Todd Eising, PE, Utilities Section Manager Environmental & Water Resources Department, City of Folsom

Transcription

1 Todd Eising, PE, Utilities Section Manager Environmental & Water Resources Department, City of Folsom Sean Maguire, PE, Project Manager Kennedy/Jenks Consultants Cindy Preuss, PE, Senior Project Manager HydroScience Engineers, Inc. 1

2 Overview of City water facilities Project description Pipeline investigation Pipeline rehabilitation options Project status update Q&A 2

3 Approximately 20,000 customer accounts Drivers to protect water system assets Water supply reliability Increased system demands for growth Unfunded mandates (20% by 2020) Deteriorated, aged pipelines System losses City invested in a Water System Optimization Review 3

4 System-wide review of water infrastructure that focuses on improving efficiencies and operations Develop a water management control program: Assessment of system losses from unaccounted water Implementation of improvement projects to reduce water loss Develop a plan that will meet local and regional water needs 4

5 Willow Hill Pipeline Rehabilitation Project 22,000± lineal feet of pipe (RCP and RCPP) from the City s WTP to the Willow Hill Reservoir Estimated 1 MGD system losses (measured by two meters) Potential to convert raw water to potable water based on proposed developments 5

6 6

7 Existing pipeline highlights: 30, 42 and 48 diameter RCP and RCPP Constructed in segments over the last 40 years In various stages of deterioration Portions located beneath private residences and near commercial building foundations Pipeline replaced open-ditch as development occurred along the ditch alignment 7

8 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 1 Potential Realignments WTP Segment 4 Willow Hill Reservoir 8

9 Identify, locate and fix leaks Use existing hole in the ground Convert raw water to potable water Balance operational storage within water system Leverage various funding sources (City & DWR Grant) Consider phasing strategies 9

10 Desktop condition assessment Phased construction over several decades Limited pipe leak history Interior condition assessment Preparation (Cleaning/CCTV) NASSCO PACP defect rating system Only about 30% inspected due to access 10

11 11

12 12

13 Segment 1 42 WTP to Randall Structure (0+00 to 6+76) 13

14 Segment 1 48 Randall Structure to Weir (6+76 to 28+97) 14

15 15

16 Segment 2 16

17 17

18 Phase 1 Address water losses Point repairs for 42 and 48 seal leaking joints/cracks Fully line a portion of the 30 (Segment 2) Clean, clear, add access and complete condition assessment. Phase 2 Convert to Potable Realignment of 3 potential segments Line remaining 30 18

19 Desired minimum pipe internal diameter (I.D.) = 24 inches Proposed pipe pressure class (after rehabilitation) = 150 psi Materials must meet the ANSI/NSF Standard 61 guidelines 19

20 AWWA Manual M28 Host pipes will only support internal pressures in the 20 to 40 psi range Renovation System Class Structural Classification Description Class I Non-Structural Non structural, rely on adhesion Class II Semi-Structural Semi structural, rely on adhesion, interactive with host pipe Class III Semi-Structural Semi structural, possess inherent ring stiffness, interactive with host pipe Class IV Fully Structural Close-fit or loose-fit, fully structural, independent, lining with continuous pipes required 20

21 AWWA Manual M28 Host pipes will only support internal pressures in the 20 to 40 psi range Renovation System Class Structural Classification Description Class I Non-Structural Non structural, rely on adhesion Class II Semi-Structural Semi structural, rely on adhesion, interactive with host pipe Class III Semi-Structural Semi structural, possess inherent ring stiffness, interactive with host pipe Class IV Fully Structural Close-fit or loose-fit, fully structural, independent, lining with continuous pipes required 21

22 Feasibility assessment of 30-inch and larger diameter rehabilitation alternatives Loose-Fit Sliplining Close-Fit Sliplining Cured-in- Place Pipe (CIPP) 22

23 PE 4710 High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) Dimension ratio (DR) of 13.5 (160 psi) Iron pipe size (IPS) 28-inch HDPE (ID=23.60 in) Custom sized 29-inch HDPE (ID=24.45 in) C905 Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) Dimension ratio (DR) of 25 (165 psi) Ductile iron pipe size (DIPS) 24-inch PVC (ID=23.61 in) Fusible (continuous, joint free length of installed pipe) Requires launching/receiving pits Pushed/pulled into host pipe Install lengths up to 4,000 feet (2,000 feet typical) Requires removal of elbows Requires grouting of annular space 23

24 PE 4710 high density polyethylene (HDPE) Dimension ratio (DR) of 13.5 (160 psi) Iron pipe size (IPS) Custom sized 30-inch HDPE (ID=25.29 inches) Fusible (continuous, joint free length of installed pipe) Requires launching/receiving pits Pulled into host pipe Swagelining (8-10% deformation); robust setups Install lengths 1,500 to 3,000 feet Requires removal of elbows Close-fit (requires no grouting of annular space) 24

25 Felt liner reinforced with fiberglass & wetted out with epoxy resin Approx. 100 psi working pressure rating* 8-22 mm thickness (ID min =28.28 inches) *Increased working pressure liners under development Wet-out liner inserted into host pipe by inversion process Cured with heat through steam/hot water Install lengths from feet for 30-inch liner Navigates 22-1/2 elbows 25

26 Potable Water Option Meets Design Criteria Cost Installation Lengths Construction Impacts Usage FPVC Loose-Fit Slipline Pressure ID (Std Sz) HDPE Loose-Fit Slipline Pressure ID (Std Sz) ID (Cust Sz) HDPE Close-Fit Slipline Pressure ID (Cust Sz) CIPP < Pressure ID 26

27 Loose-fit sliplining: Most value from a cost and application perspective Offers lowest risk Currently the most utilized waterline rehabilitation technology Has potentially the least traffic impacts of the three options Possible to competitively bid sliplining materials for best bid price 27

28 Phase 1 currently in design Phase 1 construction to be completed in 2014 Phase 2 condition assessment 2015 Phase 2 design to be initiated 2015 All phases of construction to be completed by

29 29

30 Sean Maguire, PE Project Manager Gold Center Dr, Ste 350 Rancho Cordova, CA (916) s.com Todd Eising, PE Utilities Section Manager Env. & Water Resources Dept 50 Natoma St Folsom, CA (916) Cindy Preuss, PE Sr. Project Manager 741 Allston Wy Berkeley, CA (510) m 30

31 InsituFlex Installation InsituGuard Vista Irrigation District Flume Rehabilitation InsituGuard Close-Fit Lining Technology Sekisui-Nordipipe 31