Hierarchical fuzzy expert system for risk of failure of water mains

Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 53-62

  Fares, Hussam ^a   Zayed, Tarek ^b  

^a ALTALINK MANAGEMENT LTD   (Canada)

^b Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering   (Canada)

Author keywords

Hierarchical fuzzy expert system; Infrastructures; Risk of failure; Water mains

Indexed keywords

FAILURE EVENTS; HIERARCHICAL FUZZY; INFRASTRUCTURE ASSETS; INFRASTRUCTURES; MUNICIPAL WATER NETWORKS; PIPE MATERIAL; RISK OF FAILURE; SHORT TERM; WATER MAINS;

EXPERT SYSTEMS;

RISKS;

EID: 80455172357     PISSN: 19491190     EISSN: 19491204     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000037     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Al-Barqawi H. Zayed T. Condition rating model for underground infrastructure sustainable water mains. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 2006, 20(2):126-135. JPCFEV, 0887-3828, 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2006)20:2(126), and.
2. Al-Barqawi H. Zayed T. Sustainable infrastructure management: Performance of water main. J. Infrastruct. Syst. 2008, 14(4):305-318. JITSE4, 1076-0342, 10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2008)14:4(305), and.
3. Bhave P. Optimal design of water distribution networks 2003, Alpha Science Int'l Ltd., Oxford, U.K.
4. Christodoulou S. Aslani P. Vanrenterghem A. Risk analysis framework for evaluating structural degradation of water mains in urban settings using neurofuzzy systems and statistical modeling techniques. World water and environmental resources congress 2003, 1-9. and ASCE, Reston, Va.
5. Cromwell J. Reynolds H. Pearson N. Grant M. Costs of infrastructure failure 2002, and AWWA Research Foundation and American Water Works Association, Denver.
6. Del Campo E. Design of fuzzy systems using knowledge extracted via neural networks. 2004, MS thesis, Univ. of Texas, El Paso, Tex.
7. City of Moncton water main transmission and distribution system needs assessment study. 2003, Dillon Consulting Limited and Harfan Technologies, Inc., Rep. No.02-0904-0700, Moncton, New Brunswick.
8. Giustolisi O. Laucelli D. Savic D. Development of rehabilitation plans for water mains replacement considering risk and cost-benefit assessment. Civ. Eng. Environ. Syst. 2006, 23:175-190. ZZZZZZ, 1028-6628, 10.1080/10286600600789375, and.
9. Hahn M. Palmer R. Merr M.S. Expert system for prioritizing the inspection of sewers: Knowledge base formulation and evaluation. J. Water Resour. Plann. Manage. 2002, 128:121-129. JWRMD5, 0733-9496, 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2002)128:2(121), and.
10. Managing risk: Decision making and investment planning. 2006, InfraGuide, (Jan. 17, 2007).
11. The water main break clock. 2007, Infrastructure Report, Canada Free Press, (Jan. 23, 2008).
12. Jin Y. Advanced fuzzy systems design and applications 2003, Springer, New York.
13. Karray F. de Silva C. Soft computing and intelligent systems design 2004, and Pearson Education Limited, Essex, U.K.
14. Kirchhoff D. Doberstein B. Pipeline risk assessment and risk acceptance criteria in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 2006, 24:221-234. 10.3152/147154606781765156, and.
15. Kleiner Y. Rajani B. Considering time-dependent factors in the statistical prediction of water main breaks. Proc., AWWA Infrastructure Conf. 2000, 1-12. and AWWA, Baltimore.
16. Kleiner Y. Rajani B. Forecasting variations and trends in water-main breaks. J. Infrastruct. Syst. 2002, 8:122-131. JITSE4, 1076-0342, 10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2002)8:4(122), and.
17. Kleiner Y. Rajani B. Sadiq R. Failure risk management of buried infrastructure using fuzzy-based techniques. J. Water Supply: Res. Technol.-AQUA 2006, 55:81-94. 0165-0114, and.
18. Kleiner Y. Sadiq R. Rajani B. Modeling failure risk in buried pipes using fuzzy Markov deterioration process. Pipeline engineering and construction: What's on the horizon? 2004, 1-12. and ASCE, Reston, Va.
19. Lee M. Risk assessment of drinking water supply in Canada. 2006, MS thesis, Univ. of Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
20. Muhlbauer W.K. Pipeline risk management manual 2004, 3rd Ed., Gulf Professional Publishing, Burlington, Ont.
21. Najafi M. Trenchless technology: Pipeline and utility design, construction, and renewal 2005, McGraw-Hill, New York.
22. Nikolaidis E. Ghiocel D. Singha S. Engineering design reliability handbook 2005, and CRC, Boca Raton, Fla.
23. Ozger S. A semi-pressure-driven approach to reliability assessment of water distribution networks. 2003, Ph.D. dissertation, Arizona State Univ., Ariz.
24. Pelletier G. Mailhot A. Villeneuve J. Modeling water pipe breaks-Three case studies. J. Water Resour. Plann. Manage. 2003, 129(2):115-123. JWRMD5, 0733-9496, 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2003)129:2(115), and.
25. Rajani B. Kleiner Y. Sadiq R. Translation of pipe inspection results into condition ratings using the fuzzy synthetic evaluation technique. J. Water Supply 2006, 55:11-24. 0003-7214, and.
26. Rogers P. Failure assessment model to prioritize pipe replacement in water utility asset management. 2006, Ph.D. dissertation, Colorado State Univ., Colo.
27. Sadiq R. Rajani B. Kleiner Y. Probabilistic risk analysis of corrosion associated failures in cast iron water mains. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2004, 86:1-10. RESSEP, 0951-8320, 10.1016/j.ress.2003.12.007, and.
28. Selvakumar A. Clark R. Sivaganesan M. Costs for water supply distribution system rehabilitation 2002, and EPA, Washington, D.C.
29. Vanrenterghem-Raven A. Risk factors of structural degradation of an urban water distribution system. J. Infrastruct. Syst. 2007, 13(1):55-64. JITSE4, 1076-0342, 10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2007)13:1(55).
30. Yan J. Vairavamoorthy K. Fuzzy approach for pipeline condition assessment. New pipeline technologies, security, and safety 2003, 467-476. and ASCE, Reston, Va.
31. Zayed T. Selecting pile construction method using fuzzy approach. Proc., Construction Research Congress Conf. 2005, ASCE, San Diego.