Withybrook, England Project Date: 17-18 December 2013
Electro Scan Product Trial Presented to Severn Trent Services Birmingham, England
Report Date: 14 January 2014
About CPS Environmental Tanker Jetting Surveys (cctv & electro scan) Cleaning Drain Repairs Planned Maintenance CPS Environmental (Nottinghamshire, England) is a diversified sewer cleaning, inspection, and repair company.
Working with Ant Hire Solutions LLC (Leeds, England), CPS Environmental is pleased to present this benchmark Electro Scan Project.
CPS Environmetal Head Office: Buckthorpe, Oxton Road, Southwell, Nottinghamshire. NG25 ONH Tel: +44 0 1636 812161, Fax: +44 0 1636 691251
Website: www.cpsenvironmental.co.uk 1 About Withybrook
Withybrook is a rural village and civil parish in the English county of Warwickshire with a population of roughly 230 people.
The village is located in a valley just west of the old Fosse Way and forms part of the borough of Rugby.
2 Project Findings
3 Executive Summary Project Objective Withybrook is an area that has experienced persistent unexplained high flows. Having been televised on multiple occasions it was a good candidate to test the use of Electro Scan to see if the technology could add value to identification and measurement of sources of infiltration. Results • Electro Scan not only identified a number of potential sources of infiltration, not seen by CCTV, but provided an estimated L/S defect flow, ±40% accuracy. • Electro Scan was able to inspect 100% of the lines (23 Sewer Mains + 1 Connection = 24). By comparison, prior CCTV inspection recorded six (6) Abandoned Surveys, unable to inspect an average of 29% of the pipe and missing 69% of the sources of infiltration (p11). • Total Estimated Leakage of the twenty-three (23) pipes inspected represents 791,187 litres per day (9.25 l/s), with the seven (7) worst pipes contributing 631,504 litres per day (7.3 l/s) or eighty percent (80%) of the suspected infiltration (p 9-10).
Way Forward Given Electro Scan’s ability to rapidly (i.e. 10m/minute for ES-150 and 15m/minute for ES-300) identify & quantify sources of infiltration, it is recommended that Severn Trent considering the adoption of Electro Scan for all pre- CCTV assessments and to require CCTV contractors to visually inspect all major Electro Scan defects as part of any subsequent CCTV survey. Furthermore, given Electro Scan’s ability to detect leaks to within 1 cm, a similar trial is recommended on post-rehabilitated lines, such as lining, point repair, and new pipe construction, where Severn Trent as previously relied on visual observation to certify project completion. 4 Findings & Conclusions
1. Quantitative Information on Flow Potential – By Electro Scan – Provides Much More Accurate Conclusions Than Visual Observations from CCTV Inspection • Total Estimated Leakage of the twenty-three (23) pipes inspected represents 791,187 litres per day (9.25 l/s), ±40% accuracy, assuming a 1foot (30.48cm) head and 1% or less pipe slope.
• Seven (7) out of Twenty-Three (23) sewer mains are estimated to contribute 631,504 litres per day (7.3 l/s) or eighty percent (80%) of suspected infiltration into the survey area.
• Two (2) Infiltration Observations on the same pipe segment were identified (1-Infiltration Dripping and 1-Infiltration Seeping) on Pipe Segment From SP43843403 to SP43843301, with no observations of Infiltration Running or Infiltration Gushing, representing one (1) pipe of twenty- three (23) or 4% of the pilot area.
• Electro Scan identified 572 locations of potential infiltration totaling a leakage potential of 9.25 liters per second.
2. CCTV Overlooked an Average of 64% of the Defects in the Pipe Sections Surveyed In extreme cases CCTV missed as much as 92.7% of the defects present in a pipe section (Section SP43845104 to SP43845103) 5 Findings & Conclusions Continued 3. Survey Abandonments Seriously Reduce Assessment Accuracy • Forty-two (42) Sewer Main Television Inspection Reports were Completed or Partially Completed.
• Twenty-three (23) Main Line Segments and one (1) Service Lateral were 100% Completely by Electro Scan; ie. 100% of All Sewers Were Completely Surveyed, with Zero Abandoned Surveys.
• Out of a total of Forty-Two (42) Television Reports, 23 of 42 - or 55% - of Televised Lines Were Reported as an Abandoned Survey.
• Of the Twenty-Three (23) Lines Electro Scanned, CCTV Reported Six (6) - or 26% - Abandoned Surveys ranging from as little as 1.24% to as much as 88% of pipe section length left un-surveyed by CCTV due to abandonment.
• For the six (6) lines that were televised and reported an ‘Abandoned Survey,’ reverse set-ups were attempted; i.e. CCTV attempted from both Upstream & Downstream Manholes, but 29% of the total pipe lengths were never evaluated.
• Of the sections of pipe NOT televised due to Abandoned Surveys, 26 Flow Defects (i.e. defects registering an estimated resultant flow) were identified by Electro Scan.
• On average, those portions of the pipe section NOT televised due to Abandoned Surveys contained 63% of the whole pipe length’s infiltration potential, despite being only 29.44% of the pipe’s total length. 6 Findings & Conclusions Continued Those portions of the pipe which go 'un-surveyed' due to Abandoned Surveys, are critical points of infiltration potential and this a significant portion of the assessment of a pipes criticality is missed when surveys are abandoned. By providing quantitative data with 0 survey abandonments Electro Scan is much better suited to assess a pipe's criticality and infiltration potential. Given that 55% of all CCTV surveys in this sub-basin reported abandoned surveys, a very significant amount of data is likely missing from the analysis of this portion of the network. Electro Scan does not replace CCTV, as Electro Scan neither locates defects to a specific clock position, or is able to identify pipe sags or alignment problems. However, Electro Scan does confirm the limited use of television inspection to find sources of pathways to ground, i.e. infiltration, automatically and without the drawbacks of visual observations. By locating anomalies to the closest 1 cm (0.4 in) recording data at the rate of one (1) data point, every ¼ inch, i.e. every 14 milliseconds, Electro Scan can accurately locate and measure defects in non- conductive pipes (e.g. asbestos cement, brick, clay, plastic, reinforced concrete, resin, etc.) in accordance with ASTM F2550-13.
Recommended uses of Electro Scan include the ability to: • Identify and measure all sources of infiltration from cracks, bad joints, and defective service connections, • Rank & prioritize sewer mains and laterals that should be repaired, relined, or renewed, • Integrate with hydraulic modeling programs to re-calibrate model assumptions based on its estimated liters per second (l/s) of flow from defects, • Certify point repairs, relining, and new construction to ensure that projects performed by third-party contractors are delivered without defects or leaks, prior to Acceptance. While Electro Scan may not be able to distinguish whether leaks are occurring at a service connection or internal to a service lateral, it will consistently identify gaps allowing electrical current to pass from inside the sewer system to ground. 7 7 Worst Pipes Electro Scanned
MH 3401 to MH 3402: - 0.82 LPS - 5th Worst Pipe per Electro Scan Results
Only Pipe Where CCTV Report Mentions Infiltration
MH 3403 to MH 3301: - 1.34 LPS - 2nd Worst Pipe per Electro Scan Results
MH 3301 to MH 4301: - 1.68 LPS - Worst Pipe per Electro Scan Results
MH 4301 to MH 4303: - 1.25 LPS - 4th Worst Pipe per Electro Scan Results 7 Worst Pipes Electro Scanned Cont’d
MH 5201 to MH 5104: -0.51 LPS - 6th Worst Pipe per Electro Scan Results
MH 5104 to MH 5103: - 0.46 LPS - 7th Worst Pipe per Electro Scan MH 6001 to MH 6101: Results - 1.22 LPS - 3rd Worst Pipe per Electro Scan Results Defective Pipe Sections Missed by CCTV Survey Abandonment
MH 5501 to MH 5401: - 1.24% of pipe missed by CCTV - 0.0 LPS infiltration in abandoned section.
MH 5402 to MH 5301: - 4.37% of pipe missed by CCTV - 0.00 LPS infiltration in abandoned section.
MH 5303 to MH 4201: - 8.05 % of pipe missed by CCTV - 0.035 LPS (100% of total pipe infiltration) in abandoned section. 11 Worst Pipe Based on CCTV Observations
MH 5104 to MH 5103 CCTV Surveys All CCTV Reports were completed in accordance with Severn Trent standards following the most recent published WRc guidelines for visual observations.
NOTE: Given the number of significant defects found by Electro Scan, it is recommended that all prior CCTV reporting for Withybrook be reviewed to determine consistency of observations, and that Electro Scan defects be reviewed side- by-side with CCTV to determine whether observations were either missed, obscured due to Debris or Fats, Oils, and Grease, or not able to be visually detected, i.e. at joints. 13 14 Electro Scan Surveys All Electro Scan Reports were completed in accordance with ASTM F2550-13 Standard Practice for Locating Leaks in Sewer Pipes By Measuring the Variation of Electric Current Flow Through the Pipe Wall. http://www.astm.org/Standards/F2550.htm
15 16 17 Withybrook Sewer Plan
18 Electro Scan Project Work Productivity What is Electro Scan? 1. What Does Electro Scan Do, That CCTV Cannot? Answer: Find sources of infiltration and cracks. Infiltration is a key factor causing Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs) and Combined Sewer Overflows (CSO) caused by cracks & defects found in manholes, sewer mains, service connections, and laterals. Given the limitation of CCTV – i.e. not able to visually find leaks -- Electro Scan automatically finds , locates, and measures (i.e. in gallons per minute) the amount of infiltration (i.e. in gallons per minute) caused by defects. Electro Scan can also certify newly installed, recently repaired and rehabilitated pipe lining.
2. How Does It Work? Sewers are made of non-conductive materials (e.g. asbestos concrete, brick, clay, cement, plastic, reinforced concrete, etc.), so no electrical current should ever be able to “leak” or escape into the ground from inside the pipe – unless, of course, there is a crack or break in a pipe. Electro Scan’s patent-pending technology releases a focused array of low-voltage high- frequency electrical current that locates and quantifies all defects.
3. Who Has Endorsed or Used Electro Scan? Electro Scan has been tested in Electric “Spikes” Show numerous U.S. EPA studies and found superior to CCTV in finding the location and Defect Locations, Intensity & Estimated quantification of defects that cause leaks. Electro Scan is the only company with Gallons per Minute. products in compliance with ASTM Standard F2550-06, just approved for another five years by ASTM Committee F36. Winning international acceptance, Electro Scan has recorded nearly 1 million feet of scans in the U.S., England, Australia, and New Zealand, and represents the next generation in defect location and certification of pipeline repairs & rehabilitation, able to work in wet weather and dry weather conditions. 20 How Electro Scan Finds Defects Missed By Traditional CCTV Inspection?
Electro Scan Field Data Immediately Uploaded, Processed, Stored, & Displayed.
21 Within Minutes, Data Uploaded to Cloud.
Office Upload if WIFI is Not Available in the Field
Scan Detail Report Authorised Electro
Scan Contractor Withybrook Project
Fire Wall Password, Protected Severn Trent Account
Electro Scan Data Stored on UK-based Cloud Server
Electro Scan From SPSP43843403 To SP43843301
22 Within Minutes, Data Uploaded to Cloud.
Defect Counts Estimated Total Defect Flows.
Tabular Data Available for Export
Scan Graph for Visual Reference*
* Average 100 meters of scanning may provide 15-20,000 data points. 23 Zoom Feature
24 Critical Sewers algorithms calculates the Estimated Defect Flow in L/S (GPM)
But, How Does This Compare to CCTV?
25 SP43843403 to SP43843301 Electro Scan vs. CCTV Side-by-Side
Medium Defect Estimated Flow: 0.0625 LPS
Crack Circumferential From 07 to 05 O’Clock
26 How Electro Scan Estimate L/P? While Electro Scan’s standard graphs display the Maximum Defect Current, Electro Scan’s estimated Liters per Second (Defect Flow) is based on the Defect Area and the Electric Current sustained over that Area.
Sample Processed Data ‘Large Current Readings over a Large Area’ often result in a large l/p or Defect Flow, frequently found in defects at a service connection. In other cases ‘Large Current Readings over a Small Area’ result in small and medium LPS, frequently showing defects at joints.
Electro Scan measures height and width of defect in accordance with F2550-13. 27 Sewer Mains Laterals ES-300 6-60” Diameter Pipes ES-150 3-8” Diameter Pipes
Android
Large Diameters ES-1000 5-10’ Diameter Pipes REQUIRES ES-300
US and International Patents pending. 28 Awards & Recognition • Finalist, Europe’s GreenTec Award for Water & Sewage (Announced May 2014) • The New Economy Clean Tech Award for Water & Wastewater Solutions, December 2013 • PURE Award for Innovation, South West Water, UK, November 2013 • WEF Innovative Technology Award, October 2013 • Sierra Nevada Innovation Challenge Clean Tech Award, June 2013 • NASTT/No-Dig Joseph L. Abbott Jr., Award for Best Product Innovation, March 2013
29 Recent Nomination
30 30 Withybrook Sewer Main Assessments
31 1 SP43845501 to SP43845401
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 32
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan
SB43845501 to SP43845401 to SB43845501
33 SP43845501 to SP43845401 Defect Chart
SP43845501 to SP43845401 Scan Summary
34 2 SP43845401 to SP43845402
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 35
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845401 to SP43845402 SP43845402 to SP43845401
36 SP43845401 to SP43845402 Defect Chart
SP43845401 to SP43845402 Scan Summary
37 3 SP43845402 to SP43845301
• 150mm Diameter
• Vitrified Clay Pipe 38
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845402 to SP43845301 SP43845301 to SP43845402
39
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Cont’d Graph Scan SP43845402 to SP43845301 SP43845301 to SP43845402
40 SP43845402 to SP43845301 Scan Graph vs. CCTV Close Up
Electro Scan: - Medium Defect Estimated Flow: 0.03667 LPS
CCTV: - No Call Out
41 SP43845402 to SP43845301 Defect Chart
SP43845402 to SP43845302 Scan Summary
42 4 SP43845301 to SP43845302
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 43
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845301 to SP43845302 SP43845302 to SP43845301
44 SP43845301 to SP43845302 Defect Chart
SP43845301 to SP43845302 Scan Summary
45 5 SP43845302 to SP43845303
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 46
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845302 to SP43845303 SP43845303 to SP43845302
47 SP43845302 to SP43845303 Defect Chart
SP43845302 to SP43845303 Scan Summary
48 6 SP43845303 to SP43844201
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 49
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845303 to SP43844201 SP43844201 to SP43845303
50 SP43845303 to SP43844201 Defect Chart
SP43845303 to SP43844201 Scan Summary
51 7 SP43844201 to SP43844202
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 52
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43844201 to SP43844202 SP43844202 to SP43844201
53 SP43844201 to SP43844202 Defect Chart
SP43844201 to SP43844202 Scan Summary
54 8 SP43844202 to SP43845201
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 55
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43844202 to SP43845201 SP43845201 to SP43844202
56 SP43844202 to SP43845201 Defect Chart
SP43844202 to SP43845201 Scan Summary
57 9 SP43845201 to SP43845104
• 150mm Diameter
• Vitrified Clay Pipe 58
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845201 to SP43845104 SP43845104 to SP43845201
59 SP43845201 to SP43845104 Defect Chart
SP43845201 to SP43845104 Scan Summary
60 10 SP43845104 to SP43845103
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 61
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845104 to SP43845103 SP43845103 to SP43845104
62 SP43845104 to SP43845103 Defect Chart
SP43845104 to SP43845103 Scan Summary
63 11 SP43845003 to SP43845103
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 64
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845003 to SP43845103 SP43845103 to SP43845003
65 SP43845003 to SP43845103 Defect Chart
SP43845003 to SP43845103 Scan Summary
66 12 SP43845103 to SP43845102
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 67
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845103 to SP43845102 SP43845102 to SP43845103
68 SP43845103 to SP43845102 Scan Graph vs. CCTV Close Up
Electro Scan: - Small Defect Estimated Flow: 0.0095 LPS
CCTV: - No Call Out
69 SP43845103 to SP43845102 Defect Chart
SP43845103 to SP43845102 Scan Summary
70 13 SP43845102 to SP43845101
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 71
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845102 to SP43845101 SP43845101 to SP43845102
72 SP43845102 to SP43845101 Defect Chart
SP43845102 to SP43845101 Scan Summary
73 14 SP43845101 to SP43845105
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 74
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845101 to SP43845105 SP43845105 to SP43845101
75 SP43845101 to SP43845105 Defect Chart
SP43845101 to SP43845105 Scan Summary
76 15 SP43845001 to SP43845105
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 77
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43845001 to SP43845105 SP43845105 to SP43845001
78 SP43845001 to SP43845105 Defect Chart
SP43845001 to SP43845105 Scan Summary
79 16 SP43846101 to SP43845001
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 80
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43846101 to SP43845001 SP43845001 to SP43846101
81 SP43846101 to SP43845001 Scan Graph vs. CCTV Close Up
Electro Scan: - Medium Defect Estimated Flow: 0.2517 LPS
CCTV: - No Information Survey Abandoned Due to Debris
82 SP43846101 to SP43845001 Defect Chart
SP43846101 to SP43845001 Scan Summary
83 17 SP43846001 to SP43846101
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 84
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43846001 to SP43846101 SP43846101 to SP43846001
85 SP43846001 to SP43846101 Scan Graph vs. CCTV Close Up Electro Scan: - Large Defect Estimated Flow: 5.22 LPM - Medium Defect Estimated Flow: 0.0625 LPS
CCTV: - No Call Out
86 SP43846001 to SP43846101 Defect Chart
SP43846001 to SP43846101 Scan Summary
87 18 SP43843501 to SP43843401
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 88
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43843501 to SP43843401 SP43843401 to SP43843501
89 SP43843501 to SP43843401 Defect Chart
SP43843501 to SP43843401 Scan Summary
90 19 SP43843401 to SP43843402
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 91
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43843401 to SP43843402 SP43843402 to SP43843401
92 SP43843401 to SP43843402 Scan Graph vs. CCTV Close Up Electro Scan: - 2 Medium Defects Estimated Flows: 0.6057 LPS & 0.036 LPS
CCTV: - Crack Longitudinal@ 11 O’Clock
93 SP43843401 to SP43843402 Defect Chart
SP43843401 to SP43843402 Scan Summary
94 20 SP43843402 to SP43843403
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 95
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43843402 to SP43843403 SP43843403 to SP43843402
96 SP43843402 to SP43843403 Scan Graph vs. CCTV Close Up
Electro Scan: - Small Defect Estimated Flow: 0.017 LPS
CCTV: - No Call Out
97 SP43843402 to SP43843403 Defect Chart
SP43843402 to SP43843403 Scan Summary
98 21 SP43843403 to SP43843301
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 99
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43843403 to SP43843301 SP43843301 to SP43843403
100 SP43843403 to SP43843301 ELECTRO SCAN v. CCTV INSPECTION
Electro Scan: - Small Defect Estimated Flow: 0.0625 LPS
CCTV: -Crack Circumferential From 07 to 05 O’Clock
101 SP43843403 to SP43843301 Defect Chart
SP43843403 to SP43843301 Scan Summary
102 22 SP43843301 to SP43844301
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 103
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43843301 to SP43844301 SP43844301 to SP43843301
104 SP43843301 to SP43844301 Defect Chart
SP43843301 to SP43844301 Scan Summary
105 23 SP43844301 to SP43844201
• 150mm Diameter • Vitrified Clay Pipe 106
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Graph Scan SP43844301 to SP43844201 SP43844201 to SP43844301
107
CCTV
Scan Graph vs. CCTVvs. Cont’d Graph Scan SP43844301 to SP43844201 SP43844201 to SP43844301
108 SP43844301 to SP43844201 Scan Graph vs. CCTV Close Up
Electro Scan: - Medium Defect Estimated Flow: 0.02017 LPS
CCTV: - No Call Out
109 SP43844301 to SP43844201 Defect Chart
SP43844301 to SP43844201 Scan Summary
110 Withybrook Private Sewer Lateral Assessment
111 24 C4 to SP43845003
• Not A Main Line – A Connection • 100mm Diameter
• Vitrified Clay Pipe 112 C4 to SP43845003 Scan Graph
113 C4 to SP43845003 Defect Chart
C4 to SP43845003 Scan Summary
114 Supplemental Information
115
anytime, anywhere global cloud Electro Scan Data Export
116 • Real Time Data Capture • Raw, Unprocessed Data • 1 Data Point, Every ¼ in, every 14 milliseconds • Visual Studio 2012, .NET 4.5, C#, LINQ • SQL Server 2008R2 Backend Database
• Global Service – Anytime, Anywhere • Amazon S3 Platform • Unlimited Scalability • Receives Uploaded Data from the Field
• Five (5) 64-bit Electro Scan Cloud Servers • Windows SQL Server 2012, Hosted Tableau • Web Services, C# Programming • Database Retrieval, Processing, and Storage
• HTML 5.0 • Python • PHP • Embedded Tableau
117 Hall B-5
Hall B5, Booth #111-120
World’s Leading Trade Fair for Water, Sewage, Waste & Raw Materials Management
May 5-9, 2014 Messe München www.ifat.de See Our European Demonstration Van 118 References 1. US EPA Sewer Electro Scan Field Demonstration Revisited, Special Reprint from 2012 WEFTEC Conference Proceedings http://www.electroscan.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/WEFTEC_US- EPA-Electro-Scan-Demonstration-Project.pdf
2. ASTM Standard F2550-13 http://www.electroscan.com/wp- content/uploads/2012/01/2006-02-01-Electro- Scan_ASTM-Standard-F2550-06.pdf
3. Electro Scanning Technology Adds Another Layer of Inspection, Trenchless Technology Magazine, Published February 2013 http://www.electroscan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Trenchless- Technology-Mag_ES-Tech-Adds-Another-Layer-of-Inspection.pdf
4. Electro Scan Technology Test Drive, Municipal Sewer &Water Magazine, December 2012 http://www.electroscan.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Electro- Scan_Technology-Test-Drive.pdf
5. Electro Scan Newspapers http://www.electroscan.com/newspapers/
119