Finding the difficult leaks

Malcolm Farley * * Principal, Malcolm Farley Associates: mfarley@alvescot.demon.co.uk

In 2003 IWA Publishing (IWAP) published 'Losses in Water Distribution Networks - A Practitioner's Guide to Assessment, Monitoring and Control (1). The book is a step-by-step guide for water utility practitioners who wish to introduce, or strengthen, a non-revenue water (NRW) reduction strategy. Addressing the need for up to date information on the technologies and instrumentation for supporting a NRW reduction strategy, IWAP will publish, in 2008, a follow up book, by Malcolm Farley and Stuart Hamilton Technology and Equipment for Water Loss Management (2). Based on the results of research by the authors, with practical case study examples from their own experiences, this new book describes and reviews the available technology. Particularly relevant are those technologies for leak location and pinpointing in large diameter transmission mains still a major gap in the multi-sensor toolbox. The book includes the experiences and case studies from manufacturers and utility practitioners on the operation and effectiveness of new technologies (and enhancements to existing technologies) for finding those difficult leaks. This article gives a short review of such technologies. Today's water utility operators have a range of equipment and techniques to measure, analyse, monitor and reduce leakage and other losses in their networks. In recent years there has been a surge in development of tools and equipment to support these tasks. However, there is still a big gap in the toolbox - complementary technology and equipment for locating and pinpointing leaks in difficult situations. There are always leaks that are difficult to find. These are invariably in transmission mains - large diameter, non-metallic, low-pressure mains, or in those which are strategically difficult to monitor and where excavation cost is at a premium. Accuracy is therefore paramount. What technologies will find the difficult leaks? There are several conventional technologies for localizing, locating and pinpointing leaks, in both the distribution network and transmission mains. All these technologies work well on conventional pipes small to medium diameter, metallic pipes at reasonable pressure. They are: Leak noise correlator Correlating noise loggers Gas injection and detection at the leak point

But every network has a proportion of large diameter, non-metallic pipes, such as PVCu, medium density polyethylene, asbestos cement or reinforced concrete. These are usually transmission mains, frequently in low-pressure systems. Such mains can traverse many kilometres of rural terrain, will have few valves or other suitable contact points for sensors and hydrophones, and will often be laid in positions where they are strategically difficult to monitor and where excavation cost is at a premium for example beneath a river bed or a main highway. They are usually laid deeper than distribution pipes, and depths of 5.0 metres or more are not uncommon. In such cases accuracy of leak location and pinpointing is paramount to avoid major disruption and unnecessary excavation costs. Leaks in these pipes are difficult to locate with conventional technology, and even the most advanced leak noise correlator will require the main to be excavated at say, 500 m intervals, for the installation of sensor contact points or hydrophone insertion points, to maximize the leak noise. In-pipe acoustic technology is able to pinpoint the leak very accurately, but the cost of excavation of the insertion point and chamber, particularly for deep laid pipes, is high. 1

There are, however, some less conventional techniques, which are invariably called on when the other technologies fail: Correlation with low frequency hydrophones Signal analysis at low frequencies In pipe acoustic technology Ground penetrating radar (GPR)

GPR the technology Of all the technologies, only one is a truly non-intrusive technology GPR. If this technology can be enhanced to distinguish bursts and leakage from other underground anomalies, we will have solved the quest for the perfect leak detection technology. The advantages and disadvantages of both the conventional and the new technologies are discussed in the following sections. Needing no direct access to the main, GPR is a well-established technique for identifying underground disturbances and voids, and for providing information on other utilities' underground plant - positions of buried pipes, irrespective of the pipe material. As GPR also detects underground water content, it has been adapted as an alternative technology for leakage detection. As such it is another tool for use in circumstances where correlation is not possible or is unreliable, such as rural transmission mains, avoiding the need for creating additional access points. It is a technology which is used with a great deal of success in one or two countries - for example there are experienced operators in South Africa and Australia who are using GPR successfully on a daily basis. Elsewhere its use as a first-line leak detection tool is currently limited, but its credibility with leak detection contractors is growing.

Figure 1. GPR image showing water accumulation from a leak (Source: Rodney Brier/RVM Surveys CC)

The resolution of the image produced depends on the ground strata, but with favourable conditions resolution is a few centimetres. Depending on antennae and the material properties of the soil, it can successfully penetrate down to about 10m to detect most utility network services. Data are stored electronically in a project file for storage and retrieval as and when necessary for comparison with later surveys. Interpretation of the raw data can provide information such as depth, orientation, size and shape of buried objects (e.g manhole covers, valve chamber and meter covers) and the density and water content of soils. It is the ability to detect differences in the density and water content of soils around pipelines that allows GPR to be used to detect leakage from mains. Figure 1 illustrates this principle: additional water in the ground is very reflective to radar and shows up in the image as the 2

white area. The main is at the top of the image, apparently rising and falling due to the compressed scale of the image. Water rising to the underside of the road surface is clearly visible and the leak is at the extreme left of the image. GPR is particularly cost effective when deployed as a rapid reconnaissance survey tool on long lengths of transmission main. An array of antennae is attached to a survey vehicle and driven along transmission main routes at 15 - 30 km per hour, depending on location and traffic. The survey equipment can also be adapted to fit to four-wheel drive rough terrain vehicles. Units can also be used by pedestrian surveyors, trolley-mounted or mounted on 'teflon' skids, with survey speeds of 10 - 20 km per hour. However, the complexity of interpreting the data continues to deter water utilities from more extensive use of GPR. The skill requirement is clearly in the interpretation of the signal, and a high level of skill and experience is required to interpret the raw data prior to filtering to provide data which utility operators can understand and use. However, in the hands of a skilled contractor the rapid reconnaissance technique can quickly identify likely points of leakage, which can then be confirmed by traditional acoustic methods if necessary. In Figure 2 the left hand image illustrates the raw signal and the right hand image the same signal after interpretation.
Fractured Main GPR Survey Vehicle

Sewer

Leakage

Valve Chamber

Figure 2. GPR data before and after interpretation of image (Source: Wide World/South East Water Plc)

It is possible to carry out cross country pipeline inspection for leaks using GPR mounted on a small aircraft or helicopter, as is the case for infra red scanning of the pipeline surface for changes in soil temperature. But, unlike infra-red scanning, GPR does needs movement of the antenna to develop an image. Differing climates and geologies would dictate which method to use in a particular situation. GPR has also been used with some success for identifying leakage from underground storage reservoirs. The unit is used to scan through the roof of the reservoir to the base slab. The results can help the utility engineer to justify draining the reservoir for a visual inspection. So is GPR the Holy Grail of leak detection? GPR and thermal imaging are still the only non-intrusive technologies presently available for detecting leaks in transmission mains. The next few years will see a rapid increase in their development and use, particularly if cost benefits are comparable with conventional technologies, and the data can be analysed and interpreted by the utility engineer, without specialist knowledge and without the need to bring in a specialist GPR contractor. The European Union is funding an innovative research project, Waterpipe (3), which aims to develop an integrated system of Ground Penetrating Imaging Radar (GPIR) for detecting buried water pipes, for detecting leakage, and damage to pipelines. Combined with decision support software for rehabilitation management, this will indeed be the leak detection/infrastructure management technology of the future at last the perfect solution?

The progress of all the technologies will be reviewed in the author's next book (2) to be published by IWA Publishing in 2008. References 1. Farley, M and Trow, S (2003) Losses in Water Distribution Networks - A Practitioner's Guide to Assessment, Monitoring and Control. London: IWA Publishing http://www.iwapublishing.com/template.cfm?name=isbn1900222116 2. Farley, M and Hamilton S, Technology and Equipment for Water Loss Management (to be published by IWA Publishing in 2008) http://www.iwapublishing.com/template.cfm?name=isbn1843390868 3. Kiss, G, Koncz, K and Melinte, C. Conference proceedings, Water Loss 2007, 23-26 September 2007, Bucharest. Volume 3, pp 622-631: http://www.waterloss2007.com