The Link between Transient Surges and Minimum Pressure Criterion in Water Distribution Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The minimum pressure criterion (MPC) is considered as the minimum standard for delivering water pressure when designing water distribution systems (WDSs). This criterion is established by political jurisdictions and is different around the world. A low value of the MPC may reduce water consumption (e.g., faucet, showers, and lawn watering) and also lead to efficient operation through reduced energy use, leakage, and frequency of pipe breaks. However, if this criterion is too low, the system may be more susceptible to low pressure failures, either hydraulic (e.g., an inability to supply the required flow) or safety related (e.g., increasing the risk of an intrusion event and pipe bursts associated with hydraulic transients). Thus, although it may not have been part of the original intent, there is a direct connection between MPC and transients that should not be ignored. This paper looks specifically at the role of MPC and how it affects the system response in transient conditions to raise the awareness about issues that can arise from changes in MPC. First, the definition of MPC and the possible effects of changes in the MPC on WDSs during transient events are briefly explained. Then, two case studies are developed to explore the role of MPC in transient pressures. The results show, not surprisingly, that using surge control strategies is more efficient than increasing the MPC to prevent unwanted surge pressures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".