EPA/600/R-14/081 | January 2014 | www.epa.gov/research
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Demonstration of
Innovative Sewer System
Inspection Technology
SewerBatt
Office of Research and Development
-------
EPA/600/R-14/081
January 2014
Demonstration of Innovative
Sewer System Inspection
Technology SewerBatt
By
Srinivas Panguluri
Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc.
Cincinnati, OH
Gary Skipper
Brown & Caldwell
San Diego, CA
Steve Donovan
Brown and Caldwell
Cincinnati, OH
Contract No. EP-C-11-006
Daniel Murray
Water Supply and Water Resources Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
National Risk Management Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
-------
Disclaimer
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), through its Office of Research and
Development (ORD) National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) Water Supply
and Water Resources Division (WSWRD), funded and managed this technology demonstration
through EPA Contract No. EP-C-11-006. This report has been both peer and administratively
reviewed and approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or
commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use of a specific
product.
Questions concerning this document or its application should be addressed to:
Daniel J. Murray, Jr., P.E.
Water Supply and Water Resources Division
National Risk Management Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 West Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7522
murray.dan@epa.gov
-------
Acknowledgments
Principal authors of this report were:
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Dan Murray
Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc.
Srinivas Panguluri
Brown and Caldwell
Gary Skipper
Steve Donovan
Contributions of the following individuals and organizations that assisted in performing this
technology demonstration are gratefully acknowledged.
Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati
Jerry Weimer
Eric Schneider
Dustin Prue
Eric Withers
Mike Pittinger
Acoustic Sensing Technology Ltd (United Kingdom)
Richard Long
Nick Hawkins
Andrej Fedotov
Kirill Horoshenkov
ALSA Tech, LLC.
Abraham Chen
External Technical Peer Reviewers:
Rick Nelson, CH2M Hill
Rick Arbour, Rick Arbour & Associates, Inc.
in
-------
Contents
Disclaimer ii
Acknowledgments iii
Contents iv
Abbreviations/Acronyms vi
Abstract vii
Executive Summary viii
1.0 Introduction 12
1.1 Maintenance of Sanitary Sewers 12
1.2 Sewer Line Inspection Techniques 14
1.3 Industry Standard Sewer Inspection Methodology 16
1.4 Innovative Sewer Inspection Methodologies 16
1.5 Study Objective 17
1.6 SewerBatt Equipment Overview 18
1.7 SewerBatt Pipe Condition Assessment Overview 21
1.8 Project Team 25
2.0 Study Area Description and Evaluation Parameters 27
2.1 Test Conditions 27
2.2 Condition Assessment/Inspection Strategy 28
2.3 CCTV and Pole Mounted Zooming Camera Data Evaluation Procedure 31
2.4 Rapid Deployment Evaluation Procedure 32
3.0 Technology Demonstration Results 33
3.1 Galia Drive Study Area CCTV/SewerBatt Assessment Summary 33
3.2 Hunt Road Area CCTV/SewerBatt Assessment Summary 38
3.3 Greenhills Area - Rapid Deployment Evaluation Summary 43
3.4 Miscellaneous Pipe Evaluation Summary 44
3.5 SewerBatt Operator Feedback 45
4.0 Summary and Conclusions 46
4.1 Inspection Cost per Foot Analysis 46
4.2 Rapid Deployment Capability 49
4.3 Opportunity to Refocus Critical Resources Deployed for Pipe Cleaning 49
4.4 Conclusion 50
5.0 References 52
Appendix A- SewerBatt Report on Cincinnati Trials 53
Appendix B - Study Area Figures 179
Appendix C - SewerBatt Signal Penetration and Excitation Signal Trials 180
iv
-------
List of Tables
Table 2-1. Hunt Road, Galia Drive, and Greenhills Pipe Segment Size Summary 27
Table 2-2. Hunt Road, Galia Drive, and Greenhills Pipe Segment Material Summary 27
Table 3-1. Summary of SewerBatt and CCTV Results for Galia Drive 35
Table 3-2. Summary of SewerBatt and CCTV Results for Hunt Road 40
Table 3-3. Summary of SewerBatt and CCTV Results for Greenhills 44
Table 4-1. MSDGC On-Road CCTV Inspection Costs 47
Table 4-2. MSDGC Off-Road CCTV Inspection Costs 48
Table 4-3. SewerBatt On/Off-Road Inspection Costs 49
List of Figures
Figure 1-1. Custom Off-road CCTV Camera Tractor (Courtesy: MSDGC) 15
Figure 1-2. SewerBatt Conceptual Deployment 18
Figure 1-3. SewerBatt System Components and Connectivity 19
Figure 1-4. SewerBatt System 19
Figure 1-5. SewerBatt User Input Dialog Box 20
Figure 1-6. SewerBatt Acoustic Response Lines Plot 21
Figure 1-7. SewerBatt Acoustic Response Envelope Plot 22
Figure 1-8. SewerBatt Acoustic Response Match Plot 23
Figure 1-9. SewerBatt Condition Assessment (RAG) Response 24
Figure 2-1. Overall Test Procedure 29
Figure 2-2. Inspection Test Procedure 30
Figure 2-3. CCTV Test Procedure 31
Figure 3-1. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 11705010-11705009) 37
Figure 3-2. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 11705013-11705012) 38
Figure 3-3. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 44712007-44712002) 41
Figure 3-4. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 48209015-48209016) 41
Figure 3-5. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 44706014-44706013) 42
Figure 3-6. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 44712002-44712001) 43
Figure 3-7. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 31602008-31602007) 44
Figure 4-1. Sewer Pipe-Condition Assessment Tools (Adapted from: InfoSense, 2013) 46
v
-------
Abbreviations/Acronyms
3-D Three-dimension
ADS ADS Environmental Services
ALSA ALSA Tech LLC
ASTL Acoustic Sensing Technology Ltd (United Kingdom)
ATV All Terrain Vehicle
BC Brown and Caldwell
CCTV Closed-Circuit Television
CIP Cast Iron Pipe
CMOM Capacity, Management, Operation and Maintenance
DAQ Data Acquisition (electronic data communication module)
DE Dissipation Energy
DIP Ductile Iron Pipe
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
GIS Geographic Information System
GPS Global Positioning System
HD High-Definition
IBAK Ingenieur Euro Atlas, Kiel (manufacturer of RapidView and PANORAMO (CCTV))
I&I Infiltration and Inflow
LC Lateral Connection
MCR MATLAB Compiler Runtime
MSDGC Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati
NASSCO National Association of Sewer Service Contractors
NRMRL National Risk Management Research Laboratory
O&M Operation and Maintenance
ORD Office of Research and Development
OSHA Occupational Safety & Health Administration
PACP Pipeline Assessment and Certification Program
PC Personal Computer
PE Pipe End
POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Works
PTSI Pegasus Technical Services, Inc.
PVC Poly-vinyl Chloride
QAPP Quality Assurance Proj ect Plan
RAG Red, Amber and Green (summary pipe conditions)
RCP Reinforced Concrete Pipe
RF Radio Frequencies
SD secure digital (data storage card)
SL-RAT Sewer Line - Rapid Assessment Tool
SSO Sanitary Sewer Overflow
USB Universal Serial Bus
VCP Vitrified Clay Pipe
WERF Water Environment Research Foundation
WSWRD Water Supply and Water Resources Division
VI
-------
Abstract
The overall objective of this EPA-funded study was to demonstrate innovative a sewer line
assessment technology that is designed for rapid deployment using portable equipment. This
study focused on demonstration of a technology that is suitable for smaller diameter pipes (less
than 12-inch diameter). The recently developed and commercially-available acoustic-based
sewer pipe assessment technology demonstrated during this study was the SewerBatt
manufactured by Acoustic Sensing Technology LTD (ASTL), based in the United Kingdom.
This technology can provide a rapid assessment of the need for pipe cleaning and to detect
obstructions and defects in sewer pipes. Acoustic technologies require a minimal amount of
equipment when compared to traditional closed-circuit television (CCTV) inspection systems.
This acoustic based technology has the potential to provide information in a matter of minutes to
assist an operator in determining whether a sewer pipe might be partially or fully blocked and
require cleaning or renewal. The speed of the assessment, using minimal equipment, has the
potential to result in significant cost-savings compared to traditional methods, such as CCTV
inspection. It is generally known that smaller diameter pipes (i.e., less than or equal to 12-inch
diameter) contribute to over 90 percent of the sewer main backups reported in a typical city
(Sprague, J., 2007). This study hence focused on the demonstration of an acoustic technology
that is suited for smaller diameter pipes.
This collaborative field demonstration of the SewerBatt was led by EPA's National Risk
Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) in Cincinnati, Ohio. EPA worked with the
Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati (MSDGC) as a collaborative research partner
to identify study locations, provide access to the study area sewer lines and to perform the related
field work. Specifically, the data and information obtained from the following technologies were
used in this demonstration project: SewerBatt; Pan-Tilt-Zooming pole-mounted camera (aka
"camera on a stick") manufactured by Envirosight Quickview; and HD-digital scanning CCTV
or the PANORAMO 3D Optical Pipeline Scanner manufactured by RapidView-IBAK.
The results of this demonstration of the SewerBatt show promise for the application of this
technology as a tool for cost-effective, pre-cleaning assessment, post-cleaning quality assurance
and quick condition assessment screening. The application of this technology in an overall
collection system O&M program should enable wastewater utilities to optimize their sewer
cleaning efforts and free up valuable resources to more effectively implement critical CMOM
and asset management programs. Also, with further development, SewerBatt has the potential to
provide very useful sewer defect identification and location capability.
vn
-------
Executive Summary
The focus on condition assessment of gravity wastewater collection systems (sewers) continues
to broaden. Traditionally, the main focus of condition assessment of sewers has been directed at
operational issues related to the collection and conveyance of flows to a facility for treatment and
disposal. To address operational issues, attention has tended to concentrate on maintenance
activities associated with the cleaning and removal of debris and foreign materials from
collection system pipes. The combination of debris and extraneous wet-weather induced flows
can result in less than desired levels of customer service and possibly cause raw sewage to
overflow from the collection system or to result in basement backups.
Cleaning and inspecting sewer pipes is essential for utilities to operate and maintain a properly
functioning system and minimize SSOs. The routine maintenance of a sewer system often
includes sewer system cleaning, root removal/treatment, and cleaning/clearing of sewer mainline
blockages. However, understanding where and when to perform cleaning activities in the most
effective manner is not necessarily a straight forward task. In an attempt to direct maintenance
staff and cleaning equipment to those pipes in a sewer system that require attention, some
agencies identify cleaning needs by conducting inspection of the sewers prior to cleaning. Rapid
assessment approaches and tools provide an avenue to significant pre-cleaning inspection cost
savings that could be achieved through reduced inspection and non-productive cleaning costs.
The overall objective of this EPA funded study was to demonstrate a recently developed
innovative acoustic-based sewer line assessment technology that is designed for rapid
deployment using portable equipment. This technology can provide a rapid assessment of the
need for pipe cleaning and an overall pipe-condition assessment. Acoustic technologies require a
minimal amount of equipment when compared to closed-circuit television (CCTV) inspection
systems. These acoustic based technologies have the potential to provide information in a matter
of minutes to assist a utility in determining whether a sewer pipe might be partially or fully
blocked and require cleaning or renewal.
Innovative inspection approaches are now emerging that take advantage of the advances in
newly available observation and detection technologies and deployment strategies, such as
acoustic- (sonic, ultrasonic) and light- (laser, infrared) based devices that have not traditionally
been applied to sewer system investigation. These technologies are designed for rapid
deployment using portable equipment and do not necessarily require a robotic transporter in
order to capture data for the entire length of the pipe. The deployment of these non-traditional
technologies, supported by emerging digital, modular, and robotics technologies has the potential
to greatly expand the "reach" of sewer system inspection techniques, while reducing the overall
cost of sewer inspections.
One commercially available line of emerging technology for the rapid assessment of gravity
sewer lines is acoustic-based technology for sewer inspection. Acoustic energy naturally follows
a pipe's curvature. Obstructions within the pipe will cause a portion of the acoustic energy to be
reflected and absorbed. In addition, unless the obstruction is significantly dense, a portion of the
acoustic energy also passes through. These inherent physical properties of acoustics within pipes
Vlll
-------
provide the mechanisms for evaluating a pipe's condition. Based on these mechanisms, acoustic
inspection technology may be capable of quickly evaluating the presence of blockages, features,
and defects in the interior of sewer pipes and provide informed decisions relating to the need for
cleaning or further inspection using other available technologies.
The SewerBatt is a portable, battery-operated, acoustic sewer inspection tool that consists of an
acoustic sensor head that is mounted on a pole (similar to a pole-mounted camera device) which
is lowered into the manhole and inserted into the pipe being inspected. The sensor head contains
a sound source (speaker) that transmits an acoustic excitation signal into the pipe.
Simultaneously, the acoustic signal response from the pip is captured by an array of microphones
that are also contained in the sensor head. The captured signal responses, along with the user
inputs related to the pipe section being inspected, are used to assess the pipe condition.
After the device is inserted into the pipe and the user inputs are completed, the user can click on
the "run" button to run an inspection test. Typically, the signal transmission and response
recording process is completed in less than a minute. Features (such as lateral connections and
the pipe end) and defects (such as broken pipes and sedimentation) affect the acoustic excitation
signal either by reflecting a part of it back to the SewerBatt sensor, or by absorbing the sound
energy. These pipe segment features (or defects) are presented as "bumps" in the acoustic signal
response plots. By comparing these response bumps recorded with a library of known signal
responses, the system provides an assessment. For rapid assessment, an automated condition
assessment module that reviews the acoustic signal response, makes allowance for the energy
loss from the pipe-ends and lateral connections, and then grades the pipe. The final pipe
condition or grading is simply in the form of a colored traffic light indicator providing a red,
amber (yellow), or green (RAG) grade. A red grade assessment indicates the need for further
inspection or cleaning. An amber grade assessment is cautionary, indicating that there may be
some blockage issues, but not sufficient to block the flow. A green assessment indicates the pipe
is free of any significant blockages and no further evaluations are necessary.
MSDGC is responsible for the operation and maintenance of over 3,000 miles of sewer, with
approximately 600 miles of those sewers being "off-road." These off-road sewers are typically
inspected every 8-10 years and are difficult to access, and expensive to inspect. In addition to
these "off-road" sewers, MSDGC also inspects and cleans on-road sewers on a proactive basis.
For the purposes of this study, the following three Greater Cincinnati-area locations were
identified and selected for this demonstration:
Hunt Road - off-road sewers (see Appendix B for a detailed figure)
Galia Drive - off-road sewers (see Appendix B for a detailed figure)
Greenhills - on-road sewers (see Appendix B for a detailed figure)
These locations include a range of pipe sizes and a variety of pipe materials and were scheduled
for cleaning and inspection during the study year. The selected study areas have sewer pipes
ranging from 6- to 12-inch diameters. The SewerBatt system deployed in this evaluation is
designed to work optimally in this pipe size range. For optimal evaluation of larger diameter
IX
-------
pipes, the acoustic unit would require retrofitting with larger sized and more powerful electronic
hardware coupled with adjustments to the algorithm software.
A project-specific EPA required Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) was developed and
implemented by the project team. Each sewer pipe-segment was to be examined and assessed
using selected acoustic methods, pole mounted camera, and CCTV prior to cleaning. If cleaning
was considered necessary based on the inspections, the sewer segments were to be cleaned,
examined, and assessed again after cleaning. Per the project's QAPP, the following strategy was
specified for conducting the inspections. Sewer line branches were to be inspected by starting at
the furthest downstream pipe segment, with the inspection regime systematically conducted to
the furthest upstream pipe segment. This procedure was specified to ensure that if any material
(or debris) was dislodged during testing, the material would flow downstream and not impact
subsequent testing in the upstream pipe segments.
Besides providing a pipe condition and blockage assessment, the key advantage of implementing
technologies such as SewerBatt is the rapid deployment feature using portable equipment that
can result in significant cost savings to utilities. As mentioned previously, the Greenhills area
within MSDGC was selected to evaluate the time it takes to conduct an acoustic assessment
campaign using SewerBatt. As the goal of this study area was to evaluate the time required to
perform the acoustic inspections, advanced planning and preparation was conducted to help
mitigate issues associated with traffic control and location of manholes. This sub-study involved
sixty-two (62) SewerBatt measurements at pipe-segments covering approximately 10,000 linear
feet of pipe in the Greenhills study area with pipe sizes of 8" and 10" diameters.
The emergence of acoustic sewer inspection technologies (e.g., SewerBatt) as rapid deployment,
low-cost, reliable, pre-cleaning assessment tools is focusing growing attention on the potential
for more cost-effective sewer cleaning programs. Through the ease of deployment, reduction of
cost, increases in reliability of these inspection approaches, combined with the potential for
reducing the "cleaning of clean pipes," significant cost savings are attainable. As utilities apply
these new inspection technologies, they can move towards implementing sewer cleaning
programs that consist of planned directed and quick response cleaning. Also, these cost savings
can be realized while improving collection system performance and achieving the protection of
public health and water quality.
The results of this demonstration project reveal the potential for more cost-effective sewer
cleaning programs. The site specific pre-cleaning assessment inspection costs resulting from this
project and MSDGC's historic practices for CCTV (on-road), CCTV (off-road), and SewerBatt
(on- and off-road) are $1.68/ft, $2.03/ft, and $0.13/ft, respectively. Thus, for pre-cleaning
assessment, the application of the SewerBatt can reduce MSDGC's costs by $1.55/ft. for on-road
sewers and $1.90/ft. for off-road sewers. In addition, by moving to a sewer cleaning program
predominated by planned directed cleaning, MSDGC can save $2.00/ft. by reducing its "cleaning
of clean pipe." In total, when costs of conventional CCTV inspection and cleaning are
combined, for each pipe segment that is deemed "clean" using the SewerBatt, MSDGC can save
$3.55/ft. for on-road sewers and $3.90/ft. for off-road sewers.
x
-------
The results of this demonstration of the SewerBatt show promise for its application as a tool for
cost-effective, pre-cleaning assessment, post-cleaning quality assurance and quick condition
assessment screening. The application of the SewerBatt in an overall collection system O&M
program should enable wastewater utilities to optimize their sewer cleaning efforts and free up
valuable resources to more effectively implement critical CMOM and asset management
programs. Also, with further development, SewerBatt has the potential to provide a very useful
sewer defect identification and location capability.
XI
-------
1.0 Introduction
The focus on condition assessment of gravity wastewater collection systems (sewers)
continues to broaden. As sewer system networks age, the risk of deterioration, blockages,
and collapses becomes increasingly of concern. The consequences of these events and
conditions can negatively impact a community's social, environmental and financial well-
being. As a result, sewer system owners and operators worldwide are taking proactive
measures to better maintain and improve the performance levels of their sewer systems.
Sewer system owners and operators are progressively addressing operational issues prior to
their occurrence, when possible, and obtaining information concerning the condition of their
sewer system assets.
Traditionally, the main focus of condition assessment of sewers has been directed at
operational issues related to the collection and conveyance of flows to a facility for treatment
and disposal. To address operational issues, attention has tended to concentrate on
maintenance activities associated with the cleaning and removal of debris and foreign
materials from collection system pipes. The presence of debris and foreign material in sewer
pipes reduces capacity and inhibits sewage from flowing through the system to the treatment
facilities as intended. Additionally, attention has been directed towards the reduction of
excessive hydraulic loading of sewers due to wet-weather induced infiltration and inflow
(I&I) entering and over burdening the hydraulic capacity of the sewers and wastewater
treatment plants. The combination of debris and extraneous wet-weather induced flows can
result in less than desired levels of customer service and possibly cause raw sewage to
overflow from the collection system or result in basement backups. Unintended overflows
from a wastewater collection system are commonly referred to as sanitary sewer overflows
(SSOs).
Occasional unintentional discharges of raw sewage (i.e., SSOs) from municipal sanitary
sewers occur in almost every system. SSOs result from a variety of causes, including but not
limited to line blockages, line breaks, and sewer defects that allow storm water and
groundwater to overload the system; lapses in sewer system operation and maintenance;
power failures; inadequate sewer design; and vandalism. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) estimates that there are at least 23,000 - 75,000 SSOs per year (not including
the sewage backups into buildings). The untreated sewage from these overflows can
contaminate the nation's water resources, causing serious water quality problems. Sewage
can also backup into basements, causing property damage and threatening public health
(EPA, 2012).
1.1 Maintenance of Sanitary Sewers
Many avoidable SSOs are caused by inadequate operation or maintenance, inadequate system
capacity, and improper system design and construction. These SSOs can be reduced or
eliminated by the following practices (EPA, 2012):
Sewer system cleaning and maintenance
Reducing I&I through system rehabilitation, repairing broken or leaking service lines,
and removing illicit direct inflow connections from the private sector.
Increasing or upgrading sewer, pump station, or sewage treatment plant capacity and
reliability
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
Construction of wet-weather storage and high-rate treatment facilities to treat excess
flows
Cleaning and inspecting sewer pipes is essential for utilities to operate and maintain a
properly functioning system and minimize SSOs; these activities further a community's
reinvestment in wastewater infrastructure (EPA, 1999). For many utilities, sewer cleaning
and inspection programs are generally part of larger umbrella programs. These programs are
commonly referred to by the utilities and regulatory agencies as capacity, management,
operation and maintenance (CMOM) and asset management programs. Effective operation
and maintenance (O&M) of a collection system is an essential element of any CMOM and
asset management program (EPA, 2005).
The routine maintenance of a sewer system often includes sewer system cleaning, root
removal/treatment, and cleaning/clearing of sewer mainline blockages. However,
understanding where and when to perform cleaning activities in the most effective manner is
not necessarily a straight-forward task. Some agencies clean their sewer system as a matter of
course without knowing in advance whether the system or portions of the system require
cleaning. Pipes with blockages receive the same attention and resources as those with no
actual cleaning needs. The use of staff and equipment is not optimized in this approach, with
the result that staff time and resources which could be directed to other more productive
O&M activities are lost.
In an attempt to direct maintenance staff and cleaning equipment to those pipes in a sewer
system that require attention, some agencies identify cleaning needs by conducting inspection
of the sewers prior to cleaning. These pre-cleaning inspections are conducted using various
approaches and equipment with varying degrees of success, efficiency and speed.
The speed and cost associated with traditional methods for pre-cleaning inspections vary
greatly. The rapid assessment of sewers to determine the need for cleaning and to possibly
identify defects is an approach that is capturing wide attention at many wastewater utilities.
Rapid assessment approaches and tools provide an avenue to significant pre-cleaning
inspection cost savings that could be achieved through reduced inspection and non-
productive cleaning costs.
The overall objective of this EPA-funded study was to demonstrate a recently developed
innovative acoustic-based sewer line assessment technology that is designed for rapid
deployment using portable equipment. This technology can provide a rapid assessment of the
need for pipe cleaning and an overall pipe-condition assessment. Acoustic technologies
require a minimal amount of equipment when compared to closed-circuit television (CCTV)
inspection systems. These acoustic-based technologies have the potential to provide
information in a matter of minutes to assist a utility in determining whether a sewer pipe
might be partially or fully blocked and require cleaning or renewal. The speed of the
assessment, using minimal equipment, has the potential to result in significant cost-savings
compared to traditional methods, such as CCTV inspection. It is generally known that
smaller diameter pipes (i.e., less than or equal to 12-inch diameter) contribute to over 90
percent of the sewer main backups reported in a typical city (Sprague, J., 2007). This study
therefore focused on the demonstration of an acoustic technology that is suited for smaller
diameter pipes.
13
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
1.2 Sewer Line Inspection Techniques
The traditional sewer system inspection methodologies used for pre-cleaning assessment and
inspection-based condition assessment are generally based on visual observations. Most
inspections of sewer lines are performed primarily by one or more of the following
established inspection techniques:
Visual (historical)
Lamping (historical)
Pole/Stick Mounted Zooming Cameras
CCTV
Laser profiling
Sonar assessment
The historical approaches to visually examining sewers have been used to varying degrees of
success. In the past, before camera and robotic equipment were widely available, workers
often entered a maintenance access point (manhole) and visually examined the pipes. This
method of pipeline inspection is rarely used today due to worker safety considerations,
limitations inherent to the inspection method, and the introduction of technologies that allow
for remote, non-entry, camera-based inspections.
Workers have long used light sources lowered into sewer access structures or manholes in an
attempt at illuminating the interior of a pipe. A second worker positioned at grade at an
adjacent manhole then attempts to see if the light has reached the adjacent manhole. If light
is observed, the pipe is assumed to be relatively free of obstructions. If light is not observed,
the pipe is assumed to have a blockage that also obstructs flow. The pipe would then typically
be cleaned in an attempt to remove the blockage. Inspection of a pipe in this manner has
been referred to as lamping of lines or simply lamping. Many older sewer systems have lamp
holes constructed in the sewers to facilitate this type of inspection. The fundamental issue
with lamping of lines is that the entire inspection relies on whether light can visibly be seen
from one access structure to the next. The inspectors cannot directly see whether a sewer
pipe requires cleaning or if a structural defect exists. Such structural defects might include
conditions such as misalignment of the pipeline, sags, protruding taps or a collapsed pipe. A
variation of line lamping that has been used extensively is for a worker to enter a manhole
and shine a bright light and view the pipe condition using a mirror or direct observation. This
approach can be effective but only a small percentage of the line can be inspected.
More recently, cameras have been mounted on poles, much like a painter's extension pole
commonly referred to as cameras on a stick or pole-mounted cameras. A pole-mounted
camera is lowered into the manhole by an operator standing at street level, and the camera
operator directs the camera's view into the pipes connected to the manhole. On an integrated
monitor, the equipment operator remotely views at street level what the camera observes in
the pipe. These cameras are now commonly equipped with operator-controlled lighting and
camera focus/zooming capabilities to augment the inspection in an attempt to view and
inspect the entire pipe length between access structures.
Pole-mounted zooming cameras are a significant advancement over lamping of lines.
However, issues with lighting the entire length of the pipe between access structures and the
ability to focus the camera lens at significant distances in poor lighting conditions are
limitations of these tools. Furthermore, the effectiveness of this tool is further diminished, if
14
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
the pipe is misaligned, water vapor is present, or obstructions such as roots or other matter are
present.
Robotic platforms, mounted with camera-based technologies, have been in use for sewer
inspections for more than 50 years. These robotic systems allow for CCTV camera equipment
to be remotely operated, controlled, and monitored from ground level. The inspection images
can be viewed immediately and transferred to data storage devices for viewing and evaluation
at a later time. Advances in technology include self-propelled equipment, digital imaging and
360-degree field of view. The cameras are transported into the length of sewer pipes for
direct visual inspection via the camera. These CCTV systems are now widely used and, over
the course of the past 20 to 30 years, become the current industry standard for direct visual
inspection of sewer pipes. A majority of utilities own and operate CCTV systems or have
contract(s) for the provision of CCTV services.
The most common type of robotic CCTV inspection systems in use for inspection of public
sewers requires vans, trucks, or similar vehicles for their operation. If sewers are located off-
road, all wheel drive or four wheel drive vehicles may be required to access the manhole
structures. A new vehicle equipped with a CCTV inspection system will typically cost
between $100,000 and $200,000, and require a minimum crew of two persons. Custom off-
road vehicles equipped with CCTV systems are even more expensive to own and operate.
Figure 1-1 shows a custom off-road CCTV camera tractor owned and operated by the
Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati (MSDGC).
Figure 1-1. Custom Off-road CCTV Camera Tractor (Courtesy: MSDGC)
The use of laser and sonar profiling technologies for the inspection and condition assessment
of sewers has been introduced in recent years (EPA, 2009). Laser profiling technology is
increasingly being used to inspect sewers. Laser profiling goes beyond visual inspection and
allows for geometric measurements to be obtained. However, the adoption of laser profiling
for pre-cleaning inspection is of limited added value to what CCTV can provide.
15
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
Unlike CCTV and laser technologies, sonar profiling equipment requires that the sensing
apparatus be completely submerged and only provides an assessment of the pipe condition
under the water level. Therefore, the equipment is often coupled with CCTV equipment so
that the pipe above and below the water level can be inspected. Sonar assessment is useful in
locating and mapping debris especially in large diameter pipes with significant base-flow,
water filled siphons and pressurized force mains.
1.3 Industry Standard Sewer Inspection Methodology
The National Association of Sewer Service Contractors (NASSCO) has established "de-
facto" industry standards for the use of CCTV systems in sewers. The standards include
acceptable operating parameters as well as observation and defect coding standards for sewer
inspection. NASSCO offers the Pipeline Assessment and Certification Program (PACP) for
CCTV operators and those who analyze and interpret CCTV data. The NASSCO PACP
system provides for the standardization of the description of defects within the industry.
Inspections performed in compliance with the NASSCO PACP require that CCTV
inspections be conducted at a pace of no more than 30 feet per minute for camera transporter
travel. PACP compliant inspections also require that the system operator stop and view
observed pipe defects and features. Advanced technologies using high-definition (HD) digital
scanning and imaging CCTV systems are capable of traveling at a faster pace without the
need to stop and view observed pipe defects and features, while maintaining visual clarity
and gaining high resolution, enhanced defect, and feature observation. The capture of data
from these scanning systems allows for virtual pan, tilt zoom operations and post-inspection
coding of defects and features. Use of these scanning systems is acceptable under the
NASSCO PACP system if image quality is adequate and meets minimum PACP standards.
Typical average daily CCTV inspection production rates vary from operator-to-operator and
from site-to-site. A multitude of factors affect the typical average daily production rates.
Such factors include the availability of system access locations (e.g., manholes), distance
between access locations, pipe diameter, pipe materials, flow depth and velocity in the pipes,
presence of debris, number of defects, number of features, CCTV system cable length,
transporter weight, and other factors. An average daily production rate between 1,000 feet to
4,000 feet can be expected.
CCTV has revolutionized the manner in which sewer systems are operated, maintained, and
inspected, thus making sewer pipe inspection relatively safe when compared to previous
methods of inspection. Its greatest strength is its ability to visually examine and inspect the
entire length of a pipe. It's limitation, however, is that the CCTV system must travel the
entire length of a pipe to complete an inspection. Significant blockages, defects, or lack of
available access denies its ability to inspect the sewer in part or total.
1.4 Innovative Sewer Inspection Methodologies
Multi-sensor robotic transporter platforms have been developed and introduced to the
industry that allow for the coupling of laser and sonar profiling technologies onto a remotely
operated and controlled CCTV inspection system. These systems provide for significant
advancements in the ability to inspect a sewer system. These technologies are typically
integrated with the CCTV camera transporter (increasing the overall cost), but providing
additional insights into the condition of the sewer.
16
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
Innovative inspection approaches are now emerging that take advantage of the advances in
newly available observation and detection technologies and deployment strategies, such as
acoustic- (sonic, ultrasonic) and light- (laser, infrared) based devices that have not
traditionally been applied to sewer system investigation. These technologies are designed for
rapid deployment using portable equipment and do not necessarily require a robotic
transporter in order to capture data for the entire length of the pipe. The deployment of these
non-traditional technologies, supported by emerging digital, modular, and robotics
technologies has the potential to greatly expand the "reach" of sewer system inspection
techniques, while reducing the overall cost of sewer inspections.
One commercially available line of emerging technology for the rapid assessment of gravity
sewer lines is acoustic-based technology for sewer inspection. This technology provides for
the acoustic "lamping" of lines rather than using a light source to illuminate the lines. The
major difference in operating methods between light lamping of lines versus acoustical
monitoring is that the acoustic signal bends along the pipe; unless the pipe has significant
blockage, a portion of the signal passes through. In addition, a portion of the transmitted
signal will be reflected when obstructions, features, or defects are encountered whereas light
is absorbed and/or blocked by those same conditions. The acoustic inspection technology
may be capable of quickly evaluating the presence of blockages, features, and defects in the
interior of sewer pipes and provide informed decisions relating to the need for cleaning or
further inspection using other available technologies.
CCTV sewer inspections, especially in "off road" conditions, generally require special
equipment, such as a highly customized vehicle equipped with an on-site generator, remotely
operated transporter, tether cable and spool system, operator control hardware, a computer
system, specialized software, and various other tools. Acoustic sewer inspections require
much less supporting equipment and the inspection equipment is portable, allowing for easier
access to remote sites.
Sewer inspections with acoustic-based technology have the potential of being performed in a
fraction of the time in which CCTV inspections are performed, thus increasing the rate of
productivity of the inspections and reducing the cost of the inspections.
A portable acoustic inspection system can assist in making a quick diagnostic determination
whether a sewer line needs to be cleaned or if it needs to be investigated further using CCTV
inspection. These diagnostic determinations will allow the utility to more cost-effectively
deploy their limited resources to areas that require cleaning or further investigation. It will
optimize the deployment of the special equipment and crews required for CCTV inspection to
locations where they are most needed, thus increasing the cost-effectiveness of the CCTV
inspection program.
1.5 Study Objective
The overall objective of this EPA-funded study was to demonstrate innovative sewer line
assessment technologies that are designed for rapid deployment using portable equipment.
This study focused on demonstration of technologies that are suitable for smaller diameter
pipes (less than 12-inch diameter). One commercially-available acoustic-based sewer pipe
assessment technology is the SewerBatt manufactured by Acoustic Sensing Technology
Ltd (ASTL), based in United Kingdom. This report summarizes the collaborative
demonstration of the SewerBatt in a study area consisting of sewer lines operated by MSDGC
in the Greater Cincinnati area.
17
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
1.6 SewerBatt Equipment Overview
SewerBatt uses acoustic technology to detect obstructions in sewer pipes. The SewerBatt is a
portable, battery-operated system that consists of an acoustic sensor head that is mounted on
a pole (similar to a pole-mounted camera device) which is lowered into the manhole and
inserted into the pipe being inspected. The sensor head contains a sound source (speaker) that
transmits an acoustic excitation signal into the pipe. Simultaneously, the acoustic signal
response from the pipe is captured by an array of microphones that are also contained in the
sensor head. The captured signal responses, along with the user inputs related to pipe section
being inspected, are used to assess the pipe condition. Figure 1-2 shows the SewerBatt's
conceptual deployment for blockage assessment.
Figure 1-2. SewerBatt Conceptual Deployment
Figure 1-3 schematically illustrates the SewerBatt system used during this demonstration
study, including its components and their connectivity. Figure 1-4 shows the SewerBatt
system demonstrated during this project.
18
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
USB cable
1
Ruggedised PC
ScanField
software
USB
interface
i-
Electronic module
DAQ
unit
SD card
i
\
Acoustic sensor
Speaker
Microphone
array
i
Armoured coaxial cable
Figure 1-3. SewerBatt System Components and Connectivity
Figure 1-4. SewerBatt System
The main components of the SewerBatt system are briefly described below:
Acoustic Sensor Head - As mentioned previously, the sensor head contains a speaker unit
that transmits an acoustic signal and an array of microphones that capture the acoustic signal
response from the pipe. Currently, the SewerBatt sensor head is available in two sizes: small
(for pipes up to 9-inches in diameter) and large (for pipes up to 18-inches in diameter). Upon
request, ASTL can produce a custom sensor head for inspecting pipes of diameter larger than
18-inches. The excitation acoustic signal strength and the associated signal processing
hardware are matched to the sensor head-size. As shown in Figure 1-2, the acoustic sensor
19
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
head is mounted on a pole for insertion into the sewer pipe and is connected to an above
ground electronic module via a shielded waterproof cable (note: the electronic module and
connecting cable are not shown in Figure 1-2).
Electronic Module - The above-ground electronic module is a small, weather-proof sealed
plastic box that contains a data acquisition (DAQ) board and a secure digital (SD) card for
data storage. The connection interface to the sensor head and the universal serial bus (USB)
connection to the PC are on the outside of this box. The electronic module communicates
with a Microsoft Windows-based laptop or a personal computer (PC) via the USB interface.
The separate electronic module has been merged with the sensor head in the newer version of
the equipment.
Scanfield Software - The acoustic signal response is evaluated and the individual pipe-
segment condition is assessed using ASTL's proprietary Scanfield1 software that
communicates with the hardware via the USB interface and serves as the user interface. The
Scanfield software comes with a MATLAB Compiler Runtime (MCR)2 which enables the
execution of Scanfield software. Prior to transmitting an acoustic signal, the software requires
the user to input basic pipe-segment related information that is used to perform some of the
computations. The user input software dialog box is presented as Figure 1-5.
C:\AST\Da,
oLxJ
operator:
C:\AST\pata
ame
pipe length (m):
site description
start manhole ID
end manhole ID
water level (mm)
OK Cancel
Figure 1-5. SewerBatt User Input Dialog Box
1 Scanfield Version 1.4.1 was used for development of this report.
2 MathWorks, Natick, Massachusetts, USA.
20
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
A full description of the Scanfield software features is beyond the scope of this document.
However, for the purposes of understanding the results presented in Section 3.0, a brief
overview of the pipe evaluation procedure is presented in the following section.
1.7 SewerBatt Pipe Condition Assessment Overview
After the device is inserted into the pipe and the user inputs shown in Figure 1-5 are
completed, the user can click on the "run" button to run an inspection test. Typically, the
signal transmission and response recording process is completed in less than a minute. Figure
1-6 shows SewerBatt's acoustic response "lines" plot output using the Scanfield software for
one of the pipe segments (1705013 - 1705012) that was inspected during this demonstration.
> d = 300mm, L= 82.6m, water level = 20mm, C:\Documents and Settings\srinivas.panguluri\Desktop\T&E\Pegasus\WA6... 1 I
File Configure Add Help
:h1toch3 [0.075 0.076 O.OG4] v, peaktopeak 0.82V
done!
11705013-»11705012
100
115
130
159
174
189
204
213
233
248
263
292
307
322
337
351
: 366
!
0 250 Hz
0 265 Hz
o 280 Hz
o 309 Hz
o 324 Hz
o 339 Hz
o 354 Hz
0 368 Hz
0 383 Hz
0 398 Hz
0413 Hz
0-427'Hz-
o 442 Hz
o 457 Hz
o 472 Hz
n Afi7 Hj
0 501 Hz
o 516 Hz
0 531 Hz
NEW TEST
REPEAT
CAMERA
AMP. 0
recorded
SPECT
I LIMES I
ENV
STEM
Figure 1-6. SewerBatt Acoustic Response Lines Plot
Features (such as lateral connections and the pipe end) and defects (such as broken pipes and
sedimentation) affect the acoustic excitation signal either by reflecting a part of it back to the
SewerBatt sensor, or by absorbing the sound energy. These pipe segment features (or defects)
are presented as "bumps" in the acoustic signal response plot above. By comparing these
response bumps recorded with a library of known signal responses, the system provides an
assessment.
A review of the "Lines" plot presented above as Figure 1-6, indicates an initial "bump" or
response (at the manhole insertion point) and other responses at approximately 5m, 10m, 44m
and 82m (and beyond). The colored lines in this plot indicate the range of frequencies and the
relative amplitude of the frequency-specific response from the pipe. Also, the level of detail
21
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
or "bumps" presented in the plot depends upon the set threshold. The threshold used to
generate the "Lines" plot presented in Figure 1-6 was 0.01. This plot can be further reviewed
by using the "Envelope" plot option in the Scanfield software presented as Figure 1-7. The
level of signal response detail presented in this plot also depends upon the set threshold. For
the purposes of discussion, to only highlight features of interest with high amplitude signal
response, a different threshold level (0.039) was used to generate the "Envelope" plot
presented as Figure 1-7.
> cl = 300mm, L= 82.6m, water level = 20mm, C:\Documents and Settings\srinivas.panquluri\Desktop\T&E\Pegasus\WA6... 1
File Configure Add Help
Figure 1-7. SewerBatt Acoustic Response Envelope Plot
At the set threshold-level for this pipe segment (1705013 - 1705012), the SewerBatt
identified an initial response from the device insertion point (0.87m), some obstructions at
4.93m and 43.12m and the end of pipe response at 82.51m (the distances are indicated in the
plot in red). In this case, the end-of-pipe acoustic response distance (-82 m) is matched based
on known pipe length data from MSDGC's Geographic Information System (GIS) database.
When the match button is selected, based on the limited site specific acoustic match library,
the software generates the impulse response "Match" plot presented as Figure 1-8.
22
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
> d = 300mm, L= 82.6m, water level = 20mm, C:\Documents and Settings\srinivas.panguluri\Desktop\T&E\Peqasus\WA6.
File Configure Add Help
Figure 1-8. SewerBatt Acoustic Response Match Plot
The "Match" plot indicates that the response at the initial 4.93m obstruction is likely a lateral
connection (Ic), and the later responses at the 43.12m and 82.51m locations are likely pipe
ends (pe). Although the SewerBatt system is designed to identify such discrete
features/defects along the sewer pipe, additional effort and time will be necessary to build a
substantial acoustic signal response signature library. Therefore, for the purposes of this
technology demonstration project, ASTL developed a rapid assessment feature. A more
detailed overview of the SewerBatt's discrete defect identification capability is available in
Romanova et al., 2013.
For rapid assessment, the Scanfield software includes an automated condition assessment
module3 that reviews the acoustic signal response, makes allowance for the energy loss from
the pipe-ends and lateral connections, and then grades the pipe. The final pipe condition or
grading is simply in the form of a colored traffic light indicator providing a red, amber
(yellow), or green (RAG) grade. A red grade assessment indicates the need for further
inspection or cleaning. An amber grade assessment is cautionary, indicating that there maybe
some blockage issues, but not sufficient to block the flow. A green assessment indicates the
pipe is free of any significant blockages and no further evaluations are necessary. The
reflected energy set levels for the RAG assessment are user definable. For the purposes of
3 An "alpha" or test version of this module was provided by ASTL for use in this demonstration study.
23
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
this demonstration, it was determined that pipes in good condition (green) generally had a
reflected energy value of less than 70 (a dimensionless number based on the ratio of the
strength of the reflected energy compared to the strength of the excitation signal). Pipes in
poor condition were generally observed to have a reflected energy level of more than 90.
Thus, the RAG classification was set to the following reflected energy levels: green - energy
< 70, amber - energy 70 to 90, and red - energy > 90. Furthermore, if the RAG algorithm
determines a green or amber value based on the reflected energy value, the system also
calculates the strength of the biggest feature/defect response and compares it with the
strength of the response calculated for the pipe end (pe) to calculate a value designated as
dissipation energy (DE) ratio in the software output. If the DE ratio is less than 0.33, the
initial RAG classification is not changed; for a DE ratio value between 0.33 and 0.66, the
initial green RAG value is elevated to amber and finally for a value more than 0.66, the RAG
is set to red irrespective of its initial classification.
Figure 1-9 depicts an example RAG condition assessment output for the pipe segment
(1705013 - 1705012), using acoustic data previously presented in Figures 1-6, 1-7, and 1-8.
j> TLReport
SITE: SOUTH RD
DATE 3 TIME : 25-Apr-2013 10:41:37
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH: 1170S013
END MH : 1170S012
FILE : 11705013_11705012_300mm-1 .mat
REPORT:
4.93 : xx
32.51 : pe
ENERGY: 39
PE: 0.18
DE ratio: 0.5
Figure 1-9. SewerBatt Condition Assessment (RAG) Response
This assessment was performed by clicking the "condition" button, which asked the user to
confirm the pipe end location and if the acoustic responses at the 4.93m and 43.12m locations
were related to pipe ends or lateral connections. Because the current signature library was
limited, the decision was made to reject those identified assessments. Although the energy
level was in the green range, the RAG algorithm comes up with a summary assessment of an
elevated value or amber because of the DE ratio 0.5 (0.09/0.18) for blockage response at
4.93m (as shown in Figure 1-9). A more detailed discussion of this pipe segment is presented
in Section 3.0, where the CCTV findings indicate the presence of 15% medium roots at
4.93m (-16 feet) and 30% medium roots at about 44m (-147 feet). Appendix A contains a
more detailed report from ASTL that provides additional details on the SewerBatt
24
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
methodology and overall results from the MSDGC assessments during the Greater Cincinnati
trials.
Overall, the SewerBatt system setup and analysis is quick (taking only a few minutes) and
gives some indication of defect type and location. Therefore, the main practical advantage of
this method over traditional inspection methods, such as CCTV, is the speed of measurement
and the ability to measure from the manhole without traversing the pipe. If necessary, the
acoustic inspection can be performed by a single operator as the equipment is lightweight and
no personnel entry is required.
1.8 Project Team
This collaborative field demonstration of the SewerBatt was led by EPA's National Risk
Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) in Cincinnati, Ohio. EPA engaged MSDGC as
a collaborative research partner to provide access to the study area (see Section 2.0) sewer
lines and to perform the related field work. For coordinating and performing this
demonstration, EPA issued a work assignment to Pegasus Technical Services, Inc. (PTSI)
under EPA Contract No: EP-C-11-006. Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc. (Shaw -
a team subcontractor to PTSI) served as the project lead to assist in the selection of
technology vendors, obtain the equipment through lease, coordinate the field efforts with
MSDGC, evaluate the data generated, and produce this report with the project team.
To perform these tasks, Shaw subcontracted with Brown and Caldwell (BC) and ALSA Tech
LLC (ALSA) to serve as industry experts/consultants in this demonstration. In addition, Shaw
contacted selected technology vendors (e.g., ASTL) to arrange for the lease of the SewerBatt
device. The members of this project team included:
EPA - Dan Murray, Patrick Clark and John Olszewski
MSDGC - Jerry Weimer, Eric Withers, Eric Schneider, Dustin Prue, and Mike
Pittinger
Shaw - Srinivas Panguluri and Don Schupp
BC - Gary Skipper and Steve Donovan
ALSA - Abraham Chen
ASTL - Richard Long, Nick Hawkins, Andrej Fedotov and Kirill Horoshenkov
The EPA and Shaw project team participated in this collaborative field demonstration mainly
as neutral observers during the field activity-phase of this study. The project team's main
objective was to compile the data collected by MSDGC and perform the evaluation contained
in this report. The project team members periodically accompanied MSDGC personnel while
they deployed the equipment and assessed the condition of sewers in the Cincinnati area
using both a conventional CCTV camera-based inspection system and the SewerBatt.
Specifically, the results obtained from the following technologies will be discussed in this
report:
SewerBatt manufactured by ASTL.
Pan-Tilt-Zooming pole-mounted camera (aka "camera on a stick") manufactured by
Envirosight Quickview.
HD-digital scanning CCTV.
Although the PANORAMO 3D Optical Pipeline Scanner (manufactured by RapidView-
IBAK) was slated for use during this study, the equipment had to be serviced and was not
available for use during the SewerBatt portion of this demonstration.
25
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
26
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
2.0 Study Area Description and Evaluation Parameters
MSDGC is responsible for the operation and maintenance of over 3,000 miles of sewers, with
approximately 600 miles of those sewers being "off-road." These off-road sewers are
typically inspected every 8 to 10 years and are difficult and expensive to access and inspect.
In addition to these "off-road" sewers, MSDGC also inspects and cleans on-road sewers on a
proactive basis. For the purposes of this study, the following three Greater Cincinnati-area
locations were identified and selected for the demonstration:
Hunt Road - off-road sewers (see Appendix B for a detailed figure)
Galia Drive - off-road sewers (see Appendix B for a detailed figure)
Greenhills - on-road sewers (see Appendix B for a detailed figure)
These locations include a range of pipe sizes and a variety of pipe materials and were
scheduled for cleaning and inspection during the study year. Tables 2-1 and 2-2 summarize
the total number of pipe segments by size and material type selected for this study.
Pipe Size (in)
6
8
10
12
Total
No. of Segments
1
97
1
56
155
Table 2-1. Hunt Road, Galia Drive, and Greenhills Pipe Segment Size Summary
Pipe Material
Concrete (RCP)
Ductile Iron Pipe (DIP)
Cast Iron Pipe (CIP)
Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP)
Poly- Vinyl Chloride (PVC)
Slip-lined
Unknown
No. of Segments
75
2
1
60
1
5
11
Table 2-2. Hunt Road, Galia Drive, and Greenhills Pipe Segment Material Summary
As summarized in Table 2-1, the selected study areas have sewer pipes ranging from 6- to 12-
inches diameter. The SewerBatt system deployed in this evaluation is designed to work
optimally in this pipe size range. For optimal evaluation of larger diameter pipes, the
acoustic unit would require retrofitting with larger sized and more powerful electronic
hardware coupled with adjustments to the algorithm software.
2.1 Test Conditions
A project-specific EPA required Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) was developed and
implemented by the project team (EPA, 2012b). As part of the QAPP, the inspections were
to be conducted during times when the water level in the sewer was below 40 percent of pipe
diameter and there were no significant changes to the water levels between the technology
deployments. Each sewer pipe-segment was to be examined and assessed using selected
acoustic methods, pole mounted camera, and CCTV prior to cleaning. If cleaning was
27
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
considered necessary based on the inspections, the sewer segments were to be cleaned,
examined, and assessed again after cleaning. Figure 2-1 depicts the overall test procedure
that MSDGC was to follow during this study. Figure 2-2 shows the inspection test
procedure, and Figure 2-3 shows the mainline CCTV test procedure. As indicated in Figure
2-1, another acoustic inspection technology the Sewer Line - Rapid Assessment Tool (SL-
RAT) was also evaluated during this demonstration study with results contained in a separate
EPA report. Both acoustic inspection technologies were evaluated using the same underlying
CCTV-based PACP assessments.
2.2 Condition Assessment/Inspection Strategy
The SewerBatt representatives from ASTL visited Cincinnati in April 2013 to train all project
personnel on the appropriate techniques for deployment and use of the SewerBatt equipment.
Thereafter, the vendor representatives and Shaw/EPA/BC personnel accompanied the
MSDGC crew periodically to observe the condition assessment and data collection process.
Each subsection of the sewer segments were tested from the furthest downstream section to
the upstream section to ensure that if any material was dislodged during testing, the material
would flow downstream and not impact the upstream sections. Each segment was examined
using the following technologies:
SewerBatt
Pole/Stick Mounted Camera
CCTV or PANORAMO Pipeline Scanner
As mentioned previously in Section 1.8, the PANORAMO 3D Optical Pipeline Scanner
(manufactured by Rapid View-IB AK) was slated for use in this study. However, the
equipment had to be serviced and was not available for use during the SewerBatt evaluations.
28
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
EPA TEST PROCEDURE OVERALL
Figure 2-1. Overall Test Procedure
29
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
EPA TEST PROCEDURE INSPECTION
FIELD
SUPERVISOR
INSPECTOR
EQUIPMENT
SPECIALIST
EQUIPMENT
SPECIALIST
OPEN ACCESS
POINTS
i
PUT CAMERA IN
LINE
Figure 2-2. Inspection Test Procedure
30
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
EQUIPMENT
SPECIALIST
EQUIPMENT
SPECIALIST
Figure 2-3. CCTV Test Procedure
2.3 CCTV and Pole Mounted Zooming Camera Data Evaluation Procedure
As indicated in the previous sections, two camera-based technologies were specified in the
QAPP to be used as part of the inspection regime for each pipe segment evaluated. The two
specific camera technologies used during the project were:
31
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
Envirosight Quickview (Pole/Stick Mounted Camera) -handheld pole mounted
zooming camera used to visually inspect and assess the sewer condition.
HD CCTV - robotic CCTV which utilizes high-definition camera lenses to capture
video. The video recording can be assessed in real time or at a later date. The system
permits computer-aided measurement of the positions and sizes of objects or pipe
defects.
For both camera-based technologies, the condition assessment of the sewer segments was
based on the NASSCO PACP methodology. The PACP provides a standard method for
coding each defect, based on a visual assessment of the type and extent of the observed defect
within a pipe segment. The PACP methodology stipulates a mapping between defect codes to
a numeric pipe condition grade. The general assignment of pipe condition grades are:
Grade 5 - Pipe segment has failed or will likely fail within the next five years. Pipe
segment requires immediate attention.
Grade 4 - Pipe segment has severe defects with the risk of failure within the next five
to ten years. Pipe condition is generally poor and will likely become Grade 5 in near
future.
Grade 3 - Pipe segment has moderate defects and the condition is fair to moderate.
Deterioration may continue, but not for ten to twenty years.
Grade 2 - Pipe segment has minor defect, but generally good and has not begun to
deteriorate. Pipe is unlikely to fail for at least 20 years.
Grade 1 - Pipe segment may have minor defects, but otherwise in excellent condition.
Failure is unlikely in the foreseeable future.
For the purposes of this report, the sewer condition assessment performed by the mainline
CCTV was coded and rated using the NASSCO PACP method. However, the numerical
PACP codes were not directly comparable to the SewerBatt outputs. Therefore, the video
outputs from the CCTV inspections were compared to the outputs generated by the
SewerBatt in Section 3.0 of this document.
2.4 Rapid Deployment Evaluation Procedure
Besides providing a pipe condition and blockage assessment, the key advantage of
implementing technologies such as SewerBatt is the rapid deployment feature using portable
equipment that can result in significant cost savings to utilities. As mentioned previously, the
Greenhills area within MSDGC was selected to evaluate the time it takes to conduct an
acoustic assessment campaign using SewerBatt. As the goal of this study area was to evaluate
the time required to perform the acoustic inspections, advanced planning and preparation was
conducted to help mitigate issues associated with traffic control and location of manholes.
All manholes were pre-marked, and motorized All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) were used to
conduct this campaign. This sub-study involved sixty-two (62) SewerBatt measurements at
pipe-segments covering over 10,000 linear feet of pipe in the Greenhills study area with pipe
sizes of 8 and 10 inches in diameter. It should be noted that the NASSCO-PACP CCTV
assessments were performed only for four of the pipe-segments in the Greenhills study area.
32
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
3.0 Technology Demonstration Results
The inspection test procedure shown previously in Figure 2-2 and the CCTV test procedure
depicted in Figure 2-3 were not accomplished for every pipe segment during the course of the
project. This was due to a variety of reasons including access limitations, wet-weather rain
events that interrupted the schedule, unscheduled CCTV tractor repairs, and the unforeseen
periodic need for the MSDGC crew to address system issues requiring immediate attention.
Therefore, for some of the data/results presented in the following sections, only factual field
findings are reported without a detailed interpretation. For the purposes of this report, the data
obtained from the pole/stick mounted camera was found to be of little use in terms of
discussing the SewerBatt results when compared to the more detailed data obtained from the
CCTV; hence, it has not been included in this document.
Furthermore, the SewerBatt equipment was expected to arrive in January 2013 and was
originally designated to be tested concurrently with the SL-RAT device (as presented
previously in the test procedures Figures 2-1 and 2-2). However, there were some unforeseen
delays related to the formation of ASTL as a "spin-off company from the University of
Bradford (United Kingdom), the organization that had developed the original non-
commercialized SewerBatt product. Subsequently, the SewerBatt representatives from ASTL
arrived in Cincinnati during April 2013 to train all project personnel on the appropriate
techniques to deploy and use the SewerBatt equipment. However, by that time, the Galia
Drive inspections using the SL-RAT, CCTV and associated cleaning had already been
completed. Although SewerBatt inspections were conducted at the Galia Drive location
(presented below in Section 3.1), the results are separated in time and are interpreted
accordingly.
The version of the SewerBatt system used in this study uses metric units in the acoustic signal
processing functions that are performed during its deployment. Although the option to
display results in U.S. customary units (e.g., distances in feet) is provided in the interface, the
internal calculations function only with metric units. For this reason, this report uses metric
units when presenting the SewerBatt results. According to ASTL, the option to run the
software in U.S. customary units will be included in a later release. Appropriate conversion
factors should be applied where necessary while interpreting the results (e.g., for distances,
multiply meters by 3.281 to convert to feet).
3.1 Galia Drive Study Area CCTV/SewerBatt Assessment Summary
The Galia Drive evaluation area consists mainly of off-road sewers, through a wooded area
serving several residential subdivisions. The terrain has very steep slopes and access to the
manholes is provided by an unpaved path cut through the area. The alignment of the sewer
along the path is above a steep ravine that leads to an unnamed creek in the Muddy Creek
watershed. All of the inspections listed in this section were performed between April 2013
and June 2013.
Of the fifty-four (54) sewer pipe-segments originally identified for inclusion in the Galia
study Drive area, a total of thirty-four (34) SewerBatt assessments were performed in this
study area. Also, no CCTV data was available for three (3) of the thirty four (34) SewerBatt
assessed pipe-segments for comparison purposes. Therefore, only thirty one (31) individual
pipe-segments have CCTV data to support the SewerBatt inspections. Furthermore, several of
these segments had been inspected earlier in the year; for the purposes of this analysis, the
most recent CCTV data was used.
33
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
Table 3-1 (below) summarizes the SewerBatt test results and associated CCTV inspection
findings for the Galia Drive study area.
Segment
ID
11702001-
11702002
11702003-
11702012
11705009-
11706007
11705011-
11705010
11705013-
11705012
11706002-
11707005
11706003-
11706002
11706004-
11706003
11706006-
11706005
11706006-
11706005
11706007-
11706006
11707005-
11702001
11711001-
11706006
11712001-
11711001
11712002-
11712001
11712003-
11712002
11712004-
11712003
CCTV
Date
4/30/2013
1/29/2013
5/2/2013
5/2/2013
5/3/2013
4/30/2013
4/30/2013
4/30/2013
4/30/2013
4/30/2013
5/2/2013
4/30/2013
4/30/2013
4/30/13
4/30/13
4/30/13
5/1/13
CCTV Findings
Light grease
No issues
No issues
Fine roots
Roots Med
Roots Med- 15%
roots seen at 156'
and small root
ball at 206'
Root Ball at end
of pipe
Roots fine
Roots Med at 173'
Slight structural
overall very clear
Overall very clear
Root Ball at 114',
offset joint w/
roots at 54'
No issues
Light O&M
Roots fine
Roots fine
Light deposits
SewerBatt
Date
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/25/13
04/25/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/25/13
SewerBatt RAG
Grade
(Initial/Revised)
G/G
G/G
G/G
G/G
G/A
G/A
G/G
G/A
G/A
G/G
G/G
G/A
G/G
G/A
G/G
G/G
G/G
SewerBatt Comments
from Envelope Plot
Review
Minor responses at 16'
and 105'
No responses
Medium responses
between 16' and 33'
Slight response at 14'
Responses at 16', 33',
50' and 147'
Response at 13'
No response
No response
No sharp response
Response at 16'
No response
Strong response at
139' and 199'
Slight response at 16'
Responses at 16' and
102'
Responses at 13' and
23'
Response at 20'
Response at 23'
34
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
Segment
ID
11712005-
11712004
11712006-
11712005
11713001-
11712006
11713002-
11713001
11713003-
11713002
11713004-
11713003
11713005-
11713006
11713006-
11712006
11713007-
11713006
11713014-
11713018
11713018-
11713003
15016001-
11713004
15016002-
15016001
CCTV
Date
5/1/13
5/1/13
5/1/13
5/1/13
5/1/13
5/1/13
5/3/13
5/3/13
5/3/13
5/3/13
5/3/13
5/1/13
5/3/13
CCTV Findings
Light deposits
No issues
Minor issues
Minor Issues
Gusher, light
deposits, grease
throughout the
line
Sideline splash at
starting manhole,
deposits (5%)
throughout
Minor issues, tap
at 244', 2 taps 2'
from target
manhole
No issues
Minor deposits,
tap at 59', 2 taps
2' from target
manhole
Tap at 6', 15.6'
and 39.9',
beyond 40'
camera
"jumped" over
several joints
No issues
Light deposits
Grease starts at
173', TF at 33.5'
SewerBatt
Date
04/25/13
04/25/13
04/25/13
04/25/13
04/25/13
04/25/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/29/13
04/25/13
04/25/13
04/25/13
SewerBatt RAG
Grade
(Initial/Revised)
G/G
G/G
G/G
G/G
G/A
G/A
R/R
G/G
R/R
R/R
G/G
G/A
G/A
SewerBatt Comments
from Envelope Plot
Review
Response at 20'
No responses
Response at 15'
Response at 13'
No responses
No responses with
low end of pipe
response
Responses at 20',
244', 280' and 290'
Slight response at 23'
Responses at 16' and
194'
Numerous
responses, peaks at
16', 46', 56', and 73'
No responses
Slight responses at 40'
and 80', more
noticeable from 198'-
264'
Responses at 23',
36', 43', and 191'
Table 3-1. Summary of SewerBatt and CCTV Results for Galia Drive
35
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
Of the thirty-one (31) SewerBatt assessments supported by CCTV, twenty-eight (28) received
an auto condition grade of green, and three received an auto condition grade of red. The data
were also provided to ASTL representatives for a detailed evaluation. The ASTL team
recommended a manual override often (10) of the Galia road segments from green to amber
(See Appendix A for a detailed discussion). These sections were on the threshold of the
cutoff value between green and amber, and in most cases they were downgraded due to a
lower than expected pipe-end acoustic response. The conservative assumption here was that
the unidentified conditions that decreased the acoustic response at the pipe-end and the
manual override of the quick assessment recommends further investigation. It should be
noted that no major structural defects were found during the CCTV inspections (e.g., no
PACP Structural Grades of 4 or 5) in this area. However, numerous minor PACP O&M
defects were identified and are included in Table 3-1.
Based on the relatively consistent SewerBatt response, a sub-sample (twelve segments)
across the various automated condition grade categories (red/amber/green including the
manual override for this study area) was selected for a more detailed discussion. These
selected pipe-segments include the following consideration: all three (3) segments that had a
final condition grade of red; seven (7) of the ten (10) sections that had an automatic grade of
green, but were manually overridden to amber; and two (2) of twenty (20) sections that had a
final condition grade of green.
Green Condition Grade Discussion - Of the two green graded pipe sections selected for
further discussion, one (11705010-11705009) was selected because SewerBatt indicated a
response, but the CCTV log did not indicate any issue in the pipe. For the other pipe-segment
(11706003-11706002), the CCTV log showed a root ball in the pipe and was evaluated to
ascertain why the SewerBatt condition rating remained green.
The first selected pipe-segment (11705010-11705009) was assessed from the downstream
manhole (i.e., from manhole ID 11705009) and showed a SewerBatt response at 6.1m. This
location is equivalent to 127 feet (distance compensated for reverse setup of the SewerBatt
vs. the CCTV) on the CCTV inspection. The pipe-end response is correctly indicated at 44.87
m (-147 feet), and no major defects were found; however, a noticeable hydraulic jump was
seen at the 127 feet joint on the CCTV footage. Figure 3-1 shows the CCTV response image
for the exact location where a SewerBatt response (6.1 m) was noted for this segment.
36
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
11705009~»11705010
20 30 40
distance (m)
Figure 3-1. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 11705010-11705009)
For the second pipe-segment (11706003-11706002), a root ball filling 80% of pipe was found
at 3 feet from the upstream manhole. However, since the SewerBatt deployment was from the
downstream manhole (in reverse from manhole ID 11706002), it appears that any response
from the root ball was masked by the pipe-end response at the target manhole.
Amber Condition Grade Discussion - As mentioned previously, there were no automated
amber condition grades. However, ten (10) sections were manually downgraded from green
to amber by the ASTL team. Seven (7) of these locations were evaluated in more detail to
determine if conditions were identified in the CCTV inspection that could explain the manual
re-grading to amber.
For segment 1705013-1705012, the SewerBatt identified responses, seen in Figure 3-2, at
4.93m (16') and at about 44m (147') which were consistent with roots seen with CCTV. A
downgrade to amber is considered appropriate.
37
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
11705013 >11705012
04
0.35
0.3
_0.25
02
a.
E
0.15
0.1
005
CO
A
20
40
60
distance (m)
Figure 3-2. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 11705013-11705012)
Similarly, two (2) other pipe-segments downgraded to amber also were verified for root
intrusion at discrete locations in the pipe as identified by SewerBatt. The remaining four (4)
pipe-segments had either fine roots, grease deposits or encrustation throughout the entire line
which likely affected the overall energy value resulting in an amber downgrade.
Red Condition Grade Discussion - The three (3) pipe segments, with a final condition
grade of red, also reported an automatic condition of red. During review of the CCTV
investigations, no significant defects were found in the pipe. However, each of these sections
contained lateral connections in the pipe which resulted in significant energy loss and a low-
level response from the target manhole (or pipe-end). A review of the peaks on the SewerBatt
output graph identified most of the lateral connections noted during the assessment. A
summary of these pipe feature/defect identifications is presented in Appendix A.
3.2 Hunt Road Area CCTV/SewerBatt Assessment Summary
The Hunt Road Evaluation area consists mainly of off-road sewers, through a wooded area
serving several residential subdivisions. The terrain on the periphery has very steep slopes
and access to the manholes is provided by an unpaved path cut through the area from the
downstream location. The alignment of the sewer is along the path which is adjacent to an
unnamed creek in the East Branch of the Mill Creek watershed.
In this study area, the SewerBatt operation and inspections were performed between May
2013 and June 2013. A total of twenty-six (26) sections were inspected using CCTV and
only twenty (20) of those were assessed with SewerBatt. No sewer segments were found in
need of cleaning and two (2) segments were found with structural issues, neither of which
resulted in obstruction of the pipe. Table 3-2 presents the SewerBatt test results and the
correlating CCTV inspection findings of the pipe segments at the Hunt Road site.
38
J O
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
Segment ID
44705005-
44705004
44706004-
44707026
44706008-
44706009
44706009-
44706010
44706010-
44706004
44706012-
44706011
44706013-
44706010
44706014-
44706013
44706015-
44706014
44712001-
44705005
44712002-
44712001
44712007-
44712002
44712008-
44712007
CCTV
Date
5/28/13
6/12/13
6/12/13
6/12/13
6/12/13
6/12/13
6/12/13
5/28/13
5/28/13
5/28/13
5/28/13
5/28/13
5/28/13
CCTV Findings
Minor deposits
throughout, pipe
end at 65'
Deposits, water
level 25%
No issues
No issues
Minor deposits
throughout
No issues
Deposits at joint 3'
from manhole
Minor structural
issues, significant
cracked pipe and
possible shape loss
in the first 33',
deposit at 72'
Minor grease
Minor O&M
Minor grease and
deposits, grease
throughout, starts
at 14', a little
heavier at 20'
Minor structural
issues, cracked pipe
w/ deposits 90'-
126', non-laminar
flow first 33' from
deployment
manhole
Minor deposits,
hydraulic jumps at
joints
SewerBatt
Date
05/29/13
05/29/13
06/04/13
06/04/13
05/29/13
06/04/13
05/29/13
05/29/13
05/29/23
05/29/13
05/29/13
05/29/13
05/29/13
SewerBatt RAG
Grade
(Initial/Revised)
R/R
G/A
A/A
G/G
R/R
R/R
G/A
R/R
G/G
G/A
R/R
G/G
A/G
SewerBatt
Comments from
Envelope Plot
Review
No pipe end,
strong responses at
64' and 90' and
many lower
responses past 64'
Response at 16'
No responses
Slight response at 23'
Response at 20'
Low responses 10'
through 66'
No responses
Response at 13'
and 23'
Response at 13'
No responses, pe
response low
Response at 23,
pipe end response
low
No responses
Minor responses at
16' and 33'
39
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
Segment ID
48209013-
44712008
48209014-
48209013
48209015-
48209014
48209016-
48209015
48209017-
48209016
48209018-
48209017
CCTV
Date
5/28/13
6/10/13
6/10/13
6/10/13
6/10/13
6/10/13
CCTV Findings
Minor deposits
Minor O&M
No issues
No issues, water
level 50% at target
manhole, 2 break in
taps at 126' and
133'
Minor grease
Minor deposits
SewerBatt
Date
06/03/13
06/03/13
06/03/13
06/03/13
06/03/13
06/04/13
SewerBatt RAG
Grade
(Initial/Revised)
G/G
G/G
G/G
G/G
G/G
A/A
SewerBatt
Comments from
Envelope Plot
Review
No responses
No responses
Response at 145'
Responses at 96'
and 102'
No response
Response at 26',
lower responses
throughout
Table 3-2. Summary of SewerBatt and CCTV Results for Hunt Road
Similar to the extended discussion for the Galia Drive area, ten (10) sewer segments were
selected for a detailed comparative discussion. Once again, the pipe segments selected
included a sampling across the various SewerBatt condition grade categories
(red/amber/green, including the manual override for this study area). The selected ten (10)
pipe segments include the following considerations: all five (5) segments that had a final
condition grade of red; one (1) pipe-segment that had an automatic and final condition grade
of amber; one (1) segment that reported an automatic grade of amber, but was manually
overridden to green; one (1) segment that had an automatic grade of green, but was
downgraded to amber; and two (2) segments that were evaluated had an automatic and final
condition grade of green.
Green Condition Grade Discussion - Of the selected locations, two (2) locations had final
condition grades of green. One pipe segment (44712007-44712002) was assessed from the
upstream manhole using SewerBatt, but was CCTV'd upstream or with a reverse setup. The
SewerBatt inspection Envelope plot shows a slight response in the first 20 meters (end of
pipe response is at 55.04m and beyond) and the CCTV inspection showed non-laminar flow
and some cracked pipe with minor deposits (See Figure 3-3).
40
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
44712007 KM71200!
Figure 3-3. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 44712007-44712002)
At the second segment 48209015-48209016, SewerBatt responded in the vicinity of two (2)
break-in taps identified by CCTV at about 30 meters (See Figure 3-4). No other issues were
found with this pipe; therefore the green rating was appropriate.
46209015 .48209016
w,
) 1
0 2
6
0 3
L
0 4
0 5
0 6
IE
|
I
I
,«..
0 7
J
It o>
li
\
) 8
0
distance (m)
Figure 3-4. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 48209015-48209016)
Amber Condition Grade Discussion -Two (2) amber pipe segments were selected for
further evaluations. One was manually adjusted and the second one was not. The segment
(44706008-44706009) which returned an automatic amber condition grade (and not manually
adjusted) was likely due to the energy loss from an outside drop at the deployment manhole.
The second segment (44706013-44706010) was downgraded from green and showed
encrustations in the first meter from the deployment manhole. Additionally, the segment was
identified as potentially having a force main discharge which resulted in increased flow levels
during the inspection.
Red Condition Grade Discussion - Of the five (5) pipe segments with a final condition
grade of red, four (4) reported an automatic condition of red, and one (1) segment (44705005-
44705004) came back with "PE not found," with an automatic grade was red. Upon further
41
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
review of the Envelope output graph, it appears the SewerBatt actually identified the target
manhole correctly at 20 meters (65 feet). This rating may have been due to the short pipe
length and unidentifiable response signature from the manhole.
Another segment (44706010-44706004) received a red grade due to significant attenuation of
the response from the target manhole. Based on review of the CCTV inspection, only minor
encrustations were found in the first 10 meters of the deployment manhole.
Segment 44706012-44706011 had a similar response, however the encrustations near the
deployment manhole were slightly larger and debris was identified near the target manhole.
One of the few pipes with noticeable structural issues, 44706014-44706013, also received a
red grade. There was significant horizontal cracking -14 feet from the deployment manhole.
The SewerBatt responded in the area of this defect (at 4.08m - See Figure 3-5). Additionally,
deposits were identified beyond this area which may have further affected the response from
the target manhole.
Figure 3-5. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 44706014-44706013)
The final section with a grade of red, 44712002-44712001, showed minor grease deposits
throughout the entire section (Figure 3-6). Additionally, the review of the CCTV inspection
showed the noticeably turbulent flow in the pipe.
42
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
53 100
distance i m;
Figure 3-6. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 44712002-44712001)
3.3 Greenhills Area - Rapid Deployment Evaluation Summary
As mentioned previously in Section 2.4, the Greenhills study area involved SewerBatt
measurements at 53 pipe segments, representing approximately 10,000 linear feet of pipe
with pipe sizes of 8" and 10" diameters. A primary goal of this study area was to evaluate the
time required to perform the acoustic inspections with the SewerBatt.
Overall, 62 assessments were performed between 9.53 AM and 2.00 PM on May 9, 2013.
Greenhills is a suburban residential neighborhood with a relatively large number of lateral
connections (or taps) in the pipes which resulted in a significant loss of acoustic energy.
Therefore, only twenty nine (29) segments generated valid SewerBatt data. Of the (29)
segments with valid SewerBatt data, seventeen (17) were given red condition grades after
manual override. Seven (7) segments ended up with an amber grade, and five (5) segments
were given green grades.
Since the main intent of the deployment in the Greenhills area was to assess how quickly the
SewerBatt can be deployed for obtaining quick results, only three (3) sections were supported
with CCTV inspections. For each of those sections, SewerBatt returned a condition grade of
red. Table 3-3 presents a summary of these results.
Segment
ID
31601005-
31601001
31602004-
31601005
CCTV
Date
5/10/2013
5/10/2013
CCTV Findings
Medium Roots
No Issues - 6 taps
SewerBatt
Date
5/9/2013
5/9/2013
SewerBatt RAG
Grade
(Initial/Revised)
R/R
R/R
SewerBatt
Comments from
Envelope Plot
Review
Strong response
at 109',
numerous lower
responses
throughout
Strong responses
at 32' and 52'
43
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
31602007-
31602008
6/17/2013
Roots from tap -
grease on crown of
pipe - pipe
fragment in flow
5/9/2013
R/R
Strong response
at 59', numerous
lower responses
throughout
Table 3-3. Summary of SewerBatt and CCTV Results for Greenhills
In two (2) of the three (3) pipe segments supported with CCTV data, SewerBatt responded at
locations where CCTV identified roots in the pipe. Figure 3-7 shows the SewerBatt and
CCTV response comparison for segment 31602008-31602007 (note roots at tap -91' on the
CCTV and strong SewerBatt response at 17.52m). It should be noted that the CCTV and
SewerBatt assessments for this segment were initiated from opposite manholes.
31602008 .31602007
0.35
30
distance (m]
Figure 3-7. SewerBatt/CCTV Response Comparison (Segment ID 31602008-31602007)
3.4 Miscellaneous Pipe Evaluation Summary
As indicated in Section 3.3, in residential neighborhoods, such as Greenhills which contain
pipe segments with many lateral connections, the strength of the acoustic signal will likely
decay quickly. The signal responses in Greenhills decayed to an extent that, beyond a short
distance (approximately 20 to 50m), showed little detail was visible in the recorded results.
To potentially address this issue, ASTL proposed that their team return to Cincinnati in
August 2013, and bring with them a newer production unit with some alternative excitation
signals and sensor orientations to evaluate in several of the pipes in the Greenhills area. The
goal of this evaluation was to observe the extent to which the signal penetration could be
improved in pipes with many lateral connections.
Two series of comparative tests were carried out. The first series compared the results from
the prototype equipment with those from the newer production equipment. The second series
of tests compared the results from two different excitation signals (chirp and Gaussian pulse)
and different locations of the sensor head within the pipe end cross section (center, left, right,
44
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
top and bottom). Overall, the test data were insufficient to draw any firm conclusions, but the
results appear to indicate that the gauss pulse excitation signal coupled with an increased
power at lower frequencies give incrementally stronger responses. The detailed results
tabulated by ASTL are presented in Appendix C of this report.
3.5 SewerBatt Operator Feedback
As a part of this evaluation, MSDGC field personnel were asked to provide input on the
SewerBatt performance from an operator perspective. The following is a categorized
summary of their observations:
Usability - The device is portable and light-weight. The batteries hold their charge for a
while (days to weeks depending upon use) and repairs on the speaker/microphone are simple.
The sensor head is not waterproof and requires careful insertion and should not be submerged
under water. The extension pole provided was 30 feet long and a few of the manholes in the
study area were deeper and could not be assessed. The long (30 + feet) wire connecting the
sensor head and the electronic module must be managed in the field. At the time of
preparation of this report, ASTL was developing a blue-tooth based wireless module that will
address the cable management issues.
Data Quality - In off-road conditions with limited or no lateral taps, the results appear to be
very precise. However, when testing sewer lines that had multiple lateral taps, the majority of
the signal was lost in the sewer line leading to mostly "red" assessments, necessitating further
inspection by conventional technologies such as CCTV.
Software - The software on the computer requires some training to maneuver through the
menu items and understand the output. Also, without a substantial defect signature library, a
detailed field interpretation of the results is difficult; only RAG-type rapid assessments can
be made.
45
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
4.0 Summary and Conclusions
For the purposes of this report, the SewerBatt RAG output scores have been used to
determine: 1) if the pipe is open (no further service required), 2) there is a potential blockage
(red), or 3) additional investigation is needed (amber). The actual output numbers (energy
outputs, DE ratio) that make up these ranges can be flexible based on the user's experience
and the policies established by individual organizations. As reported previously in Section
3.0, for the purposes of this report, the SewerBatt score of green was reliable in detecting
open pipes. Also, based on numerous comparisons of the SewerBatt "Envelope" plots to
CCTV inspection results, under certain conditions, the SewerBatt was capable of locating
defects within a sewer segment. This demonstration also revealed that the SewerBatt device
used during this project was unreliable for evaluating sewer segments with many lateral
connections, or taps, as the signal loss was high. Also, the "alpha" version of the RAG
algorithm, used during this project, needs additional refinement.
Overall, the use of SewerBatt as a pipe-condition inspection tool needs to be evaluated in
context with the existing tools available to wastewater utilities. Figure 4-1 presents a graphic
summary of where the SewerBatt (acoustic condition assessment) as a sewer pipe inspection
tool is likely to fit into a wastewater utility's "tool-box."
HIGH
Wastewater Pipe
Condition Assessment
Applications
Pipe Wai (Defect
Detailed
Pipe Profiling
s
Figure 4-1. Sewer Pipe-Condition Assessment Tools (Adapted from: InfoSense, 2013)
4.1 Inspection Cost per Foot Analysis
The costs for CCTV inspection and cleaning of small diameter pipelines can vary widely
from pipe to pipe and from utility to utility. There are many variables that affect the cost of
pipe inspection for any given utility. For MSDGC, cost variables for CCTV inspection of
46
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
small diameter pipes include factors such as personnel costs, travel costs, setup, planning and
data management costs. Certain locations, that are not in the public right-of-way, in
easements or difficult to access due to off-road locations, often require special arrangements
or specially equipped off-road vehicles. Tables 4-1 and 4-2 summarize the average cost of
on-road and off-road CCTV inspections, respectively, for MSDGC.
S. No.
1
2
3
4
Labor/Equipment
Crew
CCTV Truck
Polaris ATV
Setup, Planning
and Data
Management
Unit
Cost/Hour
$38.46
$25.00
$80.00
$100.00
Annual
Quantity
2,000
1,000
200
1,000
Total
Average Daily CCTV Production
Average Annual CCTV Production
CCTV Inspection Cost
Annual
Cost
$76,923
$25,000
$16,000
$100,000
$217,923
1000
130,000
$1.68
Assumptions
Assume 2 persons and annual
burdened salary of $80,000
per person, dedicated ~l/2
time (1,000 hours/year each)
Assuming 1,000 hours of
average operation per year
Assuming 200 hours of
operation per year needed
for special access at select
locations
Includes Multiple Personnel,
Work Order management,
GIS software and Data
Management Costs, QA/QC
of CCTV data
$ per year (computed from
above)
feet/day (MSDGC estimate)
feet/per year (1/2 time 130
workdays - 26 weeks, 5
days/week)
$/foot of on-road pipe
inspected
Table 4-1. MSDGC On-Road CCTV Inspection Costs
S. No.
1
2
3
Labor/Equipment
Crew
CCTV Off-Road
Tractor
Polaris ATV
Unit
Cost/Hour
$38.46
$71.50
$80.00
Annual
Quantity
2,000
1,000
200
Annual
Cost
$76,923
$71,500
$16,000
Assumptions
Assume 2 persons and annual
burdened salary of $80,000
per person, dedicated ~l/2
time (1,000 hours/year each)
Assuming 1,000 hours of
average operation per year
Assuming 200 hours of
operation per year needed
for special access at select
locations
47
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
S. No.
4
Labor/Equipment
Setup, Planning
and Data
Management
Unit
Cost/Hour
$100.00
Annual
Quantity
1,000
Total
Average Daily CCTV Production
Average Annual CCTV Production
CCTV Inspection Cost
Annual
Cost
$100,000
$264,423
1000
130,000
$2.03
Assumptions
Includes Multiple Personnel,
Work Order management,
GIS software and Data
Management Costs, QA/QC
of CCTV data
$ per year (computed from
above)
feet/day (MSDGC estimate)
feet/per year (1/2 time 130
workdays - 26 weeks, 5
days/week)
$/foot of off-road pipe
inspected
Table 4-2. MSDGC Off-Road CCTV Inspection Costs
The Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) and EPA (WERF, 1997, EPA, 1999)
have reported an average nationwide CCTV inspection cost of $4,600 per mile or $0.87 per
foot. In the above referenced EPA report, ADS Environmental Services (ADS, 1998) reports
an average CCTV inspection cost range of $1,000 to $11,450 per mile, which at the high end
computes to $2.17 per linear foot. The most recent WERF report (WERF, 2013) reviewed the
trends and cost drivers of CCTV inspection as a function of pipeline diameter, project length,
and regional location. WERF reported that the majority of the CCTV projects for inspecting
pipelines fell under $3.00 per foot regardless of pipe size. Furthermore, the WERF report
indicated that the majority of the projects reported a unit cost of less than $2.00 per foot, once
the overall inspected pipe length surpassed 5,000 feet. The report concluded that 5,000 linear
feet of pipe is the threshold for attaining savings from economies of scale. To provide a cost
comparison, Table 4-3 summarizes the expected cost of both on-road and off-road SewerBatt
inspections for MSDGC.
S. No.
1
2
3
3
Labor/Equipment
Crew
SewerBatt
Purchase Price
Regular Truck
Polaris ATV
Unit
Cost/Hour
$38.46
$25.00
$6.00
$80.00
Annual
Quantity
2,000
1,000
1,000
200
Annual
Cost
$76,923
$25,000
$6,000
$16,000
Assumptions
Assume 2 persons and annual
burdened salary of $80,000
per person, dedicated ~l/2
time (1,000 hours/year each)
$25,000 purchase price cost
of SewerBatt spread over
1000 hours of use. Not
amortized for 3-years
expected life
A regular truck will be
needed to carry personnel to
site
Assuming 200 hours of
operation per year needed
for special access at select
locations
48
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
S. No.
4
Labor/Equipment
Setup, Planning
and Data
Management
Unit
Cost/Hour
$100.00
Annual
Quantity
500
Total
Average Daily SewerBatt Production
Average Annual SewerBatt Production
SewerBatt Inspection Cost
Annual
Cost
$50,000
$173,923
10,000
1,300,000
$0.13
Assumptions
Assumes these costs will be
halved compared to CCTV
inspection. Includes Multiple
Personnel, Work Order
management, GIS software
and Data Management Costs,
QA/QC of SewerBatt data
$ per year (computed from
above)
feet/day (based on Greenhills
data)
feet/per year (1/2 time 130
workdays - 26 weeks, 5
days/week)
$/foot of on-road and
off/road pipe inspected
Table 4-3. SewerBatt On/Off-Road Inspection Costs
Although the inspection output or detail provided by SewerBatt is not equivalent to a CCTV
report, the order of magnitude cost-per-foot savings makes a good case for using the
SewerBatt as a tool to perform screening type assessments (prior to the deployment of the
more expensive condition assessment equipment or cleaning).
4.2 Rapid Deployment Capability
The majority of the pipes selected for CCTV inspection, acoustic inspection and cleaning for
this demonstration project were off-road difficult to access, inspect, and assess. The objective
of the project was to demonstrate the performance of the acoustic inspection technologies
rather than evaluate the cost of performance. It can be reported that one of the key advantages
of SewerBatt is the rapid deployment feature using portable equipment that can result in
significant cost-savings to the utilities in comparison with traditional inspection methods such
as CCTV inspection, especially when "screening-type" assessments, such as those to
determine cleaning needs, are the goal of the inspections.
The SewerBatt actual acoustic test durations for this project were all less than one minute
each. When compared to CCTV inspection rates of 30 feet/minute, the rapid assessment
capabilities of the acoustic-based SewerBatt system is apparent. While this tool does not
eliminate the need for using CCTVs in assessing pipes, it can limit the deployment of the
more expensive CCTV resources to focus on critical pipe segments.
4.3 Opportunity to Refocus Critical Resources Deployed for Pipe Cleaning
As reported previously in Section 1.1, cleaning and inspecting sewer pipes is essential for
utilities to operate and maintain a properly functioning collection system and avoid SSOs. For
many utilities, sewer cleaning and inspection programs are generally part of a larger CMOM
program. The routine maintenance of a sewer system often includes sewer system cleaning,
root removal/treatment, and cleaning/clearing of sewer mainline stoppages. However,
understanding where and when to perform cleaning activities is not necessarily a straight-
forward task. The three common approaches adopted by utilities are as follows:
49
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
Routine Cleaning - Some wastewater utilities clean their sewer system as a matter of course
without knowing in advance whether the system or portions of the system require cleaning.
Pipes with blockages receive the same attention and resources as those with potentially no
cleaning needs. In this approach, the use of staff and equipment is not optimized, thus
consuming staff time and resources that could be directed to other more productive
maintenance activities.
Directed Cleaning - In an attempt to direct maintenance staff and cleaning equipment to just
those pipes in a sewer system that require attention, some agencies attempt to identify
cleaning needs by conducting inspection of the sewers prior to cleaning. These pre-cleaning
inspections are conducted using various approaches and equipment to varying degrees of
success, efficiency and speed.
Reactive Cleaning - For many wastewater utilities, staff time is directed solely towards
reactive cleaning where staff and equipment are deployed to address blockages, spills or other
emergencies.
4.4 Conclusion
The emergence of acoustic sewer inspection technologies (e.g., SewerBatt) as rapid
deployment, low-cost, reliable, pre-cleaning assessment tools is focusing growing attention
on the potential for more cost-effective sewer cleaning programs. Through the ease of
deployment, reduction of cost, increases in reliability of these inspection approaches,
combined with the potential for reducing the "cleaning of clean pipes," significant cost
savings are attainable. As utilities apply these new inspection technologies, they can move
towards implementing sewer cleaning programs that consist of planned directed and quick
response cleaning. Also, these cost savings can be realized while improving collection
system performance and achieving the protection of public health and water quality.
The results of this demonstration project reveal the potential for more cost-effective sewer
cleaning programs. The site specific pre-cleaning assessment inspection costs resulting from
this project and MSDGC's historic practices for CCTV (on-road), CCTV (off-road), and
SewerBatt (on- and off-road) are $1.68/ft, $2.03/ft, and $0.13/ft, respectively. Thus, for pre-
cleaning assessment, the application of the SewerBatt can reduce MSDGC's costs by
$1.55/ft. for on-road sewers and $1.90/ft. for off-road sewers. In addition, by moving to a
sewer cleaning program predominated by planned directed cleaning, MSDGC can save
$2.00/ft. by reducing its "cleaning of clean pipe." In total, when costs of conventional CCTV
inspection and cleaning are combined, for each pipe segment that is deemed "clean" using the
SewerBatt, MSDGC can save $3.55/ft. for on-road sewers and $3.90/ft. for off-road sewers.
The results of this demonstration of the SewerBatt show promise for its application as a tool
for cost-effective, pre-cleaning assessment, post-cleaning quality assurance and quick
condition assessment screening. The application of the SewerBatt in an overall collection
system O&M program should enable wastewater utilities to optimize their sewer cleaning
efforts and free up valuable resources to more effectively implement critical CMOM and
asset management programs. Also, with further development, SewerBatt has the potential to
provide a very useful sewer defect identification and location capability.
50
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
5.0 References
ADS Environmental Services, 1998. "Sewer Evaluation Services." Available at:
[http://www.adsenv.com/what_we_doservices-syeval.html], reported to be accessed by EPA
on June, 1998.
EPA , 1999. Collection Systems O&M Fact Sheet Sewer Cleaning and Inspection. EPA
Document ID: 832-F-99-031, September 1999. Published by EPA Office of Water,
Washington DC.
EPA, 2005. Guide for Evaluating Capacity, Management, Operation, and Maintenance
(CMOM) Programs At Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems. EPA Document ID: 305-B-05-
002. Published by Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. January 2005.
EPA, 2009. Condition Assessment of Wastewater Collection Systems. State of Technology
Review Report. EPA Document ID: 600-R-09-049. Published by NRMRL. May 2009.
EPA, 2012. Sanitary Sewer Overflows and Peak Flows. Available at:
http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home.cfm?program id=4
EPA, 2012b. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Category IV Measurement Project. Condition
Assessment of Wastewater Collection Systems. QA ID W-17354-QP-1-0, dated October
2012, Approved November 2012.
InfoSense, 2013. Rethinking Collection System Maintenance with the Sewer Line Rapid
Assessment Tool or SL-RAT. Pumper and Cleaner International Environmental Expo.
Indianpolis, IN, February 2013.
Romanova, A., Horoshenkov, K.V., Tait, S.J., and Ertl, T. 2013. Sewer Inspection and
Comparison of acoustic and CCTV Methods. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers, Water Management Volume 166, Issue WM2, Pages 70-80, February 2013.
Sprague, J. 2007. Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District System Wide Cleaning Program,
Presentation dated July 19, 2007.
Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF), 1997. Benchmarking Wastewater
Operations - Collection, Treatment, and Biosolids Management. Project 96-CTS-5.
Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF), 2013. Cost Information for Wastewater
Pipelines. Synthesis Report. WERF Alexandria, VA.
52
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
Appendix A - SewerBatt Report on Cincinnati Trials
53
-------
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
SewerBatt Survey Report
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
CONDITION ASSESSMENT OF WASTEWATER
COLLECTION SYSTEMS
US Environmental Protection Agency
Contract No EP-C-11_006
SewerBatt Trial
Report ref AST001-RT002-02
CB!
SewerBatt
acoustic sensing technology
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
The Innovation Centre
Sci-Tech Daresbury
METROPOLITAN Keckwick Lane
SEWER DISTRICTT Daresbury
ofgreater^^^ Cheshire
CINCINNATI f.^ WA4 4FS
Tel: +44 (0) 1925 606505
Web: www.acosuticsensing.co.uk
54
-------
6.0 log
Report ref
AST001-RT002-01
AST001-RT002-02
Issue date
03/09/2013
11/12/2013
Author
R Long
R Long
Checked
N Hawkins
N Hawkins
Approved
R Long
R Long
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
-------
Table of Contents
Issue and approvals log 1
Introduction 6
Interpretation of SewerBatt output 6
Presentation of results 8
Conclusions 8
Note on measurement units 9
Appendix 1-Summary of results 10
Appendix 2 - Interpretation of SewerBatt output- Galia & South 19
Survey 1.1 - 11702001_11702002_300mm-l.mat 20
Survey 1.2- 11702001_11707005_300mm-2.mat 21
Survey 1.3 - 11702003_11702002_300mm-l.mat 23
Survey 1.4 - 11702003_11702012_300mm-l.mat 24
Survey 1.5- 11705009_11705010_300mm-l.mat 25
Survey 1.6 - 11705009_11706007_200mm-l.mat 26
Survey 1.7- 11705011_11705010_300mm-l.mat 27
Survey 1.8 - 11705011_11705012_300mm-l.mat 28
Survey 1.9 - 1705013_11705012_300mm-l.mat 29
Survey 1.10- 11705013_11705014_200mm-l.mat 30
Survey 1.11 - 11706002_11706003_300mm-l.mat 31
Survey 1.12 - 11706002_11707005_300mm-l.mat 32
Survey 1.13 - 11706003_11707005_300mm-l.mat 34
Survey 1.14 - 11706004_11706003_300mm-l.mat 35
Survey 1.15 - 11706004_11706005_300mm-l.mat 37
Survey 1.16 - 11706006_11706005_300mm-l.mat 39
Survey 1.17 - 11706006_11706007_150mm-2.mat 40
Survey 1.18 - 11711001_11706006_300mm-l.mat 41
Survey 1.19 - 11711001_11712001_300mm-l.mat 42
Survey 1.20 - 11712002_11712001_300mm-l.mat 43
Survey 1.21 - 11712002_11712003_300mm-2.mat 44
Survey 1.22 - 11712004_11712003_300mm-l.mat 45
Survey 1.23 - 11712004_11712005_300mm-l.mat 46
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
-------
Survey 1.24 - 11712005_11712006_300mm-l.mat 47
Survey 1.25 - 11713001_11712006_300mm-l.mat 48
Survey 1.26 - 11713001_11713002_300mm-l.mat 49
Survey 1.27 - 11713003_11713002_300mm-l.mat 50
Survey 1.28 - 11713003_11713004_300mm-l.mat 51
Survey 1.29 - 11713003_11713018_200mm-l.mat 52
Survey 1.30 - 11713006_11712006_300mm-l.mat 53
Survey 1.31 - 11713006_11713005_300mm-2.mat 54
Survey 1.32 - 11713006_11713007_300mm-l.mat 56
Survey 1.33 - 11713014_11713018_300mm-l.mat 58
Survey 1.34 - 15016001_11713004_300mm-l.mat 60
Survey 1.35 - 15016001_15016002_300mm-l.mat 62
Appendix 3- Interpretation of SewerBatt output- Hunt Road 64
Survey 2.1-44705004_44705005_300mm-l.mat 65
Survey 2.2-44705004_447060017_300mm-l.mat 67
Survey 2.3- 44706004_44706010_300mm-l.mat 69
Survey 2.4-44706004_44707026_300mm-l.mat 70
Survey 2.5-44706008_44706009_300mm-l.mat 71
Survey 2.6-44706009_44706010_300mm-l.mat 72
Survey 2.7 - 44706010_44706009_200mm-3.mat 73
Survey 2.8 - 44706010_44706011_200mm-2.mat 74
Survey 2.9-44706010_44706013_300mm-l.mat 75
Survey 2.10-44706011_44706010_300mm-l.mat 77
Survey 2.11-44706011_44706012_300mm-l.mat 78
Survey 2.12-44706014_44706013_300mm-l.mat 80
Survey 2.13-44706014_44706015_300mm-l.mat 82
Survey 2.14-44712001_44705005_300mm-l.mat 83
Survey 2.15-44712001_44712002_300mm-l.mat 84
Survey 2.16-44712007_44712002_300mm-l.mat 86
Survey 2.17-44712007_44712008_300mm-l.mat 87
Survey 2.18-48209013_44712008_300mm-l.mat 89
Survey 2.19-48209013_48209014_300mm-l.mat 90
Survey 2.20-48209015_48209014_300mm-l.mat 91
Survey 2.21-48209015_48209016_300mm-l.mat 92
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
-------
Survey 2.22-48209016_48209017_300mm-l.mat 93
Survey 2.23-49209018_48209017_300mm-l.mat 94
Appendix 4- Interpretation of SewerBatt output- Greenhills 95
Survey 3.1-31601001_31601002_200mm-l.mat 96
Survey 3.2-31601001_31601005_200mm-l.mat 98
Survey 3.3 - 31601001_31601006_200mm-3.mat 100
Survey 3.4 - 31601003_31601002_200mm-l.mat 102
Survey 3.5 - 31601003_31601004_200mm-l.mat 103
Survey 3.6 - 31602001_31602003_200mm-l.mat 104
Survey 3.7 - 31602001_31602016_200mm-l.mat 106
Survey 3.8 - 31602004_31601005_200mm-l.mat 108
Survey 3.9 - 31602004_31602005_200mm-2.mat Ill
Survey 3.10 - 31602006_31602003_200mm-l.mat 112
Survey 3.11 - 31602006_31602007_200mm-l.mat 113
Survey 3.12 - 31602008_31602007_200mm-l.mat 115
Survey 3.13 - 31602008_31602009_200mm-3.mat 117
Survey 3.14 - 31602008_31602014_200mm-l.mat 118
Survey 3.15 - 31602015_31602009_200mm-l.mat 120
Survey 3.16 - 31602015_31714009_200mm-l.mat 121
Survey 3.17 - 31714003_31714002_200mm-l.mat 122
Survey 3.18 - 31714003_31714004_200mm-l.mat 124
Survey 3.19 - 31714003_31714010_200mm-l.mat 125
Survey 3.20 - 31714005_31714004_200mm-l.mat 127
Survey 3.21 - 31714006_31714005_200mm-l.mat 128
Survey 3.22 - 31714006_31714007_200mm-l.mat 130
Survey 3.23 - =31714009_31714008_200mm-l.mat 131
Survey 3.24 - 31714009_31714018_200mm-l.mat 132
Survey 3.25 - 31714011_31714004_200mm-l.mat 134
Survey 3.26 - 31714011_31714012_200mm-l.mat 135
Survey 3.27 - 31714011_31714017_200mm-l.mat 137
Survey 3.28 - 31714014_31714013_200mm-l.mat 139
Survey 3.29 - 31714014_31714015_200mm-l.mat 140
Survey 3.30 - 31714014_31714019_200mm-l.mat 142
Survey 3.31 - 31714016_31714015_200mm-l.mat 144
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
-------
Survey 3.32 - 31714016_31714017_200mm-l.mat 146
Survey 3.33 - 31714016_31714020_200mm-l.mat 148
Survey 3.34 - 31714021_31714018_200mm-l.mat 150
Survey 3.35 - 31714021_31714022_200mm-l.mat 152
Survey 3.36 - 31714022_31714023_200mm-l.mat 154
Survey 3.37 - 31715005_31715006_200mm-l.mat 156
Survey 3.38 - 31715005_31716014_200mm-l.mat 157
Survey 3.39 - 31715011_31602016_200mm-l.mat 159
Survey 3.40 - 31715011_31715006_200mm-l.mat 160
Survey 3.41 - 31715013_31715010_200mm-l.mat 161
Survey 3.42 - 31715013_31715016_200mm-l.mat 163
Survey 3.43 - 31715016_31715020_200mm-l.mat 165
Survey 3.44 - 31715016_31715022_200mm-l.mat 167
Survey 3.45 - 31715023_31602014_200mm-l.mat 169
Survey 3.46 - 31715023_31715022_200mm-l.mat 170
Survey 3.47 - 31715024_31602015_200mm-l.mat 171
Survey 3.48 - 31715024_31715021_200mm-l.mat 173
Survey 3.49 - 31716012_31716011_200mm-l.mat 174
Survey 3.50 - 31716012_31716013_150mm-l.mat 175
Survey 3.51 - 31716015_31716013_200mm-l.mat 178
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
-------
7.0 Introduction
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) is sponsoring a series of investigations
into emerging technologies for the assessment of the condition of wastewater collection systems.
One of the these technologies is SewerBatt, a system manufactured by Acoustic Sensing Technology
(UK) Ltd. SewerBatt uses acoustic technology to determine the condition of sewers and drain pipes.
SewerBatt uses acoustic technology to detect conditions inside sewers and drainage pipes. An
acoustic sensor head comprising a sound source and an array of microphones is positioned in one
end of the pipe to be tested. An excitation signal is then propagated along the pipe and the response
is recorded and then processed. Features (such as lateral connections and the pipe end) and defects
(such as broken pipes and sedimentation) affect the sound either by reflecting a part of it back to the
SewerBatt sensor, or by absorbing the sound energy. By comparing the responses recorded with a
library of known responses the system will seek to identify specific responses. An automated
condition assessment system is provided that reviews the acoustic response, makes allowance for
the energy loss from the pipe end and lateral connections, and then grades the pipes in a traffic light
RAG form.
The Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD) of Greater Cincinnati was supplied with the SewerBatt
equipment in April 2013 and has since then been undertaking a series of sewer surveys using the
equipment. The project has been supervised for the US EPA by CB&I Federal Services. The
equipment supplied for the use of MSD was a prototype built by the University of Bradford. This was
because the production equipment being manufactured by Acoustic Sensing was not available at the
time that the survey work had to be carried out. The production equipment is now available and
some limited testing has been carried by Acoustic Sensing in conjunction with CB&I, EPA and MSD
during August 2013. A separate report has been prepared to summarise the results of the work with
the production equipment.
This report summarises the results of a SewerBatt tests on 151 pipes surveyed during April and May
2013.
8.0 Interpretation of SewerBatt output
The interpretation of the SewerBatt output provided in the Appendices has been produced by the
SewerBatt report generator. They include a listing of selected items from the metadata recorded in
the SewerBatt results file, a listing of the responses recorded, an image of the envelope of the
responses and a condition assessment generated using the 'traffic light' functionality within
SewerBatt. This classifies pipes as either 'Green' (serviceable and not requiring further survey),
'Amber' (serviceable but showing evidence of deterioration of operational and/or structural
condition and should be logged up for resurvey after an interval), and 'Red' (pipe shows evidence
that serviceability is or may soon be compromised and should be CCTVd in the near future). Version
1.4.1 of ScanField (the SewerBatt software) was used to generate the interpretations in this report.
Some comments written by the author of the report are included where appropriate.
The 'traffic light' functionality within SewerBatt is a feature that has only recently been incorporated
into the software, and was released to the EPA as an 'alpha' test version.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
6
-------
The traffic light system works in a series of logical steps. The first one is to analyse how strong the
pipe end reflection is. If the location of pipe end is detectable either automatically by comparison
with the signature database or by visual inspection the system checks the level of matching of the
reflection by comparison with pipe end signatures in the database. If the pipe end cannot be
detected by either means then RAG of pipe condition becomes red. Otherwise, the system calculates
the strength of the pipe end reflection.
The pipe end location having been confirmed, the signature matching for other responses in the
acoustic record is repeated to enhance its accuracy.
Next, the system then searches for lateral connections by seeking matches with the signature
database. The system also provides the option for the operator to select the location of lateral
connections manually if the information is known beforehand but they have not been identified by
the database matching process.
Next the system searches for any blockages and/or defects in the pipe by comparing other acoustic
responses with the database and calculates the total energy reflected excluding the lateral
connections and pipe end. The value of energy determines the RAG classification of the pipe by
mapping it to pipes of known condition for which acoustic data has previously been acquired. It has
been observed that pipes in serviceable condition generally have an energy value less than 70. Pipes
in poor condition have generally been observed to have an energy level of more than 90. Thus the
RAG classification is set by default to be as follows;
Green - energy <70
Amber - energy 70 to 90
Red - energy >90
This mapping can be changed if required as additional data becomes available and/or to suit the
requirements of particular national Codes of Practice.
Finally, if the RAG in the previous step becomes green or amber the system calculates the strength
of the biggest blockage/defect response and compares it with the strength calculated for the pipe
end. If the ratio is less than 0.33 the previous calculated RAG classification is not changed, for a value
between 0.33 and 0.66 a previously green RAG is elevated to amber and finally for a value more than
0.66 the RAG is set to red irrespective of its previous classification.
The present traffic light algorithm depends on the correct identification of lateral connections and
pipe ends. While the user has some options to control this selection, at base it relies on the library of
signatures of features and defects that are being built up whenever contemporaneous CCTV and
acoustic data of the same pipe become available. At the time of writing this report the signature
library comprised the following;
Pipe size
Blockage
(bk)
Broken pipe
(bp)
Deformation
(df)
Displaced
joint
(dj)
Encrustation
(ec)
Lateral
connection
(Ic)
Pipe end
(pe)
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
-------
150mm (6")
200mm (8")
250mm (10")
300mm (12")
380mm (15")
-
-
-
-
1
1
-
-
-
-
3
4
-
-
-
3
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
16
5
1
9
-
11
9
1
16
1
In some cases the conditions within the sewer pipes was such that that very little energy was
reflected back from the target manhole. This loss of energy is not related primarily to the length of
the pipe - indeed some very long pipes of up to 122m in length have been tested and the target
manhole is clearly visible in the response, eg Survey 1.14 11706004_11706003 which is 122m long.
In cases where signal has been lost the pipes have been listed for CCTV without further assessment,
because the signal attenuation may well be an indication that conditions in the pipe have
deteriorated to the point where inspection is required. We now recommend that SewerBatt testing
should be carried out from both ends of each pipe. This has several advantages, one of which is to
provide more data in cases where signal attenuation is high.
In the zone close to the acoustic sensor head SewerBatt is effectively 'blind'. Therefore defects in
this zone will not be detected acoustically. To overcome this limitation we are currently working on
the addition of a small camera to the sensor head so that this part of the pie can be inspected
visually.
9.0 Presentation of results
The results of the SewerBatt tests are summarised in the Appendices. Appendix 1 provides a
summary table of all the tests carried out, together with the traffic light classification (in two parts,
the auto-generated condition assessment first followed by the classification after review, to take
account of the 'alpha' stage of development of this part of the package) and the recommended
action in terms of no requirement for further survey, reinspection by SewerBatt after an appropriate
period, or CCTV in the near future..
Appendices 2 to 4 provide a detailed set of analysis results for each pipe. These comprise a listing of
the locations of the artefacts in the acoustic response, the matching against the signature library and
the percentage match, an envelope plot showing the maximum amplitude of all of the frequency
bands analysed, the output from the traffic light analyser and comments.
10.0 Conclusions
Of the 105 pipes surveyed for which useful data was obtained, the result of the analysis of the
SewerBatt data is that 35 pipes are serviceable and require no further survey (green traffic light), 25
pipes are displaying some signs of deterioration and while currently serviceable they should be
retested by SewerBatt after an appropriate interval (amber traffic light) and 45 pipes should be
programmed for CCTV survey (red traffic light). The percentages are as follows.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
-------
By number
By length
Green
35 (33%)
2007m (31%)
Amber
25 (24%)
1745m (27%)
Red
45 (43%)
2819m (43%)
105 (100%)
6572 (100%)
Thus in this sample the use of SewerBatt could have reduced the use of CCTV by 58% (the sum of the
Green and Amber lengths). This figure maps well to the results of similar trials undertaken
elsewhere, where the reduction in CCTV achieved usually lies in the range 33% to 66%.
As well as achieving economies in CCTV survey, SewerBatt can also be used for other purposes, such
as confirming that sewer jetting operations have been completed to an acceptable standard, and
that pipes in the area around the pipe that had been blocked are not suffering some distress
themselves.
11.0 Note on measurement units
SewerBatt was originally developed in the UK, using metric units for the many signal processing
functions that are performed during its operation. The option to display results in US customary
units (in this case distances in feet) is provided in the interface, but at present the internal
calculations function correctly only if metric units are selected. For this reason this report has been
written using metric units. The option to run the software in US customary units will be included in a
later release. Multiply metres by 3.281 to convert to feet.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
-------
12.0 Appendix 1 - Summary of results
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
10
-------
Survey reference
Survey 1.1 - 11702001_11702002_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.2 - 11702001_11707005_300mm-2.mat
Survey 1.3 - 11702003_11702002_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.4 - 11702003_11702012_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.5 - 11705009_11705010_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.6 - 11705009_11706007_200mm-l.mat
Survey 1.7 - 11705011_11705010_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.8 - 11705011_11705012_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.9 - 1705013_11705012_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.10 - 11705013_11705014_200mm-l.mat
Survey 1.11 - 11706002_11706003_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.12 - 11706002_11707005_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.13 - 11706003_11707005_300mm-l.mat
Survey date and time
29-Apr-2013 12:06:50
29-Apr-2013 12:05:19
29-Apr-2013 12:13:00
29-Apr-2013 12:15:15
29-Apr-2013 13:35:15
29-Apr-2013 13:33:10
25-Apr-2013 10:12:29
25-Apr-2013 10:19:12
25-Apr-2013 10:41:37
25-Apr-2013 10:50:23
29-Apr-2013 11:51:55
29-Apr-2013 11:53:52
03-May-2013 17:11:53
pipe size
(mm)
300
300
300
300
300
200
300
300
300
200
300
300
300
GIS
length
(m)
36.5
89.9
97.2
40.2
45.0
47.0
92.6
86.8
82.6
46.3
110.0
89.9
90.0
SewerBatt
pipe end
(m)
36.05
79.62
98.04
40.42
44.87
47.21
91.74
86.19
82.51
45.95
109.20
90.68
92.43
SewerBatt
auto
condition
grade
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Amber
Final
condition
grade
Green
Amber
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Amber
Green
Green
Amber
Amber
Recommendation
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Comment
Minor responses in several
locations and target manhole
attenuation may indicate potential
for deterioration.
Minor responses in several
locations and target manhole
attenuation may indicate potential
for deterioration.
Pipe is currently serviceable but
significant attenuation of response
from remote manhole indicates
potential for deterioration.
Minor responses in several
locations and target manhole
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
11
-------
Survey 1.14 - 11706004_11706003_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.15 - 11706004_11706005_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.16 - 11706006_11706005_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.17 - 11706006_11706007_150mm-2.mat
Survey 1.18 - 11711001_11706006_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.19 - 11711001_11712001_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.20 - 11712002_11712001_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.21 - 11712002_11712003_300mm-2.mat
Survey 1.22 - 11712004_11712003_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.23 - 11712004_11712005_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.24 - 11712005_11712006_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.25 - 11713001_11712006_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.26 - 11713001_11713002_300mm-l.mat
29-Apr-2013 11:42:21
29-Apr-2013 11:40:59
29-Apr-2013 11:32:51
29-Apr-2013 11:29:10
29-Apr-2013 11:15:37
29-Apr-2013 11:14:01
29-Apr-2013 10:53:28
29-Apr-2013 10:50:15
25-Apr-2013 11:25:36
25-Apr-2013 11:28:16
25-Apr-2013 11:44:21
25-Apr-2013 12:04:33
25-Apr-2013 12:06:23
300
300
300
150
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
122.0
78.0
45.4
45.4
64.6
71.3
46.0
71.0
65.5
41.5
61.5
32.4
86.5
122.69
78.19
55.57
45.04
64.88
71.80
47.55
71.40
65.25
40.71
61.19
31.89
86.27
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Amber
Amber
Green
Green
Green
Amber
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Green
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
attenuation may indicate potential
for deterioration.
Pipe is currently serviceable but
significant attenuation of response
from remote manhole indicates
potential for deterioration.
Pipe is currently serviceable but
significant attenuation of response
from remote manhole indicates
potential for deterioration.
GIS pipe length is believed to have
been entered incorrectly. There is
clear evidence of pipe end at 55.57
in the SewerBatt data.
Minor responses in several
locations and target manhole
attenuation may indicate potential
for deterioration.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
12
-------
Survey 1.27 - 11713003_11713002_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.28 - 11713003_11713004_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.29 - 11713003_11713018_200mm-l.mat
Survey 1.30 - 11713006_11712006_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.31 - 11713006_11713005_300mm-2.mat
Survey 1.32 - 11713006_11713007_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.33 - 11713014_11713018_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.34 - 15016001_11713004_300mm-l.mat
Survey 1.35 - 15016001_15016002_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.1 - 44705004_44705005_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.2 - 44705004_447060017_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.3 - 44706004_44706010_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.4 - 44706004_44707026_300mm-l.mat
25-Apr-2013 12:19:50
25-Apr-2013 12:23:22
25-Apr-2013 12:27:04
29-Apr-2013 12:44:27
29-Apr-2013 12:55:48
29-Apr-2013 12:48:09
29-Apr-2013 13:10:20
25-Apr-2013 12:54:55
25-Apr-2013 13:02:57
29-May-2013 12:24:51
29-May-2013 12:13:44
29-May-2013 10:24:39
29-May-2013 10:17:15
300
300
200
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
115.5
66.9
22.2
23.0
96.6
76.2
52.6
83.4
68.2
53.0
53.0
58.2
54.0
115.71
66.91
22.58
23.31
96.66
76.27
53.02
83.78
69.96
Not found
48.36
56.43
55.61
Green
Green
Green
Green
Red
Red
Red
Green
Green
Green
Red
Green
Amber
Amber
Green
Green
Red
Red
Red
Amber
Amber
Red
^_^_
Amber
Red
Amber
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
CCTV recommended.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
CCTV recommended.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Significant attenuation of response
from target manhole in the
absence of responses along the
pipe indicates defects that are
absorbing the acoustic energy.
Significant attenuation of response
from target manhole in the
absence of responses along the
pipe indicates defects that are
absorbing the acoustic energy.
Significant attenuation of response
from target manhole in the
absence of responses along the
pipe indicates defects that are
absorbing the acoustic energy.
Minor responses in several
locations and target manhole
attenuation may indicate potential
for deterioration.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
13
-------
Survey 2.5 - 44706008_44706009_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.6 - 44706009_44706010_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.7 - 44706010_44706009_200mm-3.mat
Survey 2.8 - 44706010_44706011_200mm-2.mat
Survey 2.9 - 44706010_44706013_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.10 - 44706011_44706010_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.11 - 44706011_44706012_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.12 - 44706014_44706013_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.13 - 44706014_44706015_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.14 - 44712001_44705005_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.15 - 44712001_44712002_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.16 - 44712007_44712002_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.17 - 44712007_44712008_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.18 - 48209013_44712008_300mm-l.mat
04-Jun-2013 16:46:30
04-Jun-2013 16:57:53
29-May-2013 10:57:03
29-May-2013 10:47:30
29-May-2013 11:06:51
04-Jun-2013 16:53:23
04-Jun-2013 16:50:33
29-May-2013 11:25:03
29-May-2013 11:32:39
29-May-2013 12:39:38
29-May-2013 12:45:33
29-May-2013 13:11:11
29-May-2013 13:14:17
03-Jun-2013 09:49:59
300
300
200
200
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
82.9
31.7
31.6
104.2
3.65
87.4
95.7
63.0
115.8
105.3
54.3
52.7
109.7
90.29
31.11
Not found
No data
104.94
No data
87.27
96.45
61.19
117.41
106.57
55.04
54.17
106.67
Amber
Green
No data
Green
No data
Red
Red
Green
Green
Red
Green
Amber
Green
Amber
Green
Red
No data
Amber
No data
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
CCTV recommended.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Red 1 CCTV recommended.
Red
^^H__
Green
Amber
Red
Green
Green
Green
CCTV recommended.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
CCTV recommended.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
No usable data was recorded for
this pipe
Significant attenuation of response
from target manhole in the
absence of responses along the
pipe indicates defects that are
absorbing the acoustic energy.
No usable data was recorded for
this pipe
Significant attenuation of response
from target manhole in the
absence of responses along the
pipe indicates defects that are
absorbing the acoustic energy.
Regraded to account for selection
of manhole response.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
14
-------
Survey 2.19 - 48209013_48209014_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.20 - 48209015_48209014_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.21 - 48209015_48209016_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.22- 48209016_48209017_300mm-l.mat
Survey 2.23 - 49209018_48209017_300mm-l.mat
Survey 3.1 - 31601001_31601002_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.2 - 31601001_31601005_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.3 - 31601001_31601006_200mm-3.mat
Survey 3.4 - 31601003_31601002_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.5 - 31601003_31601004_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.6 - 31602001_31602003_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.7 - 31602001_31602016_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.8 - 31602004_31601005_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.9 - 31602004_31602005_200mm-2.mat
Survey 3.10 - 31602006_31602003_200mm-l.mat
03-Jun-2013 09:51:46
03-Jun-2013 10:09:59
03-Jun-2013 10:11:44
03-Jun-2013 10:30:33
04-Jun-2013 14:15:45
09-May-2013 10:06:31
09-May-2013 10:04:38
09-May-2013 10:22:34
09-May-2013 10:30:14
09-May-2013 10:32:04
09-May-2013 12:06:13
09-May-2013 12:07:36
09-May-2013 09:55:22
09-May-2013 09:59:31
09-May-2013 11:58:22
300
300
300
300
300
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
93.8
76.0
69.0
69.0
65.6
49.0
68.5
62.0
81.0
64.0
42.0
29.0
62.0
45.0
44.0
93.80
75.35
68.75
74.79
66.56
47.11
67.40
62.40
Not found
Not found
39.05
27.89
61.46
Not found
Not found
Green
Green
Green
Green
Amber
Red
Red
Red
Red
^B__
Amber
Red
Green
Green
Green
Green
Amber
Red
Red
Red
Red
Red
Red
Red
Red
Amber
Red
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
CCTV recommended.
Override to Red due to defective
nature of two laterals and many
artefacts.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
15
-------
Survey 3.11 - 31602006_31602007_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.12 - 31602008_31602007_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.13 - 31602008_31602009_200mm-3.mat
Survey 3.14 - 31602008_31602014_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.15 - 31602015_31602009_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.16 - 31602015_31714009_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.17 - 31714003_31714002_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.18 - 31714003_31714004_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.19 - 31714003_31714010_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.21 - 31714006_31714005_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.22 - 31714006_31714007_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.23 - =31714009_31714008_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.24 - 31714009_31714018_200mm-l.mat
09-May-2013 11:56:22
09-May-2013 11:51:22
09-May-2013 11:50:05
09-May-2013 11:46:26
09-May-2013 12:25:42
09-May-2013 12:27:48
09-May-2013 13:17:31
09-May-2013 13:14:17
09-May-2013 13:15:42
09-May-2013 13:30:04
09-May-2013 13:31:32
09-May-2013 12:32:24
09-May-2013 12:33:53
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
29.0
45.0
91.5
47.0
79.5
92.0
15.0
69.5
26.0
39.0
73.0
91.0
27.72
43.40
Not found
46.68
Not found
Not found
12.51
Not found
Not found
38.19
No data
Not found
Not found
Green
Red
Green
Green
Amber
No data
Green
Red
Red
Green
Red
Red
Red
Red
Red
^^H
Amber
No data
Red
:
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended due to
reported lateral in poor condition
and significant attenuation of
response from target manhole.
M hi r\ t r\ r\ f
this pipe
No usable data was recorded for
this pipe
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
16
-------
Survey 3.25 - 31714011_31714004_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.26 - 31714011_31714012_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.27 - 31714011_31714017_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.28 - 31714014_31714013_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.29 - 31714014_31714015_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.30 - 31714014_31714019_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.31 - 31714016_31714015_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.32 - 31714016_31714017_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.33 - 31714016_31714020_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.34 - 31714021_31714018_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.35 - 31714021_31714022_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.36 - 31714022_31714023_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.37 - 31715005_31715006_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.38 - 31715005_31716014_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.39 - 31715011_31602016_200mm-l.mat
09-May-2013 13:09:33
09-May-2013 13:08:13
09-May-2013 13:06:39
09-May-2013 13:00:52
09-May-2013 12:57:52
09-May-2013 12:59:15
09-May-2013 12:51:11
09-May-2013 12:48:55
09-May-2013 12:50:51
09-May-2013 12:38:13
09-May-2013 12:40:03
09-May-2013 12:43:53
09-May-2013 11:24:02
09-May-2013 11:25:29
09-May-2013 11:17:07
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
92.0
53.0
59.0
22.0
40.0
40.0
32.0
29.5
31.0
35.0
26.0
36.0
14.5
61.0
92.0
Not found
53.32
59.14
21.63
39.56
37.96
28.98
26.16
30.70
32.48
25.97
35.53
13.84
60.13
Not found
Red
Red
Green
Red
Red
Red
Red
Green
Red
Red
^B__
Amber
Amber
Red
Red
Red
Red
Green
Red
Red
Red
Amber
Green
Amber
Red
Amber
Amber
Red
Red
1 CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
1 appropriate interval
CCTV recommended.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
17
-------
Survey 3.40 - 31715011_31715006_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.41 - 31715013_31715010_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.42 - 31715013_31715016_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.43 - 31715016_31715020_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.44 - 31715016_31715022_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.45 - 31715023_31602014_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.46 - 31715023_31715022_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.47 - 31715024_31602015_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.48 - 31715024_31715021_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.49 - 31716012_31716011_200mm-l.mat
Survey 3.50 - 31716012_31716013_150mm-l.mat
Survey 3.51 - 31716015_31716013_200mm-l.mat
09-May-2013 11:19:07
09-May-2013 11:30:11
09-May-2013 11:31:37
09-May-2013 11:35:31
09-May-2013 11:36:59
09-May-2013 11:42:07
09-May-2013 11:40:45
09-May-2013 12:19:32
09-May-2013 12:17:34
09-May-2013 11:00:58
09-May-2013 10:56:08
09-May-2013 10:40:58
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
150
200
92.0
52.0
63.0
50.5
83.0
62.0
51.5
52.5
75.5
46.0
53.5
68.0
Not found
52.30
63.23
51.24
Not found
Not found
Not found
52.04
Not found
Not found
54.10
Not found
Red
Amber
Green
Green
Red
^B__
Red
Red
Amber
Amber
Red
Red
Red
Green
Red
Red
Red
Red
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
Log for reSewerBatt survey after an
appropriate interval
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
Serviceable - no further inspection
recommended at this time.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
CCTV recommended.
manual override to Amber due
nature of reported defects
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
18
-------
13.0 Appendix 2 - Interpretation of SewerBatt output - Galia & South
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
19
-------
14.0 Survey 1.1 - 11702001_11702002_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 12:06:50
WATER LEVEL : 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11702001
ENDMH : 11702002
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.91m
2 : pe (100%) at 36.05m
11702001-»11702002
15 20
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT
36.05 : pe
ENERGY:29
PE : 0.78
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENTS - GIS pipe length = 36.5m. The pipe is serviceable and no further inspection is
recommended at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
20
-------
15.0 Survey 1.2 - 11702001_11707005_300mm-2.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 12:05:19
WATER LEVEL: 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11702001
END MH : 11707005
REPORT:
1 : O (0%) at 0.71m
2 :lc (100%) at 42.31m
3 : Ic (98%) at 60.38m
4 : Ic (91%) at 76.92m
11702001-»11707005
~ °-3
c
3
(1)
+;
Q.
E
/V.
/w__
5
8
I
ftz
/I
1
\
2i-
o
)
°0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
time(s)
CONDITION REPORT
42.31 :lc (Good)
60.38 : Ic (Good)
76.92 : pe
ENERGY:59
PE:0.17
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
21
-------
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENTS - GIS pipe length = 89.9m. Pipe is currently serviceable but minor responses along the
length of the pipe indicate potential for deterioration. Log for resurvey.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
22
-------
16.0 Survey 1.3 - 11702003_11702002_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 12:13:00
WATER LEVEL : 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11702003
ENDMH : 11702002
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.26m
2 : Ic (96%) at 19.52m
3 : pe (84%) at 98.04m
11702003-»11702002
I 0.3
40 50 60
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
19.52 : Ic (Good)
98.04 : pe
ENERGY:29
PE:0.13
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENTS - GIS pipe length = 76.5m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
23
-------
17.0 Survey 1.4 - 11702003_11702012_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 12:15:15
WATER LEVEL : 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11702003
ENDMH : 11702012
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.31m
2 : pe (90%) at 40.42m
11702003-»11702012
20 25
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
40.42 : pe
ENERGY:34
PE : 0.63
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENTS - GIS pipe length = 40.2m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
24
-------
18.0 Survey 1.5- 11705009_11705010_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 13:35:15
WATER LEVEL : 22mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11705009
ENDMH : 11705010
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.26m
2 : Ic (68%) at 6.1m
3 : pe (100%) at 44.87m
11705009-»11705010
0.6-
I 0.3
20 25 30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
6.1: Ic (intruding, defective)
44.87 : pe
ENERGY:48
PE : 0.07
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENTS - GIS pipe length = 45.0m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
25
-------
19.0 Survey 1.6 - 11705009_11706007_200mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 13:33:10
WATER LEVEL : 22mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 11705009
ENDMH : 11706007
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.29m
2 : xx (53%) at 6.24m
3 :pe (71%) at 47.21m
11705009-»11706007
20 25 30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
6.24 : xx
47.21 : pe
ENERGY:23
PE:0.29
DE ratio : 0.22
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENTS - GIS Pipe length = 47.0m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
26
-------
20.0 Survey 1.7- 11705011_11705010_300mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 10:12:29
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11705011
ENDMH : 11705010
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.65m
2 : xx (67%) at 4.25m
3 : pe (89%) at 91.74m
I 0.3
11705011-»11705010
40 50
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
4.25 : xx
91.74 : pe
ENERGY:20
PE:0.37
DE ratio : 0.14
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENTS - GIS pipe length = 92.6m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
27
-------
21.0 Survey 1.8 - 11705011_11705012_300mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 10:19:12
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11705011
ENDMH : 11705012
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.46m
2 : xx (64%) at 4.88m
3 :pe (100%) at 86.19m
0.3
Q.
E
11705011-»11705012
40 50
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
4.88 : xx
86.19 : pe (good)
ENERGY:26
PE:0.18
DE ratio : 0.26
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENTS - GIS pipe length = 86.8m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
28
-------
22.0 Survey 1.9 - 1705013_11705012_300mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 10:41:37
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11705013
ENDMH : 11705012
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.87m
2 : Ic (79%) at 4.93m
3 : pe (100%) at 82.51m
11705013-»11705012
Q.
E
J\.
40 50
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
4.93 : Ic (intruding, defective)
82.51 : pe (good)
ENERGY:23
PE:0.18
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 82.6m. Small responses recorded, eg at 44m indicate potential for
deterioration. Log for resurvey after an appropriate interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
29
-------
23.0 Survey 1.10- 11705013_11705014_200mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 10:50:23
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 11705013
ENDMH : 11705014
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.26m
2 :pe (91%) at 45.95m
A
11705013-»11705014
20 25 30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
45.95 : pe
ENERGY:9
PE:0.2
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
30
-------
24.0 Survey 1.11 - 11706002_11706003_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 11:51:55
WATER LEVEL : 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11706002
ENDMH : 11706003
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.71m
2 : pe (100%) at 109.2m
11706002-»11706003
60
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
109.2 : pe
ENERGY:34
PE : 0.34
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENTS - GIS length 110m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
31
-------
25.0 Survey 1.12 - 11706002_11707005_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 11:53:52
WATER LEVEL : 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11706002
ENDMH : 11707005
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.72m
2 : pe (87%) at 90.68m
11706002-»11707005
40 50
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
90.68 : pe
ENERGY:16
PE:0.22
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT - GIS length = 89.9m. Pipe is currently serviceable but significant attenuation of response
from remote manhole indicates potential for deterioration. Log for resurvey after an appropriate
interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
32
-------
26.0 Survey 1.13 - 11706003_11707005_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 03-May-2013 17:11:53
WATER LEVEL : Omm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11706003
ENDMH : 11707005
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.99m
2 : pe (85%) at 92.43m
11706003-»11707005
VT
£
8.
/
°0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
92.43 : pe
ENERGY:74
PE:0.27
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Amber
COMMENT - GIS length = 90.0m. Amber grading in this case appears to be the result of many small
responses along the length of the pipe. The energy score of 74 is close to the lower amber threshold of
70, indicating that the loss of serviceability is minor.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
34
-------
27.0 Survey 1.14 - 11706004_11706003_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 11:42:21
WATER LEVEL : 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11706004
ENDMH : 11706003
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.93m
2 : pe (86%) at 122.69m
11706004-»11706003
0.45
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
122.69 : pe
ENERGY:13
PE:0.1
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT GIS length = 122m. Pipe is currently serviceable but significant attenuation of response from
remote manhole indicates potential for deterioration.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
35
-------
28.0 Survey 1.15 - 11706004_11706005_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 11:40:59
WATER LEVEL : 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11706004
ENDMH : 11706005
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.92m
2 :pe (86%) at 78.19m
11706004-»11706005
~ °-3
c
3
(1)
+;
Q.
E
s
3_
j)
\
V .
i
CO
0
°0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
78.19 : pe
ENERGY:23
PE:0.18
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT - GIS Length = 78m. Pipe is currently serviceable but significant attenuation of response
from remote manhole indicates potential for deterioration. Log for resurvey after an appropriate
interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
37
-------
29.0 Survey 1.16 - 11706006_11706005_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 11:32:51
WATER LEVEL : 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11706006
ENDMH : 11706005
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.26m
2 : pe (88%) at 55.57m
o 11706006-»11706005
20 30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
55.57 : pe
ENERGY:19
PE : 0.24
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length recorded in metadata as 45.4m is incorrect. Pipe is serviceable. No further
survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
39
-------
30.0 Survey 1.17 - 11706006_11706007_150mm-2.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 11:29:10
WATER LEVEL : 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11706006
ENDMH : 11706007
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.62m
2 : pe (84%) at 45.04m
11706006-»11706007
20 25
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
45.04 : pe (good)
ENERGY:8
PE:0.37
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS length = 45.4m. Three tests were taken in this pipe. Two of these recorded a large loss
of signal. The test used for the analysis showed a serviceable pipe; this could not have been recorded if
it were not the case, hence the reason why this test has been selected.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
40
-------
31.0 Survey 1.18 - 11711001_11706006_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 11:15:37
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11711001
ENDMH : 11706006
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.71m
2 : pe (83%) at 64.88m
o 11711001-»11706006
30 40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
64.88 : pe
ENERGY:18
PE:0.27
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT GIS Length 64.6m. Energy is slightly reduced by the small response between 4m and 7m and
some very minor responses between 7m and 25m.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
41
-------
32.0 Survey 1.19 - 11711001_11712001_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 11:14:01
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11711001
ENDMH : 11712001
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.91m
2 : pe (90%) at 71.8m
11711001-^11712001
30 40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
71.8 : pe
ENERGY:35
PE:0.11
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT - GIS length 71.3m. Energy is reduced by the small responses at 5m, 32m and 68m, and
some minor responses up to 40m. Taken with the attenuation of the response from the target manhole
there is potential for deterioration in this pipe. Log for resurvey after an appropriate period.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
42
-------
33.0 Survey 1.20 - 11712002_11712001_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 10:53:28
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11712002
ENDMH : 11712001
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.22m
2 : pe (83%) at 47.55m
11712002-»11712001
§ 0.25
"a.
E
n 02
25
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
47.55 : pe
ENERGY:41
PE:0.23
DE ratio : 0
CONDITION _ Green
COMMENT-GIS length = 46.0m. Energy is reduced by the responses between 3m and 10m and some
minor intermittent responses along the length of the pipe.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
43
-------
34.0 Survey 1.21 - 11712002_11712003_300mm-2.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 10:50:15
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11712002
ENDMH : 11712003
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.24m
2 : pe (100%) at 71.4m
11712002-»11712003
30 40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
71.4 : pe
ENERGY:27
PE:0.3
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS length = 71.0m. Energy is reduced by the response between 4m and 10m and some
minor intermittent responses between 10m and 35m.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
44
-------
35.0 Survey 1.22 - 11712004_11712003_300mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 11:25:36
WATER LEVEL : 76.2mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11712004
ENDMH : 11712003
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.64m
2 : pe (93%) at 65.25m
11712004-»11712003
30 40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
65.25 : pe
ENERGY:18
PE:0.25
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS length = 65.5. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
45
-------
36.0 Survey 1.23 - 11712004_11712005_300mm-l.mat
37.0
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 11:28:16
WATER LEVEL : 76.2mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11712004
ENDMH : 11712005
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.66m
2 : pe (85%) at 40.71m
? 11712004^11712005
20 25
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
40.71 : pe
ENERGY:29
PE : 0.42
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS length = 41.5m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
46
-------
38.0 Survey 1.24 - 11712005_11712006_300mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 11:44:21
WATER LEVEL : 80mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11712005
ENDMH : 11712006
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.63m
2 :pe (100%) at 61.19m
E 0.3
11712005-»11712006
30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
61.19 :pe (Good)
ENERGY:36
PE:0.25
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS Length = 61.5m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
47
-------
39.0 Survey 1.25 - 11713001_11712006_300mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 12:04:33
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11713001
ENDMH : 11712006
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.9m
2 : pe (95%) at 31.89m
11713001-»11712006
15
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
31.89 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:62
PE:0.55
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 32.4m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
48
-------
40.0 Survey 1.26 - 11713001_11713002_300mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 12:06:23
WATER LEVEL : 76mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11713001
ENDMH : 11713002
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.69m
2 : pe (86%) at 86.27m
11713001-»11713002
~ °-3
c
3
(1)
+;
Q.
E
uo
1
^U
os_
1
0 2
0 3
0 4
0 5
0 6
0 7
0 8
g
Si
8.
\
|\
0
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
86.27 : pe (good)
ENERGY:23
PE:0.15
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS Length = 86.5m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
49
-------
41.0 Survey 1.27 - 11713003_11713002_300mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 12:19:50
WATER LEVEL : 70mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11713003
ENDMH : 11713002
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.9m
2 : pe (86%) at 115.71m
11713003-»11713002
60
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
115.71 : pe
ENERGY:17
PE : 0.07
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 115.5m. Significant attenuation of response from target manhole in the
absence of responses along the pipe indicates defects that are absorbing the acoustic energy. Log for
reinspection after an appropriate interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
50
-------
42.0 Survey 1.28 - 11713003_11713004_300mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 12:23:22
WATER LEVEL : 70mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11713003
ENDMH : 11713004
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.71m
2 : pe (100%) at 66.91m
11713003-»11713004
30 40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
66.91: pe
ENERGY:18
PE:0.13
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT - GIS Length = 66.9m. Pipe is currently serviceable but attenuation of target manhole
response indicates potential for deterioration. Log for resurvey after an appropriate interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
51
-------
43.0 Survey 1.29 - 11713003_11713018_200mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 12:27:04
WATER LEVEL : 50mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 11713003
ENDMH : 11713018
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.03m
2 : pe (100%) at 22.58m
0.05-
11713003-»11713018
10 15
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
22.58 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:0
PE : 0.08
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS Length = 22.2m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
52
-------
44.0 Survey 1.30 - 11713006_11712006_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 12:44:27
WATER LEVEL : 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11713006
ENDMH : 11712006
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.48m
2 : pe (100%) at 23.31m
11713006-»11712006
10 15
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
23.31 :pe (Good)
ENERGY:54
PE: 1.59
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS length = 23.0m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
53
-------
45.0 Survey 1.31 - 11713006_11713005_300mm-2.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 12:55:48
WATER LEVEL : 22mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11713006
ENDMH : 11713005
REPORT :
O (0%) at 0.69m
xx (65%) at 6.15m
pe (91%) at 73.84m
pe (84%) at 84.74m
pe (87%) at 88.37m
pe (89%) at 96.66m
11713006-»11713005
1
I
= °-3
^
o
~o.
E
X
A,
\
g
-------
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS Length = 96.6m. Responses at 73.84m, 84.74m and 88.37m were initially identified as
pipe ends, but subsequently reclassified by the system as lateral connections once the true pipe end at
96.66m had been confirmed through the interface. There is an unidentified response at 6.15m. The
reason for the red classification in this case is the low level of response from the target manhole. CCTV is
recommended in this case.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
55
-------
46.0 Survey 1.32 - 11713006_11713007_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 12:48:09
WATER LEVEL : 21mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11713006
ENDMH : 11713007
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.72m
2: xx (61%) at 5.67m
3 : pe (81%) at 68.82m
4 : Ic (80%) at 76.27m
11713006-»11713007
0.3
J\J
30 40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
5.67 : xx
68.82 : Ic (defective)
76.27 : pe
ENERGY:41
PE : 0.04
DE ratio : 1.04
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS Length = 76.2m. The response at 68.82m was initially identified as pipe end, but
subsequently reclassified by the system as a lateral connection once the true pipe end at 76.27m had
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
56
-------
been confirmed through the interface, after which the system reclassified the response at 68.82 as a
defective connection. There is an unidentified response at 5.67m. CCTV is recommended in this case.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
57
-------
47.0 Survey 1.33 - 11713014_11713018_300mm-l.mat
SITE : south rd
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-Apr-2013 13:10:20
WATER LEVEL : 22mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 11713014
ENDMH : 11713018
REPORT :
O (0%) at 0.48m
Ic (74%) at 4.83m
Ic (77%) at 13.74m
Ic (90%) at 16.78m
pe (73%) at 21.72m
pe (77%) at 53.02m
11713014-»11713018
CONDITION REPORT:
4.83 : xx
13.74 : xx
16.78 : Ic (Good)
21.72 : xx
53.02 : pe
ENERGY:239
PE : 0.05
DE ratio : 1.51
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
58
-------
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS length = 52.6m. There are many responses along the length of the pipe and the energy
loss is very high. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
59
-------
48.0 Survey 1.34 - 15016001_11713004_300mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 12:54:55
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 15016001
ENDMH : 11713004
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.68m
2 : pe (88%) at 83.78m
15016001-»11713004
3_
)
l/v
se
CO
f
I
I
p
°0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
83.78 : pe
ENERGY:25
PE:0.17
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT - GIS Length = 83.4m. Pipe is currently serviceable but significant attenuation of response
from remote manhole indicates potential for deterioration. Log for resurvey after an appropriate
interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
60
-------
49.0 Survey 1.35 - 15016001_15016002_300mm-l.mat
SITE : SOUTH RD
TEST DATE & TIME : 25-Apr-2013 13:02:57
WATER LEVEL : 20mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 15016001
ENDMH : 15016002
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.67m
2 : Ic (85%) at 69.96m
15016001-»15016002
30 40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
69.96 : pe
ENERGY:55
PE : 0.06
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 68.2m. Pipe end was initially identified as a lateral connection. This was
subsequently reclassified as a pipe end based on the GIS data. There are minor responses along the
length of the pipe and the response from the target manhole is significantly attenuated. The energy
level is approaching the amber threshold of 70, indicating that there are some serviceability issues with
this pipe but CCTV is not recommended at the present time. Log for resurvey after an appropriate
interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
62
-------
50.0 Appendix 3 - Interpretation of SewerBatt output - Hunt Road
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
64
-------
51.0 Survey 2.1 - 44705004_44705005_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 12:24:51
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44705004
ENDMH : 44705005
TEST FILE : 44705004_44705005_300mm-l.mat
REPORT :
xx at 0.33m
xx at 19.45m
xx at 27.29m
xx at 30.2m
xx at 33.06m
xx at 36.98m
xx at 39.34m
xx at 47.1m
44705004-»44705005
E 0.15
25 30
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
65
-------
COMMENT - GIS length = 53m. Condition assessment performed manually this case. CCTV is
recommended on account of the many strong responses recorded and the heavily attenuated response
from the target manhole.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
66
-------
52.0 Survey 2.2 - 44705004_447060017_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 12:13:44
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44705004
ENDMH : 447060017
TEST FILE : 44705004_447060017_300mm-l.mat
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.4m
2 : pe (100%) at 48.36m
44705004->447060017
E 0.15
15 20 25 30
distance (m)
40 45
CONDITION REPORT:
48.36 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:40
PE:0.16
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT-GIS length = 53.0m. The system reported a faulty microphone for this test. In the absence
of a repeat test the available data from the other microphones has been used. The strong response at
48.36m may be a lateral or a defect. The pipe is serviceable but should be logged for reinspection after
an appropriate interval on account of the significantly attenuated response from the target manhole
and small responses at llm and 19m that indicate a potential for deterioration.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
67
-------
53.0 Survey 2.3- 44706004_44706010_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 10:24:39
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44706004
ENDMH : 44706010
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.67m
2: xx (52%) at 5.28m
3 : pe (88%) at 56.34m
44706004-»44706010
20 30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
5.28 : xx
56.34 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:51
PE:0.08
DE ratio : 0.74
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS length = 58.2m. The energy loss is within the 'Green' zone but a 'Red' classification has
been applied by the system due to the significant attenuation of the response from the target manhole.
This may be due to issues such as sediment or roots and CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
69
-------
54.0 Survey 2.4 - 44706004_44707026_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 10:17:15
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44706004
ENDMH : 44707026
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.94m
2 : pe (90%) at 55.61m
44706004-»44707026
30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
55.61: pe (Good)
ENERGY:38
PE:0.17
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT - GIS Pipe length = 54.0m. Pipe is currently serviceable but significant attenuation of
response from remote manhole indicates potential for deterioration.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
70
-------
55.0 Survey 2.5 - 44706008_44706009_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 04-Jun-2013 16:46:30
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44706008
ENDMH : 44706009
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.65m
2: xx (65%) at 3.46m
3 : pe (95%) at 90.29m
44706008-»44706009
I 0.3
40 50
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
3.46 : xx
90.29 : pe
ENERGY:22
PE:0.12
DE ratio : 0.64
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Amber
COMMENT - GIS Pipe length = 82.9m. SewerBatt output shows pipe length as 90.29m. It is
recommended that the pipe should be logged up for reinspection after an appropriate period.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
71
-------
56.0 Survey 2.6 - 44706009_44706010_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 04-Jun-2013 16:57:53
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44706009
ENDMH : 44706010
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.2m
2 :pe (100%) at 31.11m
E 0.3
44706009-»44706010
15 20
distance (m)
REPORT:
1.11: pe (Good)
ENERGY:23
PE:0.29
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 31.69m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
72
-------
57.0 Survey 2.7 - 44706010_44706009_200mm-3.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 10:57:03
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 44706010
ENDMH : 44706009
REPORT :
xx at 0.02m
xx at 2.87m
xx at 5.76m
xx at 8.19m
xx at 11.63m
xx at 14.46m
0.4
44706010-»44706009
15 20
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 31.6m. The SewerBatt output data provided includes three tests of this
pipe. All of them provide results similar to the above, where the record is truncated some distance short
of the target manhole. Given the many responses recorded in the data that is available then CCTV is
recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
73
-------
58.0 Survey 2.8 - 44706010_44706011_200mm-2.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 10:47:30
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 44706010
ENDMH : 44706011
REPORT :
No usable data was recorded at this site.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
74
-------
59.0 Survey 2.9 - 44706010_44706013_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 11:06:51
WATER LEVEL: 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44706010
ENDMH : 44706013
REPORT :
l:O(0%)at0.1m
2 : pe (88%) at 104.94m
44706010-»44706013
50 60
time(s)
CONDITION REPORT:
104.94 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:36
PE : 0.04
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT-GIS Pipe length = 104.2m. Pipe is currently serviceable but significant attenuation of
response from remote manhole indicates potential for deterioration.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
75
-------
60.0 Survey 2.10 - 44706011_44706010_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 04-Jun-2013 16:53:23
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44706011
ENDMH : 44706010
REPORT :
No usable data was recorded at this site.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 3.65m
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
77
-------
61.0 Survey 2.11 - 44706011_44706012_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 04-Jun-2013 16:50:33
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44706011
ENDMH : 44706012
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.61m
2: xx (70%) at 3.32m
3 : pe (94%) at 87.27m
I 0.3
44706011-»44706012
20 30
40 50
distance (m)
REPORT:
3.32: xx
87.27 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:29
PE:0.11
DE ratio : 0.9
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS Pipe length = 87.4m. The energy loss is within the 'Green' zone but a 'Red'
classification has been applied by the system due to the significant attenuation of the response from the
target manhole. This may be due to issues such as sediment or roots and CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
78
-------
62.0 Survey 2.12 - 44706014_44706013_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 11:25:03
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44706014
ENDMH : 44706013
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.32m
2 : xx (59%) at 4.08m
3 : xx (58%) at 6.69m
4 : pe (80%) at 96.45m
44706014-»44706013
40 50
distance (m)
REPORT:
4.08 : xx
6.69 : xx
96.45 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:38
PE : 0.03
DE ratio : 2.04
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
80
-------
Comment - GIS pipe length = 95.7m. The reflected energy is within the 'Green' zone but a 'Red'
classification has been applied by the system due to the significant attenuation of the response from the
target manhole. This may be due to issues such as sediment or roots and CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
81
-------
63.0 Survey 2.13 - 44706014_44706015_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 11:32:39
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44706014
ENDMH : 44706015
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.3m
2: xx (64%) at 4.19m
3 :pe (85%) at 61.19m
44706014-»44706015
20 30
distance (m)
REPORT:
4.19 : xx
61.19 :pe (Good)
ENERGY:22
PE:0.12
DE ratio : 0.29
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 63.0m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
82
-------
64.0 Survey 2.14 - 44712001_44705005_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 12:39:38
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44712001
ENDMH : 44705005
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.32m
2 : pe (87%) at 117.41m
44712001-»44705005
E 0.15
60
distance (m)
REPORT:
117.41: pe (Good)
ENERGY:14
PE : 0.04
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green, (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT-GIS Pipe length = 115.8m. Pipe is currently serviceable but significant attenuation of
response from remote manhole indicates potential for deterioration.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
83
-------
65.0 Survey 2.15 - 44712001_44712002_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 12:45:33
REPORT DATE & TIME : 28-Aug-2013 14:12:31
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44712001
ENDMH : 44712002
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.3m
2 : xx (70%) at 6.39m
3 : pe (100%) at 106.57m
0.3'
44712001-»44712002
50 60
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
6.39 : xx
106.57 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:18
PE : 0.04
DE ratio : 1.04
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
Comment - GIS Pipe length = 105.3m The reflected energy is within the 'Green' zone but a 'Red'
classification has been applied by the system due to the significant attenuation of the response from the
target manhole. This may be due to issues such as sediment or roots and CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
84
-------
66.0 Survey 2.16 - 44712007_44712002_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 13:11:11
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44712007
ENDMH : 44712002
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.32m
2 : pe (84%) at 55.04m
44712007-»44712002
30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
55.04 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:33
PE:0.16
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 54.25m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
86
-------
67.0 Survey 2.17 - 44712007_44712008_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 29-May-2013 13:14:17
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 44712007
ENDMH : 44712008
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.31m
2 :pe (74%) at 54.17m
44712007-»44712008
30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
54.17 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:81
PE:0.13
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Amber (manual over-ride to Green - see below)
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 52.7m. It is likely that the response from the target manhole is at 53m
rather than the 54.17m derived by SewerBatt. This is due to the double-peaked response. This being the
case, the condition would have been calculated as 'Green' and hence the pipe is considered to be
serviceable, with no further action required.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
87
-------
68.0 Survey 2.18 - 48209013_44712008_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 03-Jun-2013 09:49:59
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 48209013
ENDMH : 44712008
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.62m
2 : pe (87%) at 106.67m
48209013^44712008
~ °-3
c
3
(1)
+;
Q.
E
t
S
SI
0)
f
t
K
°0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 11
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
106.67 : pe
ENERGY:10
PE:0.11
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 109.7m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
89
-------
69.0 Survey 2.19 - 48209013_48209014_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 03-Jun-2013 09:51:46
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 48209013
ENDMH : 48209014
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.72m
2 : pe (92%) at 93.8m
48209013-»48209014
o
U.b
= n.
iplitude (ur
D C
0 4
CO
°o
L.
1
0 2
0 3
0 4
0 5
0 6
0 7
0 8
0 9
?
|
Q.
\
I
0
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
93.8 : pe
ENERGY:12
PE:0.18
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 93.8m. Pipe is serviceable. No further survey is required at this time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
90
-------
70.0 Survey 2.20 - 48209015_48209014_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 03-Jun-2013 10:09:59
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 48209015
ENDMH : 48209014
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.69m
2 :pe (94%) at 44.22m
3 : pe (96%) at 75.35m
48209015-»48209014
40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
44.22 : Ic (Good)
75.35 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:24
PE:0.12
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 76.0m. Pipe is serviceable.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
91
-------
71.0 Survey 2.21 - 48209015_48209016_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 03-Jun-2013 10:11:44
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 48209015
ENDMH : 48209016
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.24m
2 : pe (88%) at 68.75m
48209015-»48209016
V/V_
A
V .
i
L
D
J
°0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
68.75 : pe
ENERGY:60
PE:0.12
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 69m. Pipe is serviceable, but responses around 30m may indicate a
developing problem and the energy level is approaching the Amber threshold.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
92
-------
72.0 Survey 2.22- 48209016_48209017_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 03-Jun-2013 10:30:33
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 48209016
ENDMH : 48209017
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.65m
2 : pe (84%) at 74.79m
E 0.3
48209016-»48209017
30 40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
74.79 : pe
ENERGY:33
PE:0.1
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 69m but SewerBatt result indicates that the true length is around 75m.
This may a data entry error on site, since 69m is also the GIS length of the previous pipe surveyed. The
pipe is serviceable.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
93
-------
73.0 Survey 2.23 - 49209018_48209017_300mm-l.mat
SITE: blue ash
TEST DATE & TIME : 04-Jun-2013 14:15:45
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 300mm
START MH : 49209018
ENDMH : 48209017
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.84m
2 : xx (55%) at 8.25m
3 : pe (90%) at 66.56m
49209018-»48209017
30 40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
8.25 : xx
66.56 : pe
ENERGY:90
PE : 0.24
DE ratio : 0.28
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Amber
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 65.6m. The pipe is on the Amber/Red threshold but is serviceable at the
present time. Log for resurvey at an appropriate interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
94
-------
74.0 Appendix 4 - Interpretation of SewerBatt output - Greenhills
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
95
-------
75.0 Survey 3.1 - 31601001_31601002_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 10:06:31
WATER LEVEL : Omm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31601001
ENDMH : 31601002
REPORT :
O (0%) at 0.04m
Ic (94%) at 17.37m
pe (71%) at 26.99m
Ic (80%) at 29.6m
Ic (93%) at 37.67m
pe (100%) at 47.llm
31601001-»31601002
20 25
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
17.37 :lc
26.99 : xx
29.6 : Ic (closed)
37.67 :lc (closed)
47.11 :pe (Good)
ENERGY:56
PE:0.01
DE ratio : 2.3
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
96
-------
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 49m. Energy level is in the 'Green' zone but the system has allocated
'Red' due to amplitude of response at 17.37m and relative weakness of response from the target
manhole.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
97
-------
76.0 Survey 3.2 - 31601001_31601005_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 10:04:38
WATER LEVEL : Omm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31601001
ENDMH : 31601005
REPORT :
1 O(0%) at 0.06m
2 xx (59%) at 12.02m
Ic (74%) at 27.55m
Ic (91%) at 33.18m
df (68%) at 37.42m
pe (81%) at 41.88m
xx (64%) at 45.29m
8 Ic (68%) at 49.09m
Ic (82%) at 52.72m
10 : pe (90%) at 58.89m
11: pe (85%) at 67.4m
31601081-»31601005
x a
30 40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
12.02 : xx
27.55 : xx
37.42 : xx
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
98
-------
45.29 : xx
49.09 : xx
67.4 : pe
ENERGY:84
PE:0
DE ratio : 26.8
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 68.5m. The energy level is in the 'Amber' zone but the system has
allocated 'Red' due to the strength of the response at 33m and the attenuation of the response from the
target manhole.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
99
-------
77.0 Survey 3.3 - 31601001_31601006_200mm-3.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 10:22:34
WATER LEVEL : Omm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31601001
ENDMH : 31601006
REPORT :
1 O(0%) at 0.37m
2 xx (59%) at 6.51m
xx (58%) at 13.2m
Ic (91%) at 22.59m
Ic (89%) at 29.21m
pe (83%) at 31.92m
Ic (84%) at 34.74m
8 Ic (74%) at 37.18m
xx (62%) at 39.62m
10 : Ic (88%) at 50.01m
11 : Ic (82%) at 52.98m
12 : Ic (75%) at 55.52m
13 : Ic (70%) at 57.86m
14 : Ic (81%) at 62.4m
31601001-»31601006
CONDITION REPORT:
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
100
-------
6.51: xx
13.2 : xx
22.59
29.21
31.92
34.74
37.18
39.62
50.01
52.98
55.52
57.86
Ic
Ic
Ic
Ic
XX
XX
Ic (closed)
Ic (closed)
Ic (closed)
Ic (missing pieces, crack, displacement)
62.4 : pe
ENERGY:17
PE:0
DE ratio : 7.3
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 62m. Assuming laterals are correctly identified, the energy level is well
into the 'Green' zone, but the system has allocated 'Red' due to the attenuation of the response from
the target manhole.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
101
-------
78.0 Survey 3.4 - 31601003_31601002_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 10:30:14
WATER LEVEL : Omm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31601003
ENDMH : 31601002
REPORT :
1 : xx at 0.93m
2 : xx at 20.61m
31601003-»31601002
40 50
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 81m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
102
-------
79.0 Survey 3.5 - 31601003_31601004_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 10:32:04
WATER LEVEL : Omm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31601003
ENDMH : 31601004
REPORT :
1 : xx at 0.87m
2 : xx at 5.86m
3 : xx at 11.88m
4 : xx at 16.89m
5 : xx at 30.75m
£
VVwv
31601003-»31601004
30 40
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 64m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
103
-------
80.0 Survey 3.6 - 31602001_31602003_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:06:13
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31602001
ENDMH : 31602003
REPORT :
Ic (89%) at 1.21m
pe (73%) at 12.91m
Ic (81%) at 17.18m
df (68%) at 23.02m
pe (77%) at 29.26m
pe (74%) at 34.38m
pe (77%) at 39.05m
31602001-»31602003
CONDITION REPORT:
12.91
17.18
23.02
29.26
34.38
39.05
xx
Ic (crack, infiltration)
xx
xx
xx
pe
ENERGY:80
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
104
-------
PE:0.02
DE ratio : 3.67
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT-GIS pipe length = 42m. Energy level is in the 'Amber' zone but the system has allocated
'Red' due to the strength of the response at 33m and the attenuation of the response from the target
manhole.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
105
-------
81.0 Survey 3.7 - 31602001_31602016_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:07:36
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31602001
ENDMH : 31602016
REPORT :
O (0%) at 0.08m
pe (89%) at 6.11m
pe (79%) at 14.38m
Ic (90%) at 18.46m
xx (64%) at 21.96m
Ic (77%) at 24.15m
pe (78%) at 27.89m
31602001-»31602016
CONDITION REPORT:
6.11: Ic (crack, infiltration)
14.38 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
18.46 : Ic
21.96 : xx
24.15: xx
27.89 : pe
ENERGY:78
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
106
-------
PE:0.06
DE ratio : 0.43
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Amber (manual override to red)
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 29m. Override to Red due to defective nature of two laterals and many
artefacts.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
107
-------
82.0 Survey 3.8 - 31602004_31601005_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 09:55:22
WATER LEVEL : Omm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31602004
ENDMH : 31601005
REPORT :
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
O (0%) at 0.06m
xx (40%) at 3.83m
xx (57%) at 6.91m
Ic (81%) at 9.52m
df (66%) at 12.84m
Ic (82%) at 15.54m
df (66%) at 19.96m
df (73%) at 24.5m
xx (62%) at 28.66m
xx (66%) at 31.7m
pe (89%) at 34.41m
xx (54%) at 37.94m
pe (66%) at 43.06m
Ic (90%) at 45.63m
pe (83%) at 49.38m
pe (79%) at 52.18m
pe (75%) at 54.48m
df (72%) at 61.46m
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
108
-------
31602004-»31601005
30 40
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
3.83 : xx
6.91: xx
9.52 : Ic (missing pieces, crack, displacement)
12.84 : xx
15.54 : Ic (closed)
19.96 : xx
24.5 : xx
28.66 : xx
31.7: xx
34.41
37.94
43.06
45.63
49.38
52.18
54.48
61.46
Ic (closed)
xx
xx
Ic (closed)
xx
xx
xx
pe
ENERGY:17
PE:0
DE ratio : 3.35
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
109
-------
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 62m. Energy is well into the 'Green' Zone but the system has allocated
'Red' due to the attenuation of the response from the target manhole.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
110
-------
83.0 Survey 3.9 - 31602004_31602005_200mm-2.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 09:59:31
WATER LEVEL : Omm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31602004
ENDMH : 31602005
REPORT :
l:lc(82%)atl.31m
2 : Ic (90%) at 8.43m
3 : Ic (83%) at 10.99m
4 : Ic (79%) at 14.55m
5 : Ic (78%) at 25.45m
31602004-»31602005
20 25 30
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Amber by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 45m. The pipe between the laterals appears to be in reasonable
condition. Log for resurvey after an appropriate interval..
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
111
-------
84.0 Survey 3.10 - 31602006_31602003_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:58:22
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31602006
ENDMH : 31602003
REPORT :
1 : xx at 0.83m
2 : xx at 3.22m
3 : xx at 14.66m
0.15
Q.
E
31602006-»31602003
u
20 25 30
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 44m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
112
-------
85.0 Survey 3.11 - 31602006_31602007_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:56:22
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31602006
ENDMH : 31602007
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.05m
2 : Ic (92%) at 15.53m
3 : pe (79%) at 25.5m
4 : pe (85%) at 27.73m
31602006-»31602007
10 15 20
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
15.53 : Ic
25.5 : pe
ENERGY:34
PE:0.16
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 29m. Pipe is serviceable.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
113
-------
86.0 Survey 3.12 - 31602008_31602007_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:51:22
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31602008
ENDMH : 31602007
REPORT :
1 O(0%) at 0.52m
2 Ic (76%) at 5.18m
3 Ic (81%) at 10.59m
pe (95%) at 17.52m
pe (76%) at 22.62m
pe (71%) at 26.09m
Ic (72%) at 28.61m
8 pe (78%) at 30.79m
pe (74%) at 34.25m
10 :lc (76%) at 38.61m
11 :pe (83%) at 43.4m
31602008-»31602007
E 0.15
20 25
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
5.18 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
10.59 : xx
17.52 : df (8%, soil visible)
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
115
-------
22.62 xx
26.09 xx
28.61 xx
30.79 xx
34.25 xx
38.61 Ic
43.4 : pe
ENERGY:411
PE:0.01
DE ratio : 30.49
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 45m. CCTV recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
116
-------
87.0 Survey 3.13 - 31602008_31602009_200mm-3.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:50:05
WATER LEVEL: 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31602008
ENDMH : 31602009
REPORT:
1 : xx at 1.46m
2 : xx at 7.32m
3 : xx at 9.5m
4 : xx at 14.39m
31602008-»31602009
40 50
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 91.5m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
117
-------
88.0 Survey 3.14 - 31602008_31602014_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:46:26
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31602008
ENDMH : 31602014
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.44m
2 : Ic (92%) at 20.22m
3 : Ic (93%) at 33.22m
4 : pe (83%) at 36.38m
5 : pe (79%) at 46.68m
31602008-»31602014
25
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
20.22 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
33.22 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
36.38 :lc
46.68 : pe
ENERGY:18
PE:0.03
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
118
-------
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 47m. Pipe is serviceable.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
119
-------
89.0 Survey 3.15 - 31602015_31602009_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:25:42
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31602015
ENDMH : 31602009
REPORT :
1 : xx at 0.05m
2 : xx at 28.09m
3 : xx at 40.63m
4 : xx at 45.06m
31602015-»31602009
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 79.5m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
120
-------
90.0 Survey 3.16 - 31602015_31714009_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:27:48
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31602015
ENDMH : 31714009
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.55m
2: xx (51%) at 5.56m
3 : Ic (73%) at 8.82m
4 : Ic (88%) at 12.33m
5 : Ic (83%) at 25.3m
;? 31602015^31714009
30 40 50
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 92m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
121
-------
91.0 Survey 3.17 - 31714003_31714002_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 13:17:31
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714003
ENDMH : 31714002
REPORT :
l:O(0%)at0.11m
2 : pe (90%) at 7.93m
3 : pe (69%) at 12.51m
5.
E
31714003-»31714002
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
7.93 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
12.51 :pe (Good)
ENERGY:10
PE:0.02
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to red)
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 15m. Poor data quality from mic 1. Data processed from mics 2 and 3
only. Due to reported condition of lateral (crack, infiltration) and significant attenuation of response
from target manhole CCTV is recommended as a precautionary measure.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
122
-------
92.0 Survey 3.18 - 31714003_31714004_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 13:14:17
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714003
ENDMH : 31714004
REPORT :
l:O(0%)at0.14m
2 : Ic (92%) at 11.27m
3 : pe (86%) at 14.43m
4 : xx (59%) at 17.9m
5 : pe (76%) at 28.53m
31714003-»31714004
E 0.03
J \r-t^/\t
30 40
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 69.5m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
124
-------
93.0 Survey 3.19 - 31714003_31714010_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 13:15:42
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714003
ENDMH : 31714010
REPORT :
l:O(0%)at0.12m
2 : pe (89%) at 5.4m
3 : pe (72%) at 11.81m
4 : pe (75%) at 18.42m
31714003-»31714010
'E 0.4
3
I
±:
Q_
E 0.3
r\
10 15
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
11.81: xx
18.42 : pe
ENERGY: 1366
PE:0.07
DE ratio : 7.54
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 26m. CCTV recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
125
-------
94.0 Survey 3.20 - 31714005_31714004_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 13:25:26
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714005
ENDMH : 31714004
REPORT :
The data from this site is not usable
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
127
-------
95.0 Survey 3.21 - 31714006_31714005_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 13:30:04
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714006
ENDMH : 31714005
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.03m
2 :pe (89%) at 38.19m
31714006-»31714005
E 0.3
A
15 20 25
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
38.19 : pe
ENERGY:83
PE:0.14
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Amber
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 39m. The pipe is serviceable but shows signs of deterioration. It is
recommended that the pipe should be logged for reinspection after an appropriate interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
128
-------
96.0 Survey 3.22 - 31714006_31714007_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 13:31:32
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714006
ENDMH : 31714007
REPORT :
The data from this site is not usable
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
130
-------
97.0 Survey 3.23 - =31714009_31714008_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:32:24
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714009
ENDMH : 31714008
REPORT :
O (0%) at 0.41m
Ic (67%) at 4.07m
xx (65%) at 10.75m
Ic (71%) at 24.4m
pe (72%) at 29.22m
Ic (72%) at 40.04m
pe (74%) at 47.59m
df (69%) at 50.92m
E 0.03
_ 31714009-»31714008
30 40
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 73m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
131
-------
98.0 Survey 3.24 - 31714009_31714018_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:33:53
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714009
ENDMH : 31714018
REPORT :
O (0%) at 0.03m
Ic (74%) at 2.6m
xx (57%) at 6.65m
Ic (66%) at 9.3m
pe (89%) at 15.16m
pe (80%) at 18.02m
Ic (73%) at 22.98m
pe (84%) at 25.51m
Ic (72%) at 32.96m
31714009-»31714018
40 50
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment. Not previously graded
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 91m. Persistent noise in the response along the pipe indicates a general
low level of continuous defects such as roots, debris and displaced joints. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
132
-------
99.0 Survey 3.25 - 31714011_31714004_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 13:09:33
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714011
ENDMH : 31714004
REPORT :
1 : xx at O.llm
2 : xx at 4.24m
3 : xx at 9.llm
4 : xx at 11.52m
5 : xx at 17.98m
E 0.15
31714011-»31714004
40 50
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 92m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
134
-------
100.0 Survey 3.26 - 31714011_31714012_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 13:08:13
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714011
ENDMH : 31714012
REPORT :
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
O (0%) at 0.02m
xx (47%) at 4.99m
xx (54%) at 7.34m
xx (51%) at 9.96m
xx (59%) at 14.93m
xx (54%) at 18.63m
xx (63%) at 21.29m
pe (88%) at 27.3m
xx (62%) at 30.37m
pe (74%) at 33.33m
pe (77%) at 36.37m
pe (71%) at 39.02m
pe (71%) at 41.28m
xx (63%) at 43.76m
pe (68%) at 46.91m
pe (70%) at 53.32m
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
135
-------
31714011»31714012
CONDITION REPORT:
4.99 : xx
7.34 : xx
9.96 : xx
14.93 : xx
18.63 : xx
21.29 : xx
27.3 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
30.37
33.33
36.37
39.02
41.28
43.76
46.91
53.32
xx
XX
XX
XX
XX
XX
XX
pe
ENERGY:42
PE:0
DE ratio : 10.77
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 53m. CCTV recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
136
-------
101.0 Survey 3.27 - 31714011_31714017_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 13:06:39
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714011
ENDMH : 31714017
REPORT :
O (0%) at 0.45m
Ic (77%) at 7.41m
xx (64%) at 11.01m
xx (63%) at 13.2m
Ic (73%) at 17.1m
df (67%) at 21.6m
xx (62%) at 25.72m
Ic (67%) at 34.27m
Ic (73%) at 59.14m
5.
E
31714011-»31714017
30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
7.41 : xx
11.01 : xx
13.2: xx
17.1 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
21.6: xx
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
137
-------
25.72 : xx
34.27 : xx
59.14 : pe (crack, infiltration)
ENERGY:74
PE:0.01
DE ratio : 7.49
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 59m. Analysis based on mics 2 and 3 only. Energy level is in the 'Amber'
zone but given the nature of several of the identified defects and the level of attenuation of the
response from the target manhole CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
138
-------
102.0 Survey 3.28 - 31714014_31714013_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 13:00:52
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714014
ENDMH : 31714013
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.09m
2 : pe (86%) at 21.63m
31714014-»31714013
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
21.63 : pe
ENERGY:38
PE : 0.42
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 22m. Pipe is serviceable.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
139
-------
103.0 Survey 3.29 - 31714014_31714015_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:57:52
WATER LEVEL: 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714014
ENDMH : 31714015
REPORT:
O(0%) at O.llm
Ic (86%) at 2.52m
pe (86%) at 6.24m
Ic (78%) at 8.87m
Ic (74%) at 12.96m
pe (77%) at 17.77m
Ic (66%) at 24.32m
pe (71%) at 35.32m
pe (76%) at 39.56m
0.15
Q.
E
31714014-»31714015
20 25
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
2.52 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
6.24 : xx
8.87 : xx
12.96 :lc (closed)
17.77 : xx
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
140
-------
24.32 : xx
35.32: xx
39.56 : pe
ENERGY:306
PE:0.02
DE ratio : 12.06
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 40m. If the many peaks could be identified as lateral connections then an
'Amber' or 'Green' classification could be given to this pipe, but with the present signature library CCTV
is recommended on a precautionary basis.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
141
-------
104.0 Survey 3.30 - 31714014_31714019_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:59:15
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714014
ENDMH : 31714019
REPORT :
xx at 0.46m
xx at 17.04m
xx at 20.96m
xx at 24.41m
xx at 26.7m
xx at 29.78m
xx at 32.29m
xx at 34.55m
xx at 37.96m
31714014-»31714019
CONDITION REPORT:
17.04 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
20.96 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
24.41: xx
26.7 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
29.78 : xx
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
142
-------
32.29 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
34.55 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
37.96 : pe
ENERGY:207
PE:0.03
DE ratio : 12.79
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 40m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
143
-------
105.0 Survey 3.31 - 31714016_31714015_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:51:11
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714016
ENDMH : 31714015
REPORT :
1 : xx (62%) at 1.39m
2 : Ic (67%) at 3.66m
3 : Ic (65%) at 9.84m
4 : Ic (68%) at 12.64m
5 : pe (80%) at 28.98m
31714016-»31714015
10 15
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
3.66 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
9.84 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
12.64 : Ic (missing pieces, crack, displacement)
28.98 : pe
ENERGY:46
PE:0.15
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
144
-------
Comment - GIS pipe length = 32m. CCTV recommended to investigate poor conditions reported to be
associated with lateral connections and multiple responses in first 5m.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
145
-------
106.0 Survey 3.32 - 31714016_31714017_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:48:55
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714016
ENDMH : 31714017
REPORT :
O (0%) at 0.54m
pe (66%) at 3.11m
xx (59%) at 5.67m
pe (63%) at 8.37m
Ic (86%) at 12.46m
pe (80%) at 26.16m
31714016-»31714017
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
3.11: xx
5.67 : xx
8.37 : xx
12.46 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
26.16 : pe
ENERGY:95
PE:0.07
DE ratio : 0.72
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
146
-------
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red (manual override to Amber)
COMMENT - GIS pipe length 29.5m. Condition is just into the 'Red' zone but appears serviceable. Re-
survey after 1 year is recommended to assess whether pipe has deteriorated further.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
147
-------
107.0 Survey 3.33 - 31714016_31714020_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:50:51
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714016
ENDMH : 31714020
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.06m
2 :lc (94%) at 10.16m
3 : pe (82%) at 19.26m
4 : pe (80%) at 23.8m
5 : pe (88%) at 30.7m
31714016-»31714020
CONDITION REPORT:
10.16 :lc
19.26 :lc
23.8 : Ic (closed)
30.7 : pe
ENERGY:59
PE:0.03
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
148
-------
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 31m. The response from the target manhole is significantly attenuated
and there are continuous low-level responses along the pipe. However the pipe appears serviceable and
further survey is not recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
149
-------
108.0 Survey 3.34 - 31714021_31714018_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:38:13
REPORT DATE & TIME : 29-Aug-2013 12:57:34
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714021
ENDMH : 31714018
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.42m
2 : Ic (69%) at 9.28m
3 :lc (71%) at 13.1m
4 : Ic (73%) at 18.89m
5 : pe (100%) at 32.48m
31714021-»31714018
15 20
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
9.28 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
13.1 : Ic (closed)
18.89 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
32.48 : pe
ENERGY:97
PE:0.07
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red (manual override to Amber;
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
150
-------
COMMENT-GIS pipe length = 35m. Energy level calculated by the system is marginally in the red zone
but this is affected by the large incident pulse and an 'Amber' classification has been applied. It is
recommended that the pipe should be logged for resurvey after an appropriate interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
151
-------
109.0 Survey 3.35 - 31714021_31714022_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:40:03
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714021
ENDMH : 31714022
REPORT :
O (0%) at 0.28m
Ic (92%) at 10.62m
xx (59%) at 13.43m
Ic (91%) at 16.1m
pe (80%) at 21.53m
pe (100%) at 25.97m
_ 31714021-»31714022
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
10.62 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
13.43 : xx
16.1: Ic (crack, infiltration)
21.53 : xx
25.97 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:149
PE : 0.04
DE ratio : 1.75
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
152
-------
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 26m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
153
-------
110.0 Survey 3.36 - 31714022_31714023_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:43:53
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31714022
ENDMH : 31714023
REPORT :
O(0%) at 0.12m
xx (52%) at 2.36m
Ic (67%) at 13.llm
pe (90%) at 15.36m
pe (74%) at 19.59m
pe (79%) at 24.29m
pe (78%) at 27.17m
Ic (83%) at 29.57m
pe (90%) at 35.53m
5.
E
31714022-»31714023
15 20
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
2.36 : xx
13.11: xx
15.36 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
19.59 : xx
24.29 : xx
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
154
-------
27.17: xx
29.57 :lc
35.53 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:63
PE:0.05
DE ratio : 0.52
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Amber
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 36m. Pipe appears serviceable but with potential for deterioration. Log
for reinspection after an appropriate interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
155
-------
111.0 Survey 3.37 - 31715005_31715006_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:24:02
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715005
ENDMH : 31715006
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.58m
2 : Ic (94%) at 3.23m
3 : pe (79%) at 13.84m
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
3.23 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
13.84 : pe
ENERGY:72
PE:0.26
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Amber
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 14.5m. Pipe appears serviceable but is deteriorating. Log for resurvey
after an appropriate period.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
156
-------
112.0 Survey 3.38 - 31715005_31716014_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:25:29
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715005
ENDMH : 31716014
REPORT :
1 O(0%) at 0.57m
2 Ic (79%) at 4.77m
xx (57%) at 9.24m
xx (54%) at 13.36m
pe (76%) at 21.13m
pe (76%) at 26.92m
xx (60%) at 31.67m
8 pe (71%) at 38.26m
df (69%) at 40.7m
10 : pe (72%) at 44.26m
11: xx (64%) at 46.48m
12 : xx (58%) at 49.42m
13 : df (70%) at 53.08m
14: xx (56%) at 60.13m
J715005 -»31716014
CONDITION REPORT:
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
157
-------
4.77 : Ic
9.24 : xx
13.36 : xx
21.13 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
26.92 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
31.67: xx
38.26 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
40.7 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
44.26 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
46.48 : xx
49.42 : xx
53.08 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
60.13 : pe
ENERGY:25
PE:0.01
DE ratio : 2.96
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 61m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
158
-------
113.0 Survey 3.39 - 31715011_31602016_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:17:07
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715011
ENDMH : 31602016
REPORT :
xx at 0.09m
xx at 11.73m
xx at 19.84m
xx at 22.82m
xx at 30.37m
xx at 39.25m
31715011-»31602016
40 50
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 92m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
159
-------
114.0 Survey 3.40 - 31715011_31715006_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:19:07
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715011
ENDMH : 31715006
REPORT :
1 : xx at 0.09m
2 : xx at 4.27m
3 : xx at 8.8m
4 : xx at 13.03m
0.05 -
31715011-»31715006
30 40 50
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 92m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
160
-------
115.0 Survey 3.41 - 31715013_31715010_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:30:11
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715013
ENDMH : 31715010
REPORT :
O (0%) at 0.05m
Ic (94%) at 17.99m
pe (81%) at 22.2m
Ic (93%) at 24.52m
Ic (95%) at 32.19m
pe (80%) at 36.1m
pe (80%) at 52.3m
31715013-»31715010
25 30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
17.99 : Ic
22.2 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
24.52 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
32.19 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
36.1: xx
52.3 :pe (Good)
ENERGY:37
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
161
-------
PE:0.01
DE ratio : 1.6
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 52m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
162
-------
116.0 Survey 3.42 - 31715013_31715016_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:31:37
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715013
ENDMH : 31715016
REPORT :
1 O(0%) at 0.08m
2 xx (49%) at 4.26m
3 xx (60%) at 6.59m
pe (88%) at 32.33m
pe (70%) at 36.68m
pe (90%) at 40.68m
pe (84%) at 45.97m
pe (78%) at 52.47m
pe (84%) at 55.23m
10 : pe (80%) at 63.23m
31715013-»31715016
CONDITION REPORT:
4.26 : xx
6.59 : xx
32.33 :lc
36.68 : xx
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
163
-------
40.68 : Ic
45.97 : Ic
52.47 : xx
55.23:lc
63.23 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:31
PE:0.02
DE ratio : 0.49
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Amber
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 63m. The pipe is serviceable but has potential to deteriorate. 11 is
recommended that the pipe be logged for reinspection after an appropriate interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
164
-------
117.0 Survey 3.43 - 31715016_31715020_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:35:31
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715016
ENDMH : 31715020
REPORT :
O (0%) at 0.08m
pe (92%) at 16.01m
pe (79%) at 25.46m
pe (77%) at 30.33m
pe (81%) at 32.59m
pe (88%) at 51.24m
31715016-»31715020
t:
25 30
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
16.01: Ic (crack, infiltration)
25.46 : xx
30.33 : Ic (crack, infiltration)
32.59 : xx
51.24 :pe
ENERGY:38
PE:0.08
DE ratio : 0.19
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
165
-------
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green (manual override to Amber due nature of reported defects)
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 50.5m. Pipe is serviceable but has potential to deteriorate. It is
recommended that it should be logged for reinspection after an appropriate interval.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
166
-------
118.0 Survey 3.44 - 31715016_31715022_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:36:59
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715016
ENDMH : 31715022
REPORT :
xx at O.lm
xx at 12.98m
xx at 15.31m
xx at 18.75m
xx at 21.5m
xx at 27.88m
xx at 30.34m
xx at 34.75m
xx at 37.55m
31715016-»31715022
Q. <
E 0.06
WAJJ
40 50
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 83m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
167
-------
119.0 Survey 3.45 - 31715023_31602014_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:42:07
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715023
ENDMH : 31602014
REPORT :
1 : xx at 0.96m
31715023-»31602014
._ /v
30 40
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 62m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
169
-------
120.0 Survey 3.46 - 31715023_31715022_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:40:45
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715023
ENDMH : 31715022
REPORT :
1 : xx at 0.42m
2 : xx at 13.35m
3 : xx at 18.87m
4 : xx at 27.16m
5 : xx at 34.43m
8
31715023-»31715022
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 51.5m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
170
-------
121.0 Survey 3.47 - 31715024_31602015_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:19:32
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715024
ENDMH : 31602015
REPORT :
1 : O (0%) at 0.04m
2 : Ic (93%) at 31.02m
3 : pe (83%) at 52.04m
31715024-»31602015
Q.
E 0.15
0.05 -
I
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
distance (m)
CONDITION REPORT:
31.02 :lc
52.04 : pe (Good)
ENERGY:8
PE:0.33
DE ratio : 0
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Green
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 52.5m. The pipe is serviceable and no further survey is required at the
present time.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
171
-------
122.0 Survey 3.48 - 31715024_31715021_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hillss
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 12:17:34
WATER LEVEL : 1mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31715024
ENDMH : 31715021
REPORT :
xx at 0.04m
xx at 8.96m
xx at 15.41m
xx at 24.75m
xx at 27.39m
xx at 32.21m
xx at 34.66m
31715024-»31715021
30 40 50
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 75.5m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
173
-------
123.0 Survey 3.49 - 31716012_31716011_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 11:00:58
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31716012
ENDMH : 31716011
REPORT :
xx at 0.48m
xx at 6.04m
xx at 8.26m
xx at 10.69m
xx at 13.35m
xx at 15.8m
xx at 20.23m
xx at 24.4m
E 0.03
31716012-»31716011
20 25
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 46m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
174
-------
124.0 Survey 3.50 - 31716012_31716013_150mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 10:56:08
WATER LEVEL : 2mm
DIAMETER: 150mm
START MH : 31716012
ENDMH : 31716013
REPORT :
xx at O.lm
xx at 3.37m
xx at 6.84m
xx at 9.07m
xx at 11.74m
xx at 14.38m
xx at 16.69m
xx at 19.13m
xx at 22.04m
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
xx at 27.36m
xx at 29.71m
xx at 34.83m
xx at 37.64m
xx at 41.llm
xx at 44.62m
xx at 54.1m
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
175
-------
31716012-^31716013
25 30
time(s)
CONDITION REPORT:
3.37 : xx
6.84 : xx
9.07 : Ic (good)
lc(Good)
11.74
14.38
16.69
19.13
22.04
27.36
29.71
34.83
37.64
41.11
44.62
54.1: pe(Good)
ENERGY:91
PE:0
DE ratio : 13.14
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red ( Energy is only just in the 'Red' zone and the energy loss appears to be
caused mainly by low level distributed defects but CCTV is recommended on a precautionary basis)
COMMENT-GIS length = 53.5m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
176
xx
XX
XX
XX
XX
XX
XX
XX
XX
XX
-------
125.0 Survey 3.51 - 31716015_31716013_200mm-l.mat
SITE : green hills
TEST DATE & TIME : 09-May-2013 10:40:58
WATER LEVEL : Omm
DIAMETER: 200mm
START MH : 31716015
ENDMH : 31716013
REPORT :
1 : xx at 0.4m
2 : xx at 4.81m
3 : xx at 10.63m
4 : xx at 18.92m
31716015-»31716013
A
30 40
distance (m)
AUTO CONDITION GRADE - Red by manual assessment.
COMMENT - GIS pipe length = 68m. CCTV is recommended.
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
178
-------
Appendix B - Study Area Figures
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
179
-------
I
flj
3
*M
V)
s'
2
"(5
CD
R'
10
1
ft
*,
Ml
n4
*
i
*
.«.
SEGMENT ID
11702001-11702002
11702002-11702003
11702003-11702012
11702004-11702005
11702005-11701013
11702012-11702004
11702013-11702012
11705009-11706007
11705010-11705009
11705011-11705010
11705012-11705011
11705013-11705012
11705014-11705013
11705015-11705014
11705016-11705010
11706002-11707005
11706003-11706002
11706004-11706003
11706005-11706004
11706006-11706005
11706007-11706006
11707005-11702001
11707007-11707008
11707008-11702013
11711001-11706006
11711009-11712012
11712001-11711001
11712002-11712001
11712003-11712002
11712004-11712003
11712005-11712004
11712006-11712005
11712012-11712003
11713001-11712006
11713002-11713001
11713003-11713002
11713004-11713003
11713005-11713006
11713006-11712006
11713007-11713006
11713014-11713018
11713018-11713003
15016001-11713004
15016002-15016001
SIZE (in)
12
12
12
12
12
12
8
8
12
12
12
12
8
12
8
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
6
8
12
8
12
12
12
12
12
12
8
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
8
12
12
LENGTH
120.73
318.72
132.00
313.45
282.96
87.80
339.85
151.85
147.51
304.34
285.30
271.35
151.19
171.93
253.94
295.45
361.31
400.51
256.98
182.78
149.67
251.02
80.18
160.07
212.01
246.88
234.00
151.08
233.80
215.44
136.12
202.29
47.30
106.27
283.85
378.94
219.81
317.19
76.78
250.01
172.84
73.06
273.64
223.81
MATERIAL
PVC
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
VCP
RCP
RCP
Cone
Cone
Cone
RCP
RCP
DIP
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
RCP
Cone
VCP
VCP
Cone
VCP
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
VCP
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
RCP
DIP
RCP
RCP
CIP
Cone
RCP
SLOPE
4.86
7.02
4.17
5.39
1.22
4.39
6.22
20.85
14.05
5.32
2.75
13.11
24.29
4.79
30.05
2.70
3.38
9.87
3.14
6.14
3.05
14.55
3.77
4.32
12.02
11.79
9.02
14.86
4.39
4.39
1.09
1.03
12.05
4.81
2.67
1.06
5.31
10.97
17.86
14.78
11.15
26.92
7.15
14.66
INST YEAR
1994
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1968
1968
1968
1968
1968
1972
1968
1968
1978
1968
1968
1968
1968
1968
1968
1978
1968
1968
1968
1969
1974
1974
1974
1973
1973
1969
1969
I 11702013-11702012 |
VCP (8 in.)
I 11707007-11707008 |
VCP (6 in.)
h ^wa^^^HHi^^^^^H
'''am 11713014-11713018
RCP (12 in.)
111713018-11713003]
| CIP (8 in.)
E5?
Ro5
[ 15016002-15016001
RCP (12 in.)
r^RCPmlnT'Bl^lSOOS-I^ISOOZ
l5016001-11713004]
Cone (12 in.)
[l1713007-11713006 ]
RCP (12 in.)
[11713006-11712006]
DIP (12 in.)
M1713004-11713003J
Cone (12 in.)
^rju
fl1712005-11712004l
Cone (12 in.)
P
, 11713002-11713001
Cone (12 in.'
[11711009-11712012
VCP (8 in.)
[11712003-11712002]
Cone (12 in.)
[l1712002-11712001
Cone (12 in.)
[ 11712001-11711001
Cone (12 in.)
I 11713001-11712006
Cone (12 in.)
**
£'/«
M1712006-11712005]
Cone (12 in.)
Legend
Pipe Size (in.) Material Type
6-8 CIP; DIP
12 Concrete
PVC
Segment ID
Material (Pipe Size - in)
f 11711001-11706006]
Cone (12 in.)
[l1706006-11706005
Cone (12 in.)
[l1706005-11706004|
Cone (12 in.)
| 11712004-11712003
Cone (12 in.)
'i 11712012-11712003 ]
VCP (8 in.)
[ 11705010-117050091
RCP (12 in.)
fflh
i
11705011-11705010
Cone (12 in.)
. 11705015-11705014
RCP (12 in.)
. 11705014-11705013
RCP (8 in.;
Cincinnati dH.
[l1705009-11706007 ,
RCP (8 in.)
I 11705012-11705011
Cone (12 in.)
| 11706002-11707005 |
Cone (12 in.)
i 11706003-11706002 |
Cone (12 in.)
I 11705013-11705012 ,
Cone (12 in.)
0 200 400
^=U
State Plane Feet
OHIO STATE PLANE, SOUTH, NAD83, FEET
I 11702001-11702002 |
PVC (12 in.)
i 11707005-11702001
Cone (12 in.)
| 11702004-11702005|
Cone (12 in.)
, 11702002-11702003 |
Cone (12 in.)
, 11702003-11702012 |
Cone (12 in.)
Shaw
U.S. EPA
,. " "
I 11702005-11701013 |
Cone (12 in.)
I 11702012-11702004 |
Cone (12 in.)
FIGURE 1
GALIA DRIVE SEWER PIPE LOCATION
-------
05
o
^.
o
M SEGMENT ID
44705004-44706017
44705005-44705004
44706004-44707026
44706007-44706008
44706008-44706009
44706009-44706010
44706010-44706004
44706011-44706010
44706012-44706011
44706013-44706010
44706014-44706013
44706015-44706014
44706017-44706015
I 44707027-44706012
I 44712001-44705005
44712002-44712001
44712003-44712004
44712004-44712005
I 44712004-44712010
I 44712005-44712007
H 44712007-44712002
I 44712008-44712007
1 44712010-44712005
1 48209013-44712008
1 48209014-48209013
48209015-48209014
I 48209016-48209015
1 48209017-48209016
1 48209018-48209017
1 48209019-48209018
48209020-48209018
48209021-48209020
48209022-48209020
SIZE (in)
12
12
12
8
8
8
12
8
8
12
12
12
12
8
12
12
8
8
8
8
12
12
8
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
8
LENGTH
159.93
65.19
181.28
109.17
275.98
102.62
191.59
21.58
276.78
342.22
315.56
198.87
200.11
208.15
380.54
345.97
76.75
44.98
84.82
83.63
175.10
176.92
66.84
359.21
307.29
249.22
226.05
247.27
214.75
234.55
86.26
158.93
1 1 1 .00
MATERIAL
RCP
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
RCP
Cone
RCP
Cone
Unk
Unk
Unk
Unk
Cone
Cone
Unk
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
RCP
RCP
RCP
Cone
Cone
SLOPE
1.67
8.55
1.33
0.78
14.53
1.30
1.42
31.08
22.13
2.44
2.48
2.84
1.49
5.13
4.45
4.05
0.56
34.76
0.63
21.69
3.86
4.16
14.73
2.27
2.34
2.94
3.09
2.72
2.12
1.55
1.41
5.13
-2.95
INST_YEAR
1979
1979
1968
1979
1979
1979
1968
1979
1979
1968
1968
1968
1979
1979
1968
1968
1984
1984
1984
1984
1968
1968
1984
1968
1968
1968
1968
1968
1968
1968
1968
N/A
1968
I 44707027-
44706012
Sin.
Cone
[44706012-
44706011
Sin.
Cone
44706011-
44706010 |
Sin.
Cone
m^m
[44706004- I
44707026 |
12in.
Cone
j 44706014-
44706013
12in.
Cone
|44706015-
44706014
12in.
Cone
*i
!i
»
^^
Tl .
t -
-
n
,
:
v. A;
Legend
Pipe Size (in.) Material Type
/\S 6-8 Concrel
|2 ======: RCP
m
I 48209014-
48209013
12in.
Cone
I 48209016-
48209015
12in.
Cone
I 48209022-
48209020
Sin.
' 48209018- J Cone
48209017
12in.
RCP
. 48209021-
48209020 If/
12in.
Cone 1
44705005-j
44705004
12in.
Cone
^Si
44705004- j
44706017 ]
12in.
RCP
44712002-|
44712001
12in.
Cone
144712007-
l 44712002
12in.
Cone
I 44712008-
44712007
12in.
Cone
f48209013-
44712008
12in.
Cone
I 48209017-
48209016
12in.
Cone
I^W
^v 1
[48209019-
48209018
12in.
RCP
48209020-
48209018
12in.
RCP
I 48209015-
48209014
12in.
Cone
\ -
44706013-
44706010
12in.
Cone
[44706017-
44706015
12in.
RCP
44712001-
44705005 ;
12in.
RCP
f!44706010-
44706004
12in.
Cone
44706009-
44706010
Sin.
Cone
I 44706008-
44706009
Sin.
Cone
[44712010-
44712005
Sin.
Unk
Ha
[44712004-
44712010
Sin.
Unk
144712003-
44712004
Sin.
Unk
Hunt
44712005-
44712004-
44712005
Sin.
Unk
0 200 400
^=U
State Plane Feet
OHIO STATE PLANE, SOUTH, NAD83, FEET
Shaw
!44706007-
44706008
Sin.
Cone
U.S. EPA
FIGURE 2
HUNT ROAD SEWER PIPE LOCATION
Gec?ly,e
-------
I
(B
V)
1
CD
KEY
1 1 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
I 39
SEGMENT ID
31601001-31716015
31601002-31601001
31601003-31601002
31601004-31601003
31601005-31601001
31601006-31601001
31602001-31602003
31602003-31602006
31602004-31601005
31602005-31602004
31602006-31602007
31602007-31602008
31602008-31602009
31602009-31602015
31602014-31602008
31602015-31714009
31602016-31602001
31709008-31716007
31710001-31710002
31710002-31710003
31710003-31715014
31714001-31714005
31714002-31714003
31714003-31714004
31714004-31714011
31714005-31714004
31714006-31714005
31714007-31714006
31714008-31714009
31714009-31714018
31714010-31714003
31714011-31714017
31714012-31714011
31714013-31714014
31714014-31714015
31714015-31714016
31714016-31714020
31714017-31714016
31714018-31714021
SIZE (In)
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
LENGTH
271.62
157.10
265.39
210.26
221.10
203.41
140.13
146.15
205.69
159.08
86.93
149.93
300.87
281.31
154.01
306.28
96.75
139.43
137.63
301.80
308.91
150.52
59.06
228.11
301.86
23.16
128.02
211.53
240.66
299.65
84.59
194.73
175.61
73.47
132.23
96.78
103.08
97.45
114.54
MATERIAL
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
Cone
VCP
VCP
Cone
Cone
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
Unk
Unk
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
Unk
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
Slip Lined
SLOPE
0.58
1.13
1.00
1.09
0.63
1.01
0.56
0.70
0.56
0.66
0.67
0.54
0.40
0.83
4.73
0.40
0.61
0.62
0.56
0.12
0.91
0.51
0.54
0.62
0.42
0.60
3.57
1.25
1.67
0.39
0.91
0.35
4.70
0.93
0.79
0.76
0.32
0.39
0.34
INST YEAR
1962
1962
1962
1962
1962
1962
1936
1936
1962
1962
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
KEY
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
SEGMENT ID
31714019-31714014
31714020-31714023
31714021-31714022
31714022-31714023
31714023-31714024
31715001-31715004
31715002-31715001
31715003-31710001
31715004-31715008
31715005-31715006
31715006-31715011
31715007-31715003
31715008-31715003
31715009-31715004
31715010-31715008
31715011-31602016
31715012-31715014
31715013-31715010
31715014-31715018
31715015-31715012
31715016-31715013
31715017-31714001
31715018-31715017
31715019-31715015
31715020-31715016
31715021-31715024
31715022-31715016
31715022-31715023
31715023-31602014
31715024-31602015
31716004-31709008
31716007-31716008
31716008-31716009
31716009-31715002
31716011-31716010
31716012-31716011
31716013-31716012
31716014-31715005
31716015-31716013
SIZE (In)
8
8
8
8
10
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
LENGTH
82.87
209.15
86.83
119.15
274.00
140.74
158.53
205.35
195.50
48.06
141.01
139.80
137.23
179.14
133.33
303.61
178.40
172.18
137.69
273.43
206.83
144.24
80.23
188.74
169.49
248.93
272.17
169.03
204.66
172.11
94.72
81.55
78.70
299.48
85.06
154.21
176.19
200.40
228.61
MATERIAL
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
Unk
VCP
VCP
Unk
Unk
VCP
Slip Lined
Slip Lined
Slip Lined
Slip Lined
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
Cone
Cone
Cone
VCP
Cone
SLOPE
0.00
0.51
0.62
5.21
0.43
0.56
0.52
0.44
0.48
0.60
0.64
3.34
0.66
3.26
2.15
0.54
5.16
2.32
0.55
1.88
3.51
0.53
0.27
1.97
1.20
3.61
2.20
1.01
5.60
4.78
0.61
0.59
0.42
0.66
0.58
0.64
0.65
0.60
0.57
INST YEAR
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1936
1962
1962
1962
1936
1962
Legend
Pipe Size (in.) Material Type
42)
43)1317140223.17.14023
State Plane Feet
OHIO STATE PLANE, SOUTH, NAD83, FEET
Shaw
U.S. EPA
FIGURE 3
GREENHILLS SEWER PIPE LOCATION
-------
Appendix C - SewerBatt Signal Penetration and Excitation Signal Trials
SewerBatt Final Preclearance Report 3-26-14.docx
180
-------
CONDITION ASSESSMENT OF WASTEWATER
COLLECTION SYSTEMS
US Environmental Protection Agency
Contract No EP-C-11_006
SewerBatt
Signal penetration and excitation signal trials
Test dates: May 9th and August 9th 2013
Report ref AST001-RT001-01
Acoustic Sensing Technology (UK) Ltd
The Innovation Centre
Sci-Tech Daresbury
Keckwick Lane
Daresbury
Cheshire
WA4 4FS
Tel:+44 (0)1925 606505
Web: www.acosuticsensing.co.uk
-------
Report ref
AST001-RT001-01
Issue date
03/09/2013
Author
M Tareq Bin All
R Long
Checked
R Long
Approved
R Long
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
-------
Table of Contents
Issue and approvals log 1
1. Introduction 3
2. Comparison of prototype (May 2013) and production equipment (August 2013) 4
Comparison 1 - 31602001 - 31602003 Dia =200mm Length = 42m 5
Comparison 2 - 31602001 - 31602016 Dia =200mm Length = 29m 6
Comparison 3 - 31602006 - 31602007 Dia =200mm Length = 29m 7
Comparison 4-31602007-31602006 Dia =200mm Length =29m 8
Comparison 5 - 31602007 - 31602008 Dia =200mm Length = 45m 9
Comparison 6 - 31602008 - 31602009 Dia =200mm Length = 91.5m 10
Comparison 7 - 31602009 - 31602015 Dia =200mm Length = 79.5m 11
Comparison 8 - 31602008 - 31602014 Dia =200mm Length = 47m 12
Comparison 9 - 31602015 - 31714009 Dia =200mm Length = 92m 13
Comparison 10 - 31715024 - 31602015 Dia =200mm Length = 52.5m 15
3. Effect of sensor positioning and excitation signal 16
Pipe section: 31602015 to 31714009 17
Pipe section 31715024 to 31602015 19
4. Conclusions 20
5. Note on measurement units 21
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
2
-------
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) is sponsoring a series of investigations
into emerging technologies for the assessment of the condition of wastewater collection systems.
One of the these technologies is SewerBatt, a system manufactured by Acoustic Sensing Technology
(UK) Ltd. SewerBatt uses acoustic technology to determine the condition of sewers and drain pipes.
SewerBatt uses acoustic technology to detect conditions inside sewers and drainage pipes. An
acoustic sensor head comprising a sound source and an array of microphones is positioned in one
end of the pipe to be tested. An excitation signal is then propagated along the pipe and the response
is recorded and then processed. Features (such as lateral connections and the pipe end) and defects
(such as broken pipes and sedimentation) affect the sound either by reflecting a part of it back to the
SewerBatt sensor, or by absorbing the sound energy. By comparing the responses recorded with a
library of known responses the system will seek to identify specific responses. An automated
condition assessment system is provided that reviews the acoustic response, makes allowance for
the energy loss from the pipe end and lateral connections, and then grades the pipes in a traffic light
RAG form.
The Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD)of Greater Cincinnati was supplied with the SewerBatt
equipment in April 2013 and has since then been undertaking a series of sewer surveys using the
equipment. The project has been supervised for the US EPA by CB&I Federal Services.
The equipment supplied to MSD in April 2013 was prototype equipment, the first batch of
production equipment being in manufacture at that time. The initial test results recorded in May
2013 showed that while in most pipes the equipment provided a strong recorded signal, in some
longer pipes with many lateral connections the strength of the acoustic signal decayed to an extent
that beyond approximately 50m little detail was visible in the recorded results. It was therefore
proposed that Acoustic Sensing would return to Cincinnati in August 2013, bringing with them a
production unit and some alternative excitation signals to try in several of the pipes where signal
decay had previously been noted, to evaluate to what extent the signal penetration could be
improved.
Two series of comparative tests were carried out. The first series compared the results from the
prototype equipment with those from the production equipment. The results are presented in
Section 2 of this report.
The second series of tests compared the results from two different excitation signals (chirp and
Gaussian pulse) and different locations of the sensor head within the pipe end cross section (centre,
left, right, top and bottom). The results are presented in Section 3 of this report.
Section 4 of the report provides a summary of the conclusions drawn from the work. Finally Section
5 gives information about the measurement units used in compiling the report.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
-------
2. Comparison of prototype (May 2013) and production equipment
(August 2 013)
This section of the report summarises the results of a comparison between SewerBatt tests
undertaken in May 2013 and those of August 2013. A total of 10 pipes were resurveyed.
Three of the ten subsequent tests ( Nos 3, 7 and 10) were carried out in the reverse direction to the
original test. These results are not comparable and cannot be used for the present purpose.
Three of the ten subsequent tests (Nos 4, 5 and 8) appear to have been mis-referenced, though
there is clear evidence that the pipes were in fact tested in the correct direction and the results have
been included in the comparison.
Five of the ten subsequent tests (Nos 1, 2, 5, 8 and 9) using the small production sensor and chirp
excitation show either no improvement or a slight deterioration in signal penetration.
Two of the ten subsequent tests (Nos 4 and 6) using the small production sensor and chirp excitation
show an improvement in signal penetration, in the case of test 6 by approximately +200% at the
target manhole, although amplitudes at this location remain low.
The most significant gain was obtained by using the large sensor head with a Gauss pulse excitation
signal.
The small production sensor with the chirp excitation signal performs in a generally comparable way
to the prototype unit. Since it uses essentially the same system, there was to be expected.
The most significant increase in signal penetration appears to come from the use of a Gauss pulse
excitation signal coupled with the increased power at lower frequencies offered by the large sensor
head.
Further investigation of the causes and possible minimisation of the strong incident pulse recorded
at some locations will also be carried out. In the case of the present series of tests it will be of use in
due course to have the CCTV longhand reports and video, to see if there are any features such as
connections and backdrops close to the sensing head.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
-------
Comparison 1 - 31602001 - 31602003 Dia =200mm Length = 42m
Tests
1. Original test on May 9th 2013 (31602001_31602003_200rnrn-l.rnat)
2. Subsequent test on August 9th 2013 (31602001_31602003_200mm-2.mat)
Figure 1
0.4
0.35
0.3
fo.25
_=_
V
a 0.2
"5.
E 0.15
re
0.1
0.05
°C
1
1
11
11
vl
vL-
Ly^ S
T
Ol
1
A
:wW VV
L _ __
1
) 5 10 15
316
31
:
b^Ss
02001 160
3
020M-160
i-^xOs-.
2003 OOmr
2
2003200mr
to
CM
^A
n-1. mat, OJ
n-2-.mat; OJ
l-May-201:
l-Aag-20-f:
^£\
i 12:06:13
h15752t30
/V/Xx^
20 25 30 35 40 45
distance (m)
The subsequent test was performed using the production unit and small sensor head and a chirp
excitation signal. It displays a large response at 1.57m. This may be due to a connection close to the
location of the sensor head. This appears to have given a strong response, reducing the energy available
for onward transmission; hence most subsequent peaks are reduced in amplitude compared to the
original test. In this case there is however sufficient energy recorded throughout the length of the pipe
for a satisfactory assessment of condition to be made.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
-------
Comparison 2 - 31602001 - 31602016 Dia =200mm Length = 29m
Tests
1. Original test on May 9th 2013 (31602001_31602016_200rnrn-l.rnat)
2. Subsequent test on August 9th 2013 (31602001_31602016_200mm-l.mat)
Figure 2
0.14
0.1
31602001 1602016 Q0mm-1.mat, 09-May-2013 12:07:36
^^31602001 16Q2016 OQmmA.mat, 09-Aug-2Q13 15;53i58
20
distance (m)
The subsequent test was performed using the production unit and small sensor head and a chirp
excitation signal. It displays a large incident pulse at 0.03m, indicative of poor testing conditions. This
has reduced the energy available for onward transmission, hence subsequent peaks are reduced in
amplitude compared to the original test. In this case there is however sufficient energy recorded
throughout the length of the pipe for a satisfactory assessment of condition to be made.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
-------
Comparison 3 - 31602006 - 31602007 Dia =200mm Length = 29m
Tests
1. Original test on May 9th 2013 (31602006_31602007_200rnrn-l.rnat)
2. Subsequent test on August 9th 2013 (31602006_31602007_200mm-2.mat)
Figure 3 - Original test on May 9th 2013 (31602006_31602007_200mm-l)
31602006-»31602007
0.25
0.2
§ 0.15
B- 0.1
ra
0.05
t
10
15
distance (m)
20
25
30
Figure 4 - Subsequent test on August 9tn 2013 (31602006_31602007_200mm-2)
31602006-»31602007
0.25
10
15
distance (m)
20
25
30
The subsequent test was performed using the production unit and small sensor head and a chirp
excitation signal. Although the file names indicate that the tests were carried out in the same direction,
the results clearly show that the tests were done in opposite directions and are therefore not suitable
for direct comparison (ref Comparison 4).This can be seen by noting that in the original test there was a
strong response at 15.53m (9.97m from the target manhole) which correlates strongly with the strong
response at 9.54m in the subsequent test, clearly demonstrating that the readings have been taken in
opposite directions and therefore cannot be compared.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
-------
Comparison 4 - 31602007 - 31602006 Dia =200mm Length =29m
Tests
1. Origi
2. Subs<
Figure 5
0.35
0.3
0.25
5, 0.2
»_ ^ ^5SS*^ . *,f~r~+..rrf.. -^
1602007 00mm-1.mat, 09-May-2013 11:56:22
2 i
[16 00mm-2.mat, 09-Aud-2013 15:40:09
2" 1 J =f
i
f
I w
J\ ^/
) 5 10 15 20 25 30
distance (m)
?nt test was performed using the production unit and small sensor head and a chirp
nal. Although the file references indicate the contrary, it is clear that these two tests were
the same direction (ref Comparison 3). The strengths of the responses at 15.07m and from
at 24.64m are both greater than the original results, indicating that improved signal
las been achieved.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
-------
Comparison 5 - 31602007 - 31602008 Dia =200mm Length = 45m
Tests
1. Original test on May 9th 2013 (31602008-31602007_200rnrn-l.rnat)
2. Subsequent test on August 9th 2013 (31602007-31602008_200mm-l.mat)
Figure 6
0.35
18 1602007,
^31602008 1602001 00mm-1imat, 09-May-2013 11:51:22
i 3 2 |
1_5:1_6i47
^ 31602007 16Q2008 OQmm-1
20 25
distance (m)
The subsequent test was performed using the production unit and small sensor head and a chirp
excitation signal. Filenames show references reversed but inspection of the test results, with a close
match in the distances of the observed peaks, shows that the tests were in fact carried out in the same
direction. The larger incident pulse at 0.02m in the subsequent test indicates poor testing conditions and
has absorbed acoustic energy, thus reducing the amplitude of the response from the rest of the pipe.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
-------
Comparison 6 - 31602008 - 31602009 Dia =200mm Length = 91.5m
Tests
1. Original test on May 9th 2013 (31602008_31602009_200rnrn-l.rnat)
2. Subsequent test on August 9th 2013 (31602008_31602009_200mm-l.mat)
Figure 7
08 1602009
9-Ma
^^T 3160200^ 16Q20P9 OQmm-1
31602008 1602009 00mm-1.mat, 09-May-2013 11:48:15
3 2
1_5:1_3i33
mat 09-^ug-2D13
30
40 50 60
distance (m)
70
80
90
100
The subsequent test was performed using the production unit and small sensor head and a chirp
excitation signal. It displays a large response at 1.54m. This may be due to a connection close to the
location of the sensor head. This appears to have given a strong response, although energy available for
onward transmission is still greater than the original test. The following figures compare the response
from the target manhole 31602009.
Figure 8
31602008-»31602009
_ J I I _
Response from target manhole 31602009 from the
original test on May 9th 2013
(31602008_31602009_200mm-l)
Figure 9
Response from target manhole 31602009 from the
subsequent test on August 9th 2013
(31602008_31602009_200mm-l), showing
improved definition of the response despite the
low amplitude of the signal.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
10
-------
Comparison 7 - 31602009 - 31602015 Dia =200mm Length = 79.5m
Tests
1. Original test on May 9th 2013 (31602015_31602009_200rnrn-l.rnat)
2. Subsequent test on August 9th 2013 (31602009_31602015_200mm-2.mat)
Figure 10 - Original test on May 9th 2013 (31602015_31602009_200mm-l)
0.07
0.06
31602015^.31602009
o>
10
15
20 25 30
distance (m)
35
40
45
50
Figure 11 - Subsequent test on August 9tn 2013 (31602009_31602015_200mm-2)
31602009^31602015
0.12
10
15
20 25 30
distance (m)
35
40
45
50
Filenames show references reversed and the test results appear to confirm that the tests were in fact
carried out in the opposite direction since the difference in distance to the large response at
28.09m/26.03m is too large to admit otherwise and the shapes are quite different also. Consequently
the results are not suitable for comparison.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
11
-------
Comparison 8 - 31602008 - 31602014 Dia =200mm Length = 47m
Tests
1. Original test on May 9th 2013 (31602008_31602014_200mm-l.mat)
2. Subsequent test on August 9th 2013 (31602014_31602008_200mm-l.mat)
Figure 12
0.14
0.12
0.1
a. o.os
_
JM
CM
i
A
00
I- «*>
to
3?
J \s>ee
MO^J*
CD
°0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
distance (m)
The subsequent test was performed using the
production unit and small sensor head and a chirp
excitation signal. Filenames show references reversed but test results appear to show the tests were in
fact carried out in the same direction. This is evidenced by the close correlation of the various peaks and
the distances
test indicates
between them, which are within 4%. The larger incident pulse at 0.04m in the subsequent
poor testing conditions and has
absorbed acoustic energy, thus reducing the amplitude of
the response from most of the rest of the pipe.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
12
-------
Comparison 9 - 31602015 - 31714009 Dia =200mm Length = 92m
Tests
1. Original test on May 9th 2013 (31602015_31714009_200rnrn-l.rnat)
2. Subsequent test on August 9th 2013 (31602015_31714009_200mm-3.mat)
Figure 13
13160201^ 17140091 00mm-l!.mat, 09-lllay-2013
I I 3 I2 I I
3160201^ 171400^.
l2:27:48
-A i ~
10
20
30
40 50 60
distance (m)
70
80
90
100
The subsequent test was performed using the production unit and small sensor head and a chirp
excitation signal. There are some differences in the two results, and while the response at 12.33m in the
subsequent test is larger than the original, the responses from the target manhole 31714009 as shown in
the following figures show the subsequent test having a slightly reduced amplitude.
Figure 14
31602015-»3171
Response from target manhole 31714009 from
original test on May 9th 2013
(31602015_31714009_200mm-l)
Figure 15
Response from target manhole 31714009 from
subsequent test on August 9th 2013
(31602015_31714009_200mm-3
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
13
-------
Tests
1. Subsequent test on August 12th 2013 using large sensor and chirp excitation
(31602015_31714009top_200mm-l.mat)
2. Subsequent test on August 12th 2013 using large sensor and gauss excitation
(31602015_31714009GTop_200mm-l.mat)
31602015 1714009top 00mm-1.mat, 12-Aug-2013 13:55:21
3 2 | | |
e^ flOmm-llmat;
40 50 60
distance (m)
70
80
90
100
For these tests a large prototype sensor head with chirp and gauss excitation signal were used. The
response is found to be higher in the case of gauss excitation.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
14
-------
Comparison 10 - 31715024 - 31602015 Dia =200mm Length = 52.5m
Tests
1. Origir
2. Subse
Figure 16 - Origi
0.35
0.3
0.25
5, 0.2
Ol
«
u
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
distance (m)
it pipe has been tested from the opposite direction. This may be inferred by the different
e response at 31.02m in the original test and 20.64m in the subsequent test, which are
cal locations if the tests were reversed as surmised. Since the tests have not been taken in
ction the results are not comparable.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
15
-------
3. Effect of sensor positioning and excitation signal
Several pipe lengths were revisited during the August 2013 visit and tested with two different
excitation signals. These were firstly a sinusoidal chirp and secondly a Gaussian pulse. The chirp is a
signal that lasts 10 seconds and modulates from low frequency to high frequency over this period.
The Gaussian pulse is a short burst of sound, sounding similar to a handclap.
For each excitation signal five different sensor locations were tested. In each case the sensor head
was inserted at the pipe end, but the location of the sensor head was moved from the pipe centre to
the end of left end of the horizontal diameter, then the right end, then to the pipe soffit and finally
to the pipe invert.
The results from two of the tests are presented in this section of the report. In both cases the
acoustic envelopes for all the tests for the full pipe length are plotted. The next plot compares the
maximum signal amplitude for a particular location where a response was observed in all the tests.
Finally the chirp and gauss pulse responses are plotted on separate axes but to the same horizontal
and vertical scales so that comparisons can be more easily made.
The testing carried out is insufficient for firm conclusions to be drawn, but from the results of the
two tests analysed it does appear that the gauss pulse excitation signal responses are less influenced
by sensor position and give incrementally stronger responses.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
16
-------
Pipe section: 31602015 to 31714009
T
1.2
1
3.0.8
ight 00mm-1.triat, 12-Aug-20-i3 13:54:33
3 i 2 i
31602(115 17J4M9top OOmm-1 mat, 12-_Aug=2M3! 13:55^
3l60201531714009>ottom2OOmmJl.mat, 12-Aug-?013 13:56:06
- 31fiO5(HS 1744(U)QGCAivtpr Onmm-Jjnat 19 iimi?JV!3 J3-S7-3a
316020153171400^GLeft2OOmm-1.|mat, 12-Aug-20fl3 13:58:27
3160201531714009GRigtit OOmm^l.mat, t2^-Aag-2&13^l3S9^)2
3160201531714009GTop2OOmm-lJmat, 12-Aug-2013 13:59:43
k 3-(602(T15 171400$GBottom^Omr^-T.maf, 12-Aug-20TrT4:00:18
i 3 i 2 i i
i i i i
i i i i
i i i i
i i i i
.A*_ ! ! ! 1 ft
) 20 40 60 80 100 12
distance (m)
Figure 18 Acoustic responses from pipe section 31602015_31714009 for different sensor position using chirp (first five)
and gauss (last five) excitation signal.
R
B
R
B
0.18
^0,2
Ch
1
4
rp
!_
>
4
C
>
> c
i
4
C
»
iauss
/
4
^
5 6
test numbers
10
Figure 19 - 31602015_31714009 maximum amplitudes at 11.92m
It can be seen that the responses from the Gauss pulse excitation are slightly higher and generally
more consistent than those from the chirp.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
17
-------
1.2
1
'E
3. 0.8
0)
f 0.6
ra
0.4
0.2
n
i
JV
\
3160201531714009center200mm-1.mat, 12-Augi2013 13:52:51
31602015 1714009left 00mm-1.fnat, 12-Aua-2013 13:53:47
3160201531714d09right200mm--|.mat, 12-Aug-2t)13 13:54:33
31602015- t7J4009top,OOmra-J inat^t2-Aug-20J3 J355:21
3 I 2 I l
51602015 171 4(j09bottom OOmr^-1. mat, 12-Au^-2013 13:56:06
i
ro
" ^
' ^*, *
10
15
distance (m)
20
25
30
Figure 20 - 31602015_31714009 Chirp excitation, different sensor positions
- 3l!60201531714009GCenter2OOmm-1.mat, 12-Augl2013 13:57:32
__ 3{602015j1714Q09GLeft2OOmmlrmatL 12_-Aug-2Q|l_3J3L58:_27
- 316020153171400^GRight2OOmm-1.mat, 12-Aug-2^013 13:59:02
-1,matT lZ-Aug-2013
- 316020153171400$GBottom2OOmrh-1.mat, 12-Au^-2013 14:00:18
10
15
distance (m)
20
25
30
Figure 21 - 31602015_31714009 Gauss pulse excitation signal, different sensor positions
It can be seen that the incident pulse (close to the origin) has greater amplitude when the Gauss
pulse is used but the amplitude of the responses at around 8.5m and 12m are stronger for the Gauss
pulse too.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
18
-------
Pipe section 31715024 to 31602015
1
c
;
uc
i
VUAf8^
) 1
0 2
L 31715024 1602015Center OOmm-1. mat, 12-Aug-2013 14:15:01
I I ^ | 2 | | | |
i i 3 i 2 i i i i
r31715024 160201$Right OOrnm-1 .majt, 12-Augp2013 14;-|6:55
L31715024 1602015Top OOmm-1 .mat, 12-Aug-2013 14:17:42
i i 3 i 2 i i i i
^31715024 1602015GCenter!oOmm-1.i7iat, 12-Aug-2013 14:19:27
l l 3 | 2 | | |
r31715024 16020liGRight 60mm-1.mat, 12-Aug-2013 14:21:06
L3i7i502431602015GTop2OOmm-1.mat, 12-Aug-2013 14:21:46
L 13171502^ 16020lSGBottoni OOmm-lj.mat, 12-Aug-2013 14:22:32
I I ' I I I I
I I *l^ I I I I
I I O I I I I
II I I I I
I I li I I I I
j ^ i /V*/\_^_ j. -i
0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1C
distance (m)
i)
o
3
Figure 22 Figure 18 Acoustic responses from pipe section 31715024_31602015 for different sensor position using chirp
(first five) and gauss (last five) excitation signal.
R
B
R
B
0.45
~ 0.4
5- 0.35
*
T)
P
C
>
^
t
»
i
r
Gai
i V-
ISS
^
5 6
test numbers
10
Figure 23 - 31715024_31602015 maximum amplitudes at 50.35m
It can be seen that the responses from the Gauss pulse excitation are higher and more consistent
than those from the chirp.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
19
-------
3.5
3
|2.5
0)
1 2
*-
Q.
E 1.5
re
1
0.5
°C
CO
u>
]
5
S1715024 16020
3
S1745024-16020
!1715024316020
31715024316020
L $1715024,16020
^
1
15Center2OOmm
15Left2OOmm^
15Right2OOmm-
15Top2OOmm-1
15 Bottom OOmr
-l.mat, 12-Aug-2013 14:15:01
matr 12-Aug-2013 14K16:05
l.mat, 12-Aug-4oi3 14:16:55
mat, 12-Aug-2013 14:17:42
i-1.mat, 12-Aug-2013 14:18:28
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
s
-l« »O
1 3 ".
a . 10
i«\ « 10
/^JakJ^.
) 10 20 30 40 50 6
distance (m)
Figure 24 - 31715024_31602015 Chirp excitation, different sensor positions
1
e
3.5
3
|2.5
0)
1 2
Q.
E 1.5
;
0.5
°C
I
I
L-S-
31
31
715024 1602015GCenter 00mm
3 , 2
17^5024 1602M5GLeft OOmm^
3 I 2
7150243160201$GRight2OOmm-
3171502431602015GTop2OOmm-1
L 3-(715024,160201$GBottomnOOmr
-l.mat, 12-Aug-2013 14:19:27
matr 12-Aug-2013 14:20:26
l.mat, 12-Aug-^013 14:21:06
mat, 12-Aug-2013 14:21:46
i-1.mat, 12-Auc|-2013 14:22:32
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
to
O
d
IV^yx m
10 20 30 40 50 6
distance (m)
Figure 25 - 31715024_31602015 Gauss pulse excitation signal, different sensor positions
It can be seen that the incident pulse (close to the origin) has greater amplitude when the Gauss
pulse is used but the amplitude of the response at around 50m is slightly stronger for the Gauss
pulse too.
4. Conclusions
The production SewerBatt equipment was found to work satisfactorily and overall was found to give
similar results to the prototype equipment. This is as expected.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
20
-------
The most significant increase in signal penetration appears to come from the use of a Gauss pulse
excitation signal coupled with the increased power at lower frequencies offered by the large sensor
head.
The Gauss pulse responses were also found to vary less when the location of the sensor within the
pipe end was varied.
In the current release of the SewerBatt software the selection of chirp or Gauss pulse for excitation
can be made by the user.
Further investigation of the causes and possible minimisation of the strong incident pulse recorded
at some locations will also be carried out. In the case of the present series of tests it will be of use in
due course to have the CCTV longhand reports and video, to see if there are any features such as
connections and backdrops close to the sensing head.
5. Note on measurement units
SewerBatt was originally developed in the UK, using metric units for the many signal processing
functions that are performed during its operation. The option to display results in US customary
units (in this case distances in feet) is provided in the interface, but at present the internal
calculations function correctly only if metric units are selected. For this reason this report has been
written using metric units. The option to run the software in US customary units will be included in a
later release. Multiply metres by 3.281 to convert to feet.
SewerBatt - Report on signal penetration ASTOOl-RTOOl-Ol.docx
21
------- |