LABORATORY ASSIGNMENT NO.

3
WATER DISTRIBUTION NETWORK:
USING EPANET SOFTWARE

College of Engineering and Architecture

University of Science and Technology of Southern Philippines
Cagayan De Oro City

CE423: Water Supply Planning and Development

Submitted to:
Engr. Alchristine P. Apdian, RMP

Submitted by:
Agbas, Iver A.
Aranzo, Blaizel Grace O.
Badiang, Jesah May B.
Butra, Mc Ethan G.
Cabactulan, Hanna Jane A.
Cardanio, Clint Justin Y.
Datu, Joed C.
Halasan, Merl Jhone

October 10, 2024

I. INTRODUCTION
Environmental Protection Agency Network Evaluation Tool (EPANET) is
a hydraulic modeling software used to study water distribution networks is called. In this
lab assignment, the students will use the EPANET software to analyze the flow dynamics
of a water distribution network. EPANET is a well-liked hydraulic simulation program for
modeling the flow and pressure behavior of pressurized pipe systems. There are multiple
connections, pipes, a tank, a reservoir, and a pump that make up this network. The
pressures, pipe velocities, and flow rates at each junction will be calculated using the
Hazen-Williams formula with a roughness coefficient (C) of 150. By simulating this
network, one can evaluate system performance and optimize the water distribution process.

II. OBJECTIVE
The primary objectives of this analysis are as follows:
For Problem No. 1a
1. To determine the flow rate (in cubic meters per hour, CMH) and velocity (in
meters per second, m/s) in each pipe of the network.
2. To calculate the pressure at each junction/node in the system.
For Problem No. 1b
1. To generate the network diagram during the extended period simulation (EPS) at
Day 2, 9:00 AM.
2. To create a graph showing the head versus time in the tank at Day 3, 8:00 AM.
3. To produce a graph illustrating pressure versus time in Junctions 2, 3, 4, and 6 at
Day 2, 12 Noon.

III. SCOPE
This laboratory uses EPANET to analyze a hydraulic network and determine the
flow rates, velocities, and pressures in each pipe and junction under steady-state conditions.
Additionally, it evaluates the network's performance during an extended period simulation
(EPS) of 72 hours, allowing for various demand patterns. As part of the inquiry, a network
diagram and graphs displaying head and pressure variations at specific nodes at
predetermined periods are created. The results are meant to assess network efficiency and
pressure distribution across different operating conditions.

IV. METHODOLOGY (Problem No. 1a)

1. Set up Network Configuration
• Set the default units for flow as CMH
 • Create the Junctions, Tank, and Reservoir: In EPANET, create Junctions
J1 through J6, tank (T1) a reservoir (R1).
• Connect the Pipes:
o Pipe 1 (P1) connects Junction 1 (J1) to Junction 2 (J2).
o Pipe 2 (P2) connects J2 to Junction 6 (J6).
o Pipe 3 (P3) connects J2 to Junction 3 (J3).
o Pipe 4 (P4) connects J3 to Junction 5 (J5).
o Pipe 5 (P5) connects J5 to Junction 6 (J6).
o Pipe 6 (P6) connects J6 to Tank 1 (T1).
o Pipe 7 (P7) connects J3 to Junction 4 (J4).
o Pipe 8 (P8) connects J4 to Junction 5 (J5).

2. Input Tank, Pump Curve, Reservoir, Nodes/Junction, and the Pipe Data
• Tank Elevation: Set the tank’s (T1) elevation to 830 meters.
• Tank Diameter: Set the tank’s (T1) diameter to 60 meters.
• Tank Initial Level: Set the tank’s (T1) initial level to 4 meters.
• Tank Maximum Level: Set the tank’s (T1) maximum level to 20 meters.
• Pump Curve: Set the curve with a design flow of 600 CMH and a head of
150 meters.

• Reservoir Elevation & Demand: Set the reservoir’s (R1) elevation of 700
meters and a demand of 0 CMH.
• Junction 1 Elevation & Demand: Set the junction’s (J1) elevation of 700
meters and a demand of 0 CMH.
• Junction 2 Elevation & Demand: Set the junction’s (J2) elevation of 710
meters and a demand of 150 CMH.
• Junction 3 Elevation & Demand: Set the junction’s (J3) elevation of 700
meters and a demand of 150 CMH.
• Junction 4 Elevation & Demand: Set the junction’s (J4) elevation of 650
meters and a demand of 200 CMH.
• Junction 5 Elevation & Demand: Set the junction’s (J1) elevation of 700
meters and a demand of 150 CMH.
• Junction 6 Elevation & Demand: Set the junction’s (J6) elevation of 700
meters and a demand of 0 CMH.
• Pipe 1 Length & Diameter: Set the pipe’s (P1) length of 3000 meters and a
diameter of 350 millimeters.
• Pipe 2 Length & Diameter: Set the pipe’s (P2) length of 5000 meters and a
diameter of 300 millimeters.
• Pipe 3 Length & Diameter: Set the pipe’s (P3) length of 5000 meters and a
diameter of 200 millimeters.
• Pipe 4 Length & Diameter: Set the pipe’s (P4) length of 5000 meters and a
diameter of 200 millimeters.
• Pipe 5 Length & Diameter: Set the pipe’s (P5) length of 5000 meters and a
diameter of 200 millimeters.
• Pipe 6 Length & Diameter: Set the pipe’s (P6) length of 7000 meters and a
diameter of 250 millimeters.
• Pipe 7 Length & Diameter: Set the pipe’s (P7) length of 5000 meters and a
diameter of 150 millimeters.
• Pipe 8 Length & Diameter: Set the pipe’s (P5) length of 7000 meters and a
diameter of 150 millimeters.
3. Run EPANET Simulation
• Run the simulation in EPANET and ensure it completes successfully without
errors.

4. Analyze Flow
• Go to Report → Table.
• Enable Flow to view the Flow values.
• Identify the flow and record its value in CMH.
5. Analyze Velocity
• Go to Report → Table.
• Enable Velocity to view the velocity values.
• Identify the velocity and record its value in m/s.

6. Analyze Pressure
• Go to Report → Table.
• Enable Pressure to view the pressure values.
• Identify the pressure and record its value in m
V. RESULTS (Problem No. 1a)
1. Flow Values
After running the EPANET simulation, the flow values for each pipe were
recorded as follows:
• P1: 579.86 CMH
• P2: 174.99 CMH
• P3: 254.87 CMH
• P4: -4.17 CMH
• P5: 245.13 CMH
• P6: -70.14 CMH
• P7: 109.04 CMH
• P8: -90.96 CMH
Observation: The values that follow are the flow rates for each pipe: the flow
rates for Pipe 1 (P1) are 579.86 CMH, Pipe 2 (P2) is 174.99 CMH, Pipe 3 (P3)
is 254.87 CMH, Pipe 5 (P5) is 245.13 CMH, and Pipe 7 (P7) is 109.04 CMH.
Meanwhile, Pipes 4 (P4), 6 (P6), and 8 (P8) display negative flows of -4.17
CMH, -70.14 CMH, and -90.96 CMH, respectively. A negative flow, often
referred to as a reverse flow, occurs when water flows in the opposite direction
from the intended flow.

2. Velocity Values
After running the EPANET simulation, the velocity values for each pipe were
recorded as follows:
• P1: 1.67 m/s
• P2: 0.69 m/s
• P3: 2.25 m/s
• P4: 0.04 m/s
 • P5: 2.17 m/s
• P6: 0.40 m/s
• P7: 1.71 m/s
• P8: 1.43 m/s
Observation: The velocities of Pipe 1 (P1), Pipe 2 (P2), Pipe 3 (P3), Pipe 4 (P4),
Pipe 5 (P5), Pipe 6 (P6), Pipe 7 (P7), and Pipe 8 (P8) are 1.67 m/s, 0.69 m/s,
2.25 m/s, 0.04 m/s, and 2.17 m/s, respectively. These are the velocity values for
each pipe. These data show varying flow speeds throughout the network, with
Pipe 3 (P3) having the largest velocity and Pipe 4 (P4) indicating a significantly
low velocity, indicating negligible flow throughout this portion of the network.

3. Pressure Values
After running the EPANET simulation, the pressure values for each pipe were
recorded as follows:
• J1: 153.30 m
• J2: 126.42 m
• J3: 42.71 m
• J4: 13.73 m
• J5: 42.76 m
• J6: 129.94 m
• R1: 0.0 m
• T1: 4.0 m
Observation: The following are the pressure values at each node or junction: 0.0
m is the reservoir (R1), 4.0 m is the tank (T1), 13.73 m is at junction 4 (J4),
42.76 m is at junction 5 (J5), 129.94 m is at junction 6 (J6), 126.42 m is at
junction 2 (J2), 42.71 m is at junction 3 (J3), and 153.30 m is at junction 1 (J1).
The reservoir has no pressure, and these data indicate that J1 and J6 have the
highest system pressures while T1 has the lowest out of the nodes.

VI. METHODOLOGY (Problem No. 1b)

1. Set the total duration for the times options as 72 hours
2. Input the Demand Multiplying Factors for the Pattern
• Hour 1: Factor of 0.45
• Hour 2: Factor of 0.50
• Hour 3: Factor of 0.50
• Hour 4: Factor of 0.65
• Hour 5: Factor of 0.65
• Hour 6: Factor of 0.55
• Hour 7: Factor of 0.75
• Hour 8: Factor of 1.00
• Hour 9: Factor of 1.50
• Hour 10: Factor of 1.40
• Hour 11: Factor of 1.25
• Hour 12: Factor of 1.18
• Hour 13: Factor of 1.25
• Hour 14: Factor of 1.25
• Hour 15: Factor of 1.30
• Hour 16: Factor of 1.30
• Hour 17: Factor of 1.50
• Hour 18: Factor of 1.70
• Hour 19: Factor of 1.60
• Hour 20: Factor of 1.32
• Hour 21: Factor of 1.00
• Hour 22: Factor of 0.75
• Hour 23: Factor of 0.65
• Hour 24: Factor of 0.52
3. Analyze Flow at Day 2, 9:00 AM
• Go to Report → Table.
• Enable Flow to view the flow values.
• Identify the flow and record its value in CMH.

4. Analyze Velocity at Day 2, 9:00 AM

• Go to Report → Table.
• Enable Velocity to view the velocity values.
• Identify the velocity and record its value in m/s.
5. Analyze Pressure at Day 2, 9:00 AM
• Go to Report → Table.
• Enable Pressure to view the pressure values.
• Identify the pressure and record its value in m.

6. Analyze Head vs Time in the Tank at Day 3, 8:00 AM

• Go to Report → Graph
• Select the object type as nodes
• Set the parameter to head
• Add the tank (T1) as the node and graph
 7. Analyze Pressure vs Time in the Junctions 2, 3, 4, and 6 at Day 2, 12 Noon
• Go to Report → Graph
• Select the object type as nodes
• Set the parameter to pressure
• Add the junctions J2, J3, J4, and J6 as the nodes and graph

VII. RESULTS (Problem No. 1b)

1. Flow Values
At Day 2, 9:00 AM, the flow values for each pipe were recorded as follows:
• P1: 581.94 CMH
• P2: 176.97 CMH
• P3: 254.97 CMH
• P4: -4.07 CMH
• P5: 245.03 CMH
• P6: -68.06 CMH
• P7: 109.04 CMH
• P8: -90.96 CMH

Observation: The flow rates indicate that Pipe 1 has the highest flow at 581.94
CMH, which shows an increase from the steady-state flow observed
previously. In contrast, Pipes 4, 6, and 8 exhibit negative flow values,
indicating reverse flow conditions that have developed since the steady state.
This change could point to backflow issues or reduced demand in those
segments, highlighting potential areas for system adjustment.

2. Velocity Values
At Day 2, 9:00 AM, the velocity values for each pipe were recorded as follows:
• P1: 1.68 m/s
 • P2: 0.70 m/s
• P3: 2.25 m/s
• P4: 0.04 m/s
• P5: 2.17 m/s
• P6: 0.39 m/s
• P7: 1.71 m/s
• P8: 1.43 m/s
Observation: The velocities of Pipes 1, 2, and 6 increased, suggesting
improved flow conditions, while Pipe 4 continues to exhibit very low velocity,
pointing to a persistent flow problem. The other pipes show stability in their
velocities.

3. Pressure Values

At Day 2, 9:00 AM, the pressure values for each junction were recorded as
follows:
• J1: 152.96 m
• J2: 125.97 m
• J3: 42.19 m
• J4: 13.32 m
• J5: 42.24 m
• J6: 129.36 m
• R1: 0.0 m
• T1: 3.19 m

Observation: At Day 2, 9:00 AM, the pressure readings across the junctions
indicate stability, with Junction 1 at 152.96 m and Junction 6 at 129.36 m.
Compared to the steady-state values from Day 1, the pressure in Junction 1 has
decreased slightly, while Junction 6 shows a minor decrease as well. These
changes suggest that, while pressure remains adequate, there may be slight
fluctuations in demand or system dynamics affecting the pressure distribution.
4. Head vs Time in the Tank at Day 3, 8:00 AM
The head vs time graph shows a linear decline in hydraulic head over time,
indicating a steady decrease from 834 m at 0 hours to 832.65 at 57 hours. The
consistent drop suggests a balanced outflow, likely due to the base demand. The
time frame of 0 to 80 hours allows for trend analysis, highlighting the
importance of monitoring head levels to prevent low conditions that could affect
water supply and pressure
 5. Pressure vs Time in Junctions 2, 3, 4, and 6 at Day 2, 12 Noon.

The pressure values among the junctions shows notable differences. Junction 6 has
the highest pressure at 129.30 m, indicating strong water flow or proximity to a
supply source such as the tank, while Junction 2 is also well-supplied at 125.93 m.
In contrast, Junction 4's significantly lower pressure of 13.17 m may suggest a
blockage or increased demand, and Junction 3, at 42.15 m, indicates it might be
further from the main supply. The pressure readings are relatively stable, indicating
a well-balanced hydraulic system.

VIII. CONCLUSION

Highlighting significant performance findings from both extended period

simulation (EPS) and steady-state conditions, the water distribution network
laboratory concludes. Through supplying initial data for flow rates, pressures, and
velocities across junctions, the Day 1 analyze identified supply variations and other
challenges that needed to be resolved for Problem 1a. Day 2's 9:00 AM EPS analysis
in Problem 1b showed how variations in demand affect system performance by
showing constant flow rates and pressure, with some variables fluctuating from Day
1 to Day 2. These findings emphasize the necessity of constant monitoring and
adjustment to ensure optimal performance of the water distribution network,
especially in response to changing demands over time.