North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Re[2]: a generic water encapsulation technique [Re: floods]
That would be traffic shaping and priority queueing, right? New features in the latest rev of plumbing management software. At 09:17 AM 4/11/97 EST, [email protected] wrote: > >Peter, > >What you said is true if the drain system treats all fluids equally. But >consider the difference between these fluids. > >It is much more important that sewage water, with its Constant Flow Rate, get to >its intended destination and not leech its pollutants into the ground. Storm >water, with a bursty Variable Flow Rate, will not cause environmental damage if >leeched into the ground during overflow cases. What is needed is a drain system >which can distinguish between storm water and sewage. > >Prabhu > > >______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ >Subject: Re: a generic water encapsulation technique [Re: floods] >Author: [email protected] at SMTPLINK >Date: 4/10/97 10:56 PM > > >Kent W. England wrote: >> >> We could also multiplex the rain water with the sewage water in a >> multi-mode drain system. Internet drain specialists tend to take religious >> points of view on whether we should have separate drain systems, should >> combine them, or outlaw one in favor of the other. But, clearly, >> encapsulation is the favored approach. >> > >The multiplexed drain system will never work. Sewage water we know >to be a fairly constant flow over time, and in fact sanitary engineers >refer to it as having a Constant Flow Rate. Storm water, on the other >hand, is >very bursty in nature, and sanitary engineers describe that as Variable >Flow Rate. In the old days they tried combining drain systems, sharing >the resources between the CFR water and the VFR water, and called the >result AFR (or >available flow rate). AFR had one weakness, however: it relied upon a >phenomena called precipitation shaping to keep the VFR storm water from >interfering with the CFR sewage water. As the clouds and the ground >didn't >have enough buffering to do proper precipitation shaping, the result was >a drain system which periodically suffered massive congestion, and all >users were equally unhappy. > >-peter > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|