<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://communities.bentley.com/cfs-file/__key/system/syndication/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><channel><title>Christen Crique's Activities</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/members/1b7e3c31_2d00_18df_2d00_4ddf_2d00_b8b9_2d00_31102f41dc01</link><description>Christen Crique's recent activity</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Community 12</generator><item><title>Peaking factor</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/239178/peaking-factor</link><pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2022 15:30:14 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:2c11c1bb-8007-4b2c-8259-379c858ce51a</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;From what I&amp;#39;ve read it&amp;#39;s adviced to enter average day demands as your base demands and to peak those demands using peaking factors when necessary. To model my low and high flow conditions in my steady state model i&amp;#39;ve simply created a highflow scenario and ea low flow scenario using alternatives. However is it possible to temporarily adjust my base demands using peaking factors in WaterCAD? So say for example i have as base demand in a particular area a demand of 1.2m&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;/ hour at all the customer meter elements and at the other area 0.9&lt;span&gt;m&lt;/span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;span&gt;/ hour&amp;nbsp;at all the customer meter elements. But i know that during peak flow conditions the demands in these areas are 2.4m&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;/ hour&amp;nbsp;and 2.7m&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;/ hour&amp;nbsp;respectfully. Is there i way for me to adjust those demands using peaking factors of 2 and 3 respectfully without having to create knew scenarios?&lt;/span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Difference between model and field data during average/low flow conditions</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/238892/difference-between-model-and-field-data-during-average-low-flow-conditions</link><pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov 2022 13:34:53 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:dadb5921-da21-4c17-82b7-09fa4032af9c</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;In the following tables are some results of field tests compared to model predictions at average/low flow conditions in table 1 and then at high flow conditions in table 2. In the 1st table one can see that the hydraulic grade during average/low flow conditions differs from results of the model prediction but on average they do not differ as much as the ones form the high flow conditions.&amp;nbsp; The values in red are values that seem to be bad data since the hydraulic grade is higher than that of the reservoir. From one of the articles in the calibration tips it is explained that in the low flow scenario model predictions should match field data. But my question then is if the difference during the average/ low flow scenario is significant enough or are they small enough to where one could take away that the model and field data are matching well enough?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Table 1&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;table width="264"&gt;
&lt;tbody&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td colspan="3" width="264"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hydraulic grade of reservoir (average /low flow conditions)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td colspan="3" width="264"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.91&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hydraulic grade from model prediction (average /low flow conditions) &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hydraulic grade from measurement (average /low flow conditions)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="82"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Percentage difference&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="background-color:#ff0000;"&gt;46.829&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="82"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;-4.51%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;43.686&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="82"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;2.51%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;43.524&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="82"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;2.87%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;43.639&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="82"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;2.61%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.353&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="82"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;1.02%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;42.516&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="82"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;5.12%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="background-color:#ff0000;"&gt;46.67&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="82"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;-4.15%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/tbody&gt;
&lt;/table&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Table 2&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;table width="265"&gt;
&lt;tbody&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td colspan="3" width="265"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hydraulic grade of reservoir (High flow conditions)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td colspan="3" width="265"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.6&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hydraulic grade from model prediction (High flow conditions) &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hydraulic grade from measurement (High flow conditions)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Percentage difference&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;42.54&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;39.444&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;7.28%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;43.51&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;36.033&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;17.18%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;42.7&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;26.856&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;37.11%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;43.51&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;38.378&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;11.79%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;42.68&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;37.278&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;12.66%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;42.55&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;23.091&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;45.73%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.07&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="100"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style="background-color:#ff0000;"&gt;44.612&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="83"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;-1.23%&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/tbody&gt;
&lt;/table&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>How is the hydraulic grade calculated</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/238796/how-is-the-hydraulic-grade-calculated</link><pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2022 03:33:28 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:7f25e1cf-1a17-4f33-9f7a-3db236f3448a</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I would like to know the equation the model uses to calculate the Hydraulic grade. Because I want to calculate the hydraulic grade line for my field results in order to compare it with the model results but I cannot figure out how the model is calculating the HGL. Because from what I found 1 bar is equivalent to 10.199773339984 m of head. So I would then simply multiply the measured &amp;nbsp;pressures in bar by that number and then ad the result to the elevation. So to test that I took the pressures predicted by the model and calculated the HGL using that method but I get different results then the HGL that the model produces (see the results in the table below). And also the way I calculate the Hydraulic grade I get a hydraulic grade that is higher than the hydraulic grade of my boundary element (a reservoir) which does not make sense since there are no pumps or prv&amp;rsquo;s downstream of the reservoir.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;table width="662"&gt;
&lt;tbody&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="73"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hydraulic grade of the boundary element&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="111"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pressure from model prediction (bar)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="191"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Node Elevations (m)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="180"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hydraulic grade from model prediction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="108"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hydraulic grade calculated by me&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td rowspan="6" width="70"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.91&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="112"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;3.6&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="191"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;7.87&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="180"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="110"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;44.59&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="111"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;3.6&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="191"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;8.21&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="180"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="108"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;44.93&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="111"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;4.2&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="191"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;2.14&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="180"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="108"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;44.98&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="111"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;4.3&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="191"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;0.98&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="180"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="108"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;44.84&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="111"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;3.9&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="191"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;5.3&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="180"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="108"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;45.08&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td width="111"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;3.4&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="191"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;9.98&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="180"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;44.81&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td width="108"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;44.66&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/tbody&gt;
&lt;/table&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Annotation</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/238824/annotation</link><pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2022 15:11:29 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:96fa8f8c-902e-44f8-9135-5b78106a3422</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;How do I display both my measurement results and the model predictions at the same time as shown in the image below. I know how to display the model results using the annotion but how do i add my meauserment results.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;img style="max-height:240px;max-width:320px;" src="/resized-image/__size/640x480/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/5925/pastedimage1669734713320v1.png" alt=" " /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>c-factor vs roughness height extremes</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/238458/c-factor-vs-roughness-height-extremes</link><pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2022 23:29:19 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:f5f674cb-0537-4e75-9942-3304b39c1f42</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;In the book&lt;em&gt; &amp;ldquo;&lt;/em&gt;Advanced Water Distribution Modeling and Management&amp;rdquo; I found the following:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If the differences in pressures and flows between actual conditions and predicted conditions are so great that unrealistic and unexplainable pipe roughness values (less than 30 or more than 150) or major adjustments in demands must be used to achieve calibration, then chances are good that the discrepancy is the result of a closed or partially closed valve or errors in system mapping.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The numbers less than 30 or more than 150 are Hazen-Williams c-factor. But when talking in terms of Darcy-Weisbach roughness height (e) what would be the extremes that one could draw the same conclusions from?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Network Navigator</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/238200/network-navigator</link><pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2022 19:28:20 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:55481dd9-41df-4b03-8e44-71781002e8b1</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;When I try to use &amp;quot;Find shortest Path&amp;quot; from network navigator I keep getting the following message. What could be the problem here?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img src="/resized-image/__size/320x240/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/5925/pastedimage1668108659975v1.png" alt=" " /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Peak hour calibration vs Hydrant Flow calibration</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/236873/peak-hour-calibration-vs-hydrant-flow-calibration</link><pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2022 17:07:50 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:cf5c9f11-cedc-4639-b2de-e1bdda77834d</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;I am considering whether or not I should use fire hydrant test for calibration or if I can simply collect field data during peak hours. From what I understand this would be dependent on the amount of velocity of the water traveling within the pipes. So my question is at what velocity&amp;#39;s can the modeler be assured that they would be capturing the impact of ,&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;pipe roughness,&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;closed valves&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;and demand errors to a significant degree. Because if&amp;nbsp; the velocity in my system is reaching that velocity during peak hours I could simply set out a bunch of pressure and flow loggers&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;during peak hour and calibrate based on that instead of having to conduct a bunch of fire flow tests.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Elevations</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/236849/elevations</link><pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2022 05:55:36 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:6b20fbc2-d4b2-4637-824e-40d4698daa40</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Does anyone know of a good android application that can be used to give accurate elevations that i could use&amp;nbsp; to get the elevations of my data measurement points during calibration?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>question about suggested article</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/236776/question-about-suggested-article</link><pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2022 19:18:31 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:92773bd1-b22f-4f11-a946-3f7d474a3048</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;In the explanation that the article &amp;ldquo;Water Model Calibration Tips&amp;rdquo; wiki &amp;agrave; &lt;a href="/products/hydraulics___hydrology/w/hydraulics_and_hydrology__wiki/40028/water-model-calibration-tips"&gt;https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/w/hydraulics_and_hydrology__wiki/40028/water-model-calibration-tips&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There is an article called; &amp;ldquo;Model Calibration Data: the good , the bad, and the useless&amp;rdquo;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In that article the following is stated:&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &amp;ldquo;The Hazen-Williams equation can be solved for C-factor to give&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img alt=" " src="/resized-image/__size/320x240/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/5925/pastedimage1665429414750v1.png" /&gt;(1)&amp;rdquo; (p.96)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I understand why the &amp;ldquo;error&amp;rdquo; element is introduced since the article is usig the equation to highlight the impact of errors on C factors that might result from calibration. However on the &amp;ldquo;Bentley WaterGEMS CONNECT Edition Help&amp;rdquo; website &amp;agrave; &lt;a href="https://docs.bentley.com/LiveContent/web/Bentley%20WaterGEMS%20SS6-v1/en/GUID-E5FCE3A52CBA40899062D149A5CE2D5A.html"&gt;https://docs.bentley.com/LiveContent/web/Bentley%20WaterGEMS%20SS6-v1/en/GUID-E5FCE3A52CBA40899062D149A5CE2D5A.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Hazen Williams equation is described as follows:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img alt=" " src="/resized-image/__size/320x240/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/5925/pastedimage1665429462933v2.png" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;table&gt;
&lt;tbody&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Q&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;=&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Discharge in the section (m 3 /s, cfs)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;C&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;=&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Hazen-Williams roughness coefficient (unitless)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;=&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Flow area (m 2 , ft. 2 )&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;R&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;=&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Hydraulic radius (m, ft.)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;S&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;=&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Friction slope (m/m, ft./ft.)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;k&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;=&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Constant (0.85 for SI units, 1.32 for US units).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/tbody&gt;
&lt;/table&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If I try to isolate for C using this equation I do not see how I get to:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img alt=" " src="/resized-image/__size/320x240/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/5925/pastedimage1665429516451v3.png" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Comparing field and model data</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/236252/comparing-field-and-model-data</link><pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2022 15:28:31 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:f49b455d-11d6-41e4-93b5-d5143da617da</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;From the following Bentley YouTube tutorial &amp;agrave;&lt;span&gt;&lt;a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llA0Dud9R_E&amp;amp;list=PLLCOESNdmKSJAaqcqkfZJqw4eIEpB-NAC&amp;amp;index=10"&gt;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llA0Dud9R_E&amp;amp;list=PLLCOESNdmKSJAaqcqkfZJqw4eIEpB-NAC&amp;amp;index=10&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It&amp;rsquo;s explained that one should &amp;ldquo;compare &lt;u&gt;hydraulic grade lines&lt;/u&gt; between the field and the model&amp;rdquo;. And gives the following illustrations to as an example of why comparing model to field using &lt;u&gt;hydraulic grade line &lt;/u&gt;is better then comparing pressures.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img alt=" " src="/resized-image/__size/320x240/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/5925/pastedimage1664378859861v1.png" /&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;img alt=" " src="/resized-image/__size/320x240/__key/communityserver-discussions-components-files/5925/pastedimage1664378878227v3.png" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;My question is then the following:&lt;br /&gt; What does &lt;u&gt;location&lt;/u&gt; portrayed on the X-axis stand for? Is it the distance from the source in terms of:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Difference in elevation between source and measurement point or&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Pipe length between source and measurement point&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Discussion Starter I</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/achievements/21025ab1-febb-4fb4-a872-d32a921cb45c</link><pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2022 17:45:46 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:7a65ada8-43f4-49ae-9a6e-94362b8de286</guid><dc:creator /><description>Start a discussion in a forum that receives 5 replies.</description></item><item><title>Darcy Weisbach roughness</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/236339/darcy-weisbach-roughness</link><pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2022 20:47:57 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:a21ee7ec-0b8f-4e35-897e-91c0e40956b9</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I entered the the Darcy Welsbach roughness heights for my pipes but after doing some research I found out that the roughness can be negligible in certain depending on the Reynolds number. So I ran my scenarios with all the roughness&amp;#39;s set to zero to see how that would impact my results and I noticed it had no impact compared to when I&amp;nbsp;used&amp;nbsp;the roughness associated with the pipe materials. This would indicate to me that the roughness heights are negligible in my my situation. Is that a&amp;nbsp;correct assumption?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Sample size when collecting data</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/236310/sample-size-when-collecting-data</link><pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2022 12:15:21 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:c507d10d-d734-4074-816c-9281f88c9fca</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;First of all, are there a minimum number of data collection points per foot of pipe required for calibration of a steady state model in WaterCAD, or possibly an interval at which data should be collected from the central water source?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Flow in dead end pipes</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/235809/flow-in-dead-end-pipes</link><pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2022 18:40:13 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:ab2cde55-4171-43fa-9601-02be0b8dc190</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I am encountering small amount of flows in dead end pipes. I filtered my pipes by selecting all pipes that have flows smaller then 0 so that i could find all the negative flows. and what i noticed was there were still some values that were equal to 0 after filtering. So I changed units and formatting to 10 decimal place and found that these values were not 0 but had a very small amount of flow. This is confusoing since these pipes are all dead end pipes with no customer meters / demands attributed to them. Is there a explanation for this?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Negative flows</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/hydraulics___hydrology/f/haestad-hydraulics-and-hydrology-forum/235803/negative-flows</link><pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2022 15:53:08 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:542b7fae-a637-4d24-a1de-a4be1234cead</guid><dc:creator>Christen Crique</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I have 6663 pipes that give negative flow results. Therefore the start and stop nodes of all these pipes need to be reversed. How do I&amp;nbsp;accomplish this. Is there a way to reverse them all at ones?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>