Ajay, Thanks for explaining that you have SELECTseries 5. In this version, a patch is required to support displaying results in metric units in the SWMM text output file. I will contact you offline via private message regarding this. In the CONNECT Edition release, SWMM results are now shown in the CivilStorm user interface instead of the text output file, in a new SWMM Calculation Executive Summary. See more here: communities.bentley.com/.../30465.what-s-new-in-civilstorm-connect-edition

Product(s): Bentley WaterGEMS, WaterCAD, HAMMER Version(s): 10.00.00.49 Environment: N\A Area: Other Problem The below error may occur in the initial CONNECT Edition release (10.00.00. 49 ), when working on a model that was originally created in an older version: Haestad.SQLite.SQLiteConstraintViolationException: 19: columns DomainElementID, AlternativeID are not unique at Haestad.SQLite.SQLiteLibrary.ThrowException(Int32 errorCode, String errorMessage) at Haestad.SQLite.SQLiteCommand.ExecuteNonQuery() at Haestad.Domain.DataObjects.Sqlite.SqliteAlternativeRecordDataBrokerBase.MakeRecordLocalBasic(String tableName, StringFilterDelegate fieldsToCopyFilterDelegate, Int32 fromDomainElementID, Int32 fromAlternativeID, Int32 toDomainElementID, Int32 toAlternativeID) ... Solution To resolve this issue, please upgrade to CONNECT Edition build 10.00.00.50 (or greater, when available). If you are not able to upgrade from build 49 to build 50, please contact Technical Support for the latest Cumulative Patch set for version 10.00.00.49. Defect #616558 See Also

Applies To Product(s): Bentley WaterCAD, Bentley WaterGEMS Version(s): V8 XM, V8i, CONNECT Edition Area: Output and Reporting Original Author: Jesse Dringoli, Bentley Technical Support Group Overview This Technote explains how to interpret and troubleshoot calculated results for an automated fire flow analysis in WaterCAD or WaterGEMS V8 XM or V8i. Before reading this Technote, it is recommended that the user complete the Fire flow Quick start lesson. This is located in the WaterCAD/WaterGEMS help, under Contents > Quick Start Lessons > Automated Fire Flow Analysis. Background Fire Flow analysis is a common tool used in WaterCAD and WaterGEMS to ensure enough protection is provided during fire emergencies. The user is able to enter constraints in order to determine how much fire flow is available at hydrants while adequate system pressure is maintained. Several tools available to aid in understanding fire flow results. With the release of WaterGEMS V8i SELECTseries 6, the SCADAConnect Simulator tool has a new option: Fire response. Fire Response enables you to place a fire demand (or other emergency flows) at a node for a period of time to determine its impact on pressure and flows and possibly test alternative ways of responding to the fire. Here is the technote on that. How Does Automated Fire Flow Work? Fire flows are computed at each node by iteratively assigning demands and computing system pressures. When you execute a fire flow analysis, WaterCAD\GEMS will: Calculate a steady-state simulation for all nodes designated as fire-flow nodes. At each node, it begins by running a Steady-State simulation using only non-fire demands, to ensure that the fire flow constraints (e.g., minimum residual pressure, minimum zone pressure) that have been set can be met without withdrawing any Fire Flow from any of the nodes. Evaluate the Fire Flow Upper Limit and Available Fire Flow at each of the fire-flow nodes. Assuming the fire flow constraints were met in the initial run, the program performs a series of steady-state runs in which flow is applied to each specified fire-flow node and results are evaluated against fire-flow constraints. Note that the fire flow for each individual node is evaluated using a separate analysis (i.e., needed fire flow is not applied simultaneously to all fire-flow nodes). The program performs a series of steady-state analyses in which the Fire Flow Upper Limit discharge is applied to each node in turn. If the fire flow constraints are met for the Fire Flow Upper Limit discharge, the node satisfies the fire flow constraints and no further analysis is required for that node. The program then performs a series of steady-state analyses in which it iteratively assigns lesser demands to nodes that do not meet Fire Flow Upper Limit constraint to determine the Avalable Fire Flow. The Available Fire Flow is the maximum fire flow that each node can supply without violating fire flow constraints. If the Available Fire Flow is greater than or equal to Needed Fire Flow, the node satisfies the fire flow contraints. If Available Fire Flow is less than Needed, it does not. Run a final Steady-State calculation that does not apply Fire Flow demands to any of the junctions. This provides a baseline of calculated results that can then be compared to the Fire Flow conditions, which can be determined by viewing the results presented on the Fire Flow tab of the individual junction editors, or in the Fire Flow Tabular Report. Interpreting the Fire Flow Alternative Configuration for an automated fire flow analysis is done under the Fire Flow alternative. This is found under Analysis > Alternatives > Fire flow. When computing a scenario, the fire flow alternative assigned to that scenario is used. At a minimum, you should specify values for the needed Fire Flow, Fire Flow Upper Limit, Apply Fire Flow By, Residual Pressure Lower Limit, Zone Pressure Lower Limit and Fire flow nodes selection set. Below is an explanation of each of the main fields found in this alternative (when double clicking on it): Note: If the above options need to be configured differently for each junction/hydrant, you can specify "local" fireflow constraints by clicking the "specify local fireflow constraints?" check box next to the junctions/hydrants in the list at the bottom of the fireflow alternative. If this box is not checked, that particular fireflow node will utilize the global constraints entered at the top of the fire flow alternative. Note: it is important to understand that for the minimum zone pressure constraint, the program checks pressures for all other nodes in the model that are assigned to the same zone as the fireflow node in question. The zone is an attribute of the node. Say for example there are two nodes in the fireflow selection set: J-1 and J-2. J-1 is assigned to Zone A and J-2 is assigned to Zone B. Fireflow nodes are checked independently during the analysis, so when J-1 is being computed, the program will check pressures at all other nodes that are also assigned to Zone A and compare against the minimum zone pressure constraint. Then, when the analysis moves on to J-2, it will be checking pressure at all nodes assigned to Zone B. So, the program isn't running a fireflow analysis on a particular zone - it considers pressures at nodes assigned to certain zones, based on the fireflow node it is currently analyzing. Configuring your model to run a fire flow analysis After you've configured your fire flow alternative, the next step is to assign that alternative to the scenario you would like to compute. First, go to Analysis > Calculation Options. If you have an existing calculation option set that you're using in other scenarios, click on it and click the "duplicate" button. If you'd like, you could also click the "new" button to create a new calculation option set. Provide a meaningful name for your new calculation option set and double click it to open the properties. In the properties, set the Calculation Type to Fire Flow. Next, go to Analysis > Scenarios. Create a new scenario by choosing New > base scenario, or right click an existing scenario and choose "child". Provide a name for the new scenario, such as "Automated Fire Flow Analysis". Double-click your fire flow scenario to open the properties. Select your fire flow alternative from the dropdown next to "Fire Flow" and select your fire flow calculation option from the dropdown next to "Steady state/EPS solver Calculation options". Make your fireflow scenario current by right clicking it's name in the scenario manager and choosing "make current" or by selecting it from the Scenario dropdown menu bar at the top of your WaterCAD/WaterGEMS window. At this point, the automated fireflow analysis can be computed by going to Analysis > Compute. To understand the process that WaterCAD/GEMS uses, please see the section further above, entitled "How does the automated fire flow routine work?". Interpreting Automated Fire Flow Results There are several ways you can view the results of your automated fire flow analysis. Below describes the most common. Using the Fire Flow Report Make sure that your Fire Flow Analysis scenario is the current scenario and that you've succesfully computed it. Click Report > Element Tables > Fire Flow Report. The Fire Flow report is essentially a custom flextable including only the relevant fire flow results for both junctions and hydrants. The fields seen here can be added to the junction and hydrant flextables, but it is generally more convenient to use and keep this separate fireflow flextable when reviewing results of an automated fire flow analysis. Note: if you look at the general results in other flextables, such as "pressure" in the junction table, you will be viewing the baseline steady state results for your model, without any fire flow demands present. It is recommended that you only look at the fireflow table, so as not to be confused. The first thing you will notice is a column titled "Satisfies Fire Flow Constraints?" This will be checked only if the particular fire flow node (designated by the "label" for each row in this report) can provide at least the needed fire flow, while satisfying the fire flow constraints - the pressure constraints and sometimes the velocity constraints, if applicable. Here is a description of some of the other fields (columns) available in the fire flow report: Note: if your table does not display one or more of the below fields, you can add it using the yellow "edit" button at the top of the flextable. Is Fire Flow Run Balanced? "If set to true then the fire flow analysis was able to solve". Specifies whether the fireflow run was balanced or not for the given node. Using the Fire Flow Results Browser The Fire Flow Results Browser will allow you to check results for others elements in your model, during individual fire flow runs. Normally, the only results available after a fire flow analysis are the residual pressures at each fireflow node and minimum zone/system pressures. If you'd like to see other results, such as pipe velocities, hydraulic grades, valve status, etc, during a specific fire flow test, you can use this tool. First, you'll need to make sure that you have set up your Fire Flow Alternative for this function before running the fire flow analysis: After you have set up your Auxiliary Output Settings and run the Fire Flow analysis, go to Analysis > Fire Flow Results Browser. Select a fire flow node from the list to see the results for its adjacent pipes, and for the elements included in the output selection set (defined in the fire flow alternative). With a fire flow node selected, you can then establish color coding, annotations or simply check auxiliary results using the elemenet properties or flextables. For example, if you wanted to see the status of Valve X when Hydrant Y was flowed, click Hydrant Y in the list and then open the properties of Valve X. Color Coding Fire Flow Results Another good way to review an automated fire flow analysis is to use color coding. For example, you can color code junctions and hydrant based on the values for total available fire flow, to see areas where the available fire flow is lacking. Another useful color coding could be one based on the "satisfies fire flow constraints?" attribute. For example, you could color code such that junctions with "false" for this attribute show up as red, with a larger size. This would be done by using the "color and size" option, in the color coding dialog. You can also use color coding with the fire flow results browser. For example, you could color code pipe velocities so that when you click fire flow nodes from the fire flow results browser list, the colors will update to show the velocity distribution when that particular node was flowed. Troubleshooting Fire flow results not available In some cases, you may notice that the results in your fire flow report show "N/A" after computing the model. Make sure your scenario is set up correctly. Ensure that the correct fire flow alternative is assigned to the scenario that you are computing and ensure that its calculation options have the calculation type set to "fire flow". If this is set to "hydraulics only", fire flow results will not be computed. Make sure the scenario computed succesfully. If any messages show up under your user notification (Analysis > User notifications) with a red circle next to them, it means that the calculation failed. You'll need to address these fatal errors first, before results will be available. "N/A" entries can also be caused by omission from the fireflow selection set. In your fire flow alternative, make sure that all the nodes you'd like to study are included in the selection set selected for "Fire flow nodes". The fireflow routine will only analyze and provide results for nodes in this selection set. If desired, a filter can be used in the fire flow report so that nodes not included in the fire flow nodes selection set are not displayed. Make sure that you are not trying to use the fire flow results browser, if you haven't set up your fire flow alternative to save auxiliary results. Doing so can cause results in the fire flow flextable to show "N/A". This can be fixed by clicking the "reset to standard steady state results" button at the top of the fire flow results browser. Understanding why a node cannot provide the desired fire flow In the fire flow report (flextable), you may notice that one or more fire flow nodes does not satisfy the fire flow constraints. Meaning, the total available fire flow is less than the needed fire flow or below what you expected. There are several reasons why this could occur. First, check the calculated residual pressure field. This is the pressure at the fire flow node, at the total available fire flow. So, if this is equal to the residual pressure constraint, it means that the residual pressure constraint would be violated if any more flow was passed, so the fire flow routine stopped. If the calculated residual pressure is less than the residual pressure constraint, it probably means that the residual pressure was below the constraint even with the base demands (with no additional fire flow added). In this case, you should check the pressures in the model with baseline demands - they should all be above the constraints entered in the fire flow alternative. Next, check the calculated minimum zone pressure field. This is the lowest pressure out of all nodes in the same zone as the fire flow node in question, at the total available fire flow. So, if this is equal than the minimum zone pressure constraint that you entered, it means that the fire flow constrainted would be violated if any more flow was passed. So, the fire flow calculation stopped and reported the total available fire flow such that this would not be violated. If the calculated minimum zone pressure shows as less than the constraint, it probably means that the pressure somewhere else in that zone was less than the constraint, even with only the base demands (with no additional fire flow added). You should check the pressures in the model with baseline demands - they should all be above the constraints entered in the fire flow alternative. To check which specific node had the lowest pressure in the zone, check the "Junction with minimum pressure (zone)" field. In many cases, this may be a node at the suction side of the pump or at some other location that you may not be concerned with. In this case, it is recommended that you assign a different zone to these nodes. For example, create a zone called "low" and use that. This way, it won't be in the same zone as any fire flow nodes and thus won't be considered (unless you're using the minimum system pressure constraint). If you elected to use the minimum system pressure constraint in your fire flow alternative, you'll also need to check the calculated minimum system pressure. This is identical to the zone pressure constraint (see above), except it checks pressure at ALL nodes in the model. You can also check the "Junction with minimum pressure (system)" field to see which node caused the fire flow routine to stop. If you elected to use the Velocity constraint in your fire flow alternative, you'll also need to check the "Velocity of maximum pipe" and "Pipe w/ Maximum Velocity" fields. If the velocity in any pipe inside the chosen "pipe set" selection set exceeds the constraint you entered, the fire flow routine will stop. So, similar to the pressure constraints, you may notice the "Velocity of maximum pipe" is equal to or less than the constraint, indicating the reason why no additional fire flow could be extracted. Lastly, in rare cases, the fire flow routine may stop at a certain Total Available fire flow due to an unbalanced model. Meaning, at certain flow rates, the steady state simulation may not be able to converge on a balanced hydraulic solution within the maximum number of trials. This can occur in large, complex models, with low or near-zero flows, and/or when other data input in the model is not correct. It causes the results to be invalid and the fire flow run to stop. If your available fire flow is less than the upper limit, yet all the constraints described above are not violated, chances are that this was caused by the network becoming unbalanced. To check, try running a manual fire flow analysis on that junction. For the manual run, just make sure the calculation type in your calculation options is set to “Hydraulics only” and that you have entered the value for the total needed fire flow as an additional, fixed demand on that junction. Run the analysis and check your user notifications for an unbalanced error. One solution to this is to increase the max trials value in the calculation options, but you should also consider investigating other causes, such as data entry errors. Note: be aware of the presence of local fire flow constraints. At the bottom of your fire flow alternative, you can set node-specific constraints, which override the global constraints set at the top. This could potentially cause confusion when viewing fire flow results. For example, the total available fire flow for a certain node may be less than what you believe the needed fire flow value is, but still showing as satisfying the fire flow constraints. If you had a local "needed fire flow" set to a lower value, this could be valid. So, make sure you include and check the "Fire flow (needed)", "Fire flow (upper limit)" "Pressure (residual lower limit)" and "Pressure (Zone lower limit)" fields in your fire flow report/flextable. Consider the following Fire Flow Flextable, with no minimum system pressure or maximum velocity constraints used: J-10 - This node passed the fire flow test, as indicated by the "Satisfies fire flow constraints?" check box. It reports a Total available fire flow of 2012.68gpm, which is above the total needed fire flow of 462.68. Although the needed fire flow is actually 450.00gpm, we have chosen to add fire flows to base demands, and there is a base demand of 12.68gpm on this node. The total available amount of 2012.68gpm accounts for this base demand as well. Meaning, the total demand on this particular node can be up to 2012.68gpm without violating any fire flow constraints. The reason is because at the upper limit (2012.68gpm), both the residual pressure and minimum zone pressure are 59.2psi, which is above the constraints. The fire flow analysis stopped at the upper limit value to prevent unrealistically high flows from being computed. J-169 - This node passed the fire flow test with a reported total available fire flow of 557.82gpm. This is above the needed fire flow but below the upper limit. The reason why the fire flow test stopped at this flow is because a higher flow rate would violate the zone pressure constraint. As you can see, the calculated minimum zone pressure (lower limit) is equal to the user-entered minimum zone pressure constraint of 20psi and the "junction w/ minimum pressure (zone)" shows J-170. This means that although the residual pressure at J-169 (24.3psi) is above the constraints, J-170 is in the same zone as J-169 and had the lowest pressure, 20psi. J-171 - This node passed the fire flow test with a reported total available fire flow of 489.28gpm. This is above the needed fire flow but below the upper limit. The reason why the fire flow test stopped at this flow is because a higher flow rate would violate the residual pressure constraint. Although the minimum zone pressure of 23.5psi is above the 20psi constraint, the residual pressure (calculated pressure at J-171) is equal to the residual pressure constraint of 15psi. At a higher flow rate than 489.28gpm, the residual pressure would drop below 15psi, which would violate the pressure constraint. So, the fire flow analysis reports the maximum flow available without violating the constraint. J-159 - This node failed the fire flow test, as indicated by the unchecked "Satisfies fire flow constraints?". This is because the total available fire flow is 327.06gpm, which is less than the total needed flow of 453.17gpm. The reason why this node can only supply 327.06gpm is because of the residual pressure constraint. As you can see, even though the minimum zone pressure (60.4psi) is well above the zone pressure constraint, the calculated residual pressure is equal to the residual pressure constraint. This means that the pressure constaint would be violated at a flow any higher than 327.06gpm. J-154 - This node failed the fire flow test, because the available fire flow of 289.24gpm is less than the needed fireflow of 455.39. The reason it can only supply this much flow is because of the minimum zone pressure constraint. As you can see, although the residual pressure (28.5psi) is above the constraint, the minimum zone pressure is equal to the constraint, with J-158 as the "junction w/ minimum pressure (zone)". This means that J-158, which is in the same zone as J-154, is preventing any additional flow from being extracted, without violating the minimum zone pressure constraint. J-1 - This node failed the fire flow test with a total available flow of zero. This means that even without any demand at all on J-1, the baseline pressures in the model fall below the constraints. This is indicated by the calculated residual pressure of -1.4psi. This means that with zero demand on this node, the pressure at J-1 is -1.4psi. Since this is well below the constraint of 20psi, the fireflow test fails and the available fire flow is reported as zero. This particular junction is located on the suction side of a pump station, so it probably should be excluded from the fire flow nodes selection set. Meaning, it is probably unnecessary to compute fire flow for this node. J-2 - This node also failed the fire flow test with a total available flow of zero. In this case, it is because the minimum zone pressure constraint was violated. This means that without any demand at all on this node, the pressure at J-1 is -1.4psi. J-1 is in the same zone as J-2 and as seen above, it is at the suction side of the pump. So, assigning a new zone to J-1 should resolve this problem, since it would no longer be considered during the check of zone pressure. J-3 - This node, along with other junctions below it, show "N/A" for all calculated fields. This is because these nodes are not included in the fire flow nodes selection set , set in the fire flow alternative. Fire flow results browser not working If you attempt to use the fire flow results browser tool, you may run into problems if it is not configured correctly. Symtoms could be: Nothing showed up in the list. Some results show "N/A" in the properties/flextables after clicking a fire flow node from the list. This is caused by improper configuration in the fire flow alternative. Open the fire flow alternative and check the "Auxiliary output Settings" section. If you'd like to be able to check auxiliary results for any fire flow node, regardless of whether it passed or failed the "needed fire flow", select "All nodes" for the "Fire flow auxiliary results type". Doing this will ensure that all nodes show up in the list. At this point, at a minimum, you will be able to see auxiliary results for pipes adjacent to the fire flow node that you select in the results brower. If you'd like to see results for more elements, you'll need to choose a selection set for the "Auxiliary output selection set". If you want to be able to see auxiliary results for all nodes, you can create a selection set of all nodes. To do this, close the fire flow alternative, go to Edit > Select All. Right click anywhere in the drawing pane, choose "create selection set" and give it a name, such as "ALL ELEMENTS". Then, select this in your fire flow alternative for the output selection set. Now, when you compute the fire flow simulation, you'll be able to check results for all elements in the model, for your fire flow nodes. Note: the more fire flow nodes available in the list and the more elements included in the output selection set, the longer the calculation will take to perform and the more disk space it's saved results will take up. See Also WaterGEMS V8 Automated Fire Flow FAQ Product TechNotes and FAQs Haestad Methods Product Tech Notes And FAQs [[General WaterGEMS V8 FAQ|General WaterGEMS V8 FAQ]] WaterGEMS V8 Modeling FAQ Hydraulics and Hydrology Forum Whats new in WaterGMES SS6 SCADAConnect Simulator for WaterGEMS SS6 Simulating a Fire Response in SCADAConnect Simulator

Looking for any good white papers, etc. that discuss a basic workflow to update piping networks in WaterGEMS as new water mains are being added to a Bentley GIS.

Here are a couple of wiki's and forum posts that may help. communities.bentley.com/.../18884.how-can-i-update-my-gis-id-s communities.bentley.com/.../2674.updating-a-model-using-modelbuilder-tn communities.bentley.com/.../87343 communities.bentley.com/.../112839

Hi Earl, Here are a few more resources: Preparing GIS data for use in the hydraulics and hydrology products Tips for improving performance of all-pipe models linked to a GIS How to populate an existing model with GIS-IDs Automated Model Building using WaterCAD or WaterGEMS Learning Path

Applies To Product(s): Bentley WaterGEMS, Bentley WaterCAD (SELECTseries 5), Bentley SewerGEMS (SELECTseries 4) Version(s): 08.11.05.61 (WaterGEMS/WaterCAD), 08.11.04.54 (SewerGEMS) Area: Modeling Original Author: Akshaya Niraula, Bentley Technical Support Group SCADA Element A SCADA element is an element created in order to link model elements.The SCADA element must be linked to a model element and can also be linked to some type of external signal. Each SCADA element has only one property so that an element with multiple properties must have one element per property (e.g. a pump with suction and discharge pressure and flow would have three SCADA elements). These elements can be used to display external data in a model or set up alarms for model results. For information on using SCADAConnect Simulator and SCADAConnect, please see the SCADAConnect Simulator TechNote. Creating / Placing SCADA Element From the Layout tool bar click on SCADA Element icon and then click on the drawing next to the element of interest. One SCADA Element can be mapped to one SCADA tag/item so if there are multiple signals for an element multiple SCADA Element are required. For instance, if a pump has two signals from SCADA representing flow and pressure then to map both of the signals there must be two SCADA Elements. SCADA Element Properties / Signal Mapping Once the SCADA Elements are placed, double-click the Element to bring up its properties. Model Element - Click on the drop-down menu and select the target element. Field - Click on the drop-down menu and select the type of the data that the signal represents. Real-time Signal - Click on the drop-down menu and select the signal that represents the field selection above. The list of the signals in this field is tied to the signals visible in SCADA Signal Editor . Historical Signal - Click on the drop-down menu and select the signal that holds the historic information. Active Alarms - In this field there are several drop-down menus which after selecting shows different options to enter. Corresponding to the values defined, the Alarms tab in the User Notifications window will update. For more on Alarms see the Alarms section below SCADA Element Graphing The SCADA data can be viewed in the graph manager as well. Simply right-click on the SCADA Element and then Graph. Click OK on the Graph Series Options window and a graph will be displayed. Note: generating graph for Real-time may not be as valuable as for historic data as there may be only one data value at a given time for a signal. If data are not visible in the graph then please refer to the FAQ in the SCADAConnection Simulator TechNote. SCADA Element Color-Coding SCADA Elements can be color-coded based on its value just like other modeling elements. From View > Element Symbology window, right click on SCADA Element > New > Color-Coding and then populate the window as necessary. SCADA Element Annotating / Labeling Similar to other modeling elements, SCADA Elements can also be annotated, that means the SCADA data value can be viewed in the drawing very easily. From View > Element Symbology window, right click on SCADA Element > New > Annotation . In the Annotation window, populate the necessary field and then click Apply and OK. SCADA Element Flex Table In this FlexTable, all the SCADA Signals that are mapped in the drawing are visible. This FlexTable shares all the features that other FlexTables offers. FlexTable can be view from View > FlexTables, then double-click on SCADA Element Table . The same table can also be viewed from Report > Element Tables > SCADA Element. Alarms Alarms are tied only to SCADA Elements, however Alerts are tied to all elements. There are four types of Alarms that SCADA Element can raise, •  High   Only one value can be provided. When the corresponding modeling element's value is higher than the given value, this alarm is triggered. •  Low   Only one value can be provided. When the corresponding modeling element's value is lower than the given value, this alarm is triggered. •  Low, High   Two values can be provided. •  Low-Low, Low, High, High-High   Four values can be provided All the Alarms are listed in the Alerts and Alarms tab of the User Notifications window which can be obtained from Analysis > User Notifications For information on use of SCADAConnect Simulator and the publishing ability in SCADAConnect Simulator, please refer to the SCADAConnect Simulator TechNotes: SCADAConnect Simulator in WaterCAD and WaterGEMS V8i SELECTseries 5 SCADAConnect Simulator for WaterGEMS (V8i SELECTseries 6 and CONNECT edition) For a free Webinar showcasing the SCADA Element and related workflow in SewerGEMS, click this link .

This is a bit of a late reply on this thread, but I would recommend considering using the SCADA node element along with SCADAConnect, available in recent versions of WaterGEMS. You can connect to your field data in SCADAConnect, use the SCADA element to easily graph the field data along with model results, then use the import button in Darwin Calibrator to import field data snapshots from SCADAConnect. See related articles: New SCADA Element annotation and reporting abilities S CADAConnect Simulator in WaterCAD and WaterGEMS V8i SELECTseries 5 SCADAConnect Simulator for WaterGEMS (V8i SELECTseries 6 and CONNECT edition) Using Darwin Calibrator

Product(s): CivilStorm, SewerGEMS, StormCAD Version(s): 08.09.26.17 and later Area: Layout and Data Input Problem What is the purpose of the left and right overbank in the conduit properties, when using the "overbank Channel" roughness type of an irregular channel? What is the purpose of "left bank station"/"left overbank Manning's n", "right bank Station"/"right overbank Manning's n" and "channel manning's n". in CivilStorm or SewerGEMS? Solution When selecting "Overbank channel" as the roughness type of an irregular channel, the user must define the roughness coefficient for the left bank of the channel, right bank of the channel and central part of the channel. The "Left bank station" is the station point that marks the end of the left bank. The left bank is measured from the first station-depth point in the irregular channel section table to the selected point. The "left overbank Manning's n" is the roughness coefficient for the left river bank (the part of the channel to the left of the "left bank station".) The "right bank station" is the station point that marks the beginning of the right bank. The right bank is measured from the selected point to the last station-depth point in the irregular channel section table. The "right overbank Manning's n" is the roughness coefficient for the right river bank (the part of the channel to the right of the "right bank station".) The "channel Manning's n" is the roughness coefficient for the middle part of the channel, between the left and right bank stations. Basically if the water surface is below the banks, the "channel Manning's n" applies but if the flow rises to a point where some of it goes over the banks on the sides of the river, part of the flow is subjected to a different roughness, based on the coefficients entered. [Solution: 500000060234] See Also SELECTsupport TechNotes And FAQs Product TechNotes and FAQs Original Author: Jesse Dringoli

Jesse, How would you incorporate a V-notch weir and a rectangular weir in an inlet box outlet structure? I am modeling a multi stage weir outlet structure, and don't know how to incorporate the various weirs with the riser option. I tried adding them in separately and then turning off the equation at the top elevation of the outlet structure. However, this stops the weir flow equation altogether and does not include the flow below that top elevation.

Our network system is operating with throttled valves (with different number of turns for each valve) and I would like to reflect all of it in our water system network in WaterGems. What is the best way and process to apply TCVs in our system?

Jing, Could you be more specific on what you are trying to do, how you've tried to accomplish it in Waterobjects.NET, and what specific problem you had when you tried? If possible, zip up and include your source code. You can use the below process to upload (reply back with the name of the file afterwards) communities.bentley.com/.../7079.communities-secure-file-upload When you say "I need resturction the net in new windows" do you mean you want to display the plan view of the network in your Waterobjects.net application? When you say "get the information of the node", what specific information do you need, and what do you need to do with it? (display it in a table in your application?)

Darwin Designer reports the "least cost solution", not necessarily the best solution. As a design engineer, you still need to review the solution and make adjustments based on your judgment.

Applies To Product(s): Bentley WaterCAD, Bentley WaterGEMS, Bentley HAMMER, Bentley SewerGEMS, Bentley CivilStorm, Bentley StormCAD, Bentley PondPack, Bentley SewerCAD Version(s): 08.11.XX.XX Area: Output and Reporting Original Author: Jesse Dringoli, Bentley Technical Support Group Problem Contours not showing up in plot preview / plot. When trying to plot a WaterCAD/GEMS for AutoCAD model, the contours do not show up. Problem ID#: 40638 Solution First, try exporting the contours to native format. This is done by right clicking the entry in the contour manager (View > Contours), then choosing to export to native format. If this does not help, please upgrade to the latest version of WaterCAD/GEMS and apply the latest corresponding cumulative patch set. The directions for downloading these can be found in the following wiki: https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/w/hydraulics_and_hydrology__wiki/8175.how-do-i-download-watergems-watercad-hammer-sewergems-sewercad-civilstorm-stormcad-pondpack-flowmaster-culvertmaster

Product(s): Bentley WaterGEMS, Bentley WaterCAD Version(s): 08.11.XX.XX, 10.XX.XX.XX Area: Results and Presentation Problem The maximum value for my contours is not showing up when I use the contours browser. For example, the maximum value in my contours is set for 3,000 gpm and the maximum contour value line showing is only 2900 gpm, but I have junctions that have a maximum of 3,000 gpm. Solution Make sure the maximum value in the contour manager is set slightly higher than the value that you want to display. For example, if potting contours the fire flow (Available) and the upper limit is set to 3,000 gpm and you want to display that value in your contours, set the maximum value in the contours manager for 3001 gpm or larger.

Applies To Product(s): Bentley WaterGEMS, Bentley WaterCAD Version(s): 08.11.XX.XX, 10.XX.XX.XX Original Author: Mark Pachlhofer, Bentley Technical Support Group Problem Why aren't my controls aren't being followed? Solution First, check if this is an EPS (extended period simulation) or steady state. If steady state, note that logical controls cannot be used and will be ignored. A control is designated as logical by the "evaluate as simple control?" check box, in the controls tab of the controls editor window. If the model is EPS or if simple controls are used, then you should check your control sets. In the controls editor window click the control sets tab and ensure that the control(s) in question are included in your control set. Also, go to Analysis > Alternatives, expand the operational alternatives, double click the one used in the current scenario (designated by the red check mark), and ensure that the correct control set is being used.

Applies To Product(s): Bentley HAMMER Version(s): 08.xx.xx.xx Area: Analysis/Computation Original Author: Jesse Dringoli, Bentley Technical Support Group Problem Description When using an operating rule to gradually close a valve element (FCV, TCV, etc) in Bentley HAMMER, the time history graph of flow and head is constant before dropping suddenly at the time corresponding to 100% closure? Why do I not see a gradual change in head/flow during a transient, when a valve operating rule is configured as such? Solution In order to see the proper results, you need to enter a minor loss or headloss coefficient for the valve. For example, if the operating rule is placed on a flow control valve (FCV) and the calculated status is Inactive during the initial conditions time step used for the transient analysis, then it will need to use the minor loss coefficient to determine headloss during valve closure. If the calculated status of the valve in Inactive and the minor loss coefficient is zero, there will be no headloss during the closure until the valve fully closed. Background information When an FCV is active, it is producing a head loss to reduce the amount of flow. HAMMER will take the value for the head loss needed to make the flow reduction and use it to compute a discharge coefficient. The discharge coefficient is necessary to define the relationship between head loss and discharge as the valve closes. If the valve setting is inactive, or if the calculated setting is inactive, the headloss-discharge relationship is determined by the minor loss coefficient. The program converts the minor loss coefficient to a discharge coefficient for use in the transient analysis. The loss coefficient represents the losses when the valve is fully open. A discharge coefficient will be computed based on this and the relative area of the valve, which is defined in the valve characteristics table. Basically the coefficient stays the same for all closure percentages, but since the area is decreasing, the velocity increases, which is used in the headloss calculation. So, you get a varying amount of headloss, which should be reflected in the transient results viewer. Example closure with headloss coefficient omitted: Example closure with headloss coefficients included: See Also Modeling Reference - Valves of Various Type Modeling an Initially Partially Closed Valve

Applies To Product(s): Bentley SewerGEMS, Bentley CivilStorm Version(s): 08.11.XX.XX Environment: N/A Area: Original Author: Mark Pachlhofer, Bentley Technical Support Group Defect # 388202 Problem When computing a composite outlet structure with no connected outfall the following error occurs: System.ArgumentException: Value does not fall within the expected range. at Haestad.Domain.DataObjects.Sqlite.SqliteAlternativeRecordDataBrokerBase.GetValue(Int32 domainElementID, Int32 alternativeID, Int32 fieldTypeID) ... Solution Add a short conduit that is connected to an outfall as shown in the screen shot below.

Applies To Product(s): Bentley SewerGEMS, Bentley CivilStorm, Bentley StormCAD Version(s): 08.11.XX.XX Original Author: Mark Pachlhofer, Bentley Technical Support Group Problem How is flow balanced at junctions with the GVF Rational Solver (StormCAD)? Solution Because of the use of rational method hydrology, flow discontinuities may be noticed. This is a condition where the sum of the inflows does not equal the sum of the outflows. The main reason for this is that the rational method is only concerned with peak flows and has a high dependence on duration (system time). As the system time changes, the intensity changes and has a direct effect on the rate of flow in the system. The most common cause of confusion with this discontinuity stems from rational loads that are tracked through a long piping system without any other loads entering the network. At the inlet of origin, the time of concentration may be relatively small, resulting in a high intensity and a large peak discharge. As the load travels through the pipes, the system time becomes larger, so the intensity lowers. This results in smaller discharge values, so the peak flow at the outlet may be significantly smaller than the peak flow at the original inlet. This may seem counter-intuitive at first, with questions like "Where did the rest of the flow go?" coming to mind. In reality, the rest of the flow was not lost, but an attempt to balance peak flows is not valid. Picture standing at the top of a hill with a bucket of water. If you empty the entire bucket into the gutter in one second, then the peak rate of discharge at the top of the hill is one bucket per second. Racing to the bottom of the hill, you can observe the flow and see that the peak flow is much less than one bucket per second. However, the flow lasts longer than one second. There was no water lost, but the peak was lower. StormCAD does not simply add flow at a junction node; rather, it takes into account the attenuation of peak flow as one moves downstream by keeping track of upstream catchment properties and decreasing the peak intensity according to the time of concentration and travel. The flow out of a catchment is: Where : Q = Flow C = Coefficient i = Intensity a = Area And the flow out of a junction is: Q (out) = Sum (C * i * a) + Sum (Q known) One would think therefore that flow in equals flow out. However, the intensity (i) used for determining the flow into the manhole will be higher than the intensity of the flow leaving the manhole. This intensity is calculated using the longest possible flow travel time in order to generate the most conservative value for peak flow. For example, say a catchment empties into a catch basin and has a Time of Concentration of 10 minutes. On the other hand the travel time of the piped flow getting to the catch basin is 12 minutes. The rational flow generated at the catch basin will be generated based on the intensity associated with the 12 minute duration. This way you are assured that the whole system is contributing to the flow and hence you are using the most conservative peak flow value at that point. If you do not wish to have this flow attenuation taken into account, you should specify Known or Additional flows at the catch basins. See Also Why is the system time at one of my nodes much larger than the upstream nodes Tc or system time?

Juliet, also of consideration should be the accuracy of the discharge coefficient versus relative closure (number of turns). Referring to the valve manufacture catalog could help provide you the flow characteristics that you would need for the hydraulic model to more accurately represent the valves. The Wiki Sushma included has some good graphics to walk you through this.