See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/355107604

Surge Analysis and Protection for Water Distribution Networks

Article in The Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research · October 2021

CITATIONS READS

0 1,305

3 authors, including:

Alaa Nabil El-Hazek Salma H Tonsy

Benha University Faculty of Engineering in Shoubra, Benha University
48 PUBLICATIONS 67 CITATIONS 1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Alaa Nabil El-Hazek on 06 October 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Available online www.jsaer.com

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

ISSN: 2394-2630
Research Article CODEN(USA): JSERBR

Surge Analysis and Protection for Water Distribution Networks

Alaa N. El-HAZEK1, Salma H. Tonsy2*, Rehab M. Mahmoud1

1
Civil Engineering Dept., Faculty of Engineering at Shoubra, Cairo, Benha University, Egypt
2
Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Modern University for Technology and Information, Egypt
Abstract In this paper, Bentley HAMMER software was employed to simulate, analyze, and protect the water
distribution network of Assiut city in Egypt having two pump stations against a pump power failure for the
current and future conditions.
Three scenarios were investigated; the current demand, 25% increased demand, and 50% increased demand.
Each scenario included three cases; failure of PMP-1, failure of PMP-2, and failure of PMP-1 and PMP-2
together. Each case was studied without and with protection.
From the obtained results, case 3 was the worst-case followed by case 2, and finally, case 1.
For the current demand, the min pressures were -10.0 m and 30.7 m without and with protection. The protection
devices were hydropneumatic tanks for cases 1 and 3, while an air valve was used with hydropneumatic tanks
for case 2.
For the 25% increased demand, representing required demand 15 years later, the min pressures were -10.0 m
and 31.1 m without and with protection. The protection devices had the same volume of hydropneumatic tanks
for cases 1 and 3, while for case 2, the same air valve was employed with increased volume of hydropneumatic
tanks by 50%.
For the 50% increased demand, representing required demand 25 years later, the min pressures were -3.9 m and
30.5 m without and with protection. The protection devices had the same volume of hydropneumatic tanks for
case 1, increased volume of hydropneumatic tanks by 43% for case 3, while for case 2, a larger air valve by 33%
was employed with increased volume of hydropneumatic tanks by 100%.

Keywords Water hammer, transient flow, hydropneumatic tank, Assiut city water distribution network
1. Introduction
The hydraulic transient phenomenon always exists, but it is just not obvious most of the time. Studying the
nature and causes of transient phenomena, where the velocity and pressure can change suddenly, in the pipelines
and distribution networks will permit facilities to avoid its destructive forces.
The common events that typically produce large changes in pressure are pump startup, pump power failure,
valve opening, and closing operations. Also, improper operation of surge protection devices could be additional
reasons causing the water hammer, which is a form of transient flow.
Several methods have been introduced and used to analyze water hammer problems such as the energy,
arithmetic, graphical, characteristics, algebraic, implicit, and linear analyzing methods, Euler and Lagrangian
based method, and decoupled hybrid methods, [1].
This paper employed the method of characteristics to construct models using the Bentley HAMMER Software
V8.0 Edition to calculate, simulate, and protect against transients in a water supply system.
M. Kandil et al., [2], presented a water hammer as a transient flow in pipes due to a quick change in speed in
pipes. The novelty of this study showed how the materials with less elastic modulus were less likely to occur in
the water hammer than the high elastic modulus for the same operating conditions.

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

63
El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

El-Hazek, [3], investigated the impact of different protection devices to assure surge protection for a pipeline
system via Bentley HAMMER V8.0. Using five air vessels with a vacuum breaker valve as surge protection
proved to be more effective and economical against pump power failure. Equations were obtained to predict the
pressures according to the inlet pipe diameter, the area of the surge tank, and the pipe diameter. Also, it was
found that cast iron pipes proved to be the best pipe material when using the air vessel as protection devices.
Emami et al, [4], observed that, in the same conditions, the effect of GRP pipe in reducing the maximum rate of
water hammer was 25% less than the steel pipe. Wuyi Wan et al., [5], introduced a kind of intelligent self-
controlled surge tank (IST), which proved to have advantages in pressure control and applicability compared to
normal surge tanks. Kamil Urbanowicz, [6], showed that simple effective two-terms weighting functions were
able to accurately model the analyzed transients.
Desmukh and Sadanand, [7], presented a case study where the manual analysis was done without surge
protection devices. Also, the transient analysis of the pipeline was performed using Bentley Hammer V8i
software without surge protection devices. The results obtained matched well with the manual results for the
same case. Thus, the location for surge protection could be found out.
Abuiziah et al., [8], presented the influence of using the protection devices to control the adverse effects due to
excessive and low pressure that occurred in the transient flow. Ali EL-Turki, [9], simulated a field case study to
investigate a pipe burst that occurred on a pipeline system in the Man-Made River in Libya employing the
Bentley HAMMER V8i software. The results showed that the transient pressures in the pipeline exceeded the
bar rating of the pipe. Elsaeed et al., [10], investigated the unsteady flow in irrigation pipeline networks due to
pump power failure. The study was applied using Water Hammer Software Wanda V 3.03.
El-Hazek, [11], employed the Bentley HAMMER model to simulate and analyze steady-state and transients in
the irrigation pipeline systems. A hydropneumatic tank was employed as a protection device against power
failure. It was concluded that by decreasing the tank diameter to 1/6 times the pipeline diameter, the max
pressure decreased. More decreasing the diameter, the max pressure increased. A design chart and design
equations were obtained, which accomplished savings of 55% in the diameter and 51% in liquid and
hydropneumatic tank volumes.
Giuseppe Frega et al., [12], have proved that minimizing water hammer by the uniform valve closure in the first
part of an urban water distribution network was not true based on the theoretical and experimental results
obtained in their paper. Polanco et al, [13], showed that the systems operated in a fragile environment, as in cold
regions, concern about the consequences of leakage increased due to the variation of physical properties of the
fluid and the pipe material as a function of the temperature.
Skulovich et al., [14], introduced a new function fitting model that was integrated with mixed-integer
programming to optimally place and size surge tanks for transient control for water distribution systems. The
closed surge tank was optimal protection against transient events. Mehdi, [15], showed that the compressibility
of the liquid and the elasticity of the pipeline caused a transient pressure wave to propagate throughout the
hydraulic systems. Hassan et al., [16], discussed that frequent pump shut-off could be a quite serious threat to
the stability of the newly installed network if adequate protection measures were not taken. Hassan and Gamal,
[17], employed EPANET software to perform hydraulic and water quality analysis for the city of Assiut water
supply network. The failure of some pipes in the networks changed the flow directions in some pipes through
the network. Closing a pipeline increased pressure in a region and decreased it at another affecting the chlorine
distribution through the network.
In this paper, surge analysis and protection for water distribution networks will be investigated employing
Bentley HAMMER (V8.0 SELECT-series 5) software. The model is applied to a case study (Assiut city water
distribution network, Egypt) to simulate, analyze, and protect the network against transient flow due to pump
failure.

2. Materials and Method

Hydraulic models are important for the simulation, analysis, and design of water distribution networks. Bentley
HAMMER (V8.0 SELECT-series 5) software is a widely used computer model that can be used to perform
extended period simulation of hydraulic and water quality behavior within pressurized pipe networks and

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

64
El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

steady-state conditions. It is a very efficient and powerful tool for simulating hydraulic transients in pipelines
and networks using the method of characteristics to solve differential equations of transient flow, [18].
Bentley HAMMER is based on technology first created by GENIVAR (Formerly Environmental
Hydraulics Group Inc.). However, it is a graphical interface software that makes it easy to quickly layout the
schematic of a complex network of pipes, tanks, pumps, and surge control devices. Steady-state models from
other software such as WaterCad or WaterGEMS can be directly used in Bentley HAMMER saving time and
eliminating transcription errors, [8].
In this paper, Bentley HAMMER software is employed to simulate, analyze, and protect the water distribution
network of Assiut city in Egypt for the current and future conditions.

3. Case Study: Assiut City Water Distribution Network in Egypt

The analysis of transient flow was performed for the Assiut city water supply network. Assiut city is a city in the
Upper Egypt region that is located 400 km southern Cairo, as shown in Fig. 1, [19]. The network is fed by two
sources of water, which are R-1(El-Helaly plant) and R-2 (Nazlet Abdellah plant), [20 – 21], as shown in Fig. 2.
All the network 26 junctions lie at the same level (elevation = zero). The distribution network is composed of35
Cast Iron pipes with different lengths and diameters as illustrated in Table1. Two pumping stations labeled
PMP-1 and PMP-2pump the water supplied from the two reservoirs into the distribution network.

Figure 1: Assiut City, Egypt, [19]

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

65
El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

Figure 2: Assiut City Water Distribution Network

Table 1: Lengths and Diameters of the Network Pipes

Pipe Length Diameter Pipe Length Diameter Pipe Length Diameter
number (m) (mm) number (m) (mm) number (m) (mm)
P1 1600 800 P13 1100 500 P25 950 300
P2 300 1000 P14 500 1000 P26 1200 600
P3 600 1000 P15 750 500 P27 400 600
P4 900 500 P16 850 500 P28 2650 600
P5 200 500 P17 1000 500 P29 2100 600
P6 300 500 P18 100 800 P30 1500 400
P7 1400 500 P19 300 600 P31 1600 400
P8 1100 800 P20 600 400 P32 1500 800
P9 500 800 P21 300 500 P33 700 400
P10 800 800 P22 600 400 P34 500 1200
P11 150 800 P23 600 400 P35 150 500
P12 850 500 P24 950 400

4. Results and Discussion

Three main scenarios were performed to simulate, analyze, and protect the Assiut city water distribution
network in Egypt employing Bentley HAMMER software for the current and future conditions. These
investigated scenarios concerned the current demand, 25% increased demand, and 50% increased demand.
Each scenario included three cases, which were the failure of PMP-1 only, failure of PMP-2 only, and failure of
PMP-1 and PMP-2 together. Each case was studied without and with protection. Also, for each case, simulation
and studying via the Bentley Hammer model were performed for three profiles at different locations of the
distribution network to investigate the max and min pressures. The first profile included junctions 1, 25, 10, 9, 8,
and 2 that presented the near part of the distribution network to the pump stations. The second profile included
junctions 3, 4, 5, 6, 14, 13, and 17 presenting the middle part of the network. The third profile included junctions
20, 21, 22, and 23 presenting the far part of the network to the pump stations.

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

66
El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

4.1. First Scenario: The Current Demand

Assiut city water distribution network consists of 26 junctions that are illustrated in Table 2 for the current
demand. The first scenario, current demand, included three studied cases without protection and with protection
for each case as mentioned previously. The obtained results are tabulated in Table 3.
For case3concerningthe failure of PMP-1 and PMP-2 together, the three studied profiles are shown without
protection in Figures 3, 4, and 5 and with protection in Figures 6, 7, and 8.
For the same case 3 concerning the failure of PMP-1 and PMP-2 together, the max pressure for all the
distribution networks is shown in Figure 9. Also, the min pressure for all the distribution networks is shown in
Figure 10 without protection (A) and with protection (B).
As an example, at Junction 10, the pressure, discharge, and air volume are illustrated in Figure 11 without
protection (A) and with protection (B) for case 3 concerning the failure of PMP-1 and PMP-2 together.

Table 2: Current Demand for the Network Junctions

Node Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Demand (Lit/s) 0 61 0 61 34 40 61 52 30 30 54 81 61
Node Number 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Demand (Lit/s) 40 16 32 61 87 61 41 78 78 101 0 40 0

Table 3: Max and Min Pressure Head for Cases of First Scenario, Current Demand
Min Head, m
Junction

Max Failure Failure Failure

Head, PMP-1 Only PMP-2 Only PMP-1 and PMP-2
m Without With Without With Without With
Protection Protection Protection Protection Protection Protection
Profile-1
J-1 62.1 45.4 45.6 6.2 31.3 0.2 37.3
J-25 61.9 45.0 45.3 10.7 31.3 -0.7 37.3
J-10 61.8 45.0 45.0 11.6 31.3 -0.8 37.3
J-9 61.5 44.7 44.4 14.2 31.2 -0.2 37.3
J-8 61.3 36.3 43.8 23.7 31.4 0.7 37.4
J-2 61.7 27.4 44.1 25.4 32.0 0.7 37.8
Profile-2
J-3 61.7 26.2 43.7 26.8 32.0 0.7 37.9
J-4 61.1 29.6 43.6 26.0 31.6 0.6 37.5
J-5 60.9 32.0 43.2 24.5 31.4 -1.2 37.4
J-6 60.6 32.6 42.2 22.0 31.1 -0.2 37.1
J-14 60.5 33.4 42.1 19.7 31.1 -1.6 37.1
J-13 60.4 34.9 42.1 21.7 30.9 0.0 36.9
J-17 59.9 35.3 41.2 20.0 30.7 0.0 36.7
Profile-3
J-20 60.0 39.2 41.6 6.3 30.8 -8.3 36.8
J-21 60.0 36.1 41.6 4.2 30.8 -9.5 36.8
J-22 60.1 26.9 41.7 10.1 30.7 -10.0 36.8
J-23 60.7 40.3 42.8 16.1 30.9 -3.3 37.0

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

67
El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

Figure 3: Pressures and Air Volume, First Scenario, Case 3, Profile 1 without Protection

Figure 4: Pressures and Air Volume, First Scenario, Case 3, Profile 2 without Protection

Figure 5: Pressures and Air Volume, First Scenario, Case 3, Profile 3 without Protection

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

68
El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

Figure 6: Pressures and Air Volume, First Scenario, Case 3, Profile 1 with Protection

Figure 7: Pressures and Air Volume, First Scenario, Case 3, Profile 2 with Protection

Figure 8: Pressures and Air Volume, First Scenario, Case 3, Profile 3 with Protection

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

69
El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

Pipes Nodes
Figure 9: Max Pressure, First Scenario, Case 3

(A)

Pipes Nodes

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

70
El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

(B)
Figure 10: Min Pressure without Protection (A) and with Protection (B), First Scenario, Case 3

B
Figure 11: Pressure, Discharge, and Air Volume at Junction 10 without Protection (A) and with Protection (B),
First Scenario, Case 3
From the obtained results, case 3 concerning the failure of PMP-1 and PMP-2 together was the worst-case
followed by case 2 concerning the failure of PMP-2, and finally, case 1 concerning the failure of PMP-1.
Without protection, the min pressures were in the range of -10.0 m to 45.4 m for the studied cases, while
employing protecting techniques achieved min pressures in the range of 30.7 m to 45.6 m. The protection

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

71
El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

devices were hydropneumatic tanks for all cases except case 2, where an air valve was used associated with
hydropneumatic tanks.

4.2. Second Scenario: 25% Increased Demand

For future increasing population and consequently increasing water demand, a second scenario was investigated
for 25% increased demand. This 25% increased demand for the Assiut city water distribution network is
illustrated in Table 4.
According to the population governmental records and future interpretation according to the Egyptian Code, the
25% increased demand will be required 15 years later representing the demand in the Year 2035, [20].
The second scenario, 25% increased demand, included three studied cases without protection and with
protection for each case as mentioned previously. The obtained results are shown in Table 5.
Table 4: 25% Increased Demand for the Network Junctions
Node Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Demand (Lit/s) 0 76 0 75 43 50 76 65 38 38 68 101 76
Node Number 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Demand (Lit/s) 50 20 40 76 109 76 51 98 98 126 0 50 0

Table 5: Max and Min Pressure Head for Cases of Scenario 2, 25% Increased Demand
Min Head, m
Junction

Max Failure Failure Failure

Head, PMP-1 Only PMP-2 Only PMP-1 and PMP-2
m Without With Without With Without With
Protection Protection Protection Protection Protection Protection
Profile-1
J-1 62.1 45.8 44.9 3.3 31.9 -2.2 33.7
J-25 61.9 45.3 44.3 7.5 32.0 -3.2 33.8
J-10 61.6 45.1 43.9 8.6 31.9 -2.7 33.7
J-9 61.2 43.1 43.1 11.7 31.8 -1.0 33.7
J-8 61.0 30.7 41.7 21.1 32.0 0.9 33.9
J-2 61.6 22.0 41.0 27.0 33.0 0.5 34.5
Profile-2
J-3 61.6 20.1 40.1 27.8 33.2 1.1 34.6
J-4 60.7 23.6 40.6 26.5 32.4 1.0 34.0
J-5 60.4 27.2 40.4 21.9 32.2 0.3 33.8
J-6 59.8 29.1 39.9 19.0 31.7 1.3 33.5
J-14 58.3 29.7 39.8 19.2 31.7 1.2 33.5
J-13 58.0 31.9 40.1 22.5 31.4 1.5 33.2
J-17 57.4 32.4 39.2 19.3 31.1 1.6 32.9
Profile-3
J-20 57.6 36.2 39.4 10.2 31.2 -3.9 33.1
J-21 57.5 33.7 39.4 8.2 31.2 -8.6 33.0
J-22 57.7 25.3 40.0 10.5 31.1 -10.0 33.0
J-23 58.6 37.8 41.3 15.3 31.4 0.0 33.3

When the demand increased by 25%, case 3 concerning the failure of PMP-1 and PMP-2 together was also the
worst-case followed by case 2 concerning the failure of PMP-2, and finally, case 1 concerning the failure of
PMP-1.
Without protection, the min pressures were in the range of -10.0 m to 45.8 m for the studied cases, while
employing protecting techniques achieved min pressures in the range of 31.1 m to 44.9 m. The protection
devices had the same volume of hydropneumatic tanks for case 1 of PMP-1 failure and case 3 of PMP-1 and
PMP-2 failure together. While for case 2 of PMP-2 failure, the same air valve was employed with increased
volume of hydropneumatic tanks by 50%.

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

72
El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

4.3. Third Scenario: 50% Increased Demand

For future increasing population and consequently increasing water demand, a third scenario was investigated
for 50% increased demand. This 50% increased demand for the Assiut city water distribution network is
illustrated in Table 6.
According to the population governmental records and future interpretation according to the Egyptian Code, the
50% increased demand will be required 25 years later representing the demand in the Year 2045, [20].
The third scenario, 50% increased demand, included three studied cases without protection and with protection
for each case as mentioned previously. The obtained results are shown in Table 7.
When the demand increased by 50%, case 3 concerning the failure of PMP-1 and PMP-2 together was still the
worst-case followed by case 2 concerning the failure of PMP-2, and finally, case 1 concerning the failure of
PMP-1.
Without protection, the min pressures were in the range of -3.9 m to 46.3 m for the studied cases, while
employing protecting techniques achieved min pressures in the range of 30.5 m to 44.3 m. The protection
devices had the same volume of hydropneumatic tanks for case 1 of PMP-1 failure and increased volume of
hydropneumatic tanks by 43% for case 3 of PMP-1 and PMP-2 failure together. While for case 2 of PMP-2
failure, a larger air valve by 33% was employed with increased volume of hydropneumatic tanks by 100%.
Table 6: 50% Increased Demand for the Network Junctions
Node Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Demand (Lit/s) 0 90 0 90 51 60 92 78 45 45 120 120 90
Node Number 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Demand (Lit/s) 60 24 48 90 120 90 62 110 110 145 0 60 0

Table 7: Max and Min Pressure Head for Cases of Scenario 3, 50% Increased Demand
Min Head, m
Junction

Max Failure Failure Failure

Head, PMP-1 Only PMP-2 Only PMP-1 and PMP-2
m Without With Without With Without With
Protection Protection Protection Protection Protection Protection
Profile-1
J-1 62.2 46.3 44.3 1.9 31.6 -3.4 36.5
J-25 61.8 45.6 43.5 6.4 31.6 -3.9 36.6
J-10 61.5 45.0 42.9 8.2 31.6 -2.5 36.5
J-9 60.9 42.0 41.9 12.0 31.5 0.3 36.3
J-8 60.6 27.6 39.6 19.8 31.8 1.3 36.6
J-2 61.4 19.3 38.0 27.1 33.0 -3.4 37.4
Profile-2
J-3 61.4 16.3 36.9 28.9 33.4 -1.1 37.5
J-4 60.2 20.5 37.9 25.0 32.4 1.0 36.7
J-5 59.8 22.9 37.9 20.1 32.0 0.7 36.4
J-6 59.1 27.6 37.7 18.9 31.4 1.6 35.9
J-14 59.0 28.7 37.8 19.7 31.3 1.6 35.9
J-13 58.6 31.9 38.2 19.8 30.9 1.6 35.5
J-17 57.8 31.3 37.5 18.5 30.5 1.5 35.1
Profile-3
J-20 58.0 35.9 37.5 14.0 30.7 0.2 35.3
J-21 58.0 33.1 37.5 12.4 30.6 0.0 35.3
J-22 58.2 24.3 38.0 13.2 30.6 -2.4 35.2
J-23 59.3 37.8 39.7 16.6 30.9 1.1 35.7

5. Conclusions
In this paper, Bentley HAMMER software was employed to simulate, analyze, and protect the water distribution
network of Assiut city in Egypt, which had two pump stations, against a pump power failure for the current and
future conditions.

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

73
El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

Three scenarios were investigated concerning the current demand, 25% increased demand, and 50% increased
demand. Each scenario included three cases, which were the failure of PMP-1 only, failure of PMP-2 only, and
failure of PMP-1 and PMP-2 together. Each case was studied without and with protection.
From the obtained results, for all scenarios, case 3 concerning the failure of PMP-1 and PMP-2 together was the
worst-case followed by case 2 concerning the failure of PMP-2, and finally, case 1 concerning the failure of
PMP-1.
For the current demand, without protection, the min pressures were in the range of -10.0 m to 45.4 m for the
studied cases, while employing protecting techniques achieved min pressures in the range of 30.7 m to 45.6 m.
The protection devices were hydropneumatic tanks for cases 1 and 3, while an air valve was used associated
with hydropneumatic tanks for case 2.
When the demand increased by 25%, case 3 concerning the failure of PMP-1 and PMP-2 together was also the
worst-case followed by case 2 concerning the failure of PMP-2, and finally, case 1 concerning the failure of
PMP-1. This scenario represented the required demand 15 years later, which would be the demand in the year
2035.
Without protection, the min pressures were in the range of -10.0 m to 45.8 m for the studied cases, while
employing protecting techniques achieved min pressures in the range of 31.1 m to 44.9 m. The protection
devices had the same volume of hydropneumatic tanks for case 1 of PMP-1 failure and case 3 of PMP-1 and
PMP-2 failure together. While for case 2 of PMP-2 failure, the same air valve was employed with increased
volume of hydropneumatic tanks by 50%.
When the demand increased by 50%, case 3 concerning the failure of PMP-1 and PMP-2 together was still the
worst-case followed by case 2 concerning the failure of PMP-2, and finally, case 1 concerning the failure of
PMP-1.
Without protection, the min pressures were in the range of -3.9 m to 46.3 m for the studied cases, while
employing protecting techniques achieved min pressures in the range of 30.5 m to 44.3 m. The protection
devices had the same volume of hydropneumatic tanks for case 1 of PMP-1 failure and increased volume of
hydropneumatic tanks by 43% for case 3 of PMP-1 and PMP-2 failure together. While for case 2 of PMP-2
failure, a larger air valve by 33% was employed with increased volume of hydropneumatic tanks by 100%.

References
[1]. Don J. Wood, Waterhammer Analysis—Essential and Easy and Efficient, JOURNAL OF
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, ASCE, (2005) 1123-1131.
DOI: 10.1061/~ASCE07339372~2005!131:8~1123.
[2]. M. Kandil, A.M. Kamal, T.A. El-Sayed, Effect of pipe materials on water hammer, International
Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 179 (2020). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpvp.2019.103996.
[3]. El-Hazek A.N., Ahmed M.F., Badawy N.A.-M., Transient flow simulation, analysis, and protection of
pipeline systems, Journal of Water and Land Development, 47 (X–XII) (2020) 47–60.
DOI: 10.24425/jwld.2020.135031.
[4]. M. Emami, M.H. Mohebi, and R. Aghamajidi, Sensitivity Analysis of Different Parameters on
Dynamic Loads due to Water Hammer in Water Pipelines Projects (GRP Pipe), Specialty Journal of
Engineering and Applied Science, 4 (2) (2019) 6-16.
[5]. Wuyi Wan and Boran Zhang, Investigation of Water Hammer Protection in Water Supply Pipeline
Systems Using an Intelligent Self-Controlled Surge Tank, Energies, 11, (2018).
DOI: 10.3390/en11061450.
[6]. Kamil Urbanowicz, Modern Modeling of Water Hammer, Polish Maritime Research 3 (95), 24 (2017)
68-77. DOI: 10.1515/pomr-2017-0091.
[7]. T.S. Desmukh and Sadanand (2014), Hydraulic Transient Analysis of Kolar Water pipeline using
Bentley Hammer V8i – A Case Study, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology, 3
(9) (2017).

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

74
 El-HAZEK AN et al Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2021, 8(9):63-75

[8]. Abuiziah A., Oulhaj K., and Sebari D. Ouazar, Sizing the Protection Devices to Control Water
Hammer Damage, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of
Civil and Environmental Engineering, 7 (11) (2013).
[9]. Ali EL-Turki, Modeling of Hydraulic transients In Closed Conduits, Master of Science Thesis,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins,
Colorado (2013).
[10]. Gamal H. Elsaeed, Abd Elazim M. Ali, and Eman F. Abd-Elgani, Improved Design for Irrigation
Pipeline Networks, Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 7(12) (2011) 2127-2139.
[11]. Alaa Nabil El-Hazek, Hydro Pneumatic Tank Design for Surge Protection of Irrigation Pipeline
Systems, Journal of Scientific Research & Reports 18(6) (2018) 1-15.
DOI: 10.9734/JSRR/2018/40253.
[12]. Giuseppe Frega, Carmelina Costanzo, and Ferdinando Frega, Water Hammer in Water Distribution
Systems, Italian Journal of Engineering Geology and Environment, Special Issue 1, (2018) 65-71. DOI:
10.4408/IJEGE.2018-01.S-06.
[13]. Polanco, G., Virk, M.S., Mughal, U.N., Victor, S., José, D.P., Antonio, V., and Orlando, A.,
Encapsulated Water Hammer: Theoretical/ Experimental Study, World Journal of Engineering and
Technology, 3 (2015) 290-295.
[14]. Skulovich, O., R. Bent, D. Judi, L.S. Perelman, and A. Ostfeld, Piece-wise mixed integer programming
for optimal sizing of surge control devices in water distribution systems, Water Resour. Res., 51 (2015)
4391–4408. DOI: 10.1002/2014WR016256.
[15]. Mehdi Salmanzadeh, Numerical Method for Modeling Transient Flow in Distribution Systems,
International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, 13 (1)(2013) 72-78.
[16]. A. Hassan, R. Chowdhury, and D.M. Khan, Aspect and necessity of hydraulic transient analysis in
water distribution system in Dhaka, 4th Annual Paper Meet and 1st Civil Engineering Congress,
(2011), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
[17]. Hassan Ibrahim Mohamed and Gamal Abozeid, Dynamic Simulation of Pressure Head and Chlorine
Concentration in the City of Asyut Water Supply Network in Abnormal Operating Conditions, Arab J
Sci Eng., 36 (2011) 173–184. DOI: 10.1007/s13369-010-0027-3.
[18]. Tapomoy Guha and Subhasish Das, Transient Analysis of a Piped Water Network using HAMMER
Software: A Case Study of South Mizoram, M. Eng. Thesis, School of Water Resources Engineering,
Jadavpur University, (2019) Kolkata, India.
[19]. Information on https://i.pinimg.com/originals/43/e7/d1/43e7d18b9670dd075057472e8dd919c4.gif -
Accessed on 9/1/2021
[20]. Hassan Ahmed, Wael El-Sadek, Mona Mostafa, Mohamed F. Soliman, and Nashat Ali, Simulation,
evaluation, and optimization of drinking water distribution networks. Case study: Assiut city-Egypt,
Third International Conference on Environmental Design and Innovation, Zaytoonah Engineering
Conference, (2016), Amman, Jordan.
[21]. Nashat A. Ali, Gamal Abozeid and Moustafa S. Darweesh, Analysis of Different Protection Methods
against Water Hammer on Water Supply Network (Case Study-Assiut City Network), Journal of
Engineering Sciences, Assiut University, Faculty of Engineering, 41 (6) (2013) 2021-2035.

Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

75

View publication stats