2016
DOI: 10.1007/s11269-016-1371-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Penalty-Free Multi-Objective Evolutionary Approach to Optimization of Anytown Water Distribution Network

Abstract: This paper describes the development and application of a new multiobjective evolutionary optimization approach for the design and upgrading of water distribution systems with multiple pumps and service reservoirs. The optimization model employs a pressure-driven analysis simulator that accounts for the minimum node pressure constraints and conservation of mass and energy. Pump scheduling, tank siting and tank design are integrated seamlessly in the optimization without introducing additional heuristic procedu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
22
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

4
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
1
22
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In this way the constrained optimization problem was converted and solved as an unconstrained problem without introducing any constraint violation penalties as penalty-free genetic algorithms have achieved better results than other algorithms in the literature consistently (Saleh and Tanyimboh 2013;Siew et al 2014Siew et al , 2016.…”
Section: Formulation Of the Optimization Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this way the constrained optimization problem was converted and solved as an unconstrained problem without introducing any constraint violation penalties as penalty-free genetic algorithms have achieved better results than other algorithms in the literature consistently (Saleh and Tanyimboh 2013;Siew et al 2014Siew et al , 2016.…”
Section: Formulation Of the Optimization Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, it is widely known that evolutionary algorithms that deploy both feasible and infeasible solutions in the optimization outperform those that penalise infeasible solutions unduly (Woldesenbet et al 2009;Saleh and Tanyimboh 2013;Siew et al 2016). At the end of the optimization, after removing the infeasible solutions in the Pareto-optimal front, a program developed in the Perl language was used to select and sort all the feasible solutions, including those from all the preceding generations, based on Pareto-dominance considering entropy and cost.…”
Section: Description Of the Optimization Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, in an attempt to exploit the excellent computational properties of EPANET 2, the line minimization was not optimized in Siew and Tanyimboh (2012a). While the applications to date suggest that the strategy works well in general Siew et al 2014Siew et al , 2016, relatively poor and inconsistent performance was discovered subsequently, under conditions of extremely low pressure (Seyoum 2015). For the networks investigated, this corresponds roughly to a demand satisfaction of less than around 10 %.…”
Section: Qn I Hnmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent results have demonstrated the advantages of retaining nondominated infeasible solutions until the end of the optimization (Siew and Tanyimboh 2012b;Eskandar et al 2012;Saleh and Tanyimboh 2013Siew et al 2014Siew et al , 2016Tanyimboh and Seyoum 2016) as infeasible solutions usually contain useful genetic materials (Herrera et al 1998).…”
Section: Source Head Variationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, significantly improved solutions to some benchmark optimization problems were achieved using pressure-driven analysis (Siew et al 2014(Siew et al , 2016. However, the models have not been considered in water quality studies concerned with issues such as loss of disinfection residual and intrusion of contaminants under low-pressure conditions (Rathi and Gupta 2015;Rathi et al 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%