This article was downloaded by: [Massachusetts Institute of Technology]

On: 25 November 2014, At: 22:10

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Urban Water Journal

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nurw20

A review of modeling water quality in distribution

systems
A Ostfeld Senior Lecturer
a
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering , Technion – Israel Institute of Technology ,
Haifa, 32000, Israel
Published online: 16 Feb 2007.

To cite this article: A Ostfeld Senior Lecturer (2005) A review of modeling water quality in distribution systems, Urban Water
Journal, 2:2, 107-114, DOI: 10.1080/15730620500144266

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15730620500144266

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Urban Water Journal, Vol. 2, No. 2, June 2005, 107 – 114

A review of modeling water quality in distribution systems

A. OSTFELD*

Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Technion – Israel Institute of Technology,
Haifa 32000, Israel

The objective of this paper is to review the state of the art knowledge in modeling water
quality in distribution systems and to suggest future research needs in this area.
Downloaded by [Massachusetts Institute of Technology] at 22:10 25 November 2014

Multiquality water distribution systems (MWDS) are systems in which waters from
different qualities are taken from sources, possibly treated, conveyed and supplied to the
consumers. In addition to the hydraulic laws which describe the system behavior,
equations that describe the water quality in the system are added. The consumers’
demands are for quantity, pressure, and quality. The review is focusing on simulation,
optimization, chlorine control, monitoring, and water security modeling in MWDS.

Keywords: Review; Water distribution systems; Optimization; Simulation; Water quality

in which contaminants enter a drinking WDS and are

1. Introduction
A water distribution system (WDS) is an interconnected
collection of sources, pipes, and hydraulic control elements
(e.g. pumps, valves, regulators, tanks) delivering consumers
prescribed water quantities at desired pressures and
qualities. Such systems are often described in terms of a
graph, with the links representing the pipes, and the nodes
representing connections between pipes, hydraulic control
elements, consumers, and sources. The behavior of a water
distribution system is governed by: (1) the physical laws
that describe the flow relationships in the pipes and the
hydraulic control elements, (2) the consumer demands, and
(3) the system layout.
The interest in modeling flow and quality in WDS stems
from three types of circumstances: (1) use of waters from
sources with different qualities in a single distribution
system serving as a ‘‘treatment facility’’ to mix and convey
them, with a blend supplied to its consumers. This situation
is common to areas where sources of good quality are
limited, and thus there is a need to use alternate water
sources, such as saline groundwater, to meet agricultural or
industrial water needs, (2) concern in municipal WDS over
quality changes such as decay of disinfectants and/or
growth of organisms, and (3) deliberate or accidental events
distributed with flow.
Research in modeling water quality in distribution
systems started in the context of agricultural usage (e.g.
Liang and Nahaji 1983; Sinai et al. 1985) primarily in arid
regions (e.g. the Arava valley in southern Israel) where
good water quality is limited. In 1990 the USEPA
promulgated rules requiring that water quality standards
must be satisfied at the consumer taps rather than at the
sources treatment plants. This initiated the need for water
quality modeling, the development of the USEPA simula-
tion water quantity and quality model EPANET (USEPA
2003), and raised other problems and research needs that
commenced considerable research in this area to assist
utilities meet that goal.
Development of simulation and optimization algorithms
for modeling water quality in distribution systems are
needed by both designers, utilities, and regulating agencies
for a number of purposes: (1) planning and design of
networks and facilities, (2) real time operation, (3)
monitoring design and operation, (4) simulation of
contamination events, and (5) guidelines establishments
for planning, design, operation, and monitoring.
Shamir and Howard (1991) classified water quality
models for water distribution systems with respect to the

*Corresponding author. Email: ostfeld@tx.technion.ac.il

Urban Water Journal

ISSN 1573-062X print/ISSN 1744-9006 online ª 2005 Taylor & Francis Group Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/15730620500144266
 108
flow conditions in the network and the contaminant
concentrations in the sources: (1) Steady flow – steady
concentration. Occur in agriculture or industry; flows are
never steady in municipal water distribution systems, (2)
Steady flow – unsteady concentration. Appear when a pulse
of contamination is distributed within the distribution
system under steady flow conditions, (3) Unsteady flow –
steady concentration. Contaminant concentrations in the
sources remain constant while the flow regime is unsteady,
and (4) Unsteady flow – unsteady concentration. Occurs
when a pulse of contamination enters the system under
unsteady flow conditions.
The above classifications set the boundary conditions for
the analysis of flow and quality in WDS. These involve four
major categories: simulation, optimization, chlorine con-
Downloaded by [Massachusetts Institute of Technology] at 22:10 25 November 2014
trol, and monitoring. Each of these is further described
below.
2. Simulation
Simulation modeling is aimed at studying the changes of
water quality substances in time and in space within the
distribution system.
The major parts of the methods allow the quality
model to ‘‘ride’’ on the hydraulic solution. These
techniques get as input the time series of the hydraulic
simulation, and the contaminant concentrations of the
sources, which then serves as the starting point for the
quality analysis.
The governing equations for simulating flow and quality
in WDS for steady flow–steady concentration are:
Continuity of flows at nodes (Kirchoff’s Law no. 1).
X
n
qi;j ¼ 0 8 nodes i ð1Þ
i¼1
where: q i, j = the flow from node i to node j, positive when
node i is the upstream node; n = the number of nodes in the
network. The summation is over all the nodes j connected
to node i, including node i.
Continuity of energy (Kirchoff’s Law no. 2).
 
hi
hj ¼ f qi;j 8 linksði; jÞ ð2Þ
where: h i,h j = heads at nodes i and j, respectively;
f(qi,j) = a function expressing the head loss or gain along
the link (i , j) (e.g. the Hazen Williams headloss equation).
Continuity of mass (Kirchoff’s Law no. 1) at nodes.
Xn
qi;j cki;j ¼ 0 8 nodes i; and quality parameters k ð3Þ
i¼1
A. Ostfeld
where: cki;j = the concentration in link (i,j) of quality
parameter k (note that cki;j is the concentration at node i
of quality parameter k).
Dilution requirements.
cki;j ¼ cki;i 8 links ði; jÞ; quality parameters k; and qi;j 40
cki;j ¼ ckj;j 8 links ði; jÞ; quality parameters k; and qi;j 50
ð4Þ
The dilution requirements represent the condition that the
concentration in each link is that of its upstream node, for
steady flow–steady concentration.
Further to (1) to (4) above, steady flow–steady concen-
tration models are restricted to: (1) conservative water
quality constituents (i.e. no decay or growth of the
constituents as a function of time); (2) no chemical
reactions among quality parameters; (3) complete and
instantaneous mixing at nodes; and (4) the water quality in
the links have no influence on the hydraulic head losses.
Steady flow–steady concentration conditions are rarely
established in reality. To incorporate unsteady conditions
(flow and/or quality), the following governing equations
need to be incorporated:
Continuity of flow for each storage component (i.e. tanks,
reservoirs).
dhi;i 1 hX X i
¼ qin
qout ð5Þ
dt ai;i
where: t = time; hi,i = water level; ai,i = reservoir storage
component area; Sqin, Sqout = sum of inflows and out-
flows, to and from the storage component, respectively.
Continuity of mass for each storage component and each
quality parameter k. For complete and instantaneous
mixing:
dcki;i 1 hX X i
¼ qin ckin
qout cki;i 8k ð6Þ
dt Vi;i
where: ckin ; cki;i = the inlet and storage component concen-
trations for quality parameter k, respectively; Vi,i = storage
component volume.
2.1 Water quality transportation lag
A plug flow, governed by the water velocity in each of the
pipes, is assumed to describe the water quality transporta-
tion phenomena. The common strategy is to divide each
pipe into a series of segments (parcels), where the water
quality parameters are tracked as they move from one
segment (parcel) to the other.
 Modeling water quality in distribution systems
Simulation is performed for a given discrete time series,
where equations (5), (6), and the water quality transporta-
tion lag connect mutual time steps.
Along the above lines the USEPA developed a public
sector model entitled EPANET in the early 1990s (Ross-
man 1994), which became during the years the most
acceptable computational tool for simulating water quality
in distribution systems.
EPANET performs extended period simulation of
hydraulic and water quality behavior within pressurized
pipe networks consisting of wells, tanks, pipes, consumer
nodes, pumping units, and valves. EPANET tracks the
flow of water in each pipe, the pressure at each node, the
level of water in each tank, and the concentration of
chemical constituents throughout the distribution net-
Downloaded by [Massachusetts Institute of Technology] at 22:10 25 November 2014
work, during a simulation period. Following the
EPANET development, commercial spins off EPANET
became also available that even extended the EPANET
capabilities.
A different approach to simulate water quality in
distribution networks has been developed by Shah (1985).
Shah solved the hydraulics and the constituent quality
problem simultaneously. This formulation allowed the
definition of mixtures of unknowns – not just the water
quality concentrations. It thus permits solving inverse type
problem: for example, locating sources of contaminations,
given data from different points in the distribution system
of flows, heads, or concentrations.
An ‘‘input – output’’ analysis approach for simulating
water quality in distribution networks, entirely different
from the ones listed above, has been proposed by Shamir
and Howard (1991). Shamir and Howard suggested
developing unit impulse response functions to approximate
the way in which an impulse input of a contaminant at one
point of the network would appear at other selected points.
This technique allows modeling the course of a contami-
nant plume by using linear theory which involves linear
superposition and convolution without having to simulate
the entire passage of the plume using the segments (parcels)
approach.
3. Optimization
The need for optimization exists whenever the solution to a
problem is not unique. Common examples for optimization
needs in modeling water quality in WDS (i.e. multi-quality
WDS) are: design, operation, chlorine control, monitoring,
and calibration.
Optimization models of WDS can be classified according
to their consideration of time and of the physical laws
which are included explicitly (Ostfeld and Shamir 1993a, b).
In time the distinction is between policy and real time
models. Policy models are run off-line, in advance, and
109
generate the operating plans for a number of typical and/or
critical operating conditions. Real time (on-line) models are
run continuously in real time, and generate an operating
plan for the immediate coming period. The classification
with respect to the physical laws which are considered
explicitly as constraints is: (1) QH (discharge – head)
models: quality is not considered, and the network is
described only by its hydraulic behavior; (2) QC (discharge
– quality) models: the physics of the system are included
only as continuity of water and of pollutant mass at nodes.
Quality is described essentially as a transportation problem
in which pollutants are carried in the pipes, and mass
conservation is maintained at nodes. Such a model can
account for decay of pollutants within the pipes and even
chemical reactions, but does not satisfy the continuity of
energy law (i.e. Kirchoff’s Law no. 2), and thus there is no
guarantee of hydraulic feasibility and of maintaining head
constraints at nodes. QCH (discharge – quality – head)
models: quality constraints, and the hydraulic laws, which
govern the system behavior, are all considered.
The QH and QC problems are relatively easier to solve
than the full QCH. This paper concentrates on QCH
models.
Ostfeld and Shamir (1993a) developed a QCH policy
model for optimal operation of undirected multi-quality
WDS under steady state conditions, which has been
extended to the unsteady case in Ostfeld and Shamir
(1993b). To overcome the nonsmoothness problems, an
approximation of the quality equations has been used,
following Cohen (1992). In the unsteady case, instead of
dividing each pipe into segments and tracking the move-
ment of the quality fronts, a single approximated equation
was developed, representing the average concentration of
the water quality fronts in the pipes for a specific time
increment. Both the steady and unsteady models were
solved with GAMS (Brooke et al. 1988)/MINOS (Murtagh
and Saunders 1982), an on-shelf non-linear optimization
package.
Ostfeld and Shamir (1996) developed a QCH methodol-
ogy which integrates optimal design and reliability of a
multi-quality WDS in a single framework. The system
designed is able to sustain prescribed failure scenarios, such
as any single random component failure, and still maintain
a desired level of service in terms of the quantities, qualities,
and pressures supplied to the consumers. In formulating
and solving the model, decomposition was used. The
decomposition results in an ‘‘outer’’ nonsmooth problem
in the domain of the circular flows, and an ‘‘inner’’ convex
quadratic problem. The method of solution included the
use of a nonsmooth optimization technique for minimizing
the ‘‘outer’’ problem (Shor 1985), for which a member of
the sub-gradient group was calculated in each iteration.
The method allows reversal of flows in pipes, relative to the
direction initially assigned. The methodology was applied
 110
to Anytown USA (Walski et al. 1987) for a single loading
condition, and one quality constituent.
Cohen et al. (2000) solved the steady state operation
model of an undirected multi-quality WDS by decompos-
ing the QCH problem into the QH and QC sub-problems
for given water flows in the distribution system, and
removal ratios at the treatment plants. The QC and QH
models are solved first. The combination of their solutions
serves for solving the QCH. The model has been applied to
the Central Arava Network in southern Israel, which
consists of 38 nodes, 39 pipes, 11 sources and 7 treatment
plants.
Goldman (1998) developed a simulated annealing shell
linked to EPANET for solving the scheduling pumping
problem of a water distribution system with water quality
Downloaded by [Massachusetts Institute of Technology] at 22:10 25 November 2014
constraints at the consumer nodes. Sakarya and Mays
(2000) solved the same problem by linking the GRG2
nonlinear code (Lasdon and Waren 1986) with EPANET.
In both models, treatment facilities, valves, and varying
electrical energy tariffs throughout the simulation were not
considered. In addition, the unsteady water quality
constraints were applied only to the last operational time
period, while in reality the problem of supplying adequate
water quality to consumers is a continuous operational
time-dependent problem.
Ostfeld et al. (2002) developed a QCH application of
stochastic simulation for the reliability assessment of single
and multi-quality WDS. The stochastic simulation frame-
work was casted in a program entitled RAP (Reliability
Analysis Program), linking Monte Carlo replications with
EPANET simulations. Three reliability measures were
evaluated: the Fraction of Delivered Volume (FDV), the
Fraction of Delivered Demand (FDD), and the Fraction of
Delivered Quality (FDQ).
Ostfeld and Salomons (2002) developed a genetic
algorithm scheme tailor-made to EPANET, for optimiz-
ing the operation of a WDS under unsteady water
quality conditions. The WDS consists of sources of
different qualities, treatment facilities, tanks, pipes,
control valves, and pumping stations. The objective is
to minimize the total cost of pumping and treating the
water for a selected operational time horizon, while
delivering the consumers the required quantities, at
acceptable qualities and pressures. The decision variables,
for each of the time steps that encompass the total
operational time horizon, included: the scheduling of the
pumping units, settings of the control valves, and
treatment removal ratios at the treatment facilities. The
constraints were: box heads and concentrations at the
consumer nodes, maximum removal ratios at the treat-
ment facilities, maximum allowable amounts of water
withdraws at the sources, and returning at the end of the
operational time horizon to a prescribed total volume in
the tanks.
A. Ostfeld
4. Chlorine control
The control of pressure is commonly achieved by booster
pumps and pressure reducing valves, while water quality
can be controlled by booster chlorine injections (Pool and
Lansey 1997; Boccelli et al. 1998, 2001) and by monitoring.
Since the injection process does not affect water movement,
it can be shown that if chlorine decay follows a first (or
zero) order reaction the response at a node is linear with
respect to an injection at the booster (Boccelli et al. 1998).
In the linear system, the response is scaled by the injection
rate. This linearity relationship has been used as the basis of
a linear programming problem to determine the booster
injection rates that minimize the total mass of chlorine
injected while maintaining the desired chlorine levels at all
nodes for all times (Pool and Lansey 1997; Boccelli et al.
1998). The decision variables in this problem are to identify
the amount of chlorine to inject at the in-place boosters.
Locating booster stations is an extension of the booster
operation problem. Here, the decisions are the location of
boosters and their injection rates for a typical day. The
objective of the location/operation problem is to minimize
the mass of chlorine injected for a desired number of
satellite boosters or minimize the cost of new booster
stations while limiting the injected chlorine mass. This
problem is the inverse of the monitoring location problem
in that the sources of injected material are to be identified
to satisfy desired levels at all locations. The monitoring
problem is to identify the source of contaminant from
measurements throughout the system.
Pool (2002) formulated and solved the location problem
as a mixed integer linear programming problem using the
linear response functions. To avoid solving a mixed integer
linear program, Tryby and Uber (2001) developed a set
covering approach to locate satellite boosters. This
approach, however, does not optimize satellite operation.
The covering scheme begins by assuming a constant unit set
point injection is applied at a booster for all times. The
response can be determined at all nodes for all times using a
water quality simulation model. The covering problem is
then to insure that the resulting nodal concentrations are
greater than the requirement using the fewest possible
satellite boosters.
5. Monitoring
Efficient water quality monitoring is one of the most
important tools to guarantee a reliable potable water
supply to consumers of drinking water distribution systems.
A drop in pressure at one or more of the system nodes can
cause a reduction of the quantities supplied to the
consumers, while an accidental entry of a contaminant, or
self deterioration of water quality within the network itself
– a severe damage to public health (Geldreich 1991).
 Modeling water quality in distribution systems
For a maximum protection of public health, one would
monitor every system node, which obviously leads to the
monitoring system of maximum cost. On the other hand, if
one assumes that the water quality does not change as it
travels through the network, only the sources would be
needed to monitor. Since phenomena in the network itself
(e.g. a deliberate terrorist intrusion of hazards, corrosion,
or THM formations) cause water quality to change, there is
a need to monitor in the network, and not just at the
sources.
The goal of an Early Warning Monitoring System
(EWMS) with this respect is to reliably identify contamina-
tion events (accidental or deliberate) in source water or
distribution systems, in time to allow effective response that
reduces or avoids adverse impacts that may result from
Downloaded by [Massachusetts Institute of Technology] at 22:10 25 November 2014
such an event.
Water quality monitoring water quality varies through a
distribution system and verifying that acceptable water is
delivered to customers is not straightforward. USEPA
regulations require that samples be taken at locations that
are representative of the water quality in the system.
‘‘Representative’’ has not been explicitly defined, and
several approaches have been developed to quantify
representativeness.
Lee and Deininger (1992) developed a procedure based
on steady state flow under one or more demand patterns.
The method’s premise is that sampling at a location
supplied by upstream nodes provides information about
water at the downstream nodes. With this idea, a set
covering problem for the monitoring locations is formu-
lated to maximize the representativeness of the water
samples. Nodal contributions are determined using the
steady state source contribution analysis (Boluos and
Altman 1993). After flow paths have been defined, the
source contribution from all sources can be determined.
Each node in succession is then considered as a source node
and the distribution of flow from this node is computed. A
matrix is then formed that identifies upstream nodes
supplying a downstream node and the proportion of water
that passed through the upstream node (defined as the
water fraction) to the downstream junction. The sampling
design question is then how to maximize the coverage of the
water in the distribution system with a minimum number of
measurements.
Lee and Deininger solved the optimization problem
using an integer programming method. Later, Kumar et al.
(1997) applied a greedy heuristic-based algorithm to the
problem. The algorithm provided the same results for the
small example solved by Lee and Deininger but no proof of
general optimality was shown. Al-Zahrani and Moied
(2001) applied a genetic algorithm to solve the same model.
From an engineering perspective, the demand coverage
method has several limitations. Firstly, it only considers
steady state water quality conditions that are not achieved
111
in many systems. Secondly, the method does not consider
the time water spends in the system and temporal variation
of water quality. Finally, information is only considered in
the upstream direction and coverage does not extend in the
downstream direction. Harmant et al. (2001) modified the
objective function to introduce time dependence and water
quality into the demand coverage model. The new form
weighs the sampling toward bigger flows and ‘‘older’’
water. To emphasize nodes with lower water quality, Woo
et al. (2001) further modified the objective by applying
weights at each term by normalizing the concentrations by
the source values. Thus, nodes with lower water quality
received higher weights in the objective function.
All of the above models used the notion that if
downstream water quality is acceptable then water supplied
before reaching that node must be acceptable. The
tendency in the optimal solution then was to install meters
at downstream locations and were a mixture of flows exists.
Trying to expand and cope with the above deficiencies,
Kessler et al. (1998), and Ostfeld and Kessler (1997, 1999,
2001) presented and applied a design methodology for
detecting random accidental contamination intrusions in
municipal water networks. The methodology developed in
their works is capable of identifying an optimal set of
monitoring stations, for a given level of service, which
allows capturing an accidental contamination intrusion to
the system. The level of service is defined as the maximum
volume of consumed contaminated water, prior to detec-
tion. The methodology involved: (1) the establishment of
an auxiliary network that represents all possible flow
directions in the system for a typical demand cycle; (2) the
use of the All Shortest Paths algorithm for the identifica-
tion of domains of pollution; and (3) a Minimum Covering
Set algorithm for choosing the optimal locations of the
monitoring stations. The main shortcoming of Kessler et al.
(1998), and Ostfeld and Kessler (1997, 1999, 2001), is in not
taking into account the water dilution and water quality
changes as they are distributed in the network, and in not
addressing explicitly the non-steady state of the contam-
ination behavior.
6. Water security
Following the events of 9/11 in the US, the Administrator
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
created the Water Protection Task Force (WPTF), which
identified water distribution networks as a major area of
vulnerability. The need to predict the spread of contami-
nants in distribution systems and to monitor their
concentrations at various systems locations, so as to keep
the water supplied to the public safe, was declared a major
concern.
Tracking pollutant movement and concentrations within
a water distribution system is a complex task, which
 112 A. Ostfeld
requires: (1) a mathematical quantity–quality model for
conducting an accurate extended period hydraulic water
quantity and quality simulation, and (2) the ability to
monitor real time pollutants concentrations. The optimal
allocation problem of water quality monitoring stations
that provide a real time early warning detection system for
keeping the potable water supplied safe, with a given
budget, monitoring locations, level of service, and technol-
ogy constraints, ties (1) and (2) above.
Looking at the above three mutually connected topics:
(1) a mathematical model for extended period hydraulic
water quantity and quality simulation; (2) real time
monitoring; and (3) optimal allocation of monitoring
stations, the following is stated:
Downloaded by [Massachusetts Institute of Technology] at 22:10 25 November 2014
1. The USEPA promulgated rules of initiated the need for
water quality modeling in distribution systems, and the
EPA to develop EPANET, as described in the
simulation section of this paper.
2. Commercial activity, EPA, and independent research
groups are conducting intensive research into the
development of sensors and monitoring systems for
measuring, or providing ‘‘finger prints’’, in real time of
contaminants intrusions into distribution systems – so
far with partial success. Monitoring stations/sensors
exist for free chlorine, chloramines, dissolved oxygen,
pH, conductivity, Redox/ORP, temperature, and more.
For threats of bioweapons agents intrusions (e.g.
bacteria types like Anthrax, Salmonella, or biotoxin
types like Botulinum toxins, Saxitoxin) commercial
sensors do not exist. However, this situation is
changing rapidly as of the high need for online water
quality hazards monitoring equipment from one side,
and the advances of research technology prototype
products, from the other.
3. Water distribution systems are spatially diverse. As
such, they are inherently vulnerable to physical,
chemical, or biological threats. In general, physical
disruptions can result in significant economic cost
inconvenience, but the direct threat to human health is
limited. Contrary to that is contamination intrusion –
chemical and/or biological, which is one of the most
serious potentional threats to water distribution
systems.
A contaminant can be dumped directly into tanks, wells,
water intakes, or treatment plants; or can be injected at
any connection to a water distribution system using a
pump or a mobile pressurized tank, capable of over-
coming the system pressure. Backflow preventers provide
an obstacle. However, they do not exist at all connections;
and some may not be functional. Thus, identification of
an intrusion must be made with information acquired
within the distribution system itself. The ability to
monitor water quality within the system is a significant
concern and no formal procedure or guidelines exist at
present on where and how to locate water quality
monitoring stations for drinking water distribution
systems security, subject to extended hydraulic and water
quality unsteady conditions.
A model to enhance water distribution system security
that links extended period water quantity and quality
simulation with real time monitoring for providing a real
time early warning detection system against deliberate
terrorist hazards intrusions – was presented by Ostfeld and
Salomons (2003, 2004).
The methodology developed and demonstrated in
Ostfeld and Salomons (2003, 2004) involves linking
EPANET and a genetic algorithm in an overall framework
for optimally allocating monitoring stations, aimed at
capturing deliberate external terrorist hazards intrusions
through water distribution system nodes: sources, tanks,
treatment plant intakes, consumers – subject to extended
period unsteady hydraulics and water quality conditions,
for a given defending level of service to public health – a
maximum volume of polluted water exposure at a
concentration higher than a minimum hazard level.
7. Research needs
A list of research needs/scientific challenges in the major
areas related to water quality modeling in distribution
systems is listed below.
Simulation: operational storage operation influences on
water quality in WDS; internal modeling of water quality
propagations in pipes (i.e. wall reactions involving disin-
fectants, growth and decay of disinfection by-products,
transport of particulate and colloidal matter, growth of
biofilms); modeling of chemical reactions among non-
conservative water quality parameters.
Optimization: QCH optimization models integrating the
design and operation phases in a single framework;
inclusion of reliability/risk in providing optimal strategies
for design/operation of multi-quality WDS; optimal system
sampling and monitoring strategies.
Calibration: mathematical calibration is the process of
determining the coefficient values appearing in the equa-
tions of a model such that results produced by the model
with these coefficients agree closely with a set of measured
data, in the context of a selected objective function(s).
Calibration has been the subject of much discussions and
papers (e.g. Cesario et al. 1996; Walski 1995), focusing
mainly on heuristic traditional methods. Research work on
mathematical calibration models for water quality in WDS
for QCH type models is still limited.
 Modeling water quality in distribution systems
8. Conclusions
The analysis of water quality in distribution systems is
relatively new. In the past, water quality within the
distribution systems themselves was either considered to
be more or less of a uniform single quality, or of less
importance than the quality of the sources.
This situation has been changed during the last decade,
as of the 1990 USEPA rules requiring that water quality
standards must be satisfied at the consumer taps rather
than at the source treatment plants; and as of the events of
9/11 2001 in the US, after which drinking water distribution
systems have been identified as a critical vulnerable
infrastructure, and in particular to scenarios of deliberate
terrorist contamination injections into tanks, wells, water
Downloaded by [Massachusetts Institute of Technology] at 22:10 25 November 2014
intakes, treatment plants; or directly at nodes using a pump
or a mobile pressurized tank capable of overcoming the
system pressure.
This paper reviewed the existing knowledge in modeling
water quality in distribution systems, and highlighted
future research needs/scientific challenges in this area. It
is likely to assume that problems connected to water quality
monitoring within the context of water security will be the
major focal point of multiquality water distribution systems
modeling in the coming years.
References
Al-Zahrani, M. and Moied, K., Locating optimum water quality
monitoring stations in a water distribution system. In Bridging the
Gap: Meeting the World’s Water and Environmental Resources Chal-
lenges, Proceedings of the ASCE annual conference on Water Resources
Planning and Management, Section 1, Chapter 266, 2001, (American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): Orlando, Florida).
Boccelli, D.L., Tryby, M.E., Uber, J., Rossman, L.A., Zierolf, M.L. and
Polycarpou, M.M., Optimal scheduling of booster disinfection in water
distribution systems. J. Water Res. Plan. Manage. Div. ASCE, 1998, 124,
99 – 111.
Boccelli, D.L. and Uber, J.G., Evaluation of multi-component model of
chlorine residual in water distribution systems. Proceedings of CCWI
2001, Water Software Systems, edited by U. Bogumil, B. Coulbeck and J.
Rance, Vol. 1, pp. 195 – 210, 2001 (Research Studies Press: Leicester,
UK).
Boluos, P. and Altman, T., Explicit calculation of water quality parameters
in pipe distribution systems. Civil Eng. Systems, 1993, 10, 187 – 206.
Brooke, A., Kendrick, D. and Meeraus, A., GAMS: A User’s Guide, p. 289,
1988 (Scientific Press: U.S.).
Cesario, L., Kroon, J.R., Grayman, W.M. and Wright, G., New
Perspectives on calibration of treated water distribution systems.
Proceedings of the AWWA 1996 Annual Conference, 1996 (American
Water Works Association: Denver, Colorado).
Cohen, D., Optimal operation of multi-quality networks. D.Sc. Thesis,
Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Technion – Israel (in Hebrew), 400
p, 1992.
Cohen, D. Shamir, U. and Sinai, G., Optimal operation of multi-quality
networks - III: The Q-C-H model. Eng. Opt., 2000, 33, 1 – 35.
113
Geldreich, E.E., Investigating the outbreak in Cabool, Missouri for a water
supply connection. Proceedings of the AWWARF/EPA Conference on
Water Quality Modeling in Distribution Systems, Cincinnati, Ohio, pp.
55 – 56, 1991.
Goldman, E.F., The application of simulated annealing for optimal
operation of water distribution systems. PhD dissertation, Arizona State
University, 242p, 1998.
Harmant, P., Nace, A., Kiene, L. and Fotoohi, H., Optimal supervision of
a drinking water distribution network. In Bridging the Gap: Meeting the
World’s Water and Environmental Resources Challenges, Proceedings of
the ASCE annual conference on Water Resources Planning and Manage-
ment, Section 1, Chapter 324, 2001 (American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE): Orlando, Florida).
Kessler, A., Ostfeld, A. and Sinai, G., Detecting accidental contaminations
in municipal water networks. J. Water Res. Plan. Manage Div., ASCE,
1998, 124, 192 – 198.
Kumar, A., Kansal, M.L. and Arora, G., Identification of monitoring
stations in water distribution systems. J. Environ. Eng. ASCE, 1997, 123,
746 – 752.
Lasdon, L.S. and Waren, A.D., GRG2 user’s guide. Department of General
Business, University of Texas at Austin, Texas, 1986.
Lee, B.H. and Deininger, R.A., Optimal location of monitoring stations in
water distribution systems. J. Environ. Eng. ASCE, 1992, 118, 4 – 16.
Liang, T. and Nahaji, S., Managing water quality by mixing water from
different sources. J. Water Res. Plan. Manage. Div., ASCE, 1983, 109,
48 – 57.
Murtagh, B.A. and Saunders, M.A., A projected Lagrangian Algorithm
and its implementation for sparse nonlinear constraints. Mathemat.
Program. Study, 1982, 16, 84 – 117.
Ostfeld, A. and Shamir U., Optimal operation of multiquality distribution
systems: steady state conditions. J. Water Res. Plan. Manage. Div.,
ASCE, 1993a, 119, 645 – 662.
Ostfeld, A. and Shamir, U., Optimal operation of multiquality distribution
systems: unsteady conditions. J. Water Res. Plan. Manage. Div., ASCE,
1993b, 119, 663 – 684.
Ostfeld, A. and Shamir, U., Design of optimal reliable multiquality water
supply systems. J. Water Res. Plan. Manage. Div., ASCE, 1996, 122,
322 – 333.
Ostfeld, A. and Kessler, A., Detecting accidental contaminations in
municipal water networks: application. Proceedings of the WRPLM
annual conference, ASCE, Chicago, Illinois, USA, pp. 272 – 278, 1997
(American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): Chicago, Illinois).
Ostfeld, A. and Kessler, A., Closure on detecting accidental contamina-
tions in municipal water networks. J. Water Res. Plan. Manage. Div.,
ASCE, 1999, September/October, 308 – 310.
Ostfeld, A. and Kessler, A., Protecting urban water distribution systems
against accidental hazards intrusions. Proceedings of the IWA Second
Conference, Berlin, 2001 (published on CD).
Ostfeld, A., Kogan, D. and Shamir, U., Reliability simulation of water
distribution systems – single and multiquality. Urban Water, 2002, 4,
53 – 61.
Ostfeld, A. and Salomons, E., Optimal operation of multiquality water
distribution systems under water quality unsteady conditions. Proceed-
ings of the annual WRPLM ASCE Conference, Roanoke, Virginia, May,
2002 (published on CD).
Ostfeld, A. and Salomons, E., An early warning detection system for
drinking water distribution systems security. Proceedings of the annual
WRPLM ASCE Conference, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, June, 2003
(published on CD).
Ostfeld, A. and Salomons, E., Optimal layout of early warning detection
stations for water distribution systems security. J. Water Res. Plan.
Manage. Div., ASCE, 2004, 130, 377 – 385.
 114 A. Ostfeld
Pool, S., Optimal operation and location of chlorine boosters. Thesis
submitted to the University of Arizona in partial fulfillment of the
Masters degree in Civil Engineering, 2002.
Pool, S. and Lansey, K., Locating and operating disinfection boosters in
water networks. Proceedings of the WRPLM annual conference, ASCE,
Chicago, Illinois, USA, pp. 738—743, 1997.
Rossman, L.A., EPANET User’s Manual, 1994 (USEPA: Cincinnati,
Ohio).
Sakarya, B.A. and Mays, L.W., Optimal operation of water distribution
pumps considering water quality. J. Water Res. Plan. Manage. Div.,
ASCE, 2000, 126, 210 – 220.
Shah, M., A dynamic model for dilution in water distribution systems.
M.Sc. Thesis, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technion – Israel (in
English), 132 p, 1985.
Shamir, U. and Howard, C.D.D., Topics in modeling water quality in
distribution systems. Proceedings of the AWWARF/EPA Conference on
Water Quality Modeling in Distribution Systems, Cincinnati, Ohio, pp.
Downloaded by [Massachusetts Institute of Technology] at 22:10 25 November 2014
183 – 192, 1991 (American Water Works Association: Cincinatti, Ohio).
Shor, N.Z., Minimization methods for non-differentiable functions, 159p,
1985 (Springer-Verlag: Berlin).
Sinai, G., Koch, E. and Farbman, M., Dilution of brackish waters in
irrigation networks—an analytic approach. Irrigat.Sci., 1985, 6, 191 –
200.
Tryby, M. and Uber, J., Representative water quality sampling in water
distribution systems. In Bridging the Gap: Meeting the World’s Water and
Environmental Resources Challenges, Proceedings of the ASCE annual
conference on Water Resources Planning and Management, Section 1,
Chapter 3, 2001 (American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): Orlando,
Florida).
USEPA, EPANET, 2003. http://www.epa.gov/ORD/NRMRL/wswrd/epa-
net.html.
Walski, T.M. et al., Battle of the network models: epilogue. J. Water Res.
Plan. Manage. Div., ASCE, 1987, 113, 191 – 203.
Walski, T.M., Standards for model calibration. Proceedings of the 1995
AWWA Computer Conference, 1995 (American Water Works Associa-
tion: Denver, Colorado).
Woo, H-M., Yoon, J-H. and Choi, D-Y., Optimal monitoring sites based
on water quality and quantity in water distribution systems. In Bridging
the Gap: Meeting the World’s Water and Environmental Resources
Challenges, Proceedings of the ASCE annual conference on Water
Resources Planning and Management, Section 1, Chapter 318, 2001
(American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): Orlando, Florida).