Gas Utility Network-Regulator Assemblies and system subnetwork.

[JohnBendix]

Hello,

We are in the process of trying to get our System Subnetwork to propagate through our Regulator Assemblies.

For some reason the system subnetwork gets to the first on and doesn't go any further . If I bypass the Reg Assembly it goes to the next one and stop also. The Assembly validates and has no issues there?

Any ideas would be helpful.

Thanks John.

[JSchroeder]

Are you getting any errors? If not, have you modified the system subnetwork definition?

One area to check is the terminal connections on either side of the regulator. When selecting the pipe for the High and Low side of the regulator via the 'Modify Terminal Connections' tool, it might have them properly attributed in this window, but if the 'Apply' button is not grayed out, they are not properly assigned. This should create errors, though, and you should be seeing this when you run the 'Update Subnetwork' tool.

Is there valid connectivity in your station? I assume you are referring to the physical modeling of pipes, associated devices, and junctions when you mention 'Reg Assembly' and not just trying to model the Regulator Station with a Pipeline Assembly (Regulator Station subtype) - which will not provide the necessary connectivity.

Last, you can check the sample dataset in the 'Gas and Pipeline Referencing Utility Network Foundation' solution to view some of the modeled reg stations. It may not be how you will model your stations, but will get you in the ballpark.

If you are not getting errors, can you attach a screenshot?

[JohnBendix]

Getting no errors..it all validates. This is our first reg station from the 275lb to the 80lb.

Lines on each side of the regulator device are set correct.?? I added a screen shot of the area.

Thanks John.

[JSchroeder]

Is it possible that one of the valves is closed?

If that is not it, did you modify the default System Subnetwork Configuration? If yes, then make sure the 'Valid Features and Objects' do not prevent subnetwork propagation, and that your 'Aggregated Lines' include the downstream pipes you are looking for (Distribution in this case I assume).

[JohnBendix]

Yup I did modify the Subnetwork definition for a few things but didn,t check that but I see that Station Pipe is not listed as a Aggregated Line in the definition? That May be the issue? My reg assembly has the pipes part of that assembly as station pipes.

Thanks John.

[JSchroeder]

The station pipe does not need to be aggregated, unless you want it to be for some reason. In the default config, station pipe is NOT aggregated, but is included as 'Valid Lines' to allow the subnetwork to propagate through station pipe. If you modified the default subnetwork config I would verify that it makes sense for your current setup - especially if you modified the data model.

If you play with the sample data and model this example in that preconfigured UN File GDB, this should work.

[JohnBendix]

Morning

So I looked at the sample data to me it looks like we have our Reg Assemblies setup the same way all the way around. So I don't know what the issue is? I'm sure its something simple I'm missing..lol

Thanks John. 

[RobertKrisher]

1. Can you confirm that there is a regulator device at that location, not just a regulator assembly?
2. Looking at your screenshot it appears that the trace stops at the upstream line and not the regulator itself, this implies that either the line is acting as a barrier to the trace
   1. Check the attributes of the line against the condition barriers in your network, the most likely issue is that the lifecycle status isn't "in service".
3. If you move the regulator are you seeing the pipe "rubber band" with it? if not, this means that the pipe isn't actually connected to the regulator so you may need to check your snapping, rules, etc.

[JohnBendix · Accepted solution]

Alright...

So got it figured out nothing wrong with the subnetwork setup. One found out at my reg stations that the inlet line and outlet lines to my elbows were not drawn all the way to my to the elbow..DAH.

And also the vendor that helped with our migration left all the elbows as "Not in Service"..Proposed ??

Why would you do that?? Anyways thanks for your help.

John.

[RobertKrisher]

Glad you were able to get everything figured out. I've seen many network issues caused when the lifecycle status field during migration when it is populated by a system that wasn't relying on this field for network connectivity.