AWARE P Manual

software documentation
Draft version: 2012-02-09

www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp
AWARE-P
2012
software documentation
Diogo Vitorino Sergio T Coelho Helena Alegre Andr Martins Joo Paulo Leito Maria Santos Silva Draft version: 2012-02-09 Acknowledgements The AWARE-P software is developed in the context of the AWARE-P project, a leading edge R&D effort funded by the European Economic Area (Contract No. PT 0043) and by the project partners. The project was developed and co-funded by a consortium led by LNEC National Civil Engineering Laboratory (Portugal) and comprising IST Instituto Superior Tcnico (Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal), SINTEF (Norway), Addition (Portugal) and YDreams (Portugal), as well as by ERSAR Water and Waste Services Regulator (Portugal), and by the AWARE-P end-user partners: AGS S.A., AdP Servios S.A, SMAS Oeiras & Amadora and Veolia guas de Mafra. Software development benefited from suggestions and contributions from a large number of team members and project friends, including: Adriana Cardoso, Andr Martins, Andr Pina, Daniel Mendes, Didia Covas, Diogo Vitorino, Enrique Cabrera, Helena Alegre, Joo Feliciano, Joo Paulo Leito, Joaquim Beleza, Julieta Marques, Kjersti Holte, Lus Loureiro, Lus Mamouros, Maria do Cu Almeida, Maria Santos Silva, Nelson Carrio, Pedro Ramalho, Pedro Rufino, Pedro Pereira, Rita Ugarelli, Rodrigo Borba, Rui Rua, Srgio T Coelho and Sigurd Hafskjold. License The software described in this document is distributed under the GNU General Public License. For further details go to: www.baseform.org/np4/aboutLicense.html For information on the several components used, see the Detailed Licensing section in: www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp Disclaimer Although all efforts have been undertaken to ensure that the software described here is of the highest possible quality and that the results obtained are correct, the authors do not warrant the functions contained in the program will meet your requirements or that the operation of the program will be uninterrupted or error-free. The authors are not responsible and assume no liability for any results or any use made thereof, nor for any damages or litigation that may result from the use of the software for any purpose. Google, Chrome, Google Earth, Mozilla, WebGL, Firefox, Apple, Mac, Safari, Windows, Microsoft, Word, Excel, Bing, OpenStreetMaps and all other trademarks and copyrights mentioned herein are the property of their respective owners.
Contents
7 AWARE-P
7 7 8 12 12 13 Purpose Overview Details Usage Further reading See also 25 25 25 26 27 27 27 27 27 28 28 28 28 29 29 29 29 29 29 30 30 30 30 31 31 31 FAIL Failure Analysis Overview Details Usage Further reading See also CIMP Component importance Purpose Overview Details Usage Further reading See also UNMET Expected Unmet Demand Purpose Overview Details Usage See also IVI Value Index Purpose Overview Details Usage Further reading See also
15 TOOLS
15 15 15 15 16 16 17 17 17 17 17 19 20 20 20 20 21 21 22 23 23 23 23 24 24 24 PLAN AWARE-P planning Purpose Overview Usage Further reading See also NETWORK EPANET Purpose Overview Details Usage Further reading PI PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Purpose Overview Details Usage Further reading See also PX Performance Indices Purpose Overview Details Usage Further reading See also
32 CORE
32 Purpose 32 Overview 32 Details
34 Appendix A
AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 4 / 38
FOREWORD
This document aims at helping users understand the purpose of the AWARE-P planning software and provides guidance on how to use it. The document describes the application in general terms, before introducing the tools that are included, and the core software platform where they exist. Each section is organized into purpose, overview, details, usage and further reading. The software is publicly available at www.baseform.org, and can be accessed through a simple free registration procedure. It runs from any common browser (for best results, use Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox or Apple Safari, on any Windows, Mac or Linux system). Further information, instructional materials and videos are available at www.baseform.org.
AWARE-PP
Purpose
The AWARE-P infrastructure asset management (IAM) planning software for drinking water, wastewater and storm water services is an organized assessment environment where planning alternatives or competing projects are measured up and compared through selected performance, risk and cost metrics. It comprises a portfolio of metrics and analysis tools that may be used individually for diagnosis and sensitivity gain purposes, or as part of the integrated planning procedure laid out by the AWARE-P IAM programme.
Overview
The infrastructure asset management approach developed in the AWARE-P project (www. aware-p.org) is a broad management and engineering process aiming at alignment of objectives and targets, as well as effective feedback across the various decisional levels strategic, tactical, operational (Alegre et al., 2011). The IAM process is fundamentally led by the stated objectives and by an educated choice of assessment criteria, well-chosen metrics and quantifiable targets. Based on the simple notion that every investment in a system or any change to the way it is managed will most probably impact not just one, but all three of the dimensions involved performance, risk and cost the AWARE-P approach provides an unbiased and quantified framework for organizing the task of generating, comparing and selecting alternatives for system improvement. The AWARE-P IAM planning software makes available a coherent set of user-configurable assessment models related to performance, cost and risk, which are used to evaluate userdefined alternative system modifications, planning solutions or competing projects, over a given analysis period. Based on given planning objectives and measuring criteria, the user
selects a set of metrics from the softwares metrics portfolio and proceeds to evaluate each planning alternative at the selected time frames within the planning and analysis horizons, feeding a cubic space of planning results. The softwares tools may also be used in stand-alone, direct assessment mode for the fastest possible path to results, or in the context of general-purpose sensitivity gain and system diagnosis. Examples of such uses may be: an analysis of failures rates (Poisson and LEYP models are available) and of risk of service interruption; a PI calculation (AWARE-P includes a full-fledged PI tool with the most up-to-date libraries); a water quality simulation, exploring the impact of alternative sites for a new rechlorination facility; or a fully hydraulic-enabled investigation of network component importance (aka criticality). The softwares tools have been specifically developed to make the best available methods and analysis algorithms accessible for effective industry usage, retaining a maximum of simplicity in delivering meaningful and useable results. The AWARE-P software is a web-based application that may be run on public or private server, or as a local, stand-alone deployment. It is implemented using the open-source Baseform development platform and materializes as a growing set of plug-in tool modules made available on that platform, taking advantage of its user management, common data integration services and next-generation 2D/3D visualization capabilities.
Details
The AWARE-P software provides the means to visualize, diagnose and evaluate any given water supply, wastewater or stormwater system, through a portfolio of performance, risk and cost models, at both global and detail levels; and, if so desired, to compare a system with any number of planning alternatives or competing projects using standardized methods that facilitate choice and decision-making both manually and with the assistance of decisionsupport tools tested against current or projected scenarios. AWARE-P has essentially two main usage modes:
(i) as a portfolio of assessment-oriented models and analysis tools that may be used (individually or in combination) in order to diagnose and gain sensitivity to a system; or (ii) supporting the AWARE-P IAM planning procedure through to the definition of a planning framework (time horizon, metrics, alternatives) and by feeding the planning tool with metric values produced using the tools available.
PLAN is the tool that embodies the central planning framework of the AWARE-P infrastructure asset management programme, where planning alternatives or competing projects are measured up and compared through selected performance, risk and cost metrics, through interactive numerical and 2D/3D graphical information display. AWARE-P hosts a growing number of plug-in tools that are as effective at producing metrics that feed PLAN, as they are tailored for stand-alone usage, as fully-fledged analysis algorithms and models. The range of metrics-producing tools that are currently available, and whose details are described further along in this document, include:
PI Performance Indicators, quantitative assessment of the efficiency or effectiveness of a system through the calculation of performance indicators based on state-of-the-art, standardized PI libraries as well as user-developed or customized ones. PX Performance Indices, technical performance metrics based on the values of certain features or state variables of water supply and waste/stormwater networks. The indices measure performance concepts related to level-of-service, network effectiveness and efficiency. FAIL using models such as Poisson and LEYP, prediction of future pipe or sewer failures for a given network, e.g. in the context of estimating risk or cost metrics, based on an organized failure history in the form of work orders and pipe data records. CIMP calculates a component importance metric for each individual pipe in a network, based on the impact of its failure on nodal consumption. The measure is computed based on the networks hydraulic model, using full simulation capabilities. UNMET calculates a service interruption risk metric expressed as the expected volume of unmet demand in a system over one year, given the expected number of outages for each pipe, the average downtime per pipe outage, and the component importance of each pipe, expressed in terms of unmet demand; system pipes are ranked accordingly. IVI Infrastructure Value Index, representing the ageing degree of an infrastructure, calculated through the ratio between the current value and the replacement value of the infrastructure. NETWORK-EPANET an efficient, Java-implemented Epanet simulation engine and natively integrated MSX library, for full-range hydraulic and water quality network simulation. It takes advantage of Baseform Cores NETWORK and its 2D / 3D network and results visualization.
Systems, not just collections of assets The NETWORK tool is of crucial importance in the sense that it relates to one very important feature of the software and of the AWARE-P IAM approach: its focus on evaluating water networks as systems rather than as collections of independent assets. For this reason, and whenever needed, the available range of assessment models and methods draws on the capability to simulate system behavior, either in simplified terms of by drawing support from network simulators such as Epanet. The entire set of visualization and analysis tools is available for exploratory use without having to follow a predefined project-driven script. From this viewpoint, the software is akin to a wide-ranging, system modeling software, suited to what-if and sensitivity analyses and to general system modeling. Planning approach: the AWARE-P IAM programme Good IAM is aboutfinding the best possible balance of performance, risk and costs over a long-termplanning horizon.There are many progressionpaths that improvean urban water systems service performance or help controlrisks such as interruption of supply or water quality incidents, and there willbe a certain combination ofinterventions that will maximize the benefit of agiven amount of investment. It is vital that many diverse alternative solutionsto improving the system are explored andcompared, on a quantifiable andstandardized basis. AWARE-P has defined both a language and a complete IAM programme to achieve that goal. The infrastructure asset management approach developed in the AWARE-P project is a broad management process that addresses the need for a plan-do-check-act (PDCA) philosophy at the various decisional levels in a utility strategic, tactical, operational aiming at alignment of objectives, metrics and targets, as well as solid feedback across levels (Alegre et al., 2011). This concept permeates the planning processes at each of the levels, through the PDCA-inspired loop illustrated here. The IAM process is fundamentally led by the stated objectives, and by an educated choice of assessment criteria, metrics and quantifiable targets. This is particularly evident at the strategic and tactical levels, the latter being the prime field of application for the software described here. Producing the plan is a problem-driven process, with a strong emphasis on thorough diagnosis in order to identify and assess the systems main issues and shortcomings, in view of the set targets, and to help decide where and how to act. Diagnosing and assessing a water supply, wastewater or stormwater system, over given time horizons (at least the planning horizon
and a longer, impact-analysis horizon), draw from a large range of methods and models for evaluating performance, risk and cost (Alegre & Covas, 2010; Almeida et al., 2011). For this purpose, a portfolio of techniques was selected that range from system statistics to network simulation models, to hydraulic and water quality performance, to component failure analysis and forecasting, to component importance and criticality, and to methods for estimating tangible capital and running costs. The planning process is illustrated in the schematic in very simple terms. The drawing board on the right-hand side is initially marked out by the green vertical lines, representing the metrics for the criteria chosen to drive the analysis. A thorough diagnosis and assessment of the current system according to those metrics is carried out (represented by the first blue horizontal at the top). The planning board is then successively populated with planning alternatives (represented by the subsequent blue lines). The intersections represent the assessment of each planning alternative for each metric, and the purpose of the process is to fill out the table to the extent possible. A separate table is calculated for each relevant time frame of the planning and analysis horizons, effectively giving rise to a cube of results, such as made available by the software.
The criteria draw from the available analysis methods in the performance, risk or cost dimensions. Examples could be hydraulic performance related to minimum available pressure (as given by a hydraulic model), risk of interruption of supply due to pipeline failure (e.g., calculated by combining forecast failure rates with component importance derived from network analysis), or the net present value of a given alternative. The metrics used to evaluate these criteria tend to lead to standardized quantities, which are more easily compared together and thus facilitate decision-making. Illustrations of this methodology can be found in Marques et al. (2011) and Alegre et al. (2011).
Usage
AWARE-P is accessed as a regular website, using any common web browser,(1) by addressing a public www link (public versions), a private or enterprise server, or a local (stand-alone) installation server. Versions where user-management has been activated will require a log in. A general introduction to the principles and usage concepts behind the Core platform, where the application is based, is given in the CORE section. The softwares environment includes a main menu on the left side, and an expandable main window. The main menu groups the DATA manager and the PLAN and NETWORK focal points; the Performance, Risk and Cost model sections; and housekeeping core tools such as the User Manager and Data Type Manager.(2) Data is managed, imported and exported through the DATA manager, which is in many ways a starting point for exploring and interacting with the softwares environment. There is a file system organized in folders and files. Files may be added (uploaded), while new files are created through adding a pre-defined data table. The software is used by adding and/or managing data files through the DATA manager, and then using those files in the various analysis modules available. Application modules are implemented as individual plug-ins, taking advantage of the platforms infrastructure (DATA manager, User Manager, Data Type Manager). The anchor modules, natively present in AWARE-P, are PLAN and the core NETWORK tool. The latter is the main vehicle for the software to interact with, and express results relative to, the water network. The target of the AWARE-P analysis is the PLAN tool. The metrics used in PLAN are grouped in the Performance, Risk and Cost sections of the main menu. Each of those tools may be used independently. Please refer to the appropriate sections for further explanation.
Further reading
Alegre, H., Almeida, M.C., Covas, D.I.C., Cardoso, M.A., Coelho, S.T. (2011). Integrated approach for infrastructure asset management of urban water systems. Proc. IWA LESAM 2011, Germany. Alegre, H., Covas, D. (2010). Water supply infrastructure asset management a rehabilitation-based approach. (in Portuguese). Technical Guide no.16. ERSAR, LNEC, IST, Lisboa, 472 pp. (ISBN: 978-989-8360-04-5).
1. In order to make full use of the 3D visualization capabilities on offer, the Google Earth browser plug-in should be installed. Additionally, WebGL-capable browsers, such as Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox or Apple Safari, should have that feature enabled. 2. Available to system administrators.
Almeida, M. C., Leito, J. P., Martins, A. (2011). Incorporating risk in infrastructure asset management of urban water systems. Urban Water (submitted). AWARE-P (2011). www.aware-p.org Marques, M. J., Saramago, A. P., Silva, M. H., Paiva, C., Coelho, S., Pina, A., Oliveira, S. C., Teixeira, J. P., Camacho, P. A., Leito, J. P., Coelho, S. T. (2011). Rehabilitation in Oeiras & Amadora: a practical approach. Proc. IWA LESAM 2011, Germany.
See also
PLAN AWARE-P Planning NETWORK-EPANET PI Performance Indicators PX Performance Indices FAIL Failure Analysis CIMP Component Importance UNMET Expected Unmet Demand IVI Infrastructure Value Index CORE
TOOLS
PLAN AWARE-P planning
Purpose PLAN embodies the central planning framework of the AWARE-P infrastructure asset management methodology, where planning alternatives or competing projects are measured up and compared, through selected performance, risk and cost metrics, using interactive numerical and 2D/3D graphical information display.
and cost assessment tools present in the AWARE-P environment, or from external evaluations as selected by the user, are standardized as numerical indices and then categorized as color-coded levels, with the emphasis on coherent definition by the user of the target category values. A score is also calculated as a weighted average of the indices for each alternative, and a ranking of the alternatives is given according to this score. PLAN uses a very flexible 2D/3D cube display to give the user total control of which dimensions and viewpoints are required for analysis. Usage PLAN is launched from the AWARE-P main menu. The initial screen displays any existing plan files, and gives the option to create a new plan. Existing plans may be edited by clicking on the file name, skipping the creation stage and leading directly to the tools main window. Creating a new plan entails identifying the plan name, start year, planning horizon and analysis horizon. There is optional space to register planning objectives and any relevant notes. Completing the required fields and pressing Create takes the user to the tools main window. A base alternative (named Status quo by default, though this can be edited) is automatically created. PLANs main window has 3 tabs: Data, Ranking and 3D Cube. The Data tab is essentially used to define alternatives and metrics, and then fill out the resulting table with values of those metrics for each alternative, for each of the time steps included in the analysis. The Ranking tab is used for comparing and ranking the alternatives, using essentially 2D views. The 3D Cube tab is used for a tridimensional display of the results (alternatives, metrics and time steps). In the Data tab, time steps can be edited and further adjusted by pressing the Edit Plan button. Add Alternative gives access to
Overview PLAN provides an organized assessment and comparison environment where a number of competing projects or alternative designs can be pitched against each other and numerically as well as visually compared, with a view to supporting decision-making. The tool is based on the 3 main axes that characterize the assessment and comparison exercise: a number of alternatives or projects, a set of standardized metrics and a given time frame. The latter comprises a number of user-specified time steps and includes both a planning horizon (i.e., the time frame of the intervention itself) and an analysis horizon (a longer time frame where the impact of the intervention is assessed). The metrics selected by the user, which may come from the performance, risk
the alternative editor, where a code, a name and a description are filled out. Add Metric allows the user to specify the type of metric (performance, risk or cost) as well as a code, a name(3) and its description. The most crucial feature in the metric specification is the set of values that transform it into a standardized index from 0 to 3, and into color-coded levels, whose values have the following meaning:
(Green) 2 3: good (Yellow) 1 2: fair (Red) 0 1: poor
The user must define the limits of the green, yellow and red bands for the metric. A specific weight can be assigned to the new metric using 5 levels, from very low to very high (numerically, from 0.5 to 2.0). The weight can also be specified for each time step, if the importance of the metric is thought to vary with time. The metric may also be marked as mandatory: if the metric is in the red for a particular alternative , then the whole alternative will be ranked in the red, regardless of how it fares in the other metrics. The planning table that is displayed in the data tab reflects the standardization of the metrics values into indices, by displaying the standardized values (0-3) in shaded typeface under each metric value. The colors reflect the level. Important: remember to save the planning table each time it is edited. The Ranking tab gives access to a colorcoded display of results in 2D tables, for a specific year (alternatives vs. metrics), for a specific alternative (metrics vs. years) or for a specific metric (alternatives vs. years). Click on any alternative code, metric code or year to launch the corresponding table. The Ranking tab also presents the scores and the respective rankings of the alternatives, for each year or for each metric. Overall scores and rankings are presented when selecting the option Overall in the Metric drop-down menu. This score
is obtained calculating the weighted mean of the standardized indices for each metric in each time step. Metrics that are defined as mandatory are depicted by a spiky circle symbol instead of the regular circle. Different weights associated to the metrics are translated by the size of the circles. The 3D Cube tab gives access to a tridimensional display cube that combines the 3 views. Full 3D navigation, zooming and panning is available. Clicking on any alternative code, on any metric code or on any year isolates the respective 2D view. Further reading Alegre, H., Almeida, M.C., Covas, D.I.C., Cardoso, M.A., Coelho, S.T. (2011). Integrated approach for infrastructure asset management of urban water systems. Proc. IWA LESAM 2011, Germany. Alegre, H., Covas, D. (2010). Water supply infrastructure asset management a rehabilitation-based approach. (in Portuguese). Technical Guide no.16. ERSAR, LNEC, IST, Lisboa, 472 pp. (ISBN: 978-989-8360-04-5). Marques, M. J., Saramago, A. P., Silva, M. H., Paiva, C., Coelho, S., Pina, A., Oliveira, S. C., Teixeira, J. P., Camacho, P. A., Leito, J. P., Coelho, S. T. (2011). Rehabilitation in Oeiras & Amadora: a practical approach. Proc. IWA LESAM 2011, Germany. See also
PI Performance Indicators PX Performance Indices FAIL Failure Analysis CIMP Component Importance UNMET Expected Unmet Demand IVI Infrastructure Value Index
3. It is good practice to include the units in the metric name, encased in brackets, so that they are displayed in the main planning table e.g., Expected unmet demand (m3/ year)
NETWORK EPANET
Purpose NETWORKEPANET offers an efficient, Java-implemented Epanet simulation engine and natively integrated MSX library, for fullrange hydraulic and water quality network simulation. It takes advantage of Baseform Cores NETWORK and its 2D / 3D network and results visualization.(4)
documentation available for the USEPAs Epanet simulator (e.g., Rossman, 2000). The network model implemented is a rigorous, from-scratch Java implementation of the Epanet hydraulic and water quality model and of the Epanet MSX advanced water quality library (EPA, 2008). A degree of visual and functional similarity with the original was sought in integrating it in the Baseform and NETWORK user interface, while taking advantage of the latters nextgeneration capabilities, such as the 3D visualization. At the present stage, network editing is not available and the program is essentially intended for use with network model files prepared elsewhere. Some simulation options such as the time options or the unit system can be parameterized, as detailed in Usage. Usage NETWORK opens to display a list of the .INP network model files present in the selected folder. Clicking on a file opens it in the main NETWORK window. Alternatively, from the DATA manager, clicking on a .INP file name will open a preview and offer the possibility to open the model file directly in NETWORK. Three sets of functionality are available in separate tabs: Model, Chart & Scale, and Visualization. On the left-hand side, a number of collapsible drawers are used in each tab for setting specific options. The Model tab displays the content and settings of the network model contained in the .INP file opened. It offers a network summary; a choice of base map layers, such as Google or OpenStreetMaps; simulation time parameterization; easy inspection of element properties and simulation settings; and export to .INP, Excel, XML/KML formats. The Chart & Scale tab is where the scales used in displaying pipe and junction data and results in the Visualization tab are selected. Additionally, it uses a (transposed) cumulative distribution chart that is very
Overview NETWORK makes available a network simulation engine that is a full Java re-write and implementation of the Epanet standard. It integrates the Epanet MSX advanced water quality simulation library, and offers the full network modeling functionality, performing static or extended-period simulation on .INP standard model files. The simulators implementation is particularly strong in network visualization, with the capability to seamlessly overlay on a range of publicly available maps (such as Google, Bing or OpenStreetMaps) or on the users own maps. It takes advantage of powerful charting tools that allow for full manipulation of the networks values (parameters or simulation results), and it uses the Baseform Cores NETWORK 2D and 3D network displays to full effect. Details Water distribution simulation modeling details can be found in the extensive
useful in learning about the population of values present for the particular parameter or analysis result. The latter are simulationtime sensitive, and therefore a timeline slider is made available. The Visualization tab is where 2D/3D display of the network, its parameters and modeling or analysis results takes place. 2D is implemented in a familiar Epanet-like format; 3D is offered both in a fully embedded Google Earth visualization, taking advantage of that platforms wealth of maps and 3D features (such as buildings), and in Baseforms own high-performance WebGL 3D visualizer. This tab has a full screen mode for better spatial display capabilities. The Model tab The Model tab displays the content and settings of the network model contained in the .INP file opened. The Summary gives a first digest of the models main figures, and includes a button for opening the file in the DATA manager (this is a recurring feature in any application tool). The Layers section allows for selection of which network features to display, and what background layer to use for display - sources available include several Google and Bing layers, as well as OpenStreetMaps. In case one of these is selected, the EPSG projection code(5) for the area concerned must be specified in order to adjust for the source file projection on the map. The Simulation section allows for the time-related settings of the simulation to be adjusted, and the simulation to be launched. Element Properties gives access to the properties specified for any network component. Likewise, the Settings section displays the general simulation settings. Though the current version does not allow for editing of these properties, the feature is expected to be included in forthcoming versions. However, the units system and the flow units can be specified and changed on the fly, for any network model. This useful feature does not compromise the integrity
of the .INP model file, as all necessary changes are taken care of internally by the implementation: the model file does not need to be modified for the model to work in the new choice of units. Finally, the Export section allows for the export of model files to INP, Excel and XML formats. There is also an export to Excel of the full simulation results, as well as of the visualization data to Google Earth / KML. The Excel option is particularly useful as a further editing facility and model section workflow manipulation. The Chart & Scale tab The Chart & Scale tab is where the pipe and junction data to be displayed in the visualizer are selected, and the respective scales are adjusted. This includes network features and simulation model results, as well as results from any of the network-level tools present in the AWARE-P portfolio, such as CIMP or PX. A (transposed) cumulative distribution chart is used for displaying the population of values present for the particular parameter or (simulation time-sensitive) modeling result. Two preset scale modes are available, by dividing the population into 25% quartiles in either the X or Y axes. Alternatively, the scale markers on the chart can be displaced individually by the user for fine adjustments. When adjusting the display scales for time-sensitive results (any network simulation results in an extended-period simulation), care should be taken in selecting the appropriate time frame. For example, if investigating low velocities, it will be a good idea to select a time step when demand is low, such as during nighttime. The Visualization tab This is where full 2D/3D visualization of the network, its parameters and modeling or analysis results takes place. The Visualization tab has the capability to display network features and simulation model results, as well as results from any of the network-level analysis tools present in the AWARE-P portfolio, such as CIMP
or PX. The pipe- or node-related feature to display is selected in the Chart & Scale tab. A full screen mode is accessible from this tab. A time-slider controls any time-sensitive result display, in a standard way as usually found in simulators. There is the option to play the simulation at a video-like experience, in single, double or maximum-available speed. The parameters or results shown are those selected in The Chart & Scale tab, with the corresponding selected scale. Selecting 2D displays the network in an Epanet-like map. The pipes and junctions are color-coded to reflect the scale chosen. If displaying time-sensitive values, such as model results in an extended-period simulation, the time slider should be adjusted to the desired time-step. 3D WebGL displays the network and the selected parameters in a very fast native 3D viewer implemented using WebGL browserside technology. A browser that enables WebGL must be used(6) in order for this option to be available. In this viewer, it is possible to use the customary pan and zoom commands, as well as snap onto predefined perspective views that include isometric and North, West, South and East. 3D Google Earth displays the network and the selected parameters over Google Earth visualization. Usage is intuitive and will be very familiar to users of Googles viewer. It is possible to toggle on/off the representation of model junctions as well as place & road names, 3D buildings and the zoom & scale controls. Turning on 3D buildings provides the most complete viewing experience, in locations where building shapes are available in the Google Earth database. Note that building shapes may need a few more seconds to load than the underlying terrain view, depending on internet connection speed, but are usually worth the wait in terms of the richness of presentation of analysis results. This viewing option requires the Google Earth plug-in to be installed in the browser.(7)
Further reading EPA (2008). EPANET-MSX (Multi-Species eXtension). http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/ wswrd/dw/epanet.html#extension (accessed 2012/01/12) Rossman, L. (2000). Epanet 2.0 Users Manual. Water Supply and Water Resources Division, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. See also
Baseform CORE PX Performance Indices CIMP Component Importance UNMET Expected Unmet Demand
4. This model for pressurized networks is the first in a series that will in the future hopefully include GIS network file compatibility and models for wastewater/ stormwater networks. 5. see www.epsg.org and www.epsg-registry.org 6. At the date of publication, browsers offering that feature include Firefox, Chrome, Opera and Safari. 7. Go to http://www.google.com/earth/ explore/products/plugin.html
PI Performance Indicators
Purpose PI allows for the quantitative assessment of the efficiency or effectiveness of a system through the calculation of performance indicators based on state-of-the-art, standardized PI libraries as well as user-developed or customized sets.
a shopping list mechanism intuitive search allows the user to filter out a given subset of available pre-defined PIs e.g., drinking water or wastewater, IWA/CARE/ ERSAR libraries, a specific assessment criterion, a given keyword. Once a given PI is pre-selected, the user is shown its full definition (code, name, units, concept, processing rule, comments and input variables needed) and is given the option of including it in the shopping list. When this process is complete, a table is produced with all the variables needed, ready for data input referred to one or several userdefined periods of time. The indicators are automatically calculated. Details Performance assessment refers to the evaluation of the efficiency or the effectiveness of a process or activity through the production of performance measures. Performance measures are the specific parameters that are used to inform the assessment (Matos et al., 2003, Alegre et al. 2006, Cabrera & Pardo, 2008, ISO 24510, ISO 24511, ISO 24512). Performance indicators are quantitative efficiency or effectiveness measures for the activity of a utility. A performance indicator consists of a value (resulting from the evaluation of a given processing rule) expressed in specific units, and a confidence grade which indicates the quality of the data represented by the indicator. Performance Indicators are typically expressed as ratios between variables; these may be commensurate (e.g. %) or non-commensurate (e.g. $/m3). In the latter case, the denominator should represent one dimension of the system (e.g. number of service connections; total mains length; annual costs), to allow for comparisons.(8) The components of PI systems should comply with some key requirements (ISO 24500 standards). Performance indicators are computed from variables, and interpreted taking into account explanatory factors. An explanatory factor is any element of the
Overview Underpinning the AWARE-P methodology and embedding the principles of the ISO standards 24510/24511/24512, the PI tool makes available a performance indicators framework for rigorous assessment of urban water system efficiency and effectiveness. The tool allows the users to select PIs from a rather comprehensive list organized by objectives and assessment criteria. The main leading-edge reference libraries of performance indicators relevant for infrastructure asset management of urban water services are incorporated, including the International Water Association (IWA PI systems) libraries, the CARE-W and CARE-S libraries and the Portuguese Water Services Regulator (ERSAR) libraries. Other indicators developed within the AWARE-P project are also included. The user is free to further edit the database (fully MS Excel compliant) and customize the list of objectives, criteria and performance indicators offered. The user creates a set of PIs, through
system of performance indicators that can be used to explain PI values, at the analysis stage. This includes PI, variables, context information and other data elements not playing an active role before the analysis stage. AWARE-Ps PI tool is based on the concept of PI libraries, coherent sets of PI developed for a specific purpose, from regulation, international statistics, global management of the utility or for a given decision support system. The PI tool includes libraries from some the worlds most relevant PI systems in the field of urban water supply and wastewater/ stormwater services, such as those developed by the International Water Association (IWA PI systems), by the CARE-W and CARE-S projects and by the Portuguese Water Services Regulator (ERSAR), one of the most advanced regulatory systems internationally. Besides those sets of highly validated, professionally developed PI, the PI tool allows the user to modify, customize or define own PI or libraries, and easily share or interchange them in the shape of Excel files. Usage The PI tool is started from the main menu. The first step when creating a new PI analysis file is to select a PI library (e.g. IWA, AWARE-P), which contains a set of performance indicators. The PI tool main window presents all available PIs in the selected PI library, organized by the objectives and criteria proposed in the AWARE-P methodology (see page 10). By selecting the chosen PIs, in accordance with the objectives and assessment criteria, a list of the variables needed for their calculation is automatically generated. The following step is the definition of the timesteps, i.e. the instants in time, in which the PIs are calculated. The value of each input variable involved in the calculation of the PIs is introduced by the user, for each timestep. By pressing the Save button, the software will calculate the values of the PIs in each timestep.
The PI libraries available in the software are to be taken as a reference, but the user may decide to incorporate new objectives, assessment criteria or even performance indicators that may be deemed better suited to a particular need. To do so, it is possible to export (download) a predefined PI library from the Data Manager into a .xlsx file. This file is easily edited in Excel, enabling the user to modify existing PIs, variables or criteria, and create new ones the user must only make sure the tables format is preserved so that it can be imported (uploaded) again. The following points are important:
Each row of the Excel table represents either a PI (pi_type as PI), an input variable (pi_type as UI), or a criterion (pi_type as OBJ). PI rows must present: PI as pi_type; a unique pi_code; and a pi_rule that uses only existing input variables (UI). The input variables must present: UI as pi_ type; and a unique pi_code. The criteria must present: OBJ as pi_type; a unique pi_code; a pi_description that indicates the set of associated PIs, identified by their pi_code; and a pi_group specifying the associated objective.
The modified xlsx file can then be imported (uploaded) into a new Performance Indicator library, which can be created using the function Add table in the Data manager. It will be automatically saved in the users profile. Further reading Alegre, H. (2008). Infrastructure asset management of drinking water and wastewater systems (in Portuguese), TPI 52, LNEC, Lisbon, ISBN 9789724921341 (385 p.). Alegre, H., Baptista, J.M., Cabrera Jr., E., Cubillo, F., Duarte, P., Hirner, W., Merkel, W., Parena, R. (2006). Performance indicators for water supply services, 2nd edition, Manual of Best Practice Series, IWA Publishing, London, ISBN: 1843390515 (305 p.). Alegre, H.; Cabrera, E.; Merkel, W. (2008). Current challenges in performance
assessment of water services. Water Utility Management International, Vol. 3, N. 3, IWA Publishing (p. 6-7). Alegre, H., Cabrera, E., Merkel, W. (2009). Performance assessment of urban utilities: the case of water supply, wastewater and solid waste. Journal of Water Supply: Research and TechnologyAQUA (JWSRTAQUA-D08-00041R1) n. 58.5/2009 (305-315 p.). Cabrera, E., Pardo, M.A. (eds.) (2008). Performance Assessment of Urban Infrastructure Services: drinking water, wastewater and solid waste, IWA Publishing, ISBN: 9781843391913, IWA Publishing. ISO 24510:2007 Activities relating to drinking water and wastewater services Guidelines for the assessment and for the improvement of the service to users ISO 24511:2007 Activities relating to drinking water and wastewater services - Guidelines for the management of wastewater utilities and for the assessment of wastewater services Guide ISO 24512:2007 Activities relating to drinking water and wastewater services - Guidelines for the management of drinking water utilities and for the assessment of drinking water services. Matos, R., Cardoso, M.A., Ashley, R, Duarte, P., Schulz A (2003). Performance indicators for wastewater services, Manual of Best Practice Series, IWA Publishing, ISBN: 9781900222907 (192 p.). See also
PLAN AWARE-P Planning PI Performance Indicators PX Performance Indices
same proportion. The information provided by a performance indicator is the result of a comparison (with a target value, previous values of the same indicator, or values of the same indicator from other undertakings) (Alegre et al. 2006; ISO 24500).
8. The use as denominators of variables that may vary substantially from one year to another, particularly if not under the control of the undertaking, should be avoided (e.g. annual consumption, that may be affected by weather or other external reasons), unless the numerator varies in the
PX Performance Indices
Purpose The PX model produces technical performance metrics based on the values of certain features or state variables of water supply and waste/stormwater networks. The indices measure performance concepts related to level-of-service, network effectiveness and efficiency, in areas such as hydraulic capacity, water quality, redundancy or energy behavior.
The results are produced both at pipe/node level, and at the aggregated network level. Details Performance assessment in urban water systems may complement performance indicators (see PI in p.16) with performance indices and levels (Alegre & Cabrera, 2011). Performance indices are measures resulting from the combination of disaggregated performance measures (e.g. weighted average of performance indicators) or from analysis tools (e.g. simulation models, statistical tools, cost efficiency methods). In general, they aim at aggregating several perspectives into in a single measure. Compared to performance indicators, their main advantages are that they can be more aggregated measures and can be used to assess future scenarios (e.g. using simulation results or statistical analyses). Performance levels are measures of a qualitative nature, expressed in discrete categories (e.g. excellent, good, fair, poor). In general they are adopted when the use of quantitative measures is not appropriate (e.g. evaluation of customer satisfaction by means of surveys) or when synthesizing and standardizing a range of different metrics, e.g. as the basis for a decisionmaking process (such as can be found in PLAN). The model used to calculate performance indices is a relatively straightforward process that applies a performance curve to the values of a given network model result, e.g., flow velocity (Coelho, 1997, Cardoso et al., 2004; Cardoso et al., 2005). The value thus obtained contains a performance judgment, expressed on a standardized 0-3 scale that implies good (2-3), adequate (1-2) and inadequate (0-1) ranges. The performance curve is the fundamental evaluation mechanism and is usually designed by a knowledgeable analyst. It should reflect the users sensitivity, and is often parameterized to that effect. Each performance index is associated with one or several ways to calculate a network-wide
and a given tolerance above it.
Overview The PX tool produces performance indices and levels by evaluating the numerical results of network simulation models. It uses a network model file representing the appropriate set of conditions for the analysis of the desired network. The PX are evaluated at the component level and then generalized to a network-wide value. The PX are selected from the AWARE-P extensive library of water supply and waste/ stormwater performance indices, which is continually updated with the latest R&D advances in the field, and may be edited, modified and added to by the informed user. Examples of PX are:
compliance with a minimum required service pressure at network nodes, by comparing with a user-defined reference and a zeroconsumption threshold; compliance with a maximum required travel time at network nodes, by comparing with a user-defined maximum reference travel time
value from the component values. This is termed a generalizing function, and may take up the form of a weighted average or a given percentile (including extremes) of the component values. Usage PX opens to display a list of the performance index tables available in the selected folder. Creating a new table requires selecting an uploaded Epanet model, where the performance index will be evaluated. A performance index must be selected from the available indices of the selected PX library and the name of the new performance index table must be filled out. Pressing Create takes the user to the main PX window. A brief explanation of the selected performance index is given at the top of the main PX window. In order to calculate the index of each pipe, the input boxes of the reference values must be filled out. Pressing Calculate will calculate the performance index for each pipe/node, using the reference values, and presented in the 2-D network model. The PX results can be visualized in a 3-D network model, using the NETWORK tool. New PXs can be introduced by modifying the PX libraries. In the Data manager it is possible to download a Performance Index library into a xlsx file. Opening this file will allow the user to modify existing PXs and creating new ones. The modified xlsx file, with new PXs, can then be uploaded into a Performance Index library. As in PI, the user must make sure that the tables format is preserved so that it can be imported (uploaded) again. A new Performance Index library can be created using the function Add table of the Data manager. Further reading Alegre, H., Cabrera, E. (2011). Performance Indicators. In WaterWiki, updated 2011/08/05 (http://iwawaterwiki. org/xwiki/bin/view/Articles/
PerformanceIndicators), IWA. Cardoso, M. A., Coelho, S. T., Matos, R., Alegre, H. (2004). Performance assessment of water supply and wastewater systems. Urban Water Journal 1 (1), pp. 55-67. Cardoso, M. A., Coelho, S. T., Praa. P., Brito, R. S., Matos, J. (2005). Technical performance assessment of urban sewer systems. J. Performance of Constructed Facilities 19 (4), ASCE, pp. 339-346. Coelho, S.T. (1997). Performance in water distribution: a systems approach, Research Studies Press -John Wiley & Sons, New York, E.U.A. (225 p.). Coelho, S.T., Jowitt, P.J. (1997). Performance analysis in water distribution, Computing and Control for the Water Industry, Research Studies Press - John Wiley & Sons, New York, E.U.A. (pp.3-20). See also
PLAN AWARE-P Planning PI - Performance Indicators NETWORK-EPANET
FAIL Failure Analysis

Purpose The aim of the FAIL model is to predict future pipe or sewer failures for a given network, e.g. in the context of estimating risk or cost metrics. It requires an organized failure history to be supplied, in the form of work orders and pipe data records, in order to predict future behavior.
described by length, installation year, material and diameter. The maintenance records table gathers all failure records of the water network. Each record must be associated with a pipe IPID code and contain failure date. These two tables are associated in order to build the failure history of each pipe. The analysis is applied to a network that must be specified in the form of a network model file (.INP format). A summary of network information is displayed, along with a network map. The NETWORK tool and its visualization capabilities may be invoked from this tool, namely as a swift shortcut to visualize the results on 2D or 3D maps results become available for display in that tool as soon as they are produced. Details The Poisson process A Poisson process is a counting process in which the events occur independently at a constant rate and where the number of events follows a Poisson distribution. It is assumed that the rate of the counting process is proportional to the length of each pipe. The failure rate is estimated by the maximum likelihood method. If the failure rate were estimated using the entire data set, then it would be the same for all pipes, no matter their properties. In this implementation, the data set is divided based on the pipe material, thus creating various pipe material categories. Once the pipe data set is categorized, the failure rate is estimated for each category using the maximum likelihood method. The predicted number of failures in each pipe is obtained using the expected value of the Poisson distribution, whereas the failure probabilities are obtained using the Poisson probability function. The Linear Extended Yule Process (LEYP) The Linear Extended Yule Process (LEYP) implemented in this project is a counting process where the intensity function
Overview Two alternative stochastic processes are offered for calculating failure predictions: the Poisson process and the Linear Extended Yule Process (LEYP). The probability distribution of the number of failures is estimated using the maximum likelihood method. The probability of failure and the number of future failures is predicted for each pipe, using the probability function and the expected value of the stochastic process selected. The failure data must be provided in two data tables: (i) a work orders (maintenance records) table; and (ii) a pipe inventory table, containing the universe of pipes that the work orders table refers to. This is not necessarily the same universe of pipes i.e., network or sector that the results of the analysis will be applied to: often the latter is a subset of the former; it may be a distinct set altogether, e.g., if the results from one system are applied to another where data is not available. In the pipe inventory table, each pipe is identified by a unique IPID code and
depends on the age of the pipe, the number of past events and a vector of covariates (potentially predictive variables, such as pipe diameter), (Le Gat, 2009; Martins, 2011). The covariates taken into account in this implementation are the pipe diameter and the logarithm of pipe length. Furthermore, the data set is divided according to the material of each pipe. For each pipe material category, there will be a different set of estimated parameters. All parameters are estimated through the numeric maximization of the log-likelihood function, derived by Le Gat (2009), using the Nelder-Mead nonlinear optimization method. A significance test is carried out for each estimated parameter, resorting to the likelihood ratio test, using the Chi-square distribution, given by the Wilks theorem approximation. Once the LEYP parameters have been estimated, the failure probabilities of each pipe are obtained using the Negative Binomial probability function, presented in Le Gat (2009) and Martins (2011). The predicted number of failures is obtained as the expected value of the same Negative Binomial distribution. For further details about the theoretical models behind both processes, and their implementation in the software, please refer to Appendix A. Usage FAIL is launched from the Failure Analysis option on the AWARE-P main menu. The initial screen displays any existing failure analysis tables, and gives the option to create a new table. Creating a new failure analysis table entails selecting an existing work order pipes table and an existing work order failures table, which can be uploaded in the DATA tool. Furthermore an Epanet model can be selected in order to visualize the estimated failure probabilities. The main FAIL window presents a pipe inventory description; failure estimates for
each pipe material; failure estimates for each pipe; and a visualization of the failure probabilities in the uploaded Epanet model network. In the middle of the FAIL window an option button allows to switch between two stochastic models to estimate the failure probabilities: Poisson or LEYP. When the LEYP option is selected, under each estimated parameter, the associated p-value is presented. If the p-value is close to zero, the associated parameter is more significant. Selecting a network model on the left-hand side menu (or if a model was previously selected) will allow to visualize the failure estimates on a 2-D map. Importing failure data The failure analysis tool requires a work order pipes table and a work order failures table. Both tables can be created in the Data manager tool, selecting the Add table option. In the Add table window the name of the table must be filled out and a table type must be selected (work order pipes or work order failures). Pressing the button Create will add a new empty table, with 0 rows, to the specified folder. In order to import the required failure data, both empty tables can be downloaded as xlsx files, filled out with the necessary information and uploaded next. The six pipe attributes to be filled out in the work order pipes table are:
pipe_id: an alphanumeric code that identifies uniquely each pipe of the water network. Does not accept empty values; material: a text value representing the pipe material; diameter: a numeric value representing the pipe diameter. Does not accept empty values; length: a numeric value representing the pipe length in meters. Does not accept empty values; installation_date: a date value representing the installation date of each pipe, in the form day-month-year (e.g. 27-03-1994). Does not accept empty values;
The four failure attributes to be filled out in the work order failures table are:
failure_date: a date value representing the date of occurrence of each failure, in the form day-month-year (e.g. 27-03-1994). Does not accept empty values; failure_type: a text value representing the type of failure (e.g. break or leakage); failure_duration: a numeric value representing the downtime caused by each failure; pipe_id: an alphanumeric code that identifies the pipe where each failure occurred; does not accept empty values.
decommissioning_date: a date value representing the decommissioning date of each pipe, in the form day-month-year (e.g. 27-03-1994).
CIMP Component importance

Purpose The CIMP model calculates a component importance metric for each individual pipe in a network, based on the impact of its failure on nodal consumption. The measure is computed based on the networks hydraulic model, using full simulation capabilities. Component importance (also termed hydraulic criticality) is a crucial measure of a pipes consequence in the network, used for example in the assessment of risk associated with pipe failure.
Further reading Le Gat, Y. (2009). Une extension du processus de Yule pour la modlization stochastique des vnements rcurrents. Application aux dfaillances de canalizations deau sous pression. Ph.D. thesis, Cemagref Bordeaux, Paristech. Martins, A. (2011). Stochastic models for prediction of pipe failures in water supply systems. MSc thesis, Instituto Superior Tcnico, Technical Univ. Lisbon, Portugal Martins, A., Amado, C., Leito, J.P. (2011). Stochastic models for prediction of pipe failures in water supply systems. (undergoing submission) See also
NETWORK-EPANET PLAN AWARE-P Planning CIMP Component Importance UNMET Expected Unmet Demand
Overview The component importance of each individual pipe is calculated by comparing the total demand that the network is hydraulically able to satisfy when that pipe is out of service, with the total demand that the original network is able to supply. The calculation is computed over the entire simulation duration specified in the network model used i.e., the unmet demand caused by each individual pipe failure is added for all time steps and compared with the total supplied by the original network over the entire simulation duration. Component importance values are given, for each pipe, between the values of zero (i.e., if the pipe fails, all network demand is still satisfied, over the simulation duration) and 1 (i.e., when the pipe fails, no demand is satisfied across the entire network, over the simulation duration).
For example: if a given pipe has a component importance of 0.81, it means that, when the pipe fails, the network will not be able to supply 81% of the total demand (i.e., only 19% will be supplied). In addition, the actual value of the unmet demand over the simulation period is shown for each pipe. The NETWORK tool and its visualization capabilities may be invoked from this tool, namely as a swift shortcut to visualize the results on 2D or 3D maps results become available for display in that tool as soon as they are produced. Details The calculation of satisfied demand (actual consumption) is based on a simple relationship between available pressure and effective consumption for the particular simulation time step at each node. This relationship is built on two user-specified reference pressure values:
the Zero-Consumption Pressure is the value below which there is no physical consumption at the node (e.g., 8 m / 24 ft); and the Required Minimum Pressure is the nodal pressure value above which the nodal demand is considered to be fully satisfied (e.g., 25 m / 75 ft).
sion uses Epanets standard demand-driven hydraulic model. Usage CIMP is launched from the AWARE-P main menu. The initial screen displays any existing component importance tables, and gives the option to create a new table. Creating a new component importance table requires an uploaded Epanet model. A brief explanation of the tool is given at the top of the main CIMP window. In order to calculate the component importance of each pipe, the two input boxes Zero-Consumption Pressure and Required Minimum Pressure must be filled out (default values are 15.0 m and 35.0 m, respectively). Pressing Calculate will compute the percentage of unmet demand caused by the closing of each pipe of the network. Further reading Andrianov, A. (2010). MIKE NET and RELNet: which approach to reliability analysis is better? Available at: http:// www.vateknik.lth.se/exjobb/E315.pdf [accessed: 19 July 2010] CARE-W., 2003. Tests and validation of Technical Tools. Cemagref, INSA Lyon, NTNU, Brno University. Report. CARE-W., 2004. Guidelines for the use of Technical Tools. Cemagref, SINTEF, INSA Lyon. Report. Wagner, J. M., Shamir, U., Marks, D. H. (1998). Water Distribution Reliability: Simulation Methods. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 114(3), pp. 276-294. See also
NETWORK-EPANET PLAN AWARE-P Planning FAIL Failure Analysis UNMET Expected Unmet Demand
A linear interpolation is used for pressure values in between the two limits. Nodal demand is understood as the specified basedemand multiplied by the demand patterns factor and by any applicable demand multiplier. The computation is based on full hydraulic response simulation as provided by the network model, where the nodal pressure values for each time step are computed for the reduced network (i.e., with the target pipe missing), and the expected satisfied demand at each node is calculated by applying the above relationship. The total demand for the network, which is used as the basis for the ratio, is computed in the same way but with the original network. The current ver-
UNMET Expected Unmet Demand

Purpose The UNMET model calculates a service interruption risk metric expressed as the expected volume of unmet demand in a system over one year, given the expected number of outages for each pipe, the average downtime per pipe outage, and the component importance of each pipe, expressed in terms of unmet demand.
expected loss of service or loss of revenue (if multiplied by the unit revenue). Usage See also
NETWORK-EPANET PLAN AWARE-P Planning FAIL Failure Analysis CIMP Component Importance
Overview The tool combines the results of the Failure Analysis and the Component Importance tools (although it can use failure rate and component importance tables manually produced in the same format). The NETWORK tool and its visualization capabilities may be invoked from this tool, namely as a swift shortcut to visualize the results on 2D or 3D maps results become available for display in that tool as soon as they are produced. Details For each pipe, the value of expected unmet demand in case of outage is multiplied by the pipes expected number of failures in 1 year, and by the average outage time (user input). The result is the expected value of the total volume of unmet demand in the network caused by the individual outage of each pipe. This provides a direct measure of
IVI Value Index

Purpose The Infrastructure Value Index represents the ageing degree of an infrastructure, and is calculated through the ratio between the current value and the replacement value of the infrastructure.
results on 2D or 3D maps results become available for display in that tool as soon as they are produced. Details The IVI at a given time t (IVIt) is a performance-cost measure that reflects the age of an infrastructure. It is given by the ratio between the present value and the respective replacement value (Alegre & Covas, 2010) of the infrastructure. This index is particularly adequate for establishing goals associated to infrastructural sustainability criteria. The calculation of the IVI starts with the calculation of the residual life for all pipes and associated present value, individually. Subsequently, the global infrastructure IVI is calculated (Equation 8). The IVI of a pipe corresponds to the percentage of its remaining life.
(8)
Overview This tool calculates the Infrastructure Value Index. The process of calculation of IVI is based on individual pipe characteristics, but the IVI is presented to the infrastructure as a whole. The cost data used to calculate the IVI must be provided in one data table: a cost table. The cost table contains the characteristics of the infrastructure pipes that are used to calculate the global infrastructure IVI. In the cost table, each pipe is identified by a unique IPID code and described by length, installation year, material, diameter, useful life time and construction and replacement cost. For the specific case of a water supply system infrastructure, the analysis can also be applied to a network that must be specified in the form of a network model file (.INP format). A summary of network information is displayed, along with a network map. The NETWORK tool and its visualization capabilities may be invoked from this tool, namely as a swift shortcut to visualize the
Where:
IVI(t) is the dimensionless infrastructure value index at year t (-); t is the evaluation year (year); N is the number of infrastructure components (-); csi,t is the replacement cost of the infrastructure component i in year t (currency units); vri,t is the residual lifetime of infrastructure component i in year t (year); and vui is the total technical lifetime of infrastructure component i (year).
Infrastructure value index values for stabilized infrastructures should be around 0.5 (e.g. 0.4-0.6), i.e. the investment during a specific time period is equivalent, in average, to the depreciation of the infrastructure during the same time period. IVI values above 0.6 can mean one of the following:
recent infrastructures not yet stabilized; new developments in old infrastructures; or infrastructures where there has been a rehabilitation over-investment.
Low IVI values (e.g. <0.4) can mean a deteriorated infrastructure, requiring significant rehabilitation investment. Usage IVI is launched from the AWARE-P main menu. The initial screen displays any existing cost tables. New cost tables are created in the DATA tool, in which pipe cost data can be uploaded. The main IVI window presents a summary of the cost table and information about the Epanet network model that can be associated to the cost table on the lefthand side menu, and a summary of the pipe inventory per pipe material: number of pipes, total length, total construction cost, total replacement value, the ratio between the residual life and useful life, present value and IVI; IVI for each pipe; and a visualization of the IVI in the associated Epanet network model. Selecting a network model in the left-hand side menu (or if a model was previously selected) allows visualising the IVI on a 2-D map. Importing cost data The IVI tool requires a cost table; this table is created in the DATA manager tool, selecting the Add table option. In the Add table window the name of the table must be filled out and the cost table type must be selected. Pressing the button Create will add a new empty table, with no rows, to the specified folder. In order to import the required cost data, the empty cost table can be downloaded as xlsx file, filled out with the necessary information and then uploaded (if a filled in cost table is already available, it can be directly uploaded without downloading the empty cost table). The eight pipe attributes required for the cost table are:
pipe_id: an alphanumeric code that identifies uniquely each pipe. Does not accept empty values;
pipe_material: a text value representing the pipe material; pipe_diameter: a numeric value representing pipe diameter. Does not accept empty values; pipe_length: a numeric value representing the pipe length in meters. Does not accept empty values; installation_date: a date value representing the installation date of each pipe, in the form day-month-year (e.g. 27-03-1994). Does not accept empty values; pipe_usefullife: an expected (design) lifetime of each pipe. Does not accept empty values; construction cost: per unit length of pipe. Does not accept empty values; replacement cost: per unit length of pipe. Does not accept empty values.
Further reading Alegre, H., Covas, D. (2010). Infrastructure Asset Management of Water Services. An aproach based on rehabilitation (in Portuguese). Technical Guide 16. ERSAR, LNEC, IST, Lisboa, 472 pp. (ISBN: 978989-8360-04-5 See also
PLAN AWARE-P Planning PI - Performance Indicators
CORE
Purpose The nuclear functionality of a platform that has been built from scratch with pluggability and extensibility in mind, Core is the conceptual and technical conductor of every app and tool in the baseform portfolio.
Overview Core is a common set of functionality and services used by baseform tools, including data manager, data type manager, webenabled user interface, user manager and network/data visualization environment. Every baseform tool exists on top of baseform core, using these features and working within defined boundaries. Core is the reason why going from one tool to the next is a seamless experience, all inside the same platform, always knowing where things are and how they behave.
Details Tools & apps Baseform is a host of different functionality meant to work together. Baseform tools are plugins to the core platform. Baseform applications (apps) are suites of tools working together to provide added functionality. Using an example from a well-known application family: Microsoft Word includes a charting tool which is also present on Microsoft Excel; this tool makes sense on both applications, as it provides a clear function and works in a common way on both. Data manager Data manager works like Windows Explorer (or the Finder if you prefer the Mac): you have files and folders there, you can organize, sort, rename, copy, move, etc.; all in a familiar way. Data manager is actually smarter than a regular file manager. Data is defined as having two possible forms: data files and data tables. Data files are what you would expect: images, pdfs, binary outputs, etc.. Data tables are seen as special data that is organized in rows and columns as any spreadsheet; in fact, baseform core recognizes spreadsheets as particularly important tools, and allows for the import and export of any data table to and from native MS Excel files. It is smarter because it knows specific data types, and acts on them in specific ways. For example, it knows a data table of the failure analysis type (containing the probability of failure of each pipe of a system); it lets you look at the data in a tabular way, but it also invokes the network visualizer to show an image of the network with the data. Each data type can have a specific manager allowing you to see, create and interact with data in a special, direct and meaningful way. You can even use our data type manager to extend current data types to your specific needs, or to create new data types altogether.
Finally, data manager recognizes that data is interdependent. It registers that a certain file was used to create another; it shows you that and lets you navigate through interdependent files and tables. One way this makes a lot of sense is that you can backup one data file, including its all dependent data, analysis and tables from one instance to another just by clicking one button, preserving all the dependencies. Users: accountability, security and permissions The baseform platform is designed to be just as good for one user as for multiple users, and to gather as many users from any organization or project as possible inside every application. Thus, it is natural to provide user, security and permissions management. Baseform core has built-in user management that is both simple and powerful. The data manager allows users to manage their files and share permissions, and every tool has access to this security framework. Security also means accountability: by default every action is duly logged; access and searching in these logs is given inside the applications to super/admin users. As many other aspects of baseform core, user management is there but you use it only if you need it. If all you need is just to download an app to run on your computer, you will not be bothered by it. Networks: infrastructures, systems and data from a new angle Baseform is a platform designed for hosting a growing family of tools and applications for networked urban infrastructures. This system approach means that accessing and relating to network files is central for every tool. Cutting-edge research and development is applied to interacting with data and especially with network data. You can chart any parameter, variable or assessment; you can see your networks over any maps, or on top of interactive Google Earth, and click on any element; you can explore our unique 3D viewing and you can even play back and
forth with time to visualize network behavior. Whenever a new tool is developed, making available new assessments for your system, it will directly benefit from baseforms core interactive network visualization. One way the baseform platform is moving forward is by expanding the possible definitions of network: currently, it has world-class support for hydraulic models using Epanet, but incorporation of GIS and other network models is on its way.. Inclusive technology: running in the present and in the future Core defines a new technology environment designed for running everywhere. Baseform apps run on (just a few examples):
MacBook Air Any Windows PC, including netbooks such as the Eee line Any virtual machine, Blade or Unix server environment Regular or private cloud servers, such as the Amazon EC2 platform.
Those were examples of configurations able to run baseformed apps. In order to use them, all you need is a modern web browser:
Full functionality, including 3D WebGL, is available on Chrome, Firefox or Safari, on Windows, Linux or Mac OS. Main functionality also works fine in Android smartphones and tablets, and on iPhones and iPads.
Appendix A
Notes on the theoretical models used in FAIL

The following notes provide a brief introduction to the theoretical models behind the techniques used in the FAIL tool
Notation
! (!) is the number of failures in the time interval [0, !]; ! ! ! ! is the number of failures during [!, ! ]; ! ! . is the likelihood function of the process. The number of failures through a time period t constitutes a counting process {! ! , ! ! }. ! [! (!) ! (!)] is the expected number of failures during [!, ! ];
! {! (! ) ! (!) = !} is the probability to fail times during [!, ! ];
The Poisson process

A Poisson process is a counting process in which the events occur independently with a constant rate ! and follows the counting process. where the number of events follows a Poisson distribution, i.e. ! ! ~!"#$$"%(!" ). It is assumed here that the rate of the counting process is proportional to the length of each pipe. The number of failures in pipe ! {!! ! , ! ! }, with rate !! = !! , where !! represents the length of the pipe and ! represents the failure
! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !
! is estimated by the maximum likelihood method and presented in Equation (1). = argmax!! L n, t, l = where: ,
rate per km (!"#$%& !" !"#$%&'(/ !"#$/ !") (Martins et al., 2011).
(1)
! = [!! !! ] and !! is the length of pipe ! ;
! is the number of pipes;
! = [!! !! ] and !! is the number of recorded failures of pipe ! ; ! = [!! ! ] and !! is the observation period of pipe ! .
If ! is estimated using the entire data set, then the estimated failure rate will be the same for all pipes, no matter their properties. Nevertheless, the data set can be divided based on the pipe characteristics, such as can be estimated for each category !! using Equation (1), restricted to the pipes in !! . Equation (2).
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!
!
material and diameter, creating different categories. Once the pipe data set is categorized, the failure rate !! The probability of a pipe ! in category !! to fail ! times during the time interval [!, ! + !] is given by P N t+s N t =n = (2) (3)
The predicted number of failures in pipe ! is based on the expected value of the Poisson, Equation (3). E N t + s N(t) = ! l! s
The Linear Extended Yule Process (LEYP)

The Linear Extended Yule Process (LEYP) implemented in this project is a counting process where the intensity function ! (! , !, !) depends on the age of the process, the number of past events and a vector of Martins, 2011). t, j, x = 1 + j t !!! e! ! ! = 1 !! !! represents the vector of ! covariates; ! is the number of previous failures;
covariates (potentially predictive variables, such as pipe diameter), as in Equation (4) (Le Gat, 2009; (4)
where:
! is the parameter associated with the number of previous failures (when ! = 0 the rate is age of the pipe). independent of the number of previous failures);
! = !! !! !! is the vector of parameters associated with the covariates;
! is the parameter associated with the age of the process (when ! = 1 the rate is independent of the
The covariates taken into account in this implementation are the pipe diameter and the logarithm of pipe length. Therefore, ! = 1 !!"#$ !!" !"#$%! and ! = !! !!"#$ !!" !"#$%! . there will be a different set of estimated parameters ! , ! and !. All parameters are estimated through the
! !! !!
numeric maximization of the log-likelihood function (Equation 5) derived in Le Gat (2009), using the Nelder-Mead nonlinear optimization method. ln ! ! , ! , ! !, !, !, !, ! = =
! !!! !
Furthermore, the data set is divided according to the material of each pipe. For each pipe material category
+ !! ln! + !! !! ! + ! 1
+ !!
!! ln ! +
!! ! , !! ,! !
ln ! !! + ! !!! ! , !! , !
! !!
ln !!" +
!! ! !!
!!" ! ! !! !
where:
(5)
! = [!! !! ] with !! being the age of pipe ! at the beginning of observations; ! = [!! !! ] with !! being the age of pipe ! at the end of observations;

! = [!! !! ] with !!" being the age of pipe ! at the ! !! failure;
m is the number of pipes;
! = [!! !! ] with !! being the vector of covariates of pipe ! ;
! = [!! !! ] with !! being the number of recorded failures of pipe ! ;
Once the LEYP parameters have been estimated, the probability of a given pipe failing ! times during [!, ! ], ! ! ! ! ! = ! ! ! ! ! = ! == where ! ! = exp ! !! ! ! ! . given by Equation (7).
! , ! , ! !! , !! , !! = ! !! ! !! ! + ln 1 exp ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! + exp ! !! ! !! !
knowing it has failed ! times during [! , !], is given by:

! !! ! !!
! !! + ! + !
! ! ! ! +! ! ! ! +1
! ! ! ! +1
! ! ! !!
! ! ! !
! ! ! !! !!
(6)
The predicted number of failures in a given pipe during [!, !], knowing it has failed ! times during [! , ! ], is E N t N ( s ) | N b N a = j = !! + j
! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! !
(7)
Further reading
Le Gat, Y. (2009). Une extension du processus de Yule pour la modlization stochastique des vnements Martins, A. (2011). Stochastic models for prediction of pipe failures in water supply systems. MSc thesis, systems. (undergoing submission) Instituto Superior Tcnico, Technical Univ. Lisbon, Portugal rcurrents. Application aux dfaillances de canalizations d'eau sous pression. Ph.D. thesis, Cemagref Bordeaux, Paristech.
Martins, A., Amado, C., Leito, J.P. (2011). Stochastic models for prediction of pipe failures in water supply

AWARE P Manual

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

AWARE P Manual

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

software documentation

Draft version: 2012-02-09

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 4 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 5 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 6 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 7 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 8 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 9 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 10 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 11 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 12 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 13 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 14 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 15 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 16 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 17 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 18 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 19 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 20 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 21 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 22 / 38

and a given tolerance above it.

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 23 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 24 / 38

FAIL Failure Analysis

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 25 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 26 / 38

CIMP Component importance

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 27 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 28 / 38

UNMET Expected Unmet Demand

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 29 / 38

IVI Value Index

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 30 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 31 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 32 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 33 / 38

! {! (! ) ! (!) = !} is the probability to fail times during [!, ! ];

The Poisson process

! = [!! !! ] and !! is the length of pipe ! ;

! is the number of pipes;

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 34 / 38

The Linear Extended Yule Process (LEYP)

! = !! !! !! is the vector of parameters associated with the covariates;

! = [!! !! ] with !!" being the age of pipe ! at the ! !! failure;

m is the number of pipes;

! = [!! !! ] with !! being the vector of covariates of pipe ! ;

! = [!! !! ] with !! being the number of recorded failures of pipe ! ;

knowing it has failed ! times during [! , !], is given by:

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 35 / 38

AWARE-P software documentation: draft version 2012-02-02 www.baseform.org/np4/awareApp p. 36 / 38

Вам также может понравиться