Pipe ID Issues After Import

[Bosley007]

Hi,

I'm having some issues with pipe imports for a new Infowater model build. I have two shapefiles, one containing most of the network and the other with alignment updates on existing assets and new assets to be incorporated.

The issue I'm having is that Infowater is assigning a new ID number for updated assets instead of using the existing IDs. I've gone through and removed duplicate numbers from the shapefiles and visually confirmed that the updated pipes have the correct ID. I'm using the old import tool to import the data and I've ensured that I've got "Update Existing Records" and "Create New Records" options selected.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Cheers,

Jeff

[Patrick Moore]

Jeff,

I suspect this has to do with the actual settings used for importing the elements. Make sure that the ID's are matching when running an update for both shapefiles. If an ID does not exist it will create a new element, if an ID does exist it will update the geometry (if checked to do so) and the field mapping (as specified).

If you are getting duplication then element ID's are not matching between the shapefiles, and it is creating a new element with the different ID.

If you only wish to Update elements on the "update" file then just check Update and not "create new elements" but uncheck skip geometry update if you wish to update geometry for elements.

If you need additional help please reach out to us at support@innovyze.com and refer to this thread on the forum and we would be happy to assist you further.


PS don't forget to update your software to the latest version as well as this often resolves certain issues. Update links found on this page: http://www.innovyze.com/updates/

Patrick Moore

Feel free to reply with additional information as well here, but emailing support allows us to setup a WebEx with you which can make identifying what is occurring much easier.

[Bosley007]

Hi Patrick,

I've managed to isolate the exact cause of the error. It seems to only occur when I use the "Locate/Fix Pipe-Split Candidate" tool with "Join Pipe-Split Candidates" checkbox selected. It turns out it is not a duplicate error but two pipes seem to be relocated (both with the exact same geometry but not the original geometry) approximately 60km from their original location.

In their original location, the pipes have been split and a new pipe ID has been allocated. Is this an error with the tool or an error with my database?

I'm not sure if it's relevant (as other loops appear to be ok) but both pipes were originally loops in the GIS data (i.e. no start or finish point).

Cheers,

Jeff

[Patrick Moore]

Jeff,
Without seeing your model directly, I will have to speculate a bit here, but if you run the pipe split candidate fix without first resolving all node in close proximity issues this can cause a number of known and unusual geometric things to occur. The issue arises when there is more than one node within the search radius when the geometry fix for the pipe split candidate tool is run can introduce unexpected results in the pipe geometry. This is why we always advise people to find and revise all Node in close proximity results before running the pipe split candidate tool as well as to visually check each issue identified with the pipe split candidate tool (to verify it is a pipe split and not something else like a NICP which will also get identified with the pipe split tool) before running the "fix" pipe split candidate tool.

As a check on your system geometry we would recommend you run the InfoWater menu-> Utilities-> Update map from DB -> Force all network tool as a check to make sure that there are not additional geometry errors that were created if you ran a bunch of pipe split fixes on locations with multiple nodes in the search range. If you find you have some unexpected geometry connections this is one potential side effect that can occur when the pipe split tool finds multiple junctions in the search range.

This could create additional pipe ID's which could also impact your update depending on how it was run or could certainly interfere if you had the elements have geometry updates after running pipe split fixes.

If you find issues, sometimes users find it is easier to reimport the elements again into a new model is faster than trying to resolve issues especially if you had a large number of issues created by running pipe split fixes without first eliminating the multiple nodes with the nodes in close proximity tool fix.

In general here is the process we recommend when running network review tools to best resolve them without creating potential difficulties as well as several key points we would recommend to consider when using the Node in Close Proximity and Pipe Split Candidate tools to get the most use of them:

1. Search distance recommendations for both tools.
   
   1. Nodes In Close Proximity (NICP)
      
      1. Start with ½ your shortest pipe length but generally no less than ½ a foot
      2. Note: NICP represent two junctions in the search distance that are not connected by any pipe
      3. Once issues resolved rerun the tool and increase the search distance until only “false positives” are identified. NICP are 2 nodes that have no connecting pipe between them so at a certain point as the search distance increases only “false positive” nodes will be identified where the 2 nodes should not be connected, but this is the best methodology we can recommend to make sure.
      4. Always investigate and resolve all NICP findings before you run any Pipe Split resolution routines
      
      
   2. Pipe Split Candidates
      
      1. We generally recommend using ½ your shortest pipe length but generally no less than ½ a foot as the search distance
      2. We would also recommend you investigate any pipes in your model that are less than ½ a foot in length as they likely represent nodes that should be combined.
   
   
2. General Notes
   
   1. While you can run global fixes for NICP and PSC items found, we recommend that you use caution when doing so as unless each item is checked and verified issues such as you have seen can occur. Each geometry issue identified should be investigated to verify what it represents and it is generally safest to resolve each issue one at a time, although the tool will allow you to resolve multiple elements at once. But resolving multiple issues at once has a much greater potential for possible issues and we recommend great caution when doing so to avoid potential problems.
   2. As a general rule always make sure all NICP issues are resolved before running any PSC tool. It is best to spend extra time verifying all NICP possibilities are resolved before you move to address PSC issues.
   3. Recommended Network Review Fix tool Order – Here is a basic recommended order of using the tools although the only order that is critical is that NICP must be resolved before fixing PSC:

•Trace Network 1- Initial check
•Nodes in Close Proximity (Key to resolve first)
•Pipe Split Candidates
•Diameter Discrepancy Checks
•Crossing Intersecting Pipes
•Parallel and Duplicate Pipes
•Trace Network #2 – identify disconnected areas
•Orphan Pipes
•Orphan Nodes

As noted previously, If you have an up to date Annual Maintenance and would want to discuss further and or do a WebEx to review your model, please reach out to us at support@Innovyze.com and refer to this forum post and we would happy to assist you further.

Patrick Moore