The reactive-constituent (PSO) chlorine decay model (Fisher et al. 2017) was provided to users in the MSQ module of InfoWorks in July 2020 (see the MSQ blog for details). A major advantage of this model is that only a single set of four model coefficients is required to characterize decay rate in a given bulk water throughout a distribution system, over a wide range of initial chlorine concentration and any number/size/timing of booster doses, at a single temperature.

Water temperature commonly differs by 20 degrees Celsius between summer and winter, causing reaction (decay) rates to differ typically by a factor of four (or more in warmer climates). Fisher et al. (2012) extended the PSO bulk decay model to account for this temperature variation with the Arrhenius equation, which requires only one additional (fifth) constant coefficient to to complete the characterisation of the same bulk water. The accuracy of the extended model was demonstrated in the same paper and in applications to numerous Australian distribution systems since then.

The five constant coefficients that completely characterise chlorine decay rate must be derived from laboratory decay tests under controlled laboratory conditions because there are many different substances (and concentrations) in a given source water.

I would be pleased to provide Innovyze (or any interested users in the meantime) with the MSQ tables to include the effect of temperature in the MSQ solute data.

The same tables could be used without alteration in Innovyze's InfoWater MSX sofware.

References

Fisher, I; Kastl, G; Sathasivan, A., (2012). A suitable model of combined effects of temperature and initial condition on chlorine bulk decay in water distribution systems. Water Research, 46(10), 3293-3303.

Fisher, I., Kastl, G., Sathasivan, A. (2017). A comprehensive bulk chlorine decay model for simulating residuals in distribution systems. Urban Water Journal, 14(4), 361-368.

The EXTAPPFILTER option is useful for automatically exporting results for use in other programs. However, the results are exported as DBF files with an identically named MDX file (for example, JUNCTOUT.DBF and JUNCTOUT.MDX). The presence of the MDX files causes errors when attempting to use the DBFs in MS Access or PowerBI. The only way to import the results into Access or PowerBI is to first delete the MDX files.

As far as I can tell, the MDX files serve no purpose; they are just an index. I suggest either (1) don't create the MDX files, or (2) export the results in a more modern file format, such as CSV.

Having the option to join all layer tables is great, but it's painfully slow. Other software that are add-ins to ArcGIS Pro do more or less the same thing, but update/run in a fraction of the time. Could the table join or database format be improved so it does not take so much time to refresh?

Also, instead of having to join all layer tables to utilize ArcGIS Pro's built-in symbology OR only use InfoWater Pros Map Display could they be used universally or in tandem? It would be nice to seamlessly use both symbology tools and have them display the same for uniformity, consistency, and efficiency.

2 feature requests for consideration, both relating to the “set area codes” functionality in InfoWorks WS Pro:
1. The ability to save the “set area code” configuration, whether that be in a model tree group or as a cfg file, so that you don’t have to reset all preferences every time you open the tool
2. A “pause area code identification” button so that you can make multiple changes to assets without having to wait for the area codes to recalculate after every minor change (and without having to close the set area code window to prevent the recalculation, which results in having to set up the configuration when you open it again (refer dot point 1))

Please add a column in the Fireflow Design results that displays the "Critical Node Pressure at Design Flow". The column titled “Critical Pressure for Design Run” currently displays the input criteria as it can vary for each node. However, this is not as useful when troubleshooting or reviewing the model results. As an example, if a fire flow run is velocity limited it would be nice to know the lowest pressure node and its pressure in the critical node search domain. It may not have reached the minimum pressure if limited by the velocity constraint (i.e. how close did the critical node pressure come to the minimum pressure criteria?). In short, it would be helpful to review the critical node pressure “… at Available Flow”, “… at Fire Demand”, AND “… at Design Run.”

In the drop down menu for the Critical Node Search Range, please add the option to evaluate minimum pressure based on the same zone. Or add an option to consider multiple search areas where the user can select either the entire system and/or by zone and input the minimum pressure for both search areas.

To be frank, this is a non-issue with the Bentley software. The user sets the zone or system as the critical node search area, then sets the desired minimum pressure(s). The FF results list the limiting nodes based on the selected parameter, but will report pressures for both search areas regardless. This is very helpful when troubleshooting issues with the model or just trying to review FF results.