PLANNING THE REHABILITATION OF CAMPERDOWN’S SEWERAGE PIPELINE SYSTEM Jeff Haydon Peter Wilson Max Anderson - Montgomery Watson Australia South West Water Montgomery Watson Australia Abstract: The rehabilitation of sewerage pipelines is carried out for either hydraulic, structural or operational reasons. The planning and investigation work completed to date for the town of Camperdown in South West Water is presented as a good example of using logical processes of low cost hydraulic planning to minimise high cost field investigations. Through the use of a calibrated hydraulic sewer model the effects of applying repair, lining or replacement solutions to reduce the quantity of wet weather inflow and infiltration have been modelled. The office based modelling of various combinations of the above works, together with supplementary flow management solutions, such as offline detention storage, has provided South West Water with valuable knowledge. The Authority has used this knowledge to evaluate a range of treatment and disposal options some of which involved I/I abatement and flow containment. Keywords: Planning, hydraulic modelling, flow monitoring, I/I abatement, pipeline rehabilitation, flow management, hydraulic levels of service, time series analysis. Background Camperdown is located in South West Victoria and has a population of 3,150 (ABS 1996) people serviced by 33 kilometers of reticulation sewer and a conventional trickling filter plant. Refer Figure 1. Discharge of treated effluent is to Lake Colongulac. The existing lake discharge does not comply with the requirement of the State Environment Protection Policy and South West Water is required to bring the plant into compliance by December 2001. The treatment plant includes a maturation lagoon and sludge lagoon and the required effluent discharge standards cannot be achieved without substantial augmentation to the plant. The entry of effluent into the treatment plant is currently restricted resulting in excess wet weather flows bypassing the treatment plant. In addition to the overflows at the treatment plant, high ingress of stormwater inflow and groundwater infiltration is causing hydraulic overloading of the reticulation system. Sewage spills have occurred in the town. South West Water has embarked on a program of investigation to determine the best option or combination of options to treat and dispose of wastewater from Camperdown. The Authority has identified the significant options as the: 1. 2. Provision of post treatment storage to utilise treated wastewater for irrigation; or Upgrading of the treatment plant’s capacity and treatment facilities to achieve the required discharge quality to continue discharging to the Lake; or Insert to be added: Figure 1 3 Piping of pre treated sewage to an existing treatment plant at a neighboring town and upgrade that treatment plant’s capacity to cater for additional flows. Permutations of these options were considered which accounted for the inclusion or exclusion of the following actions: Reduction in wet weather inflow and infiltration through pipeline system repair, lining and replacement; and Retention and management of high volumes of pre treated wet weather flow to reduce the downstream costs and to eliminate sewage overflows. Treatment plant inflow records and system operator concerns had provided South West Water with an impression of very high wet weather ingress into the sewerage system during and following rainfall events. An investigation in 1992 concluded that the peak wet weather flow was close to 10 times the average dry weather flow during wet weather. South West Water believed that by reducing the ingress of rain dependent inflow and infiltration to about half the existing amount the loading to the treatment plant could be significantly reduced over any one year. This reduction in flow would also reduce storage facilities and the extent of treatment plant upgrade works. Before undertaking the modelling and cost versus benefit analysis outlined in this paper the Authority had set aside a preliminary budget of over $4 million. This paper presents the planning work undertaken to ascertain the expected benefits from implementing an I/I source detection and abatement program. The results of the modelling of various flow containment upgrading and offline detention storage works are also discussed. Outline of the Investigation Methodology Previous studies of this type have focused on isolating small sub-catchments where the highest component of wet weather ingress is occurring. Source detection of I/I and sewer rehabilitation then follows to reduce the quantities of inflow and infiltration. The planning approach for Camperdown was to develop a calibrated model which would simulate both dry and wet weather flows. The recorded flow monitoring data and rain gauge recorded data would be used to achieve an accurate calibration of the model. The development and calibration of the model would have two benefits, the quantification of rain dependent inflow, rain dependent infiltration and base groundwater infiltration between the subcatchments. Secondly on quantification of these ingress components the model could then be used to assess the impact or effect of various pipeline rehabilitation strategies. By modelling percentage reductions in inflow and infiltration the volume of sewage flow and sewage overflow could be calculated by the model. In this way the cost of upgrading works, as defined by the extent of rehabilitation and flow management works, could be compared to the expected volume reductions in contained flow and overflow. The outline of the methodology is shown in Figure 2. To assess the impact or value of rehabilitation and containment works over the period of a year a number of years of actual rainfall would be simulated through the model with the improvement works in place. This time series assessment would help quantify the extent of pre and post treatment storage and the level of upgrading of the treatment plant. Quantifying the Existing Hydraulic Performance of the Camperdown Sewerage System Hydraulic modelling identified several locations of hydraulic deficiency within Camperdown. Wastewater overflows to Lake Colongulac and the town storm water drainage system prior to treatment were simulated during the recorded wet weather events. Define Study Objective Capture & Validate Sew er Data Select Flow Monitoring Sites Build Hydraulic Model Calibrate Hydraulic Model Assess Existing Service Levels Undertake Flow Monitoring Model Solutions Undertake Cost vs Benef its Analysis Plan Flow Management Works Identif y SubCatchments f or I/I Abatement CCTV & Other Plan Repair Lining & Replacement Works Plan Treatment Plant Upgrade Implement Works Figure 2 Investigation Methodology A total of three recorded storms were used to calibrate the detailed hydraulic model. The hydraulic analysis results during dry and synthetic wet weather events are shown in Table 1. The total overflow volume is the sum of spill volumes predicted from the seven emergency relief overflow structures constructed throughout the catchment. Event Weekday Dry Weather Flow (3 day simulation) 1 in 1 year ARI – 24hr duration (3 day simulation) 1 in 5 year ARI – 24hr duration (3 day simulation) Table 1 Rainfall (mm) Total Discharge Volume (m3) Total Overflow Volume (m3) 0 3120 0 39 11100 3650 65 11300 5600 Summary of Modelled Hydraulic Performance The existing hydraulic performance or level of service of the catchment failed to meet a minimum 1 in 1 year ARI design storm. Wet Weather Response by Sub-Catchment The wet weather response in the sewer is the additional flow due to rain and ground water entering the pipeline system. The three major sources of inflow and infiltration ingress into the sewer system were identified as rain dependent inflow, rain dependent infiltration and wet catchment infiltration. The hydraulic model was invaluable in separating these different components as the calibration process requires developing individual fast and slow responses for each sub area upstream of a flow monitoring site. For a 1-in-5 year ARI 24 hour duration storm the I/I volume was calculated by subtracting the dry weather flow from the wet weather flow over the length of sewer for each of the sub-catchments. Figure 3 shows the results of these calculations for each sub-catchment. Camperdown 1 in 5 year event Simulated wet weather ingress by sub-catchment 500 Rainfall dependant Inflow Rainfall dependant Infiltration Wet Catchment Infiltration Total Inflow / Infiltration 450 Volume of Ingress (m3/km) 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Catchment Number Figure 3 Summary of Wet Weather Response by Sub-Catchment The most dominate source of wet weather ingress identified was ‘wet catchment infiltration’. It was recorded entering the sewers up to two days after a significant rainfall event whilst the rain dependent inflow was proportionately low in all sub-catchments. The worst performing sewers with respect to inflow and infiltration are those contained within subcatchments 3, 4, 5 and 8, whilst the best performing sub-catchments were 1 and 7. Confirming the Required Level of Service The Victorian water authorities have not had to license their sewage overflows to this point in time. South West Water is examining the implications of adopting the 1 in 5 year level of service for flow containment for Camperdown as this has been the accepted standard applied by the EPA elsewhere in Victoria. This level of service means that the Authority must develop a flow abatement strategy and a flow management strategy to prevent overflows occurring for any wet weather event up to and including the 1 in 5 year event. Summary of the Methodology for Options Analysis The search for solutions to Camperdown’s problems of excessive wet weather sewage flow and inadequate quality of treatment plant effluent have focused on the total catchment management approach. The extent of the improvement works on the reticulation system are dependent on whether treatment plant upgrading works proceed or whether the alternative treatment/disposal option is adopted. The solutions trialled in the planning phase have been carried out quickly and efficiently with the hydraulic model. In summary the options available to South West Water were to either: Reduce I/I flow volumes through pipeline rehabilitation; Manage the wet weather flow by providing detention storage facilities; Eliminate throttles and overflows by augmentation and diversion works; and Upgrade the treatment plant. Figure 4 outlines the procedure followed to develop the optimum solution or solutions for Camperdown. Existing Sewer System Modified Treatment Plant Existing Treatment Plant I/I Abatement Works Repair Relining Renewal Flow Management Works Economic Analysis Catchment Development Plan Figure 4 Methodology to Analyse Options Pipeline Inflow and Infiltration Abatement Works Montgomery Watson and South West Water considered previous inflow and infiltration abatement experience in getting achievable reductions in the volume of wet weather ingress that could be prevented from entering the sewer system for the different methods of rehabilitation. The three types of sewer rehabilitation examined and the areas of I/I abatement they target are shown in Table 2. Method of I/I Reduction Repair Relining Renewal Table 2 Expected Result High percentage removal of rain dependent inflow, but a low percentage reduction of infiltration due to partially repairing the system and the system still exhibiting weak points. Modest to low percentage removal of rain dependent inflow and modest reduction of infiltration due to property branch connection and relining joint infiltration. High percentage removal of infiltration ingress, whilst modest to low reduction in rain dependent inflow. Expected Benefit of Inflow/Infiltration Abatement Methods The hydraulic modelling of the I/I abatement scenarios involved applying the percentage reductions in inflow response and infiltration response for the particular rehabilitation technique trialed. As the work was targeted to specific sub catchments the cost for each rehabilitation option was determined. Relationships between the cost of the option and the modelled reduction in wet weather ingress were prepared. It was determined that the most cost effective sewers to look at rehabilitation through repair, relining and renewal were found in sub-catchments 3, 4 and 5. The three methods of I/I abatement in the Camperdown catchment exhibit the relationship between cost and volume reduction as shown in Figure 5. The pattern of diminishing returns is evident for any one of the inflow and infiltration abatement works modelled. The relationship derived assumes application of either of the three rehabilitation techniques. Camperdown 1 in 5 year event Modelled flow reduction benefit from I/I Abatement 7000 6000 3 Volume Reduction (m ) 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Cost ($ millions) Repair Figure 5 Relining Replacement Flow Reduction Benefits Treatment Plant Upgrade The recommended solution for the future of the treatment plant is augmentation of the existing facilities to treat the current and expected peak flows generated from the catchment. A separate detailed investigation on the performance of the existing facility and future requirements of the treatment plant was also undertaken concurrently with the planning study. In summary the study concluded that it was more cost effective to upgrade the existing treatment plant to meet the expected flow volumes from the adopted catchment development solution rather than rebuild the treatment plant to a higher level of treatment. Flow Management Through Modelling Detention Storage The rehabilitation solutions developed for I/I abatement, even taken to the extreme of rehabilitating most of the reticulation pipeline system, will still not reduce wet weather ingress to levels to prevent system overflows during the 1 in 5 year event. The hydraulic model was utilised with each of the I/I abatement options to determine the location and preliminary sizing of wet weather detention storage facilities. Localised Sewer Augmentation and Flow Diversion Works A number of sewers require augmentation either in the form of upsizing the diameter of the existing sewer or constructing an additional sewer in parallel to increase the hydraulic capacity. Additional sewer augmentations specific to each option have been determined and costed to meet the specific catchment requirements. Cost Comparisons of Options Figure 6 illustrates the value of the hydraulic modelling to determine the lowest cost solution and achieve the maximum benefit in overflow reduction. The cost of undertaking I/I abatement work to the three worst catchment along with treatment plant upgrade is compared with the development of a complete flow management solution to meet the required level of service. Figure 6: Cost Comparison of Options South West Water’s Preferred Adopted Solution The hydraulic analysis concluded that reduction in I/I abatement through repair of the three worst catchments coupled with treatment plant upgrading works was the most cost effective option. This option satisfies the 1 in 5 year containment requirement and produced an effluent quality that complies with the existing requirements of discharge to the Lake or for storage in readiness for irrigation. The quality of the effluent does not meet the discharge standards that would apply if the Lake discharge was to continue beyond 2001 (tertiary treatment would be needed). South West Water has also been investigating the option of complete disposal of effluent to land through irrigation of farm land in the region. The works include the construction of pumping stations and rising mains together with a facility to store the winter flows until the weather is favourable for irrigation. Storage site limitations have made the cost of the storage very sensitive to the size needed to accommodate the winter flows. Accordingly, minimising the volume to be stored through more extensive I/I abatement works occurring in the town, results in a lower storage cost. The storage costs range from $2.3 million to $3.8 million. To determine the storage size, the monthly volumes generated from the catchment needed to be determined for a number of different ‘wetness’ years. This was simulated through time series analysis using the hydraulic model. Actual rainfall data was used for a number of years that were selected according to the annual rainfall measured. The cost of the resulting storage could then be determined for the specific I/I abatement option being considered. It was concluded that the lowest cost and best option was the disposal of effluent to land coupled with the I/I abatement option that involves the renewal of sewers in the three worst catchments. Thus when considering the whole sewerage cycle of collection, conveyance, treatment and disposal, the higher cost I/I abatement option of sewer renewal has been demonstrated to be cost effective in this instance. South West Water has adopted a program of works that will see the 1 in 5 year containment standard of the EPA met together with the potential renewal of all sewers in the three worst catchments. Current Works CCTV inspection of the three worst catchments is currently underway (involving 13 km of sewers) to determine if renewal of all the sewers is necessary. It may be possible to avoid the renewal of some of the sewers depending on their condition and the nature of inflow or infiltration. Further modelling of the sewer system was carried out by Montgomery Watson to determine if reduction in the rain dependant inflow (direct storm water connections) would make a substantial difference to the size of the detention storages or the augmentation works needed to prevent sewage overflows. The modelling demonstrated that significant savings in capital costs were possible if the anticipated reductions in this component of the inflow was achieved. Accordingly, South West Water is proceeding with a smoke testing program of the four catchments that were the worst performers in this area; three of which are those that are up for renewal. Implementing the Solution It is proposed to stage the augmentation, detention storage and I/I abatement works over the next two years. Monitoring of the treatment plant inflow and a number of the emergency relief structures will provide additional data upon which to base the detailed design and provide data to further validate the model accuracy. The calibrated model becomes a useful tool in the detailed design of all the elements within the works. The storage and land disposal works are proposed to be completed and operational by 2001. The discharge to the Lake can then cease and the treated effluent be put to a beneficial use. Conclusions The Camperdown study has identified the value of planning to develop optimum solutions for system upgrading and pipeline rehabilitation and to save costs on implementing the solutions. The analysis has theoretically quantified the reductions in wet weather ingress and system overflows through the application of various flow management and I/I abatement solutions throughout the catchment. Whilst assumptions about the degree of wet weather ingress reduction have had to be made the first message of this paper is that hydraulic modelling in combination with flow monitoring is the most accurate analysis available to quantify the expected benefits from any I/I work. This is due to the ability of the model to simulate the observed differences between the ingress components of rain dependent inflow, rain dependent infiltration and wet catchment infiltration. Flow measurement on its own in the hands of an experienced data analyst can quantify the various inflow and infiltration components. However it is very difficult to extrapolate the likely ingress expected from the theoretical level of service storm or from historical events which were larger than those recorded. Most storms recorded during a short term period of flow monitoring will be less than the 1 in 1 year event. Furthermore, without modelling, the data analyst would not be able to assess the impact on system performance and overflows throughout the catchment as a consequence of the wet weather ingress. Most I/I abatement strategies focus on reducing the number of stormwater drain cross connections to the sewer system. Large scale smoke testing; dye testing and CCTV surveys are carried out to find the sources of wet weather ingress. Camperdown has illustrated that it is the high infiltration through pipeline joints and cracks as the groundwater table rises following a prolonged period of rainfall which is the principal problem for this system. It is acknowledged that this is not always the case and that each system will be unique. The field work mentioned would do little to identify the infiltration problem, particularly if carried out in dryer periods of the year. The second message of the paper therefore is that until the problem is quantified and until the benefits are established through a cost versus benefit study very little money should be going into field investigations and or pipeline rehabilitation. The final message is that the assumed benefits of I/I abatement must be conservative. That is, the expected percentage reductions of inflow volume and infiltration volume for the different rehabilitation works of repair, lining and replacement must not be too high. For commercial confidentiality reasons it has not been possible to disclose the values used in the Camperdown study. It can be disclosed however that the final values were derived through a combination of research and negotiation between South West Water and Montgomery Watson. Acknowledgements: South West Water Thiess Environmental Service EPA Victoria Bureau of Meteorology