2010
DOI: 10.1080/1573062x.2010.526230
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Field testing of an optimal sensor placement methodology for event detection in an urban water distribution network

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
36
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 70 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An alternative approach based on an inverse approach that formulates the leak detection and localization problem as a parameter estimation approach was presented by Pudar & Ligget (1992) and further inverse approaches were investigated (Ligget & Chen, 1995) (Kapelan et al, 2003) (Wu & Sage, 2006). Additionally, other contributions integrating data-driven and model-driven approaches (Farley et al, 2010;Bicik et al, 2013) or based just on a data-driven approach (Romano et al, 2013) were also presented. Pérez et al (2011) presents a direct modelling methodology developed to help network operators deal with the detection and localization of leaks in district metered areas (DMAs 5 ) of water distribution networks.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An alternative approach based on an inverse approach that formulates the leak detection and localization problem as a parameter estimation approach was presented by Pudar & Ligget (1992) and further inverse approaches were investigated (Ligget & Chen, 1995) (Kapelan et al, 2003) (Wu & Sage, 2006). Additionally, other contributions integrating data-driven and model-driven approaches (Farley et al, 2010;Bicik et al, 2013) or based just on a data-driven approach (Romano et al, 2013) were also presented. Pérez et al (2011) presents a direct modelling methodology developed to help network operators deal with the detection and localization of leaks in district metered areas (DMAs 5 ) of water distribution networks.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Data was collected from the pressure instruments located inside each DMA, including the current DG2 location, and at the most sensitive (or optimal) location previously identified by a Jacobean matrix approach. Analysis of pressure measurements recorded before, during, and after the burst events were used to evaluate the sensitivity of each instrument location to the pressure changes caused by the simulated burst events (Farley et al, 2010a). Figure 1 shows model predicted, and actual sensitivities for 5 simulated bursts at eight instrumentation points in a single DMA highlighting the correlation between predicted (model) and actual (real) sensitivities.…”
Section: Instrument Location and Dma Subdivisionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the most sensitive locations were determined, more fluctuations and events would be detected and awareness of system performance increased; for example, more burst pipes can be identified, and more accurate estimates of the number of customers suffering low pressure, over what duration, can be determined. A method to identify optimal locations for pressure instruments used for detection and location of leak/burst events was developed by Farley et al (2008Farley et al ( , 2010a. The approach utilised a methodology that searches a Jacobian sensitivity matrix produced by sequentially modelling leak/burst events at all nodes in a 1-D hydraulic model, and evaluating the change in pressure response at all possible instrument locations.…”
Section: Instrument Location and Dma Subdivisionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For instance, Aksela et al [27] uses the knowledge of reported leak experience with the data collected from flow meter readings to model and train the system. Farley et al [28] presented a methodology for the detection of pipe burst, achieved by identifying the optimal locations of pressure sensors. Similarly, a sensor placement and leakage detection methodology to identify leakages in a WDS based on the deviation of sensor pressure from an estimated pressure was presented by Perez et al [29].…”
Section: Background and Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%