ELECTRONIC OFFPRINT

Use of this pdf is subject to the terms described below

This paper was originally published by IWA Publishing. The author’s right to reuse
and post their work published by IWA Publishing is defined by IWA Publishing’s
copyright policy.

If the copyright has been transferred to IWA Publishing, the publisher recognizes the
retention of the right by the author(s) to photocopy or make single electronic copies
of the paper for their own personal use, including for their own classroom use, or the
personal use of colleagues, provided the copies are not offered for sale and are not
distributed in a systematic way outside of their employing institution. Please note
that you are not permitted to post the IWA Publishing PDF version of your
paper on your own website or your institution’s website or repository.

If the paper has been published “Open Access”, the terms of its use and distribution
are defined by the Creative Commons licence selected by the author.

Full details can be found here: http://iwaponline.com/content/rights-permissions

Please direct any queries regarding use or permissions to ws@iwap.co.uk

 472 © IWA Publishing 2019 Water Supply | 19.2 | 2019

Energetic optimization and evaluation of a drinking water

pumping system: application at the Rassauta station
Bouach Ahcene and Benmamar Saadia

ABSTRACT

The energy overconsumption at drinking-water pumping stations creates considerable energy losses. Bouach Ahcene (corresponding author)
Benmamar Saadia
For this reason we have developed an NNGA tool of pumping management which optimizes the Research Laboratory of Water Sciences,
National Polytechnic School of Algiers,
consumed energy by the pumping system with respect to the hydraulic functioning conditions in the 10 Avenue Hassen Badi BP 182 El Harrach, Alger
16200,
distribution tank. This tool includes two models: a forecasting model for drinking water demand
Algeria
based on artificial neural networks and an optimization model using genetic algorithms. The results E-mail: ahcene.bouach@g.enp.edu.dz

of the NNGA tool were compared with two pumping plans: the plan based on the pumping regulation
model, and the plan used by the company of water and sewage of the city of Algiers. The analysis
result was done with the help of performed indicators that we have developed and which enable the
evaluation and diagnosis of the energetic function’s system.
Key words | demand forecasting, energy optimization, performance indicators, pumping

INTRODUCTION

The energy consumed by pumping systems represents around
20% of worldwide consumed energy; a considerable quantity
of this energy is lost because of bad management in the oper-
ating phase. Energetic optimization enables the considerable
reduction of the consumed energy beyond the direct and
indirect consequences of this action upon different economi-
cal, technical and environmental plans (Wang & Barkdoll
). The purpose of optimization methods is to find the
right pump combination to reduce the energy of pumping.
However, the strong interaction between the non-linear net-
work components and the various variables of the system
makes the resolution of the problem very complex. For this
reason, in the early work that was conducted at the beginning
of the 1980s several simplification hypotheses were adopted
to facilitate resolution. This is clear in Jowitt & Germanopou-
los () where an approach based on linear programming is
presented. In Coulbeck & Orr (), the authors divided the
optimization problem into two areas: static optimization for
pumping parameters, and dynamic optimization to search
for optimal pumping planning. This same method was
used in the work presented by Lansey & Awumah (),
doi: 10.2166/ws.2018.092
and in the work presented by Nitivattananon et al. ()
while taking into consideration the real-time operation of
the system.
From the 1990s, stochastic methods (in particular genetic
algorithms) were applied to solve the problem of the optimiz-
ation of water supply systems (Simpson et al. ), while the
first use of genetic algorithms (GA) in pumping optimization
was by Mackle et al. () where a simple genetic algorithm
with binary coding was used to reduce the pumping cost. In
Rao & Salomons (), the authors used an artificial neural
network (ANN) based on a numerical simulation to predict
the input data of a simple GA. In Savic & Walters () and
Barán et al. () an improvement on the multi-objective
aspect was introduced allowing the treatment of several objec-
tives (energy and pump switches) at once. In Van Zyl et al.
(), optimization performance was improved using a
hybrid method that combines a GA with hillclimber search strat-
egy. Subsequently, to reduce the calculation time especially for
large systems, several authors have used the parallel computing
technique (Wu & Zhu ). However, this technique requires
means for its implementation. In Behandish & Wu () a
 473 B. Ahcene & B. Saadia | Energetic optimization and evaluation of a pumping system
modified GA is employed to search for the decision space
made of both discrete variables and continuous variables
(tank levels). In the study presented by Zhuan et al.
(), a decomposition method is proposed to reduce the
electricity consumption cost of the pumping station of
Huain in China.
In our approach, two improvements have been made to
the ordinary genetic algorithms used in the optimization of
pumping systems. The first improvement introduced concerns
the generation of the initial population. Indeed, in ordinary
algorithms, the generation of the initial population is made
by a random generator, which can create a calculation diver-
gence especially when the valid solution is difficult to find. To
overcome this problem a certain percentage of the initial
population composed only of valid solutions has been
imposed, and the generation of these valid solutions is
done using an algorithm which is based on the constraints
of optimization of the problem. The second improvement
that has been made is the non-use of a coding for the rep-
resentation of the variables, which reduces the computation
time by eliminating the coding and decoding operations in
the calculation process.
The optimization calculation requires the determination of
the water demand. In the case of using a normalized pattern,
which is usually based on the average values of demand, it
can lead to a good optimization result. But this type of
method does not take into consideration the seasonal varia-
bility of demand, and also it does not take into consideration
factors determining the demand, which negatively influences
the optimization results.
For this reason, several optimization studies have used
forecasting methods, such as the simulation methods, as in
the case of the study presented by Napolitano et al. ()
where the authors used a numerical simulation by the
EPANET software of a water supply system to generate sev-
eral scenarios, in order to make the optimal decisions
provided by a GA. The same method was used in the
work presented by Mambretti & Orsi (), with the
peculiarity that the network does not have a tank.
The time series analysis method was used among other
works, in the study presented by Kang et al. (), where
an autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA)
model was developed to predict water demand, as part of
an optimization project for the Polonnaruwa pumping
Water Supply | 19.2 | 2019
station (Sri Lanka). The regression method was used in
the optimization study of a large hydraulic system to predict
the water level of the system’s reservoirs (Kim et al. ).
The connectionist methods, and more specifically the
technique of ANN, was first used in the study presented
by Cubero () to predict the daily water demand of a
water supply system. In Guhl & Brémond () a simplifi-
cation was made to the NNA by removing climate data from
the input data of the model. The model was multi-output
including 12 neurons for predicting the water demand
over a 12-hour horizon. In the work of Rao & Salomons
(), the authors conducted the learning and the forecast-
ing of the model through a numerical simulation. Then,
multi-ANN meta-modeling was improved and generalized
by Behandish & Wu (), improving the robustness and
precision of the model.
The NNA approach has shown great efficiency in pre-
dicting water demand, because of these many advantages,
especially for its ability to deal with the non-linearity of
water demand, which allows it to solve very complex pro-
blems. The other advantage of the NNA approach is its
flexibility over the parameterization data, where it does
not require a continuous and long database, against the
other methods. In this context, several comparative studies
have shown their superiority in forecasting compared to
other methods ( Jain et al. ; Adamowski ).
Most previous studies that have used the NNA approach
have used either a multi-output NNA or multi-NNA meta-
modeling. In our study, the NNA used is of the looped
type distinguished by the single output, the normalization
of input data and the non-use of bias. These characteristics
were chosen after a selection study for different model
structures.
Our optimization model is based solely on the energy
consumed. On the other hand, several optimization
models take into consideration the cost of energy. In order
to compare the two approaches, the energy cost was inte-
grated into a second variant.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The management tool developed (NNAG) contains two
models: an optimization model and a forecasting model.
 474 B. Ahcene & B. Saadia | Energetic optimization and evaluation of a pumping system
The forecasting model is based on the ANN which enables
it to foresee the hourly water request upon a horizon of 24
hours. The optimization model is based on the genetic
algorithm (GA) approach. It uses the foreseen water
demand to define an optimal pumping plan on the optim-
ization horizon. The tool has been validated at the
Rassauta pumping station.
To enrich our study, we studied and compared the
results obtained by the NNGA tool with two pumping scen-
arios. Indeed, in addition to the pumping schedule used by
the company of water and sewage of the city of Algiers
(CWSA), we have studied a scenario generated by a pump-
ing regulation model that we have developed and which is
based on the volume of water in the tank. The energy evalu-
ation of the different pumping schedules is carried out using
the performance indicators that we have developed.
PRESENTATION OF THE STUDY AREA
The pumping station studied is located in the Rassauta
region on the eastern outskirts of the Algerian capital. This
pumping station has three centrifugal pumps (two oper-
ational and one back-up) supplying a distribution tank of
3
1,500 m . The tank supplies the eastern part of the city of
Bordj El Kiffan and also the El Hamiz tank (Figure 1).
The pumps draw water from the suction tank (2 ×
3 to its power to master the non-linear relationship between
5,000 m ), whose volume of water is managed by altimetric
valves, and the pumping unit is installed 3 metres below the
suction plane (flooded suction), which reduces the problems
associated with priming and cavitations.
The management of the pumping station is warranted by
CWSA. The type of pumping used is based on a remote man-
agement system, accompanied by a regulation of the pumps.
Figure 1 | Schema of the pumping system of Rassauta.
Water Supply | 19.2 | 2019
The regulation of the pumping is done by shedding the
pumps according to the water level in the tank.
The distribution network of Bordj El Kiffan East has
about 150,000 inhabitants and a total length of pipes of
82,831 m, divided into eight distribution sectors. The unfa-
vorable point of the distribution network is in the locality
‘Bateau Cassé’. While the El Hamiz tank has a volume of
500 m3 characterized by a floor elevation of 38 m and over-
flow elevation of 42 m, this tank serves the southern part of
El Hamiz city whose distribution network has about
18,408 m of pipelines divided into three distribution sectors.
The water supply network is characterized by an average
daily consumption of about 24,878 m3/d and maximum
hourly consumption equal to 1,316 m3/h.
Despite the fact that the pumping system studied is simple,
which does not allow the generalization of the results obtained
to very complex systems, the high demand of the water supply
network makes the volume of water in the tank sensitive to
fluctuation. which is interesting for an optimization study.
MANAGEMENT PUMPING TOOL (NNGA)
Demand forecast model
The ANN method has shown a great capacity to resolve
problems of forecasting water demand and this is thanks
the determining factors of water demand (Adamowski
). This approach also has the advantage of not requiring
a long and continuous database.
In our study, an NRA is used for each quarter, where
each ANN forecasting model consists of three layers, based
on the logistics function. Its structure was adopted after sev-
eral tests. The input layer contains 35 neurons (three neurons
for the month, seven neurons for the days of the week, 24 for
the time of day, and one neuron for the consumption of the
previous hour). The input data do not contain climatic
data, where several studies have shown that forecasting can
be done without climatic data. In fact, the water demand
(t
1) implicitly contains climatic data as well as other
exogenous factors, in addition to the strong correlation
between demand (t) and (t
1), which makes it possible to
take into account the effect of continuity of demand.
 475 B. Ahcene & B. Saadia | Energetic optimization and evaluation of a pumping system
The water demand of the previous hour (neuron 35) is
normalized, dividing it on the maximum hourly consump-
tion. The hidden layer has two neurons, whose activation
functions are calculated without using bias. The output
layer has a single neuron. For the learning of the model
we used a database of 3 years (from June 2013 until June
2016). This allows adjustment of the parameters (synaptic
weight) of the NNA model, which gives each input data its
importance for forecasting demand.
The NNA is of the loop type, where the demand pre-
dicted at the previous time is used as the input data at the
next time (Figure 2).
Optimization model using genetic algorithms
The GA approach is one of the best techniques for solving
combinatorial optimization problems on which we are
working (Olszewski ; Marchi et al. ). The GA used
in our study is characterized by two modifications compared
with ordinary GA.
First, the GA does not use a binary coding operator of
the individuals, which makes it possible to reduce the calcu-
lation time. Indeed, the solution is represented by a decision
vector N (or control vector) comprising 24 components
(optimization horizon is 24 hours), and each component
indicates the number of pumps running at each time step,
Figure 2 | Structure of the adopted artificial neural network model.
Water Supply | 19.2 | 2019
as shown in Equation (1):
N(m) ¼ fn(1), n(2), . . . :, n(24)g with m:1 to mf and n(t):0 to np
(1)
np ¼ number of pumps; mf: number of solutions
(individuals).
Second, the generation of a part of the initial population
is done using a specific algorithm, which allows the creation
of valid solutions, that is to say, solutions that respect the
constraints of optimization, because in ordinary GA the
random generation of the initial population sometimes
gives initial populations that do not contain any valid indi-
vidual, which causes problems of calculation (divergence)
and enormously increases the calculation time.
This specific algorithm consists in the beginning of gen-
erating a random initial population.
Then, an iterative calculation process is started, where at
each iteration the pumping flow rate is calculated according
to the number of pumps running. Then, this number of
pumps running is changed depending on the volume of
water in the tank (Figure 3). This process is repeated NI
times, and at the end of calculation a generation of valid
individuals is created. This valid population is added to
the randomly generated population to form the initial
population of the GA.
 476 B. Ahcene & B. Saadia | Energetic optimization and evaluation of a pumping system Water Supply | 19.2 | 2019

with np: number of pumps; ρ: density of water (kg/m3), g:

standard acceleration of gravity (m/s2), H(t, n): pumping
head at time t with n pumps running (m), Qp: pumping
flow at time t with n pumps running (m3/h), η: pumping effi-
ciency at time t with n pumps running (%); Vmin and Vmax:
minimum and maximum volume in the tank respectively
(m3); V(t): volume of water in the tank at time t (m3);
V(t
1): volume in the tank at time t
1 (m3); Qp(t
1):
pumping flow at time t
1 (m3/h); Qc(t
1): consumption
flow at time t
1 (m3/h); Qmax: maximum pumping flow
(m3/h); Δt: time step (h).

PROGRESSIVE REGULATION MODEL

The progressive regulation model (PRM) controls the oper-

ation of the pumps according to the volume of water in
the tank. Indeed, if the volume of water exceeds a certain
volume Voff, the model proceeds with a progressive stop of
Figure 3 | Diagram of the generator of valid solutions.
the pumps, where at each time step one pump is stopped.
These individuals will be evaluated using a fitness func- However, if the volume of water is less than a certain Von,
tion (Equation (2)). These individuals go through a process the model proceeds with a progressive start of the pumps.
of genetic operations, which generates the new generation, The relation (4) summarizes the operating principles of the
while sanctioning the individuals who do not respect the model:
constraints of optimization (Equation (3)). This process
8
will be repeated until the stop criterion is checked. At the < V(t
1) > Voff : n(t) ¼ min [n(t
1)
1, 0]
V < V(t
1) < Von : n(t) ¼ n(t) (4)
end of the calculation the best solution represents the opti- : off
V(t
1) < Von : n(t) ¼ max [n(t
1) þ 1, np ]
mal decision variables of the problem.
In the calculation of the objective function, the pumping
efficiency is considered constant, whereas in reality its value The expression of Voff is given by the following equation:
deteriorates in the course of time. Also, the optimal solution
represents the best solution in terms of energy consumed Voff ¼
" #
without taking into consideration its effect on the down- X
np
min Vmax
Qp (n) þ np  Qc: min ; V max
Qp (np ) þ Qc:min
stream part in terms of pressure (in case of a possible
n¼1
lowering of the level). (5)

( )
X24 Xnp
ρ g Hðt, nÞ Qp ðt, nÞ
min (2)
t¼t n¼1
36000  η ðt, nÞ The Von is given by the following formula:
0

" #
8 X
np
< Vmin < V(t) < Vmax Von ¼ max Vmin
Qp (n)
(np þ 1):Qc: max ; V min þ Qc:max
V(t) ¼ V(t
1) þ Δt  Qp (t
1)
Δt  Qc (t
1) (3) n¼1
:
0 < Qp (t) < Qmax (6)
 477 B. Ahcene & B. Saadia | Energetic optimization and evaluation of a pumping system Water Supply | 19.2 | 2019

Voff: stopping volume (m3); V(t): volume of water at time analyzing the impact of operating variables, which are the
step t (m3); n(t): number of pumps running at time step t; volume, the head and the pumping efficiency. Table 2
Von: starting volume; np: number of pumps in the pumping shows these indicators.
station; Qp(n): pumping flow with n pumps running (m3/h).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

OPTIMUM OPERATING VARIABLES OF THE
PUMPING SYSTEM Demand forecast

In order to calculate the energy performance indicators, we
have defined a number of optimal values (Table 1), which
constitute a benchmark for situating the performance of
the variable studied.
ENERGY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
In recent years, several energy performance indicators have
been developed (Deng et al. ). In our study, we have
developed two types of indicators: evaluation indicators,
and diagnostic indicators. The evaluation indicators enable
the evaluation of the energy consumption and to estimate
the energy overconsumption. The diagnostic indicators
permit detection of the source of energy dysfunction by
The forecast for water demand was excellent. The results
show that the real demand and the expected demand are
practically identical (Figure 4). The prediction quality cri-
teria confirm the performance of the forecasting model
with a correlation coefficient R equal to 0.95 and an average
absolute error MAPE equal to 4.37 for the training part and
with an R ¼ 0.98 and a MAPE ¼ 2.39 for the forecasting
part. The NNA Forecasting Model is based only on the
date and time of day (without climate data), and it is similar
to the use of a standardized pattern. However, its perform-
ance was better than the normalized pattern, whose
correlation coefficient R ¼ 0.95 and the MAPE criterion ¼
5.44. This performance can be explained by the use of
water demand (t
1) by the NNA model.

Energy consumption
Table 1 | List of optimal pump operating system variables

Variable Formula Description The NNGA tool has reduced the energy consumed by the

Optimum Vopt ¼ Vr–Vi þ The volume of water

pumping system by 39.4%, while the PRM model has
pumping Vmin needed to meet demand.
volume Table 2 | Energy performance indicators list

Optimum Qopt ¼ Vopt/Topt The flow that creates the

Type Indicator Formula Objective
pumping flow least pressure drop.
Optimum Hopt ¼ Hg þ rh. The required head in the Evaluation Pumping energy IE ¼ Eopt/E Evaluate energy
pumping Q2opt case of optimum indicator (IE) consumption
head operation of the pumps. Energy loss LR ¼ Evaluate energy
Optimum ηopt ¼ ηmax The maximum efficiency of rate (LR) (1
IE)·100 losses
pumping the pumps. Diagnostic Pumping IV ¼ Vopt/V Evaluate
efficiency volume pumping
Optimum Eopt ¼ (ρ.g.Hf.opt. The energy consumed indicator (IV) volume
pumping Vopt)/ when the operating Pumping head IH ¼ Hopt/H Evaluate
energy (ηopt.36000) variables have optimum indicator (IH) pumping head
values. Pumping IR ¼ η/ηopt Evaluate the
efficiency pumping
Vopt: optimum pumping volume (m3); Vr: water volume requested (m3); Vi: initial water sto- indicator (IR) efficiency
rage in the tank (m3); Qopt: optimum pumping flow (m3/h); Topt: optimization time (h); Hg:
system geometric head (m); rh: system hydraulic resistance (h2/m5); ηmax: maximum pump IE: pumping energy indicator; E: pumping energy (KWh); IV: pumping volume indicator (%);
efficiency (%); Hopt: optimum pumping head (m); ηopt: optimum pumping efficiency (%); V: pumping volume (m3); IH: pumping head indicator; H: pumping head (m); IR: pumping
Eopt: optimum pumping energy (KWh). efficiency indicator; η: pumping efficiency (%).
 478 B. Ahcene & B. Saadia | Energetic optimization and evaluation of a pumping system Water Supply | 19.2 | 2019

Figure 4 | Predicted, normalized and actual water demand on the optimization horizon.

saved 27.4%. Figure 5 shows the evolution of the energy con-
sumption of each pumping schedule.
Water storage evolution
The evolution of the water storage (Figure 6) shows that the
NNGA model enables the hydraulic conditions to be
respected. On the other hand, the PRM model failed to guar-
antee the upper limit, where it recorded ten violations.
In second position, we have the PRM regulation model
which obtained a good pumping energy indicator IE ¼ 0.7,
with an average rate energy loss LR ¼ 29.78%.
In the last position, we have the pumping schedule used
by the CWSA with low pumping energy indicator IE ¼ 0.51,
and high operating energy losses of LR ¼ 49.02%.
Energy diagnosis of operating variables
CWSA pumping schedule

Energy evaluation
Diagnostic indicators have shown that energy overconsump-
tion of CWSA planning is largely caused by an enormous
Table 3 shows that the planning proposed by the NNGA
loss of water volume, with the indicator IV ¼ 0.63. This mal-
tool presents the best energy optimization result with
function may be due to:
pumping energy indicator IE ¼ 0.84 and energy loss rate
LR ¼ 15.89%. • presence of unaccounted consumption;

Figure 5 | Evolution of energy consumed.

 479 B. Ahcene & B. Saadia | Energetic optimization and evaluation of a pumping system Water Supply | 19.2 | 2019

Figure 6 | Evolution of the water storage in the distribution tank.

Table 3 | Energy performance indicators

Consideration of energy cost
Indicator CWSA NNGA PRM
The main purpose of the majority of optimization models of
IE 0.51 0.84 0.70
previous pumping systems is the reduction of energy cost.
LR [%] 49.02 15.89 29.78
The goal of our model is the reduction of energy only. To
IV 0.63 0.98 0.83
make a comparison between the two models, the price of
IH 0.87 0.98 0.96
the energy unit was introduced in the objective function
IR 0.94 0.88 0.89
(Equation (7)):

( )
• poorly adjusted regulation model; X24 Xnp
ρ g Hðt, nÞ Qp ðt, nÞ C(t)
• too badly sized;
min
t¼t n¼1
36000  η ðt, nÞ
(7)

•
leakage.
PRM pumping schedule
As for the previous schedule, the pumping volume indicator
of the PRM model is the least efficient of the operating vari-
ables (IV ¼ 0.83). This shows that the pumped volume lost is
the main cause of the energy overconsumption. This poor
performance is explained by the fact that the capacity of
the reservoir does not correspond to the water demand
and pumping regime.
NNGA pumping schedule
The volume and head pumping indicators for the NNGA are
excellent, with IV ¼ 0.98 and IH ¼ 0.98. However, the
pumping efficiency indicator is less effective (IR ¼ 0.88).
This shows the wrong choice of pumps.
0
with C(t): price of the energy unit according to the rate of
electricity consumption (£/KWh).
To analyze the optimization performance, two days
were studied: a day of normal water demand (average con-
sumption level), and a day of low water demand
(exceptional). NNGAC is the model that considers the
cost of energy.
For the normal water demand day: the optimization
results were identical for both models, with an energy con-
sumption of 2,912.6 KWh and an operating cost of
7,000 £. This can be explained by the fact that the high
water demand limited the possibility of having several
valid pumping schedules, so that the optimal solution was
imposed by the optimization constraints which are the
same in both models.
For the day of low water demand: the results show that
the model that considers only energy (NNGA) allowed an
 480 B. Ahcene & B. Saadia | Energetic optimization and evaluation of a pumping system
Figure 7 | Comparison of optimization results.
energy consumption of 2,668.4 KWh, less by about 8.2%
compared with the consumption of the second model
(NNGAC) of 2,906.9 KWh.
On the other hand, for the energy cost, the results show
that even though the energy consumption of the NNGAC
model is higher than the energy consumption of the
NNGA, the energy cost was less than 11.8% (Figure 7).
This confirms that the consideration of the energy cost in
the optimization models does not necessarily reduce the
energy consumed, especially in the case where valid sol-
utions are numerous.
CONCLUSION
The NNGA tool has efficiently reduced the energy con-
sumed by the pumping system by around 39.4% of the
consumed energy and with total respect of the conditions
of hydraulic functioning. This good performance was
strengthened by the good quality of the demand of water
through the forecasting model.
The comparative study between the energy optimization
model and the energy cost model has confirmed that models
that take into consideration energy costs can generate sol-
utions that reduce energy costs and not necessarily the
pumping energy, which will always cause ecological pro-
blems: depletion of energy resources, and emissions of
greenhouse-effect gas.
The PRM model has also saved a considerable part of
energy, around 27.4%. Meanwhile, the model failed to
Water Supply | 19.2 | 2019
guarantee the hydraulic conditions because of the tank
capacity that is not suitable for the time step used by the
model.
The developed performance indicators have facilitated
the evaluation of energy consumption using the IE pumping
energy indicator and the LR energy loss rate, which makes it
possible to quantify energy overconsumption. In addition,
the indicators were used to diagnose the operating variables
of the pumping system, by detecting the source of the energy
malfunction.
Despite the success of the model in obtaining good
results, it depends on certain simplifications and compromises
that should be improved in the future. Indeed, the model is
based on the pumping efficiency given by the manufacturer
when it actually deteriorates over time. In addition the non-
consideration of the downstream pressure in the calculation
of the optimal solution has to be regulated. Also the model
should be adapted to handle even more complicated systems.
REFERENCES
Adamowski, J. F.  Peak daily demand forecast modeling using
artificial neural networks. Journal of Water Resources
Planning and Management 134 (2), 119–128.
Barán, B., von Lücken, C. & Sotelo, A.  Multi-objective pump
scheduling optimisation using evolutionary strategies.
Advances in Engineering Software 36 (1), 39–47.
Behandish, M. & Wu, Z. Y.  Concurrent pump scheduling and
storage level optimization using meta-models and
evolutionary algorithms. Procedia Engineering 70, 103–112.
 481 B. Ahcene & B. Saadia | Energetic optimization and evaluation of a pumping system
Coulbeck, B. & Orr, C. H.  Optimized pumping in water supply
systems. IFAC Proceedings Volumes 17 (2), 3175–3180.
Cubero, R. G.  Neural networks for water demand time series
forecasting. In: International Workshop on Artificial Neural
Networks (A. Prieto, ed.), Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp.
453–460.
Deng, S., Wang, R. Z. & Dai, Y. J.  How to evaluate
performance of net zero energy building a literature research.
Energy 71, 1–16.
Guhl, F. & Brémond, B.  Optimisation du fonctionnement des
réseaux d’eau potable. Prise en compte de l’aspect
stochastique de la demande (Optimization of the functioning
of drinking water networks. Taking into account the
stochastic aspect of the demand). Ingénieries EAT 23, 15–23.
Jain, A., Varshney, A. K. & Joshi, U. C.  Short-term water demand
forecast modelling at IIT Kanpur using artificial neural
networks. Water Resources Management 15 (5), 299–321.
Jowitt, P. W. & Germanopoulos, G.  Optimal pump
scheduling in water-supply networks. Journal of Water
Resources Planning and Management 118 (4), 406–422.
Kang, H. S., Kim, H., Lee, J., Lee, I., Kwak, B. Y. & Im, H. 
Optimization of pumping schedule based on water demand
forecasting using a combined model of autoregressive
integrated moving average and exponential smoothing. Water
Science and Technology: Water Supply 15 (1), 188–195.
Kim, S. G., Koo, J. Y., Kim, H. Y. & Choi, Y. J.  Optimization
of pumping schedule based on forecasting the hourly water
demand in Seoul. Water Science and Technology: Water
Supply 7 (5–6), 85–93.
Lansey, K. E. & Awumah, K.  Optimal pump operations
considering pump switches. Journal of Water Resources
Planning and Management 120 (1), 17–35.
Mackle, G., Savic, G. A. & Walters, G. A.  Application of
genetic algorithms to pump scheduling for water supply. In:
Genetic Algorithms in Engineering Systems: Innovations and
Applications, 1995, Conference Publication No. 414, IET,
UK, pp. 400–405.
Mambretti, S. & Orsi, E.  Optimizing pump operations
in water supply networks through genetic algorithms.
First received 15 November 2017; accepted in revised form 27 April 2018. Available online 9 May 2018
Water Supply | 19.2 | 2019
Journal of American Water Works Association 108 (2),
119–125.
Marchi, A., Simpson, A. R. & Lambert, M. F.  Pump operation
optimization using rule-based controls. Procedia Engineering
186, 210–217.
Napolitano, J., Sechi, G. M. & Zuddas, P.  Scenario analysis
for optimization of pumping schedules in complex water
supply systems considering a cost-risk balancing problem.
Procedia Engineering 89, 565–572.
Nitivattananon, V., Sadowski, E. C. & Quimpo, R. G. 
Optimization of water supply system operation. Journal of
Water Resources Planning and Management 122 (5), 374–384.
Olszewski, P.  Genetic optimization and experimental
verification of complex parallel pumping station with
centrifugal pumps. Applied Energy 178, 527–539.
Rao, Z. & Salomons, E.  Development of a real-time, near-
optimal control process for water-distribution networks.
Journal of Hydroinformatics 9 (1), 25–37.
Savic, D. A. & Walters, G. A.  Genetic algorithms for least-
cost design of water distribution networks. Journal of Water
Resources Planning and Management 123 (2), 67–77.
Simpson, A. R., Dandy, G. C. & Murphy, L. J.  Genetic
algorithms compared to other techniques for pipe
optimization. Journal of Water Resources Planning and
Management 120 (4), 423–443.
Van Zyl, J. E., Savic, D. A. & Walters, G. A.  Operational
optimization of water distribution systems using a hybrid
genetic algorithm. Journal of Water Resources Planning and
Management 130 (2), 160–170.
Wang, M. & Barkdoll, B. D.  A sensitivity analysis method for
water distribution system tank siting for energy. Urban Water
Journal 14 (7), 713–719.
Wu, Z. Y. & Zhu, Q.  Scalable parallel computing framework
for pump scheduling optimization. In: World Environmental
and Water Resources Congress 2009: Great Rivers (S. Starrett,
ed.), ASCE, Reston, VA, USA.
Zhuan, X., Li, W. & Yang, F.  Optimal operation scheduling of
a pumping station in east route of South-to-North water
diversion project. Energy Procedia 105, 3031–3037.