Sie sind auf Seite 1von 13

Environmental Software 8 ( 1993) 101- 113 -i

Optimization of water distribution system


I. Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta & P. Khanna
National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, Nagpur 440 020, India

(Received 28 February 1992; final version received 10 August 1992; accepted 10 November 1992)

ABSTRACT

An optimization algorithm with recourse to a nonlinear programming technique based on


the interior penalty function with Davidon-Fletcher-Powell method, incorporating the graph
theoretic approach for analysis of networks, has been developed for design of functional
and least-cost water distribution systems with multiple reservoirs. The model has the capability
to design a new system as well as to reorganize an existing system. Reorganization of
a system becomes necessary due to increased water demand resulting from an increase in
population density and enhanced service levels or expansion to the new areas. Further, the
hydraulic simulator based on graph theory enables design of all types of systems; viz. branched.
looped or a combination thereof including nodes with specified fixed energy grades. The
software package has been developed for use on an IBM-PC compatible micrrDcomputer. Tim
efficacy of the algorithm has been demonstrated through an example on design of a typical
water distribution system.

KEY WORDS

Water Distribution, Optimization, Nonlinear Programming, Davidon-Fietcher-Powell Method,


Interior Penalty Function Method, Network Analysis, Graph Theory, Computer software

SOFTWARE AVAILABILITY

Name of Software : WATDIS

The software has been developed in FORTRAN language and is available for use on IBM
PC-XT/AT compatible personal computers under MS-DOS as well as on HP-9050-AM computer
system under HP-UX operating system (Hewlett-Packard, USA).

The software is available from the authors at the National Environmental Engineering
Research Institute, Nehru Marg, Nagpur - 440 020, India.

INTRODUCTION extent through the application of mathematical


programming techniques for cost minimization.
Consequent upon the launching of the International
Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade (1981- Several researchers have developed algorithms
1990), organized water supply was accorded high based on heuristics, and linear and nonlinear
priority in less developed countries. The review of programming techniques, to solve the problem of
achievements against the goals set for the decade cost minimization for water distribution system.
indicate a considerable shortfall due to inadequate
financial resources amongst other constraints. Water Featherstone and El Jumaily [1] hypothesized that
distribution is a cost intensive system and, an unique linear gradient exists for a balanced network
accordingly, the situation could be resolved to a large which results in the optimal solution. Walski et al.
101
Environmental Software 0266-9838/93/$06.00 © 1993 Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd
102 L Gupta, J. K Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Khanna

[2] developed user friendly software based on the trial estimation of frictional bead-loss in pipes. It has been
and error approach to identify the op6mal combination shown by Jain et at. [9] that the use of this formula
of pipe sizes. results in errors up to =1=.30% and :f.55% in the estimation
of velocity and frictional bead-loss respectively for
Quindry et al. [3] developed an algorithm based extreme conditions of velocities and pipe roughness
on the gradient search technique incorporating a linear encountered in practice. The researchers also presented
programming approach. Swamee et al. [4] developed the Modified Hazen-Williams formula which obviates
an algorithm to reorganize a distribution system the inherent limitations of the Hazen-Williams
where the network is synthesized via linear formula and has been employed in this research.
programming to yield the new pipe diameters and the Thus, frictional bead-loss in a pipe link can be
input point pumping beads. estimated as,
L qt.So99
Watanatada [5] used Davidon-Fletcber-Powell
method to solve an unconstrained version of a 54 f ~ ........................... ...(la)
node network and reported on the unsuitability of the 994.62 Ca I " ~ D4 " ~
approach for large size networks. C,enedese et al. [6]
formulated a multiobjective optimization problem -- Z D--A'aog9 ...(lb)
considering construction cost (capital cost) and
management cost (operational cost) as the two in which, f is frictional bead-loss in pipe in m; L
objectives and obtained a Pareto optimal set (i.e. a is length of pipe in m; q is flow in pipe in
series of compromise solutions which take into m3/s; C r is coefficient of roughness, D is internal
account the existing relation between different points diameter of pipe in m; and Z is resistance
of view) for a direct pumping water distribution coefficient term for the pipe given by (Lq t's°99) /
system. Chiphinkar et al. [7] developed an algorithm (994.62 CRl"s°°9).
using interior penalty function with Davidon-Fletcber-
Powell method and demonstrated the efficacy of the
Cost Model
approach through a case study for a large sire system.
Lartsey and Mays 181 developed a methodology
The total cost of a water distribution system is the
based on reduced gradient method using an augmented sum of individual cost components in the system, i.e.
Lagrangian approach to incorporate pressure head
pipe network, pumping systems, power, and
bounds in the objective function. distribution reservoirs.
This paper addresses itself to the development Capital cost of pipe, including the cost of laying
of software for optimal design of a new, or optimal and jointing, can be expressed as,
augmentation of an existing, combined pumping and
gravity system with multiple reservoirs. For a new
Cpip~ = K I L D" ...(2)
design problem, given a network configuration, the
program computes the pipe diameters and reservoir
heights which minimize the total cost of the system in which, C p,pe
. is the cost of pipe in Indian Rupees
while satisfying the quantity and head requirements. (1 US $ = 25.95 Indian Rupees); and K I and a am
For reorganization, since the height of the existing coefficient and exponent of the regression equation and
reservoir and the existing pipeline must remain fixed, are functions of pipe material.
functional design is achieved through additional
pipes provided in parallel with existing ones Cast iron (CO, asbestos cement (AC) and galvanized
wherever necessary and providing new reservoir(s) or iron (GI) pipes have been considered for regression
enhancing the pumping capacity. The efficacy of analysis. Cost data have been taken from the Schedule
the algorithm is demonstrated through an example of rates (1990-91) provided by the Maharashtra Water
considering reorganization of a typical water Supply and Sewerage Board, India. The values of
distribution system. coefficients for different pipe materials obtained by
regression analysis (Eq.2) are presented in Table 1.

FORMULATION OF PROBLEM The capital cost of a pumping system can be


expressed as,
Hydraulic Model
C = K'(HP) b ...(3)
pump
Most researchers on opamization of water supply
have employed the Hazen-Williams formula for in which, C pump is the total cost of pumping system
Optimization of water distribution system 103

TABLE I in which, C is total cost of reservoir in Indian


Rupees; K 4 and c are regression coefficients; and V
REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS OF
is capacity of reservoir in m 3. Regression analysis
COST EQUATION FOR DIFFERENT
PIPE MATERIALS yields 8840 and 0.73 as the values of K4 and c
respectively. Reservoir capacity is fixed by balancing
~qui~ments between the rates of pumping and
PIPE REGRESSION demand.
MATERIAL COEFFICIENTS
Total armualized cost of the system forms the
K1 a basis for optimization. The annu~lizing factor (AF) is
given by

Asbestos Cement 2812 1.74 I (I + lY'- Ks


AF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + P ...(8)
Cast kon 4920 1.38 (I + 1)y - 1
Galvanized iron 240 1.10
in which, I is rate of interest; y is life of component
in years ; K is salvage factor, and P is maintenance
in Indian Rupees; K' is coefficient of regression equation; factor.
HP is horse power of pump; and b is exponent dependent
on type and HP range of pumps. Home power of
p u m p can be expressed as, HYDRAULIC SIMULATION

ItgQH In tbe analysis of looped water distribution system


HP ............... AQH ...(4) the necessary conditions are:
746q
I) The algebraic sum of head-loss in pipes around
in which, It is density of water in kg/m3; g is acceleration a loop must be zero (energy equation) for all loops,
due to gravity in m/s2; Q is total discharge in m3/ i.e.
s; H is pumping bead in m; q is combined efficiency
of pump and motor;, and A = Itg / (746~1). Therefore Nk
Eq. 3 could be rewritten as, Y" fki = 0, for k th loop ...(9)
i=l
Cpu,,p = K2(QH) b ...(5)
in which, N k is the number of pipes in k th loop,
in which, K 2 = K'(A) b. Regression analysis yields fkl is the head-loss in ith pipe of the k th loop.
151320 and 0.84 as the values of I ~ and b respectively.
2) The algebraic sum of in-flows and out-flows
The annual cost of power can be expressed as, at a node must be zero (continuity equation) for all
nodes, i.e.
Cr,o,' = K3QH ...(6)
Mk
in which, Cpow is annual cost of power in Indian Y" qkl + Uk = 0, for k th node ...(10)
rupees and K 3 is coefficient of regression equation. i=l
Regression analysis of Eq. 6 yields 22920 as the value
of K 3. Annual cost of power has been computed based in which, M k is the number of pipes connected to
on unit cost of energy, hours of pumping, combined k th node; qki is the flow in ith pipe connected to
efficiency of pump and motor, and yearly average k th node; and U k is demand at the k th node.
consumption factor.
A water distribution network may be viewed as
Capital cost of elevated service reservoir can be a directed linear graph which is composed of a collection
expressed as, of finite number of edges (pipe sections each with
a specified length, diameter and roughness coefficient).
C,:., = (0.02H + 0.76)K4(V)c ...(7) A spanning tree is a connected system of edges which
104 I. Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Khanna

contains all the nodes but no loop. The nootree edges k = (2p-n+2) ..... (2p+l); j = l,...,n
constitute the elements of the ~ which is the
complement of spanning tree. gk(X) = Zfji + H I - H., = 0 ...(15)

Using graph theoretic formulation (Boulos and k = (2p+2) ..... (2p+s); j = 2,...,s
Airman [11]) for analysis of looped networks, Eqs.
9 and l0 could be combined in a single matrix equation.
gk(X) = Rmin R.J -< 0 ...(16)
The number of simultaneous hydraulic nonlinear
equations and the number of variables to be solved
k = (2p+s+l) ..... (2p+s+d); j = 1..... d
in this method is equal to the number of couee pipes
in the network (p - n + 1), in which p and n are
gk(X) = H.j Hmax _< 0 ...(17)
the number of pipes and nodes respectively. An energy
equation is added to the full equation set for each
node where energy grade or pre~ure is specified except k = (2p+s+d+l) ..... (2p+s+d+e); j = 1..... e
tbr the reference node. Modified Newton's method
(Dennis and Schnabel [121) has been used in this gk(X) = H.J < 0 ...(18)
research to solve the resulting system of nonlinear
equations. k = (2p+s+d+e+l) ..... (2p+s+d+2e); j = 1 ..... e

in which, e is number of new reservoirs; s is number


OPTIMIZATION OF DISTRIBUTION NETWORK of nodes with specified grade (existing reservoir or
pump); Dml n is minimum permissible diameter, d is
The p r o b l e m has been formulated as a cost number of demand nodes;
H. is the head at node
minimization problem subject to constraints on J
with specified grade; R i, is minimum desirable residual
minimum pipe diameter, minimum residual head ( I m
residual head is equivalent to a pressure of 0.1 head at the demand nodes;
R. is residual head at
J
kg/cm2), and m i n i m u m and m a x i m u m height of jth demand node; and H m a x is maximum permissible
elevated service reservoirs. Consumption at the demand reservoir height. The minimum permissible height is
nodes are known or computed based on population taken as zero. This poses a constrained nonlinear
served and per capita waler requirement. Diameter of problem with nonlinear nonconvex objective function
pipes and height of reference reservoir or pumping and nonconvex comtmints. The constraints (16), (17)
head constitute the elements of the design vector, i.e. and (18) are implicit functions of design variables.
The ,set of equations (13), (14) and (15) constitute
X = IDI,D 2..... Dp,Hll r. Height of new reservoirs and
the largest number of constraints of this problem which
residual bead al nodes are functions of diameter of
are solved by the hydraulic simulator thereby
pipes anti height of the reference reservoir/pumping
significantly reducing the number of constraints t o
head. Accordingly, the problem is formulated as,
t(--p+d+2e) for nonlinear optimization.
p e
The nonlinear problem is solved by the interior
min F ( X ) = 5". KtLIDi" + Y- K2(QIHi) b + penalty function method (Rao [131) in which the
i=l i=l constrained problem is convened to an unconstrained
one by appending the constraints to the objective function
e e
through penalty factor r, and weighting factors w k,
)". K3QiH i + 5-" (0.02H i + 0.76)K4(Vi)C ...(ll)
k = 1..... t.
i=l i=l
Thus, the objective function is,
subject to the comtraints
t wk
min O(X, r, w) = F ( X ) + rE ...... ...(19)
gk(X) = Dmi" - D.J < 0 ...(12) k=l g,,

k = i ..... p; j = 1..... p The unconstrained optimization of O (X, r, w)


is to be carried out for a decreasing sequence of
gk ( x ) = )-"fji = 0 ...(13) penalty factor (r) and weighting factors (wk). The choice
of initial penalty factor r and the weights Wk, have
k = ( p + l ) ..... (2p-n+l); j = 1..... (p-n+l) considerable influence on the effectiveness of the
method. It might appear that by choosing very small
gk(X) = )-'.qj~ + Uj = 0 ...(14) values of r one can avoid an excessive number of
Optimi:ation of water distribution system 105

iterations for minimization of the O-funcfon. However,


if too small a value of r is used, the initial minimization
will drive the solution to the minimum of F(X) itself, READ NI~rW(}RK I)ATA
a point unlikely to be near a constrained minimum. DEMANDS. CONT PARAMErTIF.RN
Comequently, a considerable amount of time will be
required in following a path to reach the constrained INVOKE IIYDRAUUC SIMULATI)R I
(;Lrr FLoW IN EA(.II PIPI~ AND I
minimum. On the other hand, if r is too large the RF.q;IDUAL nEAO AT eACII NODE I
minimum in the first few iterations will each time
be forced well away from the boundary and the search NO
will also take a long time. Values of r and w which
give the value of O (X, r, w) within the range 1.15
to 1.6 times the value of F(X) have been found to
be satisfactory in achieving faster convergence.
i EEl
P,Ir.% AGE
Contribution of diameterconsbaints in the unconstrained
INITIAI.17Jff ITERATION COUNI~.R 1'
function O could be significantly different from that ANn PENALTY I~ACTOR '¢': C()MPtrll~
of the residual head and reservoir height constraints VALUF.~ OF WEIGIITINO FACTORS
as the diameter of pipes usually varies between 50 : i
t
mm and 600 nun and the residual head and reservoir [EVALUAT~ OBIECTIVBFUNCTION}
height vary between 8 m and 30 m. Therefore, a
different weighting factor (w~) is assigned to each CAIJ. I)r:PM SUgR()UTIN~ OBTAIN 1
NEW glTr OF IJP.gI(;N VARIARI.F.~
constraint in order to ensure normalization.
Consequently, the contribution of different gk(X) to
the G-function an: equal at the initial point. YP.~

Tim unconstrained problem is solved by Davidon-


Fletcher-Powell method (DFPM) (Rao [131 and
Himmelblau [14]) as it is powerful, gives good
convergence, and needs calculation of first order partial
derivatives only. However, as some of the constraints
are implicit functions of the design variables making
Rt.:.I)UCE'¢ j NO
closed form analytical solution difficult to obtain, the
gradient of ~ is computed numerically using a finite
difference scheme. The finite difference scheme needs
evaluation of the objective function with incremented
value of decision variable. Therefore, the hydraulic
simulalor has to be invoked for solving the energy
and continuity equations for computing each component
of the gradient which is a time consuming process.
However, since the increment is small, it may be
Fig. 1. Flowchart for main program.
assumed that the changes in pipe flows are not
appreciable, therefore, old flow values are used
for computing the residual head.s, thereby reducing
the time required for computation of gradient. The
O P T I M I Z A T I O N A L G O R I T H M AND C O M P U T E R
direction matrix is updated in such a way that it SOFTWARE
eliminates the need for computation of Hessian matrix
and iLs inverse. The cubic interpolation method is used
Flow charts for tim optimization algorithm are depicted
for one-dimensional minimization in the process of
in Figs. 1 through 4. The main program (Fig. 1)
calculating the optimal step length.
invokes the subroutine ANAL (Fig. 2) for performing
the hydraulic simulation of the network and the
The solution thus obtained is a local opdmum. subroutine DFPM (Fig. 3) for optimization which in
The global optimality of the solution is difficult to turn invokes subroutine ONEDIM (Fig. 4) for
verify using modified Kuhn-Tucker type sufficient computing the optimal step length employing cubic
optimality theorem (Mangasarian [15]; Gupta and Vartak interpolation. Difference between the objective function
II 61) as some of the constraints are implicit functions values for two successive iterations being less than
of design variables and the objective function is 0.1 has been taken as the convergence criterion for
nonconvex in nature. optimization subject to a maximum number of iterations
106 I. Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Kharma

ENTER WITH X J J ENTER w m l DESIGN VECTOR X

1 1
SET STEP LF.NGTII o f t I: r r E R t l
SET DIRECTION MATRIX J AS

1 UNIT MATRIX OF ORDER OF X

1
SOLVE SYSTEM OF NONLINFAR
1 COMPUTE V ~

.
AT X

EQUATIONS BY MODIFIED
NEW'TOWS METIIOD. COMPUTE DIRE(TTION VECTOR .q
FIND FLOW IN ALL PIPES AND NORMAI.ISE S
S = - J 9@: S, t S/4(y...~;~)

I ,,E^,, , I 1
CAI.I. ONEIIIM . COMPUTE TIlE
()PTIMAL ,RTE.P I.EN(TI'I! ~" AND
NEW DF.~I(|N VECTOR X m
C()MI'U'rE GRAI)IENT V ~ . AT X.

Fig. 2. Flowchart for hydraulic simulation.


YES

?
(lm,,~) tO achieve convergence given by,

O-F
I = 6 + INT [. . . . . . . . . * 5] ...(20)
F
YES

in which, INT represents the integer part of the


expression within the brackets; Q and F are the values
of unconstrained and constrained objective function at ~ Y F . S
the initial solution as defined in Eqs. 19 and 11
respectively. It has been observed from the examples
and case study that the algorithm converges before
the maximum number of iterations allowed in the program
is reached. UPDATE ) : J - J + O + E
WIIERE, fl - S St/N'P' F
E - - ( I F) (I F)*/FrIF
The hydraulic simulator is based on graph theory AND F = VON-V~
and comprises the following steps :

Find the minimum spanning tree (MST) based


on resistance coefficient of pipes
l
1
. Form the circuit matrix corresponding to the tree
Fig. 3. Flowchart for DFPM (submudne).
and cotree subgraphs

. Form the pseudo-circuit which is a chain of of the upper triangular matrix are stored resulting in
connected tree branches between the reference node substantial reduction in memory storage.
and a node with specified grade
The DFPM subroutine based on the interior
4. Solve the resulting simultaneous equations using penalty function method with recourse to Davidon-
modified Newton's method to obtain the flow Fletcher-Powell method comprises the following steps:
in all the pipes
1. Initialize direction matrix to identity matrix (J)
5. Compute the residual heads at all the nodes
2. F'md the search direction (S)
Newton's method requires the inversion of the
Jacobian which is symmetric and hence only the elements 3. Find the optimal step length (ct*)
Optimization of water distribution system 107

~ wn'll S dk~r SIZE aJt.vo I


ANO DIRECTION VECTOR S
I

CALL ANAL; FIND R

IEVALUAT1B ~ . AND VO, AT X.


SET F, 0 , . F,, - $TVO. [ I
i

: s~w,,.1,..I , o / ~
i^

CX)MPUTB OPTIMAL STEP LIBlqoTn : [


a" A+(F.,~.Z÷W) (B-A) I (F.u.+Fm.÷ZT..)
WIIERE. 7...] (FA-F,) (B-A) + F.u. + F,,
AND W . Z(ZLF,~P~p)
I
I.-.a':..- v.I
F~ i .~P'VO. ]

EVALUATE 0 , AT I
CALL ANAL TO OBTAIN XF~LOWS I A-B'; F, - F,,{
AND R. EVALUATE (~, AT X, [ FA, - S~VO, ]
CONV - I (R*V~N) I (1~11 lV~.I) I[

NO

IS~ x - x. I

Fig. 4. Flowchart for ONEDIM (subroutine).

4. Compute the new solution (X N) the value of optimum step length c~', subject to a
maximum of three iterations. Convergence criterion for
5. Test the new solution for optimality and if cubic interpolation is given by,
optimal, return
(ST V @)
6. Update the direction matrix and go to step 2
_< 0.001 ...(21)
IISll IIV~ll
The convergence criterion for unconstrained
minimization is taken as II VO N II <: 0.001 subject
to a maximum number of iterations equal to the number Three situations can be identified for design/
of design variables, where., II VO N U = "~,Y__,(VONIz). reorganization of a water distribution system, viz. new
Cubic interpolation technique is employed for obtaining design, augmented design and selective augmentation.
108 L Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Khanna

For a new design all components of the system are ® @


to be designed. For augmented design along with the G6
tltS
introduction of new pipes and input points in the
expanded area, parallel pipe finks are allowed to he ® ®
provided for all the existing pipes whereas for selective ®
augmentation the parallel pipe links are allowed to tSO
be provided only for a few selected pipes. Therefore,
the software has been designed to operate in tluee ® _-"@
modes corresponding to the above three situations.
(~).~
., 11
A pipe with non-commercial diameter D of length ,o

@
L can be split in two sections of lengths L u and
(L - L ) in the next upper and lower commercial ®). ' '
sizes (D u and Dr) such that their combined hydraulic SO 15
characteristics are the same as fl~at of the non- t4 (~)
@ ,
commercial diameter pipe. Noting that the head-loss ! t
t |
in the non-commercial diameter pipe is equal to the |
@
sum of head-losses in two sections, i.e. f = f+f~, in
t !
which f is the head-loss in the upper diameter section ! i
t !
and f~ is the head-loss in the lower diameter section,
the following expression is obtained for computing the 1, @ ,' 18

length of the upper diameter section using Eq. la.


0 PiPE NO.
(D~.8o99 Di-4.8o'~)
L = L .............................. (22) • NODE NO.
(Du~.8o'~ Dj~.8o9¢)
6 EXISTING INPUT POINT
Thus the optimal solution with continuous diameter
,~, NEW INPUT POINT
pipes is rounded to tire nearest commercially available
pipe sizes. EXISTING PIPE LINK

The computer code has been written in --- NEW PIPE I..INK
FORTRAN-77 for use on an IBM-PC/AT-386 @ 33
MHz computer, with or without math coprocessor Fig. 5. Typical water distribution system.
support, 640K bytes memory, 1.2M bytes high capacity
floppy disk drive and a hard disk drive, under MS- The network, depicted in Fig. 5, comprising 30
DOS operating system. The programs have been pipes (24 existing and 6 new) and 18 nodes including
compiled using Microsoft FORTRAN Optimizing 16 demand nodes (all nodes except nodes 7 and 13),
Compiler Version 4.1 and linked using Microsoft is supplied through a single reservoir of 20 m height
Segmented-Executable Linker Version 5.01.20. The at node 7 with ground level of 1(11.3 m. The ground
maximum size of the distribution system that can he level at different demand nodes varies between 100.5
designed using the software is limited to 150 pipes, m and 102 m. The network is similar to the one
105 nodes, 100 demand nodes and 5 reservoirs. considered in Swamee et at. [41. Constraints on
Incorporating these limitations the size of the executable minimum nodal pressure and pipe diameter are taken
program is 440K bytes. The programs have also been as 12 m and 50 mm respectively. Cast iron (CI) pipes
compiled on HP-9050-AM computer system under I-IP- have been employed in the design for diameters of
UX operating system. 80 mm and above whereas galvanized iron (GI) pipes
have been used for diameters less than 80mm. The
coefficient of roughness for old and new pipes are
EXAMPLE taken as 0.7 and 0.9 respectively. The demand peak
factor (ratio of peak and average daily demands) of
To illustrate the usefulness and applicability of the 2.5 has been considered for design.
algorithm and software, it was used to design a typical
water distribution system having existing and proposed Two types of studies have been carried out using
pipe links including expansion into new areas. this network to meet an increase in demand.
Optimi=ation of water distribution system 109

TABLE 2a

O P T I M A L DESIGN W I T H S P U T C O M M E R C I A L D I A M E T E R PIPES

PIPE NODE LENGTH DIAMETER FLOW VELOCITY HEAD-LOSS


NO. (m) (m) (m3/s) (m/s)
FROM TO (m) (m/Km)

400.00 .0800 .0019 .39 1.803 4.508


170.81 .1250 .0054 .4.4 0.366 2.144
229.19 .1000 .0054 .69 1.438 6.272
300.00 .1250 .0066 .54 1.448 4.825
202.69 .I000 .0036 .46 0.602 2.97 I
97.31 .0800 .0036 .72 0.846 8.69 I
4 450.00 •0650 .0012 .36 2.268 5.040
353.89 .0650 .0012 .36 !.!58 3.272
96.11 .0500 .0012 .62 1.111 II .558
I 200.00 .0650 .0008 .2,1 0.488 2.439
.1000 .0033 .41 0.488 2.4~
6 280.00 •0800 .0013 .24 0.349 I.?A5
7 300.00 .1500 .0086 .49 0.968 3.225
225.68 .1500 .~D4 .53 0.540 2:394
74.32 .1250 .0094 .77 0.428 5.75.t
4 320.00 .0500 .0004 .19 0.666 2.082
146.23 .0800 .0011 .23 0.158 I .I)79
173.77 .0650 .0011 .35 0.509 2.928
8 5 350.00 .0800 .0026 .52 2.640 7.542
.0800 .0033 .66 2.640 7.542
9 6 350.00 . 1000 .0041 .52 2.067 5.9(15
.2000 .0331 1.06 2.067 5.9(}5
I0 8 450.00 .1500 .0118 .67 2.569 5.710
.1250 .0095 .76 2.569 5.710
II 9 250.00 .0650 .0013 .40 1.510 6.038
121.06 .1000 .0036 .46 0.367 3.03 I
128.94 .0800 .0037 .72 1.143 8.865
12 10 425.00 .0800 .0025 .49 2.948 6.937
63.83 .1500 .0110 .62 0.202 3.164
361.17 • 1250 .0110 .89 2.747 7.606
13 11 500.00 .0500 .0007 .36 3.387 6.775
441.25 .1000 .0051 .65 2.439 5.527
58.75 .0800 .0051 I.OI 0.95O 16.165
14 !1 370.00 .1000 .0068 .86 5.454 14.741)
293.03 • 1250 .0131 1.07 3.085 I 0.528
76.97 .1 000 .0131 1.67 2.370 31).793
15 8 12 350.00 .1250 •0121 .98 3.168 9.052
16 10 9 320.00 .0650 .0011 .31 1.201 3.753
.0500 .0006 .33 1.201 3.753
17 10 II 350.00 .0650 .0006 .17 0.439 1.255
.0500 .0004 .Ig 0.439 1.255
18 II 12 460.00 .0500 .0002 .09 0.284 (}.617
72.88 .0800 .0005 .10 0.018 0.253
387.12 .0650 .0OO5 .15 0.265 (I.686
19 9 13 250.00 .0500 .(~03 .17 0.447 1.788
.0650 .0009 .26 0.4.47 1.788
20 10 13 270.00 .0800 .(m23 .46 1.648 6.10]
.0500 .0009 .43 !.648 6.103
110 L Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Khanna

PIPE NODE !-r~G'I'H !DIAMETER FLOW VELOCITY HEAD- LOS S


NO. (m) (m) (mS/s) (m/s)
FROM TO (m) (m/Km)

21 II 14 300.00 .0800 .0017 .34 1.068 3.562


118.34 .2000 .0142 .45 0.150 1.268
181.66 .1500 .0142 .80 O.919 5.057
22 12 15 320.00 .1000 .0033 .41 1.247 3.8q7
220.26 .1000 .0032 .41 0.547 2.437
99.74 .0800 .0032 .64 0.711 7.127
23 14 13 500.00 .0500 .0001 .06 O. 140 0.28 I
323.79 .0650 .0002 .07 0.048 0.148
176.21 .0500 .0002 .II 0.092 0.524
24 14 15 450.00 .0650 .0005 .15 0•462 1.027
.0500 .0003 .16 0.462 I .(127
25 12 14 393.72 .0650 .0007 .21 0.466 I. 183
76•28 .0500 .0007 .35 0.319 4.18(I
26 13 16 440.00 .1250 .0047 .38 0.722 1.64 I
27 14 17 450.00 .1000 .0035 .45 1.240 2.756
28 15 18 490.00 .0800 .0018 .36 1.235 2.52 I
29 16 17 261.98 .1000 .0012 .15 0.103 0.3~M
238.02 .0800 .0012 .23 0.275 I. 154
30 17 18 369.44 .0800 .0009 .18 0.258 0.697
105.56 .0650 .0009 .27 0.200 1.893

I. Assuming that the source at node 7 is sufficient, TABLE 2b


no new input point is introduced. In this case, only RESIDUAL HEADS IN O P T I M A L DESIGN
parallel pipelines and new pipelines are considered for
reorganization. The number of design variables and NODE GROUND DEMAND RESIDUAL
constraints for nonlinear optimization are 30 and 46 NO. LEVEL HEAD
respectively. (m) (ME/d) (m)

Table 2a presents the results of optimal design ID 101.45 .1163 15.58


giving the diameters of parallel pipes and new pipes 2D 101.00 •1406 17.87
along with the split pipe lengths for upper and lower 3D 102.00 •1856 18.33
commercial sizes. For each pipe link, the lust row 4D 101.50 • 1350 16.58
gives the existing pipe size, the second and third rows 5D 101.75 .1725 14.79
give the split pipe lengths in upper and lower 6D 100.50 •3787 18.73
commercial sizes respectively. The third row is absent 7R 101•30 -3.3316 20.00
for those pipes which do not need splitting. The residual 8D 101.40 .2625 17.36
heads and nodal demands for the optimal design are 9D 100.90 .1875 14.08
presented in Table 2b. The computer time taken for 10D 101.25 .2663 15.13
optimization of this network was 68.54 minutes• The liD 102.00 .3450 13.82
total cost of the parallel pipes and new pipes is 1,476,000 12D 100.80 .1931 14.75
Indian Rupees (US $ 56,900). 13 101.40 13.19
14 D 101.70 .4144 13.06
2. Assuming that the source at node 7 is not sufficient, 15D 101.50 .1894 12.78
the system needs to be reorganized by providing parallel 16D 101.40 .1215 12.40
pipelines, new pipelines and an additional reservoir 17 D 101.30 .1294 12.15
at node 13. The diameter of new and parallel pipes 18D 100.95 .0938 12.00
and height of the new reservoir have to be determined.
The number of design variables and constraints for D = Demand node
nonlinear optimization are 30 and 48 respectively. R = Reservoir node
Optimization of water distribution system 111

TABLE 3a

O P T I M A L DESIGN WITH SPLIT C O M M E R C I A L D I A M E T E R PIPES

PIPE NODE LENGTH DIAMETER FLOW VELOCITY HEAD-LOSS


NO. (m) (m) (m3/$) (m/s)
FROM TO (m) (m~(m)

1 400.00 .0800 .0020 .40 1.188 2.969


2 300.00 .1250 .0075 .61 1.154 3.847
3 450.00 .0650 .0013 .40 2.687 5.97 I
347.73 .0650 .0013 .40 1.318 3.792
102.27 .0500 .0013 .67 1.370 13.393
200.00 .0650 .0007 ,22 0.408 2.(138
127.07 .0650 .0007 .20 0,135 1.06(]
72.93 .0500 .0007 .33 0.273' 3.744
280.00 .0800 .0015 ,29 0.475 1.696
300.00 .1500 .0155 .88 1.781 5.937
320.00 .0500 .0004 ,21 0.822 2.567
267.38 .0650 .0009 ,26 0.485 1.813
52.62 .0500 .0009 ,44 0.337 6.405
8 350.00 .0800 .0010 ,20 0.305 0.872
9 350.00 .1000 .0069 ,88 3.410 9.743
10 450.00 .1500 .0184 1,04 3.647 8.1{14
il 250.00 .0650 .0015 .46 1.979 7.917
68.47 .1000 .0038 .49 0.226 3.3(]3
181.53 .0800 .0038 .76 1.754 9.661
10 6 425.00 .0800 .0044 .87 5.203 12.242
6 !1 500.00 .0500 .0003 ,13 0.549 1.097
405.71 .0650 .0005 .16 0.301 0.743
94.29 .0500 .0005 .27 0.247 2.624
7 11 370.00 .1000 .0073 .93 3.959 1().699
8 12 350.00 .1250 .0095 .78 2.074 5.926
10 9 320.00 .0650 .0018 .55 3.529 11.028
276.41 .0800 .0037 .73 2.472 8.942
43.59 .0650 .0037 1.10 1.058 24.276
10 11 350.00 ,0650 .0023 .69 5.753 16.437
.0800 .0051 1.02 5.753 16.437
18 11 12 460.00 .0500 .0005 .26 1.762 3.831
200.06 .0800 .0016 .31 0,389 1.946
259.94 .0650 .0016 .48 1.373 5.284
19 13 250.00 .0500 .0014 .70 5,776 23. I (J3
59.58 .0800 .0039 .78 0,597 I0.021
190.42 .0650 .0039 1.18 5.180 27.205
20 13 10 270.00 .0800 .0027 .54 2.247 8.322
97.10 .2000 .0222 .71 0.277 2.856
172.90 .1500 ,0222 1.26 1.970 I 1.394
112 L Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Khanna

PIPE NODE ! .h-~q'GTH DIAMETER FLOW VELOCITY HEAD-LOSS


NO. (m) (m) (m3~) (m~)
FROM TO (m) (m/Kin)

21 11 14 300.00 .0800 .0034 .68 2.41 I 8.(}38


22 12 15 320.00 .1000 .0050 .64 1.738 5.43(I
23 13 14 500.00 .0500 .0013 .67 10.409 20.819
139.91 .0800 .0038 .75 1.304 9.318
360.09 .0650 .0038 1.13 9.109 25.296
24 14 15 450.00 .0650 .0008 .24 1.088 2.419
64.44 .0650 .0005 .16 0.049 (I.763
385.56 .0500 .0005 .28 1.040 2.696
25 12 14 315.87 .0800 .0010 .20 0.279 0.884
154.13 .0650 .0010 .31 0.370 2.4(10
26 13 16 115.30 .1500 .0129 .73 0.490 4.249
324.70 • 1250 .0129 1.05 3.316 10.212
27 17 14 186.54 .1000 .0038 .49 0.613 3.288
263.46 .0800 .0038 .76 2.534 9.616
28 15 18 309.05 .0800 .0009 .18 0.212 (}.685
180.95 .0650 .0009 .27 0.337 1.860
29 16 17 446.88 .1250 .0094 .76 2.565 5.740
53.12 .1000 .0094 i.19 0.892 16.791}
30 17 18 388.92 .0650 .0018 .55 2.685 6.~}'~
86.08 .0500 .0018 .93 2.099 24.383

TABLE 3b The results of optimal design are presented in


RESIDUAL HEADS IN O P T I M A L DESIGN Tables 3a and 3b. The optimal height of the new
reservoir and the flow from it are 24 m and 1.6657
NODE GROUND DEMAND RESIDUAL ML/d respectively. The flow from the old reservoir
NO. LEVEL HEAD is 1.6659 ML/d. The computer time taken for
(m) (ML/d) (m) optimization of this network was 52.53 minutes• The
total cost is 1,555,100 Indian Rupees (US $ 59,900)
ID 101.45 .1163 15.75 which comprises the following component costs; cost
2D 101.00 .1406 17.37 of the parallel pipes and new pipes is 544,100 (US
3D 102.00 • ! 856 17.52 $ 21,000), cost of reservoir is 900,000 (US $ 34,700),
4D 101.50 •1350 15.33 cost of pump is 79,000 (US $ 3,040) and cost of
5D 101.75 .1725 15.86 power is 32,000 (US $ 1,230) Indian Rupees.
6D 100.50 .3787 17.40 For comparing the cost in the two cases, cost
7R 101.30 -1.6659 20.00 of pump and power given in the second case should
8D 101.40 •2625 16.25 not be considered as it is implied in the first case
9D 100.90 .1875 18.71 also although not computed separately. It is observed
10D 101.25 .2663 21.92 from the two cases that providing a second reservoir
liD 102.00 .3450 15.31 at node 13 is more economical than to provide parallel
12D 100.80 .1931 14.78 pipe lines alone. Thus different cost estimates employing
13R 101.40 - 1.6657 24.01 the software help the design engineer in arriving at
14D 101.70 .4144 13.24 functional and least cost design.
15D 101.50 • 1894 12.34
16D 101.40 .1215 20.19
17D 101.30 .1294 16.81 CONCLUSIONS
18D 100.95 .0938 12.35
An optimization algorithm has been presented for design
D = Demand Node of least-cost water distribution system with multiple
R = Reservoir Node reservoirs in which reference reservoir height and pipe
Optimi:ation of water distribution system 113

diameters ate the decision variables. In most of the 4. Swamee. PK. and Sharma" A.K. Reorganization of Water
Distribution System. Journal of Environmental Engineering.
water supply systems serving areas with high population
ASCE 1990, 116(3), 588-600.
density the cost of reservoirs, pumps and power are
dominant. Accordingly, the objective function includes 5. Watamat~a. T. l..~a,.~tCost D~ign of Water Distribution System.
cost of pumps, power and reservoirs along with the Journal of the Hydraulics Division. ASCE 1973. 99(I-IY9),
1497-1513.
cost of pipes. The software developed runs on IBM
PC/AT-386 in a reasonable time (approximately 1 hou0 6. Cenede~, A., Gallerano, F., and Misiti, A. Multiobjecdve
for a medium size network. Analysis in Optimal Solution of Hydraulic Networks, Jonrnal
of Hydraulic Engineering. ASCE 1987, 113 (9), 1133-1143.
The example study presented in the paper 7. Chiplunkar. A.V., Mehndiratta" S.L, and Khanna" P.. Looped
demonstrates the efficacy of the optimization algorithm. Water Dixtribution System Optimization for Single Loading.
Various options of augmentation/expansion of an Journal of Environmental Engineering, ASCE 1986, 112(2)
existing system can be considered, in a reasonable 264-279.
time using this software on an inexpensive computer 8. Lan.sey, K.E. and Mays. L.W~ Optimization Model for Water
like an IBM-PC/AT, for appraisal of different solutions, Distributi,tm Sy~em Design, 1ournal of ltydraulic Engineering.
such as, whether a new reservoir is required or ASCE 1989, 115(10), 1401-1418.
strengthening the existing network with parallel pipe
9. Jain. A.K., Moran, D.M., and Khanna, P. Modified i[a~en-
lines is adequate for meeting the increased demand. Williams Formula, Journal of the Environmental Engineering
Division. ASCE 1978. 104(EEl). 137-146.
In summary, use of the algorithm presented in
I0. Schedule of Rates, Maharaahtra Water Supply and Sewerage
this r e . a r c h would provide a useful tool t0 the
Board. Office of tim Superintendent "Engineer, Environmental
practicing engineers and decision makers in less Engineering Works Division, Nagpur. 1990-91.
developed countries in arriving at least cost solutions
to water distribution system design problems. II. Bouh~. P. and Airman. T. A Graph-theoretic Approach to
Explicit Nonlinear Pipe Nctwork Optimization, Applied
Mathematical Modelling. 1991, 15. September, 459-466.

12. l)cnni,t, J.E., aiKt Schnab¢l. R.B., Numerical Methods fi~r


Unconstrained Optimization and Nonlinear Equations. 1983,
REFERENCES Preniict:-llall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

I:eatl~tstone. R.E. i~d F,l-lumaily, K.K. Opllmal Diameter 13. Rat, S.S. Optimization theory and applications. 1987, Wiley
Selection fin" Pipe Networks. Journal of the Ilydraulics Division, F..a.~tem Lid. Bombay.
1983, ASCI~ IO9(|1Y2), 221-234.
14. llimmelblau. D.M. Applied Nonlinear Programming. 1972.
2. Walski. T.M.. C,ex~ler. J. and Sj~trom, J.W. Selecling Optimal McGraw-llill Book Company, New York.
Pipe Sir,,t for Water Distribution Syxtems. Journal of American
Water Works Association, 1988, 80(2), 35 - 39. 15. Manga.,~arian, O.L., Nonlinear Programming, 1969, McGraw
llill, New York.
3. Ouindry, G.E., Brill E.D. and Liebman, J.C. Optimization
of looped Water Distribution Sy~tem.~. Journal of the 16. Gupta, [. and Vartak, M.N., Kuhn-Tucker and Fritz-John type
Environmental Engineering Division ASCE 198 I. 107(EF.,4). sufficicnt optimality conditions foe generalized .~mi-locally
665-679. ctmvex programs, Opsearch. 1989, 26(I), 11-27.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen