See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/329191710

Service Reservoir Design in Water Distribution Network Optimization Models:

Water Quality Concerns

Conference Paper · November 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 4,658

2 authors:

Mercy Nyirenda Tiku Tanyimboh

University of the Witwatersrand University of the Witwatersrand
4 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS    190 PUBLICATIONS   2,791 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Development of holistic framework for sustainable storm water management View project

Development and Application of Efficient Informational Entropy Based Computational Methods for Flow Networks View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Tiku Tanyimboh on 29 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Service Reservoir Design in Water Distribution Network
Optimization Models: Water Quality Concerns

Mercy Nyirendaa,b and Tiku T. Tanyimboha

a
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of the Witwatersrand,
Johannesburg, Private Bag 3, WITS 2050, South Africa
b
GIBB (PTY) Ltd, Woodmead North Office Park, 54 Maxwell Drive, Woodmead,
2191, South Africa
Email: mnyirenda@gibb.co.za; tiku.tanyimboh@wits.ac.za

ABSTRACT
Service reservoirs are an essential component of water distribution networks. More
often, research is being expanded to include the optimisation of not only the pipe
elements of a water distribution network but also the service reservoirs that may
exist in the system. This is done since service reservoirs contribute to the head that
drives the system and the design of the pipe elements will depend on the service
reservoirs feeding it. Until recently, the impacts of water quality in the design of
service reservoirs has been neglected. This may result in poor water quality within
the reservoir, for example, long water age and bacterial growth, among other
negative effects in the system. Various researchers are utilising computational
methods to determine tank sizing, siting and operation in addition to pipe sizing, pipe
rehabilitation, pump scheduling and cost minimization. The research has highlighted
the need to include water quality in such optimisation procedures. This article
complements the research done on the design of services reservoirs by comparing
the water quality in the service reservoirs and distribution network. The research
aims to inform decisions on service reservoirs and the formulation of new
optimisation models with particular reference to water quality.

Key words: service reservoirs; water quality; computational modelling; optimisation

procedures; water distribution networks

1 
 
INTRODUCTION
More frequently, researchers are using computational methods to solve complex
real-life water engineering problems. One of these problems is concerned with the
design of water distribution networks (WDNs). Since the early 1950s (Barricelli,
1962), WDNs have been the subject of optimisation studies. Throughout the years,
researchers have developed procedures to design WDNs of various complexities,
ranging from sizing only the pipe elements to multi-objective problems including tank
siting and tank shape. In more recent years, the works of Savic and Walters (1997),
Walski (1987), Siew & Tanyimboh (2011) (among others) have all contributed to
creating a fairly robust body of knowledge on systems and optimisation procedures
to achieve the best hydraulic and cost-efficient design of a WDN.
What these optimisation procedures have not provided is the ability to
incorporate water quality aspects in the design of WDNs whilst optimising the design
of the physical elements in the WDN. This weakness results in underperforming
systems with inefficient operation that could deliver water that is below standard,
potentially resulting in negative effects such as high water ages, low chlorine residual
as well as the production of harmful disinfection by-products (Clark and Haught,
2005).
Low chlorine residuals can lead to bacterial regrowth and ultimately waterborne
diseases (Clark and Haught, 2005), while disinfection by-products are reportedly
carcinogenic and thought to cause reproductive and developmental problems
(Nieuwenhuijsen, 2005; Richardson et al., 2002). To minimise these effects, it is
desirable to include water quality in the design of the WDN elements. Service
reservoirs have complex mixing mechanisms and the operation of the WDN
ultimately depends on the size and location of the reservoirs. Underperforming or
improperly designed service reservoirs will only exacerbate the negative effects of
poor water quality in the network. This paper assesses to what degree the design of
service reservoirs affects the water quality. This is done by assessing the water
quality of a network optimised by two optimisation procedures. The first procedure
attempts to implicitly address water quality through tank depletion whilst the other
does not take into account any water quality effects within the system.

2 
 
PENALTY-FREE MULTI-OBJECTIVE EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHM
COMPARED TO FUZZY MULTI-OBJECTIVE OPTIMISATION
“Penalty-Free Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithm” (PF-MOEA) and “Fuzzy Multi-
objective Optimisation” (FMO) are two computational optimisation procedures that
have been presented by Siew et al. (2016) and Vamvakeridou-Lyroudia et al. (2005)
respectively. These methods are both multi-objective which allows the user to
optimise a WDN for multiple criteria like overall hydraulic performance and overall
cost which were used in both of these optimisation methods.
The methods differ as PF-MOEA takes into account an additional tank depletion
criterion which has been used to explicitly improve the water quality in service
reservoirs. This is achieved by choosing the right tank location, size and shape while
attempting to force the tank to empty and re-fill every 24 hours, potentially
decreasing water age and promoting proper mixing. The FMO method only looks at
the ability of the optimised solution to deliver the required hydraulic requirements.
Both procedures have been used to optimise the Anytown network design
problem and have presented some of the most cost-effective solutions to date with
little difference in cost between the methods (see Table 1). Solutions of the Anytown
network problem derived from both procedures were analysed for hydraulic
efficiency and for water quality in EPANET 2 (a network analysis program) to
demonstrate the effects of including the relevant water quality criteria in the design of
the WDN.

Table 1 Cost comparisons between PF-MOEA and FMO solutions

Costs ($ Millions)

Optimisation method Pipes Energy Tanks Total cost

PF-MOEA 3.68 6.22 0.51 10.41

FMO 3.78 6.15 0.61 10.54

ANYTOWN NETWORK
The Anytown network was first presented by Tom Walski in 1987 at the “Computers
in Water Resources” conference (Walski, 1987). It is a benchmark network
formulated to capture typical design problems encountered when designing real-
world WDNs. Figure 1 is a schematic of the network. The network design problem

3 
 
consistts of sizing
g new pipe
es; schedu ling of pum
mps; possible additioon of new pumps;
addition, sizing and
a siting of
o new servvice reserv
voirs; identtifying pipees that nee
ed to be
cleaned and re-lined; iden
ntifying pip
pes that need new pipes placced in parrallel or
replace
ed entirelyy while still meeting p
pressure requiremen
r nts at mini mum costt. There
are two
o existing service reservoirs in
n the netwo
ork, which is fed by a treatment plant
and a p
pump housse with thre
ee identica
al pumps.
The networkk requires optimisati on for five
e scenario
os: i) Averrage day flow;
f ii)
Instanttaneous pe
eak flow; and
a iii) Thre
ee fire-figh
hting flows.. The netw
work has to
o supply
a minim
mum residu
ual pressure of 40 pssi (28.12 m)
m at avera
age and insstantaneou
us peak
flows a
and a minim
mum residu
ual pressu re of 20 ps
si (14.06 m)
m during firre flows.

Figure
e 1 Topolo
ogy of the Anytown
A network

The ne
etwork has since been
b used in multip sation proccedures and has
ple optimis
become a bench
hmark netw
work prob lem for co
omputation
nal optimissation proc
cedures
developed for WDNs.
W The
e optimised
d solution of the ne
etwork usinng the PF-MOEA
d and the FMO meth
method hod are tw o of the most
m cost-effective soolutions pre
esented
for the network so
s far. The
e PF-MOE
EA solution
n includes one new additional tank in
the north of the network lo
ocated on node 6. The solution using tthe FMO method
include
es two new
w tanks with
h one loca
ated in the centre of the
t networrk on node 16 and

4 
 
one located in the west of the network on node 9.
These two solutions of the Anytown network were analysed for hydraulic
performance and for water quality using EPANET 2. The Anytown network was first
presented in imperial units and hence some of the results are also presented in
imperial units.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The optimised solutions discussed above were first analysed hydraulically using the
various loading scenarios as described by Walski (1987). For the average-day flow
scenario, the average nodal demands were applied to the nodes and the extended
period simulation (EPS) was carried out for a 24-hour period. The average-day flow
scenario used a one-minute time step, the water use pattern as described by Walski
(1987) and the optimised pump schedules presented by each solution.
For the instantaneous peak flow scenario, the optimised solutions were analysed
using a single time step with a global peak factor of 1.8 applied to the demands. For
the fire flows, 2-hour EPS simulations were run with three critical fire-fighting
demands applied along with a daily peak flow of 1.3 times average demand. The fire
flow simulations were run on the assumption that only two pumps were operational
with the tanks starting at the minimum operational levels using only the emergency
storage volumes for the entire duration of the simulation. The optimised solutions are
required to provide a minimum residual pressure of 40 psi (28.12 m) throughout the
network during the average-day and peak-flow scenarios. The fire flows require a
minimum residual pressure of 20 psi (14.06 m) throughout the network. Table 2 is a
summary of the results of the hydraulic analyses for both solutions.
The optimised solutions discussed above were then analysed with respect to
chlorine and water age. The chlorine concentration was assumed constant at 0.6
mg/L (Seyoum and Tanyimboh, 2014) at the treatment plant. The nodes and tanks
had chlorine concentrations of 0 mg/L and water ages of 0 hours at the start of the
analysis. Bulk and wall reaction rate constants were assumed to be 0.5/day and 0.1
m/day, respectively (Seyoum and Tanyimboh, 2014) based on a first order kinetics
(Figueiredo, 2014) model. The network was analysed for a period of 72 hours with a
hydraulic and water quality time step of one minute. However, only the last 24 hours
are presented due to the fluctuations that take place at the start of the water quality
simulations.
5 
 
 Figures 2 and 3 represent the water levels in the tanks for each solution. Figures
4 and 5 represent the water quality results for each of the solutions. Table 2 shows
that the PF-MOEA method adheres to the minimum required residual heads for all of
the demand scenarios. The FMO method on the other hand fails to provide 20 psi
(14.06 m) residual pressure during Fire Flow 2, which was reported in
Vamvakeridou-Lyroudia et al. (2005). This could be a result of the inability of the
system to provide for the high demands on node 7 which is placed far from any of
the tanks in this solution.
Figure 2 shows the water levels for all of the tanks in the PF-MOEA solution for
the average day flow. Figure 3 shows the water levels for FMO similarly. Table 3
shows the minimum and maximum operating water levels for all of the tanks. From
the table and Figure 2, it can be seen that the new tank (6N) in the PF-MOEA
procedure empties and re-fills completely over the 24 hour period. This is a result of
the tank depletion criterion embedded in the procedure which is thought to promote
better mixing and shorter water ages within the tank. On the other hand, for the FMO
solution, the new tank 150N also manages to empty and re-fill during the 24 hour
period whilst the other new tank 170N fluctuates through approximately 5 m of the
10 m high tank.

Table 2 Minimum pressures at the critical nodes

Average day Peak Fire Flow 1 Fire Flow 2 Fire Flow 3
a
(24-hr EPS) flow (2-hr EPS) (2-hr EPS) (2-hr EPS)
Pressure (m) 28.89 29.87 16.03 16.23 19.63

PF-MOEA Node 16 9 16 7 11
Time 11:00 N/Ab 2:00 2:00 2:00
Pressure (m) 29.48 31.22 26.26 -6.19c 25.10

FMO Node 9 11 9 7 11
Time 13:00 N/A 2:00 2:00 2:00
a
Single snapshot simulation; bNot applicable; cInfeasible solution

In both procedures, existing tank 41 empties and re-fills completely while existing
tank 42 empties almost completely for the PF-MOEA. The water level in Tank 42 in
the FMO solution tends to fluctuate. This tank has been noted in the original
Anytown problem to have problems with emptying.

6 
 
 78 78

76 76

74 74
Tank Level (m)

Tank Level (m)
72 72

70 70

68 68

66 66

64 64
00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00 00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00
Time (hrs)  Time (hrs) 
Tank 42E Tank 41E
Tank 41E Tank 42E Tank 6N Tank 150N Tank 170N

Figure 2 Tank levels for PF-MOEA Figure 3 Tank levels for FMO
 
Figure 4 represents the results for water age and chlorine concentration in the
service reservoirs for the PF-MOEA method. The results have been plotted on
parallel axes in order to determine the better solution in terms of water quality for the
reservoirs which have different sizes and locations. The better overall solutions will
plot towards the bottom of the graph indicating lower water ages and higher
concentrations of chlorine residual over the entire 24-hour period. Additionally, the
minimum chlorine concentration required, 0.2 mg/L, which must be maintained over
the period was checked. A service reservoir with good water quality characteristics is
described as having low water age and a chlorine concentration not lower than 0.2
mg/L (World Health Organization, 2017). These results are comparable to those
previously presented in the literature.

Table 3 Tank operating levels

Existing tanks PF-MOEA FMO

Tank 41 Tank 42 Tank 6N Tank 150N Tank 170N
Minimum operating level (m) 68.58 68.58 66.50 70.25 60.00
Maximum operating level (m) 76.20 76.20 72.98 74.35 70.05

Figure 5 represents the results for water age and chlorine concentration in the
service reservoirs for the FMO method. The highest water age and lowest chlorine
concentration can be found in Table 4. Table 5 represents a summary of the water
quality results for the demand nodes.

7 
 
 45 0

40
0.1

Chlorine concentration (mg/L)
35

30 0.2
Water Age (hrs)

25
0.3
20

15 0.4

10
0.5
5

0 0.6
00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00
Tank 6N Age Tank 41E Age Tank 42E Age
Tank 6N Chlorine Tank 41E Chlorine Tank 42E Chlorine

Figure 4 Water quality results for service reservoirs in PFMOEA solution

50 0
45

Chlorine Concentration (mg/L)
0.1
40
35
0.2
Water Age (hrs)

30
25 0.3
20
0.4
15
10
0.5
5
0 0.6
00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00
Tank 42E Age Tank 41E Age Tank 150N Age Tank 170N Age
Tank 42E Chlorine Tank 41E Chlorine Tank 150N Chlorine Tank 170N Chlorine

Figure 5 Water quality results for service reservoirs in FMO solution

From Table 4 it can be seen that the solution that did not apply any water quality
related criterion (FMO) produced poorer water quality results for the tanks. The
solution provided by PF-MOEA produced better water quality results than the FMO
method. The FMO solution also fails the minimum chlorine concentration standard as
one of the existing tanks decreases to 0 mg/L at the end of the simulation period. It is
also interesting to note that the minimum and maximum limits of the water quality
standards are bounded mostly by the new tanks proposed by the optimisation

8 
 
methods. In addition, the PF-MOEA solution which applied a tank depletion criterion
to the service reservoirs was able to produce better water quality results in general
for all of the service reservoirs. Thus, it can be seen that all of the results plot lower
in the graph compared to the FMO solution throughout the simulation period.

Table 4 Summary of water quality analyses for the tanks

PF-MOEA FMO
Parameter Time Parameter Time
Tank Tank
value (hrs) value (hrs)
Highest water age (hrs) 38.8 6N 15:00 43.3 150N 18:00
Lowest chlorine 0.24 6N 15:00 0.00 41E 22:00
concentration (mg/L)

Table 5 Summary of water quality analysis for the demand nodes

PF-MOEA FMO
Parameter Time Parameter Time
Node Node
value (hrs) value (hrs)
Highest water age (hrs) 19.51 6 12:00 42.02 14 12:00

Lowest chlorine 0.39 5 & 6 12:00 0.14 14 07:00

concentration (mg/L)

From Table 5, PF-MOEA performs better in terms of the water quality at the demand
nodes. The lowest chlorine concentration for PF-MOEA is higher than the
recommended minimum value of 0.2 mg/L while the FMO solution fails to comply.
The highest water age for FMO is more than double that of PF-MOEA. It is also
interesting that the critical water quality values occur at node 14 which is directly
connected to existing tank 41.

CONCLUSIONS
This paper investigated two optimised solutions to the same network design problem
with particular reference to the water quality in the service reservoirs within the
network. The solutions presented are similar in total cost but one of the solutions
incorporates a tank depletion criterion which has been shown to improve the service
reservoirs in terms of water quality and operation. The solution encourages tank
depletion throughout the rest of the network and thus better water quality is seen

9 
 
throughout the system. The results point to the need for including water quality
requirements in design optimization models for water distribution networks and
service reservoirs in particular.

REFERENCES
Barricelli, N. A., 1962. Numerical testing of evolution theories : Part I Theoretical
introduction and basic tests. Acta Biotheoretica, Issue 16, pp. 69-98.

Clark, R. & Haught, R., 2005. Characterizing pipe wall demand: implications for
water quality modelling. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management,
31(3), pp. 208-217.

Figueiredo, D. M., 2014. Modelling Chlorine Decay in Drinking Water Supply

Systems. Lisbon, Portugal, Instituto Superior Tecnico.

Nieuwenhuijsen, M., 2005. Adverse reproductive health effects of exposure to

chlorination disinfection by-products. Gloabl NEST Journal, 7(1), pp. 128-144.

Richardson, S., Simmons, J. & Rice, G., 2002. Disinfection by-products: the next
generation. Environemntal Science and Technology, 36(9), pp. 198A - 205A.

Savic, D. A. & Walters, G. A., 1997. Genetic algorithms for least-cost design of water
distribution networks. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management,
123(2), pp. 67-77.

Seyoum, A. G. & Tanyimboh, T.T., 2014. Pressure dependent network water quality
modelling. J. Water Management, DOI: 10.1680/wama.12.00118, 167(6), pp. 342-
355.

Siew, C. & Tanyimboh, T. T., 2011. Design of the "Anytown" network using the
penalty-free multi-objective evolutionary optimisation approach. Palm Springs,
California, Proceediings of the 13th Annual Water Distribution Systems Analysis
Conference, pp. 190-198.

Siew, C., Tanyimboh, T. T. & Alemtsehay, S. G., 2016. Penalty-free multi-objective

evolutionary approach to optimization of Anytown water distribution network. Water
Resources Management, 30(11), pp. 3671-3688.

Vamvakeridou-Lyroudia, L. C., Walters, G. A. & Savic, D. A., 2005. Fuzzy multi-

objective optimization of water distribution networks. Journal of Water Resources

10 
 
 Planning and Management, 131(6), pp. 467-476.

Walski, T. M., 1987. Discussion of multi-objective optimization of water distribution

networks. Civil Engineering Systems, 4(1), pp. 215-217.

World Health Organization, 2017. Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality: Fourth

edition incorporating the first addendum, Geneva: World Health Organization.

11 
 

View publication stats