Optimal Size and Placement of Water Hammer Protective Devices in Water Conveyance Pipelines
- 128 Downloads
Positive and negative pressure waves caused by water hammer possibly may lead to high damages to the water conveyance pipelines. To decrease the negative effects of pressure waves, costly equipment are implemented in pipelines. An economic design of these devices that also provides the safety of the pipeline against water hammer pressure waves and cavitation can be achieved by simulation and optimization tools. In this paper, the simulation task was carried out by meta modeling. The accuracy of three meta models: artificial neural network (ANN), support vector regression (SVR) and adaptive neuro-fussy inference system (ANFIS) was evaluated. According to the results, SVR was identified as the inferior method due to low capability of generalization, ANFIS as the median, and ANN as the superior method for function approximation. Then, ANN was coupled with an evolutionary algorithm (EA), Differential Evolution (DE) to find the optimal size and location of water hammer control devices in a water pipeline. Optimization was carried out on two single- and multi-objective approaches. The results showed that multi-objective optimization approach presents better designs than the single objective approach and optimal designs obtained by both approaches outperform the current setup of the water hammer facilities in terms of both costs and functionality. The single objective-based design could decrease the costs up to 12.5% whereas multi-objective approach was able to reach nearly 30% cost saving with higher level of the safety against cavitation. Results also showed that air chamber is the most effective device and air-valves have little effect for pipeline protection against water hammer.
KeywordsWater hammer Optimization Surge tank DE ANN SVR ANFIS
The authors would like to express their gratitude and thanks to Mr. Mahdi Noori who provide the initial data for the case study. His effort is highly acknowledged.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
There is no conflict of interest.
- Andrade MA, Choi CY, Lansey K, Jung D (2016) Enhanced artificial neural networks estimating water quality constraints for the optimal water distribution systems design. J Water Resour Plan Manag 142(9)Google Scholar
- Azhary Moghaddam M (2004) Analysis and design of simple surge tank. Int J Eng 17:339–345Google Scholar
- Cortes C, Vapnik V (1995) Support-vector networks. Mach Learn 20(3):273–297Google Scholar
- Jung BS, Karney BW (2003). Optimum selection of hydraulic devices for water hammer control in the pipeline system using Genetic Algoritm, 4th joint Fluids summer engineering conference. Honolulu, HawaiiGoogle Scholar
- Kendir TE, Ozdamar A (2013) Numerical and experimental investigation of optimum surge tank forms in hydroelectric power plants. Renew Energy 60(2013):323e331Google Scholar
- Mirfendereski G, Mousavi SJ (2011) Comparition of support vector machines and response surface models in meta-modeling applied in basin-scale optimum water allocation. 19th international congress on modelling and simulation, PerthGoogle Scholar
- Ramadan A, Mustafa H (2013) Surge tank design consideration for controlling water hammer at hydro-electric power plants. Univ Bull 3(15):147–160Google Scholar
- Schölkopf B, Smola AJ (2002) Learning with kernels, support vector machines, regularization, optimization, and beyond. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Sun Q, Wu YB, Xu Y, Jang TU (2015) Optimal sizing of an air vessel in a long-distance water-supply pumping system using the SQP method. J Pipeline Syst Eng Pract 7(3). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000236.
- Vapnik VN (1998) Statistical learning theory. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Yazdi J (2016) Decomposition based multi objective evolutionary algorithms for Design of Large-Scale Water Distribution Networks. Water Resour Manag. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-016-1320-z
- Yazdi J, Moridi A (2018) Multi-objective differential evolution for design of cascade hydropower reservoir systems. Water Resour Manag 32(14)4779–4791Google Scholar
- Yazdi J, Doostparast TA, Zahraie B (2016) Risk based optimal design of detention dams considering uncertain inflows. Stoch Env Res Risk A 30(5)1457–1471Google Scholar