This presentation examines how manual leak detection surveys compare to fixed base leak detection and their impact on NRW as it relates to reducing time of leak-awareness, leak-location, and leak-repair. We will demonstrate whereby utilizing the customer’s GIS, we can map all points we listened to, location of leaks, and total hours invested to survey 65 miles of pipe in a DMA. Detailed maps and reports will be shown throughout the presentation. We will then show what a fixed base acoustic logger deployment would look like for the same DMA and the costs related to each system.
Learning Objectives
-
Compare manual leak detection surveys and fixed-base acoustic leak detection based on survey coverage, time, cost, and operational effectiveness.
-
Evaluate how reducing leak-awareness and leak-location time can improve overall leak-repair response and contribute to reducing non-revenue water (NRW).
-
Use GIS data to visualize survey coverage, listening points, leak locations, and personnel hours invested within a district metered area (DMA).
-
Assess the costs and deployment requirements of a fixed-base acoustic logger system compared with a traditional manual leak detection program.
-
Identify the most appropriate leak detection strategy for a DMA by considering system size, available resources, survey frequency, response time, and expected NRW reduction.
Presenter:
Josh Dickert
LB Water
Cost: $49
