ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

ADDIS ABABA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (AAiT)

Water Supply Coverage and Water Loss in Distribution System with Modeling

(The Case Study of Addis Ababa)

A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Addis Ababa University in

partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Master Science in Civil
Engineering (Water Supply and Environmental Engineering)

By: Shimeles Kabeto

Advisor Dr. Yilma Sileshi

November, 2011
Abstract
Leakage in water distribution pipes is a major problem faced by the water industry. Water utilities often
employ traditional audit methods to estimate water lost as leakage. As a result demand for additional
water sources and infrastructure is growing. More ever, nearly 37% of the total water production is loss
at different level of distribution system before reaching to the consumer. The focus of this study is to
evaluate the city’s distribution coverage of the water supply and evaluating the total water loss. The
water supply coverage at the city level and the total water loss both at the city level and at the sub
system level, the collected data was assembled in EPANET and controls were added to best represent
the functioning of the water system. Water production that is only for the city and the water
consumption as aggregated from individual customer meter reading was to evaluate the total water loss
at the city level. Select the pilot area in around Gottera the selection of the area from the branch based
on the following criteria. Hydraulically easily desecrate area, 24hr water availability, Customer not more
than 1000, and more leakage complain. The sub-system that has isolated networks and production and
consumption data were used to evaluate and compare the spatial distribution of water loss. There are
several reasons for the high level of water loss in Addis Ababa., and some advisory solutions were
briefly proposed for the major effect of the water loss like age of pipe networks, poor maintenance of
networks, water scheduling, customer side leakage and illegal connection. The reduction of NRW (Non
Revenue Water) by Water Balance Method shows the difference between predicted and actual water
losses in water distribution network, The results also shows that after leakage reduction control works
took place, the volume of water loss in water distribution network has reduce about 39% of the total
production supply to the sub-system.
The distribution system model was then used to evaluate three alternative scenarios to improve system
performance. The objective of the first and second scenario was to increase the flow rate at taps of low
supply; the third scenario aimed at adding taps to parts of the sub-system without easy access to running
water. The first scenario consisted in opening valves to connect subsystems: it increased the flow rate at
taps of large supply more so than at taps of low supply. This scenario was not recommended because it
would quickly drain parts of the water supply.

2 
 
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Yilma Sileshi for his excellent guidance, encouragement and

support.

I would also like to express my gratitude to the staff of the Addis Ababa Water and Sewerage Authority

(AAWSA) who helps me to get all the necessary data.

I am also grateful to my parents for the constant support and encouragement they have given me right

from my childhood.

Finally I want to thank all my friends for their material and moral support.

3 
 
 Table of Content

Title page
Abstract ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
Acknowledgment---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2

List of Figure------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - 6
List of Table-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - 7
List of Appendix--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8

List of Abbreviations------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9

1. Introduction---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10
1.1 Background -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10
1.2 Problem of the statement---------------------------------------------------------- 14
1.3 Research Objective---------------------------------------------------------------- 15
1.4 Study Area------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16
2. Literature Review------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------- 19
2.1 Introduction--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19
2.2 Comparing water losses----------------------------------------------------------- 20
2.3 Cause of water losses--------------------------------------------------------------- 22
2.4 Pressure and Leakage--------------------------------------------------------------- 22
2.5 Pressure Management Through Distribution System--------------------------- 22
2.6 Leakage Monitoring With District Meter Area (DMA)------------------------ 24
2.7 Water Audits------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25
2.8 Leak Location------------------------------------------------------------------------ 25
2.9 System Evaluation and Design----------------------------------------------------- 25
2.9.1 Water system demands----------------------------------------------- ---------- 26
2.9.2 Planning water demand changes--------------------------------------------- 27
3. Water loss Analysis------------------------------------------------------------------------- 33

4 
 
 3.1 Introduction--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 33
3.2 City level water loss analysis------------------------------------------------------- 34
3.2.1 Water loss as per number of connection------------------------------------ 35
3.3 Water loss analysis at sub-systems----------------------------------------------- 35
3.3.1 Water loss as per number of connection------------------------------------ 38

3.4 Pressure and leakage relationships ----------------------------------------------- 38

3.4.1 Calculation of Actual Losses by Water Balance Method------------------ 40
3.5 Comparing of water losses-------------------------------------------------------- 42
3.6 Dimensions of Water Loss in Distribution Networks--------------------------- 42
3.7 Major Factors Contributing to High Level of Water Loss in
Addis Ababa-------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ 42
3.7.1 Age of pipe network--------------------------------------------------------- 43
3.7.2 Poor maintenance of networks---------------------------------------------- 43
3.7.3 Water scheduling-------------------------------------------------------------- 43
3.7.4 Customer side leakage------------------------------------------------------- 44
3.7.5 Illegal connections----------------------------------------------------------- 44
3.8 Water loss Management----------------------------------------------------------- 44
3.9 Leakage Monitoring and control------------------------------------------------- 44
3.10 Economical Dimension of Water Loss------------------------------------------- 46
3.11 Summary----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 46
4. Water Supply Coverage ------------------------------------------------------------------- 47
4.1 Introduction--------------------------------------------------------- ----------------- 47
4.2 Domestic water supply coverage------------------------------------------------- 47
4.3 Level of Domestic Water Supply Coverage------------------------------------- 48
4.4 Average Daily per Capital Consumption----------------------------------------- 48
4.5 Evaluating of the distribution of the water supply coverage------------------- 50
4.6 Level of connection per family--------------------------------------------------- 53
4.7 Summary----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 53

5 
 
 5. Distribution System Modeling ---------------------------------------------------------- 55
5.1 Introduction--------------------------------------------------------- ----------------- 55
5.2 EPANET--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 57
5.3 Data Assembly--------------------------------------------------------------------- 59
5.3.1 Initial Setup------------------------------------------------------------------- 59
5.3.1.1 Tanks------------------------------------------------------------------- 59
5.3.1.2 Pipes------------------------------------------------------------------- 59
5.4 Setup----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ 60
5.4.1 Hydraulics and Time Parameters-------------------------------------------- 61
5.5 Result------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 62
5.5.1 Pressure----------------------------------------------------------------------- 63
5.5.2 Demand----------------------------------------------------------------------- 66
5.6 Summary----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 68
6. Conclusion and Recommendation ------------------------------------------------------- 70
7. Reference-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 72

Appendix A: Input parameter----------------------------------------------------------------------- 74

Appendix B: EPANET Input Parameters for Current System---------------------------------- 75

Appendix C: EPANET Report for the First Scenarios ------------------------------------------ 87

Appendix D: EPANET Report for the Second Scenarios -------------------------------------- 96

Appendix E: EPANET Report for the Third Scenarios ----------------------------------------- 101

6 
 
List of Figure
 

Title page

Figure 1.1 Location of study Area--------------------------------------------------------------- 16

Figure 1.1 Node-link representation of a water distribution network---------------------- 29

Figure 3.1Annual water loss of the city---------------------------------------------------------- 34

Figure 3.2 Sub-system water distributions Network ------------------------------------------- 36

Figure 3.3 Pressure distributions-------------------------------------------------------------------- 39

Figure 4.1 Water supply coverage of Addis Ababa city --------------------------------------- 52

Figure 5.1 Modeling of the sub-system --------------------------------------------------------- 58

Figure 5.2 Illustration of predicted pressure and flows by the EPANET graphical interface -- 63

Figure 5.3 Geographical distribution of pressure in sub-system ---------------------------- 64

Figure 5.4 Numerical distribution of pressure in sub-system ------------------------------- 65

Figure 5.5 Geographical distribution of flow in sub-system ---------------------------------- 66

Figure 5.6 Numerical distribution of flow in sub-system ------------------------------------- 67

Figure 5.7 Geographical distribution of demand in sub-system ------------------------------ 68

7 
 
List of Table

Title page

Table 2.1 Network leakage rates around the globe ----------------------------------------------- 20

Table 2.2 IWA standard international terminologies-------------------------------------------- 21

Table 2.3 Roughness coefficients for new pipe------------------------------------------- --------- 30

Table 3.1Annual mater loss from the year 2005 to 2009----------------------------------------- 34

Table 3.2 Water loss in Sub-system --------------------------------------------------------------- 37

Table 3.3 Daily Average Inflow Calculations for Pilot Area------------------------------------ 40

Table 3.4 Summary of Water Balance Method Results----------------------------------------- 41

Table 3.5 Comparison of water losses------------------------------------------------------------- 42

Table 4.1 Domestic Water Supply Coverage ----------------------------------------------------- 48

Table 4.2 Water consumption of Addis Ababa city --------------------------------------------- 49

Table 4.3 African capital cities of water consumption ------------------------------------------- 50

Table 4.4 Level of Connection --------------------------------------------------------------------- 53

Table 5.1 Pipe head loss formulas for full flow -------------------------------------------------- 56

8 
 
List of Appendix

Title page

Appendix A: Input parameter----------------------------------------------------------------------- 74

Appendix B: EPANET Input Parameters for Current System--------------------------------- 75

Appendix C: EPANET Report for the First Scenarios ----------------------------------------- 87

Appendix D: EPANET Report for the Second Scenarios -------------------------------------- 96

Appendix E: EPANET Report for the Third Scenarios ----------------------------------------- 101

9 
 
List of Abbreviations

AAWSA Addis Ababa Water and Sewerage Authority

CSA Central Statistics Agency of Ethiopia

DMA Distric Metering Area

DCI Ducktail Cast Iron

EPA Environmental Protection Authority

HGL High Gradient Level

IWA International Water Associations

NRW Non Revenue Water

NFPA National Fire Protection Association

UFW Unaccounted for Water

USEPA United State Environmental Protection Agency

WHO World Health Organization

10 
 
 1. Introduction

1.1 Background

According to the Global Water Supply and Sanitation assessment Report, 2000 the percentage of people
served with some form of improved water rose from 79% (4.1billion) in 1990 to 82% (4.9billion) in
2000. At the beginning of 2000, one sixth (1.1 billion people) of the world population was without
access to improved water supply. The majority of these people live in Asia and Africa, where two out of
five African’s lack improved water supply. The 2000 (G/C) coverage of water supply for the urban
population of Africa and Ethiopia was 85% and 77% respectively. According to the millennium goal
targets, the African urban areas will be accessed for improved water with 15 years from the year 2000.
On the other hand, in Africa largest cities, only 43% inhabitants have house connection water supply
services. The main problem that developing countries are faced to provide access to safe water for their
citizen’s is shortage of resource. Moreover, the capacity of the citizen’s to pay for water that fully
recovers the cost is very limited. For this reason many developing cities are faced great difficulty to
expand the service and rehabilitation of the exiting aged pipes. Generally The United Nation (UN-
HABITAT, 2002) report, tariffs in developing countries is set well below the level needed to cover even
operation and maintenance costs. Research has shown that low tariffs are set largely for political, rather
than practical, purposes

Limited institution capacity is also one of the bottlenecks that hinder cities of developing countries for
managing their infrastructure asset in general and water supply in particular. Besides to low coverage,
water losses (physical loss) in urban water supply is accounted to more than 50% of the supplies that
mainly arise from

• Leakage of pipes, joints and valves

• Over flowing service reservoir and
• Waste of water through illegal connection and non metered house connections

11 
 
Although leakage is one of the major causes for loss of water in networks distribution system, the loss of
water through illegal connections and non-functioning meters is also contributing a lot; that needs a
proper management and monitoring system.

While developed cities have started using on-line continues operation and monitoring service, the
developing cities have grate difficult even to collect information on their previously performed operation
and maintenance activities that could help them developing a strategy for the future. Many developed
countries use water audit procedures to determine the efficiency of the system and to identify the
location and magnitude of water losses.

There is also a need for some type of database or information system such as GIS to enable analysis of
flows in the networks and provide early warning or indication of leakage. At present, although some
cities in developing countries are introduced GIS based information system, many countries are still
applying conventional methods for collecting, storing, processing and retrieval of information system,
but the good news is that GIS have the ability to use previously collected and stored digital data makes
introducing GIS easy and not costly. Modeling urban networks and intermittent water supply systems
is a challenging task because these systems are not fully pressurized pipeline networks but networks
with very low pressures, with restricted water supply hours per day, and with thousands of roof tank
connections. The alternate emptying and refilling of water pipe lines makes it problematic to apply
standard EPANET based hydraulic models because of low pressures and pipes without water.

EPANET source code was adjusted to allow for modeling pressure dependent demands, for dealing with
low pressure and “dry pipe” situations. A configurable tool was developed for incorporating roof tanks
into the water supply analysis and for better formulation and schematization of the system hydraulics.
Cases studies, water distribution model of Goterra site, Addis Ababa are used to illustrate the practical
use of this approach.

Hydraulic analysis of flows and pressures in a distribution system has been a standard form of
engineering analysis since its development by Dr. Hardy Cross in 1936. Water distribution system
computer models have been in use since the middle 1960s and have evolved into sophisticated, user-
friendly tools that are capable of simulating large distribution systems (Walski, Chase, and Savic, 2001).

12 
 
In more recent years, the ability to model water utility and water age has been added to hydraulic models
(Clark and Grayman, 1998). There are many commercial models that offer a wide range of capabilities
in distribution system modeling EPANET is an open-structured, public domain hydraulic and water
quality model developed by USEPA and is used worldwide (Rossman, 2000).

In order to facilitate the examination of required pipe sizes, the standard EPANET model was modified
for use in the study project.

13 
 
 1.2 Research Problem

Leakage is often a large source of unaccounted for water and is a result of either lack of maintenance or
failure to renew ageing systems. Leakage may also be caused from poor management of presser zones,
which result in pipe or pipe joint failure. Although some leakage may go unnoticed for a long time,
detection of visible leakage also requires good reporting which includes some level of public
participation.

Water shortage and frequent service interruption is not only as a consequence of the shortfall between
demand and supply but also as result of unidentified leakage and complicated network systems.
Depending on the context of the existing system both or one of the factors may be found as a root cause
for the shortfall between demand and supply. According to estimates of the United Nations (UN-
HABITAT, 2002), Addis Ababa, which is projected to be the fourth largest city in Africa by 2015, has a
current water supply shortfall of 25%. On top of the 25% backlog, as a cause of limited resources that as
a result lead to poor maintenance and management of the water supply lines, leakage is observed as one
of the main problems of the authority.

14 
 
 1.3 Research Objective

The main objective of the research is to evaluate the supply coverage and explore the water loss in city
water supply distribution and suggest a method to better identify and reduce the loss.
Taking the main objective as mentioned above, the following specific objectives are expected to be
achieved:
¾ To identify component of non revenue water (NRW) in water supply
¾ To introduce District Meter Area (DMA) in NRW reduction and control
¾ To quantify the benefit of water loss reduction with that of demand satisfaction and economical
benefit.
¾ To test and evaluate loss reduction strategies on a sub-system
¾ Updating existing network and propose new pipe size
¾ To evaluate the domestic water supply coverage and distribution
¾ To evaluate the total loss of water at the city level
¾ Redesign the sub-system with modeling

15 
 
 1.4 Description of the Study Area

Addis Ababa has been a center of economic, social and political affairs/activities of the country for over
100 years. Addis Ababa at the moment covers 540 square kilometer land area as obtained from city map.
The city lies between 2000 and 3000 meters above sea level, enjoying mild and warm temperature
climate. Since it is established, the population is increased at alarming rate. According to the Central
Statistical Authority of Ethiopia (CSA) 2006 and 2010 population census, this gives a population of
2.793 million and 2.917 million in 2006 and 2010 respectively and average annual growth rate of 2.5%
the city is administratively divided into ten sub-cities and 99 woredas. Fig 1.1 depicts the general
location for the study areas. Provision of water supply to the people of Addis Ababa is the responsibility
of Addis Ababa Water and Sewerage Authority (AAWSA). AAWSA is a public authority and organized
into eight branch offices, namely Arada, Addis Ketema, Nifas Silik, Mekenisa, Gulele, Megenagna,
Gured Shola and Akaki which provide services to all parts of the city.

Water Supply and Distribution

The city has started getting water supply in 1901. During the years between 1942 and 2010 many water
supply projects have been implemented that the construction and upgrading of Legedadi dam and
treatment plant, improvement of the distribution, ground water and spring (wells) development of
among them (AAWSA, 2004).

Addis Ababa

 
To Debreziet The study area

Figure 1.1 study area

16 
 
Currently, around 220,003 m3/day of water produced from different sources that among the other are
Gefersa and Legedadi treatment plants that design capacity of 30,000 and 150,000 m3/day respectively.
The Gefersa consisting of 400mm steel pipe and the Legedadi line partly comparison of 1400mm
(6.8Km) and other a combination of two parallel lines of diameter 900mm and 1200mm (11.5Km) are
the main transmission lines that convey water from the treatment plant to the respective reservoirs.

The existing water supply system has 27 pumping situation and 22 balance (storage) reservoirs ranging
in capacity from 100 to 20,000m3 with a total approximate storage capacity of 87,000m3. At present 324
Km2 out of 540Km2 total area of the city (60%) are served with water.

Water demand and Consumption

One of the difficulties faced by the water authority is determining the accurate water demand of the city
as the consumption during the past years that should have been used as a base is far below the actual
demand due to the shortage of water. Consumption of water for the city is therefore estimated based on
the amount supplied rather than the actual demand. For these reason estimate of the future demand by
the water authority is found to be uncertain. The current situation as summarized by the water authority
is as shown below (AAWSA, 2006)

People having in-house services that are estimated about 4% of the total population use water on average
between 80 and 100 liters per capital per day, while the remaining populations with access to safe
drinking water (94%) are served by yard connection and use 15 and 30 liters per capital per day.

Non domestic uses excluding industrial and industries water use are about 25 liters per capital per day
and 7 liters per capital per day respectively. From the water used by industries about 40% is provided by
the water authority while the remaining amount is produced by the industries themselves from deep
wells.

The Addis Ababa Water and sewerage Authority (AAWSA) is a public institution in the city in the
water sector that is responsible for the supply of potable water and collection, treatment and disposal of
water and sludge for the city. The authority is supervised by a board and directly responsible to the city
manager. According to the overall structure development plan of the city, 100% of water supply is

17 
 
planned to be ensured by the coming year and water consumption to reach the rate of 140 liters per
capital per day during the coming year. The main source of the city is being extracted predominant from
three surface water reservoirs (dam) called Legedadi, Gefersa and Dire supported with different wells
and springs.

18 
 
2 Literature Review

2.1 Introduction

Problems in providing satisfactory water supply to the rapidly growing population especially that of the
developing countries is increasing from time to time. Water supply system in urban areas are often
unable to meet existing demands and are not available to everyone rather some consumers take
disproportionate amounts of water and the poor is the first victim develop and expand water supply
projects and one of the difficulties among the other is managing and reducing losses of water at all levels
of a distribution system. As a result of the overall shortage of water many cities are faced a problem in
distributing the available water impartially among the residents. Besides the poor management of
existing infrastructure asset increases the level of water losses in water supply. As this research deals
with overall coverage of water supply, water loss and modeling of distribution networks’ well-
maintained water distribution system is a major asset for any city or community.
Continuous monitoring and maintenance of the distribution network is the key step in meeting pressure
and flow requirements, and water quality standards. A recent drinking water infrastructure needs survey
(USEPA 2001) estimates an investment of 151 billion dollars over a period of 20 years to provide safe
drinking water for US customers. Reducing water losses in pipe networks can minimize the maintenance
costs and further improve the performance of pipe networks.
Leakage can be defined as unintentional or accidental loss of water from the pipe distribution network
(Smith et al, 2000). Leaking pipes are a major concern for water utilities around the globe (Table 1.1) as
they constitute a major portion of water losses. One of the primary reasons for leakage in pipes is aged
and deteriorated networks. The condition of existing old networks can only worsen and further increase
water losses. In the globe alone, 50% of supplied water is lost as leakage in some of the older networks
(Jowitt and Xu, 1990). Leakage rates are also related to length of pipes and number of connections.
Improper connections can sometimes result in continuous escape of water from the distribution pipes.

19 
 
 Table 2.1 Network leakage rates around the globe.

country Leakage Rate %

Netherland 5
Japan 11
USA 12
France 15
Korea 16
UK 28
India 30

(Source:www3.akwien.at/pdf/uv/university_of_greenwich.pdf).
2.2 Comparing water losses
The amount of water loss differs from country to country, city to city and even from network to another
network in the same city. Different countries uses different indicators to evaluate their states in
comparison with others and to compare the distribution of water loss from one location to other location
of a distribution system in order to take action based on the level of loss. As stated above competition
using unaccounted for water (UFW) expressed as percentage has limitation when used for comparison as
it highly depends with the volume of water produced.
The traditional performance indicators of water losses are frequently expressed as a percentage of input
volume. However, this indicator fails to take account of any of main local influences. Consequently it
cannot be an appropriate performance indicator (PI) for comparison (WHO, 2001).
Deplaned upon the consumption per service connection, the same volume of real losses/service
connection/day, in percentage terms, is anything from 5% to 30%. Thus developing countries with
relatively low consumption, can appear to have high losses when expressed in percentage terms,
percentage loses for urban areas in developed countries with high consumption can be equally
misleading (Farley and Trow, 2003).
To avoid for the wide diversity of format and definitions related to water loss, many practitioner have
identified an urgent need for a common international terminology that among them task forces from the

20 
 
international water association (IWA) recently produced a standard approach for water balance
calculation with a definition of all terms involved as indicated in table 1.2 below.

Table 2.2 IWA standard international terminologies

Billed metered
Billed Authorized Consumption
consumption Billed Unmetered REVENUE
Authorized Consumption WATER
Consumption Unbilled
Unbilled Authorized Consumption
Consumption Unbilled Unmetered
Consumption
Unauthorized
System Input Apparent Loss Consumption NON-
Metering REVENUE
Inaccuracies WATER
Water Loss Leakage From water
mains
Leakage from
Real Loss storage tank
Leakage from
service (up to
revenue meter)
(Source, Farley and Stuart)
According to IWA the above terminologies are defined as below:
¾ System input volume is the annual volume input to the part of the water supply distribution
system
¾ Authorized consumption is the annual volume of metered and/or non-metered water take by
registered customers, the water supplier and other who are implicitly or explicitly authorized to
do so. It includes water exported, and leak and overflows after the point of customer metering.
¾ Non-Revenue Water (NRW) is the difference between system input volumes and billed
authorized consumption.
¾ Water losses are the difference between system input volume and authorized consumption, and
consist of apparent losses and real losses.

21 
 
 ¾ Apparent losses consist of unauthorized consumption and all types of metering inaccuracies.
¾ Real losses are the annual volumes lost through all types of leaks, bursts and overflows on mains,
service reservoir and service connections, up to the point of customer metering.
2.3 Cause of water losses
Leakage is usually the major component of water loss in developing countries, but this is not always the
case in developing or partially developed countries, where illegal connections, meter error, or an
accenting error are often more significant (Farly and Trow, 2003) the other component of total water
loss are non-physical losses, e.g. Meter under registration, illegal connections and illegal and unknown
use (WHO, 2001)
2.4 Pressure and Leakage
In many water network systems, even though the total demand and the total loss of water can be known
rather easily, information about the possible influence of local pressure upon demand is sadly lacking
that as a result creates difficultly to assess and compare the demand and loss of water in its spatial
distribution. Pressure distribution system on the one hand contributes to the shortage of water that as a
result causes for unequal distribution of water among residents. To alleviate such problems, some water
authorities develop a zoning scheme whereby the complete water distribution network is broken down in
to manageable segments that can be easily metered and monitored and analyzed.
The leakage from water distribution system has been shown to be directly proportional to the square root
of the distribution system pressure as indicated by the relationship below (Wallingford HR, 2003).

Leak detection techniques that are in use in the water industry involve two major steps.
i. Estimation of leakage rates
ii. Location of leak

2.5 Pressure Management Through Distribution System

Pressure management can be defined as the practice to manage system pressures to an optimum level of
service ensuring sufficient and efficient supply to legal uses and consumers, while eliminating or
reducing pressure transients and variations, faulty level controls and reducing unnecessary pressures, all

22 
 
of which cause the distribution system to leak and break unnecessarily. There are many different tools
that can be used when implementing pressure management, including pump controls, altitude controls
and sustaining valves [Lambert et al., 2006]. It was reported that many water utilities introduced
pressure management to their water distribution systems. In the most cases, large reductions in a new
break frequency can be achieved over a wide range of pressures. In Australia, Canada, German and
Italy, ongoing monitoring shows that the reductions in break frequency have been sustained for over five
years to date by implementing pressure management procedure [Lamber et al., 2006]. On the other hand,
the rapid reduction in new break frequency following pressure management is immediately evident for
water loss management. Some of the pressure management benefits reported by many different utilities
include:
¾ Reduction in annual repair costs
¾ Reduction of the repair backlog, shorter run times for bursts
¾ Fewer emergency repairs, more planned work
¾ Reduced inconvenience to customers
Calculations of the economic benefit of pressure management have been based on the predicted
reduction in flow rates of existing leaks and the value of the water thus saved. If management of excess
pressure can also regularly achieve reduction in numbers of breaks of between 28% and 80% per year
[Lamber et al., 2006], the annual savings in repair costs will usually be far greater than the value of the
water saved.
Replacement of mains and services, the most expensive aspect of water distribution system
management, is normally initiated by break frequencies that are considered to be excessive. Most water
utilities consider break frequency to be a factor outside their control, and something that can only be
remedied by expensive replacement of mains and services. However, if pressure management can
reduce break frequencies and extend the working life of parts of the distribution infrastructure by even a
few years, the economic benefits would generally be even greater than the short term reduction in repair
costs.

23 
 
 2.6 Leakage Monitoring With District Meter Area (DMA)

A flow measuring system in a water distribution system should include not only measurement of total
flows from source or treatment plants, but also zone and district flows. This allows the engineer to
understand and operate the distribution system in smaller areas, and allows more precise demand
prediction, leakage management and control to take place. The measurement system must therefore be
hierarchical at a number of levels, beginning at production measurement, via zone and district
measurement and ending at the customer’s meter.
The technique of leakage monitoring is considered to be the major contributor to cost-effective and
efficient leakage management. It is a methodology which can be applied to all distribution networks.
Even in systems with supply deficiencies leakage monitoring zones can be introduced gradually. One
zone at a time is created and leaks detected and repaired, before moving on to create the next zone. This
systematic approach gradually improves the hydraulic characteristics of the network and improves
supply.
Leakage monitoring requires the installation of flow meters at strategic points throughout the
distribution system, each meter recording flows into a discrete district which has a defined and
permanent boundary. Such a district is called a district meter area and the concept of design and
operation of DMA has been detailed in elsewhere Farley and Trow, 2003.
The design of a leakage monitoring system has two aims:
1. To divide the distribution network into a number of zones or DMAs, each with a defined and
permanent boundary, so that night flows into each district can be regularly monitored, enabling
the presence of unreported bursts and leakage to be identified and located.
2. To manage pressure in each district or group of districts so that the network is operated at the
optimum level of pressure.
It therefore follows that a leakage monitoring system will comprise a number of districts where flow is
measured by permanently installed flow meters. In some cases the flow meter installation will
incorporate a pressure reducing valve.

24 
 
 2.7 Water Audits

Unaccounted-for water accounts for authorized unmetered use and under-registering metered use in
addition to water lost as leakage (Smith et al., 2000). An overall survey of leaks is done as a part of
water audit since, leakage is considered as a major component of unaccounted-for water.
A water audit involves comprehensive accounting of the total water pumped at a service station and
water utilized at the consumer end. The water supplied at a utility is measured while being pumped into
the network, and water consumed is obtained from billing records. Water lost as leakage is estimated
from simple mass balance principle which can be stated as the difference between the amount of water
produced at the utility and amount of water purchased by consumers.
Flow measurements taken in the distribution network give more precise estimates of leakage rates. A
portion of the network is isolated using valves and measurements of flows entering the isolated portion
of the network are taken for at least a period of 24 hours. Mass conservation principle is applied to that
part of the network to estimate the average amount of leakage rate.
However, such methods give only an approximate estimate of leakage rates.
2.8 Leak Location

The second step in leakage control involves location of leaks across the distribution network. Acoustic
equipment combined with correlation methods are generally used to locate leaks. Acoustic methods are
based on changes in sound of the escaping water (Smith et al., 2000). Acoustic sound transducers are
placed in contact with ground surface to listen to any abnormalities in the underlying pipes. In acoustic
equipment accompanied by noise correlates, the acoustic signals from transducers are transmitted to a
receiving unit, where the signals are processed automatically. Other leak detection methods employed
are infrared thermograph, tracer gas methods, and mechanical drilling of soil.

2.9 System Evaluation and Design

The designing and evaluating of community water supply distribution systems has to consider the
amount of water for the commercial interests, governmental property, educational facilities, and all
classifications of residential property as presented above in a general relationship to average and

25 
 
maximum daily consumption demand. At any time of the day, the day of the week, or the week of a
given year, a structure fire or other fire emergency such as transportation vehicle fires or, in some cases,
natural cover fires may erupt. Water is the primary agent of choice to confine, control, and extinguish
structural fires. Some new development in fire extinguishing agents may be used for rapid knockdown
of a fire, but a well-developed structure fire still requires established needed fire flows from fire
hydrants to control and extinguish developing fires. Each community needs to evaluate and design or
modify the design of the community water system to meet present-day needs to address future demands
based on growth of the built area and population increases, along with the need to meet EPA criteria for
water quality,. This will be an ever-increasing demand and challenge for every community water
distribution system. Some specific guidelines on consumer consumption requirements and needed fire
flows are established by the ISO, which represents in excess of 130 property and casualty underwriters
in the United States in developing advisory insurance rates. The following topics address some
fundamental information on understanding 1) water system demands, 2) determining design flow, and
the very important topic of 3) water storage on a community water system. This should provide
community leaders, municipal officials, fire department officials, water supply superintendents, and
consulting engineers on water systems, a common knowledge base so that they all can sit at the same
table and have a meaningful dialog about the present and future state of a specific water system and even
how it may relate to adjacent water supplies in nearby community water systems.
2.9.1 Water system demands

Water demands need to be assessed on the basis of the following considerations:

a. The year and date the water supply system was commissioned or started supplying water
through the distribution system. Hopefully, there is a water supply system map that will
detail where pipes were laid, the size of the pipes, the pipe material, the location of the
valves, the location, size and type of fire hydrants along with the lateral size and valve
arrangements.
b. These water maps need to show all extension and changes to the water system covering
the same topics as above.
A clear and accurate knowledge of the water system in place is needed before discussing changes to be

26 
 
made to existing systems. If this is to be a new community water system, all of these details should be
laid out on a proposed street map for evaluation. If an Engineering Firm uses different criteria, it should
conform to the most current publications of the AWWA, the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA), the ISO, the Civil Engineering Handbook, and any special State or county regulations.
There should be no oversight in considering both short-term and long-term goals. The primary objective
is to make sure that the community is being serviced adequately. If there are deficiencies in meeting
current or future goals because of economic constraints, this needs to be identified for the areas of the
community where there may be inadequate flows to meet consumer consumption during peak water
demand, so that constraints such as watering lawns and washing cars, can be placed on water usage. If
available fire flows do not meet needed fire flows in specific districts of the community, the fire
department needs to know these conditions on virtually a real-time basis. The local fire department may
need to plan on relaying water from larger supply mains to fire sites using large- diameter hose or the
existing water supply may need to be augmented by an alternative water supply using mobile takers
from adjacent fire departments under automatic-aid and mutual-aid arrangements. Another alternative is
to provide retention ponds in the community to capture runoff. Retention ponds may be outfitted with
dry hydrants as a supplementary water supply for fire protection.

2.9.2 Planning water demand changes

Special planning is needed when new water demands will be placed on a specific community water
system. This point cannot be overstressed. The amount of construction performed and the amount of
construction that realistically can be accomplished to provide adequate service are dependent on when
the construction will be needed. Ultimately, final development should be consistent with the utility’s
ability to provide consumer consumption and fire protection at the same time. Fire protection must not
lag behind supplying domestic taps, as often occurs in new residential areas of communities. The
planning and installation phase should assure that water supply for fire protection is never interrupted.
There have been too many large-loss structure fires because the water system was shut down in the
vicinity of the fire site.

27 
 
The ideal way to develop a water distribution system would be to construct a distribution network of
pipe that would adequately serve the short-range and long-range development of the service area.
Individual construction projects, developments, subdivisions, and industrial complexes then could be
developed without checking for adjustments to ensure that the original design plans remain adequate for
all projected consumer consumption and fire protection demand. However, in reality, the best of plans
needs to be adaptable to change measures where growth, moves, and demand may decline in older
portions of a community. Therefore, the design for the source, through the treatment plant to the
distribution system, must provide for growth and change in the delivery demand points. The best water
system is the one that is designed with a vision for the future. Existing water systems have to evaluated
and redesigned with a future perspective that includes a rehabilitation and/or replacement of existing
system components due to the age factor. The maintenance of old infrastructures may be more expensive
than the replacement with a better designed system that will meet both the future needs of water quality
and distribution system demand.

The bottom line is that a water supply system cannot remain constant. It is the responsibility of elected
officials, water supply superintendents and their staff, hydrologist, geologists, professional civil
engineers, rural and urban planners as appropriate, fire officials and fire protection engineers, and
representatives from the insurance industry to sit at the table and plan water systems for the future with
due consideration to all of the regulations and requirements that are being placed on water systems at
this time and in the future, especially as programmed by the EPA. The cost to do this is not going to be
any small thing, so the financial planning is just as important as the physical planning.
It is now recommended that every 3 to 5 years, as a minimum, existing water distribution systems be
evaluated thoroughly for requirements that would be placed on it by development and reconstruction for
a 20-year period into the future. A plan then should be developed for meeting those needs. In this way,
individual improvements and projects can be evaluated and made to conform, generally, to long-term
development and contingency plans for such events as serious system interruptions caused by natural
disasters and terrorism attacks without undue additional expense to either the developer or the utility.

A water distribution system is a pipe network which delivers water from single or multiple supply
sources to consumers. Typical water supply sources include reservoirs, storage tanks, and external water

28 
 
supply at junction nodes such as groundwater wells. Consumers include both municipal and industrial
users. The pipe network consists of pipes, nodes, pumps, control valves, storage tanks, and reservoirs.
EPANET views the water distribution system as a network containing nodes and links, where the nodes
are connected by links. Figure 2.1 illustrates a node-link representation of a simple water distribution
network.

Figure 2.1 Node-link representation of a water distribution network

How the EPANET program models the hydraulic behavior of each of these components is described in
the following sections. All flow rates in this discussion will be assumed as liters per second (L/s).
Pipes
Every pipe is connected to two nodes at its ends. In a pipe network system, pipes are the channels used
to convey water from one location to another. The physical characteristics of a pipe include the length,
inside diameter, roughness coefficient, and minor loss coefficient. The pipe roughness coefficient is
associated with the pipe material and age. The minor loss coefficient is due to the fittings along the pipe.
When water is conveyed through the pipe, hydraulic energy is lost due to the friction between the
moving water and the stationary pipe surface. This friction loss is a major energy loss in pipe flow and is
a function of flow rate, pipe length, diameter, and roughness coefficient.
The head lost to friction associated with flow through a pipe can be expressed in a general fashion as:
hL = aqb ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2.1
Where
hL = head loss, m

29 
 
 q = flow, L/s
a = a resistance coefficient
b = a flow exponent
EPANET can use any one of three popular forms of the head loss formula shown in Equation 2.1: the
Hazen-Williams formula, the Darcy-Weisbach formula, or the Chezy-Manning formula. MIKE NET
allows the user to choose the formulation to use.
The Hazen-Williams formula is probably the most popular head loss equation for water distribution
systems, the Darcy-Weisbach formula is more applicable to laminar flow and to fluids other than water,
and the Chezy-Manning formula is more commonly used for open channel flow. Table 5.1 lists
resistance coefficients and flow exponents for each formula. Note that each formula uses a different pipe
roughness coefficient, which must be determined empirically. Table 2.3 lists general ranges of these
coefficients for different types of new pipe materials. Be aware that a pipe's roughness coefficient can
change considerably with age.
While the Darcy-Weisbach relationship for closed-conduit flows is generally recognized as a more
accurate mathematical formulation over a wider range of flow than the Hazen-Williams formulation, the
field data on E values (required for the Darcy-Weisbach formulation) are not as readily available as are
the C values for the pipe wall roughness coefficient (used in the Hazen-Williams formulation).

Table 2.3 Roughness coefficients for new pipe

30 
 
Valves
Aside from the valves in pipes that are either fully opened or closed (such as check valves), EPANET
can also represent valves that control either the pressure or flow at specific points in a network. Such
valves are considered as links of negligible length with specified upstream and downstream junction
nodes. The types of valves that can be modeled are described below.
Pressure reducing valves (PRV) limit the pressure on their downstream end to not exceed a pre-set value
when the upstream pressure is above the setting. If the upstream pressure is below the setting, then flow
through the valve is unrestricted. Should the pressure on the downstream end exceed that on the
upstream end, the valve closes to prevent reversal of flow.
Pressure sustaining valves (PSV) try to maintain a minimum pressure on their upstream end when the
downstream pressure is below that value. If the downstream pressure is above the setting, then flow
through the valve is unrestricted. Should the downstream pressure exceed the upstream pressure then the
valve closes to prevent reverse flow.
Pressure breaker valves (PBV) force a specified pressure loss to occur across the valve. Flow can be in
either direction through the valve.
Flow control valves (FCV) limit the flow through a valve to a specified amount. The program produces
a warning message if this flow cannot be maintained without having to add additional head at the valve.
Throttle control valves (TCV) simulate a partially closed valve by adjusting the minor head loss
coefficient of the valve. A relationship between the degree to which the valve is closed and the resulting
head loss coefficient is usually available from the valve manufacturer.
Node
Nodes are the locations where pipes connect. Two types of nodes exist in a pipe network system, (1)
fixed nodes and (2) junction nodes. Fixed nodes are nodes whose HGL are defined. For example,
reservoirs and storage tanks are considered fixed nodes, because their HGL are initially defined.
Junction nodes are nodes whose HGL are not yet determined and must be computed in the pipe network
analysis. Degree of freedom, elevation, and water demand are the three important input parameters for a
node (see Figure 2.1). A node's degree of freedom is the number of pipes that connect to that node. In
EPANET, a junction node may be connected to more than one pipe, but a fixed node (reservoir) must be

31 
 
connected to exactly one pipe. Therefore, a fixed node's degree of freedom is always one, and a junction
node's degree of freedom may be greater than one. The elevation of a node can sometimes be obtained
from system maps or drawings. More often, it is approximated using topographic maps. Water demand
at a junction node is the summation of all water drawn from or added to the system at that node.
All nodes should have their elevation specified above sea level (i.e., greater than zero) so that the
contribution to hydraulic head due to elevation can be computed. Any water consumption or supply rates
at nodes that are not storage nodes must be known for the duration of time the network is being
analyzed. Storage nodes (i.e., tanks and reservoirs) are special types of nodes where a free water surface
exists and the hydraulic head is simply the elevation of water above sea level.

32 
 
3 Water loss Analysis
3.1 Introduction
The reduction and control of water loss is becoming even more vital in this age of increasing demand
and changing weather patterns that bring droughts to a considerable number of locations in the world.
Many water utilities have been developing new strategies to reduce losses to an economic and
acceptable level in order to preserve valuable water resources. In Addis Ababa, water is supplied by a
municipal, Addis Ababa water and sewerage authority, and this is usually the best assurance of an
uninterrupted supply of economical and safe water to our people in cities.
The components of water demand are Domestic like residential, Non Domestic like commercial,
industrial, institutional and Fountains like public water uses, and unaccounted system losses and
leakages. While all components generate revenue to the utility, the unaccounted system loss and
leakages are not associated with total cost revenues, and are a source of wasted production costs. With
today’s high water production costs and rates, the expense of detecting and mitigating the unaccounted
for water and leakages is an attractive option for minimizing operating expenditures. The water utility
benefits by:
(a) Saving the production costs of the water,
(b) Increasing revenues through sales of water saved,
(c) Deferring the system expansion and capital expenditures through the capture of lost water,
(d) Reducing increases in utility rates, and thus maintaining better consumer relations.
The annual volume of water loss is an important indicator of water distribution system efficiency, both
individual years and as a trend over a period of years. High and increasing water losses are an indicator
of ineffective planning and construction, and of low operational and maintenance activities. In Ethiopia
cities, the average yearly water loss is as high as 37% of the water volume produced based on Addis
Ababa water and sewerage Authority (AAWSA, 1997).
This study was aimed to propose an effective water loss management and water supply coverage in
Addis Ababa city. Thus, water loss approach was advised for present study to manage water loss
problem in Addis Ababa. In the study, in addition to technical loss, some engineering proposals for the
effective control of nontechnical loss and general water economy were suggested.

33 
 
The water loss analysis is done and compared both at city level and sub-system level. Although the data
has been collected for each customer meter or contract of the entire city, as water production was only
available at the city level, the water loss analysis has been done focusing at the city and the selected sub-
systems level that data is found. Two main line systems that have their own isolated pipes have been
selected to analysis and compare the spatial distribution of the water loss in the sub-system.
3.2 City level water loss analysis
The total annual water produced and distributed to the distribution system and the water billed that was
aggregated from the individual customer meter readings were used to quantify the total water loss for the
city.
Table 3.1Annual Water loss from the year 2005 to 2009

% of
year Total production Total Billed data total loss
losses

2005 80,073,546 45,520,623 34,552,923 43.15

2006 82,820,272 51,338,591 31,481,681 38.01
2007 86,278,592 53,272,445 33,006,147 38.26
2008 88,405,625 53,676,740 34,728,885 39.28
2009 92,201,273 58,140,949 34,060,324 36.94
The total annual water loss of the city is decreased from year to year at the end of the year 2009 the
annual water produced and distributed to the system within specified year was 92,201,273 cubic meters
and annual water loss as derived using the above expression was 34,060,324 cubic meters which account
to 36.94% of the total production.

Water loss  Distribution
45
percent of loss

40
35
30
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year

Figure 3.1 Annual water loss of the city

34 
 
 3.2.1 Water loss as per number of connection
Water loss expressed as a percentage could be an appropriate means to show the extent of the loss within
a given environment, but it is not a good indicator for comparing the loss from one area to another.
According to some literature comparison of water loss between different areas is recommended to be
done using the water loss per service connection per day. Taking the total number of connection in the
city as 297,500 AAWSA, the water loss per connection for the similar duration was derived as,
Water loss=313.67 liter/connection/day.

3.3 Water loss analysis at sub-systems

The methods used in Non-Revenue water reduction control include the application of District Metering
for estimation of water loss. Application DMA at the city level is not practice yet but in most developed
and developing city used a lot. This part of a study review a method how the South Africa Water Supply
practiced active Leakage control methods (using DMA) in pilot area .
The investigation carried out in the pilot areas made in different steps as
Step 1: Site identification of the network and its appurtenances
Step 2: Preliminary general zone monitoring
This was made to make sure that the pilot area could be isolated from the remaining network and further
check the possibility of subdividing the subzones pilot area units. Thus all boundary valves were closed
and their tightness checked. A flow meter was installed at supply point of each subzone for checking the
flows after valve closure.
Step 3: Leak Quantifying
In this step flows measured by isolating a certain portion, so that any point in the portion or subzone
could only be supplied from one supply lines. The result of this operation could indicate the volume of
water lost through the leaks, provided that one knows the normal night consumption and that of big
consumer, which should be deducted from the measured flows.
Step 4: Leak Detection and Repair
Here, the leak quantified in step two was detected for its location the leak points within the investigated
portion were precisely identified and located. Then the leaks were repaired.

35 
 
 Step 5: Night Flow Monitoring after leak repairs
In order to, again quantify the amount of UFW; night flow monitoring is performed after the identified
leaks have been repaired.
This study is focus on calculation of water losses in the pipe network of the area and the amount water
saved by Water Balance Method using International Water Association (IWA).
After preparing the schedule immediately select the pilot area. the selected pilot area are around
Gottera, this place is found in Kirkos sub-city and under Addis Ababa water and sewerage Authority
Nifas silik branch, discuss with the staff member and then arrange different material and man power,
finally selected the area from the branch based on the following criteria.
¾ Hydraulically easily desecrate area
¾ 24hr water availability
¾ Customer not more than 1000, and
¾ More leakage complain
During bulk meter installation firstly checking that if there is any other outlet pipes from the pilot area,
and close the inlet valves and investigate each and every neighbors around the boundary which they get
water or not. During investigation we get 20 private connections are broken around Gottera then repair
the connections and install the bulk meter.

Meskel Flower 

Gotera 

Figure 3.2 Sub-system water distributions Network

36 
 
 From the above network diagram we have two inlets or sources for our pilot area:
¾ The first one is from wereda 06 which has a diameter of 90mm.
¾ The second one branch outs from 200mm main line which has a diameter of 65mm.
After knowing the inlet & the outlet water consumption install two bulk meters a diameter of 90mm
with HDPE man holes. Because it is important to checking the functionality of the bulk meter monitored
per a week.
The total water loss of each sub-system has been evaluated using a similar expression to that of the city
level analysis.
The distributed water to the sub-system and that of consumed from is shown in the table 3.2 below and
the corresponding total water loss analysis shown in the table.

Table 3.2 Water loss in Sub-system

Total flow Water loss

It no Bulk meter Bulk meter Total water to the from the Water loss
one 3" two 2 1/2" consumption system system in %
1st 13788 9381
9690 14642 4952 33.82 %
2nd
18964 18847
21518 35396 13878 39.21 %
3rd
48726 24481
11430 19123 7693 40.23 %
4th
58085 34245
54267 86054 31787 36.94 %
5th 101264 77120

Two secondary lines that have data on production and consumption of water have been selected for
analyzing water loss at the sub-system. The total amount of water loss at the sub-system is within three
month is 58,310 cubic meter the total water produced and distributed to the sub-system within specified
month has been 155,215 cubic meters and which averagely account to 37.54% of the total production
has loss from the sub-system.

37 
 
 3.3.1 Water loss as per number of connection
Water loss expressed as a percentage could be an appropriate means to show the extent of the loss within
a given environment, but it is not a good indicator for comparing the losses from one area to another.
According to some literature comparison of water loss between different areas is recommended to be
done using the water loss per service connection per day. Taking the total number of connection in the
sub-system as 682 the water loss per connection for the similar duration was derived as,
Water loss=949.98 liter/connection/day.

3.4 Pressure and leakage relationships

If we know the relationship between pressure and leakage they are necessary to conduct the field test
data. When we will see the two major sources data became,
• Short tests of pressure: leakage relationships on 20 small sectors Japanese distribution systems
(Ogura, 1979), analyzed and presented in the form of a simple Power Law (Leakage L varies
with Pressure P).
• Pressure: net night flow relationships from longer duration tests on 18 district metered areas in
the UK where all detectable leaks had been located and repaired (Goodwin, 1980),

Leakage rate relationships, in its simplest form this is also a power law. Empirical quadratic and
exponential relationship were also used (or rather, misused) in the UK and elsewhere from 1994 to 2003
to analyze test data and predict the effects of pressure management. However, it is now recommended
by the Water Losses Task Force (Thornton 2003) and in the UK (UKWIR, 2003), that the most
physically meaningful and ‘Best Practice’ form of equation for representing pressure, leakage rate
relationships is a simple power law. There is no international convention for characters used for the
exponent and the water Losses task Force uses the alpha-numeric ‘N1’, resulting in the equations:
N1
L varies with P …………… ……………….. (1)
N1
And L1/L0 = (P1/P0) …..………………… ……….. (2)

So, if pressure is reduced from P0 to P1, flow rates through existing leaks change from L0 to L1, and the
extent of the change depends on the exponent N1. When N1 is calculate from the non-dimensional
Reynolds Number (Re),

38 
 
Circular holes:
• N1 near 0.5 for metal & PVC pipes for Reynolds Number Re > 4000
• N1 likely to be near 0.5 for polyethylene and AC, and Re >4000
• but N1 can be in range 0.5 to 1.0 for small leaks
• and N1 for corrosion hole clusters may be even higher

y = 0.3357x0.6703
Pressure distribution R² = 0.6676
40
35
30
25
Pressure (m)

20
15
10
5
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Leakage (m3)

Figure 3.3 Pressure distribution

The Above numerical equation generating from continuous water flow and within the same duration
they recorded the pressure and the water loss at the same period, the pressure is varied with time to time
during supply the water to the system record the pressure. And then turn off the valve and the Bulk
meter and the customer meter immediately start to reading,

The relationship of water loss (leakage) and pressure as you can see from the above graph, the graph is
linear function.

Y: - is from the graph represent the pressure (m)

X: - is represent the Leakage (Water loss) (m3)

39 
 
 0.670
From this expression the above graph function is Y=0.335 X and the factor R2= 0.667 that means
P=0.335 (L) 0.670 which is the pressure and the water loss (leakage) are directly proportional when the
pressure in distribution system is high the water loss is high.

3.4.1 Calculation of Actual Losses by Water Balance Method

The exact value of water losses is calculated by using Water Balance Method. This Water Balance
Method requires a total average consumption for each zone before and after leakage reduction works, Mi
and Me. The calculation of total average daily consumption is utilized using MS Office application. The
bulk meter reading from Baseline 1a (at step 2) is subtracted from the bulk meter reading at Baseline 1b
(after seven days of step 2). This gives the volumetric flow through the meter for seven- day period. This
figure is divided by seven to give the average daily inflow, Qi. The volume of water used through
normal domestic meters (downloaded from meter books) is added together to give total consumption for
the corresponding seven-day period. This is again divided by seven to give a daily average consumption
figure, Mi. It follows that Qi-Mi will give an accurate volumetric amount of the average daily Non-
Revenue Water within the zone. This calculation done the same way after leakage reduction work, And
use in the system the above pressure relation and finally we reduce the pressure from the top 35m to 25
m in the pilot area see the following table below summary of actual NRW reduction using water balance
method for pilot area.
Table 3.3 Daily Average Inflow Calculations for Pilot Area

Base line Reading1:Before Leakage Base line Reading1:After Leakage

Reduction work Reduction work
Meter reading Meter reading
Date Date
(m3) (m3)
26-Mar-11 69181 06-July-11 115679.654
11-Apr-11 86054
21-July-11 128929
Total Inflow= 16873
Total Inflow= 13249.346
No of Days= 15
Daily Average No of Days= 15
Daily Average
Inflow
Inflow
Qi= 1124.9
Qi= 883.29

40 
 
Table 3.4 Summary of Water Balance Method Results

Before After Result before Leakage For

Leakage Leakage (m3/day)
Meter Book Properties pilot Area Reduction Work
Reduction Reduction
work work Average Inflow, Qi 1791.5
Daily Average Consumption,
384 42 55.47 66.76 Mi 978.45
" 38 59.72 60.79 NRW before reduction works
" 37 50.83 56.42 (Qi-Mi) 813.1
" 30 50.86 58.15
" 32 60.99 48.18
Result After Leakage For pilot
" 32 39.77 63.27 (m3/day)
Area Reduction work
" 34 43 45.76
" 35 60.12 65.82 Average Inflow, Qe 1549.96
Daily Average Consumption,
385 34 64.2 62.12
Me 1055.84
" 33 65 68 NRW After reduction works
" 42 76.21 76.42 (Qe-Me) 494.12
" 33 55.44 60.21
" 46 56.87 54.33 Result before and after
" 42 35.15 54.39 Reduction work m3
" 35 50.69 37.52 Actual NRW Reduction,(Qi-
" 42 59.13 59.7 Mi)-(Qe-Me) 318.97
" 47 40 56
" 40 55 62
Total 674 978.45 1055.84

The results of NRW reduction by Water Balance Method and pressure show the difference between
predicted and actual of water losses in water distribution network. The results also shows that after
leakage reduction control works took place, the volume of water loss in water distribution network has
reduce about 39% for pilot area.

41 
 
 3.5 Comparing of water losses
Using the percentage and quantitative figures found from the above tables, comparing is made among
the sub-system and the city based on the following approaches, the percentage of water loss, and loss per
number of connections.
One of the limitations in comparing the total water losses in the city and that of the sub system was the
duration of the data. Both the production and consumption data for the city was from 2005 to 2009 and
the sub-system based on the man power averagely we read the meter and the bulk meter is between 15 to
22 day variation based on that the duration of the sub-system is three month from January to March
2011, The percentage of loss and loss per connection is summarized as shown in table 2.6 below
Table 3.5 Comparing of water losses

Network found loss per connection

Percent loss (%)
discretion (liter/connection/day)

City level 36.94 313.67

Sub-system 37.54 949.98

As we can see from the table the loss of the sub-system is high and also the loss per connection is more
than double than the city loss per connection,

3.6 Dimensions of Water Loss in Distribution Networks

A safe, reliable and efficient water supply system is essential to any community. In a water supply
system including the water supply works, treatment plant, distribution network and storage facilities, the
most expensive component is the water distribution network [Kleiner, 1997]. In Addis Ababa, there are
10 districts, and their population is varied between 13,480 and 35,989 based on the bill data of the
Authority.

3.7 Major Factors Contributing to High Level of Water Loss in Addis Ababa
There are several reasons for the high level of water loss in Addis Ababa. These factors are given below,
and some advisory solutions were briefly proposed in next sections.

42 
 
 3.7.1 Age of pipe network
It is estimated that nearly more than 50% of the pipe network in the city was laid over 25 years ago. The
main duties which made more than half a month is checking of each customer (door to door water
connection) by sounding rod .In this time get so many invisible & visible leakages both on the private
connection & also on the main line.
Totally up to compile this report identify 9135m service line, (682customer connections) from this we
get 194 leaked connections, most leakages are easily detectable and the rest are cannot maintain because
of its long service age. So we are decided to change by new line.
These lines are including DCI (ducktail cast iron) and carbon steel pipes. The aged pipe is especially in
the central part of the city and in densely population areas like in Merkato, Piasa etc. All these materials
suffer from degradation over time due to operational measures, environmental conditions and general
wear and tear result in increased leakage in the network. It is therefore necessary to replace older mains
so that less leakage occurs.

3.7.2 Poor maintenance of networks

In some places like expansion areas including Mekanissa Lebu, Bole Bulubula, CMC, etc., water
authorities has performed a maintenance program for distribution system, and in recent years
approximately more 50% of network system was replaced in the expansion areas. For partial sub-cities,
but in all branches poor maintenance of network and poor man power management for maintenance, it is
so difficult to find financial support to renew the water distribution system. Thus, the lack of finance to
buy proper materials and poor construction resulted in increased leakage in the system.

3.7.3 Water scheduling

The problem of water scheduling caused by an intermittent supply results in leakage, with a cyclic
pressure situation created due to having the supply turned on and off in the corner of the city specially in
Nifas silk and Akaki sub-cities, increased levels of leakage are experienced due to stress being inflicted
on the pipes causing them to rupture. There is clear irony in this situation as the problem of water
scheduling is caused by water shortages. Due to high levels of water loss, a continuous supply is not
available resulting in water schedules.

43 
 
 3.7.4 Customer side leakage
Because of the nature of the water storage systems in the country and the generally low rates paid by
customers, there is little incentive to conserve water. Consequently, storage tanks and fittings remain
unrepaired for long periods there by contributing to significant loss. It is a significant component of
water loss and a strain on the delivery of water. And the customer side leakage also more affected the
Authority because the water is not used by the customer so the customer is not paid and they complain
to the Authority, the office give instruction to the branch and the bill is dismissed, finally the Authority
is loss the money and the office are not collect the revenue at the end the month. These types of leakage
are mostly happened on the expansion area or in the under constructions area.

3.7.5 Illegal connections

There are a significant number of illegal users of water within distribution system in Addis Ababa city
especially in the expansion areas or construction areas. The number of households who do not pay water
rates but receive water from its distribution system is not known the Authority. As a consequence, they
contribute significantly to apparent losses and revenue loss to the water authority. These connections are
often poorly laid just a few inches below the surface and will break easily resulting in real losses taking
placed in the form of leakage. Illegal connections are therefore of significant concern of water utilities.

3.8 Water loss Management

This work represents a major step to define the best practice approach for assessing and presenting basic
elements of water loss management program in Addis Ababa city, and it will focus on international
water loss approach to promote and facilitate the application of water loss recommended methodology
of leakage monitoring and pressure management system.

3.9 Leakage Monitoring and control

Leakage management can be classified into two groups including
¾ passive leakage control and
¾ Active leakage control.

44 
 
Passive leakage control is reacting to reported bursts or a drop in pressure, usually reported by
customers or noted by the company’s own staff while carrying out duties other than leak detection. This
method can be justified in areas with plentiful or low cost supplies. Often practiced in less developed
supply system where the occurrence of underground leakage is less understood, it is the first step to
improvement.
Active leakage control (ALC) is when company staff is deployed to find leaks which have not been
reported by customers or other means. The main Active leakage control methods are regular survey and
leakage monitoring. Regular survey is a method of starting at one end of the distribution networks and
proceeding to the other using one of the following techniques:
listening for leaks on pipe-work and fittings
Reading metered flows into temporarily-zoned areas to identify high-volume night flows
Using clusters of noise loggers (leak localizing)
Leakage monitoring is flow monitoring into zones to measure leakage and to prioritize leak detection
activities. This has now become one of the most cost effective activities for leakage management
programs.
The most appropriate leakage control strategy will mainly be dictated by the characteristics of the
network and local conditions, which may include financial constraints on equipment and other
resources. Staffing resources are relevant, as a labor intensive methodology may be suitable if
manpower is plentiful and cheap. If the geology of the area allows a high proportion of leaks to appear at
the surface, a strategy of regular survey followed by rapid repair may be adequate. If some leaks fail to
appear at the surface, then, a more intensive strategy of leakage monitoring is required.
The main factor governing choice, however, is the value of the water, which determines whether a
particular methodology is economic for the savings achieved. A low activity method, such as repair of
visible leaks only, may be cost-effective in supply areas where water is plentiful and cheap to produce.
On the other hand, countries which have a high cost of production and supply, Lather factories, Airport
etc. can justify a much higher level of activity, like continual flow monitoring, or even telemetry
systems, to warn of a burst or leakage occurring [Farley and Trow, 2003].

45 
 
 3.10 Economical Dimension of Water Loss
In Addis Ababa the water loss rate was varied between 36.94 to 43.15% of the production in the last five
years. If it is assumed that unit water production cost is half price of selling, total cost of water loss for
Addis Ababa city will be 127,550,769.60 Birr for 2009 year provided that water loss rate is reduced
from 43.15% to 36.94%. Average water selling price is obtained 3.80 Birr per cubic meter.
The marginal cost producing one additional unit volume of water as the level of leakage is reduced the
cost of water saved is first benefit. Redaction in leakage will produce a similar redaction in future
projection of water supply requirements.

3.11 Summary
This study presented the current water loss perspectives of Addis Ababa city. Further, its aim is to offer
two IWA approach to control water loss and leakages through water distribution networks. Application
of these two methods to distribution systems will result in better knowledge of the components of
uncontrolled flow rate, the technical losses (real losses) and nontechnical losses (apparent losses)
including demands related to metering errors on the system. For the future, application of these two
IWA methods has the potential for reducing water loss within entire of water distribution systems for
Addis Ababa city. This paper has attempted to put forward the current situation of water loss in Addis
Ababa. Besides, it proposes appropriate solutions for the reduction and control of water loss. It is hoped
that it will be a catalyst for increased and enhanced awareness and implementation of water loss
solutions in the country. The major cause of these leakage are listed as follows
¾ internal Corrosion of galvanized pipe
¾ Shallow layering of service pipelines resulting in damage by vehicles and erosion
¾ External corrosion of pipes due to aggressive soil conditions
¾ Unnecessarily high pressure in some area resulting in damage in pipe
The results of NRW reduction by Water Balance Method show the difference between predicted and
actual water losses in water distribution network. The results also shows that after leakage reduction
control works took place, the volume of water loss in water distribution network has reduce about 39%
for pilot area.

46 
 
4 Water Supply Coverage
4.1 Introduction

Problem in provision of adequate water supply to the rapidly growing urban population are increasing
dramatically. Water demand in the domestic sector of developing cities including Addis Ababa increases
through time that as a result demand for additional water sources and infrastructure. Financial constrain
is one of the major factors for the low water coverage of the water supply but poor management of the
existing water supply also has a great impact for the low coverage. Beside to the overall low supply
coverage, supply disparity existing among different localities. Therefore evaluating the city distribution
of the water supply is important in order to identify the problematic areas and intervene accordingly.
Water supply coverage is usually evaluated based on the quality, quantity, paying capacity of the people,
distance, etc. but the intention of this research is not to evaluate all those but related to the quantity of
the supply and level of connection that are related to the water loss. In this part of the analysis, the
number of domestic connection per family and the average daily per capital consumption is used to
analysis the domestic water supply coverage for the city. The level of coverage has been also compared
with other cities of developing countries. Beside to the statistical analysis for the city, the distribution of
the average daily per capital consumption and connection per family has been evaluated.

4.2 Domestic water supply coverage

The water supply coverage of the city has been evaluated based on the average per capital consumption
and level of connection per family. The average per capital consumption has been derived from the
yearly consumption of each Weredas that has been aggregated from the individual domestic water
meters. Beside to the average per capital water consumption, the distribution number of domestic's
connection per family has been also evaluated. Statistical analysis was used to evaluate the supply
coverage for the city and supply coverage map has been prepared for the city. Number of population as
forecasted to the year 2010 has been used to evaluate the average per capital consumption.

47 
 
 4.3 Level of Domestic Water Supply Coverage

Access to water supply may be evaluated using the amount of water consumed and the level of
connection. For evaluating the amount of water consumption, the annual water consumption is
converted to average daily per capital consumption using the population data of the city. The number of
domestic connection per family has been also used for analyzing the level of connection as elaborated
below.

Table 4.1 Domestic Water Supply Coverage

Domestic water % of coverage

Total consumption consumption
year consumption based on the
population m3/person/year l/person/day
(m3) Authority data

2005 45,520,623 2,641,653 17.23 47.21 52.46

2006 51,338,591 2,687,593 19.10 52.33 58.15

2007 53,272,445 2,733,533 19.49 53.39 59.33

2008 53,676,740 2,779,474 19.31 52.90 58.79

2009 58,140,949 2,917,295 19.93 54.60 60.67

4.4 Average Daily per Capital Consumption

The level of water consumed for domestic purpose has been aggregated to all sub-cities of the city so as
to analysis the distribution of the water coverage among different localities. Statistical analysis was used
to evaluate the distribution of the supply coverage in all weredas of the city while a supply coverage
map is prepared of the city. Evaluating the domestic water supply coverage using volume of
consumption may not allow realizing the distribution comparison among the weredas. For this reason

48 
 
the annual consumption data has been converted to average daily per capital consumption using the
number of population. The average daily per capital consumption of each weredas was derived using the
following expressions.
Capital consumption (l/person/day) =Annual consumption (m3)*1000l/m3
Population number of each weredas * 365

Table 4.2 Water production and consumption of Addis Ababa city

Total production Total Billed data Total Water Production consumption

year
(m3) (m3) population l/person/day l/person/day

2005 80,073,546.00 45,520,623 2,641,653 83.05 47.21

2006 82,820,272.00 51,338,591 2,687,593 84.43 52.33

2007 86,278,592.00 53,272,445 2,733,533 86.47 53.39

2008 88,405,625.00 53,676,740 2,779,474 87.14 52.91

2009 92,201,273.00 58,140,949 2,917,295 86.59 54.60

The distribution of the domestic water coverage has been evaluated using the above statistical tools. The
distribution of the production has been first reviewed using the descriptive statics.
Taking the mean production as shown in above the average domestic water coverage of the city is found
to be 86.59 l/per/day and the consumption of the city’s are 54.60 l/per/day in 2009. The average daily
per capital production of the city is low b/c from this production more than 37% are loss before reach to
costumer, while the city production compared to other cities even in developing countries like with the
southern Africa larger cities. An overview of urban water supply for the southern Africa is shown in the
table 4.3.

49 
 
Table 4.3 African capital cities of water consumption
Country Largest city Population of Water production for the
largest city largest city (l/person/day)
(million)
Angola Luanda 4 30
Botswana Gaborone 0.13 286

Democratic republic of Congo Kinshasa 5.7 86

Lesotho Maseru 0.27 81
Maturities Port Louis 0.15 200

Mozambique Maputo 0.97 133

Namibia Windhoek 0.27

Tanzania Dar Es salaam 3 150

Zambia Lusaka 1.21 225

Zimbabwe Harare 2.38 156
(Source: Wallingford, 2003)
4.5 Evaluating of the distribution of the water supply coverage

As clarified earlier the water supply coverage of the city, both in quantity and level of connection is low
while compared to the other cities. In this case section the spatial distribution of the consumption in
relation to number of population is discussed. In areas where water supply coverage is sufficient,
volume of domestics water consumption is expected to be linear related to the level connection. Areas
having better level of connection are expected to consume more water as they can easily get it within
their building or compound. A detail demand study in Africa found that average water carried was about
22 l/day per capital over a long distance rising to about 30 l/day per capital where water was obtained
from the consumer own stand pipe. Of course distance is not a big problem in urban areas rather than
rural areas (ADB, 1993) on the other hand in areas having insufficient supply like Addis Ababa, some
areas may have better level of connection but may not necessarily mean they are consuming more
volume of water as the possibility of getting the water does not depend only on the location. There are

50 
 
number of places that get low volume of water due to their topographic location. As the city mainly uses
gravitational supply system, topography has a great impact on the per capital consumption. A map of
average daily per capital consumption of distribution was prepared for the city see in the next page.
Figure 4.1 Water supply coverage of Addis Ababa city

51 
 
 Figure 4.1 Water supply coverage of Addis Ababa city

52 
 
 4.6 Level of connection per family

Level of water connection is an important element on the one hand for evaluating the level of water
coverage that will be the focus of this section and on the other hand it has a direct impact on the water
loss that will be detail separately.
The total numbers of connection or water meter within the city are about 297,500 that among those,
260,000 are for domestic use. In order to compare the distribution of the water connection among the
different sub-cites, the total numbers of connection per weredas are converted to connection per family
using the population data of each sub-cites. According to the census of the 2010, average family size of
5.5 is used for calculating the average number of connection per family using the following expression.
number of connection of the city
Connection per famil
/

Similar to the per capital consumption, the distribution of the connection of the connection per family
has been evaluated.
Table 4.4 Level of Connection
Total Average Total number level of
year
Population family size of connection connection
2005 2,641,653 5.5 215,287 0.45
2006 2,687,593 5.5 234,209 0.48
2007 2,733,533 5.5 257,339 0.52
2008 2,779,474 5.5 279,704 0.55

2009 2,917,295 5.5 272,005 0.51

53 
 
 4.7 Summary

In order to get a realistic average daily per capital consumption of the city of Addis it was necessary to
exclude both higher and lower extreme values both for per capital consumption and connection per
family. After excluding the outlier the average per capital consumption of the city is found to be 54.60
l/day this average per capital consumption is lower while compared with other developing countries like
the southern Africa cities.

54 
 
5 Distribution System Modeling
5.1 Introduction

As a result of rapid population growth and high water losses from the distribution network, the total
water demand of the system in Addis Ababa exceeds available production capacity. To limit total
demand and provide an equitable distribution of available water supplies with reduced system pressures
are often introduced. The demand for water is not based on the notions of diurnal variations of demand
but on the maximum quantity of water that can be collected during supply hours. This will be dependent
only on the available pressure heads in the network.
The objective of this modeling was not to predict the exact time at which different users get water but to
develop a simplified model, node demand is dependent on the pressure at the junction nodes to reduce
the water loss and maximize the flow rate at the tap.
The components and processes of a water distribution system including hydraulic and water quality
concepts are described in this section.
a. Definitions
A water distribution system is principally made of links and nodes. Links are pipe sections which can
contain valves and bends. The nodes can be categorized as junction nodes, which join pipes and are the
points of input or output of flow, and fixed-grade nodes such as tanks and reservoirs with fixed pressure
and elevation.
As defined in water distribution system models, reservoirs are nodes that represent infinite sources or
sinks of water, such as lakes. Tanks are nodes with fixed storage capacity and varying volumes during
distribution. Pumps are devices that impart energy to water thereby increasing its head. Valves limit the
pressure or flow at points in the system. These components are illustrated in the figure 2.1
A loop is a sub-component of a distribution system: it consists of an entity made of nodes all connected
through links. It is an important component of a model because mass in and out of a loop can be
accounted for and used to solve for flows.

55 
 
 b. Hydraulics Modeling
The two fundamental concepts of distribution network hydraulics are conservation of mass and energy.
For energy, the Bernoulli equation states that the sum of the elevation, pressure and velocity heads
between two points must be constant. Due to losses because of friction during flow through the pipe, this
equation does not hold precisely in practice. Frictional head loss is accounted for with head loss factors
typically based on the Hazen-Williams, Chezy-Manning or Darcy-Weisbach equations.
Head loss can be described as hl = AqB
Where A is the resistance coefficient, B is the flow exponent and q is the flow rate. Table 5.1 illustrates
the different formulas used to account for head losses. Notice that each of them contains a friction or
roughness coefficient.

Table 5.1 Pipe head loss formulas for full flow

56 
 
Conservation of mass dictates that flows are equal for pipes in series and they are summed for pipes in
parallel. Head losses, on the other hand, are summed for pipes in series and assumed equal at nodes that
join pipes in parallel.
Equations can be categorized into loop and node equations. Among loop equations, mass continuity
takes the form of
ΣQin – ΣQout = Qe--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5.1
Where Qin is the inflow, Qout is the outflow and Qe is the external flow into or out of the system at
each node. Energy conservation is written as
ΔE = Σhl – Σep-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5.2
Where ΔE is the difference in energy grade, hl is losses considering pipe length, diameter, roughness
and minor losses, and ep is the pump head. Node equations expand the mass continuity equations to
express discharge in terms of head difference between nodes a and b (Ha-Hb) and resistance of the
pipeline (Kab):
Qab = [(Ha – Hb)/Kab] 1/n----------------------------------------------------------------------5.3
Where:-
n is selected depending on the head loss equation (Viessman and Hammer, 1998).
The single path adjustment method described by Hardy-Cross is best known for solving loop equations.
It consists in making an initial guess of flow rates that satisfy continuity at each node, followed by
computing flow correction factors for each loop to satisfy the energy equation. Through iteration,
improved solutions are found until the average correction factor is within acceptable limits.
The most widely used algorithm for solving node equations is the single-node adjustment method also
described by Hardy-Cross. A grade is assumed for each junction node, followed by computation of a
grade adjustment factor to satisfy continuity and through iteration improved solutions are found until a
specified convergence criterion is met (Viessman and Hammer, 1998).

5.2 EPANET

EPANET is a computer program that simulates hydraulic and water quality behavior within pressurized
pipe networks. It was developed for the Environmental Protection Agency, and presents the great

57 
 
advantage of being available on the internet free of charge. It can model networks of pipes, nodes and
reservoirs and tracks the flow of water in each pipe, the pressure at each node. As an illustration,

Figure 5.1 Modeling of the sub-system

Some of the key hydraulic capabilities of EPANET include no size limitations on the network, time-
varying demand or controls (e.g. opening and closing valves), simulating a pressure-driven node using
the concept of emitter coefficient as discussed later, handling multiple head-loss equations, and pump
operation control (e.g. based on tank water levels). The program also sends warning messages which
point out changes in the system such as negative pressures occurring in the system. No model can
perfectly reflect the underlying system but these capabilities enhance the realism of the simulation
(Rossman, 2000). An important scenario that often occurs in situations of crisis is that of intermittent

58 
 
flow. EPANET assumes a constantly pressurized system, with instantaneously full pipes at the start of
distribution. Hence, relatively significant discrepancies could arise between the model and the actual
dynamics of the system and these are discussed in the following section.

5.3 Data Assembly

The following section describes the process of putting together the water distribution model in EPANET
from the some raw data collected in the field. The first step in starting the model is to set up some
important parameters which define the input values used by the software.

5.3.1 Initial Setup

Throughout the process, International System Units (SI units) have been used. To request the use of
these units in EPANET, the user chooses SI flow unit under the hydraulics option. I have selected liters
per second for the model, which also defines all other units using the SI system. Hence lengths,
pressures, head, elevations are taken in meters and Diameters of pipes are defined as millimeters. The
Hazen-Williams equation was chosen for determining head-loss. Further setup of the interface for
analysis is discussed in the next section.

5.3.1.1 Tanks

The tanks are further defined in EPANET under the tanks section. Tanks are assumed cylindrical in
EPANET: hence their height should be kept but an equivalent diameter needs to be calculated from each
tank’s volume. After copying the tank’s ID into the section, their elevation is inputted. Their initial
water level is then taken to be their height (assuming full tanks); such height was taken from the
overflow to the outflow pipes, the useful height of the tank, and not from the total height. The minimum
level and volume is taken to be zero and the maximum level is the same as the initial one. No volume
curve is chosen since all of the tank storage volume varies linearly with height.

59 
 
 5.3.1.2 Pipes

In EPANET, pipes are links connecting two nodes. Inputting pipes can be done using the text or the
graphical interface of EPANET. It was recommended using the graphical interface with the GIS map to
verify the overall logic of the system by its location. Also, throughout the process of inputting pipes,
lengths surveyed were verified against computed lengths to make sure the field lengths were correctly
recorded from the GIS plan of Addis Ababa road network. Besides, direct measurements take into
account the slope whereas the length feature only provides the planar distance between two points.
As a side note, it should be noted that to write data from an Excel file into an EPANET input data file, it
is necessary to first save the Excel file to text file and to then copy and paste the content of the text file
into an input file exported from EPANET.
Pipe length and diameters are then inputted as well as roughness. A roughness of 150 was selected for
the polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipes (Briere, 1999). The pipes are fairly new but considering the
stagnation periods due to the intermittent nature of the system, build-up should have made roughness
rise to such levels. Minor losses are also included as part of pipes, not at the tee or elbow junctions.
These minor losses were ignored and assigned a null value because errors in elevation were assumed to
outweigh the minor losses sufficiently that results would not significantly vary by considering such
losses.
As to the status of pipes, they were generally left with their default status of open. These were assigned
the status of control valve, letting water flow only in the direction of their first to their second node. This
setting is important to avoid backwards flow from tanks or reservoirs whose inlets discharge above
surface water or for emitter taps which would become sources in the absence of flow.

60 
 
 5.4 Setup

As mentioned earlier, it is important to define the parameters on which the model is based.

5.4.1 Hydraulics and Time Parameters

Under hydraulics options, SI units of measurement are chosen and the Hazen-Williams equation used to
find head-loss. The specific gravity of water is set to 0.998, for average temperature of 25 degrees
Celsius, and a relative viscosity of 1.The emitter coefficient is 0.52 and the bulk reaction coefficient is 0.
The hydraulics accuracy represents the threshold ratio of variation in total flow from one iteration to the
next over total flow in the system. If this ratio is under the specified accuracy, iterations for solving the
model stop. A lower value for this accuracy would give more precise results. A lower accuracy would
also increase the solution time for the model, and possibly prevent the model from converging on a
solution. The value of accuracy is often tweaked in the case of non convergence. This represents a
reasonable accuracy considering the magnitude of error in the surveyed elevations. It is also preferable
to set a large maximum number of trials (10,000 for example) and to select the option of continuing if
the model is unbalanced (instead of stopping), since the analysis can be cancelled manually if it takes
too long. The quality tolerance is another important parameter. It represents the smallest change in water
quality that will cause a new parcel of water to be created. Typically, this accuracy is set at or below the
detection limit.
Besides hydraulics setup, time characteristics need to be set up to properly use EPANET. The duration
of the simulation is one such time setting. Other parameters include the hydraulic time steps as well as
time pattern and reporting time steps. A time pattern can be associated with different parameters such as
valve controls and more. The duration of these time increments determine the time resolution for
analysis, control setting and reporting. Hydraulics usually vary less throughout the distribution period
than quality does and this is why the hydraulics time step is often set to be longer than the water quality
time step to reduce computing time. Considering the subtleties of the system with its opening and
closing of valves.

61 
 
Based on the above information the pressure was taken from the above expression, the water loss
analysis that means from the leakage and pressure relationship and we use in the model most of the
nodes are less pressure from the previous.

5.5 Result

The work discussed so far has led to the construction of a computer model designed to serve as a tool for
analysis and improvement of the drinking water supply system in Gotera, Addis Ababa. The following
chapter gives a brief overview of the system and evaluates the success of this model in predicting
different parameters associated with the water supply. It then provides an analysis of potential
improvements of the system.
The skeleton of the system is shown in Figure 5-1. It is made of 136 pipes and 102 junctions. The
different subsystems within the overall distribution system are shown. Reservoir Gotera 1 and Reservoir
Gotera 2 are sub-components of the sub-system since reservoir can supply water to system.
EPANET can show pressures, demand, and water quality at different nodes as well as flows, velocities
and head loss in pipes throughout the distribution period. Such results can be exported to tables and
graphics or visualized on the graphical interface as illustrated in Figure. Direction of flow is shown by
arrows on Figure 4.3. The figure shows large flows (red arrows) going into the system which then re-
distributes water to taps. To the very left of the illustration, flow is coming in the opposite direction but
a valve blocks it from entering the pipes supplied by the Gotera Reservoirs Many other analysis tools are
available in EPANET, such as drawing contour plots of the region based on a parameter of choice, or
time series plots of specific nodes.

62 
 
 Figure 5.2 Illustration of predicted pressure and flows by the EPANET graphical interface

5.5.1 Pressure
Figure 5.2 is an illustration of the pressure distribution throughout the sub-system. The orientation of the
sub-system is the same as in Figure 5.1 and all subsequent figures of the sub-system will follow the
same orientation. North is upward of the image while the road is adjacent to the right edge and the left
edge in the image. The pressure distribution is extrapolated by EPANET to areas without pipes but these
areas should not distract the viewer. It should be noted that the pressure distribution is not an illustration
of pressures at taps only; it includes the pressure at all different nodes in the system.

63 
 
 Fig 5.3 Geographical distribution of pressure in sub-system

There are extremes of low and high pressure throughout the system mainly due to the topography of the
area and the elevation of the distribution reservoirs. Most of the Gotera reservoir 1 is subsystem in
particular is marked by low pressure in the pipes bordering the road. Most of the Gotera reservoir 2 is
subsystem could make use of higher pressures as well. On the other hand, the two reservoirs are
reservoir 1 and reservoir 2 subsystems are marked by high pressures even though they also possess some
low pressure areas. The objective is to convey some of the high pressure to low pressure areas.
Figure 5.3 provides a geographical analysis of the pressure distribution in the sub-system whereas
Figure 5.4 provides more quantitative information through a frequency plot of the pressure at nodes
throughout the sub system, About 50 percent of the sub-system is marked by pressure between 50 to 75
meters, each tap added to the pipe system in the sub-system will produce about 140 liters per day for

64 
 
each domestic costumer and for non domestic and fountain based on consumer. The pressure is only
important as it creates the flow to provide water to the general sub-system population. Figure 5.4 shows
the geographical distribution of pressure around Gotera.

Figure 5.4 Numerical distribution of pressure in sub-system

Comparing pressure (Figure 5.3) and flow distribution (Figure 5.5) shows that elevated flows are located
in more concentrated areas than pressure; these areas are centered on the public taps. However, some
extremes of the pipe system do not end in a concentrated demand area: this is either due to a flow less
than 5 liters per second, or simply because these taps have an emitter coefficient of zero because they
were used minimally (e.g. latrines). These are usually nonpublic taps such as those for Non domestic,
schools or latrine and private taps or drums. Unfortunately, there are some high flow public taps not
represented on the figure: some taps are calculated to have low or no flow.
As far as distribution of water, it seems that the northern part of the sub-system has better access to
water than the southern part. This might be because the northern part is more densely populated but
people also live in the southern region and they should be provided drinkable water at a reasonable
distance.

65 
 
 Figure 5.5 Geographical distribution of flow in sub-system

5.5.2 Demand
As far as distribution of water, it seems that the southern part of the sub-system has better access to
water than the northern part. This might be because the northern part is more densely populated but
people also live in the southern region and they should be provided drinkable water at a reasonable
distance.
Figure 5.6 provides a more quantitative analysis of the demand throughout the sub-system. The
distribution of flows in Figure 5.6 only takes into account taps with non-zero flows. This is close to the
median value of 140 liters per day flow from a single tap which was calculated from the pressure
distribution. The median flow from Figure 5.6 is a bit higher because the system includes many tap
stands with more than one valve. Tap stands with more than one tap have a reduced pressure at each tap

66 
 
but can generally discharge more than a single valve tap stand because of the non-linear relationship
between flows and pressure.

Figure 5.6 Numerical distribution of flow in sub-system

The lower flow portions of this distribution represent the tap stands of concern with flows that need to
be increased. Currently, about 15 percent of the taps provide flows of 21600 liters per day, 34 percent
are at flows of less than 14400 liters per day, 40 percent at 7200 liters per days and 11 percent 25200
liters per day.

67 
 
 Figure 5.7 Geographical distribution of demand in sub-system

5.6 Summary

The purpose of this work was to develop a model that would represent the water distribution system in
Gotera site. It would serve as an analysis tool to increase understanding of the complexities of the
system and to plan improvements.
The distribution system model was then used to evaluate three alternative scenarios to improve system
performance. The objective of the first and second scenario was to increase the flow rate at taps of low
supply; the third scenario aimed at adding taps to parts of the sub-system without easy access to running
water. The first scenario consisted in opening valves to connect subsystems: it increased the flow rate at
taps of large supply more so than at taps of low supply. This scenario was not recommended because it
would quickly drain parts of the water supply. The second scenario consisted of adding connecting pipes

68 
 
between subsystems of high pressure and those of low pressure. It was recommended because it would
increase the flow rate of low- and medium-supply taps.

69 
 
6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMENDATIION

Both the average water supply coverage and the city distribution were evaluated based on the daily per
capital consumption and level of connection using the population data of the city. The average water
supply coverage of the city is found to be 86.59 liter/person/day. This average per capital consumption is
lower compare with other developing cities like the southern of Africa.

Despite the low water coverage of the city, the total water loss is found to be high, the total water loss
was computed by subtracting the consumption (bill data) from the water supplied is 34,060,524 m3 that
means 39% of the production water in 2009 at the city level,

In the sub-system after collect the meter reading both the customer and Bulk meter for five times the
total loss has 58310 m3, out of the total supply to the system 155215 m3 and the loss is 37.56 % of the
total supplied to the sub-system. The approaches unaccounted for water expressed as a percentage and
loss as per connection. The total water loss express as percentage is an important tool than water loss as
per number of connection. In the city the loss of water as per number of connection, taking the total
number of connection in the city as 297,500 the water loss per connection for the similar duration was
derived as; Water loss is 313.67 liter/connection/day.
From the water loss analysis of the sub-system, higher water loss has been found in around Gotera,
Meskel flower.

The other issue addressed in the analysis was the major factor contributing to high levels of water loss in
Addis Ababa is

1) Age of pipe network

2) Poor maintenance of networks
3) Water scheduling
4) Customer side leakage
5) Illegal connections

This paper has attempted to put forward the current situation of water loss in Addis Ababa. Besides, it
proposes appropriate solutions for the reduction and control of water loss. It is hoped that it will be a

70 
 
catalyst for increased and enhanced awareness and implementation of water loss solutions in the
country.
The water supply coverage of the city, supply 7 days a week for 12-24 hours/day 50% of the total Addis
Ababa area and its consumed full nearly to 2,072,028 population out of the total population of the Addis
Ababa city, supply 5-6 days a week 10 to 20 hours/day is only 5% of the total area and consumed
estimated population 527,972 people, supply for 2 to 4 days a week for 15 hour/day are 18% and
estimated population are 163,247 people, supply for 1 day a week for 7 to 24 hours/day are 4% from the
total area of Addis Ababa served for 210,768 people and 23% of the total area is no supply and
estimated population 17,931 are without service.
The purpose of this work was to develop a model that would represent the water distribution system in
Gotera site. It would serve as an analysis tool to increase understanding of the complexities of the
system and to plan improvements.
The distribution system model was then used to evaluate three alternative scenarios to improve system
performance. The objective of the first and second scenario was to increase the flow rate at taps of low
supply; the third scenario aimed at adding taps to parts of the sub-system without easy access to running
water. The first scenario consisted in opening valves to connect subsystems: it increased the flow rate at
taps of large supply more so than at taps of low supply. This scenario was not recommended because it
would quickly drain parts of the water supply. The second scenario consisted of adding connecting pipes
between subsystems of high pressure and those of low pressure. It was recommended because it would
increase the flow rate of low- and medium-supply taps. For the third scenario, these new taps were
successful in providing water to these areas without significantly affecting the rest of the system. An
additional recommendation for increasing the water supply in the sub-system was found from analyzing
reservoirs:

71 
 
7 References

AAWSA (1997). Draft report on leak detection study for Addis Ababa water supply.

Andey P & Kelkar P (2007). Performance of water distribution systems during intermittent versus
Continuous water supply. Journal American Water Works Association.

AWWA (1987). American Water Works Association leak in water Distribution system
A technical/Economical overview.

Bentley (2006). Efficient Pressure Dependent Demand Model for Large Water Distribution System
Analysis. Haestad Methods Solution Center, Bentley Systems, Incorporated. Retrieved May 5,
2008fromftp://ftp2.bentley.com/dist/collateral/whitepaper/WDSA2006_EfficientPDD_haestad
_eng_lowres.pdf
Batish R (2003). A New Approach to the Design of Intermittent Water Supply Networks. In: Bizier P
and DeBarry P (Eds.) World Water Congress 2003. June 23–26, 2003, Philadelphia
Pennsylvania, USA. American Society of Civil Engineers. Washington D.C.
Farley M and Trow s (2003). Losses in Water Distribution Networks: A Practitioner’s Guide to
Assessment, Monitoring and Control. IWA Publishing, Alliance House, 12
Caxton St., London, UK.
Goodwin S J (1980). The Results of the Experimental Programme on Leakage and Leakage Control.
Technical Report TR 154. Water Research Centre, UK.
Kleiner, Y (1997). Water Distribution Network Rehabilitation: Selection and Scheduling of Pipe
Rehabilitation Alternatives. PhD Thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Lambert A O Brown T G Takizawa M and Weimer D (1999). A Review of Performance
Indicators for Real Losses from Water Supply System. J Water SRTAqua, 48:6, 227-237.
Lewis A Rossman (2000). Water Supply and Water Resources Division National Risk Management
Research Laboratory Cincinnati. OH 45268.
Ogura (1979). Japan Water Works Association Journal, June 1979
Thornton J (2003). Managing Leakage by Managing Pressure. Water 21, October 2003

72 
 
Tooms S and Pilcher R (2006). Practical Guidelines on Efficient Water Loss Management, Water
Supply. August
UKWIR (2003). Leakage index curve and the longer term effect of pressure management, UKWIR
report
UN-HABITAT (2008). Water and sanitation initiative fast track capacity building program, Leakage
reduction and repair guideline.
Wallingford HR (2003). Handbook for assessment of catchment water demand and use.
Walski M chase V and Savic A (2003). Advanced Water distribution Modeling and Management (first
edition)
WHO (2000). World Health Organization, Global Water Supply and Sanitation assessment 2000 report.
WHO (1993). Drinking Water Standards. World Health Organization. Retrieved December 10, 2007,
from http://www.lenntech.com/WHO's-drinking-water-standards.htm.

73 
 
 Appendix A: Input parameter

Annual production of Addis Ababa water supply in (m3)

year Legedadi Gefersa Akaki well other Well Total production

1994 45844675 9374150 55,218,825
1995 47186039 9565064 1189126 57,940,229
1996 45930020 9466714 958423 56,355,157
1997 47591408 8668216 2184111 58,443,735
1998 43737558 8371040 1758190 53,866,788
1999 53134069 8297900 312933 2261461 64,006,363
2000 65,793,897
2001 52246317 7917757 387620 2476480 63,028,174
2002 52716452 8244936 5424830 2418970 68,805,188
2003 50973399 7972714 6590432 2001084 67,537,629
2004 53591559 8607688 12023963 1596948 75,820,158
2005 57081868 8315611 12939921 1736146 80,073,546
2006 59514199 8138448 13363547 1804078 82,820,272
2007 60038338 8467056 14977954 2795244 86,278,592
2008 60144865 7456619 16995893 3808248 88,405,625
2009 60475493 8132038 16734281 6859461 92,201,273
2010 60321250 10569909 18324278 9391896 98,607,333

Annual Billed data of Addis Ababa water Supply in (m3)

year Domestic Non Domestic Total Billed data

2006 21,982,984 23,537,639 45,520,623
2007 23,587,590 27,751,001 51,338,591
2008 24,827,437 28,445,008 53,272,445
2009 26,230,408 27,446,332 53,676,740
2010 29,910,592 28,230,357 58,140,949

74 
 
 Appendix B: EPANET Input Parameters for Current System

[ ]

[JUNCTIONS]
;ID Elev Demand Pattern
3 2282 17 ;
4 2280 17 ;
5 2268 8 ;
6 2268 12 ;
7 2247 16 ;
8 2245 17 ;
9 2233 11 ;
10 2232.5 7 ;
11 2186.4 11 ;
12 2270 11 ;
13 2270 1 ;
14 2246 13 ;
15 2244 17 ;
16 2214 16 ;
17 2213.5 16 ;
18 2209.5 14 ;
19 2209 14 ;
20 2168.4 10 ;
21 2269 12 ;
22 2269 2 ;
23 2235 7 ;
24 2235 3 ;
25 2203 9 ;
26 2201 9 ;
27 2204 10 ;
28 2204 10 ;
29 2256 3 ;
30 2256 5 ;
31 2251 2 ;
32 2248 5 ;
33 2281 5 ;
34 2281 7 ;
35 2234 10 ;
36 2234 11 ;
37 2220 4 ;
38 2219 3 ;

75 
 
 39 2275 2 ;
40 2274 2 ;
41 2251 2 ;
42 2248 3 ;
43 2247 1 ;
44 2247 5 ;
45 2280 5 ;
46 2277 1 ;
47 2277 2 ;
48 2255.5 3 ;
49 2255.5 4 ;
50 2215 2 ;
51 2214 3 ;
52 2212 2 ;
53 2212 2 ;
54 2220 5 ;
55 2219 3 ;
56 2236 4 ;
57 2236.5 6 ;
58 2251 12 ;
59 2251 12 ;
60 2222 10 ;
61 2223 10 ;
62 2202 10 ;
63 2203 10 ;
64 2183 8 ;
65 2184 8 ;
66 2214 9 ;
67 2214 8 ;
68 2215 5 ;
69 2215 5 ;
70 2222 10 ;
71 2222 10 ;
72 2244 11 ;
73 2244 10 ;
74 2242 10 ;
75 2242 8 ;
76 2241 9 ;
77 2239 8 ;
78 2240 11 ;
79 2239 10 ;
83 2224 9 ;
84 2225 11 ;
85 2223 9 ;
86 2223 11 ;
87 2215 8 ;
88 2216 12 ;
89 2214 11 ;
90 2214 12 ;
91 2217 5 ;

76 
 
 92 2217 8 ;
93 2219 2 ;
94 2219 2 ;
95 2218 3 ;
96 2218 2 ;
97 2220 2 ;
98 2220 2 ;
99 2214 5 ;
100 2214 6 ;
101 2217 8 ;
102 2217 8 ;

[RESERVOIRS]
;ID Head Pattern
Gotera1 2310.5 1 ;
Gotera2 2310.5 1 ;

[TANKS]
;ID Elevation InitLevel MinLevel MaxLevel
Diameter MinVol VolCurve

[PIPES]
;ID Node1 Node2 Length Diameter
Roughness MinorLoss Status
1 3 Gotera1 370
100 0 Open ;
2 5 4 544 500
100 0 Open ;
3 7 6 617 400
100 0 Open ;
4 9 8 441 400
100 0 Open ;
5 11 10 2215 300
100 0 Open ;
6 12 Gotera2 1918 500
100 0 Open ;
7 14 13 640 400
100 0 Open ;
8 16 15 1062 400
100 0 Open ;
9 18 17 366 250
100 0 Open ;
10 19 20 1151 250
100 0 Open ;
11 12 21 344 200
100 0 Open ;
12 13 22 344 200
100 0 Open ;
13 14 23 334 200
100 0 Open ;

77 
 
 14 15 24 334 200
100 0 Open ;
15 16 25 397 200
100 0 Open ;
16 17 26 397 200
100 0 Open ;
17 18 27 244 200
100 0 Open ;
18 19 28 244 200
100 0 Open ;
19 3 29 816.5 500
100 0 Open ;
20 30 31 654 400
100 0 Open ;
21 32 4 1500 500
100 0 Open ;
22 29 33 1278 250
100 0 Open ;
23 30 34 1278 250
100 0 Open ;
24 7 35 860 300
100 0 Open ;
25 36 37 914 300
100 0 Open ;
26 38 8 1871 300
100 0 Open ;
27 6 35 1435 400
100 0 Open ;
28 5 36 1435 400
100 0 Open ;
29 37 32 1000 500
100 0 Open ;
30 41 43 136 400
100 0 Open ;
31 43 39 1050 250
100 0 Open ;
32 31 46 1053 250
100 0 Open ;
33 41 47 1053 250
100 0 Open ;
34 44 40 1050 250
100 0 Open ;
35 44 49 747 300
100 0 Open ;
36 42 48 967 300
100 0 Open ;
37 50 48 820 300
100 0 Open ;
38 49 40 729 300
100 0 Open ;

78 
 
 39 39 47 209 200
100 0 Open ;
40 46 34 550 200
100 0 Open ;
41 52 51 277 200
100 0 Open ;
42 53 45 1918.5 150
100 0 Open ;
43 50 54 1635 200
100 0 Open ;
44 51 55 1635 200
100 0 Open ;
45 54 42 1000 400
100 0 Open ;
46 38 56 199 500
100 0 Open ;
49 10 60 1000 300
100 0 Open ;
52 60 66 1019 200
100 0 Open ;
53 61 67 1019 200
100 0 Open ;
54 61 68 1000 300
100 0 Open ;
55 9 62 1659 300
100 0 Open ;
56 63 64 522 200
100 0 Open ;
57 65 69 615 200
100 0 Open ;
58 57 58 376 500
100 0 Open ;
59 55 59 648 400
100 0 Open ;
60 56 62 2085.6 200
100 0 Open ;
61 63 71 1000 200
100 0 Open ;
62 57 70 1628 200
100 0 Open ;
64 59 78 573 400
100 0 Open ;
66 58 73 79 500
100 0 Open ;
67 70 84 1000 150
100 0 Open ;
68 71 85 1000 150
100 0 Open ;
69 85 64 686 200
100 0 Open ;

79 
 
 70 73 84 1000 200
100 0 Open ;
71 74 83 1000 200
100 0 Open ;
72 86 65 686 200
100 0 Open ;
73 83 88 1000 200
100 0 Open ;
74 86 89 1000 200
100 0 Open ;
75 76 72 22 300
100 0 Open ;
76 91 77 26 300
100 0 Open ;
77 92 79 26 400
100 0 Open ;
78 88 74 04 500
100 0 Open ;
79 87 75 04 300
100 0 Open ;
80 94 90 1000 200
100 0 Open ;
81 93 92 50 200
100 0 Open ;
82 91 87 130 300
100 0 Open ;
83 90 101 1129 300
100 0 Open ;
84 89 102 1129 300
100 0 Open ;
85 79 95 14 250
100 0 Open ;
86 95 93 80 150
100 0 Open ;
87 97 78 1013 200
100 0 Open ;
88 98 96 299 150
100 0 Open ;
89 96 100 1718 150
100 0 Open ;
90 94 99 1069 150
100 0 Open ;
91 77 75 122 200
100 0 Open ;
92 12 13 12 500
100 0 Open ;
93 14 15 12 400
100 0 Open ;
94 16 17 12 300
100 0 Open ;

80 
 
 95 18 19 12 250
100 0 Open ;
96 9 10 12 300
100 0 Open ;
97 7 8 12 400
100 0 Open ;
98 5 6 12 500
100 0 Open ;
99 3 4 12 500
100 0 Open ;
100 29 30 12 400
100 0 Open ;
101 35 36 12 300
100 0 Open ;
102 37 38 12 500
100 0 Open ;
103 54 55 12 400
100 0 Open ;
104 32 42 1000 300
100 0 Open ;
105 31 41 12 400
100 0 Open ;
106 46 47 12 200
100 0 Open ;
107 33 34 12 200
100 0 Open ;
108 39 40 12 200
100 0 Open ;
109 49 48 12 300
100 0 Open ;
110 50 51 12 200
100 0 Open ;
111 56 57 16 500
100 0 Open ;
112 73 74 12 500
100 0 Open ;
113 72 75 12 300
100 0 Open ;
114 78 79 16 400
100 0 Open ;
115 76 77 16 300
100 0 Open ;
120 88 89 12 400
100 0 Open ;
121 87 90 12 300
100 0 Open ;
122 93 94 20 150
100 0 Open ;
123 84 85 12 200
100 0 Open ;

81 
 
 124 83 86 12 200
100 0 Open ;
125 70 71 12 200
100 0 Open ;
126 62 63 12 300
100 0 Open ;
127 64 65 20 200
100 0 Open ;
128 61 60 12 300
100 0 Open ;
129 45 33 12 200
100 0 Open ;
130 53 52 1000 150
100 0 Open ;
131 97 98 20 150
100 0 Open ;
132 100 99 16 150
100 0 Open ;
133 95 96 20 150
100 0 Open ;
134 90 89 1000 300
100 0 Open ;
135 86 85 20 150
100 0 Open ;
136 12 5 50 500
100 0 Open ;
47 76 72 1021 300
100 0 Open ;
48 44 43 20 300
100 0 Open ;

[PUMPS]
;ID Node1 Node2 Parameters

[VALVES]
;ID Node1 Node2 Diameter Type
Setting MinorLoss

[TAGS]

[DEMANDS]
;Junction Demand Pattern Category

[STATUS]
;ID Status/Setting

82 
 
[PATTERNS]
;ID Multipliers
;
1 1.0 1.3 1.1 0.6

[CURVES]
;ID X-Value Y-Value
;PUMP:
1 600 150
;PUMP:
2 600 150

[CONTROLS]

[RULES]

[ENERGY]
Global Efficiency 75
Global Price 0
Demand Charge 0

[EMITTERS]
;Junction Coefficient

[QUALITY]
;Node InitQual

[SOURCES]
;Node Type Quality Pattern

[REACTIONS]
;Type Pipe/Tank Coefficient

[REACTIONS]
Order Bulk 1
Order Tank 1
Order Wall 1
Global Bulk 0
Global Wall 0
Limiting Potential 0
Roughness Correlation 0

[MIXING]
;Tank Model

[TIMES]
Duration 24
Hydraulic Timestep 1:00

83 
 
 Quality Timestep 0
Pattern Timestep 6
Pattern Start 0:00
Report Timestep 1:00
Report Start 0:00
Start ClockTime 12 am
Statistic None

[REPORT]
Status Yes
Summary No
Page 0

[OPTIONS]
Units LPS
Headloss H-W
Specific Gravity 1
Viscosity 1
Trials 40
Accuracy 0.001
Unbalanced Continue 10
Pattern 1
Demand Multiplier 1.0
Emitter Exponent 0.5
Quality None mg/L
Diffusivity 1
Tolerance 0.01

[COORDINATES]
;Node X-Coord Y-Coord
3 473760.4152 991186.7318
4 473771.4983 991144.1432
5 473853.9587 990621.9472
6 473860.0981 990583.3769
7 473923.0241 989988.1607
8 473918.4170 989939.0778
9 473877.3169 989501.2041
10 473872.3019 989447.7747
11 473975.6822 987554.8294
12 473925.4164 990645.5578
13 473928.1036 990600.8252
14 473995.5183 989969.5800
15 473991.5401 989925.8610
16 474087.4015 988917.9532
17 474110.3342 988867.9623
18 474255.7018 988551.0760
19 474276.0278 988505.3875
20 474032.8436 987589.3414
21 474208.3963 990641.3530
22 474224.0640 990612.1404

84 
 
 23 474255.3961 989940.6229
24 474256.5714 989915.4331
25 474456.8681 989015.4114
26 474460.8573 988978.3299
27 474468.5374 988576.3890
28 474466.8661 988544.3217
29 472984.2145 991159.8521
30 472934.0920 991166.9163
31 472324.4392 990985.9263
32 472324.2805 990916.8809
33 473149.0706 992122.7974
34 473149.4270 992093.2403
35 473063.5261 990016.8779
36 473032.6010 990028.2336
37 472196.1995 990296.5821
38 472142.7430 990271.5719
39 472086.9696 992017.7228
40 472027.4154 992004.0265
41 472244.4099 990980.9170
42 472253.3429 990919.5794
43 472128.1043 990973.6370
44 472066.2967 990979.2435
45 473102.8221 992088.6642
46 472331.0323 992012.8818
47 472276.3131 992018.4327
48 471478.3906 991453.7421
49 471515.5935 991475.8085
50 470898.4771 990882.4783
51 470807.1179 990843.7590
52 470584.0849 990719.2209
53 470499.5491 990805.4215
54 472140.9516 990350.1670
55 472107.4193 990305.6152
56 471996.5092 990157.8008
57 471947.9398 990122.1370
58 471755.9988 989824.1905
59 471726.5649 989822.4438
60 473589.3984 989347.4441
61 473569.8925 989340.8144
62 472836.5417 988387.6548
63 472795.2882 988360.9527
64 472344.4219 988069.2290
65 472266.3935 988034.8763
66 474066.3259 988713.5456
67 474079.1112 988686.9078
68 471935.5397 987564.9096
69 471890.7588 987595.6522
70 472616.9213 988763.3749
71 472633.5818 988720.6512
72 471842.5691 989459.4542

85 
 
 73 471872.7787 989459.1663
74 471875.5976 989409.8280
75 471830.7776 989413.9526
76 471521.0029 989465.9412
77 471535.0376 989411.6366
78 471479.0738 989461.7982
79 471489.7105 989408.0489
83 472202.8634 988781.3070
84 472263.7658 988775.3988
85 472268.3771 988729.7608
86 472207.7058 988735.6406
87 471790.0743 988816.6738
88 471824.8940 988813.0160
89 471821.6321 988770.7238
90 471781.9065 988776.9619
91 471670.8917 988817.7770
92 471636.2403 988812.0835
93 471210.7376 988715.7531
94 471230.0915 988666.2381
95 470970.1231 988998.8695
96 470925.3593 988974.2654
97 470663.2260 989040.3549
98 470661.6395 988969.6345
99 470832.8488 987826.4570
100 470805.3164 987855.5815
101 471719.1454 987668.4645
102 471746.5045 987663.5874
Gotera1 473480.3398 992663.1828
Gotera2 473528.8992 992642.3299

[LABELS]
;X-Coord Y-Coord Label & Anchor Node
473111.8660    992740.9300    "Gotera "
471647.0453   989576.2975    "Lafto"
471547.0741    990701.8104    "Gofa"
 473081.4307    989415.7305    "Sarise"
474128.5864    990189.3122    "To Bole Bulubula"
471454.2186    988135.6260    "Hana Mariyam"
471384.2518    991826.3025    "Kera"
472966.2721    990699.6878    "Yosef cherch"
470913.3542    988537.2468    "Lebu"

[BACKDROP]
DIMENSIONS 0.00 0.00 10000.00 10000.00
UNITS Meters
FILE
OFFSET 0.00 0.00

86 
 
[END]
Appendix C: EPANET Report for the First Scenarios

87 
 
  

88 
 
  

89 
 
  

90 
 
  

91 
 
  

92 
 
  

93 
 
  

94 
 
 95 
 
 Appendix D: EPANET Report for the Second Scenarios

96 
 
    

97 
 
  

98 
 
  

99 
 
  

100 
 
 Appendix E: EPANET Report for the Third Scenarios

101 
 
  

102 
 
  

103 
 
   

104 
 
  

105