This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
i
Optimization of water distribution system
I. Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta & P. Khanna
National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, Nagpur 440 020, India (Received 28 February 1992; final version received 10 August 1992; accepted 10 November 1992) ABSTRACT An optimization algorithm with recourse to a nonlinear programming technique based on the interior penalty function with DavidonFletcherPowell method, incorporating the graph theoretic approach for analysis of networks, has been developed for design of functional and leastcost water distribution systems with multiple reservoirs. The model has the capability to design a new system as well as to reorganize an existing system. Reorganization of a system becomes necessary due to increased water demand resulting from an increase in population density and enhanced service levels or expansion to the new areas. Further, the hydraulic simulator based on graph theory enables design of all types of systems; viz. branched. looped or a combination thereof including nodes with specified fixed energy grades. The software package has been developed for use on an IBMPC compatible micrrDcomputer. Tim efficacy of the algorithm has been demonstrated through an example on design of a typical water distribution system.
KEY WORDS
Water Distribution, Optimization, Nonlinear Programming, DavidonFietcherPowell Method, Interior Penalty Function Method, Network Analysis, Graph Theory, Computer software SOFTWARE
Name
AVAILABILITY
: WATDIS
of Software
The software has been developed in FORTRAN language and is available for use on IBM PCXT/AT compatible personal computers under MSDOS as well as on HP9050AM computer system under HPUX operating system (HewlettPackard, USA). The software is available from the authors at the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, Nehru Marg, Nagpur  440 020, India.
INTRODUCTION Consequent upon the launching of the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade (19811990), organized water supply was accorded high priority in less developed countries. The review of achievements against the goals set for the decade indicate a considerable shortfall due to inadequate financial resources amongst other constraints. Water distribution is a cost intensive system and, accordingly, the situation could be resolved to a large 101
extent through the application of mathematical programming techniques for cost minimization. Several researchers have developed algorithms based on heuristics, and linear and nonlinear programming techniques, to solve the problem of cost minimization for water distribution system. Featherstone and El Jumaily [1] hypothesized that an unique linear gradient exists for a balanced network which results in the optimal solution. Walski et al.
Environmental Software 02669838/93/$06.00 © 1993 Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd
102
L Gupta, J. K Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Khanna
estimation of frictional beadloss in pipes. It has been shown by Jain et at. [9] that the use of this formula results in errors up to =1=.30% and :f.55% in the estimation of velocity and frictional beadloss respectively for extreme conditions of velocities and pipe roughness encountered in practice. The researchers also presented the Modified HazenWilliams formula which obviates the inherent limitations of the HazenWilliams formula and has been employed in this research. Thus, frictional beadloss in a pipe link can be estimated as,
L qt.So99
f ~ ...........................
[2] developed user friendly software based on the trial and error approach to identify the op6mal combination of pipe sizes. Quindry et al. [3] developed an algorithm based on the gradient search technique incorporating a linear programming approach. Swamee et al. [4] developed an algorithm to reorganize a distribution system where the network is synthesized via linear programming to yield the new pipe diameters and the input point pumping beads. Watanatada [5] used DavidonFletcberPowell method to solve an unconstrained version of a 54 node network and reported on the unsuitability of the approach for large size networks. C, enedese et al. [6] formulated a multiobjective optimization problem considering construction cost (capital cost) and management cost (operational cost) as the two objectives and obtained a Pareto optimal set (i.e. a series of compromise solutions which take into account the existing relation between different points of view) for a direct pumping water distribution system. Chiphinkar et al. [7] developed an algorithm using interior penalty function with DavidonFletcberPowell method and demonstrated the efficacy of the approach through a case study for a large sire system. Lartsey and Mays 181 developed a methodology based on reduced gradient method using an augmented Lagrangian approach to incorporate pressure head bounds in the objective function. This paper addresses itself to the development of software for optimal design of a new, or optimal augmentation of an existing, combined pumping and gravity system with multiple reservoirs. For a new design problem, given a network configuration, the program computes the pipe diameters and reservoir heights which minimize the total cost of the system while satisfying the quantity and head requirements. For reorganization, since the height of the existing reservoir and the existing pipeline must remain fixed, functional design is achieved through additional pipes provided in parallel with existing ones wherever necessary and providing new reservoir(s) or enhancing the pumping capacity. The efficacy of the algorithm is demonstrated through an example considering reorganization of a typical water distribution system.
...(la) D4 " ~ ...(lb)
994.62 Ca I " ~  Z DA'aog9
in which, f is frictional beadloss in pipe in m; L is length of pipe in m; q is flow in pipe in m3/s; C r is coefficient of roughness, D is internal diameter of pipe in m; and Z is resistance coefficient term for the pipe given by (Lq t's°99) / (994.62 CRl"s°°9).
Cost Model
The total cost of a water distribution system is the sum of individual cost components in the system, i.e. pipe network, pumping systems, power, and distribution reservoirs. Capital cost of pipe, including the cost of laying and jointing, can be expressed as, Cpip~ = K I L D" ...(2)
in which, C p,pe is the cost of pipe in Indian Rupees . (1 US $ = 25.95 Indian Rupees); and K I and a am coefficient and exponent of the regression equation and are functions of pipe material. Cast iron (CO, asbestos cement (AC) and galvanized iron (GI) pipes have been considered for regression analysis. Cost data have been taken from the Schedule of rates (199091) provided by the Maharashtra Water Supply and Sewerage Board, India. The values of coefficients for different pipe materials obtained by regression analysis (Eq.2) are presented in Table 1. The capital cost of a pumping system can expressed as,
C pump
=
FORMULATION OF PROBLEM
be
Hydraulic Model
K'(HP) b ...(3)
Most researchers on opamization of water supply have employed the HazenWilliams formula for
in which, C pump is the total cost of pumping system
Optimization of water distribution system
TABLE
I
103 is total cost of reservoir in Indian
in which, C
REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS OF COST EQUATION FOR DIFFERENT PIPE MATERIALS
PIPE MATERIAL
Rupees; K 4 and c are regression coefficients; and V is capacity of reservoir in m 3. Regression analysis yields 8840 and 0.73 as the values of K4 and c respectively. Reservoir capacity is fixed by balancing ~qui~ments between the rates of pumping and demand. Total armualized cost of the system forms the basis for optimization. The annu~lizing factor (AF) is given by
I (I + lY'Ks
REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS
K1 a
Asbestos Cement Cast kon Galvanized iron
2812 4920 240
1.74 1.38
1.10
AF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I + 1)y  1
+ P
...(8)
in Indian Rupees; K' is coefficient of regression equation; HP is horse power of pump; and b is exponent dependent on type and HP range of pumps. Home power of p u m p can be expressed as, ItgQH ...............
in which, I is rate of interest; y is life of component in years ; K is salvage factor, and P is maintenance factor.
HYDRAULIC SIMULATION In tbe analysis of looped water distribution system the necessary conditions are: I) The algebraic sum of headloss in pipes around a loop must be zero (energy equation) for all loops, i.e.
Nk
HP
AQH
...(4)
746q
in which, It is density of water in kg/m3; g is acceleration due to gravity in m/s2; Q is total discharge in m3/ s; H is pumping bead in m; q is combined efficiency of pump and motor;, and A = Itg / (746~1). Therefore Eq. 3 could be rewritten as, Cpu,,p = K2(QH) b ...(5) in which, N k is the number of pipes in k th loop, in which, K 2 = K'(A) b. Regression analysis yields 151320 and 0.84 as the values of I ~ and b respectively. The annual cost of power can be expressed as, Cr,o,' = K3QH ...(6)
Mk
Y" fki = 0, for k th loop
i=l
...(9)
fkl is the headloss in ith pipe of the k th loop. 2) The algebraic sum of inflows and outflows at a node must be zero (continuity equation) for all nodes, i.e.
in which, Cpow is annual cost of power in Indian rupees and K 3 is coefficient of regression equation. Regression analysis of Eq. 6 yields 22920 as the value of K 3. Annual cost of power has been computed based on unit cost of energy, hours of pumping, combined efficiency of pump and motor, and yearly average consumption factor. Capital cost of elevated service reservoir can be expressed as, C,:., = (0.02H + 0.76)K4(V)c
Y" qkl + Uk = 0, for k th node i=l
...(10)
in which, M k is the number of pipes connected to k th node; qki is the flow in ith pipe connected to k th node; and U k is demand at the k th node.
A water distribution network may be viewed as a directed linear graph which is composed of a collection of finite number of edges (pipe sections each with a specified length, diameter and roughness coefficient). A spanning tree is a connected system of edges which
...(7)
104
I. Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Khanna
k = (2pn+2) ..... (2p+l); j = l,...,n gk(X) = Zfji + H I H., = 0 ...(15)
contains all the nodes but no loop. The nootree edges constitute the elements of the ~ which is the complement of spanning tree. Using graph theoretic formulation (Boulos and Airman [11]) for analysis of looped networks, Eqs. 9 and l0 could be combined in a single matrix equation. The number of simultaneous hydraulic nonlinear equations and the number of variables to be solved in this method is equal to the number of couee pipes in the network (p  n + 1), in which p and n are the number of pipes and nodes respectively. An energy equation is added to the full equation set for each node where energy grade or pre~ure is specified except tbr the reference node. Modified Newton's method (Dennis and Schnabel [121) has been used in this research to solve the resulting system of nonlinear equations.
k = (2p+2) ..... (2p+s); j = 2,...,s
gk(X) =
Rmin
R. J
< 0 1..... d
...(16)
k = (2p+s+l) ..... (2p+s+d); j = gk(X) = H.j Hmax _< 0
...(17) 1..... e ...(18)
k = (2p+s+d+l) ..... (2p+s+d+e); j = gk(X) = H. < 0 J
k = (2p+s+d+e+l) ..... (2p+s+d+2e); j = 1 ..... e in which, e is number of new reservoirs; s is number of nodes with specified grade (existing reservoir or pump); Dml n is minimum permissible diameter, d is number of demand H. is the head at node J with specified grade; R i, is minimum desirable residual head at the demand nodes; nodes;
OPTIMIZATION
OF DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
The p r o b l e m has been formulated as a cost minimization problem subject to constraints on minimum pipe diameter, minimum residual head ( I m residual head is equivalent to a pressure of 0.1 kg/cm2), and m i n i m u m and m a x i m u m height of elevated service reservoirs. Consumption at the demand nodes are known or computed based on population served and per capita waler requirement. Diameter of pipes and height of reference reservoir or pumping head constitute the elements of the design vector, i.e. X = IDI,D 2..... Dp,Hll r. Height of new reservoirs and residual bead al nodes are functions of diameter of pipes anti height of the reference reservoir/pumping head. Accordingly, the problem is formulated as,
p e
R. is residual head at J jth demand node; and H m a x is maximum permissible reservoir height. The minimum permissible height is taken as zero. This poses a constrained nonlinear problem with nonlinear nonconvex objective function and nonconvex comtmints. The constraints (16), (17) and (18) are implicit functions of design variables. The ,set of equations (13), (14) and (15) constitute the largest number of constraints of this problem which are solved by the hydraulic simulator thereby significantly reducing the number of constraints t o t(p+d+2e) for nonlinear optimization. The nonlinear problem is solved by the interior penalty function method (Rao [131) in which the constrained problem is convened to an unconstrained one by appending the constraints to the objective function
min F ( X )
=
5". KtLIDi" + Y K2(QIHi) b + i=l i=l
e
e
)". K3QiH i + 5" (0.02H i + 0.76)K4(Vi)C i=l i=l subject to the comtraints
...(ll)
through penalty k = 1..... t. Thus, min O(X,
factor r, and weighting
factors w k,
the objective
function is, + rE ...... k=l g,,
t wk
r, w) = F ( X )
...(19)
gk(X) = Dmi"  D. < 0 J k =
gk ( x ) =
...(12)
i ..... p; j =
)"fji = 0
1..... p ...(13) 1..... (pn+l) ...(14)
The unconstrained optimization of O (X, r, w) is to be carried out for a decreasing sequence of penalty factor (r) and weighting factors (wk). The choice of initial penalty factor r and the weights Wk, have considerable influence on the effectiveness of the method. It might appear that by choosing very small values of r one can avoid an excessive number of
k = ( p + l ) ..... (2pn+l); j = gk(X) = )'.qj~ + Uj = 0
Optimi:ation of water distribution system
iterations for minimization of the Ofuncfon. However, if too small a value of r is used, the initial minimization will drive the solution to the minimum of F(X) itself, a point unlikely to be near a constrained minimum. Comequently, a considerable amount of time will be required in following a path to reach the constrained minimum. On the other hand, if r is too large the minimum in the first few iterations will each time be forced well away from the boundary and the search will also take a long time. Values of r and w which give the value of O (X, r, w) within the range 1.15 to 1.6 times the value of F(X) have been found to be satisfactory in achieving faster convergence. Contribution of diameterconsbaints in the unconstrained function O could be significantly different from that of the residual head and reservoir height constraints as the diameter of pipes usually varies between 50 mm and 600 nun and the residual head and reservoir height vary between 8 m and 30 m. Therefore, a different weighting factor (w~) is assigned to each constraint in order to ensure normalization. Consequently, the contribution of different gk(X) to the Gfunction an: equal at the initial point.
Tim unconstrained problem is solved by DavidonFletcherPowell method (DFPM) (Rao [131 and Himmelblau [14]) as it is powerful, gives good convergence, and needs calculation of first order partial derivatives only. However, as some of the constraints are implicit functions of the design variables making closed form analytical solution difficult to obtain, the gradient of ~ is computed numerically using a finite difference scheme. The finite difference scheme needs evaluation of the objective function with incremented value of decision variable. Therefore, the hydraulic simulalor has to be invoked for solving the energy and continuity equations for computing each component of the gradient which is a time consuming process. However, since the increment is small, it may be assumed that the changes in pipe flows are not appreciable, therefore, old flow values are used for computing the residual head.s, thereby reducing the time required for computation of gradient. The
105
READ NI~rW(}RK I)ATA DEMANDS. CONT PARAMErTIF.RN
INVOKE IIYDRAUUC SIMULATI)R (;Lrr FLoW IN EA(.II PIPI~ AND I RF.q;IDUAL nEAO AT eACII NODE I
I
NO
i
INITIAI.17Jff ITERATION COUNI~.R 1' ANn PENALTY I~ACTOR '¢': C()MPtrll~ VALUF.~ OF WEIGIITINO FACTORS : i t
EEl P,Ir.% AGE
[EVALUAT~ OBIECTIVBFUNCTION}
CAIJ. I)r:PM SUgR()UTIN~ OBTAIN 1 NEW glTr OF IJP.gI(;N VARIARI.F.~
YP.~
Rt.:.I)UCE'¢ j
NO
Fig. 1. Flowchart for main program.
direction matrix is updated in such a way that it eliminates the need for computation of Hessian matrix and iLs inverse. The cubic interpolation method is used for onedimensional minimization in the process of calculating the optimal step length. The solution thus obtained is a local opdmum. The global optimality of the solution is difficult to verify using modified KuhnTucker type sufficient optimality theorem (Mangasarian [15]; Gupta and Vartak II 61) as some of the constraints are implicit functions of design variables and the objective function is nonconvex in nature.
O P T I M I Z A T I O N A L G O R I T H M AND C O M P U T E R SOFTWARE Flow charts for tim optimization algorithm are depicted in Figs. 1 through 4. The main program (Fig. 1) invokes the subroutine ANAL (Fig. 2) for performing the hydraulic simulation of the network and the subroutine DFPM (Fig. 3) for optimization which in turn invokes subroutine ONEDIM (Fig. 4) for computing the optimal step length employing cubic interpolation. Difference between the objective function values for two successive iterations being less than 0.1 has been taken as the convergence criterion for optimization subject to a maximum number of iterations
106
ENTER WITH X J
I. Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Kharma
J ENTER w m l
DESIGN VECTOR X
SOLVE SYSTEM OF NONLINFAR EQUATIONS BY MODIFIED NEW'TOWS METIIOD. FIND FLOW IN ALL PIPES
1 1 1
SET STEP LF.NGTII o f t I: r r E R t l SET DIRECTION MATRIX J AS UNIT MATRIX OF ORDER OF X
1
COMPUTE V ~
.
1
AT X
COMPUTE DIRE(TTION VECTOR .q AND NORMAI.ISE S S =  J 9@: S, t S/4(y...~; ~)
I
,,E^,, , I
CAI.I. ONEIIIM . COMPUTE TIlE ()PTIMAL ,RTE.P I.EN(TI'I! ~" AND NEW DF.~I(N VECTOR X m C()MI'U'rE GRAI)IENT V ~ . AT X.
1
Fig. 2. Flowchart for hydraulic simulation.
YES
(lm,,~) tO achieve convergence given by, OF
I = 6 + INT [. . . . . . . . . * 5]
?
...(20)
YES
F in which, INT represents the integer part of the expression within the brackets; Q and F are the values of unconstrained and constrained objective function at the initial solution as defined in Eqs. 19 and 11 respectively. It has been observed from the examples and case study that the algorithm converges before the maximum number of iterations allowed in the program is reached. The hydraulic simulator is based on graph theory and comprises the following steps : Find the minimum spanning tree (MST) based on resistance coefficient of pipes . Form the circuit matrix corresponding to the tree and cotree subgraphs Form the pseudocircuit which is a chain of connected tree branches between the reference node and a node with specified grade Solve the resulting simultaneous equations using modified Newton's method to obtain the flow in all the pipes Compute the residual heads at all the nodes 2. Newton's method requires the inversion of the Jacobian which is symmetric and hence only the elements 3.
~
Y
F
.
S
UPDATE ) WIIERE, fl E AND F
: =
J  J + O + E S St/N'P F '  ( I F) (I F)*/FrIF VONV~
l
1
Fig. 3. Flowchart for DFPM (submudne). of the upper triangular matrix are stored resulting substantial reduction in memory storage. in
.
4.
The DFPM subroutine based on the interior penalty function method with recourse to DavidonFletcherPowell method comprises the following steps: 1. Initialize direction matrix to identity matrix (J) F'md the search direction (S) Find the optimal step length (ct*)
5.
Optimization of water distribution system
~ wn'll S dk~r SIZE aJt.vo I ANO DIRECTION VECTOR S
107
I
CALL ANAL; FIND R
IEVALUAT1B ~ . AND VO, AT X. SET F, 0 , . F,,  $TVO. [
i
I
:
s~w,,.1,..I , o / ~
i^
i
CX)MPUTB OPTIMAL STEP
LIBlqoTn : [
a" A+(F.,~.Z÷W) (BA) I (F.u.+Fm.÷ZT..) WIIERE. 7...] (FAF,) (BA) + F.u. + F,, AND W . Z(ZLF,~P~p)
I
I..a':.. v.I
F~ i .~P'VO. ]
AB'; F,  F,,{ FA,  S~VO, ]
!
EVALUATE 0 , AT I CALL ANAL TO OBTAIN XF~LOWS I AND R. EVALUATE (~, AT X, [ CONV  I (R*V~N) I (1~11 lV~.I) I[
NO
IS~
x 
x. I
Fig. 4. Flowchart for ONEDIM (subroutine). 4. 5. Compute the new solution (X N) Test the new solution for optimality and if optimal, return Update the direction matrix and go to step 2 IISll IIV~ll Three situations can be identified for design/ reorganization of a water distribution system, viz. new the value of optimum step length c~', subject to a maximum of three iterations. Convergence criterion for cubic interpolation is given by, (ST V @) 6. _< 0.001 ...(21)
The convergence criterion for unconstrained minimization is taken as II VO N II <: 0.001 subject to a maximum number of iterations equal to the number of design variables, where., II VO N U = "~,Y__,(VONIz). Cubic interpolation technique is employed for obtaining
design, augmented design and selective augmentation.
108
L Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Khanna
For a new design all components of the system are to be designed. For augmented design along with the introduction of new pipes and input points in the expanded area, parallel pipe finks are allowed to he provided for all the existing pipes whereas for selective augmentation the parallel pipe links are allowed to be provided only for a few selected pipes. Therefore, the software has been designed to operate in tluee modes corresponding to the above three situations. A pipe with noncommercial diameter D of length L can be split in two sections of lengths L u and (L  L ) in the next upper and lower commercial sizes (D u and Dr) such that their combined hydraulic characteristics are the same as fl~at of the noncommercial diameter pipe. Noting that the headloss in the noncommercial diameter pipe is equal to the sum of headlosses in two sections, i.e. f = f+f~, in which f is the headloss in the upper diameter section and f~ is the headloss in the lower diameter section, the following expression is obtained for computing the length of the upper diameter section using Eq. la. (D~.8o99 L Di4.8o'~) (22)
®
tltS
@
G6
®
®
®
®
tSO
_" @ @
'
(~).~
,o
.,
11
®).
SO
'
t4 (~)
15
,
t
@
!
t 

@
! i !
t ! t
1, 0
@
,' PiPE NO. NODE NO.
18
= L ..............................
•
(Du~.8o'~
Dj~.8o9¢)
6
,~,
EXISTING INPUT POINT
NEW INPUT POINT EXISTING PIPE LINK
Thus the optimal solution with continuous diameter pipes is rounded to tire nearest commercially available pipe sizes. The computer code has been written in FORTRAN77 for use on an IBMPC/AT386 @ 33 MHz computer, with or without math coprocessor support, 640K bytes memory, 1.2M bytes high capacity floppy disk drive and a hard disk drive, under MSDOS operating system. The programs have been compiled using Microsoft FORTRAN Optimizing Compiler Version 4.1 and linked using Microsoft SegmentedExecutable Linker Version 5.01.20. The maximum size of the distribution system that can he designed using the software is limited to 150 pipes, 105 nodes, 100 demand nodes and 5 reservoirs. Incorporating these limitations the size of the executable program is 440K bytes. The programs have also been compiled on HP9050AM computer system under IIPUX operating system.

NEW PIPE I..INK
Fig. 5. Typical water distribution system. The network, depicted in Fig. 5, comprising 30 pipes (24 existing and 6 new) and 18 nodes including 16 demand nodes (all nodes except nodes 7 and 13), is supplied through a single reservoir of 20 m height at node 7 with ground level of 1(11.3 m. The ground level at different demand nodes varies between 100.5 m and 102 m. The network is similar to the one considered in Swamee et at. [41. Constraints on minimum nodal pressure and pipe diameter are taken as 12 m and 50 mm respectively. Cast iron (CI) pipes have been employed in the design for diameters of 80 mm and above whereas galvanized iron (GI) pipes have been used for diameters less than 80mm. The coefficient of roughness for old and new pipes are taken as 0.7 and 0.9 respectively. The demand peak factor (ratio of peak and average daily demands) of 2.5 has been considered for design. Two types of studies have been carried out using this network to meet an increase in demand.
EXAMPLE To illustrate the usefulness and applicability of the algorithm and software, it was used to design a typical water distribution system having existing and proposed pipe links including expansion into new areas.
Optimi=ation of water distribution system
TABLE O P T I M A L DESIGN W I T H S P U T PIPE NO. FROM NODE TO LENGTH 2a
109
C O M M E R C I A L D I A M E T E R PIPES FLOW (m3/s) VELOCITY (m/s) HEADLOSS (m) (m/Km)
(m)
DIAMETER (m)
4
I 6 7
400.00 170.81 229.19 300.00 202.69 97.31 450.00 353.89 96.11 200.00
4
8 9
I0 II
5 6 8 9
280.00 300.00 225.68 74.32 320.00 146.23 173.77 350.00 350.00 450.00 250.00 121.06 128.94 425.00 63.83 361.17 500.00 441.25 58.75 370.00 293.03 76.97 350.00 320.00 350.00 460.00 72.88 387.12 250.00 270.00
12
10
13
11
14
!1
15 16 17 18
8 10 10 II
12 9 II 12
19 20
9
10
13 13
.0800 .1250 .1000 .1250 .I000 .0800 •0650 .0650 .0500 .0650 .1000 •0800 .1500 .1500 .1250 .0500 .0800 .0650 .0800 .0800 . 1000 .2000 .1500 .1250 .0650 .1000 .0800 .0800 .1500 • 1250 .0500 .1000 .0800 .1000 • 1250 .1 000 .1250 .0650 .0500 .0650 .0500 .0500 .0800 .0650 .0500 .0650 .0800 .0500
.0019 .0054 .0054 .0066 .0036 .0036 .0012 .0012 .0012 .0008 .0033 .0013 .0086 .~D4 .0094 .0004 .0011 .0011 .0026 .0033 .0041 .0331 .0118 .0095 .0013 .0036 .0037 .0025 .0110 .0110 .0007 .0051 .0051 .0068 .0131 .0131 •0121 .0011 .0006 .0006 .0004 .0002 .0005 .0OO5 .(~03 .0009 .(m23 .0009
.39 .4.4 .69 .54 .46 .72 .36 .36 .62 .2,1 .41 .24 .49 .53 .77 .19 .23 .35 .52 .66 .52 1.06 .67 .76 .40 .46 .72 .49 .62 .89 .36 .65 I.OI .86 1.07 1.67 .98 .31 .33 .17 .Ig .09 .10 .15 .17 .26 .46 .43
1.803 0.366 1.438 1.448 0.602 0.846 2.268 !.!58 1.111 0.488 0.488 0.349 0.968 0.540 0.428 0.666 0.158 0.509 2.640 2.640 2.067 2.067 2.569 2.569 1.510 0.367 1.143 2.948 0.202 2.747 3.387 2.439 0.95O 5.454 3.085 2.370 3.168 1.201 1.201 0.439 0.439 0.284 0.018 0.265 0.447 0.4.47 1.648 !.648
4.508 2.144 6.272 4.825 2.97 I 8.69 I 5.040 3.272 II .558 2.439 2.4~ I.?A5 3.225 2:394 5.75.t 2.082 I .I)79 2.928 7.542 7.542 5.9(15 5.9(}5 5.710 5.710 6.038 3.03 I 8.865 6.937 3.164 7.606 6.775 5.527 16.165
14.741) I 0.528
31).793 9.052 3.753 3.753 1.255 1.255 (}.617 0.253 (I.686
1.788 1.788
6.10] 6.103
110
L Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Khanna
PIPE NO.
FROM
NODE
TO
!r~G'I'H
!DIAMETER
(m)
FLOW
VELOCITY
HEAD LOS S
(m)
(mS/s)
(m/s)
(m) (m/Km)
21
II
14
22
12
15
23
14
13
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
14
12 13 14 15 16
15 14 16 17 18 17 18
300.00 118.34 181.66 320.00 220.26 99.74 500.00 323.79 176.21 450.00 393.72 76•28 440.00 450.00 490.00 261.98 238.02 369.44 105.56
17
.0800 .2000 .1500 .1000 .1000 .0800 .0500 .0650 .0500 .0650 .0500 .0650 .0500 .1250 .1000 .0800 .1000 .0800 .0800 .0650
.0017 .0142 .0142 .0033 .0032 .0032 .0001 .0002 .0002 .0005 .0003 .0007 .0007 .0047 .0035 .0018 .0012 .0012 .0009 .0009
.34 .45 .80 .41 .41 .64 .06 .07 .II .15 .16 .21 .35 .38 .45 .36 .15 .23 .18 .27
1.068 0.150 O.919 1.247 0.547 0.711 O. 140 0.048 0.092 0•462 0.462 0.466 0.319 0.722 1.240 1.235 0.103 0.275 0.258 0.200
3.562 1.268 5.057 3.8q7 2.437 7.127 0.28 I 0.148 0.524 1.027 I .(127 I. 183 4.18(I 1.64 I 2.756 2.52 I 0.3~M I. 154 0.697 1.893
I. Assuming that the source at node 7 is sufficient, no new input point is introduced. In this case, only parallel pipelines and new pipelines are considered for reorganization. The number of design variables and constraints for nonlinear optimization are 30 and 46 respectively. Table 2a presents the results of optimal design giving the diameters of parallel pipes and new pipes along with the split pipe lengths for upper and lower commercial sizes. For each pipe link, the lust row gives the existing pipe size, the second and third rows give the split pipe lengths in upper and lower commercial sizes respectively. The third row is absent for those pipes which do not need splitting. The residual heads and nodal demands for the optimal design are presented in Table 2b. The computer time taken for optimization of this network was 68.54 minutes• The total cost of the parallel pipes and new pipes is 1,476,000 Indian Rupees (US $ 56,900). 2. Assuming that the source at node 7 is not sufficient, the system needs to be reorganized by providing parallel pipelines, new pipelines and an additional reservoir at node 13. The diameter of new and parallel pipes and height of the new reservoir have to be determined. The number of design variables and constraints for nonlinear optimization are 30 and 48 respectively.
TABLE
2b
RESIDUAL HEADS IN O P T I M A L DESIGN NODE NO. GROUND LEVEL (m) 101.45 101.00 102.00 101.50 101.75 100.50 101•30 101.40 100.90 101.25 102.00 100.80 101.40 101.70 101.50 101.40 101.30 100.95 DEMAND RESIDUAL HEAD (m) 15.58 17.87 18.33 16.58 14.79 18.73 20.00 17.36 14.08 15.13 13.82 14.75 13.19 13.06 12.78 12.40 12.15 12.00
(ME/d)
.1163 •1406 •1856 • 1350 .1725 •3787 3.3316 .2625 .1875 .2663 .3450 .1931 .4144 .1894 .1215 .1294 .0938
ID 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D 7R 8D 9D 10D liD 12D 13 14 D 15D 16D 17 D 18D D R
= Demand node = Reservoir node
Optimization of water distribution system
111
TABLE
3a
O P T I M A L DESIGN WITH SPLIT C O M M E R C I A L D I A M E T E R PIPES
PIPE NO. FROM
NODE
LENGTH
DIAMETER
(m)
TO
(m)
FLOW (m3/$)
VELOCITY (m/s)
HEADLOSS
(m)
400.00 300.00
(m~(m)
1 2 3
8 9 10 il
10 6
6 !1
7 8 10
11 12 9
10 18 11
11 12
450.00 347.73 102.27 200.00 127.07 72.93 280.00 300.00 320.00 267.38 52.62 350.00 350.00 450.00 250.00 68.47 181.53 425.00 500.00 405.71 94.29 370.00 350.00 320.00 276.41 43.59 350.00
460.00 200.06 259.94 250.00 59.58 190.42 270.00 97.10 172.90
19
13
20
13
10
.0800 .1250 .0650 .0650 .0500 .0650 .0650 .0500 .0800 .1500 .0500 .0650 .0500 .0800 .1000 .1500 .0650 .1000 .0800 .0800 .0500 .0650 .0500 .1000 .1250 .0650 .0800 .0650 ,0650 .0800 .0500 .0800 .0650 .0500 .0800 .0650 .0800 .2000 .1500
.0020 .0075 .0013 .0013 .0013 .0007 .0007 .0007 .0015 .0155 .0004 .0009 .0009 .0010 .0069 .0184 .0015 .0038 .0038 .0044 .0003 .0005 .0005 .0073 .0095 .0018 .0037 .0037 .0023 .0051 .0005 .0016 .0016 .0014 .0039 .0039 .0027 .0222 ,0222
.40 .61 .40 .40 .67 ,22 .20 .33 ,29 .88 ,21 ,26 ,44 ,20 ,88 1,04 .46 .49 .76 .87 ,13 .16 .27 .93 .78 .55 .73 1.10 .69 1.02 .26 .31 .48 .70 .78 1.18 .54 .71 1.26
1.188 1.154 2.687 1.318 1.370 0.408 0,135 0.273' 0.475 1.781 0.822 0.485 0.337 0.305 3.410 3.647 1.979 0.226 1.754 5.203 0.549 0.301 0.247 3.959 2.074 3.529 2.472 1.058 5.753 5.753 1.762 0,389 1.373 5,776 0,597 5.180 2.247 0.277 1.970
2.969 3.847 5.97 I 3.792 13.393 2.(138 1.06(] 3.744 1.696 5.937 2.567 1.813 6.405 0.872 9.743 8.1{14 7.917 3.3(]3 9.661 12.242 1.097 0.743 2.624 1().699 5.926 11.028 8.942 24.276 16.437 16.437 3.831 1.946 5.284 23. I (J3 I0.021 27.205 8.322 2.856 I 1.394
112
L Gupta, J. K. Bassin, A. Gupta, P. Khanna
PIPE NO.
FROM
NODE TO
! .h~q'GTH DIAMETER
(m)
(m)
FLOW (m3~)
VELOCITY (m~)
HEADLOSS
(m)
300.00 320.00 500.00 139.91 360.09 450.00 64.44 385.56 315.87 154.13 115.30 324.70 186.54 263.46 309.05 180.95 446.88 53.12 388.92 86.08
.0800 .1000 .0500 .0800 .0650 .0650 .0650 .0500 .0800 .0650 .1500 • 1250 .1000 .0800 .0800 .0650 .1250 .1000 .0650 .0500 .0034 .0050 .0013 .0038 .0038 .0008 .0005 .0005 .0010 .0010 .0129 .0129 .0038 .0038 .0009 .0009 .0094 .0094 .0018 .0018 .68 .64 .67 .75 1.13 .24 .16 .28 .20 .31 .73 1.05 .49 .76 .18 .27 .76 i.19 .55 .93 2.41 I 1.738 10.409 1.304 9.109 1.088 0.049 1.040 0.279 0.370 0.490 3.316 0.613 2.534 0.212 0.337 2.565 0.892 2.685 2.099
(m/Kin)
21 22 23
11 12 13
14 15 14
24
14
15
25 26 27 28 29 30
12 13 17 15 16 17
14 16 14
18 17 18
8.(}38 5.43(I 20.819 9.318 25.296 2.419 (I.763 2.696 0.884 2.4(10 4.249 10.212 3.288 9.616 (}.685 1.860 5.740 16.791} 6.~}'~ 24.383
TABLE
3b
RESIDUAL HEADS IN O P T I M A L DESIGN NODE NO. GROUND LEVEL (m) 101.45 101.00 102.00 101.50 101.75 100.50 101.30 101.40 100.90 101.25 102.00 100.80 101.40 101.70 101.50 101.40 101.30 100.95 DEMAND RESIDUAL HEAD (m) 15.75 17.37 17.52 15.33 15.86 17.40 20.00 16.25 18.71 21.92 15.31 14.78 24.01 13.24 12.34 20.19 16.81 12.35
(ML/d)
.1163 .1406 • ! 856 •1350 .1725 .3787 1.6659 •2625 .1875 .2663 .3450 .1931  1.6657 .4144 • 1894 .1215 .1294 .0938
ID 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D 7R 8D 9D 10D liD 12D 13R 14D 15D 16D 17D 18D
The results of optimal design are presented in Tables 3a and 3b. The optimal height of the new reservoir and the flow from it are 24 m and 1.6657 ML/d respectively. The flow from the old reservoir is 1.6659 ML/d. The computer time taken for optimization of this network was 52.53 minutes• The total cost is 1,555,100 Indian Rupees (US $ 59,900) which comprises the following component costs; cost of the parallel pipes and new pipes is 544,100 (US $ 21,000), cost of reservoir is 900,000 (US $ 34,700), cost of pump is 79,000 (US $ 3,040) and cost of power is 32,000 (US $ 1,230) Indian Rupees. For comparing the cost in the two cases, cost of pump and power given in the second case should not be considered as it is implied in the first case also although not computed separately. It is observed from the two cases that providing a second reservoir at node 13 is more economical than to provide parallel pipe lines alone. Thus different cost estimates employing the software help the design engineer in arriving at functional and least cost design.
CONCLUSIONS An optimization algorithm has been presented for design of leastcost water distribution system with multiple reservoirs in which reference reservoir height and pipe
D = Demand Node R = Reservoir Node
Optimi:ation of water distribution system
diameters ate the decision variables. In most of the water supply systems serving areas with high population density the cost of reservoirs, pumps and power are dominant. Accordingly, the objective function includes cost of pumps, power and reservoirs along with the cost of pipes. The software developed runs on IBM PC/AT386 in a reasonable time (approximately 1 hou0 for a medium size network. The example study presented in the paper demonstrates the efficacy of the optimization algorithm. Various options of augmentation/expansion of an existing system can be considered, in a reasonable time using this software on an inexpensive computer like an IBMPC/AT, for appraisal of different solutions, such as, whether a new reservoir is required or strengthening the existing network with parallel pipe lines is adequate for meeting the increased demand.
In summary, use of the algorithm presented in this r e . a r c h would provide a useful tool t0 the practicing engineers and decision makers in less developed countries in arriving at least cost solutions to water distribution system design problems.
4.
113
Swamee. PK. and Sharma" A.K. Reorganization of Water Distribution System. Journal of Environmental Engineering. ASCE 1990, 116(3), 588600. Watamat~a. T. l..~a,.~tCost D~ign of Water Distribution System. Journal of the Hydraulics Division. ASCE 1973. 99(IIY9), 14971513. Cenede~, A., Gallerano, F., and Misiti, A. Multiobjecdve Analysis in Optimal Solution of Hydraulic Networks, Jonrnal of Hydraulic Engineering. ASCE 1987, 113 (9), 11331143. Chiplunkar. A.V., Mehndiratta" S.L, and Khanna" P.. Looped Water Dixtribution System Optimization for Single Loading. Journal of Environmental Engineering, ASCE 1986, 112(2) 264279. Lan.sey, K.E. and Mays. L.W~ Optimization Model for Water Distributi,tm Sy~em Design, 1ournal of ltydraulic Engineering. ASCE 1989, 115(10), 14011418. Jain. A.K., Moran, D.M., and Khanna, P. Modified i[a~enWilliams Formula, Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division. ASCE 1978. 104(EEl). 137146. Schedule of Rates, Maharaahtra Water Supply and Sewerage Board. Office of tim Superintendent "Engineer, Environmental Engineering Works Division, Nagpur. 199091. Bouh~. P. and Airman. T. A Graphtheoretic Approach to Explicit Nonlinear Pipe Nctwork Optimization, Applied Mathematical Modelling. 1991, 15. September, 459466. l)cnni,t, J.E., aiKt Schnab¢l. R.B., Numerical Methods fi~r Unconstrained Optimization and Nonlinear Equations. 1983, Preniict:llall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Rat, S.S. Optimization theory and applications. 1987, Wiley F..a.~tem Lid. Bombay.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
I0.
II.
12.
REFERENCES
I:eatl~tstone. R.E. i~d F,llumaily, K.K. Opllmal Diameter Selection fin" Pipe Networks. Journal of the Ilydraulics Division, 1983, ASCI~ IO9(1Y2), 221234. 2. Walski. T.M.. C,ex~ler. J. and Sj~trom, J.W. Selecling Optimal Pipe Sir,,t for Water Distribution Syxtems. Journal of American Water Works Association, 1988, 80(2), 35  39. Ouindry, G.E., Brill E.D. and Liebman, J.C. Optimization of looped Water Distribution Sy~tem.~. Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division ASCE 198 I. 107(EF.,4). 665679. 13.
14.
llimmelblau. D.M. Applied Nonlinear Programming. McGrawllill Book Company, New York.
1972.
15.
Manga.,~arian, O.L., Nonlinear Programming, 1969, McGraw llill, New York. Gupta, [. and Vartak, M.N., KuhnTucker and FritzJohn type sufficicnt optimality conditions foe generalized .~milocally ctmvex programs, Opsearch. 1989, 26(I), 1127.
3.
16.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.