EWB PROJECT:



#1

[pic]

Document 525

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION REPORT

CHAPTER: University of Minnesota

COUNTRY: Guatemala

COMMUNITY: Simajhuleu

PROJECT: Uniting Water and People

TRAVEL DATES: January 1st to the 17th

PREPARED BY

John Frieseke, Derrick Passe, Peter Glashagel, Manuel Orozco, Justin Konen, Adam Swierczek, Kris Langlie, Nate Flieschacker, Charles Vermance, David Buck, Kathryn Klarich, Laura McDonald, Becca Pilkerton, Ryan Ballard, Taylor Hoffman, Kyle Johnson, Alexandra Paidosh, Alistar McIntyre, Jamie Wilcox, Jordan Klussendorf, Leigh Severson, Valerie Troutman, Laura Price

October 18th 2010

ENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS-USA

ewb-

Post-Assessment Report Part 1 – Administrative Information

1. Contact Information

| |Name |Email |Phone |Chapter |

|Project Leads |John Frieseke |frie0369@umn.edu |775 2295425 |UMN |

|President |Lauren Butler |butle226@umn.edu |847 3457356 |UMN |

|Mentor #1 |Derrick Passe |passe027@umn.edu |763 2860570 |MN |

|Mentor #2 |Peter Glashagel |pglashagel@ |651 4682062 |MN |

|Faculty Advisor (if |Tim LaPara |lapar001@umn.edu |612 6246028 |UMN |

|applicable) | | | | |

|Health and Safety Officer |Valerie Troutman |trout032@umn.edu |507 2616142 |UMN |

|Assistant Health and Safety |Derrick Passe |passe027@umn.edu |763 2860570 |MN |

|Officer | | | | |

|NGO/Community Contact |Elizabeth Howland |orlando624@ | |Long Way Home |

|Education Lead |Manuel |orozc014@umn.edu |559 9012192 |UMN |

| |Orozco | | | |

2. Travel History

|Dates of Travel |Assessment or Implementation |Description of Trip |

|January 5-12, 2008 |Assessment |Met with Simajhuleu community. Discussed existing design for |

| | |proposed water line. Explored alternative design options. |

| | |Collected information on community, topography, availability |

| | |of water, water quality, soil stability, etc |

|July 9-17, 2008 |Assessment |Surveyed Simajhuleu residents about water usage. Gathered |

| | |additional technical data about the existing water |

| | |distribution system. |

|Aug 23 –Sept, 2009 |Implementation |The constructed a 130,000L concrete rainwater cistern and |

| | |supporting rainwater collection system for the school in |

| | |Simajhuleu. Trained locals to be able to operate and maintain|

| | |structures in future. |

|January 6-17, 2010 |Assessment |Investigated possible solutions to the village-wide water |

| | |problems with data collection of multiple forms. (e.g. |

| | |survey) |

|May 19- June 2, |Assessment |Continued data collection with regards to a solution for |

|2010 | |Simajhuleu’s water system. Began addressing alternatives |

| | |analysis with the village to determine a best possible design|

| | |to move forward with but were interrupted by Tropical Storm |

| | |Agatha. |

|August 24 – Sept 3, 2010 |Assessment |Completed intended discussions from previous assessment. |

| | |Reached an agreement with local officials’ responsibilities |

| | |for a future implementation. Surveyed potential construction|

| | |sites and obstacles. |

1. Travel Team

|Name |E-mail |Phone |Chapter |Student or Professional |

|John Frieseke |frie0369@umn.edu |775 2295425 |UMN |Student |

|Justin Konen |konen007@umn.edu |612 4235289 |UMN |Student |

|Manuel Orozco |orozc014@umn.edu |559 901 2192 |UMN |Student |

|John Buzek |jrbuzek@ |612 2038669 |MN |Professional |

|David Buck |buckx107@umn.edu |414 4158156 |UMN |Student |

|Adam Swierczek |swier011@umn.edu | |UMN |Student |

|Amy Mikus |amy.mikus@ | |MN |Professional |

|Kris Langlie |kris.langlie@ | |MN |Professional |

|Jordan Klussendorf |kluss004@umn.edu |715 8465590 |UMN |Student |

|Charlie Vermance |verma035@umn.edu |563 4192990 |UMN |Student |

|Kathryn Klarich |klar0030@umn.edu |507 2723954 |UMN |Student |

|Ben Olin |olin0057@umn.edu |608 2957198 |UMN |Student |

|Scott Ajax |ajaxx003@umn.edu |952 2616288 |UMN |Student |

|Kyle Johnson |Joh07179@umn.edu |952 8074544 |UMN |Student |

|Derrick Passe |passe027@umn.edu |763 2860570 |MN |Professional |

|Dan Martens |danlmartens@ |651 2700091 |MN |Professional |

|Matt Hansen |matt.hansen@ |612 8395865 |MN |Professional |

|Laura McDonald |mcdon509@umn.edu |920 3442456 |UMN |Student |

|Valerie Troutman |trout032@umn.edu |507 2616142 |UMN |Student |

|Laura Price |price455@umn.edu |814 6887967 |UMN |Student |

• Please see man-hours in the Construction plan in Part 2 Section 5 as well as Appendix J.

• During week one we will have 14 members present and during week two we will have 11 members present.

2. Safety

1. Travel Safety

1. Department of State Travel Warning/Alert and International SOS Travel Risk Ratings

SOS Travel Risk Ratings

Currently there are no state department warnings or alerts for this country. (per the state department website).

2. Point to point travel detail

The team will be traveling by air from Minneapolis, Minnesota to Guatemala City, Guatemala.

From there a representative of Long Way Home, the local NGO that we are working with, will provide transportation to the village located north of Guatemala City near Chimaltenango.

3. On-the-ground phone number and email for travel team

The team has access to the internet while in country so all emails will be accessible in the evenings when the team has returned to the hotel after working in the village. In an emergency our NGO is available as well by contacting Mateo Paneitz: 978-352-6804; email address: mpaneitz@

U.S. Embassy in Guatemala City Avenida La Reforma 7-01, Zone 10

(502) 2331-2354 for emergencies

(502) 2326-4000 during business hours (8:00 am to 5:00 pm)

(502) 2332-4353 fax

American Citizen Services Unit(3)

(502) 2326-4405

Monday through Thursday 7:30 am to 12:00 noon and 1:00 pm to 3:30 pm

Friday 7:30 am to 11:30 am

Saturday and Sunday closed

Roadside Assistance

Roadside assistance force PROVIAL(2)

2419-2121

basic tools, first aid supplies, services are free

Hospital Santiago Apostol (Private), 28.4 km away(5)

Calle del Manchén #7

Phone: 78 32 08 83

Antigua, Guatemala

Hospital San Rafael Antigua Guatemala, 28.7 km away(1)

Hospital Evangelico El Buen Samaritano, Chichicastenango 32.4 km(1)

Hospitals in Guatemala City , 39.3 km away(7)

Hospital De Las Americas (private)

10a. Calle 2-31, Zona 14

Phone: 2384-3535 Fax: 2366-1029

Hospital General San Juan De Dios (Public Hospital)

1a. Avenida 10-50, Zona 1

Phone: 2253-0443/47, 2253-0423/29.

Affiliated with University San Carlos School of Medicine

Roosevelt Hospital (Public Hospital)

Calzada Roosevelt, Zona 11

Phone: 2471-1441, 2472-1442, 2471-2389, 2472-1381, 472-1886

Hosproos@.gt

Affiliated with University San Carlos School of Medicine

2. Site Safety – Health and Safety Plan

See separate document.

3. Budget

1. Cost

|Expense |Total Cost |

|Airfare |$6,000 |

|On Ground |$4,250 |

|Materials |$13,684 |

|Other |$1,275 |

|Total |$25,209 |

2. Hours

|Names |# of Weeks |Hours/Week |Trip Hours |Total Hours |

|Project Lead: John Frieseke |56 |13 |744 |1,472 |

|Mentor: Derrick Passe |56 |10 |744 |1,304 |

|Mentor: Peter Glashagel |42 |10 |168 |588 |

|Professional Team Members/ Mentors: |20 |5 |804 |904 |

|John Buzek, John Chlebeck, Adam | | | | |

|Klecker, Mark Ryan, Kris Langlie, | | | | |

|Mark Arneson | | | | |

|Other Team Members (20 person |56 |100 (5 hours per |6,384 |11,984 |

|average) | |person) | | |

*These hours represent cumulative hours spent preparing for this implementation. Trip hours represent hours spent in country for assessments and implementation.

3. Donors and Funding

|Donor Name |Type (company, foundation, private, in-kind) |Account Kept at EWB-USA? |Amount (dollars) |

|Rotary Hudson |Foundation |No |5,000 |

|Rotary River Falls |Foundation |No |500 |

|Rotary International |Foundation |No |2,319 |

|Travel Team |In-Kind |No | |

|Milwaukee High School of the Arts, |Private |No |2,100 |

|National Honors Society | | | |

|Pentair (Pending) |Foundation |No |12,500 |

|Institute on the Environment (pending) |Foundation |No |6,000 |

|Textile Sales |Private |No |400 |

|Caterpillar (pending) |Foundation |No |18,500 |

|Amount Raised: | | |10,319 |

|Amount Pending: | | |37,000 |

|Total: | | |47,319 |

4. Project Location

Longitude: -90.85

Latitude: 14.79

5. Project Impact

Number of persons directly affected: 2,500

Number of persons indirectly affected: 2,500

6. Mentor Resume

Derrick J Passe

492 Coulee Trail

Hudson, WI 54016

Home: 715 386-8348 Mobile: 763 286-0570

dpasse@dishup.us

ENGINEERING PROFILE:

Experienced civil engineer with over 25 years of experience, BS in Civil Engineering, MS in Water Resource Science, and track record of success in engineering project goals. Skilled team member and problem solver able to identify cost effective designs to decrease expenditures of time and resources. Efficient, organized leader with success in engineering design specializing in water resources. Able to communicate engineering designs to diverse cultures. Expert-level skills in civil engineering, water resource management and business development.

RELEVANT EXPERIENCE:

Engineers Without Borders - MN Professionals 2005 - Present

PROJECT MANAGER – GUATEMALA

• Led volunteer team of professional and student engineers in the assessment and

implementation of sustainable development projects.

• Completed a water system providing water to an environmental learning center.

• Constructed a Rainwater Harvesting System for a grade school.

• Currently assessing a water system for 2500 people. (Implementation January 2011)

Anderson Passe & Associates, Spring Lake Park,MN and Hudson, WI 1993 to 2009

PRESIDENT, PROJECT MANAGER, CIVIL ENGINEER

• Established Passe Engineering Incorporated (PEI) and grew company to 30

Employees in three offices.

• Coordinated Civil Engineering and Land Surveying for construction and modification of roadways, water supplies, sanitary facilities, storm water management, wetland alterations and building construction.

• Marketed company to existing and prospective clients.

• Consulted with clients, public and private agencies to determine project requirements.

• Prepared preliminary and final plans for client, government, watershed, and agency approval. Made technical presentations to elected and appointed officials to secure project approval.

• Assisted in the preparation of EAWs and met with concerned citizens to explain construction projects and modified details to reduce impacts where appropriate.

• Evaluated contractor performance to assure that their work met the project specifications.

• Provided expert witness testimony to resolve civil construction claims.

Ulteig Engineers - Fridley, MN 1988 - 1993

PROJECT MANAGER, CIVIL ENGINEER

• Worked with private clients to design, develop and construct private improvement projects.

• Administered contracts between the Owner and Contractor for the construction of improvement projects.

• Worked on construction projects including roadways, site grading, wetland alteration,

water facilities, sanitary installations and drainage structures.

DeWayne C. Olson Consulting Engineers - Spring Lake Park, MN 1984 – 1987

ENGINEER IN TRAINING

• Design engineer for private improvement projects.

• Securing approvals from City, State and Federal Agencies.

• Inspected projects on behalf of the Owner and City to assure that the Contractor completed the improvements in accordance with the Plans and Specifications.

EDUCATION:

University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, July 2010

M.S., Water Resource Science, GPA: 3.68/.4.00

Thesis – Providing Safe Drinking Water in Guatemala Through Collaboration, Metering and Monitoring.

University of Wisconsin - Platteville, Platteville, Wisconsin, December 1983

B.S., Civil Engineering, GPA: 3.42/4.00.

LICENSES AND CERTIFICATIONS:

Professional Engineer - Minnesota, 1988-present.

Professional Engineer - Wisconsin, 1988-present.

Stream Restoration, Science and Engineering of, Post Baccalaureate Certificate, 2010.

First Responder - Wisconsin, 2003-2009.

Wetland Delineation & Management, USACOE Training, 2001.

Pre-Implementation Report Part 2 – Technical Information

1. INTRODUCTION

This document will demonstrate how the design of water system improvements proposed by the University of Minnesota and Minnesota Professional chapters of Engineers Without Borders will aid Simajhuleu, Guatemala.

Simajhuleu is isolated from the rest of Guatemala economically, socially and politically due largely to its location in the central highlands. This is especially evident in the rainy season when the dirt roads, which serve as the only means of transportation, become impassible due to the combination of landslides, mud, and steep grades.

For this project we will be creating a new trunk line and pressure break tanks in what is known as Water Area C. These will be used to accomplish our primary goal. This is to reduce the pressure in the system and therefore reduce leaks and prevent damage to the system. This trunk line will be placed between the existing storage tank and the existing distribution system. The trunk line will provide water to four segments of Water Area C. These segments will be the made up of the existing lines to serve individual homes. The segment will be served by one of the pressure break tanks in order to limit the maximum pressure. The pressure is also how these segments were defined by the elevation change. This then defined where the tanks were needed to reset the pressure. This will also allow those receiving excess water to shut of their taps without harming the system. By doing this more water will be available to those in areas of poor pressure by backfilling the existing distribution line.

2. PROGRAM BACKGROUND

This report details the proposed design by the University of Minnesota and Minnesota Professional chapters of Engineers Without Borders of an improved water system to aid Simajhuleu, Guatemala.

Simajhuleu is located in the central highlands and is a very mountainous region, making it isolated from the rest of Guatemala economically, politically, and socially. The village is accessible only by dirt roads which are frequently impassable due to the combination of landslides, mud, and steep grades. During the rainy season, these roads are often closed leaving the village increasingly isolated.

Simajhuleu covers approximately one square mile where approximately 2,500 community members reside. An almost 40 year old PVC pipeline originally designed and left incomplete by a Canadian engineering firm, is the current means of distributing water to these 2,500 residents. The number of residents in the village has almost tripled since the original system was designed, resulting in a larger demand of water. As the system ages, leaks occur from built up pressure at the end of the system decreasing the amount of water further. The pipeline is composed of PVC no greater the 2.5 inches in diameter and the majority is constructed from 1 ¼ in PVC. The system is fed from three springs located 4 to 8 kilometers away and is able to supply the village with 92 LPCD (Appendix E). This was determined through measuring the inflow into the main tank where all of the three supply lines meet before entering the distribution system. At this point in the system, a chlorination system was installed and is still currently used to clean the water before being distributed. The chlorination system is a pool chlorinator that uses tablets, supplied by the government, to treat the water. This system has been tested by the government and has passed due to little to no identification of biological contaminates. Our team also analyzed the water and confirmed the results of the government. Our investigation also tested for chemical, heavy metals and physical characteristics which the community’s system passed.

The COCODE, or Water Board of the village, is responsible for the care and repair of the water system. The COCODE is a group of elected officials that regulates the uses and repairs of the system and has been able to keep the current system operational for almost 40 years with very limited resources.

Despite the best efforts of the COCODE, the system is failing to adequately serve the village. After initial analysis of the supply to the system, it was determined that the existing supply will adequately serve the village with a sufficient supply of water if there are no losses in the distribution system.

The village is divided into 6 political sectors. Sectors 1 and 2 receive water one day, sectors 3 and 4 the next, and sector five the last day in the cycle. Sector 6 has an independent water system Losses in each sector have been found to be approximately 45% in Sector 5, 25% in sectors 3 and 4, and only 5% in sectors 1 and 2 (Appendix E) leading Sector 5 to be in the most need.

After several assessment trips, an alternatives analysis was completed. Our investigation was divided into three categories: supply, distribution, and demand. These will be discussed briefly. Increasing the supply would allow more LPCD for the village and would be beneficial. However with the current distribution system, increasing the amount of water in the system will not decrease the amount of leaking in the system. Further, the current supply line is ¾ in and cannot transport the additional water. Another difficulty in increasing the supply is finding another source of water. Due to the mountainous terrain, it would be difficult to drill a well and additional springs or spring capacity could not be identified.

Next, decreasing demand was considered. We would need to work directly with the people in the community to convince those who use too much water to change their habits to allow their neighbors to receive more water. This is a low cost solution, however the impact will not be high.

Finally, decreasing losses in the system was explored. After examining the distribution system, we identified the losses listed in Appendix E and created solutions to prevent these losses. One possible solution is to break the pressure that is in the system through building small tanks that would temporarily store the water, alleviating pressure. This would also allow the regulation of pressure at each new small tank, which allows the regulation of water at each location.

The results of this alternatives analysis were presented to the village and COCODE. They also had identified the distribution system as the component whose improvement would be most beneficial.

After returning from the final assessment trip, the data was gathered and analyzed. Our solution is to build three small pressure break tanks that will equalize the pressure. Water from the main tank will no longer be distributed linearly. The water will be distributed to these three smaller pressure breaking tanks after which, the water will be routed back into three independent lines. These independent lines will utilize the current distribution system preventing us from needing to interrupt every household to reconstruct their lines. The pressure break tanks will reduce the amount of leaking where large pressure builds up such as at the end of the system, and will also increase the pressure at those houses who currently do not receive water due to pressures too low. A new main line from the main tank that all three supply lines feed into will be constructed reducing additional water losses at the beginning of the system. Finally, we will work with the community on an education campaign that will teach the villagers about the correct usage of the system and also water sanitation. With knowledge of the functionality of the system, the village can contribute to the success of the new system. Our solution will more equally distribute water through the construction of the pressure break tanks because water will be carried further in the system before it is then distributed.

However, our solution will not solve all of the issues with the current system. Each sector will still receive water only once every three days and there will also still be leaks in the system due to cracked pipes. Despite these issues, EWB-UMN believes our solution will best address the needs of the community. Both increasing the supply and creating a new distribution system is the ideal solution, however is very impractical when the landscape, resources, and time frames are considered. Our solution will first improve the system so that a future increase in the amount of water supplied will be have the greatest impact on the village. The village understands our work will start in sector 5 and will incrementally extend to the other sectors and their problems will not be immediately fixed. However, in the long run, our system will equally supply all villagers with an adequate amount of water.

3. FACILITY DESIGN

The design will be described as section A, which describes the piping network, and section B, which details the concrete pressure breaking tanks.

1. Description of the Proposed Facilities

This system is intended to serve the people in sector 5 of Simajhuleu equitably and reliably. The first major component of the design is a PVC distribution line that will increase the flow to appropriate quantities and reduce the village’s dependence on the current 40 year old pipes. Larger diameter PVC piping will be placed between the village’s main tank, and the four new pressure break tanks. These four concrete pressure breaking tanks will be constructed throughout sector 5 of Simajhuleu. The tanks will service four sub sectors in sector five based on elevations and will allow for greater pressure equity throughout the sector.

Please see the attached SchematicDrawings.ppt for a drawing and conceptual drawing and discussion of the system.

[pic]

Please see attached file SimaProposedSystem.pdf for file with zoom and additional clarity. This file is in the Sector5CADMaps folder that is attached to the email along with this document. Also in this folder are detailed maps with profiles as well as an expanded view including the existing system around our proposed system.

[pic]

Schematic of Sector 5 service areas. The number of homes is listed. From a previous survey the average number of persons per house hold is 5. Turquoise boxes are pressure break tanks. Black lines represent the existing distributions system. Green lines represent our new mainlines. Blue lines represent the pipe run from the tank to its connection to the distribution network. The small turquoise dot represents the spring feed collection tank. Each local service area is drawn with a light blue line.

2. Description of Design and Design Calculations

3.2.A Piping Network

Assumptions made for piping calculations:

• Water level of tanks will be 0. This gives us a 'worse case' scenario for pipe-sizing.

• Peak demand is the equivalent of 40% of the village having their taps fully open. A fully open tap runs at an average of 0.3 L/s

• Manning’s equations assumptions

o Assumed 100% wetted perimeter. (i.e. A full pipe)

o k = 1 (Standard coefficient for metric Manning’s calculations.)

o n = 0 for PVC pipe.

• Bernoulli's power equation assumptions

o hp and ht, the components for pumps and turbines, are equal to 0

o Velocity in tanks = 0

o Pressures in tanks are equal to atmospheric pressure, and cancel

To ensure that the pipes between pressure break tanks are of sufficient size to provide the water needed, both Manning’s Equation and Bernoulli’s Energy Equation were used.

Manning’s Equation, used for modeling open-channel flow, is specifically for gravity-powered flow systems. With it, the flow velocity can be found given characteristics of the pipe:

[pic] (1)

where:

V = cross-sectional average velocity

k = conversion constant (1.486 for U.S. units, 1 for SI units)

n = “Manning’s n”, a frictional coefficient dependent on pipe material

Rh = A/P, the cross sectional area of the pipe divided by its wetted perimeter, called the hydraulic radius

S = slope of pipe

This equation can then be modified to find the flow rate for a full pipe by substituting [pic] where Q is the flow rate and A is the cross-sectional area. Also, since the pipe is assumed to be full, the wetted perimeter of the pipe is simply the inner circumference of the pipe. Substituting [pic] and [pic] where D is the inner diameter of the pipe, the equation becomes:

[pic] (2)

Thus, the flow rate capacity of a pipe can be found given its diameter, slope, and frictional coefficient.

In addition, the Energy Equation was also used as an auxiliary method of finding flow capacity. The Bernoulli Equation is an equation that relies on conservation of energy to find flow characteristics at either end of a control volume:

[pic] (3)

where:

p = pressure at a certain location

γ = fluid density times the force of gravity

α = kinetic energy correction factor

z = elevation at a certain location

V = fluid average velocity at a certain location

hp = pump head

ht = turbine head

hL = head loss

By drawing a control volume such that the endpoints are both pressure break tanks, and flow cannot escape through any other boundary, many terms drop out of the equation. Since no turbine or pump is present, both the turbine and pump heads are zero. Also, since the pressure break tanks are open to atmospheric pressure, they are at equal pressures, which can be subtracted from the equation. The velocities in each tank are also equal, since no flow enters or exits the control volume through any other means. Given these assumptions, the equation simplifies to:

[pic] (4)

Since the elevation of each tank is known, all that is left to find is the head loss. Head loss in a system without components, such as bends or diameter transitions, is given by the following equation:

[pic] (5)

where:

f = friction factor of pipe

L = length of pipe

D = diameter of pipe

V = average cross-sectional velocity of pipe flow

g = force of gravity

The friction factor f is dependant upon the velocity of flow, pipe diameter, and flow viscosity in the following manner:

[pic] (6)

where:

ks = equivalent sand roughness of pipe

[pic]= flow Reynold’s Number, where ν = kinematic viscosity of fluid

Now, rewriting the head loss implicitly in terms of flow rate and pipe diameter, again by substituting [pic] and [pic], the final equation obtained is:

[pic] (7)

To find pipe capacity, a diameter and a guess for Q are chosen. The equation is then iterated, varying Q until the equation is satisfied. This Q found is the maximum flow rate the given pipe can support, assuming the only energy lost is due to head loss.

With these two methods for finding capacity, the choices for pipe diameter can be verified to be sufficient. By using the length, diameter, and elevation difference/slope of each individual pipe, the maximum flow rates can be found using the following values for PVC and water:

|Parameter |Value |

|Manning’s n |0.01 |

|ks |[pic] |

|ν |[pic] |

|g |[pic] |

The demand calculated assuming that forty percent of the households would require water at a given time. With this assumption and the above constants, the flow capacities for each respective pipe are given in the table below. The pipe sizes were chosen to handle flows that exceed the demands.

|Pipe |Diameter (inches) |Demand (L/s) |Eq. (2): Manning’s |Eq. (7): Energy Eqn. |

| | | |Capacity (L/s) |Capacity (L/s) |

|Main Tank to RP1 |2.5 |7.36+ |8.23 |11.38 |

|RP1 to Soccer Road |4 |7.36 |15.98 |50.83 |

|Soccer Road to RP2 |1 |0.32 |0.57 |N/A |

|Soccer Road to RP3 |3 |7.04 |9.76 |N/A |

|RP3 to RP4 |3 |4 |4.45 |8.14 |

*The form of the Energy Equation derived here is not applicable for the pipes branching from the Soccer Road, since the pressure at the start point of the control volume is not equal to the endpoint.

|Piping into and out of Pressure Break Tanks: Size, Length, and Location |

|  |Diameter |Length |

| |in |m |

|Main |RP1 to Junction |4 |140 |

|Lines | | | |

| |Junction to RP2 |1 |380 |

| |Junction to RP 3 |3 |330 |

| |RP3 to RP4 |3 |675 |

| |RP1 to Valves |2 |100 |

|  |

|Feeders |Rp2 to System |2 |80 |

| |Rp3 to System |2 |75 |

| |Rp4 to System, Part 1 |1 ¼ |200 |

| |Rp4 to System, Part 2 |2 |65 |

To ensure the system would work properly we created a hydraulic grade line which is summarized in the chart on the following page.

3.2.B Concrete Pressure Break Tanks

The design of the pressure break tanks is based on the design of a Guatemalan engineer (Appendix B-1) that was commissioned by Simajhuleu for a supply line. The tank was adapted for use in our system for the number of outlets required. The structural calculations on the design are shown on the following page. Also, included in Appendix B-2 is the design check as performed by John R. Buzek, a professional engineer. Though both sets of calculations conclude that rebar is unnecessary, it will still be included for added durability. Rebar will be spaced horizontally and vertically in 12” spacing. Not noted in the drawing is that the concrete mixture to be used is 1:2:3. This mixture design is explained in its entirety in Appendix B-7.

Objective: Determine whether the provided architectural drawings are sufficient for a Pressure Break Tank (PBT) design.

Assumptions:

• PBT will be made of concrete

• Top of tank will be flush with grade

• Side panels are 1.1m x 1.1m

• Side panels are simply supported on 3 sides and free on the 4th side

• Bottom dimensions are 1.0m x 1.0m

• Bottom slab and lid are simply supported on all 4 sides

• Concrete Strength f’c = 3000psi

• Reinforcing Steel Strength Fy = 40 ksi

• Specific Gravity of Soil = 2.4

• Soil Density: ρ = 2.4*62.4 lb/ft3 = 150 lb/ft3

• Soil Lateral Pressure Coefficient = 1.0

• Allowable tension in concrete (AASHTO recommended) [pic]

Plan View Elevation View

Side Panel Design

From Roark, Formulas for Stress and Strain 4th Edition, Table X, Case 49 – One edge free, other three edges supported. Distributed load varies linearly along the length of the side panel.

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

The stress, s, on the side panel is significantly less than the allowable tensile stress, therefore no reinforcement is needed. Also, since the PBT will be placed below grade, there is a lack of large temperature differences, meaning no shrinkage and temperature steel is needed.

Bottom Design

From Roark, Formulas for Stress and Strain 4th Edition, Table X, Case 36 –all four edges supported. Distributed load is uniform over the entire bottom of the PBT.

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

The stress, s, on the bottom is significantly less than the allowable tensile stress, therefore no reinforcement is needed. Also, since the PBT will be placed below grade, there is a lack of large temperature differences, meaning no shrinkage and temperature steel is needed.

Lid Design

Assumptions:

• Modeled as a beam equal to the middle 1/3 of the lid, b = 8in

• Simply supported on both ends

• λ = 1 for normal weight concrete

• tl = 0.06m = 0.06m*3.28ft/m*12in/ft =2.36in

• clear span = l = (0.6m + 0.07m) * 3.28ft/m*12in/ft =26.4in

• self weight, wd [pic]

• live load = 25 lb/ft2

• wu = 1.4*wd = 1.4*29.5 lb/ft2 = 41.3 lb/ft2

• wu = 1.2*wd + 1.6*wL=1.2*29.5 lb/ft2 + 1.6*25 lb/ft2 = 75.4 lb/ft2 = 0.52 psi (controlling case)

Deflections

Minimum Thickness of Lid – ACI 318-08 Table 9.5(a) – simply supported, one-way slab

[pic]

The designed lid thickness is sufficient for deflection requirements.

Flexure

From Roark, Formulas for Stress and Strain 4th Edition, Table X, Case 36 –all four edges supported. Distributed load is uniform over the entire bottom of the PBT.

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

The stress, s, on the lid is significantly less than the allowable tensile stress, therefore no reinforcement is needed. However, since the lid will be placed above grade, shrinkage and temperature steel should be used

Shear

Shear capacity, ϕVn, is computed using equation 22-9 from ACI 318-08

FBD:

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

The maximum stress seen by the lid is 55.3lb, while the shear capacity is 1034.1 lb. This means that the lid design is more than sufficient for shear requirements.

Conclusion: The design checks shown above allow for the PBT to be constructed without the use of structural reinforcement. In addition, all design checks were satisfied by the design depicted in the architectural plans.

3. Drawings

3.3.A Piping Network

Detail drawings of the piping network are presented in the appendix for brevity.

A-1a: Overview of Simajhuleu

A-1b: Overview of Simajhuleu

A-2: Sector 5 Topographical Map

A-3: Main Tank at Top of System

A-4: 1995m Pressure Break Tank

A-5: 1995m Pressure Break Tank New Route Detail

A-6: Mainline to Southern 1955m Tank

A-7: Main Southern 1955m Tank

A-8: Southern 1955m Tank New Route Detail

A-9: Mainline to 1940m Tank 1

A-9: Mainline to 1940m Tank 1

A-10: Mainline to 1940m Tank 2

A-11: Main 1940m Tank

A-12: Distribution Line Below 1940m Tank 1

A-13: Distribution Line Below 1940m Tank 2

A-14: Distribution Line End Below 1940m Tank

A-15: Branch From Mainline to 1955m (Northern) Tank

A-16: 1955m Northern Branch Tank and Line End

A-17: Tank Back Fill Calculations

A-18: Dynamic Pressure calculating spread sheet

A-19 System Schematic for dynamic calculations from EPANET

A-20: Spread Sheet to calculate pipe sizing

A-21: Thrust Block Calculations

A-22: Trench Diagram

3.3.B Concrete Pressure Break Tanks

Detail drawings of each tank are presented in the appendix for brevity.

B-1: Guatemalan Engineer’s Design

B-2: Professional Engineer Design Check

B-3: Pressure Break Tank 1

B-4: Pressure Break Tank 2

B-5: Pressure Break Tank 3

B-6: Pressure Break Tank 4

B-7: Construction Plan

B-8: Materials List

B-9: Concrete Mix Design and Instructions

B-10: Formwork Diagram

B-11: Rebar Diagram

B-12: Civil Site Plan Tank 1

B-13: Civil Site Plan Tank 2

B-14: Civil Site Plan Tank 3

B-15: Civil Site Plan Tank 4

B-16: Tank Lid Formwork

B-17: Tank Top Formwork

B-18: Pipe Connection Diagrams

4. PROJECT OWNERSHIP

The system will be owned by the town of Simajhuleu and will be maintained under the authority of the COCODE (water board). Daily operation of the system will be carried out by Don Lucas, the town plumber. The village has similarly taken ownership of the recent rainwater harvesting project and has been managing and maintaining it for the past year. (Daily operation of the rainwater system is being done by a group called Padres de la Comunidad, which is similar to our PTA.)

Encouraging the village to take ownership of the project has motivated their heavy involvement in the design process allowing them to have input on what sort of system they would most want to use and maintain. This was also our motivation in requiring the water board to provide 10% of the funding for materials. This demonstrates their ability to raise and provide funding for future operation and maintenance. It also puts a monetary resource value on the project making it something worthwhile to protect and preserve well into the future.

Ownership will also be encouraged to maintain the system through a series of education, outreach, and training activities. Education will consist of demonstrating economically and culturally appropriate methods of water conservation and cleaning. Conducted as a part of smaller group meetings, these education events will also give us an opportunity to help the villagers understand what our project is about, how they will benefit from it and what they can do to help increase the effectiveness of the project. Knowledge will also be shared as the EWB members and villagers work side by side on the construction site. By demonstrating how each component works and fits into the entirety of the system we will be helping them understand the system’s operation.

These programs meant to foster continued ownership of the system will be supplemented by oversight from Long Way Home (LWH), our partnering nongovernmental organization. LWH has lived in the area since 2003 and conducted many large-scale construction projects. Their members will serve as the local “go to” for any questions the village might have that need immediate attention. They will also serve as a reliable point of contact for both EWB-UMN and Simajhuleu during times of cell phone and internet interruption.

5. CONSTRUCTION

1. Construction Plan

The construction plan for laying of the pipe will be broken into two sections: connections and mainline.

The 'connections' section involves everything within 20 meters (or 3 pieces of PVC) of the pressure break tanks. This will involve correctly placing and securing the pipes through the walls of the pressure break tanks. The pipe areas in contact with the cement will be knurled to ensure correct bonding, and the pipes will be held in place using x-looped wire hangers where backfilling is not ideal while the cement cures. Flow meters are to be installed just downstream of the tanks and will be tested for water-tightness before being installed. These areas will be directly overseen or conducted by EWB-UMN members, to ensure that the most vital parts of the system are completed to specification. Connections to the existing distribution will be completed by Don Lucas and performed on days when the sector is not receiving water.

The 'mainline' section involves the piping running between all the tanks of the system. This area is going to be installed almost entirely by the villagers, with a small group of EWB members helping and providing oversight. Care will be taken to make sure that the village understands that the pipe must be:

– Buried to a depth of 18 inches from (or knee depth when stepping down the pipe)

– ASTM D2241 from under traffic loads.

– Connected using only proper, manufactured connections

– Using primer and glue properly at every joint

Due to the extremely high cohesion and strength of the soil, it is feasible to dig the entire trench first, then lay-out and assemble the pipe above ground next to it. Once fully set, the pipe will be placed into the trench, and backfilled, with the backfill being tamped in two lifts, once with the trench halfway full using a simple dropping weight, and once while flush with the ground using either a dropping weight or vehicle where possible. We anticipate backfilling to take a considerable amount of time due to the soil characteristics mentioned earlier. If cave-ins in the trench do become an issue, although quite unlikely given the soil characteristics, a supported cantilever construction system would be used. This would greatly increase the amount of time needed to correctly connect and install the pipe.

As for scheduling, the pipe will be installed during the construction of the walls of the pressure break tanks, so that they can be encased in concrete. The village has signed a document that they will have the trench dug for the pipe mainline before our arrival, which will begin following EWB-USA approval. Pipe laying to our specifications will commence with our arrival on site, can continue concurrently with tank construction, and should be completed and backfilled within the first two weeks of our arrival. The laying of pipe is not on our critical path, and has approximately several days of float if necessary. We anticipate being able to lay and backfill approximately 200 meters of pipe each day.

Each tank will require approximately 16 hours to construct and 10-14 days to cure.

A detailed construction plan can be found in Appendix B-7. The general timeline per tank can be broken down as follows:

|Task |Time |

|Site Prep |1 hours |

|Drains |1 hours |

|Floor, Roof, Lid |3 hours |

|Walls and Connections |2 hours |

|Valve Box |1 hours |

|Curing |10-14 days |

|Finalizing and Piping |2 hours |

|Total |18 hours + 10-14 days |

Four tanks will be constructed in two weeks. The initial construction will be completed during the first 4 days of construction. The final connection time will depend on curing times. The COCODE has the necessary skills needed to finish the construction, if needed. The estimated construction timeline is shown below.

Construction Timeline

|Days of Construction |Tasks |Time |EWB Members |Community Members |

|1 |Stake out all four tanks |3 hours |10 |10 |

| |Dig all four tanks | | | |

| |Connect pipeline |5 hours |10 |10 |

| | |8 hours |5 |10 |

|2 |Construct rebar cage of tank 1 |4 hours |5 |5 |

| |Construct forms of tank 1 | | | |

| |Connect pipeline |4 hours |5 |5 |

| | | | | |

| | |8 hours |5 |10 |

|3 |Pour tank 1 |8 hours |5 |5 |

| |Construct rebar and forms of tank 2 |8 hours |5 |5 |

| |Connect pipeline | | | |

| | |8 hours |5 |10 |

|4 |Pour tank 2 |8 hours |5 |5 |

| |Construct rebar and forms of tank 3 |8 hours |5 |5 |

| |Moisten concrete of curing tanks | | | |

| |Connect Pipeline |0.5 hours |1 |1 |

| | | | | |

| | |8 hours |5 |10 |

|5 |Pour Tank 3 |8 hours |5 |5 |

| |Construct rebar and forms for tank 4 |8 hours |5 |5 |

| |Moisten concrete of curing tanks | | | |

| |Connect Pipeline | | | |

| | |1 hour |1 |1 |

| | | | | |

| | |8 hours |5 |10 |

|6 |Pour Tank 4 |8 hours |5 |5 |

| |Moisten concrete of curing tanks |1.5 hour |1 |1 |

| |Connect pipeline | | | |

| | |8 hours |5 |10 |

|7 |Moisten concrete of curing tanks |2 hours |1 |1 |

| |Connect pipeline | | | |

| | |8 hours |5 |10 |

|8 |Remove formwork of pressure break tank |3 hours |2 |2 |

| |1 | | | |

| |Moisten concrete of curing tanks | | | |

| |Connect pipeline |2 hours |1 |1 |

| | | | | |

| | |8 hours |5 |10 |

|9 |Remove formwork of pressure break tank |3 hours |2 |2 |

| |2 | | | |

| |Moisten concrete of curing tanks | | | |

| |Connect pipeline |2 hours |1 |1 |

| | | | | |

| | |8 hours |5 |10 |

|10 |Remove formwork of pressure break tank |3 hours |2 |2 |

| |3 | | | |

| |Moisten concrete of curing tanks | | | |

| |Connect pipeline |2 hours |1 |1 |

| | | | | |

| | |8 hours |5 |10 |

|11 |Remove formwork from pressure break |3 hours |2 |2 |

| |tank 4 | | | |

| |Inspect Pressure tanks for curing | | | |

| |completion. If completed, then |3 hours |5 |5 |

| |finalize | | | |

| |Moisten concrete of curing tanks | | | |

| |Connect pipeline if needed | | | |

| | | | | |

| | |2 hours |1 |1 |

| | | | | |

| | |8 hours |5 |10 |

|12 |Inspect Pressure break tanks for curing|3 hours |5 |5 |

| |completion. If complete, then finalize | | | |

| |Moisten concrete of curing tanks | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | |2 hour |1 |1 |

Contingency plan: If required, the COCODE along with assistance from The Long Way Home (Local NGO) can finalize each tank and the piping network.

The general materials list for the pressure break tanks are provided in Appendix B-8. The specific valves and floats are listed below in the “Operation and Maintenance Plan.”

2. Construction Safety Plan

The single safest thing we can do on this project is to simply use common sense. There are no high risk activities required in this implementation (e.g. no high structures, no heights, no electricity, no large excavations, no heavy equipment), but even simple, everyday construction activities can pose a risk if certain common sense precautions are not taken. As such, we will follow the following procedures at all times:

– All Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) will be purchased and carried by EWB.

– 100% eye protection during any activity that could cause flying objects or eye hazards. e.g. shovels, pickaxes, hammers, mattocks, rebar cutters, rebar benders, all saws, etc.

– Minimum 6 foot clearance will be given to operator when an impact tool (e.g. Mattock, hammer) is being used.

– 100% ear protection during all activities that could cause ear damage. These include using all power tools, hammers, rebar cutters, etc.

– All power tool operators will have previous experience with the tool being used.

– Proper lifting techniques will be used for all heavy lifting (particularly cement bags) with a required warm up stretch first.

– High Visibility markers will be employed anytime any work is being done on or within 10 feet of a street.

– Have present a safety supervisor who has the responsibility to stop any activity at any time that is being done in a potentially unsafe manner.

– Comply at all times with applicable OSHA rules. A member of the travel team has OSHA-10 certification.

6. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN

6.0.A Piping network

Operation and maintenance of the piping system will be carried out by the water board and village plumber, Don Lucas. The water board will provide organization, funding and support, while the plumber carries out the maintenance procedures. A maintenance and repair guide will be developed to provide the village with written documentation of proper procedures. This guide will be written in simple Spanish and include diagrams to ensure understanding as well as include location descriptions for various system components. These repair methods will replace current ones in order to improve long-term functionality of the system. Some maintenance activities are as follows.

– Inlet pipes, outlet pipes, flow meters, and valves shall be visually inspected at least twice a year.

– In the event of broken pipes, a minimum of 2 meters of pipe will be exposed in each direction to facilitate the repair section.

– Broken pipes will always be repaired with two manufactured couplings and a 'patch' piece of pipe.

6.0.B Concrete tanks

Operation

The new tanks should not impose any new daily operation procedures but will require additional cleaning and facilities to supervise. In the event that a float valve should break, the inlet valve to the tank can be adjusted to control the flow rate into the tank.

Maintenance

Upon completion of this project Simajhuleu will assume responsibilities for any maintenance of the system that will be needed. Possible maintenance issues include, but are not limited to:

• Cleaning of the tanks.

• Repair of broken pipeline.

Regular Cleaning and Maintenance (Frequency: At least annually)

• Tank should be checked regularly for signs of cracking, erosion, or other damage

• Inlet/outlet pipeline should be checked for signs of damage as well.

• Before cleaning, tank should be completely drained. Excess water should be swept toward outlet valve.

• Any solids or substantial mineral deposits should be flushed out before cleaning.

• Using a 1-10 chlorine/water solution, lightly coat the walls of the tank. Take care to avoid fumes and wear protective equipment.

• With a long-handled brush or broom, scrub the walls, being mindful of areas that require additional attention (particularly dirty areas of the tank).

Replacement Costs

|Part |Hardware Store |Location |Cost |

|Valve ¾” |FFACSA |Chimaltenango |Q 80 |

|Valve 1” |FFACSA |Chimaltenango |Q 101.5 |

|Valve 2.5” |FFACSA |Chimaltenango |Q 481 |

|Valve 3” |FFACSA |Chimaltenango |Q 520 |

|Float 1” | |US |$45 |

|Float 2.5” | |US |$100 |

|Float 3” | |US |$1161 |

7. SUSTAINABILITY

The project has been designed to sustainably provide sector 5 of the village with adequate, reliable water for many years. To start, the village will pay 10% of the initial materials cost (1,400 US dollars). This payment also gives the village a degree of responsibility for the project and promotes village ownership. In addition, the village has a volunteer water board in place to organize and execute maintenance of the system. This committee collects an equal amount of money from each villager in order to maintain the system. Finally, there is a community plumber, Don Lucas, who will perform any repairs necessary in the event of a leak, break or similar problem.

The piping system itself is simple and easy to fix, with measures in place to reduce leaks and breaks. First, the system will be constructed with schedule 40 PVC pipes, which are designed to withstand the expected pressure. The piping will be placed 18 inches underground to prevent inadvertent breakage due to activity in the area. This depth was chosen to ensure that all substantial aboveground activity, such as car and truck movement, will not affect the system given the soil conditions. In addition, the village plumber, Don Lucas, and others will be trained in proper repair techniques designed to replace the current, insufficient methods used. A written maintenance and repair guide will be created to illustrate these techniques using pictures and simple Spanish. This manual will ensure villager understanding and serve as a reference guide for future use.

The people of Simajhuleu are familiar with concrete tank construction and operation. These tanks will be considerably smaller than the tank we constructed at the school. The plumber, Don Lucas, is able to repair any leaks or replace any broken pipes as necessary. He, with the water board’s permission, can call on people to aid him in cleaning the pressure breaks. With that in mind, the people of Simajhuleu already have the needed capacity to maintain these tanks.

One issue on sustainability is the cost of the 3” float valve. Such a high cost would make it difficult for the community to replace the valve should it fail. Another option Simajhuleu can use is to adjust the inlet valve in order to prevent overflow. Another option for the village would be to reduce the pipe size to tank to a 2 ½” pipe. This small choke would restrict the flow slightly while making the compatible float a more realistic price

Lastly when considering population growth the officials in the village claim the population is actually shrinking in the village as more people move to the cities. Therefore, the sizes of the new pipes provide extra capacity in case any one region of the village was to expand disproportionatly.

8.0 COST ESTIMATE

8.0.A Piping Network

|Cost Summary: Piping between each Pressure Break Tank and between the Tanks and the Existing Distribution System | |

|Tube length (m) |6 |  | |

|  | |

|Pipe Diameter |Length |Unit Cost |Tubes Needed |Cost |Cost |

|in |m |Q/tube |# |Q |USD |

|Ferreteria la Nueva Chimaltenango | |

|1 |380 |22.13 |64 |1416 |182 |

|1 ¼ |200 |36.3 |34 |1234 |158 |

|2 |320 |57 |54 |3078 |395 |

|Ferreteria Nueva Comalapa | |

|3 |1005 |157.2 |168 |26410 |3,386 |

|4 |140 |258 |24 |6192 |794 |

|Piping Subtotal |38330 |4914 |

|Estimated Delivery Cost from Comalapa |150 |20 |

|Estimated Delivery Cost from Chimaltenango |550 |75 |

|Subtotal |39030 |5003 |

|10% Contingency |3903 |500 |

|Total |42933 |$5504 |

|Conversion rate of approximately 7.8Qt to 1USD | | |

|Note: We don't have a cost for 1 ¼ inch pipe. We use the price for 1 ½ inch pipe to err on the side of higher cost. | |

8.0.B Concrete Tanks

|Parts |Cost Q |Cost USD |

|Tank Construction Material X4 |23,400 |$ 3000 |

|Valves |1661 |$ 213 |

|Floats |19242 |$2467 |

|Flow Meters |15600 |$2000 |

|Fittings |3900 |$500 |

|Total |63,804 |$8180 |

9.0 MENTOR ASSESSMENT

9.1 Derrick Passe

EWB Minnesota and UM Chapters have been working with Simajhuleu since 2006. Previous assessment trips have surveyed the needs of the Village, measured water flow in the Village, prepared a topographical survey of the Village and discussed proposed system improvements with the Water Council and the village as a whole. In 2009 EWB constructed a rainwater harvesting system at the elementary school to provide a stable water source for 500 students. Subsequent trips have included the completion of the topographical survey of the Village in May. A return trip in September was required due to a tropical storm that prevented the EWB group to meet with the Village during the second half of the May trip. The September trip was focused on walking the alignment of the proposed watermain with the villagers and handheld GPS’s.

EWB had reached the conclusion that Sector 5 of the village was most in need of improvements. Measurements of water flow in this sector indicated that more than 50% of the water supply is lost between the central storage tank and users. This information was provided to the village and, although they expressed doubt as to the quantity lost, they agreed with the approach of installing larger pipe and reduced pressure to increase the water supply to Sector 5.

The proposed watermain improvements have been designed by the student chapter with integral involvement by professional engineers. Separate committees have been encharged with design of the different components of the system. These committees are: tank design, hydraulic modeling, plan preparation, education, fundraising and health & safety. Each of these committees has met at the weekly project meeting as well again as a committee. A professional engineer has worked with these groups, including experts in hydraulic modeling (John Chlebeck, Suresh Hettiarachdir), Water Treatment (Mark Arneson), Cad drafting (Ann Johnson, Pete Glashagel, Tony Rochel), Structures (John Buezk) and Fundraising (Mark Ryan, Kris Langlie).

The proposed design will improve water delivery to sector 5 of the village. Reducing the pressure will reduce the leakage in the system, and larger pipes will eliminate existing pipe constriction which account for 10% losses due to the overflows from the central storage tanks. The scope of improvements is unknown due to the uncertainty as to where leakage is occurring in the system. The proposed system alteration will increase the number of points in the system where water use/loss can be monitored.

Index of Appendices

Appendix A: Piping Network

A-1a: Overview of Simajhuleu

A-1b: Overview of Simajhuleu

A-2: Sector 5 Topographical Map

A-3: Main Tank at Top of System

A-4: 1995m Pressure Break Tank

A-5: 1995m Pressure Break Tank New Route Detail

A-6: Mainline to Southern 1955m Tank

A-7: Main Southern 1955m Tank

A-8: Southern 1955m Tank New Route Detail

A-9: Mainline to 1940m Tank 1

A-9: Mainline to 1940m Tank 1

A-10: Mainline to 1940m Tank 2

A-11: Main 1940m Tank

A-12: Distribution Line Below 1940m Tank 1

A-13: Distribution Line Below 1940m Tank 2

A-14: Distribution Line End Below 1940m Tank

A-15: Branch From Mainline to 1955m (Northern) Tank

A-16: 1955m Northern Branch Tank and Line End

A-17: Tank Back Fill Calculations

A-18: Dynamic Pressure calculating spread sheet

A-19 System Schematic for dynamic calculations from EPANET

A-20: Spread Sheet to calculate pipe sizing

A-21: Thrust Block Calculations

A-22: Trench Diagram

Appendix B: Concrete Pressure Break Tanks

B-1: Guatemalan Engineer’s Design

B-2: Professional Engineer Design Check

B-3: Pressure Break Tank 1

B-4: Pressure Break Tank 2

B-5: Pressure Break Tank 3

B-6: Pressure Break Tank 4

B-7: Construction Plan

B-8: Materials List

B-9: Concrete Mix Design and Instructions

B-10: Formwork Diagram

B-11: Rebar Diagram

B-12: Civil Site Plan Tank 1

B-13: Civil Site Plan Tank 2

B-14: Civil Site Plan Tank 3

B-15: Civil Site Plan Tank 4

B-16: Tank Lid Formwork

B-17: Tank Top Formwork

B-18: Pipe Connection Diagrams

Appendix C: Memorandum of Understanding

C-1: English Version

C-2: Spanish Version

Appendix D: World Health Organization Guidelines

Appendix E: Water Supply, Point of Use and Flow Data

Attached with accompanying email as Appendix E. Appendix E is a compilation of data collected on previous assessment trips regarding point of use flow measurments. It also uses this informatin to interpret the current LPCD recived throughout the village as well as what percentage of the water is used by each sector and what percentage is lost to leakage or otherwise wasted.

Appendix F: Gantt Chart of Construction Timeline

Appendix G: Risk Register and Mitigation Plan

Appendix H: Schematic Drawings

H-1: Tank Inlet, Outlet, and Float Schematic

H-2: Tank Outlet and Connection to Distribution Schematic

H-3: Daily Operation Schematic

H-4: Implementation Overview

H-5: Tank 1 Operation Schematic

Appendix I: Hydraulic Grade Lines

Appendix J: General Trip Schedule

Appendix A: Piping Network

Appendix A-1a: Overview of Simajhuleu

[pic]

Appendix A-1b: Overview of Simajhuleu

Please See attached document A-1bOverviewofSimajhuleu.pdf for greater detail and clarity

[pic]

Appendix A-2: Sector 5 Topographical Map

[pic]

Dashed purple lines represent the water areas from appendix A-1, The blue lines represent the existing distribution lines, Dashed green lines represent the proposed mainline, The solid turquoise squares represent the pressure break tanks, The hollow turquoise represents the main storage tank, red circles represent the location were the line out of the tank will reconnect with the distribution system, the turquoise lines represent significant rout deviations from the existing line for the proposed line to avoid hazards, each contour represents an elevation change of 5 meters. This is true for all subsequent topographical maps and profiles. All elevations are in meters.

Appendix A-3: Main Tank at Top of System

[pic]

Appendix A-4: 1995m Pressure Break Tank

[pic]

Appendix A-5: 1995m Pressure Break Tank New Route Detail

[pic]

Appendix A-6: Mainline to Southern 1955m Tank

[pic]

Appendix A-7: Main Southern 1955m Tank

[pic]

Appendix A-8: Southern 1955m Tank New Route Detail

[pic]

Appendix A-9: Mainline to 1940m Tank 1

[pic]

Appendix A-10: Mainline to 1940m Tank 2

[pic]

Appendix A-11: Main 1940m Tank

[pic]

Appendix A-12: Distribution Line Below 1940m Tank 1

[pic]

Appendix A-13: Distribution Line Below 1940m Tank 2

[pic]

Appendix A-14: Distribution Line End Below 1940m Tank

[pic]

Appendix A-15: Branch From Mainline to 1955m (Northern) Tank

[pic]

Appendix A-16: 1955m Northern Branch Tank and Line End

[pic]

Appendix A-17: Tank Back Fill Calculation

The total time to fill the system was determined to be 15 minutes 37 seconds. This was calculated assuming the the demand on the system is equal to the average daily demand. The numbers are as follows:

|Reservoir |Volume (L) |Inflow (L/S) |Use (L/S) |Time to fill (Sec) |

|Tank 4 |1000 |8.05 |0.69 |135.87 |

|Tank 4 feedline |1912.6 |8.05 |0 |237.59 |

|Tank 3 |1000 |10.75 |0.53 |97.89 |

|Tank 3 feedline |2420.8 |10.75 |0 |225.19 |

|Tank 2 |1000 |0.88 |0.06 |- |

|Tank 2 feedline |126.27 |0.88 |0 |143.49 |

|Tank 1 |1000 |10.75 |0.42 |96.81 |

Total Seconds 936.83

Minutes 15.61

If we instead assume the peak diurnal demands on the system, the time to fill the system jumps to 22 minutes 56 seconds.

|Reservoir |Volume (L) |Inflow (L/S) |Use (L/S) |Time to fill (Sec) |

|Tank 4 |1000 |8.05 |5.91 |468.01 |

|Tank 4 feedline |1912.6 |8.05 |0 |237.59 |

|Tank 3 |1000 |10.75 |4.58 |162.09 |

|Tank 3 feedline |2420.8 |10.75 |0 |225.19 |

|Tank 2 |1000 |0.88 |.48 |- |

|Tank 2 feedline |126.27 |0.88 |0 |143.49 |

|Tank 1 |1000 |10.75 |3.6 |139.85 |

Total Seconds 1376.22

Minutes 22.94

NOTE: The time to fill Tank 2 was discarded, as it takes a very long time to fill the large 1 cubic meter reservoir from a 1” line. Since the four houses being serviced by Tank 2 will be served before the 15 minutes is up, we discarded the filling time for Tank 2.

Appendix A-21: Thrust Block Calculations

Thrust Block Calculations:

3 y

x

4

135(

2

In order to determine whether or not a thrust block is needed at the y-connection, we used the momentum equation for fluid flow to calculate a reactionary force. We assumed the weight of water to be negligible compared to the forces generated by the pressure and momentum. To find the reactionary force we first calculated the pressures just before and after the junction using the energy equation. The equations and values for these pressures are shown below:

[pic]

Next we used the component form of the momentum equation to calculate the magnitude and direction of the reactionary force needed to hold the piping in place. The force summation equations are given below.

[pic]

Finally, we combined these two forces to create a resultant reactionary force and find an angle at which this force is applied. The angle theta is

[pic]

[pic]

(

[pic]

[pic]

Appendix A-22: Trench Diagram

[pic]

Appendix B: Concrete Pressure Break Tanks

Appendix B-1: Guatemalan Engineer’s Design

Appendix B-2: Professional Engineer Design Check

[pic]

Appendix B-3: Pressure Break Tank 1

* Tank will use rebar #4 in the walls placed in a 12” grid.

* Tank uses a cement mixture of 1:2:3 detailed in appendix B-9.

[pic]

Appendix B-4: Pressure Break Tank 2

* Tank will use rebar #4 in the walls placed in a 12” grid.

* Tank uses a cement mixture of 1:2:3 detailed in appendix B-9.

[pic]

Appendix B-5: Pressure Break Tank 3

* Tank will use rebar #4 in the walls placed in a 12” grid.

* Tank uses a cement mixture of 1:2:3 detailed in appendix B-9.

[pic]

Appendix B-6: Pressure Break Tank 4

* Tank will use rebar #4 in the walls placed in a 12” grid.

* Tank uses a cement mixture of 1:2:3 detailed in appendix B-9.

[pic]

Appendix B-7: Construction Plan

Site Prep

• Gather materials and tools

o Have supply of water for mixing concrete

• Stake out hole location.

• Dig hole 1.25 meter deep with a 1.2 by 1.2 meter base.

• Smooth and compact tank area. Grade the floor.

Drains

• Dig a trench for the cleaning drain.

• Dig a run off that will lead overflow away from water away from the tank.

Floor

• Mix concrete - 1 part concrete, 2 parts sand, 3 parts gravel

• Construct form for floor. Insure boards are held firmly in place.

• Add rebar for support. Should be laid in grid pattern, and should be tied together with wire at intersections.

• Insert cleaning drain. Cover trench immediately below the tank.

• lay 15cm of rocks with a 10cm clearance from the form walls.

• The above process should take approximately 0.5 hours to complete.

• Pour concrete - 10mm reinforcing bars laid in grid pattern separated by 150mm

• Immediately after pouring the floor, rebar for the walls should be placed with a bent end in the concrete.

• Foundation sections should be poured in same day to ensure even drying

• Tamp floor to remove air pockets.

• Smooth base with long boards.

• Pouring and smoothing of concrete will take approximately 2 hours to complete.

Walls

• Place formwork for walls. Cut holes where outlets will be placed.

• Begin pouring concrete. Place pipes once concrete reaches the level of the hole in the formwork.

• vibrate walls to remove air pockets.

• Provide a 2% grade towards the drain.

• Once the structure is poured it will take 10-14 days to cure. During that time the structure should be kept moist.

• If the structure dries too quickly it can crack. Also, to ensure that it is water tight the sides of the structure should be roughened and coated with mortar.

Roof

• Lay formwork for tank top.

• Pour concrete

• Vibrate to remove air bubbles.

Valve Box

• Create formwork to cover inlet pipe.

• Fill with concrete.

Finalizing

• Begin mixing mortar 1 part concrete 4 parts sand

• Remove formwork for base and walls

• Roughen walls and apply mortar

• Lay roof onto place

Appendix B-8: Materials List

Materials for Concrete Tank

• 6 boards, .305m by 1m

• 6 boards, .305 by 1.5m

• 4 plywood strips, .30m by 1.22m

• 4 plywood strips, two of .15m by .75m and one .15m by .9m

• 6 boards, four of .2m by .75m and two of .2m by .9m

• 8 boards, each .2m x .6m

• plywood strips, .31m by .61m

• 150 nails

• 16 pieces 8mm rebar, each 1m long (vertical)

• 12 pieces 8mm rebar, each 1.3m long (horizontal)

• 25 pieces 8mm rebar, each 1.7m long (base)

• 12 pieces 8mm rebar, each .84m long

• 10 pieces 8mm rebar, each .45m

• 8 pieces 8mm rebar, each 1.5m long

• 3 pieces 8mm rebar, each .75m long (valve box lid)

• 2-3 pieces 8mm rebar, each .9mm long (valve box lid)

• Cooking oil, ½ liter at least

• 2 or more brushes or rags for applying oil

• Wire grid, measuring 1.22m by 1.22m. Bend the outside edges of the grid so that when on the ground, the grid will rest 5-7cm off the ground.

• Wire grid, measuring .8m by.8m. Bend the outside edges of the grid so that when on the ground, the grid will rest 5-7cm off the ground.

• 56 wire form double-loop ties

• 200 lengths of small wire, 30cm long

• Float valve

• Candle wax for sealing pipe threads

• 12.75 bags of cement (50kg)

• .8316 m3 of sand

• 1.260 m3 of gravel

Equipment:

• 60 Stakes

• Flagging tape

• Teflon tape

• Tarp to cover tank

• Adjustable wrench

• 3 flat-edge shovels

• 5 hammers

• Duct tape

• 2 pointed trowels

• 2 flat trowels

• 5 equal sized buckets for measuring

• 5 metal buckets for hauling concrete

• level

• screed board, approx. 3 feet long

• Plywood for concrete mixing platform, approx. 6 feet by 8 feet

• Available water for mixing and cleaning

• Wire brush

• 2 tape measures

• wire cutters

Appendix B-9: Concrete Mix Design and Instructions

[pic]

Appendix B-10: Tank Formwork

[pic]

See attached file, B10 TankFormwork.pdf for image

Appendix B-11 Rebar Diagram

[pic]

See attached file, B11 RebarDiagram.pdf for image

Appendix B-12: Tank 1 Site Plan

[pic]

See attached file, PBT_1_Site_Plan.pdf for image

Appendix B-13: Tank 2 Site Plan

[pic]

See attached file, PBT_2_Site_Plan.pdf for image

Appendix B-14: Tank 3 Site Plan

[pic]

See attached file, PBT_3_Site_Plan.pdf for image

Appendix B-15: Tank 4 Site Plan

[pic]

See attached file, PBT_4_Site_Plan.pdf for image

Appendix B-16: Tank Lid Formwork

[pic]

Appendix B-17: Top Formwork

[pic]

See attached file, PBT_FORMWORK_TOP.pdf for image

B-18: Pipe Connection Diagrams

[pic]

Appendix C: Memorandum of Understanding

Appendix C-1: English Version

[pic]

Appendix C-2: Spanish Version

[pic]

Appendix D: World Health Organization Guidelines

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

Appendix F: Gantt Chart

Appendix F-1: Gantt Chartt Showing Relationship of Tasks

[pic]

Appendix G: Risk Register and Risk Management Plans

Appendix G-1: Risk Register

|No. |Description |Likelihood |Severity |Categories |

|1 |Lack of engagment by community |H |H |Community |

|2 |Time Over Run |M |L |Project |

|3 |Late Material Delivery |H |H |Project |

|4 |Worker Availability |L |M |Community |

|5 |Weather |L |H |Project |

|6 |Cost Over Run |M |M |Project |

|7 |Lack of Technical Understanding |M |M |Community |

|8 |Cultural Acceptance |L |H |Community |

|9 |Cultural Barriers |L |H |Community |

|10 |Community Politics |L |H |Community |

|11 |Unable to Financially Buy in |H |M |Community |

| | | | | |

|No. |Priority |Owner |Date |Status |

|1 |H |EWB |Oct-10 |Planning for |

|2 |L |EWB |Oct-10 |Planning for |

|3 |M |EWB, Long Way Home |Oct-10 |Planning for |

|4 |M |Water Board |Oct-10 |Planning for |

|5 |L |EWB |Oct-10 |Planning for |

|6 |L |EWB |Oct-10 |Planning for |

|7 |M |EWB |Oct-10 |Planning for |

|8 |H |EWB |Oct-10 |Planning for |

|9 |M |EWB |Oct-10 |Planning for |

|11 |L |EWB |Oct-10 |Planning for |

|12 |L |Water Board |Oct-10 |Planning for |

Appendix G-2: Risk Management Strategies

No.1 Lack of Engagment by Community

Causes

Poor education campaign. Lack of buy in. The "Americans" effect.

Symptoms

Lack of community voulenteers. Lack of finacial buy in by the community. System falling into disrepair. Unable to reap all benfits of system and is under performing

Counter Measures

Well planned and executed education and outreach campaign explaining potential impact of project and what must be done to reap these benefits. Working closely with community throughout design and implementation process they are in agreement with the decisions being made and why they were made.

No. 2 Time Over Run

Causes

Poor estimation of time required to complete tasks. Materials arriving late. A sufficient number and skilled community volunteers are not available. Weather.

Symptoms

Chaotic work days where additional help is need. Work days are longer than expected and the schedule cannot be kept up with.

Counter Measures

Timeline has been planed with community and NGO. By utilizing of expertise within EWB, NGO, and community we should be able to keep the schedule being set.

No. 3 Late Material Delivery

Causes

If we are ordering late because of a lack of preparation the materials may not arrive on time. The supplier may not understand the urgency or just be generally be incompetent. Weather may also become a factor.

Symptoms

Suppliers may sound indecisive on their ability to deliver on time. We will be unable to start work on time if materials are not available.

Counter Measures

This can be avoided by planning with Long Way Home so they can order supplies with a sufficient amount of time to prepare. Communication with suppliers established ahead of time.

No.4 Worker Availability

Causes

Disinterest in the project would result in a lack of motivation to show up. Able bodied men are the family bread winners and will have their own duties or jobs to attend.

Symptoms

Less than needed number of community volunteers showing up each day. Tasks are left unfinished at the end of each day due to needing additional people.

Counter Measures

Having a long standing partnership with community and water board helps us understand what they are able to provide. It also means that they understand that when we say we need a certain number of people they need to be there. They also understand the need for their presence because the construction schedule planning with conducted with the community.

No. 5 Weather

Causes

Tropical Storm, Volcano

Symptoms

Tropical Storm, Volcano

Counter Measures

Bring rain gear.

No. 6 Cost Over Run

Causes

Poor material quantity estimation during design and assessment would lead to planning to purchase the wrong quantity of materials. Price Changes.

Symptoms

Budget over runs.

Counter Measures

Prices gather over multiple trips to see variance and lowest available price. Accurate mapping.

No. 7 Lack of Technical Understanding

Causes

The villagers and water board may be unable to understand the reasoning behind designs and design choices.

Symptoms

The community would not conduct system repairs when needed. When system repairs have been conducted they may not meet the requirements of the system. The community would be unable to overcome obstacles to the longevity of the project.

Counter Measures

By partnership with water board through alternatives analysis, design and implementation they have had input into the maintenance of the system and what they are and are not capable of or willing to do. The village currently has a plumber and several trained skilled masons and construction managers who work with concrete and PVC on a regular basis.

No.8 Cultural Acceptance

Causes

Unwilling to use new system and the additional repairs, cleaning and work that comes with it. Poor education campaign.

Symptoms

If the village has not bought in they may become lazy and use the system improperly or fail to spend the additional time necessary. The village is unwilling to change behavior and follow through with concepts such as water conservation and water treatment.

Counter Measures

Working closely with community throughout design and implementation process they are in agreement with the decisions being made and why they were made. Well planned and executed education and outreach campaign explaining potential impact of project and what must be done to reap these benefits.

No. 9 Cultural an Communication Barriers

Causes

It can always be difficult to communicate through language and cultural separation. This can often result in work group segregation which will keep the village and EWB groups from fully integrating.

Symptoms

The working groups will display an inability to work efficiently, make decision and work cohesively.

Counter Measures

Through working side by side over the course of several trips an understanding of each other can be leaned upon and previous friendships used successfully. Working closely with community throughout design and implementation process they are in agreement with the decisions being made and why they were made.

No. 10 Community Politics

Causes

The election of unfriendly water board by the community in the February elections would hamper the sustainability of the project.

Symptoms

The water board is our main point of contact in the village and if we are unable to access them or they are uncooperative we will no longer have access to the village and its resources.

Counter Measures

By developing good relations with the entire community not just the current water board our friends in the village our many and their appreciation of our ability to impact the village is present.

No.11 Community Unable to Financially Buy In

Causes

The water board or the village governance may be unable to secure 10% funding from private sources or community.

Symptoms

Unable to fund 10% of project.

Counter Measures

The ability of the village to supply labor as a last resort alternative to a monetary contribution would still make us comfortable with the about of community buy in. The presence of Rotary International, the Japanese Embassy and other institutions specifically intended for this type of project make us optimistic that they will b able to secure funding.

Appendix H: Schematic Drawings

Appendix H-1: Tank Inlet, Outlet and Float Schematic

[pic]

Appendix H-2: Tank Outlet and Connection to Distribution Schematic

[pic]

Appendix H-3: Daily Operation Schematic

[pic]

Appendix H-4:Implementaion Overview

[pic]

Appendix H-5:Tank 1 Operation Operation schematic

[pic]

Appendix I: Hydrolic Grade Lines

In these images the purple lines represent the hydrolic grade, the black lines represent the ground and the green lines represent the required head

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

Appendix J: General Trip Schedule

Total trip days

Day 1: 1) Travel from US to Guatemala City to Comalapa

2) Gather equipment and supplies

2) Ensure delivery

Day 2: 1) Get bearings in Simajhuelu look over rainwater harvesting system.

2) Gather equipment and supplies

3) Ensure delivery

Day 3: Construction Day 1

Day 4: Construction Day 2

Day 5: Construction Day 3

Day 6: Construction Day 4

Day 7: Construction Day 5

Day 8: Construction Day 6

Day 9: Team Transition

1) Travelers for the second week only arrive in Guatemala City

2) Travelers for the first week only return to Guatemala City

3) Travelers for both weeks rest, help Long Way Home and enjoy Guatemala

Day 9: 1) Construction Day 7

2) Education and Outreach

4 person education and outreach team 8 hours a day

1 person 7 hours education 1 hour Moisten

Day 10: 1) Construction Day 8

2) Education and Outreach

3 person 5 hours rainwater harvesting, 3 hours education and outreach

1 person 3 hours form work removal, 2 hours rainwater harvesting, 3 hours education and outreach

1 person 3 hours form work removal, 2 hours moisten 3 hour education

Day 11: 1) Construction Day 9

2) Education and Outreach

3 person 5 hours rainwater harvesting, 3 hours education and outreach

1 person 3 hours form work removal, 2 hours rainwater harvesting, 3 hours education and outreach

1 person 3 hours form work removal, 2 hours moisten 3 hour education

Day 12: 1) Construction Day 10

2) Education and Outreach

3 person 5 hours rainwater harvesting, 3 hours education and outreach

1 person 3 hours form work removal, 2 hours rainwater harvesting, 3 hours education and outreach

1 person 3 hours form work removal, 2 hours moisten 3 hour education

Day 13: 1) Construction Day 11

2) Education and Outreach

3 person 5 hours rainwater harvesting, 3 hours education and outreach

1 person 3 hours form work removal, 2 hours rainwater harvesting, 3 hours education and outreach

1 person 3 hours form work removal, 2 hours moisten 3 hour education

Day 14: 1) Float Day

2) Construction Day 12

3) Education and Outreach

3 person 5 hours rainwater harvesting, 3 hours education and outreach

1 person 3 hours form work removal, 2 hours rainwater harvesting, 3 hours education and outreach

1 person 3 hours form work removal, 2 hours moisten 3 hour education

Day 15: Float Day

1) Continue inspection of facilities and curing

2) Meet with Rotary in Guatemala City

Day 16: Travel from Guatemala to US

-----------------------

Pipe Pipe Tank Tank Surface HGL Hydrolic Head HGL Target Pipe Head

Dia Slope Designation Elevation Elevation mH2O Slope Capacity Length Loss

(IN) (%) Inlet Outlet Inlet Outlet Inlet Outlet Inlet Outlet (%) LPS m m

3 1.88 RP-3 RP-4 1955 1940 1955 1944.77 0 4.77 1.52 4 673 10.23

3 9 Soccer Road RP-3 1982 1955 1987.9 1974.39 5.9 19.39 4.69 7.04 288 13.51

1 10.8 Soccer Road RP-2 1982 1940 1987.9 1975.23 5.9 35.23 3.48 0.32 364 12.67

4 5 RP-1 Soccer Road 1990 1982 1990 1987.9 0 5.9 1.1 7.36 191 2.1

2.5 16.91 Existing Tank RP-1 2043 1995

This is the summary of the inlets and outlets of the main pipelines that will be implemented in Simajhuleu to connect the four proposed pressure break tank. The grade line below shows the path from tank to tank. The hydraulic grade lines themselves can be found in Appendix I. In Appendix I In the purple lines represent the hydrolic grade, the black lines represent the ground and the green lines represent the required head

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download