2020
DOI: 10.3390/w12123337
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sewer Network Layout Selection and Hydraulic Design Using a Mathematical Optimization Framework

Abstract: This paper proposes an iterative mathematical optimization framework to solve the layout and hydraulic design problems of sewer networks. The layout selection model determines the flow rate and direction per pipe using mixed-integer programming, which results in a tree-like structured network. This network layout parametrizes a second model that determines hydraulic features including the diameter and the upstream and downstream invert elevations of pipes using a shortest path algorithm. These models are embed… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
30
0
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
30
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The difference between SND and PBP are mainly visible on both ends of the diameter distribution: SND estimates more pipes of large diameter 2.5 m and PBP calculated more pipes of small diameter 0.225 m. This can be explained by the nature of each algorithm. SND aims at optimizing construction costs of the system, minimizing the amount of excavation by using larger diameters with lower slopes to comply with the hydraulic constraints (Duque et al 2020). On the other hand, PBP designs one pipe at the time assigning the smallest feasible pipe diameter that would have the required capacity and looks for the first slope (starting from the minimum) at which the hydraulic constraints are fulfilled.…”
Section: Hydraulic Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The difference between SND and PBP are mainly visible on both ends of the diameter distribution: SND estimates more pipes of large diameter 2.5 m and PBP calculated more pipes of small diameter 0.225 m. This can be explained by the nature of each algorithm. SND aims at optimizing construction costs of the system, minimizing the amount of excavation by using larger diameters with lower slopes to comply with the hydraulic constraints (Duque et al 2020). On the other hand, PBP designs one pipe at the time assigning the smallest feasible pipe diameter that would have the required capacity and looks for the first slope (starting from the minimum) at which the hydraulic constraints are fulfilled.…”
Section: Hydraulic Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sitzenfrei et al (2010a) present the Virtual Infrastructure Benchmarking (VIBe) model to generate ensembles of virtual case studies of entire urban water systems (e.g., water supply, drainage and sewer systems (Urich et al 2010)) that resemble real systems for testing new measures and generalising theories. Spatial layouts of water infrastructure networks in this framework are generated through graph theoretical algorithms (Sitzenfrei et al 2010b, Duque et al 2020 or agent-based models, in which possible/optimal sewer placement is identified (Urich et al 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…A limited number of sewer layout generation and optimization methods can be found in the literature, for example, in [15,17,[19][20][21][22][23]. Some of these works use graph theory to represent the layout of UDSs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%