| dc.description.abstract | This paper presents an economic analysis of pressure control solutions for leakage and pipe burst reduction. In detail, it explores the operating conditions under which the installation of conventional mechanical pressure reducing valves (PRVs) or remotely real-time controlled (RTC) valves are cost effective compared to a scenario with no control. For a range of system sizes, hydraulic extended period simulations and empirical formulas were used to estimate leakage rates and pipe bursts, respectively, in numerous operational scenarios, including different precontrol leakage levels and demand patterns, the absence of pressure control, and the installation of a PRV or RTC valve. The total cost of the controlled system, including the installation cost of the control device, the flow-dependent operation and maintenance (O&M) cost, and the pipe burst repair cost over the planning horizon, was compared with the water-related O&M and pipe burst repair costs of the uncontrolled system. The results pointed out that no pressure controls are needed if leakage and the variable O&M cost of water are low. When these variables are high, remote RTC is attractive, especially when the demand pattern is peaked and the system is large. For more moderate cost and leakage, a conventional PRV may be better than RTC, especially in small systems and for relatively smooth demand patterns. | |
