Klassifizierung von Rohren für DHC

Question

<\/HEAD>Basierend auf dem Feedback von Teilnehmern der Datenmodellgruppe weltweit sieht es so aus, als ob die empfohlene Kategorisierung und Unterkategorisierung wie folgt aussieht:<\/P> <\/P> <\/P> Sieht dies nach der richtigen Methode zur Organisation von DHC-Rohren aus? Ist diese Liste vollständig? Ist die Liste der Unterkategorien für diese verschiedenen Rohrtypen vollständig und korrekt? Wie steht es um diese zusätzlichen potenziellen Rohrkategorien? <\/P> <\/P> Lassen Sie mich wissen, was Sie denken? <\/P> <\/P> Tom DeWitte<\/P> Esri, Inc<\/P><\/BODY><\/HTML>

Tom DeWitte · Answer

Hi Danielle,

This is great feedback.  This is exactly the critical type of thinking and review of the data model that is needed to make this data model a success.  Thank you for this.

What do you think about organizing the DHCLine featureclass (ie pipes) with the following asset group (asset types):

-Service (Unknown, Hot Water, Chilled Water, Steam, Condensate)

-Distribution (Unknown, Hot Water, Chilled Water, Steam, Condensate)

-Transmission( Unknown, Hot Water, Chilled Water, Steam, Condensate)

-Bypass (Unknown, Hot Water, Chilled Water, Steam, Condensate)

-Discharge (Unknown, Steam, Condensate)

-Sensing  (Unknown, Pressure)

The designation is whether the pipe is a "Supply", "Return", or "Reserve" would be stored as a separate attribute.

Would really like to hear everyone's thoughts on this idea for reorganizing the asset groups and asset types for DHCLines.

Tom DeWitte

Esri, Inc

DanielleNeufelt · Answer

Hi Tom

I have two feedbacks based on your first slide:

1. I find disturbing to to propose a mix of assetgroups/assettypes (service line with temperatures as assettypes, but the other pipes with temperature distinction on the assetgroup level). As an enduser, I would have difficulties to understand it.

2. I don't think that we should build the pipe assetgroups based on the Temperature of the water. I think that this property is defined by the station, source of the heat/cold delivery. You could have a subnetwork working with high temperatures, but want to reduce these temperatures for efficiency reasons. You would only change the dimensioning of the elements where absolutely necessary, but try to use the same network, at lower temperatures. This is a strategy which is being more and more undertaken in Europe.  Additionnally, the aim is to have a modern low-temperature network that is operated on a sliding scale depending on the outside temperature. Per example: In winter, with an outside temperature of -8°C, this is approx. 115°C, and from an outside temperature of +15°C it is approx. 75°C.

So, the temperature should be attributed to the elements of the subnetwork by the subnetwork controller.

I would suggest to make a distinction on the assetgroup level based on the "type" of pipe: service pipe, distribution pipe, transport pipe. Here the rules would also come in use: you should not connect a service pipe to a transport pipe.

I'm curious about the reaction of other people about it.

Best greetings

Danielle

Geocom by VertiGIS

EricStraalman · Answer

Thanks again Tom for this. The way you classified it, is the way I would have done it, however some time ago I wasn't so sure anymore. The reason is that not so long ago, I heard somebody saying that the pipe can be used for any type of media (chilled water, hot water, steam what so ever) It is the pump that is connected to the pipe that determines if chilled, hot etc. Interesting topic to discuss I think. :-). Looking forward to some reactions from the others on this topic.