What is best practice when splitting water mains designated as a complex edge in a geometric network? I have currently been splitting mains at valves. I will eventually want to take advantage of the network tracing tool in desktop and WAB.
Jake, I'm also researching this right now. I haven't found a definitive answer, but here are some other posts I've found with more info:
From an asset management point of view, I can see it being problematic to have a separate record/ID for the small section of "main" (which is really the ****** or mechanical joint) between the center of the valve and the center of the fitting. It's also more work!
I also know methods differ on what is preferred for hydraulic modelling. Since demands get assigned to the nearest node, I've been told it's advantageous to break the main at the valves and assign the system valve feature class as a node in the model. I guess the hydraulic model closes pipes instead of placing barriers at points, like in the geometric network. Breaking the main at the valve allows the model to shut the small section of main between the valve and the fitting, while still providing flow to the demands that have been allocated to the valve from the other direction in a looped system.
Lastly, I'm curious what the schema model for the new Utility Network expects for pressurized water distribution systems. My thinking is that if it expects splits at the valves, it will be easier to migrate if you just get it done now in the geometric network.
Retrieving data ...