Conferences & Events
Conferences & Events
(September and October 2008)
EUROPEAN WATER RESEARCH DAY
8 September 2008
Zaragoza, Spain
www.circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/rtd/eesd-
watkeact/library?l=/european_research
Contact name: Elena Dominguez
In the framework of the Zaragoza Interna-
tional Expo 2008, the Directorate General for
Research organises a one day event – the
European Water Research Day - aimed at
presenting past, on- going and future EU re-
search water-related activities.
Organized by: European Commission, Di-
rectorate General for Research.
11th International River symposium
1 to 4 September 2008
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
www.riversymposium.com
Contact name: Carla Mathisen
The 11th International River symposium
will explore the challenges associated with the
increased incidence of flooding and drought
– 110.
Schultz, G. A. (1998), A Change of Paradigm in Water
Sciences at the Turn of the Century?, Water International,
Journal of the International Water Resources Association
23(1), pp. 37 – 44.
Skaggs, R. W. and Mays, L. W. (1999), Simulated
Annealing for Groundwater Restoration, Journal of Wa-
ter Resources Planning and Management, ASCE (in re-
view).
Shane, R. M., et al. (1995), The INTEGRAL PROJ-
ECT: Overview in Computing in Civil Engineering, Pro-
ceedings of the Second Congress, Vol. 1, pp. 203 – 205,
ASCE, June 5 - 8, Atlanta, GA.
Sprague, R.H. and Carlson, E. D. (1982), Building
Effective Decision Support Systems, Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs: NJ
Tang, A. and Mays, L. W. (1999), Genetic Algorithms
for Optimal Operation of Soil Aquifer Treatment Systems,
Water Resources Management, Kluwer Academic Pub-
lishers, The Netherlands, to be published, 1999.
Topping, B.H.V, et al., (1993), Topological Design of
Truss Structures Using Simulated Annealing in Topping,
B.H.V. and Khan, A. I. (eds.), Neutral Networks and Com-
binatorial Optimization in Civil and Structural Engineer-
ing, pp. 151 – 165, Civil-Comp Press, Edinburgh: UK.
Unver, O., Mays, L. W., and Lansey, K. (1987), Real-
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
time Flood Management Model for the Highland Lakes
System, Journal of Water Resources Planning and Man-
agement 113(5), pp. 620 – 638.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineer-
ing Center (HEC) (1998), HEC-FDA Flood Damage Re-
duction Analysis, User’s Manual, Version 1.0, January
1998.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineer-
ing Center (HEC) (1998), HEC-HMS, Hydrologic Model-
ing System, User’s Manual, Version 1.0, March 1998.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineer-
ing Center (HEC) (1997), HEC-RAS River Analysis Sys-
tem, User’s Manual, Version 2.0, April 1997.
U.S. General Accounting Office (1994), Ecosystem
Management Additional Actions Needed to Adequately
Test a Promising Approach, GAO/RCED-94-111.
U.S. Geological Survey (1998), Summary of
MODFLOW96, User’s Manual.
Viessman, W., Jr., (1998), Water Policies for the Fu-
ture: Bringing It All Together, Water Resources Update,
Issue No. 111, Universities Council on Water Resources,
Carbondale, Illinois.
Vlachos, E. C. (1998), Practicing Hydro diplomacy in
the 21st Century, Water Resource Update, Issue No. 111,
Universities Council on Water Resources, Carbondale, Il-
linois.
Wanakule, N., Mays, L. W., and Lasdon, L. S. (1986),
Optimal Management of Large Scale Aquifers: Methodol-
ogy and Applications, Water Resources Research 22(4),
pp. 447 – 465.
Wehrends, S. C. and Reitsma, R. F. (1995), A Rule
Language to Express Policy in a River Basin Simulator in
Computing in Civil Engineering, Proceedings of the Sec-
ond Congress, Vol. 1, pp. 392 – 395, ASCE, June 5 - 8,
Atlanta, GA.
Wada, R. N., et al. (1986), Honolulu’s New SCADA
System, Journal of American Water Works Association
78(8), pp. 43 - 48.
Winston, W. L. (1994), Operations Research Applica-
tions and Algorithms, Duxbury Press, Belmont: CA.
Wurbs, R. A. (1995), Water Management Models A
Guide to Software, Prentice Hall PRT, Englewood Cliffs:
NJ.
Zagona, E. A. (1995), The INTEGRAL PROJECT:
The PRYSM Reservoir Scheduling and Planning Tool in
Computing in Civil Engineering, Proceedings of the Sec-
ond Congress, Vol. 1, ASCE, June 5 - 8, Atlanta, GA.
Zagona, E. A., (1998), River Ware: A General River
and Reservoir Modeling Environment, Proceedings of the
First Federal Interagency Hydrologic Modeling Confer-
72
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
ence, April 19 - 23, Las Vegas, NV.
Zhao, B. and Mays, L. W. (1995), Estuary Manage-
ment by Discrete-Time Stochastic Linear Quadratic Op-
timal Control, Journal of Water Resources Planning and
Management 121(5), pp. 382 – 391.
 Issue No. 111, Universities Council on Water Resources,
Carbondale, Illinois.
Hall, Millard W. (1998), Extending the Resources:
Integrating Water Quality Considerations into Water Re-
sources Management, Water Resources Update, Issue
No. 111, Universities Council on Water Resources, Car-
bondale, Illinois.
Heathcote, Isobel W. (1998), Integrated Watershed
Management Principle and Practice, John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., New York.
Hooper, B. (1995), Towards More Effective Inte-
grated Watershed Management in Australia: Results of
a National Survey, and Integrated Implications for Urban
Catchment Management, Water Resources Update, Is-
sue No.100, Universities Council on Water Resources,
Carbondale, Illinois.
Khalil, H. M. (1998), Proposed Water Management
System for the Great Man-made River Project in W. R.
Blain (ed.), Hydraulic Engineering Software VII, , pp. 361
– 379.
Kirkpartick, S., et al., (1983), Optimization by Simu-
lated Annealing, Science, American Association for the
Advancement of Science, 220(4598), pp. 671 – 680.
Jamieson, D.G. and Fedra, K (1996), The ‘Water-
Ware’ Decision-support System for River-basin Planning.
73 1. Conceptual Design, Journal of Hydrology 177, pp. 163-
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
175.
Jeter, M. W. (1986), Mathematical Programming An
Introduction to Optimization, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New
York.
Julien, P. Y., et al.. (1995), Raster-Based Hydrologic
Modeling of Spatially Varied Surface Runoff, Water Re-
sources Bulletin 31(3), pp. 523 – 536.
Kool, J. B. and van Genuchten, M. Th. (1991), HY-
DRUS: One-dimensional Variable Saturated Flow and
Transport Model, Including Hysteresis and Root Uptake,
U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Service, Riv-
erside, CA.
Lasdon, L. S. and Waren (1986), GRG2 User’s Guide,
Department of General Business, The University of Texas
at Austin, Austin, Texas.
Li, G. L. and Mays, L. W. (1995), Differential Dynamic
Programming for Estuarine Management, Water Resourc-
es Planning and Management 121(6), pp. 455 – 462.
Loucks, D. P. (1996), Surface Water Resource Sys-
tems in L. W. Mays (ed.), Water Resources Handbook,
McGraw Hill, Inc., New York.
Mays, L. W. (1991), Flood Simulation for a Large Res-
ervoir System in the Lower Colorado River Basin, Texas
in National Water Summary 1988-89 – Hydrologic Events
and Floods and Droughts, USGS Water Supply Paper
2375, US Government Printing Office, pp. 143 –146.
Mays, L. W. (1997), Optimal Control of Hydrologic
and hydraulic systems, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York.
Mays, L. W. and Tung, Y. K. (1992), Hydrologic and
hydraulic systems Engineering and Management, Mc-
Graw-Hill, Inc., New York.
Mitchell, B. (1998, ed.) Integrated Water Manage-
ment: International Experiences and Perspectives, Bel-
haven Press, London.
Moore, I. D., Grayson, R. B., and Ladson, A. R.
(1991), Digital Terrain Modeling: A Review of Hydrologi-
cal, Geomorphological, and Biological Applications, Hy-
drological Processes 5(11), pp. 3 – 30.
Murty, K. G. (1995), Operations Research Deter-
ministic Optimization Models, Prentice Hall, Englewood
Cliffs: NJ.
Nelson, E. J. (1995), A Comprehensive Environment
for Watershed Modeling and Hydrologic Analysis in Es-
pey, W. H., Jr. and Combs, P. G. (eds.), Water Resources
Engineering, Vol. 1, Proceedings of the First International
Conference, ASCE, San Antonio, Texas, Aug. 14 – 18,
1995, pp. 829 – 833.
Nicklow, J. W. and Mays, L. W. (1999), Optimal Con-
trol of Reservoir Releases to Minimize Sedimentation in
Rivers and Reservoirs, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
ASCE (in review).
Nicklow, J. W. and Mays, L. W. (1999), Operation of
Multiple Reservoir Systems to Control Sedimentation in
River-Reservoir Networks, Journal of Hydraulic Engineer-
ing, ASCE (in review).
Philip, E. G. (1988), GAMS: A User’s Guide, The Sci-
entific Press, Redwood City, CA.
Reitsma , R. F., et al. (1996), Decision Support Sys-
tems (DSS) for Water Resources Management in L. W.
Mays (editor-in-chief), Water Resources Handbook, Mc-
Graw-Hill, Inc., New York.
Rossman, L. A. (1994), EPANET Users Manual, Proj-
ect Summary Report, Risk Reduction Engineering Labo-
ratory, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
Cincinnati, OH.
Sakarya, A. B. and Mays, L. W. (1999), Optimal Op-
eration of Water Distribution Systems for Water Qual-
ity Purposes, Journal of Water Resources Planning and
Management, ASCE (in review).
Sakarya, A. B., Goldman, F. E. and Mays, L. W.
(1998), New Methodologies for Optimal Operation of
Water Distribution Systems for Water Quality Purposes
in Blain, W. R. (ed.), Hydraulic Engineering Software VII,
Wessex Institute of Technology Press, Boston, pp. 101
overall result is attainable.
Finally, lack of efficient techniques in the past
that could be used to code hydrologic and hydraulic
systems policies in computer programs might have
had negative impact on the development of com-
puter models for integrated hydrologic and hydrau-
lic systems management. The advance in comput-
ing technology appears to be at a stage where it
is capable of overcoming such problems. Today, a
computer programming language specifically used
for rulesets (a set of simulation rules) have been de-
veloped at CADSWES and therefore can be help-
ful for modeling integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems problems, should such languages become
the requirement of the state-of-the-art for this pur-
pose.
References
Adeli H. and Hung, S. L. (1995), Machine Learning
– Neural Networks, Genetic Algorithms, and Fuzzy Sys-
tems, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
American Water Works Association Research Foun-
dation (1996), Minutes of Seattle Workshop on Total Wa-
ter Management, Denver, CO.
Anderson, M. P., et al. (1993), Computer Models for
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
Subsurface Water in D. R. Maidment (editor in chief),
Handbook of Hydrology, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.
Andreu, J., Capilla, J. and Sanchis, E. (1996), AQUA-
TOOL A Generalized Decision Support System for Wa-
ter-Resources Planning and Operational Management,
Journal of Hydrology 177, pp. 269 – 291.
Bao, Y. X. and Mays, L. W. (1994b), New Methodol-
ogy for Optimization of Freshwater Inflows to Estuaries,
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
120(2), pp. 218 – 236.
Brion, L. M. and Mays, L. W. (1989), Methodology for
Optimal Operation of Pumping Stations in Water Distribu-
tion Systems, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE,
117(11), pp. 1551 – 1569.
Bulkley, J. W. (1995), Integrated Watershed Manage-
ment: Past, Present and Future, Water Resources Up-
date, Issue No. 100, Universities Council on Water Re-
sources, Carbondale, Illinois.
Carriaga, C. C. and Mays, L. W. (1995), Optimization
Modeling for Simulation in Alluvial Rivers, Journal of Wa-
ter Resources Planning and Management, ASCE, 121(3),
pp. 251 – 259.
Carriaga, C. C. and Mays, L. W. (1995), Optimal Con-
trol Approach for Sedimentation Control in Alluvial Rivers,
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management,
ASCE, 121(6), pp. 408 – 417.
Chambers, L. (1995), Practical Handbook of Genetic
Algorithms Applications, Vol. 1, CRC Press.
Clement, D. P. (1996), SCADA System Using Packet
Radios Helps to Lower Cincinnati’s Telemetry Costs, Wa-
ter Engineering and Management 134(8), pp. 18-20
Culver, T. B. and Shoemaker, C. A. (1992), Dynamic
Optimal Control for Groundwater Remediation with Flex-
ible Management Periods, Water Resources Research
28(3), pp. 629 – 641.
Davis, B. E. (1996), GIS: A Visual Approach, On Word
Press, Santa Fe, NM.
DeVries, J. J. and Hromadka, T.V. (1993), Computer
Models for Surface Water in D. R. Maidment (editor in
chief), Handbook of Hydrology, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New
York.
Dumont, A. and Lynn, P. (unpublished at the time of
reference), Creating a Ruleset, CADSWES, University of
Colorado, Boulder, CO.
Essaid, H. I. (1990), The Computer Model SHARP, A
Quasi-Three-Dimensional Finite Difference Model to Sim-
ulate Freshwater and Saltwater Flow in Layered Coastal
Aquifer Systems, Water-Resources Investigation Report
90-4130, U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park: CA.
Fedra, K. and Jamieson, D.G. (1996), The ‘Water
74
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
Ware’ Decision Support System for River-Basin Planning.
2. Planning Capability, Journal of Hydrology 177, pp. 177
- 198.
Fredericks, J. W., et al. (1998), Decision Support
System for Conjunctive Stream-Aquifer Management,
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
124(2), pp. 69 – 78.
Ford, D. T. and Killen, J. R. (1995), PC-Based Deci-
sion-Support System for Trinity River, Texas, Journal of
Water Resources Planning and Management 121(5), pp.
375 – 381.
Goldman, F. E. (1998), the Application of Simulated
Annealing for Optimal Operation of Water Distribution
Systems, Ph.D. Dissertation, Arizona State University,
Tempe: AZ.
Goldman, F. E. and Mays, L. W. (1999), Simulated
Annealing Approach for Operation of Water Distribution
Systems Considering Water Quality, ASCE (in review).
Greene, R.G. and Cruise, J.F. (1995), Urban Water-
shed Modeling Using Geographic Information System,
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
121(4), pp. 318 – 325.
Grigg, N. S. (1998), Coordination: The Key to Inte-
grated Water Management, Water Resources Update,
 terms of hydrologic and hydraulic systems policies
or rules and because such policies can be inter-
preted and coded in computer programs, it is very
important to have these policies clearly defined
for a given watershed. It may be noted that it is
these policies that we begin with to deal with inte-
grated hydrologic and hydraulic systems manage-
ment. Furthermore, the scope and areal coverage
of integrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems
management that is mandated to an institution or
water agency should be unambiguously defined.
The authors agree with the watershed approach
strategy for integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management already recommended by
different institutions. This approach entails hydro-
logic and hydraulic systems policies that transcend
political boundaries for the purpose of integrated
hydrologic and hydraulic systems management
and, therefore, it is necessary that this approach
be acceptable by different parties so that the best

Object type User Method Category User Methods

No evaporation
Pan and ice evaporation
Evaporation and precipitation Daily evaporation
Input evaporation
CRSS evaporation
Reservoirs
Unregulated spill
Regulated spill
Spill Unregulated plus regulated
Regulated plus bypass
Unregulated plus regulated plus bypass
75
Plant power
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

Unit generator power

Peak base power
Power
LCR power
Power
Reservoirs Tailwater base value only
Tailwater base value plus lookup table
Tailwater storage flow lookup table
Tailwater
Tailwater compare
Hoover tailwater

No routing
Time lag routing
Variable time lag routing
SSARR
Routing
Reaches Muskinghum
Kinematic wave
Muskingum-Cunge
MacCormack

Fraction return flow

Water User (on
Return flow Proportional storage
AggDiversion)
Variable efficiency

Table 4- Selected user methods in River Ware (after Zagona, et al., 1998)
used for hydrologic and hydraulic systems man-
agement policy called ruleset has been developed
at CADSWES. Ruleset is a collection of rules that
control simulation (Dumont and Lynn, unpublished
at the time of reference).
7. Summary and Conclusions
Water being a precious, but limited, resource
poses the question of how to allocate a sufficient
amount to all the competing users efficiently and
effectively. An integrated hydrologic and hydrau-
lic systems management approach enables us to
have knowledge in space and time of what water
is needed for and in what amount it is needed,
thereby allowing for balancing out between the
competing needs. Through integrated hydrologic
and hydraulic systems management, viable water
policies compromising to all parties or satisfying all
objectives can be formulated.
Design of multi-dimensional, multi-objective
hydrologic and hydraulic systems projects require
formulation of sound water policies. As discussed
herein, an integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management may be the most promising
means to provide the water requirements of all the
competing users, requiring the involvement of all
parties concerned. The scope and regional cover-
age of hydrologic and hydraulic systems agencies
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
need to be clearly defined. To this effect, a river
basin or watershed approach for regional coverage
is a sound strategy.
Computer models for integrated hydrologic and
hydraulic systems management can be very im-
portant tools that are helpful for fast computations,
easy data management and drawing conclusions
about certain water policies. Such models, gener-
ally termed as Decision Support Systems (DSS),
have been introduced recently by different institu-
tions. As computing speed and ease become more
powerful, more complex yet more comprehensive
computer models are being developed. Such com-
puter models as TERRA, River Ware, AQUATOOL
and Water Ware are examples of DSS that are
used for integrated hydrologic and hydraulic sys-
tems management.
These DSS are embodied with water policies in
the form of rulesets (to use the term used in River
Ware) or expert systems (to use the term used in
Water Ware). These models have become suc-
cessful as models of integrated hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems management by the incorporation
of water policies that are formulated in a form un-
derstandable in the computation processes.
At the center of DSS are found simulation and
optimization models. A tremendous amount of
work has been done in the past to develop simula-
tion and optimization computer models that solve
problems in the areas of hydrology, hydraulics and
water resources. Effort was also made to interface
simulation and optimization computer models to
solve optimal control problems in water resources.
Although DSS are highly based on these models,
they also introduce water policy issues such as
water rights, ecosystem sustainability, amenity and
so on. These additional aspects have been incor-
porated in DSS models in such forms as rulesets
or expert systems. In this regard, much more ef-
fort is needed not only because rulesets or expert
systems have been recently introduced, but also
because the concept of integrated hydrologic and
hydraulic systems management approach is yet to
come to fruition.
In conclusion, some useful computer models
in the form of decision support systems that ad-
dress integrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems
management problems have been written. Some of
these programs such as TERRA, which have been
in use for some time now, have proved the impor-
tance of DSS in integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management problems. The availability of
various hydrologic and hydraulic systems mod-
els that address specific hydrologic and hydraulic
76
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
systems problems and different optimization tech-
niques, in conjunction with the advance in the infor-
mation technology, provide a wealth of resources
that are useful in designing DSS. Thus, we may
conclude that not enough work has been done to
develop DSS for integrated hydrologic and hydrau-
lic systems management. However, we have the
technical resources – database management sys-
tems, simulation models, optimization techniques
and advanced computing technology – and we are
faced to make use of these resources to bring out
more DSS for integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management.
The requirements of writing DSS for integrated
hydrosystms models would be more complete if the
ideals of integrated hydrologic and hydraulic sys-
tems management are clearly defined and under-
stood, and if the policies can be easily interpreted
so as to code in computer programs. The challenge
in this regard is yet to be fully overcome. Heathcote
(1998) points out that although the concept of inte-
grated hydrologic and hydraulic systems manage-
ment is a strategy that is increasingly advocated
in the literature, it is still relatively new. Because
the concepts of integrated hydrologic and hydrau-
lic systems management can be best explained in
 els, it has been possible to develop DSS that have
manifested to address these issues. A few of these
systems have been designed not only to solve the
problem, but also to attempt to interpret the result.
Jamieson and Fedra (1996) point out that DSS
have the capabilities of predicting what may hap-
pen under a particular set of planning assumptions
and of providing expert advice on the appropriate
course of action.
In summary, most of the available computer
models for hydrologic and hydraulic systems prob-
lems address only a specific issue of the general
concept of integrated hydrologic and hydraulic sys-
tems management. While they have been found
satisfactory tools to solve the particular problem
they are designed for, only a few DSS currently
available such as TERRA, River Ware, AQUA-
TOOL and Water Ware are useful as stand-alone
computer models for integrated hydrologic and
hydraulic systems management. Therefore, it can
be inferred that because of the availability of only
a limited number of DSS for integrated hydrologic
and hydraulic systems management, the state of
practice of DSS for integrated hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems management is premature, yet
evolving.
77 6. Prospects for Integrated Hydrologic and hy-
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
draulic systems Management Models
Advances in software engineering appear to be
promising for integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management models. It has enabled the
development of models that not only incorporate
easy-to-use analytical capabilities, but also offer
expert advice and intelligent interrogation facilities.
With these types of models, the artificial intelligence
involved can be provided by a mixture of optimiza-
tion techniques and expert systems that can evalu-
ate, draw preliminary conclusions and recommend
appropriate actions. This stage of development of
hydrologic and hydraulic systems models is the
emergence of what has been referred to as the fifth
generation of hydro informatics system (Jamieson
and Fedra, 1996).
The efforts made in the past to develop simula-
tion models have been tremendous. Almost every
specific hydrosytems problem has been modeled,
albeit the limited focus of the objective of many of
these models. In other words, many hydrologic and
hydraulic systems models were written to address
specific hydrologic and hydraulic systems problems
such as reservoir operation, water distribution, ur-
ban drainage, stream flow, and so on. However, the
painstaking task of integrating these simple models
as we see it fit is still to demand of us the commit-
ment. The parts are out, yet we are faced to put
them together to bring out the wagon.
Some promising efforts in this regard have al-
ready been undertaken. The successful develop-
ments of TERRA, WaterWare, River Ware, AQUA-
TOOL and so on are very good examples. The
efforts made at the USACE Hydrologic Engineering
Center to enhance the old models to the new ones,
generally known as the Next Generation (NexGen)
models, may form one of the strong cores of DSS,
simulation models.
DSS in general are, perhaps, the most promis-
ing approach to integrate the simple models and
use for integrated hydrologic and hydraulic sys-
tems management. The three subsystems of DSS
– database management subsystem, model base
management subsystem, and dialog generation
and management subsystem – constitute a logi-
cal construct of the concept of integrated hydro-
logic and hydraulic systems management. Figure
13 shows a representation of most of the possible
components of a typical DSS that one can aspire
for to develop. The dotted lines in the Figure show
the components that can be included in the DSS in
the future or enhancement to its current proposed
structure.
The data base management subsystem pro-
vides the opportunity for easy collection, storage
and alteration of data, including on real-time basis.
GIS and SCADA, among others, are important sys-
tems for this purpose. The proliferation of simula-
tion models and the availability of some advanced
optimization techniques provide valuable resourc-
es in dealing with different aspects of hydrologic
and hydraulic systems problems. The graphics
supported user-friendly interface environment also
helps to draw appropriate conclusions and make
necessary decisions that agree with predefined
integrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems man-
agement policies.
If there are challenges to overcome to use DSS
for integrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems
management problems, one of the most difficult
challenges, perhaps, will be not having appropriate
integrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems man-
agement policies clearly defined. It may be noted
that it is possible to code any policy in a computer
program. However, no code may be written for a
policy that does not exist. Likewise, it can not be
easy to write a clear computer code for an ambigu-
ous or ill-defined policy.
A computer programming language specifically
tecting groundwater resources.
2. Surface water pollution control: estimation of
the level of effluent treatment required to meet the
river water quality objectives.
3. Hydrologic processes: estimation of ungaged
tributary for use in the water resources planning
component (see No. 5 below); assessment of daily
water balance for ungaged subcatchments, and the
impact of land-use changes on runoff; and evalua-
tion of the effects of conjunctive use of surface and
groundwater.
4. Demand forecasting: Use of rule-based infer-
ence models which use generic expert system.
5. Water resources planning component con-
sisting of
a. a model capable of simulating the dynamics
of demand, supply, reservoir operations and rout-
ing through the channel system; and
b. a module for reservoir site selection which
assesses ten problem classes which include:
i. landscape and archeological or historical
sites;
ii. land-use restrictions;
iii. drainage, soil and microclimate;
iv. natural habitats and associated communi-
ties;
v. water quality, aquatic biology and ecology;
vi. water resources and cost implications;
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
vii. reservoir construction;
viii. reservoir operations;
ix. socio-economic effects of reservoir opera-
tions; and
x. recreational provisions.
5. State of Practice of Hydrologic and hydraulic
systems Models
“Although the principle of integrated river ba-
sin management models has been aspired to in
many countries, more often than not the problems
have been considered in a piecemeal fashion, with
experts from different disciplines using separate
models (water resources, surface-water pollution
control, groundwater contamination, etc.), to tackle
parts of the overall problem in a reactive way” (Ja-
mieson and Fedra, 1996). Uncoordinated hydro-
logic and hydraulic systems modeling efforts often
result in incompatibilities.
The new planning approaches for integrated
hydrologic and hydraulic systems management
necessitate new ways of modeling. Schultz (1998)
states that new planning tools are required to plan
and design water resources systems on the basis
of the new criteria which, include: 1) the principle of
sustainable development; 2) ecological quality; 3)
consideration of macroscale systems and effects;
and 4) planning in view of changes in natural and
socio-economic systems. He concludes that “since
no planning tools following the four new criteria are
available, we are faced with a vacuum.”
This argument shows that the concept of in-
tegrated water resources management is a com-
prehensive representation of several components
each of which requires sufficient representation or
modeling within the whole system. Modeling needs
to be driven by coverage of all aspects of integrat-
ed hydrologic and hydraulic systems management,
not by the convenience or simplicity of the model-
ing of each aspect of the problem. Loucks (1996)
clearly puts that “an integrated view of water-re-
source systems can not be compartmentalized
into either surface water or groundwater and either
water quantity or water quality just because the re-
spective time and space scales make the modeling
or study of such divisions convenient”.
On the contrary, as mentioned earlier in this pa-
per, computer programming generally started out
with the simplification of calculations of analytical
functions that required very long times to solve by
hand. Through time, the capability enhanced to the
level of tackling complex hydrologic and hydraulic
systems problems. It is through improvements of
the programming methodologies and new tech-
78
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
nological discoveries that more sophisticated hy-
drologic and hydraulic systems models have been
developed. Therefore, hydrologic and hydraulic
systems computer models have been approaching
the essence of integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management from bottom up.
The important aspects of integrated hydrologic
and hydraulic systems problems which have been
tackled using computer programs include simula-
tion, database management systems, data collec-
tion and storage systems and so on. These efforts
have reached a level of promising prospect and
have diminished the gap between the concept of
and computer models for integrated hydrologic and
hydraulic systems management. For instance, GIS
generally provides facilities for storage and man-
agement of very large geo-information. It has been
possible to represent the terrain of the entire U.S.
as a database of Digital Elevation Model (DEM).
Automatic data collection systems such as SCADA
and radar provide readily available input data for
real-time analysis of integrated hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems problems. Some computer models
such as HEC-HMS and WMS are capable of ac-
cepting radar data.
By integrating together different computer mod-

2. IF Mead’s elevation > value THEN
Mead’s release = mead’s inflow
END IF
In this approach, the user has the choice of
changing value at run-time without rebuilding the
program. However, the policies expressed in this
fashion may be still very specific.
A more comprehensive approach is to allow
policies to be completely modifiable without requir-
ing the underlying system to be rebuilt. As such,
policies can be written in a rule language that inter-
prets the policies and be interfaced with the simu-
lation models. The policies are interpreted during
run-time, which makes the running time of the pro-
gram longer.
The general architecture of River Ware program
employs the representation of a river basin by ob-
jects. The objects that are included in River ware
include the following (Zagona, et al., 1998):
Storage Reservoir – mass balance, evapora-
tion, bank storage, spill;
Level Power Reservoir – Storage Reservoir
plus hydropower, energy, tail water, operating
head;
Sloped Power Reservoir – Level Power Res-
79 ervoir plus wedge storage for very long reservoirs;
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
Pumped Storage Reservoir – Level Power
Reservoir plus pumped inflow from another reser-
voir;
Reach – routing in a river reach, diversion and
return flows;
Aggregate Reach – many Reach objects ag-
gregated to save space on the workspace;
Confluence – brings together two inflows to a
single outflow as in a river confluence;
Canal – bi-directional flow in a canal between
two reservoirs;
Diversion – diversion structure with gravity or
pumped diversion;
Water User – depletion and return flow from
a user of water;
Aggregate Water User – multiple Water Us-
ers supplied by a diversion from a Reach or Res-
ervoir;
Aggregate Delivery Canal – generates de-
mand and models supplies to off-line water users;
Groundwater Storage Object – stores water
from return flows;
River Gage – specified flows imposed at a
river node;
Thermal Object – economics of thermal power
system and value of hydropower;
Data Object – user specified data: expression
slots or data for policy statements.
Table 4 shows user methods for selected ob-
jects in River Ware.
4.3.6. AQUATOOL
Developed at the Universidad Politécnica de
Valencia (UPV), Spain, as a result of a continuing
research over a decade, AQUATOOL is a gener-
alized decision support system that has attracted
several river basin agencies in Spain (Andreu,
et al., 1996). Andreu, et al. (1996) also note that
AQUATOOL has various capabilities that can be
used in water resource systems to:
1. screen design alternatives by means of an
optimization module, obtaining criteria about the
usefulness and performance of future water re-
source developments;
2. screen operational management alternatives
by means of the optimization module, obtaining cri-
teria from the analysis of the results;
3. check and refine the screened alternatives
by means of a simulation module;
4. perform sensitivity analysis by comparing the
results after changes in the design or in the operat-
ing rules;
5. use different models, once an alternative
is implemented, as an aid in the operation of the
water resource system, mainly for water allocation
among conflicting demands and to study impacts of
changes in the system; and
6. perform risk analysis for short and medium
term operational management to decide, for in-
stance, the appropriate time to apply restrictions
and their extent.
AQUATOOL has been accepted by the Sagura
and Tagus river basins agencies in Spain as a stan-
dard tool to develop their basin hydrologic plan and
to manage the resource efficiently in the short to
medium term (Andreu, et al., 1996).
4.3.7. Water Ware
This decision support system is a comprehen-
sive model for integrated river basin planning. It
has the capabilities of combining geographical in-
formation systems, database technology, modeling
techniques, optimization procedures and expert
systems (Jamieson and Fedra, 1996). The aspects
of integrated river basin management that this DSS
incorporates are briefly as follows (Fedra and Ja-
mieson, 1996).
1. Groundwater pollution control: simulation of
flow and contaminant transport, and reduction of
the level of contaminant in the aquifer and/or pro-
reservoirs having a total capacity of approximately
13.63 billion m3 (11,080,000 acre-ft) are found in
the basin.
4.3.2. TERRA (TVA Environment and River Re-
source Aid)
TERRA is a DSS developed for the Tennes-
see Valley Authority (TVA) and the Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI) (Reitsma, et al., 1996).
It was developed for the management of the TVA
river, reservoir and power resources. TERRA has
the following characteristics:
1. consists of geo-relational data base;
2. serves as the central data-storage and re-
trieval system;
3. records the TERRA information flow;
4. supports interfacing specialized data man-
agement software;
5. has various visualization tools; and
6. checks the data entering the database or
data from both resident and non resident models
against various sets of operational constraints (en-
vironmental, recreational, special/emergency, navi-
gational and so on).
TERRA consists of the three essential compo-
nents of a DSS, namely, 1) management of the state
information of the TVA river basin, 2) the models for
conducting simulations and optimizations, and 3)
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
a comprehensive set of reporting and visualization
tools for studying, analyzing and evaluating current
and forecast states of the river system.
4.3.3. PRSYM (Power and Reservoir System Mod-
el)
This model is used for river, reservoir and power
systems. It provides a tool for scheduling, forecast-
ing and planning reservoir operations. It integrates
the multiple purposes of reservoir systems such as
flood control, navigation, recreation, water supply,
and water quality, with power system economics by
solving the problem based on pure simulation, rule-
driven simulation or a goal programming optimiza-
tion (Zagona, et al., 1995).
Shane, et al. (1995) note that PRSYM repre-
sents a major advance in modeling flexibility, adapt-
ability and ease of use, which enable the users to:
1. Visually construct a model of their reservoir
configuration using “icon programming” with icons
representing reservoir objects, stream reach ob-
jects, diversions, etc.;
2. Select appropriate engineering functions,
standardized by the industry, to reflect object char-
acteristics needed for schedule planning, e.g., res-
ervoir and stream routing methods;
3. Replace outdated functions with improved
versions developed by industry;
4. Develop and include functions that are unique
to their system;
5. Experiment with operating policies; and
6. Use data display and analysis objects to cus-
tomize data summary presentations.
4.3.4. Conjunctive Stream-Aquifer Management
This DSS is used for conjunctive management
of surface water and groundwater under the prior
appropriation water right (Fredericks, et al., 1998).
It has the three components which are typical of
a DSS: database management subsystem, model
base management subsystem, and a dialog gen-
eration and management subsystem or user inter-
face. It is possible to prepare input data files for this
DSS using GIS. The overlay of the GIS raster or
grid database with other aquifer grid data enabled
the finite groundwater model MODFLOW to readily
read these data.
4.3.5. River Ware
Developed by the Center for Advanced Deci-
sion Support for Water and Environmental Sys-
tems (CADSWES) at the University of Colorado,
this DSS was designed for a general river basin
modeling for a wide range of applications (Zagona,
80
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
1998). It has three fundamental solution methods:
simple simulation, rule-based simulation and opti-
mization.
To abate the problems of complicated water
policies, a different programming language (from
the usual programming languages such as FOR-
TRAN and C/C++) called River Ware Rule Lan-
guage (RWRL) is used. Policy descriptions can
be designed as structured ruleset in RWRL. Once
these policy descriptions are saved as ruleset files,
a simulation may be guided by the ruleset (Dumont
and Lynn, unpublished). Furthermore, the policies
can be modified between runs, without requiring
the simulator to be changed or rebuilt (Wehrend
and Reitsma, 1995).
Wehrend and Reitsma (1995) gave the follow-
ing examples of how water policies can be formu-
lated and interpreted.
1. IF Mead’s elevation > 1229.0 THEN
Mead’s release = Mead’s inflow
END IF
This approach gives a conditional water policy,
which may be considered to be easy enough to be
incorporated in a general simulation model.
 4. Decision Support Systems (DSS) as Tools for
Integrated Hydrologic and hydraulic systems
Management
4.1. DEFINITION OF DSS
Decision support systems (DSS), as might be
inferred from the name, do not refer to a specific
area of specialty. It is not easy to connote a specific
definition to DSS based on their uses. Reistma, et
al. (1996) point out that although some consensus
exists as to the purpose of DSS, “a single, clear,
and unambiguous definition is lacking”. Generally,
however, a DSS gives pieces of information, some-
times real-time information, that help make better
decisions. Sprague and Carlson (1982) defined
a DSS as an interactive computer-based support
system that helps decision makers utilize data and
models to solve unstructured problems.
4.2. BASIC STRUCTURE OF DSS
DSS generally consists of three main compo-
nents: 1) state representation, 2) state transition,
and 3) plan evaluation (Reitsma, et al., 1996).
State representation consists of information about
the system in such forms as databases and geo-
graphic information systems. State transition takes
place through modeling such as simulation. Plan
evaluation consists of evaluation tools such as multi
81 criteria evaluation, visualization and status check-
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
ing (Reitsma, 1996). The above three components
comprise the database management subsystem,
model base management subsystem and dialog
generation and management subsystem, respec-
tively. Figure 10 depicts these subsystems includ-
ing their specific purposes and functions. Some
examples of DSS for different integrated hydrologic
and hydraulic systems management are presented
later in this Section.
Jamieson and Fedra (1996) elaborated on the
basic structure of the Water Ware DSS (Figure 11).
It is shown in this Figure that each subsystem is
made up of different components. The data man-
agement subsystem can use different tools such
as GIS as well as other simplistic data. The model
base subsystem basically consists of simple simu-
lation models, optimization techniques and expert
systems (also sometimes known as rule-based
simulation models). The dialog generation and
management subsystem helps in visualization and
making decisions through interactive user inter-
face.
The structure of DSS discussed above has,
perhaps, made them the best structured and most
promising computer models for integrated resource
management. These models are believed to con-
tribute largely to this objective. Reitsma, et al.
(1996) pointed out that “… the next few years will
be most interesting” for DSS. This stems from the
fact that DSS are promising computer models for
integrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems man-
agement and the advance in the computing and
information technology is remarkable.
4.3. EXAMPLES OF DSS FOR INTEGRATED
HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC SYSTEMS
MANAGEMENT
4.3.1. Trinity River Basin, Texas
One of the integrated DSS in regional hydrolog-
ic and hydraulic systems management was devel-
oped for the Trinity river in Texas (Ford and Killen,
1995). This DSS has the capability of integrating
three major hydrologic and hydraulic systems prob-
lems. Accordingly, it has three components which
perform the following tasks: 1) retrieve, process and
file rainfall and streamflow data; 2) estimate basin
average rainfall and forecast runoff; and 3) simu-
late reservoir operation in order to forecast regu-
lated flows basinwide. Each of the tasks is done by
the DSS subsystems which use existing models.
The first subsystem, data-retrieval, processing and
filing subsystem, retrieves data that are collected
from an existing precipitation and streamflow gauge
network, and stores the data using a time-series
database-management system (DBMS) designat-
ed as HEC-DSS. The second subsystem, rainfall
estimating and runoff forecasting subsystem, uses
the following computer programs: 1) PRECIP to
compute catchment areal-average rainfall, and 2)
HEC-1F for forecasting runoff. The third subsys-
tem, reservoir simulation subsystem, uses HEC-5
that is customized and fitted to basin conditions.
Figure 12 shows different components of this
DSS that are used for forecasting streamflow.
TRACE (Trinity River Advanced Computing Envi-
ronment) is the forecaster’s interface of the DSS. It
executes programs PRECIP, HEC-1F and HEC-5
with the proper input. It also serves as a file man-
ager, input processor and DBMS interface. Further-
more, it executes, behind the scenes, programs
PREFOR and PREOP to complete the HEC-1F
and HEC-5 files, respectively. The DBMS-interface
component of TRACE executes program EX-
TRCT to create working copies of data records,
program DISPLAY to graph data, and program
DWINDO to tabulate and edit data (Ford and Kil-
len, 1995).
The size of the Trinity river basin for which this
DSS was developed is approximately 4.6 million
ha (17, 800 sq. mi.). Seven multipurpose major
SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT
No doubt that the first computer models devel-
oped to solve hydrologic and hydraulic systems
problems targeted specific problems such as catch-
ment runoff simulation, stream flow characteriza-
tion, water quality monitoring, and so on. With the
enhancement of computing efficiency and speed
over the past several years, more sophisticated
and user friendly computer models for hydrologic
and hydraulic systems problems have been devel-
oped. However, the objective of most of the com-
puter models was not to address the problems of
integrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems man-
agement inasmuch as a consensus exists as to the
definition of integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management given in Section 2.
More recently, computer models that attempt
to provide support for decision makers have been
brought into the picture. One can safely say that
such computer models, generally termed as de-
cision support systems (DSS), have manifested
themselves at this time as promising models for
integrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems man-
agement. The following topic discusses the DSS
applications for integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management.

Model name Developed by Model purpose Remarks

Solves linear, quadratic A user friendly Linear Interactive

Lindo
LINDO and integer programming and Discrete Optimizer
Systems, Inc.
problems (hence, the name LINDO).

A sophisticated matrix generator;

Lingo Allegro Solves linear and nonlinear helps the user create large
LINGO
USA, Inc. programming problems constraints objective function
terms by writing one line code.
82

‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

Uses the generalized reduced
Solves nonlinear
GRG2 Univ. of Texas gradient algorithm to find the
programming problems
optimal solution.

Solves nonlinear This model is a microcomputer

GINO
programming problems version of GRG2.

GAMS
Solves linear programming
GAMS Development
problems
Corporation

Uses different algorithms when the

problem has linear objective function
Saunders and Solves linear and nonlinear and constraints, nonlinear objective
MINOS
Murthagh programming problems function and linear constraints, and
nonlinear objective function and
constraints.

Solves mixed integer program- Adapted ZOOM

GAMS/ZOOM
ming problems (Zero/One Optimization Method).

Solves linear and nonlinear Adapted MINOS (Modular In-Core

GAMS/MINOS
programming problems Nonlinear Optimization System).

Table 3- Summary of some of the most popular optimization models in the U.S.
 (about 13 hours) on the same computer to obtain
the optimal solution for a three cycle operation.
Sakarya, et al. (1998) have compared two
newly developed methodologies, a mathematical
programming approach and a simulated anneal-
ing approach, for determining the optimal opera-
tion of water distribution system considering both
quantity and quality aspects. Both methodologies
formulate the problem as a discrete-time optimal
control problem. The mathematical programming
approach interfaces the GRG2 model (Lasdon and
Warren, 1986), a generalized reduced gradient
procedure, with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency EPANET model (Rossman, 1994) for water
distribution system analysis. The simulated anneal-
ing approach is also interfaced with the EPANET
model. The study showed that while different re-
sults were obtained for total pump operation hours,
the total 24 hr energy costs were comparable.
3.4. COMPUTER BASED INFORMATION SYS-
TEMS
3.4.1. Supervisory Control Automated Data Acqui-
sition (SCADA)
SCADA is a computer-based system that can
control and monitor several hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems operations such as pumping, stor-
83 age, distribution, wastewater treatment and so on.
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
Several such systems have been developed in the
past for different water supply agencies. For in-
stance, the Metropolitan Sewer District of Cincin-
nati planned to integrate a SCADA system in the
1980s to monitor its wastewater treatment plants
and pump stations. This system was planned for
an area which consisted of seven major treatment
plants, 30 package wastewater plants serving indi-
vidual subdivisions and about 130 pump stations
(Clement, 1996). A SCADA system developed
in 1986 for Honolulu, Hawaii, had the capability
of controlling and monitoring 57 source pumping
stations, 126 storage reservoirs, and 73 booster
pumping stations (Wada, et al., 1986). In general,
SCADA systems are designed to perform the fol-
lowing functions:
acquire data from remote pump stations and
reservoirs and send supervisory controls;
allow operators to monitor and control water
systems from computer controlled consoles at one
central location;
provide various types of displays of water
system data using symbolic, bar graph, and trend
formats;
collect and tabulate data and generate re-
ports; and
run water control software to reduce electrical
power costs.
Remote terminal units (RTUs) are used to pro-
cess data from remote sensors at pump stations
and reservoirs. The processed data are transmitted
to the SCADA system also by the RTUs. Converse-
ly, supervisory control commands from the SCADA
system prompt the RTUs to turn pumps on and off
and open and close valves.
3.4.2. Geographic Information System (GIS)
All hydrologic processes relate to space mak-
ing it plausible to associate geo-information with
hydrologic processes. Survey of some of the recent
literature shows several attempts that have been
made to incorporate GIS into hydrologic analyses.
Greene and Cruise (1995) classify these attempts
into four groups: 1) calculation of input parameters
for existing hydrologic models; 2) mapping and dis-
play of hydrologic variables; 3) watershed surface
representation; and 4) identification of hydrologic
response units. Since several GIS database layers
can be overlain, GIS can be a very useful tool to
integrate the analyses of hydrologic processes of
watersheds.
The study by Greene and Cruise (1995) formed
a GIS database of such hydrologic/hydraulic vari-
ables as storm water inlet locations, soil moisture
characteristics of layered soils, etc. to determine
the discharge hydrograph at desired outlet points.
The results obtained from this analysis showed
reasonable accuracy.
3.4.3. GIS as a Tool for Flood Damage Analysis
Buffering applications in GIS – delineating the
area in a river system that is affected by a flood
of certain magnitude – help to perform sensitivity
analysis to the risk from flooding. This can be done
in two major ways. First, a series of “what if” ques-
tions can be analyzed before the flooding occurs.
Putting in various flood levels and analyzing can
help forecast the associated damages thereby as-
sisting the management body to make better deci-
sions before the flood occurs. Second, if landscape
coverage is readily available in a GIS database, the
effect of the disaster from a flood event can be ana-
lyzed very quickly, thus permitting the management
body to respond rapidly. Such analyses can save
lives and property (Davis, 1996). Figure 9 shows
how rivers and buffered flood zones can be visual-
ized or represented on GIS desktop.
3.5. PROSPECTS OF COMPUTER MODELS FOR
INTEGRATED HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC
string of length n can be looked upon as a solution
vector for the problem (Murthy, 1995). Five tasks
are required in the performance of a GA to solve
the optimization problem: encoding, initialization of
the population, fitness evaluation, evolution perfor-
mance and working parameters (Adeli and Hung,
1995).
The decision variable vector is encoded as a
chromosome using mostly binary number coding
method. Therefore if there are m decision variables
and if each decision variable is encoded as an n-
digit binary number, then a chromosome is a string
of n x m binary digits as shown in Figure 7.
A population of chromosomes is initialized
which require randomly generating the initial popu-
lation in such a way that all values for each bit have
equal probability of being selected. The fitness
measure at every feasible solution is equal to the
objective function value at that point. Thus, fitness
evaluation is used to determine the probability that
a chromosome will be selected as a parent chro-
mosome to generate new chromosomes. Evolu-
tion performance involves selection, crossover and
mutation. Selection chooses the chromosome to
survive for a new generation. Crossover is used to
recombine two chromosomes (parent strings) and
generate two new chromosomes (offspring strings)
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
based on a predefined crossover criterion. Muta-
tion serves as an operator to reintroduce “lost al-
leles” into the population based on a predefined
mutation criterion. Working parameters guide the
genetic algorithm and include chromosome length,
population size, crossover rate, mutation rate and
stopping criterion.
Simulated Annealing (SA). SA stems from an
algorithm that is used for the application of statisti-
cal thermodynamics concepts to combinatorial op-
timization problems. A solution to a combinatorial
optimization problem is based on a statistical me-
chanics in which the best solution is obtained from
a large set of feasible solutions.
In essence, it is a type of local search (descent
method) heuristic that starts with an initial solution
and has a mechanism for generating a neighbor
of the current solution. For minimization problems,
if the generated neighbor has a smaller objective
value, it becomes the new current solution; other-
wise the current solution is retained. The process
is repeated until a solution is reached with no pos-
sibility of improvement in the neighborhood (Murty,
1995).
This algorithm has the disadvantage that the lo-
cal search stops at a local minimum (see Figure 8).
This can be avoided by running the local search
several times starting randomly from different initial
solutions. By doing so, the global minimum can be
taken as the best of the local minima found.
A better approach to find the global minimum
was introduced in 1953 by Metropolis et al. (Murty,
1995). In this attempt, annealing was applied to the
search of minimum energy configuration of a sys-
tem after the system is melted. At each iteration,
the system is given a small displacement and the
change in the energy of the system, , is calculat-
ed. < 0, the change in the system is accepted;
otherwise, the change is accepted with probability
exp (- /T) where T is a constant times the tem-
perature.
This optimization technique has been applied to
different problems in engineering, such as ground-
water restoration (Skaggs and Mays, 1999), op-
eration of water distribution systems (Sakarya, and
Mays, 1999; Goldman and Mays, 1999), for water
quality purposes (Sakarya, et al., 1998).
3.3.4. Comparison of Heuristic Search Methods
(GA and SA) to Other Optimization Techniques
Whereas the heuristic search methods involve
trial solutions, mathematical programming and
84
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
DDP/SALQR follow some given procedures. On
the other hand, mathematical programming and
DDP/SALQR require derivative information. The
optimal solution found by mathematical program-
ming approach may result in a very short operating
time during one time interval that can not be fol-
lowed for practical purposes. In the simulated an-
nealing approach, this problem can be minimized
by setting minimum period of operation (Sakarya,
et al., 1998).
The mathematical programming approaches
find the optimum solution in much shorter operating
times than the heuristic search approaches. Tang
and Mays (1999) have developed a new methodol-
ogy for the operation of soil aquifer treatment sys-
tems, formulated as a discrete-time optimal control
problem. This new methodology is based upon
solving the operations problem using a genetic al-
gorithm interfaced with the one-dimensional unsat-
urated flow model HYDRUS (Kool and van Genu-
chten, 1991). The same problem has been solved
by Tang, et al. (1996) using SALQR interfaced with
the HYDRUS model. The computer time for a ten
cycle operation with the SALQR algorithm was re-
ported as 654 CPU seconds, while with the genetic
algorithm, it needed about 46600 CPU seconds
 G (Q, s) = 0 (21)
h (Q, s) = 0 (22)
Where Q is inflow to an estuary, s is the salinity
of the estuary and H is the fish harvest. Eqs. (21) Are
the hydrodynamic transport equations that relate
the salinity at a given point in an estuary to inflow
whereas Eqs. (22) Are regression equations that re-
late inflow to fish harvest. The last two equations are
the bound constraints that define the limitations on
freshwater inflows and salinity.
3.3. INTERFACING OPTIMIZATION AND SIMULA-
TION MODELS
The general form of the objective functions and
the constraints in hydrologic and hydraulic systems
problems including the foregoing examples can be
linear, non-linear or differential equations. Each of
such equations needs different approaches for solu-
tion. Several computer codes have been written for
each of these types of formulations.
For those hydrologic and hydraulic systems op-
timization problems which involve solving general
governing differential equations of mass, energy and
momentum (as is the case with most of the above
formulations), the approach used can be solving the
optimization problem directly by embedding finite dif-
85 ferences or finite element equations of the govern-
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
ing process equations (Mays, 1997). This approach
is relatively tedious to apply to real world problems.
Alternatively, an appropriate process simulator can
be used to solve the constraints process simulation
equations when they need to be evaluated for the
optimizer. Consequently, the following general and
simpler optimization problem can be used.
Minimize F (u) = f(x (u), u) (23)
Different techniques have been successfully
applied to solve optimization problems that are for-
mulated in the above form. The most common tech-
niques are given below.
3.3.1. Mathematical Programming
Mathematical programming includes linear pro-
gramming and nonlinear programming problems
(Jeter, 1986). Herein we will refer to the mathemati-
cal programming approach as interfacing simulation
models with nonlinear programming codes such
as GRG2. This programming technique has been
found useful in several hydrologic and hydraulic sys-
tems problems such as groundwater management
systems (Wanakule, et al., 1986), water distribution
systems operation (Brion and Mays, 1989; Sakarya
and Mays, 1998), optimizing freshwater inflows to
bays and estuaries (Bao and Mays, 1994b; Zhao
and Mays, 1995).
Various computer codes are available that solve
either linear programming problems, nonlinear pro-
gramming problems or both. Table 3 gives a sum-
mary of some of the more popular optimization mod-
els in the U.S.
3.3.2. Differential Dynamic Programming
Differential dynamic programming (DDP) is a
stage wise, nonlinear programming procedure that
has been successfully applied to hydrologic and
hydraulic systems problems that are based on dis-
crete-time optimal control, such as multi-reservoir
operation, groundwater hydraulics and so on (Mays,
1997).
A modified form of DDP, known as Succes-
sive Approximation Linear Quadratic Regulator
(SALQR), has been used for optimization problems
in which nonlinear simulation equations are made
linear in the optimization step (Culver and Shoe-
maker, 1992).
Example applications of DDP have been made
by Carriaga and Mays (1995) to reservoir release
optimization to control sedimentation, and SALQR
to operation of multiple reservoir systems to control
sedimentation in alluvial river networks by Nicklow
and Mays (1998); to operate soil aquifer treatment
systems by Tang, et al. (1999); and to optimal fresh-
water inflows to bays and estuaries by Li and Mays
(1995)
3.3.3. Genetic Algorithms and Simulated Annealing
Genetic Algorithms (GA). Genetic algorithms are
non-conventional search techniques patterned after
the biological processes of natural selection and
evolution (Tang and Mays, 1999). GA can be use-
ful for the selection of parameters to optimize the
performance of a system and for testing and fitting
quantitative models (Chambers, 1995). Every solu-
tion of the optimization problem is represented in
the form of a string of bits (integers or characters)
that consist of the same number of elements, say n.
Each candidate solution represented as a string is
known as an organism or a chromosome. The vari-
able in a position on the chromosome and its value
in the chromosome are called the gene and the al-
lele, respectively. For example, if n = 3, a general
chromosome is x = (x1, x2, x3) where x1, x2, and
x3 are the genes on this chromosome in the three
positions (Murthy, 1995).
Genetic algorithms for optimization problems are
developed by first transforming the problem into an
unconstrained optimization problem so that every
tion of a discrete-time-optimal control problem is
stated as
Subject to
, t = 1, 2, … T. (4)
Where is the vector of the state variables at
time t, is the vector of the control variables at time
t, and T is the number of decision times.
A few possible optimization formulations for dif-
ferent hydrologic and hydraulic systems problems
are given below.
3.2.1. Groundwater Management Subsystems
The general groundwater management problem
can be expressed mathematically as (Mays, 1997)
Optimize Z = f (h, q) (5)
Subject to
G (h, q, c) = 0 (6)
W (h, u) 0 (7)
Where h and q in the objective function are vec-
tors of heads and pumpages (or recharges), re-
spectively. C is a parameter that measures quality
such as chlorine content and so on. Eqs. (6) Are the
general groundwater flow constraints, which repre-
sent a system of equations governing groundwater
flow and transport. Eqs. (7) may be taken as addi-
tional constraints which can be included to impose
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
restrictions such as water demands, operating rules,
budgetary restrictions and so on. It may be noted
here that the lower and upper bounds on pump ages
may or may not exist whereas those on the head
can be the bottom elevation of the aquifer and the
groundwater surface elevations for the unconfined
cells respectively.
3.2.2. Real-time Operation of River-Reservoir
Systems for Flood Control
Mays (1997) states the optimization problem for
the real-time operation of multireservoir systems un-
der flooding conditions as
Minimize Z = f(h, q) (8)
Subject to
G (h, Q, r) = 0 (9)
(15)W(r) = 0 (10)
Where h and Q are the vectors of water surface
elevations and discharges, respectively. Eqs. (9) Are
the hydraulic constraints defined by the Saint-Venant
equations for one-dimensional gradually varied flow
and other boundary conditions. Eqs. (10) are other
constraints such as operating rules, target storage,
storage capacities, and so on.
The objective of the optimization in this case can
be to minimize (a) the total flood damages, (b) de-
viations from target levels, (c) water surface eleva-
tions in the flood areas, or (d) spills from reservoirs
or maximizing storage in the reservoirs.
3.2.3. Reservoir System Operation for Water
Supply
The optimization for this kind of hydrologic and
hydraulic systems problem can be expressed as
(Mays, 1997)
Maximize Benefits = (11)
Subject to
, t = 0, …, T - 1 (12)
, t = 1, …, T (13)
, t = 1, …, T (14)
, t = 1, …, T (15)
, t = 1, …, T (16)
Where St and Ut are the vectors of reservoir
storage and releases and t represents discrete time
period. Eqs. (12) define the system of equations of
conservation of mass for the reservoirs and river
reaches. and are respectively the vectors of reser-
voir storage at the beginning of time period t + 1 and
t, is the vector of hydrologic inputs and is the vec-
tor of reservoir losses. Eqs. (13) and (14) define the
bound constraints on reservoir releases and storage
86
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
respectively.
3.2.4. Water Distribution System Operation
Mays (1997) defines the optimization problem
for water distribution system operation in terms of
the nodal pressure heads, H, pipe flows, Q, tank wa-
ter surface elevations, E, pump operating times, D,
and water quality parameter, C, as follows.
Minimize energy costs = f (H, Q, D) (17)
Subject to
G (H, Q, D, E, c) = 0 (18)
W (E) = 0 (19)
Where Eqs. (18) And (19) express the energy
and flow constraints and the pump operation
constraints. The remaining equations express the
bound constraints on the nodal pressure head,
3.2.5. Freshwater Inflows to Bays and Estuaries
The optimization problem is to minimize fresh-
water inflows, or to maximize harvest or both, ex-
pressed mathematically as
Optimize Z = f (Q, s, H) (20)
Subject to
 Table 2. Cont’d.

4. Storm water systems

SWMM Metacalf and Eddy, Simulation of urban Can simulate hydrographs and
Inc., University of runoff quantity/quality pollutographs which can be used
Florida and Water as input to river and reservoir water
Resources Engineers quality models.
under the auspices of
EPA Simulation of storage, Can simulate the interations of
STORM HEC treatment, overflow rainfall/snowmelt, runoff, dry-weather
and runoff flow, pollutant accumulation and wash-
off, land surface erosion, treatment
and detention storage. Water quality
parameters include suspended and
settleable solids, biochemical oxygen
demand, total nitrogen, orthophos-
phate, and total coliform.

5. Water distribution/quality

EPANET U.S. Environmental Water quality and Performs extended period simulation
Protection Agency hydraulics in water of hydraulic and water quality condi-
distribution tions. In addition, water age, source
tracing and chlorine decay can be
KYPIPE2/ University of Kentucky Flow and water quality simulated.Consists of several pack-
87 KYQUAL in pipe networks ages for different purposes. Simulates
both steady state flows and extended
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

Texas Water Develop- Water quality period simulation along with water
QUAL2E ment Board quality in pipe distribution networks.
Water quality for river-
reservoir systems Allows simulation of 15 water quality
WQRRS HEC constituents, including dissolved oxygen,
biochemical oxygen demand, tempera-
ture, organic nitrogen, and so on.
A package of three programs: Stream
Hydraulics Package (SHP), Stream
Water Quality (WQRRSQ) and Reser-
voir Water Quality (WQRRSR).

6. Bay/Estuary Systems

Freshwater-saltwater A quasi-three dimensional, finite

USGS flow difference models that simulates
SHARP
freshwater and saltwater flow in
layered coastal aquifer systems.

7. Flood Mitigation/Forecasting Systems

Part of the Next Generation (NexGen)

Flood damage reduc- models developed by the HEC. Per-
HEC-FDA HEC
tion analysis forms plan formulation and evaluation
for flood damage reduction studies.
 The term Optimize in Eq. (1) refers to either
maximization or minimization whereas the con-
straint equations dictate the feasibility of the objec-
tive with respect to each and all of the constraints.
the process simulation equations basically consist
of the governing physical equations of mass, en-
ergy and momentum.
Many hydrologic and hydraulic systems prob-
lems can be formulated as discrete-time-optimal
control problems. The basic mathematical defini-

Table 2. Cont’d.

FLDWAV Hydrologic Research FLDWAV combines the capabilities

Dynamic routing of
Laboratory of the Na- flood of DWOPER and DAMBRK models
tional Weather Service which are one dimensional unsteady
flow models based on an implicit finite
R. L. Barkau difference solution of the St. Venant
UNET One dimensional equations.
unsteady open channel Used for unsteady flow through a full
USGS, Water Resourc- flow network of open channels with external
FESWMS-٢DH es Division, for Federal Two-dimensional river or internal boundary conditions.
Highway Administration flow Based up on RMA-2 model which is
(FHWA) a finite element model used for either
steady or unsteady flow.

2. Ground-water systems

MODFLOW USGS Simulation of two- or Three dimensional, finite difference

three-dimensional groundwater model.
saturated flow 88
UN Groundwa- UN Department of Varies; depends on Each model in the packet solves a spe-

‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

ter Software Technical Coopera- which model is used cific groundwater flow problem.
Package (GW1 tion for Development,
- GW11) Natural Resources and Has capabilities for simulating two-di-
PLASM Energy Division Simulation of two mensional unsteady flow in hetroge-
Illinois State Water dimensional unsteady neous anisotropic
Survey flow aquifers under water table, nonleaky
and leaky artesian conditions.
Delineates capture zones and
WHPA EPA Delineation of contaminant
Wellhead Protection fronts assuming steady-state
Areas, defined by the horizontal flow in the aquifer.
Safe Water Drinking Consists of four particle tracking
Act (1986) modules.
SUTRA USGS Fluid movement and
solute and energy Can be used to analyze groundwater
transport contaminant transport and aquifer
restoration problems.

3. Surface-ground water systems

MODBRANCH USGS Combining surface and Formed by coupling together two

groundwater flow simulation models: MODFLOW-96
(latter version of MODFLOW) and
BRANCH (a steady and unsteady
surface water flow model).
 Various optimization techniques in general and
their application to various hydrologic and hydrau-
lic systems problems in particular have shown re-
markable progress over the past three decades.
The progress of the application of these techniques
has gone alongside with the revolution of computer
models and as such similar explanations can be
given to the development of simulation models
and optimization techniques over the past three or
more decades. Figure 6 gives the development of
the application of optimization techniques to hydro-
logic and hydraulic systems problems, in an anal-
ogy that is similar to Figure 1, which was given for
simulation models.
The general formulation for optimization prob-
lems in water resources can be expressed in terms
of state (or dependent) variables (x) and control (or
independent) variables (u) as (Mays, 1997; Mays
and Tung, 1992)
Optimize f(x, u) (1)
Subject to process simulation equations
G(x, u) = 0 (2)
And additional constraints for operation on the
dependent (u) and independent (x) variables

1. Surface water systems

Model name Developed by Model purpose Remarks

a) Watershed US Army Corps of Precipitation- runoff Streamflow hydrographs at desired locations

runoff system Engineers Hydrologic Engi- processes in the river basin are computed.
HEC-1 neering
Center (HEC) Precipitation- runoff Part of the Next Generation (NexGen) models
HEC processes developed by the HEC. Surpasses HEC-1.
HEC-HMS New capabilities include a linear distributed
Precipitation-runoff transformation that can be applied with grid
US Department of processes (e.g., radar) rainfall data, optimization options,
89 Agriculture Soil Conservation and so on.
TR-20 Service (SCS) and Agricul- Precipitation-runoff Uses the SCS curve number method and
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

tural Research Service processes SCS curvilinear dimensionless unit

US Department of Agriculture
HYMO Agricultural Research Service
and Texas A & M University
USACE Waterways Experi-
A & M Water- ment Station
shed Model
WMS Brigham Young University
hydrograph to develop the runoff response.
Precipitation-runoff
processes Includes option to compute watershed sedi-
ment yields using a modified version of the
Precipitation-runoff universal soil loss equation.
processes
Accepts radar readings as well as
conventional gauged rainfall data. Capabili-
ties also include standard step method water
surface profile computation.
Automatically delineates watershed
boundaries using TINs.

b) Streamflow HEC Water surface profile Computes water surface profile for
systems in rivers gradually varied flow.
HEC-2 US Geological Survey Water surface profile Uses the standard step method solution
(USGS) in rivers of the energy equation.
WSPRO HEC Water surface profile Part of the NexGen models. Surpasses
in rivers HEC-2. Current version performs one
HEC-RAS dimensional steady state flow; future
versions will perform unsteady flow and sedi-
ment transport calculations.

Table 2- Taxonomy of some of the most popular hydrologic and hydraulic systems simulation models in the US
 Some of the earliest simulation models included
in Table 2 such as HEC-1 and TR-20 are lumped
parameter hydrologic rainfall-runoff models. These
models, which were developed in the late 60’s and
early 70’s, continue to be the accepted standards.
There have been many advances in the distributed
watershed modeling over the past several years
that now permit the more comprehensive and so-
phisticated distributed modeling. The development
of collection and management of overwhelming
data required to derive these models have been
made easier with the emergence of more user
friendly software and geographic information sys-
tems (GIS).
The Watershed Modeling System (WMS, for-
merly known as GeoShed) developed at Brigham
Young University (Nelson, et al., 1995) is a graphi-
cally based software tool with an interface to HEC-
1 and an interface to CASC2D, a two-dimensional,
grid-based, distributed hydrologic model. In addi-
tion, features include triangulated irregular network
(TIN) generator from scattered and digital elevation
model data source, automated watershed and sub-
basin delineation from TINs. CASC2D, developed
through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, is a
physically based rainfall/runoff model which uses
rectangular grid cells to represent the distributed
watershed and rainfall domain (Julien, et al., 1995).
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
This model uses a two-dimensional diffusive wave
equation to simulate overland flow and a one-di-
mensional diffusive wave equation to simulate
channel flow.
3.1.3. Real-time Rainfall Runoff Analysis Using GIS
and Radar Data
Watershed rainfall-runoff computation requires
determination of the general hydrologic processes
within the watershed. This, in turn, requires not only
the topographic information of the watershed but
also information about other hydrologic variables
such as the temporal and spatial distribution of pre-
cipitation. Use of GIS has made it possible to rep-
resent spatial distribution of elevations using Digital
Elevation Models (DEM). Three principal methods
are available in most GIS models for structuring a
network of elevation data: 1) square-grid networks;
2) contour-based networks; and 3) triangulated ir-
regular networks (TIN) (Moore, et al., 1991).
Precipitation data can be obtained by means of
remote sensing such as radar at desirable time in-
tervals so that real-time runoff (flood) simulation can
be performed. Using the DEM data (available for
the entire United States from the USGS), GIS can
compute the aspect (direction of maximum slope)
at a given location within the watershed. With other
hydrologic parameters for abstraction, infiltration,
routing and so on available in GIS or other data-
base systems, the watershed runoff processes can
be easily simulated. In effect, this approach can be
used to forecast flood events at desired locations
on a real-time basis provided that instantaneous
rainfall data can be directly obtained using radar or
other means. Figure 2 shows a general procedure
that can be used for modeling a general real-time
operation (adapted from Loucks, 1996).
The WMS discussed in Section 3.1.2 is an ad-
vanced model used for a more comprehensive wa-
tershed modeling system. This model incorporates
digital terrain modeling, GIS data, and analytical
hydrologic models in a single environment. It has
the capabilities of automatically delineating water-
shed and sub basin boundaries from TIN and then
computing geometric parameters such as area,
slope and runoff distances
for each basin. Figure 3 shows the representa-
tion of a watershed by grids for which different data
can be stored in GIS. WMS can determine differ-
ent parameters of the watershed from the stored
grid data. HEC-1 is directly interfaced in WMS for
performing rainfall/runoff analysis (Nelson, et al.,
1995).
As shown in the WMS interface in Figure 4,
90
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
runoff hydrographs at desirable locations can be
computed and viewed. This can be a very useful
tool especially in dealing with flood mitigation ef-
forts. If one or more detention facilities exist within
the watershed, it may be possible to adjust release
policies on a real time basis such that threatening
flood peaks can be reduced.
3.1.4. Real-time Flood Management Model for the
Lower Colorado River Authority
Developed at the University of Texas at Austin
by Unver, et al. (1987) for the Lower Colorado River
Authority (LCRA), this model can be used for flood
routing and rainfall-runoff modeling on a real-time
framework. It has several modules that interact
with one another. Real-time data that are managed
by the data management module of this model in-
clude rainfall collected at recording gages, stream
flow collected at automated stations, headwater
and tailwater elevations at each dam, information
on which rivers and reservoirs are to be simulated
in flood routing, and current reservoir operations.
The model’s subsystems constitute the three basic
subsystems of a DSS. Figure 5 depicts the struc-
ture of the model as given by the LCRA.
3.2. OPTIMIZATION FORMULATIONS
 analytical structure or mathematical formula but also
capable of reducing and incorporating water policies
into the analytical structure are required. Further-
more, these models may be required to interpret the
result of the computations, give conclusions based
on the result and make appropriate recommenda-
tions based on the conclusions reached.
A review of the computer models for solving hy-
drologic and hydraulic systems problems show that
although tremendous work has been done in the
past to develop such models, only a few models
exist that address the overall framework of prob-
lems associated with integrated hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems management. A few of the reasons
may be attributable, among others, to:
1. the lack of clear definition and better under-
standing of integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management;
2. the variation of water needs with space and
time; and
3. the evolution (revolution) of computer pro-
gramming.
Most of the existing hydrologic and hydraulic
systems simulation models solve problems that
can be readily expressed in a form of mathematical
functions. Similarly, hydrologic and hydraulic sys-
tems optimization models search for optimal solu-
91 tions of problems defined by mathematical func-
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
tions. To use such models for integrated hydrologic
and hydraulic systems problems, they must also
have the capability of considering different water
policies and incorporating them into the solution.
Computer modeling approaches that at least
partly tried to address some of the concepts of
integrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems man-
agement are highly based on interfacing simple
computer models programmed and used for the
analysis of specific hydrologic and hydraulic sys-
tems problems. At the core of some advanced com-
puter models used for integrated hydrologic and
hydraulic systems management lie simple simula-
tion modules, rule-based simulation modules (also
known sometimes as expert systems) and optimi-
zation modules of hydrologic and hydraulic systems
problems. While many simulation and optimization
modules have been developed and interfaced over
the years by different institutions and agencies,
the incorporation of rule-based simulation mod-
ules in computer models for integrated hydrologic
and hydraulic systems management appears to
have emerged as a sound approach recently. By
incorporating rule-based simulation modules, it has
become easier to manage decisions that involve
several factors and water policies.
The following section discusses some of the
computer models that emerged in the US over
the past few decades for the simulation of various
types of hydrologic and hydraulic systems prob-
lems. Real time event hydrologic models are dis-
cussed in this Section and subsection 3.2 discuss-
es the basic mathematical structure of optimization
models, which may be viewed as generic functions
that can be customized to specific hydrologic and
hydraulic systems problems.
3.1. SIMULATION
3.1.1. Development of Hydrologic and hydraulic
systems Simulation Models
In the advancement of information technology,
hydrologic and hydraulic systems simulation mod-
els have generally gone through an evolutionary
process. Figure 1 depicts the evolution of hydro-
logic and hydraulic systems models as classified
into five generations (derived from the explanation
given by Jamieson and Fedra, 1996). The first gen-
eration codes (models) which tremendously simpli-
fied calculation of analytical functions through ge-
neric computer codes are but mediocre by today’s
standards. One may draw an analogy between the
coming into being of these codes and the transition
of computation methods from using the slide rule to
scientific calculators. In both cases, similar jobs are
done but the new method highly reduced the time
required for numerical computations. The succeed-
ing generations of models successively enhanced
the robustness of the models and/or the ease with
which the model can be used. The fifth generation
of models are embodied with artificial intelligence
that not only perform analytical computations but
also draw some preliminary conclusions and rec-
ommend appropriate actions.
3.1.2. Taxonomy of Hydrologic and hydraulic sys-
tems Simulation Models
Over the past few decades, water resources
professionals have witnessed the development
of quite a number of hydrologic and hydraulic
systems simulation models. Wurbs (1995) points
out that a tremendous amount of work has been
accomplished during the past three decades in
developing computer models for use in water re-
sources planning and management. The majority
of these models, perhaps most of the earliest com-
puter models to be developed for water resources
problems, may be viewed as simulation models.
Taxonomy of some of the popular hydrologic and
hydraulic systems simulation models in the US are
summarized in Table 2.
Fund and the National Geographic Society clearly
recognized the critical need for the watershed ap-
proach for integrated hydrologic and hydraulic sys-
tems management rather than political jurisdiction
or boundaries. Similarly, the Environmental Advisory
Board (EAB) of the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) recommended in 1994 to use the water-
shed/ecosystem approach as the holistic, integrated
concept on which to base (water resources) plan-
ning (Bulkley, 1995). Furthermore, the US General
Accounting Office (1994) listed the importance of
the watershed approach for integrated manage-
ment. Accordingly, watershed boundaries:
1.are relatively well defined;
2.can have major ecological importance;
3.are systematically related to one another hier-
archically and thus include smaller ecosystems;
4.are already used in some water management
efforts; and
5.are easily understood by the public.
Many water resources projects in the past
lacked the integrated planning aspect. Hall (1998)
states that throughout history, water management
“systems” have been developed in a linear fashion,
i.e., it had a piecemeal development in which the
components of integrated water management were
put into place as the need for the component arose.
As a result, these systems have not been sufficient
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
and effective enough.
2.3. IMPORTANCE
We are becoming more increasingly aware, with
time, of the fact that our water supplies are limited
both in quantity and quality. Because water has
multiple and often competing uses, hydrologic and
hydraulic systems are interrelated with other physi-
cal and socio-economic systems. In some locations,
when water supplies become extremely limited, its
further use is based on the determination of which
user has the oldest “right” to it, or on a judgment
about which uses have the highest priority (Hall,
1998). He also warns that unless dealt with appro-
priately, the forces of population growth, urbaniza-
tion and increased water demands for home, in-
dustry and agriculture, coupled with an increasingly
global economy and culture, will produce in the fu-
ture spreading, perilous degradation of water qual-
ity everywhere, and a continuously widening gap
between water needs and the availability of useful
water in all too many locations. As a solution to this
problem, he suggested a different approach which
includes: 1) management across political boundar-
ies, 2) the collective management of atmospheric
water, surface waters and groundwater, and 3) the
combined management of water quality and water
quantity.
Schultz (1998) brings into picture what the cri-
teria for water resources management projects at
present are and those criteria emerging as new
ones in the future. Accordingly, the factors that have
to be satisfied include: 1) economic benefits; 2)
technical efficiency; and 3) performance reliability.
The approach which seems to become more and
more dominant includes:
1.the principle of sustainable development;
2.ecological quality;
3.consideration of macroscale systems and ef-
fects; and
4.planning in view of changes in natural and so-
cioeconomic system.
It is evident from these comparisons that hydro-
logic and hydraulic systems projects are geared to-
wards integrated management.
In a different argument, an integrated hydrologic
and hydraulic systems project needs to be evalu-
ated on the following important factors: technical,
economic, financial, environmental and socio-politi-
cal. Technically, it must be feasible to build; econom-
ically, it must be reasonably affordable; financially, it
must have source; environmentally, its effect must
be mitigated with ease; and socio-politically, it must
be acceptable to the public. The project can be suc-
92
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
cessful if effective coordination prevails between the
parties involved and if such parties are mandated
to monitor clearly defined scope and regional cover-
age.
Therefore integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management is found to be a viable ap-
proach in planning efficient water resources projects.
Integrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems man-
agement makes it even easier and more efficient for
such projects to succeed. In England and Wales, for
example, regional water authorities whose boundar-
ies were defined by the watersheds of the country
enabled the replacement of 1600 separate water
service entities with ten regional watersheds (Bulk-
ley, 1995).
3. Computer Modeling Tools for Integrated Hydro-
logic and hydraulic systems Management
If the ideals of integrated hydrologic and hydrau-
lic systems management can be sought after, ana-
lytical tools become essential to simplify or assist in
the balancing out process. Water policies need to
be transformed into such forms that can be “under-
stood” and “interpreted” using analytical tools such
as computer models. Consequently, robust comput-
er models that not only solve the problems that have
 Effecti-
Type of Phrase from Total Water
Discussion ve-ness
coordination Management definition
Ranking

The exercise of stewardship of This statement provides a general

Society and water resources for the greatest organizing framework for balancing.
1
environment good of society and the It is adequately understood, but
environment needs more explanation.

Requires the participation of all… Process is known as stakeholder

stakeholders in decision-making and public involvement. Good and
Stakeholder 2
through a process of coordination improving. A central issue of
and conflict resolution democratic government.

It is recognized and currently popular

Watershed and Encourages planning and
that water management on a basin or
natural water management on a natural 3
watershed basis is desirable. Further
systems water systems basis
progress will require more effort.

This means to coordinate different

Promotes water conservation,
Means of water ways to meet needs and sustaining
reuse, source protection, and 4
management the environment. A central planning
supply development
and management issue.

This requires valid planning methods to

93 Time-wise
Through a dynamic process that preserve institutional memory and keep
5
adapts to changing conditions processes on track and requires much
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

improvement.

Requires the participation of

all units of government … in
Intergovern-
decision-making through a
mental
process of coordination and
conflict resolution
Intergovernmental coordination is
given as separate from stakeholders
6
because of the different kinds of
authorities that government has.

This is handled through water quality

Water quality To enhance water quality and
law and regulation. Many problems 7
and quantity quantity
still require solution.

This is a difficult issue requiring

Local and intergovernmental cooperation in
Taking into consideration local
regional arenas which lack adequate incentives 8
and regional variation
concerns and often can not be mandated. It is not
working too well.

Balances competing uses of

water through efficient allocation
Competing
that addresses social values cost
uses
effectiveness, and environmental
benefits and costs
This is handled through state and
federal water law regulations, court
9
decisions, and other institutions.
A very difficult arena.

Table 1- Types of coordination from total water management definition (Grigg, 1998)
 AACM (a consulting company in Australia) and
Center for Water Policy Research, Australia, in
1995 defined integrated resource management (of
which water resources is a part) as the coordinated
management of land and water resources within
the region, with the objectives of controlling and/or
conserving the water resource, ensuring biodiver-
sity, minimizing land degradation, and achieving
specified and agreed land and water management
and social objectives (Hooper, 1995). This defini-
tion is also appealing to water resources which is
just a component of the resources of a watershed.
The American Water Works Association Re-
search Foundation (AWWARF) (1996) defined the
concept of total water management which compre-
hends wide aspects of integrated hydrologic and
hydraulic systems management through the follow-
ing statements.
“Total Water Management is the exercise of
stewardship of water resources for the greatest
good of society and the environment.
A basic principle of Total Water Management
is that the supply is renewable, but limited, and
should be managed on a sustainable use basis.
Taking into consideration local and regional varia-
tions,
Total Water Management:
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
Encourages planning and management on
a natural water systems basis through a dynamic
process that adapts to changing conditions;
Balances competing uses of water through
efficient allocation that addresses social values,
cost effectiveness, and environmental benefits and
costs;
Requires the participation of all units of govern-
ment and stakeholders in decision-making through
a process of coordination and conflict resolution;
Promotes water conservation, reuse, source
protection, and supply development to enhance
water quality and quantity; and
Fosters public health, safety, and community
good will.”
Table 1 shows an elaboration by Grigg (1998)
of the definition of total water management as relat-
ed to the concept of coordination. He emphasized
on what is implied by each of the important phrases
used in the definition. These phrases which are ap-
parently the central aspects of integrated hydrolog-
ic and hydraulic systems management include so-
ciety and environment, stakeholder, watershed and
natural water systems, means of water manage-
ment, time-wise, intergovernmental, water quality
and quantity, local and regional concerns and com-
peting uses. Integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management is as much challenging as
compromising between these different aspects in
making decisions.
The foregoing definitions and discussions
indicate that integrated hydrologic and hydrau-
lic systems management is multi-objective. It is
necessary both for economic efficiency (which is
measured in monetary units) and for environmen-
tal quality (which is measured in terms of pollut-
ant concentration). Shortly, it balances between
societal welfare and ecosystem sustainability. To
summarize, integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management in a watershed involves a
multi-disciplinary approach of developing and us-
ing water resources by making possible balances
between all the competing water uses and through
coordination between all parties without causing
detrimental consequences to the ecosystem and/or
future requirements.
2.2. HISTORY
The history of integrated hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems management is, perhaps, not as
clear as we would wish it to be. Jamieson and Fe-
dra (1996) report that the concept of integrated hy-
drologic and hydraulic systems management has
been recognized by practitioners since the early
94
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
1970s. This perception was endorsed by the Unit-
ed Nations in the Dublin Statement in 1992.
The history of integrated hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems management on a regional basis is
even less clear, because the definition of a region
is often ambiguous. River basin boundaries usu-
ally differ from political boundaries. Groundwater
flow has obviously never been dictated by politi-
cal boundaries, and neither has the movement of
atmospheric water. Furthermore, the question of
the size of a region has been a challenge and will
probably remain so in the near future. Viessman,
Jr., (1998) states that it is not clear that integrated
regional water plans can be fitted within the geo-
graphic limits of large river basins or watersheds.
Vlachos (1998) poses a very important question:
Can integrated planning and management work
in the vast expanses of the Nile, the Amazon, the
Parana/LaPlata, or should it be restricted to more
regional, specific socio-political conflicts of rather
well-defined geographic, cultural, environmental,
physiographic, and economic boundaries?
Defining a water resources region now appears
to be driven more by the watershed approach than
the other factors mentioned above. A national fo-
rum convened in January 1994 by the Conservation
 under such conditions is “balancing out”. This may
be achieved through integrated hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems management.
Various definitions have been given in the past
to integrated resource management in general and
water management in particular by different individ-
uals and institutions involved in the management
and/or study of water resources. In addition, vari-
ous terms such as hydrologic and hydraulic sys-
tems management, integrated water management,
integrated regional water management, water re-
sources management, river basin management,
watershed management, total water management,
and so on have been used to refer to the manage-
ment of water resources in conjunction with other
resources on a large scale, that is, on a river basin
or watershed scale. For the purposes of this pa-
per, the term integrated hydrologic and hydraulic
systems management is consistently used unless
otherwise specified.
This paper reviews the concept of integrated
hydrologic and hydraulic systems management.
The definition of integrated water management as
used by various institutions and individuals are cit-
ed and an attempt is made to give a definition that
considers the wide range of aspects of integrated
hydrologic and hydraulic systems management.
95 The evolution of simulation models and the struc-
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
ture of optimization models for hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems problems are revisited. Examples
of a relatively new set of computer models, gen-
erally termed as decision support systems (DSS),
for hydrologic and hydraulic systems problems are
reviewed. These models, being capable of incorpo-
rating water policies, are believed to be promising
computing methodologies for integrated hydrologic
and hydraulic systems management. Some of the
examples of DSS given for integrated hydrologic
and hydraulic systems management manifest the
possibility of incorporating or at least monitoring
water policy issues in the process of allocating wa-
ter to all the competing users.
2. Integrated Hydrologic and hydraulic systems
Management
2.1. DEFINITION
Mitchell (1990) noted that integrated water
management may be contemplated in at least three
ways: 1) the systematic consideration of the vari-
ous dimensions of water: surface and groundwater,
quality and quantity; 2) the implication that while
water is a system it is also a component which
interacts with other systems; and 3) the interrela-
tionships between water and social and economic
development. In the first thought, the concern is
the acceptance that water comprises an ecological
system which is formed by a number of interdepen-
dent components. In the second one, the interac-
tions between water, land and the environment,
which involve both terrestrial and aquatic issues,
are addressed. Finally, the concern is with the rela-
tionships between water and social and economic
development, since availability or lack of water may
be viewed as an opportunity for or a barrier against
economic development.
The provision of water resources management
include: providing ports, harbors, and usable chan-
nels for water transport; supplying water and elec-
tricity for cities, industry and agriculture; providing
flood control for cities; and cleaning up visibly pol-
luted rivers and lakes (Hall, 1998). Jamieson and
Fedra (1996) also indicate that river basin man-
agement includes all aspects such as water sup-
ply, land drainage, hydropower generation, effluent
disposal, recreation and amenity.
Each aspect of integrated hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems management depends on and is
affected by other aspects. Loucks (1996) points out
“Integrated water resources systems planning and
management focuses not only on the performance
of individual components, but also on the perfor-
mance of the entire system of components”.
Water policy issues, of which limited effort was
made in the past to incorporate into hydrologic
and hydraulic systems models, are some of the
major factors that affect integrated hydrologic and
hydraulic systems management. Grigg (1998) de-
scribes water policy as dealing with finding satis-
factory ways to allocate resources to balance be-
tween diverse and competing objectives of society
and the environment. He refers to “integrated wa-
ter management” as blending together actions and
objectives favored by different players to achieve
the best total result. Mitchell (1990) states that inte-
gration in water management deals with “… prob-
lems that cut across elements of the hydrological
cycle, that transcend the boundaries among water,
land and environment, and that interrelate water
with broader policy questions associated with re-
gional economic development and environmental
management”. The policies that are needed for in-
tegrated water resources management require co-
ordination and collaboration among governments
and agencies engaged in water management
(Viessman, Jr., 1998). Grigg (1998) notes that im-
proving coordination is the most promising route to
the conceptual and perhaps utopian vision of inte-
grated water management.
 INVESTIGATION OF COMPUTER
MODELS IN CONTROL AND
MANAGEMENT OF INTEGRATED
HYDROLOGIC AND
HYDRAULIC SYSTEMS
S. Partania*, S.A.M.Naenib, A.N.Dehkordic
a
M.S.c Student of Environmental-Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tarbiat Modares Unv., I.R Iran
b
M..S.c Student of Water Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tarbiat Modares Unv., I.R Iran
c
M.S.c Student of Hydraulic Structures, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, I.R.Iran
E-mail: Sadegh_Partani@yahoo.com

Abstract
The work in this paper is directed towards two
aspects: review of the concepts of integrated hydro-
logic and hydraulic systems management and com-
puter models used for integrated hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems management. The term “integrated
mathematical programming to heuristic search tech-
niques including genetic algorithms and simulated
annealing shows the potential resources available
for computer programming for integrated hydrologic 96
and hydraulic systems management. Incorporating

‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

hydrologic and hydraulic systems management” is
used in order to be all inclusive of various types of
water systems ranging from water distribution sys-
tems and storm water management systems to en-
tire watershed systems and river basin systems. Re-
view of hydrologic and hydraulic systems computer
models developed starting prior to the 1960s to the
present day shows enormous evolution/revolution of
computer programming. These efforts which started
in the early days of computer programming for the
simplification of calculation of analytical functions
have now reached the age of what is being referred
to in computing technology as “artificial intelligence”
whereby it has become possible to write computer
programs that not only evaluate a hydrologic and hy-
draulic systems problem, but also draw preliminary
conclusions based on the results and recommend
appropriate actions based on the conclusions.
An attempt has been made herein to catego-
rize computer programming techniques and mod-
els useful for hydrologic and hydraulic systems
management into simulation models, optimization
techniques and decision support systems (DSS).
Taxonomy of some of the more widely used simu-
lation models in the U.S. is given. The discussion
of different optimization techniques ranging from
established water policies that take into account the
balancing out process of water among competing
users in simulation and optimization models help de-
velop DSS that can be used as models used for in-
tegrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems manage-
ment. The study of a few of such models manifests
the relative importance of these computer programs
for integrated hydrologic and hydraulic systems
management. Only a limited number of DSS for
this purpose have been developed and used in the
past. However, the availability of technical resources
including database management systems, simula-
tion models, optimization techniques and advanced
computing technology provide the opportunity for
more exploration to develop DSS for integrated hy-
drologic and hydraulic systems management.
1. Introduction
The fact that every living being depends on
water to live and its limited availability in terms of
both quantity and quality makes it a resource that
living beings compete for to live. This precious re-
source has competitors that need it in one way or
another as a result of which it often becomes chal-
lenging in space and time to fully satisfy the needs
of these competitors for water. The viable solution
 Water Works

The deck and swimming pool look on the lowest point on the property, a dam built to create a natural lake. It is
97 fed by the circulating stream on the opposite bank, which aerates the water. This is a favorite haunt of migrating
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

waterfowl.

three-dimensional world. A small suburban human being. Whether it exists in a mountain

estate can be transformed into a woodland glacial moraine or sits in a rock yard in the city,
garden in which the “beholder can indeed its intrinsic value is in its individual character.
measure the depth of his own nature.” It tells us in the silent aesthetic language of
nature that challenges us to discover its es-
sence. For only then will we be able to inte-
The Zen of It All grate it into a naturally balanced composition
that conveys that final goal of harmony.
In the world of Zen, we do not shape the
rock but become one with it to understand its
most elemental value. Such is true with the
rock waterfall; for until we come to accept rock
and water on its own terms, we can never cre-
ate a natural setting that is truly believable.
Even the slightest bit of unattractive concrete
can ruin a carefully conceived plan.
As makers of gardens, we must accept that
each stone is entirely unique, just as is each
 Water Works
98

‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

It is the landscapes that extend beyond the trates that each site and each owner is dif-
realm of typical and reach into the fantastic ferent, and that, with time and experience, a
that inspire wonder in us. This example illus- homeowner’s imaginings can take form in a
 Water Works
To preserve the natural beauty of the oak tree cov-
ered site, this deck, which looks onto the pool and lake,
was designed to protect these shade-giving trees.
99 OPPOSITE, looking down on the pool and spa from
above, you can see how water flowing out from under
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
the house enters the top pool, falls into the spa, and
overflows through gaps in the rockwork to the swim-
ming pool below.
blue, color.
It was truly an engineering triumph, as 75
percent of the pool was on native soil, arid the,
remainder shares some support from com-
pacted fill. the outer few feet actually cantile-
ver, which required a tremendous amount of
steel reinforcement.
To create such a perfectly natural edge
condition, it was essential to notch the bond
beam by creating pockets and shelves along
the edge, upon which the giant boulders were
placed. This required a notch to be precon-
structed for every boulder, with the rock set
just after the pool was plastered. The largest
boulder exceeded 8 tons (about 7 metric tons)
and was placed by a huge portable crane,
then invisibly mortared in place to look as
natural as possible. All of this was essential
if the pool was to have partially submerged
boulders without any fear of leakage.
The remainder of this huge site contains
many footpaths through woodland glades be-
neath the spreading canopies of oaks. At the
lowest point a lake was constructed to lure
waterfowl to the site. This is the primary view
below the decks and pool, fed by yet another
waterfall on the far side of the ravine. Creep-
ing red fescue and various lilylike plants are
the appropriate species for margins of natural
lakes. The forest of graceful deodar cedars
(Cedrus deodora) makes a fine backdrop for
the canyon and effectively screens out the
neighbor’s properties.
This wood and water landscape is prob-
ably not within the budgetary realm of most
homeowners. But if taken one piece at a time,
it is filled with lessons to learn about how to
create with rock what nature does at random.
Though the surface may seem simple to cre-
ate, the reality is that innumerable man hours
were spent in designing and engineering the
overall concept, addressing the mechanical
challenges of moving large rocks, and hiding
this contrivance behind a veneer of careless
abandon.

ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
Such a large body of water concerned the
building inspector, who deemed It the equiva-
lent of a swimming pool that would have to
comply with all applicable codes and regula-
tions. This demanded that the walkways have
railings and the entire area be enclosed with
a 4-foot (about l-m) safety fence, which was
unacceptable to both designer and owners.
The only way to get around the codes was to
make the pool no more than 18 inches (about
46 cm) deep. The pool was dug deeper than
its maximum depth in order to allow for the
concrete shell and a layer of Nevada moss
flagstones to be layered on the bottom. This
gave it a perfectly natural appearance. At
Water Works
100
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ
This waterfall is composed of a spa at the middle
level that is so
naturally tucked into the rockwork you don’t no-
tice it right away.
This water is circulated out of the pool to the front
yard pond, then under the house, where it is filtered
before it falls into the spa and pool via this waterfall.
such a shallow depth, every inch of the bot-
tom of the pool would-be clearly visible, which
illustrates how crucial such details are when
attempting to re-create the natural beauty of
lakes and streams.
The swimming pool was designed after a
natural lagoon with a boulder strewn edge.
The light gray plaster gave the water a rich
 Water Works

ABOVE left, Build-

ing codes would have
101 required guard rails on
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

either side of this walk if

the water had been over
18 inches (about 46 cm)
deep. To bring it up to
this depth, the pool bot-
tom was lined with cob-
bles. ABOVE RIGHT, This
two-tier rock waterfall il-
lustrates the concepts of
Japanese waterfall plant-
ing, with the flowering
magnolia accent tree at
left, plus the background
wings of evergreen red-
wood trees to provide
solid visual grounding of
all the stone. AT RIGHT,
though the pool appears
simple, complex engi-
neering at the edges -al-
lows the boulders to sit
below the waterline.
 ROCK AND WATER
Design by Michael Glassman
EVERY DESIGN PROFESSIONAL has a
project that is closest to his heart, that defines
terfall so that the water flowed underneath un-
hindered. Michael devised a layout that would
develop this concept using an entry pool that
flowed under the house and then into the spa
and pool in the rear part of the property.

him and his ability in a way that few other works
can. For Michael Glassman, it is this large, 3-
acre (about 12,140-square-meter) home site
on a quiet cul-de-sac in a pricey, oak-tree-cov-
ered subdivision. The owners developed the
entire property and relied on their designer
from the earliest planning stages. This shows
great wisdom, for the collaboration of archi-
tect and landscape architect always results in
a whole project far greater than the sum of its
parts.
A LAKE IS THE LANDSCAPE’S MOST BEAUTI-
FUL AND EXPRESSIVE FEATURE. IT IS EARTH’S
EYE, LOOKING INTO
Water Works
The water used in the front pool, with its
water lilies and fish, is shared with the swim-
ming pool. This was feasible because instead
of chlorine and chemicals for water quality,
a special ultraviolet light system under the
house
that kills bacteria as the water flows through
was installed.
The front entry pond was designed for fish
and water plants, and the path to the front door
would stretch over the water. This exposed
aggregate and brick walk was supported by
footings hidden underneath so it appeared to
float gracefully.

THE BEHOLDER MEASURES THE DEPTH OF HIS

OWN NATURE.

-H EN RY DAVI D THOREAU 102

‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

The desire was to create a wooded estate
that would suggest the hunting lodges of the
19th century, with their rich dark woodwork
and surrounding forests. Water would be the
essential feature, integrated into virtually every
aspect of the property. To create the ultimate
in naturalistic landscaping, huge boulders and
tons of rock were brought on site. It would be
an attempt to re-create the beautiful chaos of
nature in a wholly controlled environment.
The owners were fortunate enough to pos-
sess another property that was rich in rock,
much of it stacked into dry walls by Chinese
laborers a century ago. This provided a great
source of smaller material, as well as larger
pieces. Otherwise, the difficulties of finding
such a quantity would have precluded the
project. . At curbside you encounter the first hint of the
The overall concept for the site would be miracles of rock and water in this landscape
drawn from architect Frank Lloyd Wright’s fa-
mous project “Falling Water,” where a house
was designed in and around an existing wa-
 Water Works
Water Works

Part 7 : ROCK AND WATER

MUREEN GLIMBER WITH MICHAEL GLASSMAN
Photographs by MICK HALES

103
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

The front entry walk appears to float over this shallow pool with its beautiful water lilies and rock waterfall.
This water is circulated under the house and shared by the chemical- free swimming pool through an ultraviolet
filtration system.
International Water Engineering Journal
ISSN: 1735 – 3971
no 14 july 2008

Managing and Publishing Director:

Mohammad Moghaddasi
Editor:
Banafsheh Bojnordi

Editorial Board:
A.Ahmadian, m.barshan, R.Bazazadeh,
M.A.Pourhasan zare, M.Zavari, M.Shahraki,
H.R.Sadeghi, A.H.Salehi, H.Sabagh Farshi,
F.Aliyari, S.Fartus, A.Karaji, F.Karami,
B.Mahmodi, R.Moghaddas Jaafari, A.Mahdiyani,
H.Mehraban, P.Mirjaafari, M.Nosrati, R.P.rezvani
F.Vahed Pour

Colleagues:
104
ABANGAH, F.Babalo,

‫ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬

F.Rezaee, M.NooriZare

Address:
P.O.Box: 19585 – 186 Tehran – Iran
Tel: 66961043 – 22936961
Fax: 66955260
Email: omraneabmag@yahoo.com

Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Monitoring impact of magnetic water on mechanical properties in micro silica fiber plain concrete . . . . 5
Monitoring quality of quantity on KARON River for irrigation lawns of AHVAZ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Cheking condition of sedimentation reservoir KARKHEH dam with GSTARS3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Water resources management in iran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
The proposal method of construction subsoil concrete water budgets (part 4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Water laboratory test (part 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Head loss in transmission fluid pipes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Conferences & events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Water news . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Conferences and events ( September and October 2008 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
INVESTIGATION OF COMPUTER MODELS IN ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Water works (part 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104