Four-Engine Pipe Comparator

HEC-RAS Pipe Networks (7.0) · InfoWorks ICM · EPA SWMM5 · SWMM6 / OpenSWMM (FLOW_ROUTING FV) — one benchmark system, four numerical philosophies

Same St. Venant physics, four ways of computing it

All four engines route unsteady flow through closed conduits from the same 1D conservation laws. What separates them is how pressurization is handled, implicit vs explicit time-stepping, and how the pipe network talks to the surface. This app is a working system for comparing them: a shared benchmark suite (SWMM5 .inp as the interchange format), a solver-numerics lab, a capability matrix, and a terminology map.

Two of the four are now finite volume — and they are not the same finite volume. HEC-RAS reduces its 2D shallow-water solver to 1D and keeps it semi-implicit (Casulli & Stelling), so the pressure wave never enters the timestep bound and there is no slot at all. OpenSWMM's FLOW_ROUTING FV is explicit and Godunov-type: an HLL Riemann problem solved at every face, with the Preissmann slot folded into the cross-section closure so no regime-switching branch exists. One buys a large stable step; the other buys shock capturing and exact conservation, and pays for it in substeps. Reading “finite volume” as one thing is the easiest mistake to make on this page.

What “SWMM6” means here: the next-generation open track — OpenSWMM (HydroCouple) plus SWMM5+ (CIMM.org) — rather than a shipped EPA release. FV is real and running in 6.0.0-alpha.3, not a roadmap item; the inherited hydrology rows are marked as lineage rather than as verified here. It is still alpha, so pin the commit, not the version, and edit COMPARISON_DATA at the top of this file as the alphas ship.