Proceedings, 2nd IFAC Conference on

Proceedings, 2nd IFAC Conference on

Modelling, Identification
Proceedings,
Proceedings, 2nd IFAC
2nd and Controlon
IFAC Conference
Conference of Nonlinear Systems
on
Modelling, Identification Available
and Control of online
Nonlinear at www.sciencedirect.com
Systems
Proceedings,
Guadalajara,
Modelling, 2nd IFAC
Mexico,
Modelling, Identification
IdentificationConference
June 20-22,
and
and Control
Controlon
2018
of
of Nonlinear
Nonlinear Systems
Systems
Guadalajara, Mexico, June 20-22, 2018
Modelling, Identification
Guadalajara, Mexico, and
June Control
20-22, of
2018
Guadalajara, Mexico, June 20-22, 2018 Nonlinear Systems
Guadalajara, Mexico, June 20-22, 2018
ScienceDirect
IFAC PapersOnLine 51-13 (2018) 402–407
Steady
Steady state
state algorithm
algorithm for for leak
leak diagnosis
diagnosis in
in
Steady
Steady state
water
state algorithm
pipeline
algorithm for leak
leak diagnosis
systems
for 
diagnosis in
in
water pipeline systems 
water pipeline systems
water pipeline systems
A. Lizarraga-Raygoza ∗∗ J. A. Delgado-Aguiñaga ∗∗
∗∗
A.
A. Lizarraga-Raygoza
Lizarraga-Raygoza ∗ J. A. Delgado-Aguiñaga
∗ ∗
J. A. Delgado-Aguiñaga ∗∗
∗∗
A. Lizarraga-Raygoza O.
O. Begovich
∗ J. A. Delgado-Aguiñaga
Begovich ∗ ∗∗
A. Lizarraga-Raygoza O. J.
Begovich
O. Begovich ∗ A. Delgado-Aguiñaga
∗
∗
∗ O. Begovich
∗ CINVESTAV Guadalajara, Av. del Bosque 1145, colonia el Bajı́o,
∗ CINVESTAV
∗
CINVESTAV Guadalajara,
Guadalajara, Av.
Av. del Bosque 1145, colonia el Bajı́o,
∗ CINVESTAV Guadalajara,
45019,
45019, Av. del
Zapopan,
Zapopan, del Bosque
Jalisco,
Bosque
Jalisco,
1145,
1145, colonia
México
México colonia el el Bajı́o,
Bajı́o,
CINVESTAV Guadalajara,
45019, Zapopan, Av. del
Zapopan, Jalisco,Bosque
Jalisco, México
(e-mail:[alizarraga,obegovi]@gdl.cinvestav.mx)
45019, 1145,
México colonia el Bajı́o,
∗∗ (e-mail:[alizarraga,obegovi]@gdl.cinvestav.mx)
45019, Zapopan, Jalisco,
(e-mail:[alizarraga,obegovi]@gdl.cinvestav.mx) México
∗∗ Universidad del Valle de México, Campus
(e-mail:[alizarraga,obegovi]@gdl.cinvestav.mx) Guadalajara Sur,
∗∗ Universidad
Universidad
∗∗CIIDETEC, del
del Valle
Valle de
de México,
México, Campus
(e-mail:[alizarraga,obegovi]@gdl.cinvestav.mx)
Campus Guadalajara
Guadalajara Sur,
Sur,
Universidad Manuel
del Valle Gómez
de Morı́n
México,
∗∗CIIDETEC, Manuel Gómez Morı́n 8100, 45601 San Pedro
8100,
Campus 45601
GuadalajaraSan Pedro Sur,
Universidad
CIIDETEC,
Tlaquepaque,
CIIDETEC, del
Manuel
Jalisco,
Manuel Valle
México de
Gómez
Gómez México,
(e-mail:
Morı́n Campus
8100, 45601
8100, Guadalajara
Morı́njorge.delgado@uvmnet.edu)
45601 San San Pedro
Pedro Sur,
Tlaquepaque,
CIIDETEC,
Tlaquepaque, Jalisco, Jalisco,
Manuel México
Jalisco, México Gómez (e-mail:
México (e-mail: Morı́n jorge.delgado@uvmnet.edu)
8100, 45601
(e-mail: jorge.delgado@uvmnet.edu) San
jorge.delgado@uvmnet.edu) Pedro
Tlaquepaque,
Tlaquepaque, Jalisco, México (e-mail: jorge.delgado@uvmnet.edu)
Abstract:
Abstract: This
This work
work proposes
proposes an
an algorithm
algorithm for
for leak diagnosis in pipelines based on a steady-
Abstract:
state
Abstract: analysis.ThisThe
This work
work proposes of
motivation
proposes anthis
an algorithm
algorithm for leak
proposition
for leak diagnosis
diagnosis
arises
leak from
diagnosis the
in
in pipelines
in pipelines
fact that
pipelines
based
based
often
based
on
on aaa steady-
leaks
on steady-
appear
steady-
state
Abstract:
state analysis.
analysis.ThisThe
Theworkmotivation
proposes
motivation of
anthis
of this proposition
algorithm
proposition arises
for namely,
leak from
diagnosis
arises from the
the fact
in pipelines
fact that
that often
based
often leaks appear
on a pipeline
leaks steady-
appear
in
state
in specific
specific locations
analysis. The
locations in
in water
motivation
water pipeline
of this
pipeline systems,
proposition
systems, arises
namely, in
from
in between
the
between fact two
that
two consecutive
often
consecutive leaks appear
pipeline
state
in
stretches analysis.
specific The
locations
(junctions),
in specific(junctions),
locations in motivation
in water
according of
with
water pipeline this
pipeline proposition
systems,
experience of arises
namely,
the
systems,ofnamely, from
staff inof a the
between
real
inofbetween fact that
two
water often
consecutive
distribution
two distribution leaks
consecutive network. appear
pipeline
network.
pipeline
stretches
in specific locations according
in water with
pipeline experience
systems, the
namely, staff a real water
stretches
By
stretches (junctions),
dismissing other
(junctions), according
kind of
according leakswith
with(as experience
leaks in
experience oilof the staffinof
ofpipelines)
the staff of
forbetween
awhich
a real water
real two distribution
water
other consecutive
distribution
considerations pipeline
network.
must
network.
By
By takendismissing
stretches
dismissing other
other kind
(junctions), kind of
according leaks
ofwork
leakswith(as
(as leaks
leaks in
experience
in oil
oilofpipelines)
the staff
pipelines) for
forawhich
of real water
which other
other considerations
distribution
considerations must
network.
must
be
By
be taken into
dismissing
into account,
other
account, kind this
of
this leaks
work is
is focused
(as leaks
focused to
in
to the
oil
the most
pipelines)
most normal
normalfor events
which
events of
other
of leaks
leaks in water
considerations
in water pipeline
must
pipeline
By
be
systems,
be dismissing
taken
taken into
and
into other the
account,
here,
account, kind ofwork
this
leak
this leaks
work is (as
diagnosis
is leaks
focused
focused in
to
problem
to oil
the
the pipelines)
ismost
reduced
most normal
normalfor
to which
events
identify
events other
of
oftheleaks
leaksconsiderations
in
junction
in water
water must
pipeline
where
pipelinethe
systems,
be taken
systems, and
into
and here,
account,
here, the
the leak
this
leak workdiagnosis
is
diagnosisfocused problem
to
problem theis
is reduced
most
reducednormal to
to identify
events
identify ofthe
theleaks junction
in
junctionwater where
pipeline
where the
the
leak
systems,
leak occurs.
occurs. To
andTohere, do
do that,
that, a
the leak
a steady-state expression
diagnosis expression
steady-state is
problem isisreducedobtained
obtained from
tofromidentifythe
the classical
the junction
classical Water
Water Hammer
where
Hammer the
systems,
leak occurs.
equations
leak and
occurs. andTo here,
Toitdo the
doisthat,
that,
used leak
a diagnosis
atosteady-state
steady-state
compute a problem
expression
drop is
pressure
expression isreduced
is obtained
obtained
head to identify
from the
between
from thethe the
classical junction
pipeline
classical Water
ends
Water where
Hammer
for
Hammer the
each
equations
leak occurs.
equations Then andTo
and it itdo is
itthis used
that,
is used
used a to compute
steady-state
to compute
compute a drop pressure
expression
a drop
dropwith is
pressure head
obtained
head between
from
between by thethe pipeline
classical
theusingpipeline ends
Water
ends for for
Hammer each
for head
each
junction.
equations
junction. and
Then is
this estimation
to
estimation is
is compared
a
compared the
pressure one
head computed
between the the
pipeline pressure
ends each
equations
junction.
measurements.
junction. and itFinally
Then
Then is used
this
this fortoeach
estimation
estimation compute
is
case
is compared
a
compared dropwith
aresidual with
withcan
the
pressure
the
thebe
one
head
one computed
generated
one between
computed
computed and
by
the
by
bythe
using
using
using
the
pipeline
the
junction
the
pressure
ends
pressure
position
pressure for head
each
head
that
head
measurements.
junction.
measurements. Then Finally
this
Finally for
estimation
for each
each case
is
case aa residual
comparedresidual withcan
canthebe
be generated
one computed
generated and
and bythe
the junction
using the
junction position
pressure
position that
head
that
produces
measurements.
produces a
a residual
Finally
residual closer
closer to
for to
each zero
case
zero is
is finally
a residual
finally identified
can beas
identified as the
generated
the leak
leak location.
and The
the junction
location. The main
main advantage
position
advantage that
measurements.
produces
of this
produces proposition
a Finally
a residual
residual is for
closer
that
closer each
tothe
to case
zero a residual
is finally
uncertainties
zero is incan
finally identified
identified
the be generated
as the
leak
as the
location
leak and
leak location.
are the
location. not junction
The
longer
The main
main position
advantage
important,
advantage that i.
of
of this
produces
this proposition
a residual
proposition is
is that
closer
that tothe
the uncertainties
zero is finally
uncertainties in the
identified
in the leak
as
leak location
the leak
location are
location.
are not
not longer
The
longer main important,
advantage
important, i.
i.
e.,
of
e., the
this
the leak
leak location
proposition
location is can
that
can be
be thegiven
given with
uncertainties
with an
an exact
in
exact theposition
leak
position as
location
as long
long as
are
as the
not
the configuration
longer important,
configuration of
of the
thei.
of
e., this
the
pipeline
e., the proposition
leak location
(possibly
leak location is
locatedthat
can
can be the uncertainties
given
underground)
be given with
with an
is
an in
exact
well
exact the
known. leak
position
positionForlocation
as
sake
as long
long of are
as not
the
illustration,
as the longer important,
configuration
some
configuration of
examples
of the
thei.
pipeline
e., the
pipeline (possibly
leak location
(possibly located
can be
located underground)
given with an
underground) is
is well
exact
well known.
position
known. For
For as sake
sakelong of
of asillustration,
the configuration
illustration, some
some examples of the
examples
are
pipeline
are provided via
(possibly simulations.
located underground) is well known. For sake of illustration, some examples
are provided
pipeline
are provided
provided
via
via simulations.
(possibly
via located underground) is well known. For sake of illustration, some examples
simulations.
simulations.
© 2018,
are IFAC via
provided (International
simulations. Federation of Automatic Control) Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Keywords: Fault Fault diagnosis,
diagnosis, Pipelines,
Pipelines, Steady-state
Steady-state deviation,
deviation, Algebraic
Algebraic approaches,approaches, Detection
Detection
Keywords:
algorithms,
Keywords: Fault
Diagnostic
Fault diagnosis,
tests.
diagnosis, Pipelines,
Pipelines, Steady-state
Steady-state deviation,
deviation, Algebraic
Algebraic approaches,
approaches, Detection
Detection
algorithms,
Keywords: Diagnostic tests.
algorithms,Fault
algorithms, Diagnostic
Diagnosticdiagnosis,
tests.Pipelines, Steady-state deviation, Algebraic approaches, Detection
tests.
algorithms, Diagnostic tests.
1. INTRODUCTION
1. INTRODUCTION concluded that aa leak can take place at any position along
1. concluded that a leak can take
take place
place at any position along
1. INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION concluded
pipeline
concluded
pipeline
that the
(with
that
(with a
the
leak
same
leak
same
canprobability).
can take place
probability).
atOn
atOn
anythe
any position
other
position
the other
along
hand,
along
hand,
Pipelines are often 1. INTRODUCTION
used to transport fluids as water, oil, concluded
pipeline (with
according
pipeline that
(with
with a
the
the leak can
historical
same take
same probability). place
probability).
records ofatOnany
the
On position
the
staff
the other
otherof along
hand,
Inter-
hand,
Pipelines are often used to transport fluids as water, oil, according pipeline
according with
(with
with the historical
same
historical records
probability).
records of
of the
On
the staff
the
staffotherof
of Inter-
hand,
Inter-
Pipelines
waste
Pipelines are
water, often
and
areandoften used
others. to
to transport
However,
used However, transport fluids
fluids as
sometimes astheywater,
can un-
water, oil,
un- municipal system
oil, according with historicalof drinking water
records and
of thesewage
staff (SIAPA),
of Inter-
waste
Pipelines
waste
dergo
waste
water,
are
water,
leaks
water, often
and
which
and
others.
used
others.
lead
others. to to transport
However,
environmental
However,
sometimes
fluids
sometimes
sometimes as
damage,
they
they
they
can
water,
can
econom-
can oil, municipal
un-
un- according
municipal
in Guadalajara,
municipal
system
with historical
system
system
of
of drinking
drinking
Mexico,
of drinking the
water
records
water
most
water
and
of
and thesewage
common
and staffleak
sewage
sewage
(SIAPA),
of Inter-
(SIAPA),
cases
(SIAPA),
dergo
waste leaks
water, which
and lead toHowever,
others. environmental sometimes damage,they econom-
can un- in Guadalajara,
municipal system Mexico,
of drinking the most
water common
and sewage leak cases
(SIAPA),
dergo
ical
dergo leaks
losses, which
human
leaks human
which lead lead to
deaths, environmental
etc. Therefore,
to environmental damage,
Fault
damage, econom-
Diagnosis in Guadalajara,
water pipeline Mexico,
systems
econom- in water pipeline systems occur in the junctions ofcases
in Guadalajara, Mexico, the
occur
the most
most in common
the
commonjunctions leak
leak ofcases
two
ical
dergo losses,
leaks human
which deaths,
lead etc. Therefore,
to environmental Fault
damage, Diagnosis
econom- in Guadalajara,
water pipeline Mexico,
systems the occur most in common
the junctions leakofof two
cases
two
ical
has
ical losses,
become
losses, in
humana main deaths,
concern.
deaths, etc.
etc. AsTherefore,
a result,
Therefore, Fault
diverse
Fault Diagnosis
method-
Diagnosis consecutive
in water pipe
pipeline stretches
systems with
occur a probability
in the junctionsnear of 100
two
has
ical become
losses, in
humana main concern.
deaths, etc. As a result,
Therefore, diverse method-
Fault Diagnosis consecutive
in waterSome
consecutive pipe
pipeline
pipe stretches
systems
stretches with a
occuraa been
with probability
in theproposed
probabilityjunctionsnear
near of
of
of 100
two
100
has
has become
ologies
becomehave in
in aa main
been concern.
proposed
main concern. by As
the
As aaautomatic-control
result,
result, diverse
diverse method-
com-
method- percent.
consecutive pipe works have
stretches already
with probability nearin this
of di-
100
ologies
has becomehave been
in a proposed
main concern. by the
As aautomatic-control
result, diverse com-
method- percent.
consecutive
percent. Some
Some pipe works
works have
stretches
have already
with
already a been
been proposed
probability
proposed nearin
in this
of
this di-
100
di-
ologies
munity.
ologies have
Those
have been
been proposed
methods
proposed are by
based
by the
the automatic-control
on a nonlinear
automatic-control com-
modeling
com- rection
percent.
rection as
as in
Some
in Li
Li et
works
et al.
al. (2018)
have
(2018) for
already
for instance,
been
instance, in
proposed
in which
which in authors
this
authorsdi-
munity.
ologies Those
have been methods
proposed are based
by the on a nonlinear
automatic-control modeling
com- percent.
rection asSome
in Li works
et al. have
(2018) already
for been
instance, proposed
in which in this
authorsdi-
munity.
derived Those
from
munity. Those methods
the
methodsWater are based
Hammer
areHammer on a nonlinear
Equations
based onEquations
a nonlinear(WHE (WHEmodeling
)
modeling as present
rection a
as method
in Li et based
al. (2018) on acoustic
for instance, emission
in which techniques
authors
derived
munity. from
Those the
methodsWater are based on a nonlinear )
modeling as present
rection a
as method
in
present aatomethod Li
method et based
al. (2018)
based on on acoustic
for instance,
on acoustic
acoustic emission
in which techniques
emissiontotechniques authors
techniques
derived
wei Liu et
derived from
et
fromal. the(2015);
the Water
WaterVerde Hammer
and Torres
Hammer Equations
Torres (2015);(WHE
Equations Carvajal-
(WHE )) as focused
as present water distribution
based system subject
emission failure of
wei
Rubio
wei
Liu
derived
wei Liu
Liu etfrom
et
al.
et
al.
al.
al.
(2015);
the
(2015);
(2015);
(2015);WaterVerde
Verde
Zhang
Verde et
and
Hammer
and
al.
and Torres
(2015);
Torres
(2015);
Equations
(2015);
Carvajal-
(WHE
Carvajal-
Delgado-Aguiñaga
(2015); Carvajal- ) as focused
present
focused
socket
focused ato
to
joint,
to
water
method
water
but
water
distribution
suchbased
distribution
an
distribution approach
system
on acoustic
system
system
subject
emission
subject
requires
subject
to
to failure
techniques
failure
measurements
to failure
of
of
of
Rubio
wei Liu et al.
et (2015);
al. (2015); Zhang
Verde et al.
and (2015);
Torres Delgado-Aguiñaga
(2015); Carvajal- socket
focused
socket joint,
to
joint, but
water
but such
such an
distribution
an approach
approachsystem requires
subject
requires measurements
to failure
measurements of
Rubio
et al.
Rubio et
et al.
(2016);
al. (2015);
Navarro
(2015); Zhang
et
Zhang et
al.
et al.
al. (2015);
(2017)
(2015);from Delgado-Aguiñaga
the Fault
Delgado-Aguiñaga Model with
socket
with high-sampling
joint,
high-samplingbut such rate.
an
rate. Conversely,
approach
Conversely, this
requires
this work
work is presented
measurements
is presented
et al. (2016);
Rubio et al. Navarro
(2015); et al.
Zhang et (2017)
al. (2015);from the Fault Model socket
Delgado-Aguiñaga with joint,
high-samplingbut such an
rate. approach
Conversely, requires
this work measurements
is presented
et al.
Approach(2016);
et al. (2016); Navarro
(FMA),
Navarro and, et onal. (2017)
the other from
hand, the Fault
Billmann Model
and on
with the basis
high-samplingof FMA taking
rate. advantage
Conversely, thisof the
work information
is presented
Approach (FMA), and,et onal.the(2017)
otherfrom hand, theBillmann
Fault Model and on on the basis of FMA taking advantage thisof the information
et al. (2016);
Approach
Isermann
Approach
Isermann
Navarro
(FMA),
(1987);
(FMA),
(1987); and,eton
and,
Brunone
Brunone onal.and(2017)
the
the
and
other from
Ferrante
other
Ferrante
hand,
hand, theBillmann
(2001);Fault
Billmann
(2001); Begovich
Begovichand with
Model
and on the
provided
the
provided
high-sampling
basis
basisby
by
ofstaff
of FMA
FMA
staff
rate.
of
of
taking
SIAPA
taking
SIAPA
Conversely,
advantage
and
advantage
and which
which
ofwork
of the
the is presented
information
promises to
information
promises to be
be
Approach
Isermann
and (FMA),
(1987);
Valdovinos-Villalobos
Isermann (1987); and,
Brunone
Brunone on the
and
(2010);
and other
Ferrante hand,
Begovich
Ferrante Billmann
(2001);
et
(2001); al.Begovichand
(2012);
Begovich on the
provided
simpler
provided basis
thanby
by of
the FMA
staff
staff of
ones
of taking
SIAPA
presented
SIAPA advantage
and
andin which
recent
which of the
works. information
promises
promises to
to be
be
and Valdovinos-Villalobos
Isermann (1987); Brunone (2010);
and Begovich
Ferrante et
(2001); al. (2012);
Begovich simpler
provided
simpler than
thanby the
staff
the ones
of
ones presented
SIAPA
presented andin
in recent
which
recent works.
promises
works. to be
and
and Valdovinos-Villalobos
Ostapkowicz (2014),
Valdovinos-Villalobos from (2010);
the
(2010);Fault Begovich
Sensitive
Begovich et
et al.
al. (2012);
Approach
(2012); Motivated
simpler
Motivated than by
by thethe
the above
ones
above discussion,
presented
discussion, in and
recent
and taking
works.
taking advantage
advantage
Ostapkowicz
and (2014), from (2010);
Valdovinos-Villalobos the Fault Sensitive
Begovich et Approach
al. (2012); simpler
Motivated than by thethe ones
above presented
discussion, in recent
and works.
taking advantage
Ostapkowicz
(FSA),
Ostapkowiczfor (2014),
instance.
(2014), In from
In
fromthe the
FMA, Fault the Sensitive
nonlinear Approach
model is of the
Motivated information
by the provided
above by
discussion, the staff
and of SIAPA
taking and
advantage by
(FSA),
Ostapkowiczfor instance.
(2014), fromthe theFMA, Fault theSensitive
nonlinearApproach model is of of the
the information
Motivated by the above provided by
by the
discussion, staff
and of SIAPA
taking and
advantage by
(FSA),
used
(FSA),
used to
for
for instance.
to design
design
instance.
a state In
a state In the the
the
observer
observer
FMA,
FMA, Fault
which
which
the
the Sensitive
nonlinear
estimates
nonlinear
estimates
Approach
both
both
model
the lo-
model
the
is
lo- of the information
is Delgado-Aguiñaga
information
Delgado-Aguiñaga
provided
and
provided
and Begovich
Begovichby the
the staff
(2017),
staff
(2017),
of
the
of
the
SIAPA
main
SIAPA
main
and
and by
contri-
by
contri-
(FSA),
used
cation
used to
to for magnitude
and instance.
design
design aa state
state Inof the
observer
the
observer FMA,
which
leak
which the
whatever nonlinear
estimates
estimates the both
case:
both model
the lo-
single
the lo- of the information
is Delgado-Aguiñaga
bution of this
Delgado-Aguiñaga work provided
and
is
andan Begovichby the
algorithm
Begovich onstaff
(2017),
(2017),the of
the SIAPA
basis
the main
of
main a and
steady-by
contri-
contri-
cation
used to and magnitude
design a state of the leak
observer whichwhatever
estimates the both
case:the single
lo- bution
bution of
of this
Delgado-Aguiñaga
this work
work is
and
is an
an algorithm
Begovich
algorithm on
(2017),
on the
the basis
the
basis of
main
of a
a steady-
contri-
steady-
cation
or and
multiple magnitude
leaks of the leak whatever the case: single state equation which is described as follows: Knowing that
cation
or
cation leaks Carvajal-Rubio
and magnitude
multiple
andetmagnitude
of the leak whatever
Carvajal-Rubio
of the leak whatever
et
et al.
al. (2015);
the case:
(2015);
the case:
Delgado-
single state
Delgado-
single bution
butionequation
statemost
of this work
of this
equation which
work
which
is is
andescribed
is is
algorithmasonfollows:
anadescribed
is algorithm
described
the basis
asonfollows:
the basis
follows:
of a steady-
Knowing that
ofjunctions,
Knowing a steady-
that
or
or multiple
Aguiñaga
multiple leaks Carvajal-Rubio
al. (2015).
leaks (2015).
Carvajal-Rubio et
et al.
al. (2015);
(2015); Delgado-
Delgado- the
state likely
equation is
which that leak is occurring
as in the
Knowing that
Aguiñaga
or multiple et al.
leaks Carvajal-Rubio et al. works,
(2015); itDelgado- the
state
the most
most likely
equation
likely is
which
is that
that a leak
isbelongs
aadescribed
leak is
is occurring
asset
occurringfollows: in
in the
Knowing
the junctions,
that
junctions,
Aguiñaga
From
Aguiñagathe et
et al.
point
al. (2015).
of view
(2015). of the former can be now
the the
most leak
likely position
is that leak isof a
occurring (finite)
in the of punctual
junctions,
From
Aguiñagathe etpoint
al. of view of the former works, it can be now
(2015). the
now the
most
the leak
likely
leak position
is
position that belongs
a leak
belongs isof aa set
occurring
of set (finite)
in
(finite) the of
of punctual
junctions,
punctual
From
From the point
the author
pointwould of view
of view of the former works, it can be
be now locations
the leak (as many
position as the
belongs number
of a set of joints
(finite) the pipeline
of punctual

 The first
From the author
pointwould like toof
of view
the to
thank former
CONACYT works, it can
for the be locations
granted now the (as
leak many
position as the
asbelongs number
of aone of
set joints
(finite) the pipeline
of apunctual
 The first like toofthank
the toformer
CONACYT works, it can
for the granted locations
has).
locationsThen, (aslooking
(as many at
many as the WHE,
the
the number
number ofcan
of joints
derive
joints the
the pipeline
steady-
pipeline

scholarship
The
The first
first
scholarship
author
author would
would like
like to
to thank
thank to
to CONACYT
CONACYT for
for the
the granted
granted has).
locations
has). Then,
Then, (aslooking
many
looking at
as
at the
the
the WHE,
number
WHE, one
one of can derive
joints
can derivethe a
a steady-
pipeline
steady-
 The first author would like to thank to CONACYT for the granted
scholarship
scholarship
has). Then, looking at the WHE, one can derive a steady-
scholarship
has). Then, looking at the WHE, one can derive a steady-
2405-8963 © 2018,
Proceedings, IFACConference
2nd IFAC (International
onFederation of Automatic Control)
402 Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Proceedings, 2nd IFAC
Peer reviewIdentification
under Conference
responsibility on
of International 402 Control.
Federation of Automatic
Modelling,
Proceedings,
Proceedings, 2nd IFAC and Control
Conference
2nd IFAC Conference onof Nonlinear 402
Modelling, Identification and Controlon
10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.07.312 of Nonlinear 402
Proceedings,
Systems
Modelling,
Modelling, 2nd IFAC
Identification
IdentificationConference
and
and Control
Controlonof
of Nonlinear
Nonlinear 402
Systems
Modelling,
Guadalajara, Identification
Mexico, Juneand Control
20-22, 2018of Nonlinear
2018 IFAC MICNON
Guadalajara, Mexico, June 20-22, 2018 A. Lizarraga-Raygoza et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-13 (2018) 402–407 403
state equation in terms of a drop pressure head between
the pipeline ends, and also it can be computed via sensors
measurements. Finally for each possible node, a residual
is generated. The leak-node is identified when the residual
is the smallest. Notice that, this algorithm is limited to
the knowledge of the pipeline configuration a priori and
it becomes specially important for water pipeline systems
installed underground because uncertainties in the leak lo-
cation provided by others methods as in Delgado-Aguiñaga
and Begovich (2017) are not longer important.
This work continues as follows: In Section 2 dynamics of
a fluid inside a pipeline with leaks is presented. Section
3 presents the steady-state algorithm. Section 4 provides
some results on the basis of simulations. Finally Section 5
concludes this paper.
2. PIPELINE DYNAMICS
The nonlinear model is derived considering the following
conditions: the fluid is slightly compressible, the pipeline
is straight, without any fitting and any slope, the duct
wall is slightly deformable, the convective velocity changes
are negligible, the cross section area of the pipe and the
fluid density are constant. Then, the nonlinear Hyperbolic
Partial Differential Equations which describe the fluid
dynamics in a pipeline are as in Chaudhry (2014):
Momentum Equation
∂Q(z, t) ∂H(z, t)
+ gA + µQ(z, t)|Q(z, t)| = 0 (1)
∂t ∂z
Continuity Equation
∂H(z, t) b2 ∂Q(z, t)
+ =0 (2)
∂t gA ∂z
where H(z, t) is the pressure head [m], Q(z, t) is the flow
rate [m3 /s], t is the time coordinate [s], z is the length
coordinate [m], g is the gravity acceleration [m/s2 ], A is
the cross-section area [m2 ], b is the pressure wave speed
in the fluid [m/s] and µ = f (Q)/2DA, with f (Q) is the
friction factor coefficient depending on flow rate and D is
the inner diameter [m]. In this work, the variable z ∈ [0, L]
and L is the pipeline length [m].
2.1 Friction modeling
Friction coefficient is computed by means of the Swamee-
Jain approximation as Swamee and Jain (1976):
0.25
f (Q) = ε 5.74 2 (3)
[log10 ( 3.7D + Re0.9 )]
where ε is the roughness of the pipe [m] and Re is the
Reynolds number computed as follows:
VD
Re = (4)
v(t)
where v(t) =ce(a/Tk (t)) is the kinematic viscosity [m2 /s],
for some a and c being constant. Tk (t) the water temper-
ature in [o K] assumed to be also constant. V is the flow
velocity [m/s]. Finally, boundary conditions for 1 and 2
are here considered to be:
H(z = 0, t) = Hin (t)
(5)
H(z = L, t) = Hout (t)
403
2.2 Leak modeling
A leak that appears at position zl ∈ (0, L) can be handled
as a new boundary condition in (1) and (2). A leak’s
flow √model is derived from Torricelli’s equation: Ql =
Cd Al 2gHl , in which Cd is the discharge coefficient, Al
is the leak cross-section area, Hl is the pressure head at
the leak point and Ql is√the flow rate at the leak orifice.
Now by using λ = Cd Al 2g. The Outflow through a hole
can be modeled as:

Ql = λ H l (6)
In order to obtain a spatial-discretized approximation from
(1) and (2), the Finite-Difference method is used due to
its simplicity and low-cost computational effort. Also, by
considering boundary conditions (5), a finite-dimensional
approximation with n sections can be written as Chaudhry
(2014):
−gA
Q̇i = (Hi+1 − Hi ) − µi Qi |Qi |; ∀i = 1, ..., n (7)
∆zi
−b2
Ḣi+1 = (Qi+1 − Qi ); ∀i = 1, ..., n − 1 (8)
gA∆zi
where ∆zi represents the length of the i section, i.e.,
∆zi = zi − zi−1 , with z0 = 0 and zn = L the external
positions and n − 1 interior nodes which can represent
n − 1 leak occurrences through (6). Now, let us consider
the single leak case, by applying (7) in (8) with (n = 2),
the following state space model can be obtained:
−gA
Q̇1 = ∆z1 (H2 − Hin ) − µ√
1 Q1 |Q1 |
−b2
gA∆z1 (Q2 − Q1 + λ H2 )
Ḣ2 = (9)
−gA
Q̇2 = ∆z2 (Hout − H2 ) − µ2 Q2 |Q2 |
where ∆z1 = zl (zl denotes the leak position) and ∆z2 =
L − zl . In the following section a steady-state expression
is derived from (9) in order to design the leak diagnosis
system.
3. STEADY STATE ALGORITHM
The idea to detect a leak is as follows: once that
|Qin (t) − Qout (t)| > β a leak is detected, for any β [m3 /s]
chosen small enough such that it provides a good trade-off
between leak detection (leaks around 4% of nominal flow)
and avoiding false alarms caused by noisy measurements.
On the other hand, the idea to isolate a leak is as follows:
Let us take advantage of that each possible leak can appear
at any junction between two consecutive pipe sections,
possibly being of the same size and no matter if they are
curved, in accordance with the experience of the staff of
SIAPA.
To do that, one can build a model by using only two
sections (n = 2 by using (7) and (8)) in order to represent
the single leak case. In this way, one can introduce a
new pipe section variable as follows: ∆ζi = ζi − ζ0 for
i = 1, ..., n − 1, ζi = zi and ζ0 = z0 fixed, see Fig. 1. Note
that in this new representation the section size ∆ζi divides
the pipeline only in two sections and its size depends on the
index i. This allows to represent all possible leak positions
in the pipeline (sweeping all possibilities).
2018 IFAC MICNON
404
Guadalajara, Mexico, June 20-22, 2018 A. Lizarraga-Raygoza et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-13 (2018) 402–407

Looking at Table 1, • is a value deviated from zero, and

◦ is a value closer to zero which represents a signature for
a leak at node 1, that is, in position z1 . One can suppose
that for a leak at node 2, ◦ will be at coordinates (1,2) in
Table 1, and so on.
In the following section some results are presented.

4. SIMULATION RESULTS

To show the performance of the proposed methodology a

testbed simulator of a pipeline was built in MatlabTM en-
vironment over 50 sections of uniform size, the SimulinkTM
solver was chosen as ODE 3, and the step time as ∆t =
0.001 [s]. Physical parameters of a real pipeline prototype
which was built in Cinvestav-Guadalajara were used, in
Fig. 1. Finite-difference approximation for pipeline dynam- Table 2 those parameters are described (for a full descrip-
ics by using n sections. tion see Begovich et al. (2012)). The testbed simulator
can simulate n − 1 = 49 leaks, but here it is adapted
to the Cinvestav’s prototype leak cases whose positions
Coming from a steady-state expression of the single leak are given in Table 3. After perform experiments for each
case (9), that is by setting: Q̇1 = 0, Ḣ2 = 0, Q̇2 = 0, but case, the databases were saved and analyzed by means of
also it is considered unidirectional flow, then Qi |Qi | = Q2i , the the proposed methodology. Hereinafter the obtained
with i = 1, 2, and after some algebraic manipulations one results are presented.
can estimate a drop pressure head between the pipeline
ends as follows: Table 2. Pipeline parameters.
2 2
∆Hˆ i = µ1 Q1 ∆ζi + µ2 Q2 (L − ∆ζi ) (10) Parameter Value Units
gA gA D 0.06271 [m]
 0.01307 [m]
which basically depends on the pipe section ∆ζi . ∆H ˆ i is
ε 7 × 10−6 [m]
the corresponding estimation of the drop pressure head v 1×10−6 [m2 /s]
between the pipeline ends. For each case, (10) can then be E 7.8083×108 [N/m2 ]
compared with the real drop pressure head ∆H = Hin (t)− K 2.1794×109 [N/m2 ]
Hout (t) and a residual can also be generated. For sake of ρ 998.1938 [Kg/m3 ]
illustration, the algorithm is summarized as follows: L 85.5 [m]
Let us consider the variable ζi = zi which can take values
corresponding to each pipe node (assumed to be known),
that is: where D is the inner diameter,  is the wall thickness of
For i = 1, ..., n − 1: the pipe, ε is the roughness, v is the kinematic viscosity
1. Compute ∆ζi = ζi − ζ0 , and evaluate (10). of the water, E is the modulus of elasticity of the pipeline
2. Compute (11): material, K is the modulus of elasticity of the water, ρ is
the water density and L is the pipeline length.
  
 µ1 Q21 ∆ζi µ2 Q22 (L − ∆ζi )  Table 3. Leak position in the prototype.
e∆Hi = (∆H) − +  (11)
gA gA
Junction Location Units
3. Compute the norm of the vector e∆Hi with (12) and ∆z1 17.45 [m]
save it in Table 1 in coordinates (1, i). ∆z2 43.62 [m]

m−1 ∆z3 61.07 [m]

e∆Hi  =  e∆H(l)2 l = 1, ..., m − 1
i (12)
l=1 4.1 Leak at node 1
where m is the length of the vector.
4. Set i = i + 1 and repeat steps 1 up to 4 and so on, up A leak was induced at the first junction at time t = 40 [s]
to i = n − 1. with position ∆z1 ≈ 17.45 [m]. The pressure head and flow
rate measurements are shown in Figs. 2 and 3, respectively.
After perform the steps of the procedure described in
Table 1. Error pattern signature. Section 3, the following Error Pattern Signature (EPS )
is obtained:
e1 ∆H
∆ζ1 ◦ Table 4. EPS, leak at node 1.
∆ζ2 •
∆ζ3 • e1 ∆H
.. .. ∆ζ1 6.6715
. . ∆ζ2 75.8840
∆ζn−1 • ∆ζ3 127.4240

404
2018 IFAC MICNON

Guadalajara, Mexico, June 20-22, 2018 A. Lizarraga-Raygoza et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-13 (2018) 402–407 405

As it can be seen in Table 4, the smallest error corresponds 0.6

to ∆ζ1 (coordinate (1,1) and one can conclude that the |e1 ∆H1 |
leak had occurred at node 1. Fig. 4 depicts the drop pres-
sure head between the pipeline ends in each case but also |e1 ∆H2 |

Pressure head [m]

the one computed by using pressure head measurements. 0.4 |e1 ∆H3 |
Notice that the ∆H ˆ 1 ≈ ∆H which confirms our result. In
addition, Fig. 5 shows the errors and one can reaffirm a
correct leak-node identification.

20
0.2
18 Hin
Pressure head [m]

16 Hout
0
14
12
0 50 100
10
Time [s]
8 Fig. 5. Errors e∆Hi , case of a leak at ∆zl ≈ 17 [m].
0 50 100
Time [s] Notice that all the errors are closer to zero before the leak
occurs t < 45 [s] which can be explained as follows: since
Fig. 2. Hin , Hout , case 1. there is no leak then Q1 = Q2 is satisfied and therefore
µ1 = µ2 as well. Now, by rearranging (11)  it results:
 µ1 Q21 ∆ζi 
e∆Hi ≈ (∆H) − gA (∆ζi + (L − ∆ζi )). As a result
×10−3 the ∆ζi terms are annulled and no matter which one is
9.4
chosen the error will always be the same.
Qin
9.2
Flow rate [m 3/s]

Qout 4.2 Leak at node 2

9 In the second case, a leak was induced at the second
junction at time t = 40 [s] as before, with position ∆z2 ≈
8.8 43 [m]. The pressure head and flow rate measurements are
shown in Figs. 6 and 7, respectively. Drop pressure head at
the pipeline ends and its estimations are shown in Fig. 8,
8.6
0 50 100 and the corresponding errors are given in Fig. 9. Finally,
Time [s] the error pattern results are summarized in Table 5. In
this case, the most probable leak point is the one at ∆ζ2 .
Fig. 3. Qin , Qout , case 1.
Table 5. EPS, leak at node 2.

e2 ∆H
∆ζ1 71.6391
10.6 ˆ 1
∆H ∆ζ2 2.7967
ˆ 2 ∆ζ3 43.1083
∆H
Pressure head [m]

10.4 ˆ 3
∆H
ˆ
∆H 20 ×10−3
10.2 18 Hin 9.2 Qin
Pressure head [m]

Hout
Flow rate [m 3/s]

10 16 Qout
14 9
9.8 12
8.8
10
9.6
0 50 100 8 8.6
Time [s] 0 50 100 0 50 100
Time [s] Time [s]
Fig. 4. Drop pressure head between the pipeline ends, case
of a leak at ∆zl ≈ 17 [m]. Fig. 6. Hin , Hout , case 2. Fig. 7. Qin , Qout , case 2.

405
2018 IFAC MICNON
406
Guadalajara, Mexico, June 20-22, 2018 A. Lizarraga-Raygoza et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-13 (2018) 402–407

10.4 20 ×10−3
9.2
ˆ 1
∆H 18 Hin Qin

Pressure head [m]

ˆ 2
∆H Hout

Flow rate [m 3/s]

16 Qout
Pressure head [m]

10.2 9
ˆ 3
∆H 14
ˆ
∆H
12 8.8
10
10
8.6
8
9.8 0 50 100 0 50 100
Time [s] Time [s]

9.6 Fig. 10. Hin , Hout , case 3. Fig. 11. Qin , Qout , case 3.
0 50 100
Time [s]
10.2
Fig. 8. Drop pressure head between the pipeline ends, case

Pressure head [m]

of a leak at ∆zl ≈ 43 [m].
10

0.4 9.8 ˆ 1
∆H
|e2 ∆H1 | ˆ 2
∆H
0.3 |e2 ∆H2 | 9.6 ˆ 3
∆H
Pressure head [m]

|e2 ∆H3 | ˆ
∆H
0.2 9.4
0 50 100
Time [s]
0.1
Fig. 12. Drop pressure head between the pipeline ends,
case of a leak at ∆zl ≈ 61 [m].
0
0.5
0 50 100
|e3 ∆H1 |
Time [s] 0.4 |e3 ∆H2 |
Pressure head [m]

Fig. 9. Errors e∆Hi , case of a leak at ∆zl ≈ 43 [m]. |e3 ∆H3 |

0.3

4.3 Leak at node 3 0.2

To do end, a leak was induced at the third junction at 0.1

time t = 40 [s] and with position ∆z3 ≈ 61 [m]. Pressure
heads and flow rate measurements are illustrated in Figs. 0
10 and 11, respectively. The EPS is shown in Table 6.
Drop pressure head between pipeline ends as well as the
corresponding error are presented in Figs. 12 and 13, 0 50 100
respectively. In the same way as before, one can conclude Time [s]
that the leak-node has been correctly identified.
Fig. 13. Errors e∆Hi , case of a leak at ∆zl ≈ 61 [m].
Table 6. EPS, leak at node 3.
5. CONCLUSIONS
e3 ∆H
∆ζ1 108.0355 The potentiality of this methodology has been evaluated
∆ζ2 45.1706
with success by using databases coming from a test bed
∆ζ3 5.4666
simulator. The experience of the staff of SIAPA is the

406
 2018 IFAC MICNON
Guadalajara, Mexico, June 20-22, 2018A. Lizarraga-Raygoza et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-13 (2018) 402–407 407

heart of this proposition. It could be applied in real cases Navarro, A., Begovich, O., Sánchez, J., and Besançon,
since the configuration of pipelines is often known, that is, G. (2017). Real-time leak isolation based on
normally those systems are made by using same-size pipe state estimation with fitting loss coefficient calibra-
sections. Although this algorithm is simpler than others tion in a plastic pipeline. Asian Journal of Con-
already available in the literature, its main advantage is trol, 19(1), 255–265. doi:10.1002/asjc.1362. URL
that the leak position is given without uncertainties, since http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asjc.1362. Asjc.1362.
the identified-leak-node has a location known a priori. This Ostapkowicz, P. (2014). Leakage detection from liquid
is of particular interest for pipelines placed underground transmission pipelines using improved pressure wave
since other approaches could estimate the leak position technique. Eksploatacja i Niezawodność Maintenance
but with uncertainties which could generate extra costs and Reliability, 16, 9–16.
and waste of time in the repair process. In addition this Swamee, P. and Jain, A.K. (1976). Explicit equations for
method is not limited to deal with pipelines made of a pipeflow problems. Journal of the hydraulics division,
large number of sections. Finally applications with real 102(5).
databases will be part of future developments. Verde, C. and Torres, L. (2015). Referenced model-
based observers for locating leaks in a branched
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS pipeline. IFAC-Papers on-line, 48(21), 1066 – 1071.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.09.668. 9th
The first author would like to thank to CONACYT for the IFAC Symposium on Fault Detection, Supervision and
scholarship granted during his M.Sc. studies. Safety for Technical Processes SAFEPROCESS 2015,
Paris, 2-4 September 2015.
REFERENCES wei Liu, C., xing Li, Y., kun Yan, Y., tao Fu, J., and gian
Zhang, Y. (2015). A new leak location method based on
Begovich, O., Pizano-Moreno, A., and Besançon, G. leakage acoustic waves for oil and gas pipelines. Journal
(2012). Online implementation of a leak isolation al- of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 35, 236 –
gorithm in a plastic pipeline prototype. Latin American 246. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2015.05.006.
Applied Research, 42(2), 131–140. Zhang, T., Tan, Y., Zhang, X., and Zhao, J. (2015).
Begovich, O. and Valdovinos-Villalobos, G. (2010). DSP A novel hybrid technique for leak detection and lo-
application of a water-leak detection and isolation al- cation in straight pipelines. Journal of Loss Preven-
gorithm. In 7th International Conference on Electrical tion in the Process Industries, 35, 157 – 168. doi:
Engineering Computing Science and Automatic Control http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2015.04.012.
(CCE), 2010, 93–98. IEEE.
Billmann, L. and Isermann, R. (1987). Leak detection
methods for pipelines. Automatica, 23(3), 381–385.
Brunone, B. and Ferrante, M. (2001). Detecting leaks in
pressurised pipes by means of transients. Journal of
Hydraulic Research, 39(5), 539–547.
Carvajal-Rubio, J., Begovich, O., and Sánchez-Torres, J.
(2015). Real-time leak detection and isolation in plastic
pipelines with equivalent control based observers. In
12th International Conference on Electrical Engineer-
ing, Computing Science and Automatic Control (CCE),
2015, 1–6. IEEE.
Chaudhry, M.H. (2014). Applied Hydraulic Transients.
Springer-Verlag New York.
Delgado-Aguiñaga, J., Begovich, O., and Besançon, G.
(2016). Exact-differentiation-based leak detection and
isolation in a plastic pipeline under temperature varia-
tions. Journal of Process Control, 42, 114 – 124. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprocont.2016.04.005.
Delgado-Aguiñaga, J. and Begovich, O. (2017). Modeling
and Monitoring of Pipelines and Networks, chapter
Water leak diagnosis in pressurized pipelines: A real case
study, 235–262. Springer International Publishing.
Delgado-Aguiñaga, J., Besançon, G., and Begovich, O.
(2015). Leak isolation based on extended Kalman filter
in a plastic pipeline under temperature variations with
real-data validation. In 23th Mediterranean Conference
on Control and Automation (MED), 2015, 316–321.
IEEE.
Li, S., Song, Y., and Zhou, G. (2018). Leak detec-
tion of water distribution pipeline subject to failure
of socket joint based on acoustic emission and pat-
tern recognition. Measurement, 115, 39 – 44. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2017.10.021.

407