{"title":"分支重力驱动水网优化算法","authors":"Ian P. Dardani, Gerard F. Jones","doi":"10.5194/DWES-11-67-2018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The design of a water network involves the selection of pipe diameters that\nsatisfy pressure and flow requirements while considering cost. A variety of\ndesign approaches can be used to optimize for hydraulic performance or reduce\ncosts. To help designers select an appropriate approach in the context of\ngravity-driven water networks (GDWNs), this work assesses three\ncost-minimization algorithms on six moderate-scale GDWN test cases. Two\nalgorithms, a backtracking algorithm and a genetic algorithm, use a set of\ndiscrete pipe diameters, while a new calculus-based algorithm produces a\ncontinuous-diameter solution which is mapped onto a discrete-diameter set.\nThe backtracking algorithm finds the global optimum for all but the largest\nof cases tested, for which its long runtime makes it an infeasible option.\nThe calculus-based algorithm's discrete-diameter solution produced slightly\nhigher-cost results but was more scalable to larger network cases.\nFurthermore, the new calculus-based algorithm's continuous-diameter and\nmapped solutions provided lower and upper bounds, respectively, on the\ndiscrete-diameter global optimum cost, where the mapped solutions were\ntypically within one diameter size of the global optimum. The genetic\nalgorithm produced solutions even closer to the global optimum with\nconsistently short run times, although slightly higher solution costs were\nseen for the larger network cases tested. The results of this study highlight\nthe advantages and weaknesses of each GDWN design method including closeness\nto the global optimum, the ability to prune the solution space of infeasible\nand suboptimal candidates without missing the global optimum, and algorithm\nrun time. We also extend an existing closed-form model of Jones (2011) to\ninclude minor losses and a more comprehensive two-part cost model, which\nrealistically applies to pipe sizes that span a broad range typical of GDWNs\nof interest in this work, and for smooth and commercial steel roughness\nvalues.","PeriodicalId":53581,"journal":{"name":"Drinking Water Engineering and Science","volume":"11 1","pages":"67-85"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Algorithms for optimization of branching gravity-driven water networks\",\"authors\":\"Ian P. Dardani, Gerard F. Jones\",\"doi\":\"10.5194/DWES-11-67-2018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract. The design of a water network involves the selection of pipe diameters that\\nsatisfy pressure and flow requirements while considering cost. A variety of\\ndesign approaches can be used to optimize for hydraulic performance or reduce\\ncosts. To help designers select an appropriate approach in the context of\\ngravity-driven water networks (GDWNs), this work assesses three\\ncost-minimization algorithms on six moderate-scale GDWN test cases. Two\\nalgorithms, a backtracking algorithm and a genetic algorithm, use a set of\\ndiscrete pipe diameters, while a new calculus-based algorithm produces a\\ncontinuous-diameter solution which is mapped onto a discrete-diameter set.\\nThe backtracking algorithm finds the global optimum for all but the largest\\nof cases tested, for which its long runtime makes it an infeasible option.\\nThe calculus-based algorithm's discrete-diameter solution produced slightly\\nhigher-cost results but was more scalable to larger network cases.\\nFurthermore, the new calculus-based algorithm's continuous-diameter and\\nmapped solutions provided lower and upper bounds, respectively, on the\\ndiscrete-diameter global optimum cost, where the mapped solutions were\\ntypically within one diameter size of the global optimum. The genetic\\nalgorithm produced solutions even closer to the global optimum with\\nconsistently short run times, although slightly higher solution costs were\\nseen for the larger network cases tested. The results of this study highlight\\nthe advantages and weaknesses of each GDWN design method including closeness\\nto the global optimum, the ability to prune the solution space of infeasible\\nand suboptimal candidates without missing the global optimum, and algorithm\\nrun time. We also extend an existing closed-form model of Jones (2011) to\\ninclude minor losses and a more comprehensive two-part cost model, which\\nrealistically applies to pipe sizes that span a broad range typical of GDWNs\\nof interest in this work, and for smooth and commercial steel roughness\\nvalues.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53581,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drinking Water Engineering and Science\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"67-85\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drinking Water Engineering and Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5194/DWES-11-67-2018\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Engineering\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drinking Water Engineering and Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/DWES-11-67-2018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
Algorithms for optimization of branching gravity-driven water networks
Abstract. The design of a water network involves the selection of pipe diameters that
satisfy pressure and flow requirements while considering cost. A variety of
design approaches can be used to optimize for hydraulic performance or reduce
costs. To help designers select an appropriate approach in the context of
gravity-driven water networks (GDWNs), this work assesses three
cost-minimization algorithms on six moderate-scale GDWN test cases. Two
algorithms, a backtracking algorithm and a genetic algorithm, use a set of
discrete pipe diameters, while a new calculus-based algorithm produces a
continuous-diameter solution which is mapped onto a discrete-diameter set.
The backtracking algorithm finds the global optimum for all but the largest
of cases tested, for which its long runtime makes it an infeasible option.
The calculus-based algorithm's discrete-diameter solution produced slightly
higher-cost results but was more scalable to larger network cases.
Furthermore, the new calculus-based algorithm's continuous-diameter and
mapped solutions provided lower and upper bounds, respectively, on the
discrete-diameter global optimum cost, where the mapped solutions were
typically within one diameter size of the global optimum. The genetic
algorithm produced solutions even closer to the global optimum with
consistently short run times, although slightly higher solution costs were
seen for the larger network cases tested. The results of this study highlight
the advantages and weaknesses of each GDWN design method including closeness
to the global optimum, the ability to prune the solution space of infeasible
and suboptimal candidates without missing the global optimum, and algorithm
run time. We also extend an existing closed-form model of Jones (2011) to
include minor losses and a more comprehensive two-part cost model, which
realistically applies to pipe sizes that span a broad range typical of GDWNs
of interest in this work, and for smooth and commercial steel roughness
values.