Comparison of Steady-State Pipe Network Computer Programs

Date of Award

Summer 8-1-1982

Document Type


Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)


Civil & Environmental Engineering


Civil Engineering

Committee Director

Hanif Chaudhry

Committee Member

William A. Drewry

Committee Member

Dennis J. Fallon

Committee Member

A. Osman Akan

Call Number for Print

Special Collections LD4331.E54H36


Four widely used computer programs for the analysis of steady state flows in pipe networks are compared. These programs are NEWTH, written by Jeppson; KENTUCKY, written by Wood; FLOW, written by Epp and Fowler; and LIQSS, written by Stoner. Differences, similarities, advantages and disadvantages of these programs, and various options available are discussed for the benefit of possible future users. In addition, the efficiency of NEWTH, KENTUCKY, and FLOW was tested by simulating a typical network by each program. The listing of LIQSS was not available, and thus was not included in this comparison. In simulation, KENTUCKY used over twice the amount of CPU time as FLOW while NEWJTH used 26 percent more CPU time than did FLOW. Considering the efficiency comparison (including memory anti storage requirements, as well as CPU time) with the ease of preparing the input data, clarity of documentation, available options, and ease of adaption to computer systems did not leave any clear winner. Each program has its merits and may be best suited for a user in a particular situation.


In Copyright. URI: This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).



This document is currently not available here.