Identifying Sampling Interval for Event Detection in Water Distribution Networks
Publication: Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
Volume 138, Issue 2
Abstract
It is a generally adopted policy, albeit unofficially, to sample flow and pressure data at a 15-min interval for water distribution system hydraulic measurements. Further, for flow, this is usually averaged, whereas pressure is instantaneous. This paper sets out the findings of studies into the potential benefits of a higher sampling rate and averaging for flow and pressure measurements in water distribution systems. A data set comprising sampling at 5 s (in the case of pressure), 1 min, 5 min, and 15 min, both instantaneous and averaged, for a set of flow and pressure sensors deployed within two DMAs has been used. Engineered events conducted by opening fire hydrants/wash outs were used to form a controlled baseline detection comparison with known event start times. A data analysis system using support vector regression (SVR) was used to analyze the flow and pressure time series data from the deployed sensors and hence, detect these abnormal events. Results are analyzed over different sensors and events. The overall trend in the results is that a faster sampling rate leads to earlier event detection. However, it is concluded that a sampling interval of 1 or 5 min does not significantly improve detection to the point at which it is worth the added increase in power, communications, and data management requirements with current technologies. It was discovered that averaging pressure data can result in more rapid detection when compared with using the same instantaneous sampling rate. Averaging of pressure data is also likely to provide better regulatory compliance and provide improved data for EPS hydraulic modelling. This improvement can be achieved without any additional overheads on communications by a simple firmware alteration and hence, is potentially a very low cost upgrade with significant gains.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
This work is part of the NEPTUNE project supported by the UK Engineering and Physical Science Research Council, grant UNSPECIFIEDEP/E003192/1, and Industrial Collaborators. The authors would like to thank Mr. Ridwan Patel and Mr. Lee Soady from Yorkshire Water Services and Dr. John Machell from the Univ. of Sheffield for their assistance in the fieldwork.
References
Chang, C. C., and Lin, C. J. (2001). “LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines.” 〈http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~cjlin/libsvm〉 (Nov. 2, 2010).
Khan, A., Widdop, P. D., Day, A. J., Wood, A. S., Mounce, S. R., and Machell, J. (2005). “Artificial neural network model for a low cost failure sensor: Performance assessment in pipeline distribution.” Int. J. Math. Comput. Sci., 1(1), 27–33.
Machell, J., Mounce, S. R., and Boxall, J. B. (2010). “Online modelling of water distribution systems: A UK case study, drink.” Water Eng. Sci., 3(1), 21–27.
MATLAB Version 7.2.0.635 [Computer software]. Mathworks, Inc., Natick, MA.
Mounce, S. R., and Machell, J. (2006). “Burst detection using hydraulic data from water distribution systems with artificial neural networks.” Urban Water J., 3(1), 21–31.
Mounce, S. R., Boxall, J. B., and Machell, J. (2010a) “Development and verification of an online artificial intelligence system for burst detection in water distribution systems.” J. Water Resour. Plann. Manage., 136(3), 309–318.
Mounce, S. R., Farley, B., Mounce, R. B., and Boxall, J. B. (2010b). “Field testing of optimal sensor placement and data analysis methodologies for burst detection and location in an urban water network.” Proc., of HydroInformatics Conf. 2010, Vol. 2, Chemical Industry Press, Tianjing, China, 1258–1265.
Mounce, S. R., Mounce, R. B., and Boxall, J. B. (2011) “Novelty detection for time series data analysis in water distribution systems using support vector machines.” J. Hydroinf., 13(4), 672–686.
Puust, R., Kapelan, Z., Savic, D. A., and Koppel, T. (2010). “A review of methods for leakage, management in pipe networks.” Urban Water J., 7(1), 25–45.
Romano, M., Kapelan, Z., and Savic, D. A. (2010). “Pressure signal de-noising for improved real-time leak detection.” Proc., 9th Int. Conf. on Hydroinformatics, Vol. 3, Chemical Industry Press, Tianjing, China, 2195–2202.
Stoianov, I., Karney, B., Covas, D., Maksimović, C., and Graham, N. (2002). “Wavelet processing of transient signals for pipeline leak location and quantification.” 1st Annual Environmental and Water Resources Systems Analysis (EWRSA) Symp., ASCE EWRI Annual Conf., ASCE, Reston, VA.
Walski, T. M. (2000). “Model calibration data: The good, the bad, and the useless.” J. AWWA, 92(1), 94.
Wu, Z. Y. et al. (2011). “Online monitoring and detection.” Chapter 9, Water loss, Zheng Wu, ed., Bentley Systems, Exton, PA, 168–189.
Ye, G., and Fenner, R. (2010). “Kalman filtering of hydraulic measurements for burst detection in water distribution systems.” J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract., 2(1), 14–22.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
Volume 138 • Issue 2 • March 2012
Pages: 187 - 191
Copyright
© 2012 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Nov 3, 2010
Accepted: May 18, 2011
Published online: May 20, 2011
Published in print: Mar 1, 2012
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.