Alternative Decision Making in Water Distribution Network with NSGA-II
This article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYThis article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYPublication: Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
Volume 132, Issue 2
Abstract
Cost of effective design or rehabilitation of the pipe networks depends largely on the available budget and satisfying pressures expected at the demand nodes. With the available market pipe sizes, one or more solutions of the same cost, the least cost, and simultaneously meeting the pressure constraints can be obtained from EPANET, a water distribution network simulation model, coupled with an optimization algorithm. Often, however, the least cost may be prohibitive from the overall budget consideration especially in developing countries and a less optimal solution is therefore the only option. The study shows a scheme in which solution selection is made, among solutions, which (1) is within allowable budget; and (2) yields acceptable total pressure deficit distributed more equally at several nodes instead of loaded on one or a few nodes only. A multiobjective optimization algorithm (NSGA-II) is coupled with water distribution network simulation software (EPANET) to provide the much needed Pareto front of the cost and nodal pressure deficit. A two-looped simple network is used to demonstrate the application of the scheme.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Alperovits, E., and Shamir, U. (1977). “Design of optimal water distribution systems.” Water Resour. Res., 13(6), 885–900.
Chiplunkar, A. V., Mehndiratta, S. L., and Khanna, P. (1986). “Looped water distribution system optimization for a single loading.” J. Environ. Eng., 112(2), 264–279.
Cunha, M. D. C., and Sousa, J., (1999). “Water distribution network design optimization: Simulated annealing approach.” J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage., 125(4), 215–221.
Deb, K., Agrawal, S., Pratap, A., and Meyarivan, T. (2000). “A fast elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm for multi-objective optimization: NSGA-II.” Proc., Parallel Problem Solving from Nature VI Conf., Springer, France, 849–858.
Eusuff, M. M., and Lansey, K. E. (2003). “Optimization of water distribution network design using the shuffled frog leaping algorithm.” J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage., 129(3), 210–225.
Farmani, R., Savic, D. A., and Walters, G. A. (2004). “The simultaneous multi-objective optimization of anytown pipe rehabilitation, tank sizing, tank siting, and pump operation schedules.” ASCE EWRI Conf., Salt Lake City.
Gessler, J. (1985). “Pipe network optimization by enumeration.” Proc., Computer Applications in Water Resources, ASCE, Buffalo, NY, 572–581.
Khu, S. T., and Keedwell, E. (2004). “Using multi-objective genetic algorithm to achieve design flexibility for water distribution systems.” Proc., 6th Int. Conf. on Hydroinformatics, World Scientific, Singapore, 1011–1018.
Liong, S. Y., and Atiquzzaman, M. (2004). “Optimal design of water distribution network using shuffled complex evolution.” J. Inst. Eng. Singapore, 44(1), 93–107.
Maier, H. R. et al. (2003). “Ant colony optimization for design of water distribution systems.” J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage., 129(3), 200–209.
Nicolini, M. (2004). “Evaluating performance of multi-objective genetic algorithms for water distribution system optimization.” Proc., 6th Int. Conf. on Hydroinformatics, World Scientific, Singapore, 850–857.
Prasad, T. D., and Park, N. S. (2004). “Multiobjective genetic algorithms for design of water distribution networks.” J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage., 130(1), 73–82.
Rossman, L. A. (1993). EPANET, users manual, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Savic, D. A., and Walters, G. A. (1997). “Genetic algorithms for least-cost design of water distribution networks.” J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage., 123(2), 67–77.
Walski, T. M. (1985). “State-of-the-art pipe network optimization.” Proc. Spec. on Computer Applications in Water Resources, ASCE, Buffalo, NY, 559–568.
Walski, T. M. (1995). “Optimization and pipe-sizing decisions.” J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage., 121(4), 340–343.
Walters, G. A., Halhal, D., Savic, D. A., and Ouazar, D. (1999). “Improved design of “Anytown” distribution network using structured messy genetic algorithms.” Urban Water, 1, 23–38.
Wu, Z. Y., Boulos, P. F., Orr, C. H., and Ro, J. J. (2001). “Using genetic algorithms to rehabilitate distribution systems.” J. Am. Water Works Assoc., 93(11), 74–85.
Wu, Z. Y., and Simpson, A. R. (2002). “A self-adaptive boundary search genetic algorithm and its application to water distribution systems.” J. Hydraul. Res., 40(2), 191–203.
Wu, Z. Y., and Walski, T. M. (2004). “Self-adaptive penalty cost for optimal design of water distribution systems.” ASCE EWRI Conf., Salt Lake City.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
Volume 132 • Issue 2 • March 2006
Pages: 122 - 126
Copyright
© 2006 ASCE.
History
Received: Sep 7, 2004
Accepted: Jul 15, 2005
Published online: Mar 1, 2006
Published in print: Mar 2006
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.