nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Modeling a Corrosion subnet in a water domain

GavinMcGhie

Hi all

Does anyone have any insight on what the developers intended for modeling the corrosion system described below?

We have a Test Station-Test Station that is connected to an Anode-Galvanic with a wire in the field. Unfortunately, it looks like the Anode can only connect to a Bonding Line or cable, but not Test Wire, while Test Point can only connect to Test wire. So we’re not sure how to connect Anode to Test point? Of course I could add new rules allowing this, but every time I add custom stuff, it bites me later, so I want to explore all options first.

It would be great to get some direction on this and why there is not a rule in place to connect those features (i.e. was it just overlooked or is there a better way). According to our staffs, this is very common, so we were surprised there is no rule allowing it. Before making changes, I was hoping for some insight.

Thanks, Gavin

Encontre mais publicações marcadas com

Accepted answers

rkrisher

@GavinMcGhieAs Mike said, there shouldn't be any problem with just adding the rule.

It is my understanding that test points typically measure the current on the line that is connected to the anode, and not the anode itself (as seen in this article I'm sure you've read). This means that a test point's test wire is expected to be connected to a bonding line or cable, that wire is then connected to an anode. That is why the rules are configured that way.

If your GIS doesn't have this level of detail or your test points are directly connected to your anodes via test wire in the field, add the rule.

All comments

GavinMcGhie

Just FYI- this is the response from our Corrosion dept. (I summarized). He was guessing that the examples were more in line with oil/gas who rely on rectifiers more than we do.

"At our water district where cathodic protection was added in later, and where we don’t always have the ability to install a rectifier, we use our galvanic test stations. In our galvanic test stations we make the connection with the galvanic anode at the test station so we can test the anode directly, and monitor its output. In our galvanic test stations we have a wire off the pipe, and a wire off the anode."

In summary, I will add a new rule.

GavinMcGhie

Thanks to both of you for the feedback. I see the logic in testing the pipe and not the anode, so am going back to our Corrosion team to see why we have a wire from Test Station to the Anode. I think that also explains why in the Naperville sample, associations are used to connect the anodes. I realize everyone does things differently, but it would be nice if there were more detail around how best to configure these subsystems for the UN. With this major data migration, now would be the time to adjust the business processes to align with standardization within the UN domain. Anyway, thanks again for the answer and I will update if I get any useful feedback. Thanks, Gavin

rkrisher

@GavinMcGhieAs Mike said, there shouldn't be any problem with just adding the rule.

If your GIS doesn't have this level of detail or your test points are directly connected to your anodes via test wire in the field, add the rule.

MikeMillerGIS

Gavin,

Add the rule. We just did not model this scenario. I do not see any issue with it.

Participe da Conversa

Membros conectados podem postar, seguir atualizações e mais. Novo aqui? Registre uma conta gratuita.

Links Rápidos

Community Help
Find useful guides, FAQs, and documents to help you navigate and make the most of Esri Community.