Optimal Design for Shock Damper with Genetic Algorithm to Control Water Hammer Effects in Complex Water Distribution Systems

  • Mohammad Bostan
  • Ali Akbar Akhtari
  • Hossein BonakdariEmail author
  • Farshad Jalili


In this paper, the optimal design of a shock damper and its parameters along with the layout for controlling water hammer effects in water distribution systems (WDS) will be investigated. The shock damper and its governing equations are introduced, and then complex network (networks with loop and branching) analysis is performed during the occurrence of a water hammer. Because of the multiple design parameters for the shock damper and the complexity of WDS transient analysis, a standard optimization problem is defined with maximum safety as the objective function. The problem constraints are the network analysis equations in the event of a water hammer. Also, other constraints consist of the maximum and minimum range of the allowable head and values of the design parameters for the shock damper. To solve the problem, a genetic algorithm is used, and a flow chart of the problem-solving design with the genetic algorithm is also provided. To investigate the efficiency and the effect of the optimal design of the shock damper, two real water distribution networks are considered, which include a gravity network and a pumping network. To create a water hammer occurrence in the first network, the amount of discharge in one of the nodes is suddenly increased, while in the second network, one of the control valves is closed suddenly. These events lead to the occurrence of a significant water hammer in each system, resulting in both positive and negative waves and water column separation phenomena. The results show the high effectiveness of the optimal shock damper design in controlling the effects of transient flows in real water distribution systems, thereby increasing those systems’ effectiveness.


Water hammer Shock damper Gravity and pumping networks Optimal design Genetic algorithm 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest



  1. Afshar M, Rohani M (2008) Water hammer simulation by implicit method of characteristic. Int J Press Vessel Pip 85(12):851–859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Afshar MH, Rohani M (2009) Optimal operation of pipeline systems using Genetic Algorithm. IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Trondheim, pp 1399–1405Google Scholar
  3. Barna IF, Imre AR, Baranyai G, Ézsöl G (2010) Experimental and theoretical study of steam condensation induced water hammer phenomena. Nucl Eng Des 240(1):146–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bostan M, Afshar M, Khadem M, Akhtari A (2016) A hybrid MILP-LP-LP approach for the optimal design and operation of unconfined groundwater utilization systems. J Water Supply Res Technol AQUA 65(3):208–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bostan M, Afshar MH, Khadem M (2015) Extension of the hybrid linear programming method to optimize simultaneously the design and operation of groundwater utilization systems. Eng Optim 47(4):550–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bostan M, Akhtari AA, Bonakdari H (2018a) Deriving the governing equation for a shock damper to model the unsteady flow caused by sudden valve closure and sudden demand change. J Water Supply Res Technol AQUA 67(2):202–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bostan M, Akhtari AA, Bonakdari H, Gharabaghi B, Noori O (2018b) Investigation of a new shock damper system efficiency in reducing water hammer excess pressure due to the sudden closure of a control valve. ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineering:1–9.
  8. Chaudhry MH (1979) Applied hydraulic transients. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Djebedjian B, Mohamed MS, Mondy AG, Rayan MA (2005) Network optimization for steady flow and water hammer using genetic algorithms. Ninth International Water Technology Conference, IWTC 2005, Sharm El-Sheikh, pp 1101–1115Google Scholar
  10. Jung BS, Karney B (2004) Fluid transients and pipeline optimization using GA and PSO: The diameter connection. Urban Water J 1(2):167–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jung BS, Karney BW (2003) Optimum selection of hydraulic devices for water hammer control in the pipeline systems using genetic algorithm. 4th ASME-JSME Joint Fluids Engineering Conference, Hawaii, pp 2877–2883Google Scholar
  12. Jung BS, Karney BW (2006) Hydraulic optimization of transient protection devices using GA and PSO approaches. J Water Resour Plan Manag 132(1):44–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim S-H (2010) Design of surge tank for water supply systems using the impulse response method with the GA algorithm. J Mech Sci Technol 24(2):629–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Larock BE, Jeppson RW, Watters GZ (1999) Hydraulics of pipeline systems. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Polanco G, Virk MS, Mughal UN, Victor S, Da Paixao José VA, Orlando A (2015) Encapsulated Water Hammer: Theoretical/Experimental Study. World Journal of Engineering and Technology 3(03):290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Popescu M, Arsenie D, Vlase P (2003) Applied Hydraulic Transients: For Hydropower Plants and Pumping Stations. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  17. Rao SS, Rao SS (2009) Engineering optimization: theory and practice. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rohani M, Afshar MH (2010) Simulation of transient flow caused by pump failure: Point-Implicit Method of Characteristics. Ann Nucl Energy 37(12):1742–1750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sattar AM (2016) A probabilistic projection of the transient flow equations with random system parameters and internal boundary conditions. J Hydraul Res 54(3):342–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sattar AM, El-Beltagy M (2016) Stochastic solution to the water hammer equations using polynomial chaos expansion with random boundary and initial conditions. J Hydraul Eng 143(2):04016078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Skulovich O, Bent R, Judi D, Perelman LS, Ostfeld A (2015) Piece-wise mixed integer programming for optimal sizing of surge control devices in water distribution systems. Water Resour Res 51(6):4391–4408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Skulovich O, Perelman LS, Ostfeld A (2016) Optimal closure of system actuators for transient control: an analytical approach. J Hydroinf 18(3):393–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stephenson D (2004) Closure to “Simple Guide for Design of Air Vessels for Water Hammer Protection of Pumping Lines” by D. Stephenson. J Hydraul Eng 130(3):275–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tian W, Su G, Wang G, Qiu S, Xiao Z (2008) Numerical simulation and optimization on valve-induced water hammer characteristics for parallel pump feedwater system. Ann Nucl Energy 35(12):2280–2287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tijsseling A, Vardy A, Fan D (1996) Fluid-structure interaction and cavitation in a single-elbow pipe system. Journal of Fluids and Structures 10(4):395–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wylie EB (1984) Fundamental equations of waterhammer. J Hydraul Eng 110(4):539–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wylie EB, Streeter VL, Suo L (1993) Fluid transients in systems. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhang HX, Kou ZM, Wu J, Lu CY (2011) Numerical Simulation and Analysis of Hydraulic Excitation System Based on Water Hammer by the Method of Characteristics. Adv Mater Res 295-297:2210–2215CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Kermanshah BranchIslamic Azad UniversityKermanshahIran
  2. 2.Department of Civil Engineering, College of EngineeringRazi UniversityKermanshahIran
  3. 3.Department of Civil EngineeringIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran

Personalised recommendations