scholarly journals How are Various Surrogate Indicators Consistent with Mechanical Reliability of Water Distribution Systems: From a Perspective of Many-Objective Optimization

Water ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 1669 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wang ◽  
Huang ◽  
Wang ◽  
Zhan ◽  
Wang ◽  
...  

Exploring the trade-off between cost and system reliability of water distribution systems (WDSs) has been focused for two decades. Due to the intensive computation associated with the reliability analysis, it is popular in the research community to replace this procedure by using surrogate indicators. However, the discussion on the correlation among different types of such indicators is generally lacking, which implies that a deeper understanding of this aspect is needed. This paper proposes a novel methodology of investigating the relationships among many commonly used surrogate indicators for measuring the mechanical reliability of WDSs. In particular, the optimal design of WDSs is formulated as a many-objective optimization problem, using cost and each surrogate indicator as an individual goal. Two benchmark design problems of different scales and complexities are considered for verifying the proposed method. The well-known multi-objective evolutionary algorithm (MOEA), namely Borg that is suitable for coping with problems involving many objectives, is used to obtain the best approximation to the Pareto-optimal fronts for both cases. Afterward, the one-pipe burst testing is conducted to quantify the correlation between mechanical reliability and surrogate indicators. Results suggest that investigating the correlation of surrogate indicators from the perspective of many-objective optimization provides a direct and efficient way of distinguishing better indicators from worse ones. Resilience-based surrogate indicators and the Redundancy indicator that only depends on nodal pressures are highly related to the mechanical reliability of WDSs. In contrast, entropy-based indicators exhibit poor performance in reflecting the mechanical reliability. These insights contribute to the selection of more appropriate surrogate indicators for the optimal design of WDSs for researchers and practitioners.

1997 ◽  
Vol 123 (4) ◽  
pp. 381-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Vasant Kumar Varma ◽  
Shankar Narasimhan ◽  
S. Murty Bhallamudi

Author(s):  
Avi Ostfeld

Water distribution systems least cost pipe sizing/design is probably the most explored problem in water distribution systems optimization. Attracted numerous studies over the last four decades, two main approaches were employed: decomposition in which an “inner” linear programming problem is solved for a fixed set of flows/heads, while the flows/heads are altered at an “outer” problem using a gradient or a sub-gradient type technique; and the utilization of an evolutionary optimization algorithm (e.g., a genetic algorithm). In reality, however, from a broader perspective the design problem is inherently of a multiobjective nature incorporating competing objectives such as minimizing cost versus maximizing reliability. This chapter reviews some of the literature on single and multiobjective optimal design of water distribution systems and suggests a few future research directions in this area.


2020 ◽  
Vol 61 ◽  
pp. 102306
Author(s):  
Seneshaw Tsegaye ◽  
Kristopher C. Gallagher ◽  
Thomas M. Missimer

Water ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Choi ◽  
Joong Kim

This study proposes a multi-objective optimal design approach for water distribution systems, considering mechanical system redundancy under multiple pipe failure. Mechanical redundancy is applied to the system’s hydraulic ability, based on the pressure deficit between the pressure requirements under abnormal conditions. The developed design approach shows the relationships between multiple pipe failure states and system redundancy, for different numbers of pipe-failure conditions (e.g., first, second, third, …, tenth). Furthermore, to consider extreme demand modeling, the threshold of the demand quantity is investigated simultaneously with multiple pipe failure modeling. The design performance is evaluated using the mechanical redundancy deficit under extreme demand conditions. To verify the proposed design approach, an expanded version of the well-known benchmark network is used, configured as an ideal grid-shape, and the multi-objective harmony search algorithm is used as the optimal design approach, considering construction cost and system mechanical redundancy. This optimal design technique could be used to propose a standard for pipe failure, based on factors such as the number of broken pipes, during failure condition analysis for redundancy-based designs of water distribution systems.


2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 741-756 ◽  
Author(s):  
Medhanie Hagos ◽  
Donghwi Jung ◽  
Kevin E. Lansey

Pipe bursts in water distribution systems (WDS) must be rapidly detected to minimize the loss of system functionality and recovery time. Pipe burst is the most common failure in WDS. It results in water loss out of the system, increased head losses, and low pressure at the customers' taps. Therefore, effective and efficient detection of pipe bursts can improve system resilience. To this end, this study proposes an optimal meter placement model to identify meter locations that maximize detection effectiveness for a given number of meters and type of meter. The linear programming model is demonstrated on a modified Austin EPANET hydraulic network. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for alternative pressure and flow meters are applied to investigate the relationship between the level of available information and pipe burst detection effectiveness. The optimal sensor locations were distinctly different depending on the type of meter and the objective to be considered. The ROC curves for alternative pressure and pipe flow meters showed that pipe flow meters are vulnerable to false alarms, and that using many pipe flow meters could detect all pipe bursts. Pressure meters could detect up to 82% of the burst events.


2014 ◽  
Vol 89 ◽  
pp. 839-847 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Páez ◽  
J. Saldarriaga ◽  
L. López ◽  
C. Salcedo

2015 ◽  
Vol 119 ◽  
pp. 53-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shanshan Li ◽  
Ronghe Wang ◽  
Wenyan Wu ◽  
Jilong Sun ◽  
Yanlong Jing

Author(s):  
Kegong Diao ◽  
Guangtao Fu ◽  
Raziyeh Farmani ◽  
Michele Guidolin ◽  
David Butler

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document