Garrich TorresCONSULTANTS
العربيةLet’s talk

What would you like to improve?

All solutionsSee guided examples
All demos

SMART INFRASTRUCTURE

Understand the signal. Compare the response.

Explore building readings in context, identify the next operational check and compare the impact of different response times.

Try the interactive demo

For facility and water operations teams

An unusual reading. A clear next step.

Flow is above the normal reference; pressure and tank level are below it. The operator needs to decide whether a site inspection is warranted.

A working exampleFictional data · fixed starting point

Flow meter · Pressure sensor · Tank level · Response model

Do these readings mean we have a leak?

What the evidence shows

These readings do not diagnose a leak. High flow with low pressure and tank level warrants a site check, followed by an operator’s decision.

Illustrative telemetry sampleIllustrative response modelIllustrative inspection step
Flow12.8 m³/h

Highest point in the sampled trend.

Pressure2.1 bar

Lower than the normal reference in the same simulator.

Tank level52%

Storage level at the time of the sample.

Explore the questions that matter

Why is this worth a site check?

Higher flow with lower pressure and a lower tank level than the normal reference is a pattern worth confirming on site. It could also have other causes, such as unusual demand or an instrument fault.

Illustrative telemetry sample
What does the response-time model assume?

If an excess of 0.5 m³/h is assumed, a 12-hour response would accumulate 6 m³ and a 72-hour response 36 m³. The 30 m³ difference compares two illustrative assumptions; it is not a measured loss or a promised saving.

Illustrative response model
What happens next?

An operator reviews the readings and decides whether to send someone to inspect the site. Nothing is shut off or changed automatically.

Illustrative inspection stepIllustrative telemetry sample

Supporting records (3)

Illustrative telemetry sampleFictional readings for review; they do not diagnose a leak.
Flow
12.8 m³/h
Pressure
2.1 bar
Tank
52%

Fictional readings, not data from a real meter, site or customer.

Illustrative response modelAssumed constant excess of 0.5 m³/h for comparison, not a measured loss or leak rate.
Assumed constant excess
0.5 m³/h

For comparison only: not a measured loss, a leak rate or GTC performance data.

Illustrative inspection stepSite check prepared for operator review; no equipment control.
Prepared action
Site check
Reviewer
Operator

No valve, pump or alarm is controlled from this example.

Preview the next step

Awaiting human review

Site inspection request

  1. Operator reviews the flow, pressure and tank readings.
  2. Confirm the sensors are reporting correctly.
  3. If the operator confirms an inspection is needed, assign a technician to check the supply line on site.
  4. Record what the inspection finds before any further decision.

This is a request for review, not an alarm or a control action. No automatic shutoff, valve actuation or damage-prevention guarantee is implied.

Preview only. Nothing is sent or changed.

See the signals together

Read flow, pressure and storage side by side instead of one alarm at a time.

Separate observation from assumption

Keep measured readings apart from what-if response models.

Route the check to a person

Prepare an inspection request that an operator reviews before anyone acts.

How this would work with your team

  1. Connect the agreed readings

    Read the meter, pressure and storage data your team already monitors, with its existing permissions.

  2. Explain the pattern

    Show the readings together, compare them with an agreed reference and label modelled assumptions separately.

  3. Hand over to operations

    Prepare the inspection step for an authorised operator, who decides what happens on site.

Fixed fictional snapshot with illustrative telemetry and an assumed response model. No live sensors, leak diagnosis, measured savings or real-world control. The full workspace below is a separate simulator.

Explore the full workspace

Independent sandbox. Changes here do not change the fixed example above. Use the controls below to explore other states.

Sample data · No live sensors, automatic control or water-safety assessment.

Building water explorer

From a signal to a human decision.

FlowCurrent scenario flow reading, in cubic metres per hour. The six samples have no timestamps, so they do not establish total consumption.12.8m³/h
PressureCurrent scenario pressure reading, in bar. One reading cannot diagnose a pump fault or certify safe operation.2.1bar
Tank levelCurrent scenario fill level as a percentage of capacity. Capacity is not supplied, so stored water volume cannot be calculated.52%
Six flow samplesm³/h
Sustained flow needs investigation

Suggested human review

Compare the pattern with occupancy and planned use. Ask a qualified operator to check meters and inspect on site before deciding on an intervention.

What would a faster response change?

Assumed excess: 0.5 m³/h, independent of the sampled total flow.

Excess volume by responseAssumed excess of 0.5 m³/h × response delay in hours. The model assumes excess stops at response; this is not a measured loss.6 m³
72h comparison baselineThe same assumed excess of 0.5 m³/h × 72 hours = 36 m³. A fixed comparison, not a measured operating baseline.36 m³
30 m³Avoided versus a 72h responseThe 72-hour comparison volume minus excess accumulated by the chosen response. A conditional estimate, not measured or guaranteed savings.

Assumes constant excess flow until response, then zero. Illustrative volumes, not measured losses or guaranteed savings.

Read-only preview · controls need JavaScript

Compare response time under one assumption

Fixed fictional initial example; unaffected by selections. Possible leak

  1. Inputs

    The latest of six fictional flow samples is 12.8 m³/h. The samples have an order, not supplied timestamps.

  2. Evidence

    The response model independently assumes 0.5 m³/h excess flow. It is not calculated from the sampled total flow.

  3. Finding

    At 12 hours, accumulated excess is 6 m³ versus a 36 m³ baseline at 72 hours: 30 m³ avoided under that assumption.

  4. Human action

    Compare occupancy and planned use, then ask a qualified operator to inspect the meters and site. The model assumes excess flow stops at response; it does not diagnose a leak or operate equipment.

Example sources: Six flow samples · Response delay

Plan a pilot

Inputs, deliverables and review
Inputs
One site’s timestamped readings, meter units and planned usage.
Deliverables
Alert comparison, response assumptions and operator review record.
Acceptance cases
Normal use, unexplained increase, interrupted readings and delayed response.
Reviewer
Site operator verifies the cause and authorises equipment action.
Next step
Name one meter and the response decision in your enquiry.
Implementation guide

Connect your assets to better decisions.

Discuss your infrastructure systems