions arising from normal pump starts and stops, power failure
during pumping and, the effectiveness of any necessary surge reduction measures
taken. Also assess the impact of surge on connected pipe systems.
• Electrical power capacity needs to cater for operation of all units (ie all duty units plus
a standby unit).
• The net positive suction head (NPSH) available should be greater than the NPSH
required by the pump under full operating range.
• Consider the need for alternative power supply to the facility (standby feeder),
providing auxiliary-powered pumps (diesel, alternative power supply etc) to enable
continuity of supply during power outages.
• For monitoring requirements refer to Section 2: Water System Planning.
5.4.2.3 Number of pumping units
In general, the number of units required is driven (though not limited to the following factors):
• to meet the system characteristics (reservoir to reservoir, reservoir to reticulation,

reservoir to reservoir and reticulation, reticulation to reticulation, other pumps, etc)

• to cater for the range of flows and heads that the pumping station is planned for
• to consider appropriate staging
• to meet the frequency distribution of delivery flows required
• to obtain lower Life Cycle Costs (LCC).
A general rule of thumb is that a minimum of two units be provided. For large capacity
pumping stations, three or more units may be required.
If an alternative supply is available to the zone, two units may be sufficient even for large
capacities, subject to a risk assessment.
A standby pump unit is to be provided in addition to the one or more duty units, with
automatic controls to alternate all pumps between duty and stand-by functions. A standby
pump may not be required where sufficient reserve storage or an alternative supply is
available, subject to a risk assessment and financial evaluation.
5.4.2.4 Reliability issues
For reliability purposes, consider the inclusion of a by-pass arrangement around a water
pumping station. This arrangement would allow for the installation of an emergency (possibly
diesel) pump set when the water pumping station has failed for some reason.
In certain circumstances for reliability purposes, it may be advisable to ensure that the water
pumping station is bi-directional. This is, the design of the pumping station be such that the
normal direction of the water flow may be reversed to cover an emergency situation.

5.5 Water mains

5.5.1 General
It is common to classify water mains by size or function. The following table indicates some
common categorisation.
Type of water main Definition
Conduits Very large pipelines either on the surface or in tunnels
Trunk mains Transfer or distribution main
Feeder mains Mains (350 mm to 900 mm in diameter) that feed reticulation

mains in an area
Critical water mains Mains ≥ 375 mm in diameter and mains at critical locations.
Rising mains (or delivery mains) Mains from pumping stations to reservoirs can be of any size
Suction mains Mains to pumping stations
Inlet and outlet mains Mains to and from reservoirs

Typical configurations are illustrated in Appendix F:. In determining the general layout of
mains, consider the following factors:
• Whether existing mains need to be replaced due to their physical condition.
• Whether new mains are required to provide additional capacity.
• Main location to allow easy access for operation, repairs and maintenance.
• System security.
• Water quality as indicated by disinfectant residual and water age.
• Staged construction by using smaller initial mains and/or providing additional

treatment points such as reservoirs.
• Whether alternative sources of supply are to be used for the initial service of an area
pending development of in-fill areas (based on a reliable forecast of the rate of in-fill
development).
• Location of valves for shut off areas and zone boundaries including double isolation
requirements.

• Connection between different water managed zones should be avoided. However

where its unavoidable, appropriate valve arrangements should be considered to
separate different pressure managed zones.
• Avoidance of dead-ends where practical.
• Provision of dual or alternative feeds to minimise customer disruptions.
• The environmental impact of both construction and operational phases.
• Provision for maintenance of critical assets, eg pumping stations and operation

during reservoir or tunnel isolation.
5.5.3 Velocity and headlosses

For velocity and headloss requirements, refer to the Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney
5.5.4 Pipeline material friction factors
The friction factors of different pipeline materials are noted in the water modelling system.
5.5.5 Minimum pipe sizes

For minimum pipe size requirements, refer to the Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney
Alternative minimum pipe diameters may be specified for particular developments in CBDs
or other high growth areas (ie www.planning.nsw.gov.au/urbanactivation).

5.6 Flow controls

5.6.1 General
Valves of various types are used to control flow and pressure in the water system (Refer to
Figure 5 - 6 for examples). Also see Section 2: Water System Planning for general
monitoring requirements.
Figure 5 - 6 Typical valves used in the Sydney Water system.
Planners should provide a network schematic showing major new valves’ location or any
changes to existing valves’ operation within the study area and any relevant adjacent areas.

5.6.2 Applications
For the application of valves, refer to Appendix G:. However, this information is more
relevant to designers and provided here as general information for planners.
For details on design criteria of valves, refer to Water Supply Code of Australia, Sydney

5.7 Context

Appendix A: Understanding 1/3 of a maximum day reserve storage
Appendix B: Reservoir site layout examples
Appendix C: Example – Graphical Method for Staging Works
Appendix D: Pump types
Appendix E: Variable speed drives (VSD)
Appendix F: Typical network layout
Appendix G: Valve applications


Title: Water System Planning Guideline, Section 5: Infrastructure Planning

June 2015 Risk rank = High 2014/00004985


Stakeholders Anil Jaiswal - Servicing & Asset Strategy
consulted/reviewer: Bob Wickham - Urban Growth
Chris Salkovic - Service Delivery – Product & Asset Management
Frank Kanak - Service Delivery - Networks
Aravinda Stanley - Servicing & Asset Strategy
David Zhang - Servicing & Asset Strategy
Graham Couchman - Engineering & Environmental Services
Janssen Chan - Engineering & Environmental Services
Matthew Stark - Urban Growth
Milan Rubcic - Engineering & Environmental Services
Nihal Balasuriya - Service Delivery- Networks
Persephone Rougellis - Service & Asset Strategy
Rajiv Madhok - Engineering & Environmental Services
Robert Ius - Service Delivery - Hydraulic System Services
Thaya Thayanithy - Service Delivery - Networks
Vajira Samarasinghe - Engineering & Environmental Services


number
2014

Appendix A: Understanding 1/3 of a maximum

day reserve storage
The following failure scenario determines how effective 1/3 of a maximum day demand is as
reserve storage. Assumptions are:
• The standby unit in a pumping station has failed.
• The remaining pumps can pump 90% of the maximum day demand.
• The demand sequence factors are as shown in Table 5 - 1 (over eight days).
• A 1/3 of a maximum day demand in reserve storage.
Results – Table 5 - 1 shows that the reservoir level cycles down to near MOL over the eight-
day maximum week sequence, ie the reservoir would deplete to about 0.23 MDD below the
RSL (on Day 7) and then would start to recover. Having 1/3 of a maximum day demand as
reserve storage would mean that the supply would not be interrupted.
Table 5 - 1 Reserve storage during maximum demand week period
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Day 6 Day 7 Day 8
Demand 0.78 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.94 0.93 0.92 0.68

sequence
factors
Daily deficit (if > 0.00 -0.02 -0.02 - 0.10 - 0.04 - 0.03 - 0.02 +0.22
than 0.9 input
capacity)
Accumulated 0.00 -0.02 - 0.04 - 0.14 - 0.18 - 0.21 - 0.23 - 0.01

deficit as a
factor of max
day demand

Appendix B: Reservoir site layout examples
Reservoir site layouts

Where more than one reservoir is required to service a zone, planner must ensure that all
reservoirs are able to equalize. The connecting pipe work must be sized, so that the full
storage can be accessed, hence eliminating head diffrencec between reservoirs. Failure to
provide this will result in lead and lag conditions being experienced between the two
reservoirs. This results in loss of operational volume as the system can only be operated by
the level in the lead reservoir. We already have some sites where this condition is present
and the lag can be as much as 1m (or 8% loss of effective operation storage).
Figure 5 - 7 shows a layout of a reservoir installation to supply an extensive high-level area
for which the provision of large elevated storage is uneconomical. Water feeds into a small
elevated reservoir in off-peak periods and, when full, overflows into a surface reservoir. The
AICV is controlled by the water level in the surface reservoir. When the water in the elevated
reservoir falls, the local water pumping station draws water from the surface reservoir and
supplies the zone. The pump cuts out after replenishing the elevated reservoir.
Figure 5 - 7 Elevated reservoir site layout with future large surface reservoir

Figure 5 - 8 shows a combined arrangement of a surface reservoir and an elevated

reservoir to supply two zones isolated from each other with a dividing valve (DV). The
surface reservoir supplies a low level zone and the elevated reservoir supplies a high zone.
Note that in this arrangement there is a combined inlet and outlet main. This option would
need to be assessed financially, as well as for water quality, against an arrangement with an
additional single main to the reservoir and a PRV.
Figure 5 - 8 Typical elevated and surface reservoir site layout

Figure 5 - 9 shows a small temporary reservoir constructed to supply a new area of small
initial consumption with provision for the construction of a permanent reservoir when
development and consumption increases.
Figure 5 - 9 Typical temporary reservoir site layout

Appendix C: Example – Graphical method for

staging works
The following example was formulated in 1986 based on the Minchinbury system. At that
time,
Existing system (Figure 5 - 10)

a) 1 duty, 1 standby 1300 kW units WP0184
b) 1 x 40 ML reservoir at Minchinbury.
Figure 5 - 10 Existing Minchinbury system in 1986
Demand curve
2010 MDD = 185 MLd
Reserve storage
Reserve storage = 1/3 MDD
Pump capacity - 1300 kW units in WP0184, with different pumping units,
No. Pumps Capacity MLd

1 110
2 175
3 210
Design period
Using the distribution figures for the maximum design period (Refer to Section 3: Water
Demand and Growth, Table 7.
The actual design period will depend on the ratio of pump capacity to MDD, that is:

Pump capacity
Pump capacity ratio =
MDD
PCR Design DDF sequence DDF sequence to be used in

period the cumpter model run
(days 7.00 am
to 7.00 am)
> 0.95 1 1.00 0.93, 1.00, 0.95
> 0.93 4 1.00, 0.95, 0.95, 0.97 0.93, 1.00, 0.95, 0.95, 0.97, 0.79
> 0.88 5 0.93, 1.00, 0.95, 0.95, 0.97 0.88, 0.93, 1.00, 0.95, 0.95, 0.97,
0.79
> 0.80 6 0.88, 0.93, 1.00, 0.95, 0.95 , 0.97 0.80, 0.88, 0.93, 1.00, 0.95, 0.95 ,
0.97, 0.79
Cases to analyse
Case No. Pumps Res size % MDD Amplification

ML
1 1 40 90 None
2 2 40 90 WPS
(additional duty unit)
100 None
3 3 40 100 WPS
4 1 40 + 60 90 Reservoir
5 2 40 + 60 90 Reservoir and WPS
100 Reservoir
6 3 40 + 60 100 Reservoir and WPS

Computer Model runs

Case MDD Pump PCR Design Reservoir Reservoir
(ML/d) capacity Period storage storage/
(ML/d) (days) (ML) MDD
1 74.0 110 >1.00 1 36.4 0.49
92.5 110 >1.00 1 28.9 0.31
2 111.0 175 >1.00 1 36.7 0.33
129.5 175 >1.00 1 32.4 0.25
3 111.0 210 >1.00 1 36.7 0.33
129.5 210 >1.00 1 34.8 0.27
4 120.3 110 0.91 5 47.7 0.40
129.5 110 0.85 6 20.5 0.16
5 166.5 175 >1.00 1 60.3 0.36
185.0 175 0.95 4 46.3 0.25
6 166.5 210 >1.00 1 74.8 0.45
185.0 210 >1.00 1 62.9 0.34
Amplifications timing
Figure 5 - 11 Staging of Minchinbury Reservoir works

i. Existing system consisting of:

1 duty and 1 standby unit WPS 184
1 x 40 ML reservoir
Read timing of required amplification from Figure 5 - 11
(i) 90% maximum day (case 1): 1994
(ii) 100% maximum day (case 2): 1996
Upgrade requited in 1994.

ii. Existing system with WPS amplification consisting of:
2 duty pumps and 1 standby unit WPS 184 F
1 x 40 ML reservoir
(ii) 100% maximum day (case 3): 1996
Upgrade required in 1996.

iii. Existing system with reservoir amplification consisting of
1 duty pump and 1 standby unit WPS 184
1 x 40 and 1 x 60 ML reservoirs
(ii) 100% maximum day (case 5): 2007.
Upgrade required in 2002.
Staging options
Option 1
WPS amplification: 1 duty unit in WPS 184 in 1994
Reservoir amplification: 60 ML reservoir at Minchinbury in 1996
Option 2
Reservoir amplification: 60 ML reservoir at Minchinbury in 1994
WPS amplification: 1 duty unit in WPS 184 in 2002
Economic Evaluation
Following identification of the various staging options a full life cycle cost economic
evaluation shall be undertaken of each option to determine the preferred option.
Preferred Option (Figure 5 - 12)

In this example the preferred option on a life cycle cost basis was Option 2 (reservoir
amplification 1 x 60 ML reservoir at Minchinbury in 1994, WPS amplification 1 x 1300 kW
unit in WPS 184 in 2002).
Note that the upgrade of Minchinbury Reservoir was completed in 2008 and it involved a
second on-site 40 ML reservoir.

2 Duty units
1 stand-by
WPS 184
Figure 5 - 12 Proposed Minchinbury system in 2010

Appendix D: Pump types

There are many ways of classifying pumps. A classification by mechanical configuration
considers two main types:
The below classification complies with the Australian Pump Technical Handbook (Reference
41).
• Rotodynamic pumps
• Positive displacement pumps
Rotodynamic pumps are further classified into:
• Centrifugal pumps
• Peripheral pumps
• Special pumps
Centrifugal pumps are generally divided into three types:
• Radial flow
• Mixed flow
• Axial flow
Sydney Water mostly uses centrifugal pumps for water applications.
Centrifugal pumps characteristics

In centrifugal pumps the liquid acquires energy in the form of velocity as it passes through
the impeller passages. The velocity head is converted into pressure head by the volute or
spiral shaped pump casing that directs the liquid from the outer perimeter of the impeller to
the pump discharge.
Sydney Water mostly uses fixed speed pumps and is starting to use variable speed drive
(VSD) pumps primarily at booster pumping stations. In some cases, eg systems with high
friction head losses or/and wide range of flows and heads, variable speed drives (VSD) may
be a viable alternative to fixed speed drives.
When the head or pressure requirements are such that a single impeller cannot satisfy them,
it is usual to supply multi-stage pumps. The total head developed is equivalent to that of a
single stage, multiplied by the number of stages included. Pump performance and efficiency
deteriorate over time as the equipment ages.
Unlike positive displacement pumps, centrifugal pumps operating at constant speed can
deliver any capacity from zero to a maximum value that depends on pump size, design, and
system conditions. The total head developed by the pump, the power required driving it and
the resulting efficiency vary with capacity.
Advantages of using centrifugal pumps include:

• Capacity for high flow rates.
• Low capital cost.

• Minimal wear under normal operation due to few moving parts (ie no gears, pistons
or valves).
• High reliability of operation and low maintenance cost.
• Adaptability for direct motor and engine drive without use of expensive gears.
• Small floor space required (compact and easy to disassemble for maintenance).
• Quiet operation.
• Smooth, non-pulsating delivery.
• Can be operated in a wide range of duty points.
• Will successfully handle liquids carrying solids in suspension, providing the pump is
designed to suit conditions.
• Can be equipped with VSDs for efficient flow control options and energy savings
through speed reduction.

Appendix E: Variable speed drives (VSD)

Pumps that experience highly variable demand and/or head conditions or operate in systems
that have high friction losses (ie ‘steep’ system characteristics) are often good VSD
candidates. VSDs use electronic controls to regulate motor speed which, in turn, adjusts the
pump’s output. The principal advantage of VSDs is better matching between the fluid energy
that the system requires and the energy that the pump delivers to the system.
As system demand changes, the VSD adjusts the pump speed to meet this demand,
reducing the energy lost to throttling or bypassing excess flow. The resulting energy and
maintenance cost savings may justify the investment in the VSD. However, VSDs are not
practical for all applications, eg systems that operate against high static/low friction head (ie
‘flat’ system characteristics). Detailed analysis is required under these circumstances. A
short guide on how to assess VSD opportunities is given below.
Assessment of VSD opportunities

Some of the factors that should be weighed when considering application of VSDs are:
1. A fundamental requirement for considering VSDs should be that flow (or in a more
limited sense, head) requirements change over time. If the system flow and head
requirements are essentially fixed, efforts should concentrate on ensuring a properly
sized pump (which should also be a consideration, regardless of whether a VSD is
employed).
2. The greater the proportion of the system head that is static, the less effective will be the
VSD. This is particularly true if the flow requirements vary significantly. Parallel pumps
are, on the other hand, most effective in systems that are dominated by static head.
Parallel pumps need not all be identical; in fact there are some systems where a small
pump could meet system requirements 80-90% of the time, and supplemented by a
parallel, larger pump for the occasional higher flow condition.
3. The pumps must operate enough hours during the year to justify applying VSDs (when
based on a simple payback, a pump station with multiple pumps may only have the lead
pump equipped with a VSD).
4. The effective range for a VSD pump can be increased by selecting the pump such that
the pump operating point is to the right of (ie greater than) the best efficiency point (BEP)
when operating at the highest anticipated flow requirement. This allows the pump
efficiency to initially increase as speed is reduced.
5. The motor and electrical system should be verified to be suitable for VSD applications.
This is particularly important if a VSD is being added as a retrofit.
6. If a VSD is being retrofitted to systems with switch-based controls, such as a float-type
level control system that causes the pump to be started or stopped at distinct levels,
continuously variable instrumentation, such as a level indicator, will need to be added for
control purposes.
The following steps can be followed in assessing the feasibility of VSDs:

• Analyse daily water demand profile to determine flow requirements at different times of
day.
• Analyse system curves to identify system constraints (minimum static head and flow
range).

• Use pump information (rated speed, motor size, efficiency, net positive suction head
(NPSHr) to draw pump curves at different speeds using the affinity laws, and check
feasible operation ranges according to manufacturer’s recommendation.
• Calculate pump operating points using flow data from the demand profile and head-flow
data from the system curve.
• Calculate power requirements for all pump operating points. Note: Overall pumping units
(pump – motor – VSD) efficiencies shall be used in power calculations. VSDs generally
reduce the overall efficiency by about 6% due to heat losses in the VSDs and motors
caused by harmonics.
• Calculate energy savings by comparing the VSD pump load profile to the base case
(fixed speed pump, cut-in/cut-out operation). This information is available from the
Energy and Eco-efficiency Team. The Team should be contacted for the latest figures.
• Calculate electricity cost savings using tariff and demand information.
• Conduct a risk assessment taking into account the following elements:
o Water quality (reservoir cycling vs constant level)
o Mechanical (speed to avoid cavitation or excessive vibration)
o Electrical (harmonics and other motor losses)
o Hydraulic (minimum/maximum head, continuity of supply)
• If required, modify VSD pumping profile according to risk mitigation measures
• Estimate capital and installation costs (eg quotes from suppliers)
• Perform financial evaluation to determine payback and financial viability
For more information refer to Variable Speed Driven Pumps – Best Practice Guide, British
Pump Manufacturers Association and GAMBICA Association Ltd (Reference 40).

Appendix F: Typical network layout
Figure 5 - 13 Single transfer/distribution main, minor network and dead-end branch

mains (not preferred due to low turn-over in dead-end mains)
Figure 5 - 14 Single transfer/distribution main, network with multiple distribution

mains and branch mains with reduced diameter dead-ends

Figure 5 - 15 Twin transfer/distribution mains, network with multiple distribution

mains, looped mains and link mains to minimise dead-ends, some reduced diameter
dead-end mains and staging of provision of mains
Figure 5 - 15 is preferred to provide multi-direction supply with small shut-off areas, mains
redundancy and looped, linked or reduced diameter mains to maximise water turn-over.

Appendix G: Valve applications

Table 5 – 2 provides the common valve applications in Sydney Water. However, details on valve requirements will be considered during the design phase
and added here for the planner’s information only.
Table 5 - 2 Common valve applications in Sydney water

No Name Types Control Location Operation Application Setting
1 Air valve (AV) Double orifice High points relative Automatic Vent air during pipeline filling, admit air Not adjustable
to the hydraulic during pipeline scouring and release air
gradient) in mains. during normal pipeline operation
Increase in
downward slope,
reduction in upward
slope, long length of
pipeline in level
terrain. On both sides
of the section valve
when the flow in a
main could be in
either direction. Next
to a pumping station.
Downstream of
pressure reducing
devices
2 Anti-vacuum valve Single orifice High points in mains Automatic Capable of admitting large quantities of air
(AVV) into the pipeline to prevent vacuum
conditions in pipelines or tanks
3 Automatic Inlet Butterfly valve, globe Level of water Inlet to reservoir. Automatic Primary function is to control flow into a Fully open/closed position.
Control Valve (AICV) valve within the (electric, or reservoir
Also (altitude or float reservoir hydraulic) The flow modulating function or the
valve) pressure sustaining function can be
accommodated into the open/closed
function of the AICV
4 Pump delivery control Metal seated butterfly The outlet side of a Assist fixed speed pumps starts and stops. Opens after pump starts and closes
valve valve pump Prevent pressure surges within the suction before pump stops.
or delivery pipework

5 Dividing valve (DV) Gate Reservoir zone Manual Isolate the connecting pipework between two Closed (normal mode)
boundaries supply zones
6 Emergency inlet Butterfly valve, globe Reservoir Inlet to reservoir and Automatic Prevent overflow if AICV fails Open (normal mode)
control valve (EICV) valve overflow within reservoir site (electric,
hydraulic)
7 Pressure reducing Globe Fixed outlet Anywhere in supply Hydraulic control, Manage the water pressure supplied to a The flow compensating PRVs
valve (PRV) Plug pressure zone where high Modular high pressure area. regulate the outlet pressure as a
Piston Time of day pressures are electronic units Suitable for leakage control applications function of flow through the valve
profile experienced Adjustable to upstream pressure
Needle
Butterfly Flow
compensating
8 Pressure relief valve Globe Fixed inlet The size and location Automatic Downstream of a pressure reducing valve to The pilot senses the rise in pressure
(PReV) Plug pressure based on water avoid excessive pressure build up and fully opens the valve
Piston hammer analysis. Protection of a pipeline against excessive
Generally located pressure due to hydraulic transients
Needle near natural drainage
9 Pressure sustaining Globe Fixed inlet Generally located at Automatic Maintain a minimum set pressure on the u/s
valve (PSV) Plug pressure the inlet to the side of the valve irrespective of variations in
Piston reservoir outlet conditions
Needle
10 Non-return valve Swing check, tilting Prevents Inlet/outlet Automatic Discharge side of pump: prevent reverse
(NRV) disc, nozzle, spring reverse flow connection to flow when the pump stops.
loaded duo-check reservoir, on pump Inlet of reservoir: prevent draining of
discharge side reservoir in case of inlet main break.
Rising main: water hammer control
12 Scour valves Gate Low points in pipeline Manual De-water pipelines
profile
13 Stop valve (SV) Gate, butterfly Pipelines Manual (hand Use to isolate water mains and as bypass, Fully open/closed position
wheel or tee key) scour and air valve or AVV isolator. Open-
with or without close application, not suitable for regulation
gearbox


Water System Planning Guideline

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Water System Planning Guideline

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Water System Planning Guideline

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WATER SYSTEM PLANNING GUIDELINE

Overall Section Index and Version 1

Section 5: Infrastructure Planning Version 1 Pages 1-46

1.2 Scope of the guideline ............................................................................................... 6

1.3 Fit with other documents .......................................................................................... 8

1.4 Drivers for change .................................................................................................. 11

Appendix A: WSPG-Development and update process ........................................................ 25

WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

Section 1- Introduction to the guideline

WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

• a successful and efficient business.

1.1.2 Objectives and audience

• provide a consolidated guideline for planning work

• provide guidance on System Integrated Planning (integrating drivers such as growth,

• provide justifications for the adopted requirements and criteria

• include updated and new planning criteria from recent reviews.

1.1.3 Planners’ responsibilities

WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

• challenging criteria with the aim of improving performance or financial viability.

WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

1.2 Scope of the guideline

It mainly focuses on planning for:

• infill or greenfield developments

• renewal of existing assets

• water quality and pressure management.

• fire-fighting (Refer to Clause 1.2.3 below)

• anything other than planning, such as detail design or operational activities.

WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

1.3 Fit with other documents

A Design Criteria Guidelines Supplement (Reference 9) was developed in 2010 to update

1.3.2 Other planning documents and WSPG

• previous drafts of guideline documents

WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

The main documents now used for planning are:

Figure 1 shows information used for water system planning.

WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

** for Growth Servicing

Figure 1 - 1Water planning information (Schematic)

WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

1.4 Drivers for change

Table 1 - 1 Drivers for change

Game changers Implications for planning

Opportunities arise to re-assess reliability in the system.

Many candidates for renewals A ‘resizing/reconfiguration’ requirement is generally required when

WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

1.5 Document structure

Table 1 - 2 WSPG structure and content

Number Title Content

The introduction to the document contains general planning

This section provides information on system optimisation at the

WARNING - Document current at time of printing or downloading. Controlled Version is in BMIS.

Consequence cost The cost of the impact or inconvenience.

Consequence cost = cost ($/property/day) x days impacted (days) x number of

• A suitable pipe material to meet expected operating pressures for the

• Structural requirements associated with the pipeline pressure

• Pipes network arrangement to service customers in terms of elevation

Downtime The mean time to repair.

Failure rate The number of failures each year.