G Model

SUSCOM-116; No. of Pages 6 ARTICLE IN PRESS

Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/suscom

Evaluation of genetic algorithms using discrete and continuous

methods for pump optimization of water distribution systems夽
Seyed Mohsen Sadatiyan Abkenar a,∗ , Samuel Dustin Stanley b , Carol J. Miller a ,
Donald V. Chase c , Shawn P. McElmurry a
a
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, USA
b
Department of Computer Science, Wayne State University, Detroit, USA
c
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Dayton, Dayton, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A considerable portion of costs associated with delivering municipal drinking water is related to energy
Received 4 December 2013 usage. This energy consumption also has environmental implications resulting from the pollutants emit-
Received in revised form ted at power generation plants. Optimizing the cost and environmental emission of energy consumption
13 September 2014
by strategically scheduling pumping cycles is a multi-objective nonlinear problem that contains consider-
Accepted 24 September 2014
able number of constraints. The solution space of this type of problem even for a small water network can
be very large and finding the boundaries associated with the solution space is quite difficult. Evolutionary
Keywords:
optimization methods, such as genetic algorithm, are well suited for solving this kind of problem. In this
Optimization
Sustainability
paper, two methods for describing the pump optimization problem within a genetic algorithm solution
Water distribution system framework are considered. Each leads to different methods for conducting crossover and mutation steps
Pump of the genetic algorithm. Results are presented when these methods are used with a novel pump opti-
Genetic algorithm mization software, Pollutant Emission and Pump Station Optimization (PEPSO) using a hydraulic model
of a moderately sized municipal drinking water system located in Monroe, MI, USA. Advantages and
disadvantages of each method are discussed. Results highlight the need for genetic algorithm coding
methods which circumvent infeasible solutions.
© 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction types and ages, with various capacities. As a result, system

Energy and water issues are intrinsically linked. Extracting
sources of energy from mines, use of hydropower, and the com-
mon practice of producing power with boilers and cooling systems
all require water. Likewise, the extraction, transmission, treatment
and distribution of water are all highly energy dependent [1]. About
4% of energy demand of the United States is related to supplying
drinking water (treatment and distribution). Approximately 75% of
operation costs for municipal water systems and treatment facil-
ities are attributed to energy demand [2]. In water distribution
systems (WDS), most of the energy is consumed by pumps required
to provide discharge and pressure at critical demand points.
Municipal water systems utilize a mixture of pumps of different
夽 Great Lake Protection Fund (GLPF) sponsored project No. 881. The GLPF did not
influence the study design, interpretation of results or writing of this article.
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 3138990365.
E-mail addresses: mohsen@wayne.edu (S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar),
ed7560@wayne.edu (S.D. Stanley), ab1421@wayne.edu (C.J. Miller),
dchase1@udayton.edu (D.V. Chase), s.mcelmurry@wayne.edu (S.P. McElmurry).
requirements at demand points can be met with nearly infinite
combinations of pumps and operation schedules. Among these
many operation schemes, there is a pumping schedule (the opti-
mal solution) that requires the least amount of energy while still
providing the required discharge and pressure at demand points.
An additional complicating feature for these systems is the variable
nature of water demand over time. Therefore, the optimal solution
is continually changing. Further complicating the system solutions,
the cost of energy can also vary over time. One tool system oper-
ators may have in their systems is to essentially store energy in
elevated storage tanks and shift pumping operations to off-peak
hours when energy prices are lower. In this way, the total pumping
cost of the water network will be reduced, even if the amount of
energy consumed is not.
In addition to energy consumption and cost, a sustainable
water system should be optimized to limit environmental impacts.
Energy required for pumping results in pollution emissions from
power generation units (e.g. coal-fired power plants). The type and
amount of pollutants emitted by power generation units vary. Due
to variation in generator emissions and power demand by WDS,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suscom.2014.09.003
2210-5379/© 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar, et al., Evaluation of genetic algorithms using discrete
and continuous methods for pump optimization of water distribution systems, Sustain. Comput.: Inform. Syst. (2014),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suscom.2014.09.003
G Model
SUSCOM-116; No. of Pages 6 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2 S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar et al. / Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
it may be possible for pump optimization schemes to shift energy
demand from one time to another to effectively reduce emissions,
even if the total amount of energy consumed is more. In addition
to temporal variations in emissions, large scale water distribution
systems may also see spatial variations in pollutant emissions [3].
Operator should just know that at any time and location what type
of power generator is providing energy. Based on information that
power generators and power markets provide, it is possible to find
out which generator type is producing energy for a specific location
and at specific time [4]. Pollutant emissions for WDS can be derived
by multiplying rate of pollution per unit of energy produced by the
amount of energy required for pumping. With this information,
pumping schedules can be optimized to run pumps at locations
and during times which reduce emissions. For instance, an opti-
mized pumping schedule could require pumps that utilize power
generators that have high emission rates to be switched off, while
other pumps in the network that consume power from relatively
cleaner sources could be turned on, effectively reducing the total
amount of emissions. In addition to amount of pollutant emission
that is associated with a power demand of a pumping schedule, cost
is also critically important. To find the optimal solution (in terms
of sustainability), optimization routines should minimize energy
demand, cost and pollutant emissions [5].
In an ordinary municipal water networks, a large number of sce-
narios for pumping schedules are available. Finding the optimum
solution for this type of non-linear problem with multiple con-
straints using traditional deterministic methods is challenging and
has been a focus of extensive research. For instance, Zheng [6] has
reviewed multiple linear and non-linear programming techniques
to optimize WDS design and Ulanicki et al. [7] used a dynamic pro-
gramming method to solve this type of problem. Nearly all of these
efforts are limited to relatively small systems, minimizing the size
of the solution space. To address larger-scale problems, evolution-
ary algorithms have been found to provide as an efficient approach
for finding optimal solutions [5]. Genetic algorithms (GA) are a well-
known type of evolutionary optimizing method that has been used
by multiple groups [e.g. [8–10]] for pump schedule optimization.
These methods can find optimal solutions in a large solution space
by evaluating only a relatively small number of potential solu-
tions. It works directly with the fitness of each solution instead of
derivatives or other auxiliary characteristics used with traditional
deterministic approaches. Also, GA searches for the global optimum
solution over the whole solution space, instead of focusing in a part
or boundaries of solution space that may lead to a local, rather than
global, optimal solutions [11]. While the global optimum is com-
monly assumed, there is no guarantee that the solutions identified
by GA are the absolute optimal solutions. However, the probability
of finding optimal solutions increases with the number and vari-
ance allowed during mutations. It also might increase the time to
solution.
In the following sections, GA for optimizing pumping sched-
ules in a WDS is introduced. Two different methods for describing
the optimal pump schedule within this framework are explained.
The methodologies described in this paper have been incorporated
into a computer application named Pollutant Emission and Pump
Station Optimization (PEPSO) developed to optimize the pumping
schedules for DWS across the Great Lakes watershed.
2. Genetic algorithm for water system pump optimization
In the GA, a random group of solutions is selected as the initial
(trial) population. Each solution is a pumping schedule. Analo-
gous to genetic definitions, each solution is described as a group
of chromosomes which contain a string of genes that corresponds
to the controls (on and off condition) of a pump during running
Please cite this article in press as: S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar, et al., Evaluation of genetic algorithms using discrete
and continuous methods for pump optimization of water distribution systems, Sustain. Comput.: Inform. Syst. (2014),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suscom.2014.09.003
period (e.g. 24 h). Through assembling together the chromosomes
of all pumps in the water network, a solution will be produced.
GA optimization starts with a group of random solutions that will
be used as an initial generation (parents). Using the initial genera-
tion crossover and mutation processes are applied to produce new
solutions with modified chromosomes (children).
During the parental selection process, a group of best solutions
will be selected to from each subsequent generation. By repeating
this process, over multiple generations, the GA moves toward an
optimal solution. Once a stopping condition has been reached, the
last generation will contain a group of solutions that are assumed
to be optimal.
The number of solutions in a generation (population size) is one
of the important parameters that influence optimization by GA. By
increasing the population size, more solutions will be investigated
in each generation, covering a wider area of the solution space, thus
increasing the probability of finding the optimal solution in each
generation. Of course, it should be noted that increasing popula-
tion size will increase the solution/computational time. In general,
the number of computation steps (i.e. potential solutions investi-
gated) is equal to the number of generations multiplied by the size
of the population. Since most of the processing time is related to
hydraulic analysis of each solution, reductions in processing time
require reduction of either the number of generations or popula-
tion size. The size of a solution space for a water network can be
huge. For example, consider a WDS with 10 pumps. Assuming a
24 h modeling period with 1 h resolution, the size of the solution
space is greater than 1072 (2(10×24) , the base of 2 corresponds to the
on/off condition). Further, if we assume that some of the pumps of
this network are variable speed, this expands considerably [12]. To
prevent searching all possible solutions, evolutionary algorithms,
such as GA, explore only a portion of this space and migrate toward
optimal solutions.
Additional strategies, aside from modifications to the optimiza-
tion algorithm, can be employed to further reduce the size of the
solution space. For example, identifying identical pumps, pumps
that have the same brand and model, at the same location can
greatly reducing the number of unique solutions. Although this
strategy has some advantages, it can eliminate potentially benefi-
cial outcomes (e.g., the simultaneous utilization of multiple pumps
at the same location).
3. Various methods for storing solution population
Discrete (i.e. binary) and continuous (i.e. level-controlled trigg-
ers) methods are two approaches that can be used to optimize the
pumping schedule with GA. In first method, each modeling period
is divided into specified time intervals (minutes, hours, etc.) and for
each interval a bit of computer memory will be assigned. The bit
identifies if the pump is ON, denoted by “1”, or OFF, denoted by “0”,
for a given time interval. With this approach, each bit is considered
a gene. A chromosome contains all genes for a single pumping unit
during a modeling period. A solution, on the other hand, contains
multiple chromosomes – one for each pump in the water network.
Eq. (1) is used to calculate the amount of memory that is needed
for storing a solution using a discrete approach.
t
Md = n × × 1 bit (1)
i
Md = amount of memory required (bit); n = number of pumps;
t = total modeling time; I = time interval (i.e. temporal resolution);
1 bit = “0” or “1” (ON or OFF).
Fig. 1a illustrates storing a chromosome for two pumps during
24 h modeling with discrete or continuous method.
In the continuous method, the starting and ending time of a
pump duty cycle are stored as a pair of genes. So for each cycle of
G Model
SUSCOM-116; No. of Pages 6 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar et al. / Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
Fig. 1. Storage of solution chromosomes for 2 pumps using the discrete method
with 1 h time intervals (a) and 1 pump using the continuous method (b).
working of pump, two bytes (2 × 8 bits) are needed to store starting
and ending times. The duration between ON and OFF provides the
working cycle of a pump. Eq. (2) is used to calculate amount of
memory that is needed for storing a solution using a continuous
approach.
Mc = n × c × (2 × m)
Mc = amount of memory that is needed for storing a solution with
continuous method (bit); n = number of pumps; c = number of cycle
per modeling duration; m = a memory unit that can store a number
that describes start or end time of a pump cycle – e.g. 8 bits provides
up to 256 points (28 = 265) when the pump can be on (1) or off (0)
during a modeling period.
Fig. 1b shows the storage of a chromosome for a pump during
24 h modeling with continuous method. Both timing schemes have
advantages and disadvantages. For instance, when using the dis-
crete method, if programmers want to increase the number of ON
and OFF times that a pump may operate during a day, they can use
a smaller time interval (e.g. a few minutes instead of an hour). Of
course a smaller time interval will require more memory for stor-
ing solutions. But decreasing time intervals using discrete methods
will require more storage relative to using a continuous method. On
the other hand, coding and debugging of crossover and mutation
steps of GA using a discrete method are easier than for a continu-
ous method. To highlight these differences, consider the scenario
when a time interval of a second is used rather than an hour. In
this case, the size of the solution produced using a discrete method
will increase 3600 times. Alternatively, 24 h of modeling can be
divided into to 24 consecutive 1 h intervals. One bite of data can
store a number between 0 and 24 that incorporates the specified
start and end time for a given pumping cycle. For decreasing time
interval from an hour to a second, two bytes of data can be used
to store a number as large as 86,400 s in 24 h period of modeling.
So decreasing time interval by using continuous method at most
doubles solution size.
One way of storing solutions using the continuous method is
to use an array with three columns: the first column contains
pump ID and second and third columns store ON and OFF times,
respectively. In this case, the programmer can use a procedure
to select a random row number for breaking arrays of two par-
ent solutions and crossover them for producing two new children.
But this introduces the possibility of producing infeasible chil-
dren. An infeasible child in this case is a child that calls for a
pump to be turned ON despite already being ON, or a pump to
be turned OFF when it is already OFF. Fig. 2 demonstrates this
condition. To decrease the production of infeasible children dur-
ing crossover and mutation processes, these processes should
be conducted on pairs of ON and OFF times. Even in this case,
it is possible that after a crossover or mutation, pump work-
ing cycles may overlap and generate infeasible children. Sorting
solution arrays by time can decrease the possibility of producing
Please cite this article in press as: S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar, et al., Evaluation of genetic algorithms using discrete
and continuous methods for pump optimization of water distribution systems, Sustain. Comput.: Inform. Syst. (2014),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suscom.2014.09.003
3
Fig. 2. Producing infeasible child with using continuous method.
infeasible children but it cannot solve this problem completely.
The probability of producing infeasible children depends on the
number of pumps and duty cycles. This is especially problematic for
the last generation, when programs are close to an optimal solution,
the parents will be nearly the same, so the possibility of producing
infeasible children that overlap.
Solutions for an array produced by the discrete method would
result in rows that corresponded to a chromosome for each pump
with each column assigned to a gene indicating ON and OFF times
for a pump. For a 24 h simulation with a 1 h time interval the solu-
tion arrays would contain 24 columns. The crossover step would
(2)
then produce a random number corresponding to a column for
which a row would be broken. By using this method the parent
solutions will be divided to two parts. After replacing the first part
of each parent with another parent, two new children will be pro-
duced. These children will not have the time infeasibility problems
found using the continuous method. Although different crossover
points for pumps can be defined, points for both parents should
be identical. Multipoint crossovers can also be employed. For this
crossover procedure two or more parts of the parent’s chromosome
will be exchanged rather than being divided into two parts. The
GA code for PEPSO utilizes a double point crossover method with
different points for each pump. Fig. 3 demonstrates a crossover pro-
cedure using the discrete method. As it is shown in Fig. 3, the double
crossover points for pumps 1 and 2 are different.
In addition to ON and OFF conditions, variable speed pumps
require an additional piece of information, the rotational speed.
For these type of pumps continuous methods require another col-
umn to be added to solution array. This column contains the speed
ratio of the pump for each cycle (a pair of ON and OFF times). The
pump speed varies between one, signifying the maximum rota-
tional speed of the pump, and the minimum allowable change in
pump speed, which is related to the type of pump [13,14]. A min-
imum speed change of 5% was used throughout this analysis as it
was assumed to be the practical limit for typical centrifugal pumps
used in WDS.
Similarly, each gene produced using the discrete method
includes [the speed ratio of a pump]. In this case instead of “0”
and “1” that indicate ON and OFF conditions, a fractional number
between minimum speed ratio and “1” is used (again, intervals of
0.05 were used in this investigation). While “0” and “1” can be
stored using only one bit of memory, the speed ratio requires at
least one byte (8 bits) of data. Programmers can use simple “0” and
“1” genes for constant speed pumps or they can use similar frac-
tional genes for constant and variable speed pumps. For the later
condition the fractional number of constant speed pumps should
be rounded to “0” or “1”. This scheme has been used for coding the
discrete method for the PEPSO software.
Mutation processes for continuous methods can be used at dif-
ferent levels but they too can produce infeasible children. Mutation
can be set to randomly modify the pumping condition in a solution
array, by changing the ON and OFF time pair within the model-
ing duration (e.g. 24 h). For more effective mutations, instead of
changing ON and OFF time for a cycle of one pump, the times of
all cycles of pumps (one to all) in a solution array can be mod-
ified. Using this method of mutation, the solution space will be
G Model
SUSCOM-116; No. of Pages 6 ARTICLE IN PRESS
4 S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar et al. / Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
Fig. 3. Double point crossover procedure using discrete storage.
Fig. 4. Mutation of solution array for two pumps stored using a discrete method.
limited by a group of pumps randomly utilized as initial possible
solutions. During the crossover process a pump that is OFF can-
not be ON since it is not in the solution array. Since the pumps in
water network do not appear in the initial solution array, they are
not evaluated during the GA optimization and the solution space
will be limited. Therefore, for effective GA process using the con-
tinuous method, the pump identifier and starting and end time of
pumping cycles should be mutated simultaneously. While these
best practices improve optimization using the continuous method,
the probability of producing infeasible child is always present using
this method and can impact the validity of the optimal solution
identified.
The discrete method does not produce infeasible children
through mutation. In this method, a random number of genes of
solutions can be selected and changed. Changing genes can be con-
ducted by two methods. First, each selected gene can be inverted;
if a gene is ON it will be converted to OFF and vice versa. In another
method, a selected gene will be replaced by random number of “0”
or “1”. Alternatively, the ON/OFF period within select genes can be
modified (Fig. 4). Although the mutation process using this method
does not produce infeasible children, the number of pump cycles
can expand rapidly and may require additional constraints. For
instance, consider a solution with only one pumping cycle initially
identified, if only one interval was altered (ON/OFF) in the middle
of the pumping cycle, the number of pumping cycles will double.
One possible solution to this problem is to only allow mutations to
the beginning and ends of chromosomes. This constraint will allow
the duration of pumping to vary but keep the number of pumping
cycle constant. While this action resolves potential problems dur-
ing mutation, crossover remains problematic – particularly, when
two solutions with the maximum number of allowed duty cycles
are going to be crossed.
Please cite this article in press as: S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar, et al., Evaluation of genetic algorithms using discrete
and continuous methods for pump optimization of water distribution systems, Sustain. Comput.: Inform. Syst. (2014),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suscom.2014.09.003
To address problems associated with crossover, further modifi-
cations to potential solutions can be made. One possible resolution
is to join duty cycles. For example, when a solution identifies more
duty cycles than acceptable, a join can be constructed by chang-
ing all “0” genes between the two cycles to “1” genes. This process
reduces the number of duty cycles and minimizes changes to the
original solution. Another method for constraining GA is assigning
a penalty factor for solutions with pumping cycles that exceed the
maximum allowed. Although this method helps the GA to recog-
nize a solution with higher number of duty cycles and prevents
them from being parents for the next generation, it does not guar-
anty that the number of duty cycles found in the optimum solution
is less than the maximum allowed.
It is good practice to allow users to define the fraction of solu-
tions in each generation to be mutated. For water networks where
GAs are effectively identifying solutions, the efficiency of the algo-
rithm can be improved by concentrating computation time on the
crossover process and decreasing the amount of mutations. This
helps the algorithm efficiently focus on mutations in the areas
where useful solutions have been identified rather than exploring
large areas of the solution space. In contrast, for a problem in which
the GA cannot find a global optimum, perhaps getting stuck at local
optimum solutions, the GA can be forced to “jump out” from a local
optimum area to other parts of the solution space by increasing
the amount of mutations. In PEPSO, the user has the option to con-
trol the number of mutations based on conditions within the water
network that need to be optimized.
4. Experimental demonstration
4.1. Experimental design
To assess the utility of optimization using discrete and contin-
uous approaches, the pumping schedule for a moderate size water
distribution system was tested. Optimization was performed using
a 2010 hydraulic model of a moderate size water distribution sys-
tem (WDS). The model was based on the WDS for Monroe, MI, USA
which provides water to more than 20,000 residents and contains
more than 270 miles of water mains. The network has 11 fixed
speed pumps (FSP), 2 variable speed pumps (VSP), 1943 pipes, 1530
nodes, 3 elevated tanks and is served from one source water intake.
The basis for optimization was to reduce the electricity required
for pumping. To achieve this goal, a pressure penalty was added
to an objective function and the model was required to satisfy all
pressure requirements within the WDS. The penalty was derived
by squaring the pressure violation (above or below the allowable
pressure limits) at four critical locations within the Monroe WDS.
When pressures at these four locations were found to be acceptable,
then pressures throughout the entire distribution system were also
G Model
SUSCOM-116; No. of Pages 6 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar et al. / Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
found to be satisfied. Due to the diurnal patter of water consump-
tion, a 24 h simulation duration was employed. One hour time
intervals were set for the discrete method. The GA utilized a popu-
lation size of 100 and would stop (i.e. stopping criteria) when 200
generations were produced without an observable increase in fit-
ness or after 1000 generations. Aside from the differences required
for continuous versus discrete methods (e.g., continuous versus dis-
crete time) all optimization parameters and coding were the same
for test runs.
4.2. Results
Of the 20 optimization runs performed via the continuous
method of coding, 18 runs (90%) generated infeasible solutions dur-
ing mutation and crossover steps. This caused extensive problems
for the hydraulic solver since the infeasible operational plans were
often used to generate pump schedules before a feasible alternative
could be identified. As a result, the parameters used to gener-
ate an optimal solution were often different from those that were
used as parents for the next generation. Hence, the fitness calcu-
lated was often erroneous. This problem continued throughout all
generations and infeasibilities were almost always found in the
“optimum” solution. Contrary to the continuous method, the dis-
crete method was not found to generate infeasible solutions during
any of the 20 optimization runs.
Lopez-Ibanez [15] presented a repair process to fix infeasi-
bilities. By instituting the repair process following mutation and
crossover before parameters were report to the hydraulic simu-
lator, the continuous method was found to perform as good as
the discrete method. Accordingly Lopez-Ibanez [15] concluded that
“healed” continuous coding was better than discrete coding since it
could implicitly handle constraints on a number of pump switches.
Contrary to discrete coding, continuous coding does not change
the number of pump cycles during mutation and crossover steps.
While a healing process enables continuous methods to eliminate
infeasible solutions, it is also possible to add a similar healing step
to discrete methods to resolve problems associated with the num-
ber of pump switches. Therefore, both methods can benefit from
heuristic and healing processes to overcome their respective cod-
ing shortcomings and provide near optimal solutions of the same
quality.
Healing processes were not a focus of this study and hence
not employed. While further investigations are warranted, a heal-
ing process is likely to produce nonrandom mutations which may
reduce the efficiency of the optimization process. This is likely to
occur because the algorithm will preferentially deviate from poten-
tially optimal solutions in favor of areas dominated by feasible
answers.
Optimal solutions identified in this study using the discrete
method tended to utilize less than 5 pump cycles. Final solutions
that included more than 7 pump cycles were rare. This is consis-
tent with previous studies where optimizations without healing
processes tended to utilize a low number of pump switches [15].
Based on this analysis it appears that the discrete coding method
without a healing process increases the probability of identifying
feasible optimal solutions, at least for the Monroe WDS. Further
analysis utilizing discrete methods of coding with two other opti-
mization tools to minimize pumping related energy demand in the
Monroe WDS is presented in a companion article [16].
5. Conclusion
Genetic algorithms and other evolutionary programming meth-
ods are ideally suited to enhance the sustainability of WDS through
pump optimization. To do this, it is imperative accurate hydraulic
Please cite this article in press as: S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar, et al., Evaluation of genetic algorithms using discrete
and continuous methods for pump optimization of water distribution systems, Sustain. Comput.: Inform. Syst. (2014),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suscom.2014.09.003
5
models are combined with parameter optimization that makes it
possible to rapidly identify accurate, feasible results. While con-
tinuous methods without healing procedures have advantages
(e.g., less memory is required to store solutions), they are likely
to produce infeasible solutions, requiring more hydraulic runs to
obtain the optimum solutions and decreasing solutions efficiency.
Despite requiring substantially more memory storage for solu-
tions, especially for longer modeling periods and smaller time
intervals, discrete (i.e. binary) methods avoid producing infeasible
children during mutation and crossover steps. Because most of the
processing time required for pump optimization in WDS is devoted
to hydraulic analyses, having GA generate feasible solutions is crit-
ical to maximize efficiency. In the absence of healing processes, the
use of discrete methods was found to be favorable over continuous
methods for minimizing energy consumption of pumping schemes
in WDS, enhancing their sustainability.
Acknowledgements
Funding for this study was provided by the Great Lakes Pro-
tection Fund (GLPF), USA http://www.glpf.org/ as part of project
No. 881, “Real-Time System Optimization for Sustainable Water
Transmission and Distribution”. We appreciate the constructive
comments provided by three anonymous reviewers that greatly
improved the quality of this manuscript.
References
[1] ICF International, Water and Energy: Leveraging Voluntary Programs to Save
Both Water and Energy, ICF International, Washington, 2008.
[2] EERE, Energy Demands on Water Resources, U.S. Department of Energy, Wash-
ington, 2006.
[3] Y. Wang, C. Wang, C. Miller, S.P. McElmurry, S.S. Miller, M.M. Rogers, Loca-
tional marginal emissions: analysis of pollutant emission reduction through
spatial management of load distribution, Appl. Energy 119 (2014) 141–150,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.12.052.
[4] M.M. Rogers, Y. Wang, C. Wang, S.P. McElmurry, C.J. Miller, Evaluation of a rapid
LMP-based approach for calculating marginal unit emissions, Appl. Energy 111
(2013, November) 812–820, ISSN 0306-2619.
[5] M. Rogers, G. Xu, C. Miller, S. McElmurry, C. Wang, Timing of residential electric
loads to reduce air emissions from power generation, in: Green Chemistry and
Engineering Conference, Wayne State University, Detroit, 2013.
[6] F. Heng, Advanced Hybrid Approaches Based on Graph Theory Decomposition
Modified Evolutionary Algorithms and Deterministic Optimisation Techniques
for the Design of Water Distribution Systems (Ph.D. thesis), School of Civil,
Environmental and Mining Engineering, University of Adelaide, Australia, 2013,
pp. 302.
[7] B. Ulanicki, et al., Dynamic optimization approach for solving an optimal
scheduling problem in water distribution systems, J. Water Resour. Plann. Man-
age. 133 (1) (2007) 23–32.
[8] R. Farmani, et al., Evolutionary multi-objective optimization in water distribu-
tion network design, Eng. Optim. 37 (2) (2005) 167–183.
[9] J.-Y. Wang, T.-P. Chang, J.-S. Chen, An enhanced genetic algorithm for bi-
objective pump scheduling in water supply, Expert Syst. Appl. 36 (7) (2009)
10249–10258.
[10] A.R. Simpson, G.C. Dandy, L.J. Murphy, Genetic algorithms compared to other
techniques for pipe optimization, Journal of Water Resources Planning and
Management 120 (4) (1994) 423–443.
[11] W. Kurek, A. Ostfeld, Multi-objective optimization of water quality, pumps
operation, and storage sizing of water distribution systems, J. Environ. Manage.
115 (2013) 189–197.
[12] Bentley Systems, Incorporated, Bentley WaterGEMS V8i User’s Guide,
Bentley’s Public Documentation Archive, Retrieved 2013 from Bentley:
http://docs.bentley.com/en/HMWaterGEMS/index.php, 2009.
[13] Europump & the Hydraulic Institute, Variable Speed Pumping: A Guide To Suc-
cessful Applications, Elsevier, 2004.
[14] Carbon Trust, Variable Speed Drives: Introducing Energy Saving Oppor-
tunities for Business, Retrieved 05 13, 2013 from Carbon Trust:
http://www.carbontrust.com/media/13063/ctg070 variable speed drives.pdf,
2013.
[15] M. López-Iba’nez, Operational Optimisation of Water Distribution Networks
(Ph.D. thesis), Edinburgh Napier University, 2009, pp. 220.
[16] F. Alighalehbabakhani, C.J. Miller, A. Mohsen Sadatiyan, P.T. Fracasso, S.P.
McElmurry, Comparative evaluation of 3 distinct water/energy optimization
tools applied to real system (Monroe), Sustain. Comput. Inf. Syst. (2014) 7
(Elsevier).
G Model
SUSCOM-116; No. of Pages 6 ARTICLE IN PRESS
6 S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar et al. / Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Seyed Mohsen Sadatiyan Abkenar is a PhD student of
the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineer-
ing, Wayne State University, Michigan. He took his MSc
degree in Water and Wastewater Engineering from PWUT,
Tehran, Iran in 2009. His research efforts at that time was
focused on increasing the durability of concrete sewer
pipes by using alkaline aggregates. Then he came to USA
for continuing his studies and got interested in optimizing
the operation of water pumping systems by using evolu-
tionary algorithms and machine learning techniques.
Dr. Donald V. Chase, P.E. is a visiting professor and chair
of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
and Engineering Mechanics at the University of Dayton.
Dr. Chase has been developing optimal control strate-
gies for water distribution systems for nearly 30 years.
More recently he has conducted physical modeling studies
on three-sided concrete culverts to develop inlet control
regression coefficients used in programs such as HEC-RAS.
Dr. Chase’s most recent areas of research interest include
identifying the optimal location of encroachment stations
in floodplains and identifying the location of ineffective
flow areas at bridges.

Samuel Dustin Stanley graduated from Kenyon College
in 2008 with a major in Mathematics with a concentra-
tion in Statistics, a major in Philosophy in which he was
awarded Distinction, an interdisciplinary concentration in
Scientific Computing, and a minor in Astronomy. He was
awarded his Computer Science M.S. from Wayne State
University in 2013 for his work on an AI artifact finder
system to aid archaeologists. He was concertmaster of
the Pointes Area Youth Orchestra from 2000 to 2002, and
has performed in numerous other orchestras including
the Detroit Symphony Orchestra’s Civic Sinfonia Youth
Orchestra, the Knox County Symphony Orchestra, and the
Grosse Pointe Symphony Orchestra.
Dr. Shawn McElmurry, Associate Professor of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, is one of the original deve-
lopers of the LEEM technology. Shawn has a broad range
of skills related to contaminant transport, air quality, and
computational modeling that support product develop-
ment. Dr. McElmurry’s research has been supported by a
wide range of agencies including the US EPA, the Interna-
tional Joint Commission, and others. He is a well-known
expert in the fate and transport of heavy metals.

Professor Carol Miller of the Department of Civil

and Environmental Engineering, Wayne State University
has research interests spanning urban water sus-
tainability, environmental pollutant transport, and the
energy/environment interface. Dr. Miller is the previous
Chair of the State of Michigan Board of Licensing for
Professional Engineers and the current U.S. Chair of the
bi-national Great Lakes Science Advisory Board of the
International Joint Commission. Her research has been
funded by numerous agencies including the Great Lakes
Protection Fund (sponsoring the present project), US Army
Corps of Engineers, National Science Foundation, US EPA,
DTE Energy, the Great Lakes Commission, and others.

Please cite this article in press as: S.M. Sadatiyan Abkenar, et al., Evaluation of genetic algorithms using discrete
and continuous methods for pump optimization of water distribution systems, Sustain. Comput.: Inform. Syst. (2014),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suscom.2014.09.003