Abstract
Inverse transient analysis (ITA) has been recognized as a useful technique for pipeline condition assessment, such as leak detection and pipe wall thickness estimation. The effectiveness and accuracy of the inverse analysis are dependent on the sensor placement design; however, previous research on this topic is limited. This paper investigates how the number and location of pressure sensors affects the identifiability of pipeline parameters in the ITA approach. An analytical analysis demonstrates that infinite pipe parameter combinations can produce almost the same pressure responses at specific observation locations, which means that the identifiability of the pipe parameters will be poor if sensors are installed at these locations. Numerical sensitivity studies and multiple ITA case studies are conducted to investigate the relationship between the sensor locations and the parameter identifiability. It is found that at least three sensors are needed, and given the first two sensors are N reaches apart (i.e. N pipe segments in the inverse model), the third sensor should not be placed at nodes that are separated from any of the first two sensors by an integer multiple of N reaches.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Behzadian K, Kapelan Z, Savic D, Ardeshir A (2009) Stochastic sampling design using a multi-objective genetic algorithm and adaptive neural networks. Environ Model Softw 24(4):530–541
Brunone B, Meniconi S, Capponi C (2018) Numerical analysis of the transient pressure damping in a single polymeric pipe with a leak. Urban Water J 15(8):760–768
Bush CA, Uber JG (1998) Sampling design methods for water distribution model calibration. J Water Resour Plan Manag 124(6):334–344
Capponi C, Ferrante M, Zecchin AC, Gong J (2017) Leak detection in a branched system by inverse transient analysis with the admittance matrix method. Water Resour Manag 31(13):4075–4089
Covas DIC (2003) Inverse transient analysis for leak detection and calibration of water pipe systems-modelling special dynamic effects. University of London, London
Duan H, Lee P, Ghidaoui MS, Tuck J (2014) Transient wave-blockage interaction and extended blockage detection in elastic water pipelines. J Fluid Struct 46:2–16
Ferrante M, Brunone B, Meniconi S, Karney BW, Massari C (2014) Leak size, detectability and test conditions in pressurized pipe systems. Water Resour Manag 28(13):4583–4598
Gong J, Zecchin AC, Simpson AR, Lambert MF (2013) Frequency response diagram for pipeline leak detection: comparing the odd and even harmonics. J Water Resour Plan Manag 140(1):65–74
Gong J, Lambert MF, Simpson AR, Zecchin AC (2014) Detection of localized deterioration distributed along single pipelines by reconstructive MOC analysis. J Hydraul Eng 140(2):190–198
Gong J, Stephens ML, Arbon NS, Zecchin AC, Lambert MF, Simpson AR (2015) On-site non-invasive condition assessment for cement mortar–lined metallic pipelines by time-domain fluid transient analysis. Struct Health Monit 14(5):426–438
Haghighi A, Ramos HM (2012) Detection of leakage freshwater and friction factor calibration in drinking networks using central force optimization. Water Resour Manag 26(8):2347–2363
Jung B, Karney B (2008) Systematic exploration of pipeline network calibration using transients. J Hydraul Res 46(sup1):129–137
Kapelan ZS, Savic DA, Walters GA (2003) Multiobjective sampling design for water distribution model calibration. J Water Resour Plan Manag 129(6):466–479
Kapelan Z, Savic D, Walters G (2004) Incorporation of prior information on parameters in inverse transient analysis for leak detection and roughness calibration. Urban Water J 1(2):129–143
Kim SH (2018) Development of multiple leakage detection method for a reservoir pipeline valve system. Water Resour Manag 32(6):2099–2112
Lansey K, El-Shorbagy W, Ahmed I, Araujo J, Haan C (2001) Calibration assessment and data collection for water distribution networks. J Hydraul Eng 127(4):270–279
Lee PJ, Lambert MF, Simpson AR, Vítkovský JP, Liggett J (2006) Experimental verification of the frequency response method for pipeline leak detection. J Hydraul Res 44(5):693–707
Ljung L (1998) System identification. In: Signal analysis and prediction. Springer, New York, pp 163–173
Meier RW, Barkdoll BD (2000) Sampling design for network model calibration using genetic algorithms. J Water Resour Plan Manag 126(4):245–250
Meniconi S, Brunone B, Ferrante M, Massari C (2011) Transient tests for locating and sizing illegal branches in pipe systems. J Hydroinf 13(3):334
Meniconi S, Brunone B, Ferrante M, Capponi C, Carrettini C, Chiesa C, Segalini D, Lanfranchi E (2015) Anomaly pre-localization in distribution–transmission mains by pump trip: preliminary field tests in the Milan pipe system. J Hydroinf 17(3):377–389
Poli R, Kennedy J, Blackwell T (2007) Particle swarm optimization. Swarm Intell 1(1):33–57
Savic DA, Kapelan ZS, Jonkergouw PM (2009) Quo vadis water distribution model calibration? Urban Water J 6(1):3–22
Shi H, Gong J, Zecchin AC, Lambert MF, Simpson AR (2017) Hydraulic transient wave separation algorithm using a dual-sensor with applications to pipeline condition assessment. J Hydroinf 19(5):752–765
Steffelbauer DB, Fuchs-Hanusch D (2016) Efficient sensor placement for leak localization considering uncertainties. Water Resour Manag 30(14):5517–5533
Stephens ML, Lambert MF, Simpson AR (2013) Determining the internal wall condition of a water pipeline in the field using an inverse transient. J Hydraul Eng 139(3):310–324
Stephens M, Marchi A, Gong J (2018) Program of controlled transient field tests in Adelaide CBD smart network. In: WDSA/CCWI Joint Conference Proceedings (Vol. 1)
Vitkovsky JP, Lambert MF, Simpson AR, Wang X-J (2001) An experimental verification of the inverse transient technique for leak detection. In: Proc., 6th Conference on Hydraulics in Civil Engineering: The State of Hydraulics; Proceedings. Institution of Engineers, Barton, Australia, p 373
Vítkovský JP, Liggett JA, Simpson AR, Lambert MF (2003) Optimal measurement site locations for inverse transient analysis in pipe networks. J Water Resour Plan Manag 129(6):480–492
Zecchin AC, White LB, Lambert MF, Simpson AR (2013) Parameter identification of fluid line networks by frequency-domain maximum likelihood estimation. Mech Syst Signal Process 37(1):370–387
Zhang C, Gong J, Zecchin A, Lambert M, Simpson A (2018a) Faster inverse transient analysis with a head-based method of characteristics and a flexible computational grid for pipeline condition assessment. J Hydraul Eng 144(4):04018007
Zhang C, Zecchin AC, Lambert MF, Gong J, Simpson AR (2018b) Multi-stage parameter-constraining inverse transient analysis for pipeline condition assessment. J Hydroinf 20(2):281–300
Zhang C, Gong J, Simpson AR, Zecchin AC, Lambert MF (2019) Impedance estimation along pipelines by generalized reconstructive method of characteristics for pipeline condition assessment. J Hydraul Eng 145(4):04019010
Acknowledgments
The research presented in this paper has been supported by the Australia Research Council through the Discovery Project Grant DP170103715.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
None.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, C., Gong, J., Lambert, M.F. et al. Sensor Placement Strategy for Pipeline Condition Assessment Using Inverse Transient Analysis. Water Resour Manage 33, 2761–2774 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-019-02239-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-019-02239-2