Process for the assessment of gravity-type collection networks

• US 20050177323A1
• Filed: 02/09/2005
• Published: 08/11/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 02/11/2004
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: David J. Saylor
• Original Assignee: David J. Saylor
• Inventors: Saylor, David J.
• Granted Patent: US 7,096,128 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 702/45
• CPC Class Codes: E03F 2201/20 Measuring flow in sewer systems
• CPC Class Codes: E03F 7/00 Other installations or implements for operating sewer systems, e.g. for preventing or indicating stoppage; Emptying cesspools
• CPC Class Codes: G01F 1/002 wherein the flow is in an open channel

Abstract

A method of evaluating a gravity-type flow conveyance system is disclosed. The method includes the steps of identifying, quantifying and totaling all upstream inflow sources to compute an anticipated flow at a plurality of access points in the system. The actual depth of flow at each access point is then measured and converted to a theoretical flow for each access point. The anticipated flow and the theoretical flow are then compared to determine whether any restrictions on flow might exist in the system and also to prioritize further inspection and repair of the system.

Claims

1. A method of evaluating a gravity-type flow conveyance system having a known geometry, the method comprising the steps of:

identifying a plurality of access points in the hydraulic conveyance system;

identifying all sources of flow input to the system upstream of each access point identified;

quantifying the expected volume of flow input of each source identified;

totaling the expected flow input from all sources identified upstream of each access point to compute an anticipated flow at each access point;

measuring a depth of flow at each access point;

converting the measured depth of flow to a volume of flow based on the known geometry of the system to compute a theoretical flow at each access point;

comparing the anticipated flow to the theoretical flow at each access point to evaluate whether any restrictions on flow may exist in the conveyance system.

2. The method of claim 1, further including the steps of:

assigning a ratio to each access point, the ratio being calculated by using the anticipated flow and the theoretical flow at each access point;

ranking the access points based on the assigned ratios;

3. The method of claim 2, further including the step of prioritizing maintenance on the system based on the ranking of access points.

4. The method of claim 2 further including the step of inspecting portions of the system for restrictions based on the ranking of access points.

5. The method of claim 1 further including the step of inspecting portions of the system based on the comparison of the anticipated flow to the theoretical flow at each access point.

6. A method of evaluating a gravity-type flow conveyance system having a known geometry, the method comprising the steps of:

identifying a plurality of access points in the hydraulic conveyance system;

identifying all sources of flow input to the system upstream of each access point identified;

quantifying the expected volume of flow input of each source identified;

totaling the expected flow input from all sources identified upstream of each access point to compute an anticipated flow at each access point;

converting the anticipated flow to an anticipated depth of flow based on the known geometry of the system;

measuring an actual depth of flow at each access point;

comparing the anticipated depth of flow to the actual depth of flow at each access point to evaluate whether any restrictions on flow may exist in the conveyance system.

7. The method of claim 6, further including the steps of:

converting the actual measured depth of flow to a volume of flow based on the known geometry of the system to compute a theoretical flow at each access point;

assigning a ratio to each access point, the ratio being calculated by using the anticipated flow and the theoretical flow at each access point;

ranking the access points based on the assigned ratios.

8. The method of claim 7, further including the step of prioritizing maintenance on the system based on the ranking of access points.

9. The method of claim 7 further including the step of inspecting portions of the system for restrictions based on the ranking of access points.

10. The method of claim 6 further including the step of inspecting portions of the system based on the comparison of the anticipated flow to the theoretical flow at each access point.