Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 7

Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 3(2): 67-73, 2011 ISSN: 2040-7467 © Maxwell Scientific Organization, 2011

Received: September 22, 2010

Accepted: January 20, 2011

Published: February 20, 2011

Optimal Pipeline Connection for the West African Gas Pipeline Project

E.K. Donkoh, S.K. Amponsah and K.F. Darkwah Department of Mathematics, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana

Abstract: Ghana and three other West African countries including Benin, Togo and Nigeria have installed pipelines to establish the flow of natural gas. In this research paper, we combine Prim’s and Steiner Tree algorithms with factor rating method to solve the single source shortest path offshore/onshore pipeline problem. Data on the West African Gas Pipeline (WAGP) project was collected and analyzed. We used Prim’s algorithm to find the minimum spanning tree of length 712.30 km. This is a reduction over the original 788.90 km WAGP project design. Factor rating method was then used to find an alternative path of length 723.29 km. Steiner Tree algorithm and geometry were used to obtain an optimal pipeline length of 707.75 km. This is 10.3% reduction of the WAGP length. Our solution is shown to be topologically equivalent to the WAGP network and hence optimal in pipeline distance and project cost.

Key words: Factor rating, graphs, networks, prim’s algorithm, steiner tree algorithm, trees

INTRODUCTION

Liquefied natural gas can be transported by means of truck or ship. Due to its high cost of production and being highly inflammable, it must be shipped at a very low temperature. This makes shipping mode of transportation prohibitively expensive. Thus the most efficient and effective movement of large quantities of natural gas from producing regions to consumption regions is through pipeline transportation system especially for long distance transportation (Wikipedia, 2008). Gas pipeline transportation is unique in the transportation industry due to its mode captivity, continuous transport system, time of transport and as a commodity (Dott, 1997). Lurie (2008) reviewed the mathematical models of fluid and gas flow in the interior of a pipeline and discussed issues of non-stationary gas flow in a pipeline and non-isothermal gas flow in gas-pipelines. Hochbaum and Segev (1989) observed that sending flow along a pipeline segment involves fixed cost for using the segment and variable cost for a unit of flow. The authors recommended the use of Lagrange multiplier method in finding the minimum cost of pipeline segments along which flow will be directed in a network. Li et al. (2008) established a topology optimization technology for flow networks that finds the least cost network topology while the seismic reliability between the sources and each terminal satisfies prescribed reliability constraints. The model is applied to a large city in China and the solution is based on genetic algorithm. Ghana and three other West African countries including Benin, Togo and Nigeria have installed natural

gas pipelines to establish the flow of natural gas to the respective countries (WAGPCo, 2004a). The total offshore distance is put at 678 km (WAGPCo, 2010) while the onshore/offshore distance determined from grid coordinates is 788.90 km (Nuamah, Accra, Ghana, Grid coordinates data of WAGP in AutoCad). This research study determines the optimal pipeline distance from the single source, Alagbado ‘Tee’, Nigeria, to the final destination, Aboadzi site of Takoradi, Ghana.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The Minimum Spanning Tree (MST) problem is one of the most typical and well known problems in combinatorial optimization. Borçvka (1926) (cited in Graham and Hell, 1985), used euclidean MST to find the most economical construction of an electricity network in Moravia. The author’s MST is applied to a network with distinct edge distances (Wikipedia, 2010). Schrijver (1996) cited Boruvka as the first to consider the MST. The MST algorithms that are commonly used are the Prim’s (1957) and Kruskal’s (1956) algorithms (cited in Jayawant and Glavin, 2009). However, Kruskal algorithm finds the minimum spanning forest if the network is not connected (Agarwal, 2010). Zachariasen (1998) noted that all known exact algorithms for the Euclidean Steiner tree problem require exponential time. The general consensus is to use heuristics and approximation algorithms. However, one of the first and easiest methods involves the use of minimal spanning trees as approximation to the Steiner tree algorithm. The Euclidean Steiner tree problem has its

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 3(2): 67-73, 2011

Table 1: Grid and WGS-84 coordinates of the WAGP nodes

WAGP node points

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WGS-84

-------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------

WAGP grid co-ordinates

Node

Location

Latitude

Longitude

Easterns (Xm)

Northerns (Ym)

F

Takoradi R & M

Station

4º58'30.846'N

1º39.39.422'W

241,893.442

550,381.671

A

Takoradi Subsea

Tie-in

4º53'00.352'N

1º35'43.400"E

259,133.210

540,298.000

B

Tema offshore subsea Tie-in

5º32'33.322"N

0º07' 19.628"E

439,686.000

612,669.500

T

Tema R & M Station

5º40'04.378"N

0º02'17.112"E

440,493.093

626,529.525

C

Lome offshore subsea Tie-in

6º00'18.199"N

1º23'10.506"E

579.637.380

663,815.721

L

Lome R & M

Station

6º09'20.808"N

1º18'16.843"E

570,289.540

680,467.020

Y

Lome C.E.B Power Plant 6º09'34.803"E

1º18'04.947E

570,223.429

680,896.350

D

Cotonou offshore subsea tie-in

6º03'17.694N

2º18'54.811"E

680,394.773

687,983.208

K

Cotonou R & M Station

6º23'12.938"N

2º15'26.839"E

675,945.754

706,248.423

M

C.E.B Facility(Maria Gleta)

6º25'33.060"N

2º18'18.828"E

681,217.340

710,569.390

E

Lagos Beach Comp. Station

6º25'02.210"N

2º59'18.213"E

756,810.938

709,913.811

V

Midline Isolation Valve

6º30'31.073"N

3º01'08.775"E

760,163.131

720,0.35.976

G

Alagbado Tee (Itoki)

6º43'24.000"N

3º56'53.400"E

862,848.602

744,382.001

roots in Fermat problem whereby one finds in the plane a point, the sum of whose distances from three given points is minimal (Ivanov and Tuzhilin, 1994). The steiner ratio compares the solution of the Steiner Minimum Tree (SMT) problem to that of the MST. Moore in (Gilbert and Pollack, 1968) put the lower bound of the Steiner ratio to be 0.5 while Gilbert and Pollack (1968) conjectured the upper bound to be 0.866. This means that the SMT can be shorter than the MST by at most 13.4% (Bern and Graham, 1989). Dott (1997) reduced the 952 km Palliser pipeline network to 832 km using the haMSTer program, which is based on Prim algorithm. This was a 13% reduction over the original length. The author conjectured that if the SMT is used in addition to the haMSTer then 721 km will be realized. Brimberg et al. (2003), presented the optimal design of an oil pipeline network for the South Gabon oil field. The original design covered thirty-three (33) nodes with hundred and twenty-nine (129) possible arcs having total distance of 191.1 km. Using a variation of Prim’s algorithm, this reduced the connection to 121.6 km, which was a reduction of 36.4% of the total distance to be covered. Dott (1997) obtained an Optimal Design of Natural Gas Pipeline of Amoco East Crossfield Gas pipeline project, (Alberta, Canada). The pipeline, which covers a distance of 66 km was reduced to 48.9 km with the use of the haMSTer program software. Steiner tree algorithm was later used to reduce the MST created by the haMSTer to 48.84 km. This was 1% reduction over the MST. Arogundade and Akinwale (2009) used Prim’s algorithm to find the shortest distance between 88 villages connected by 96 roads of Odeda local governement map, Nigeria, and arrived at an MST of 388,270 m. Nie et al. (2000) combined an algorithm of rectilinear Steiner tree and the constraints and connectivity reliability of road network to obtain a new method of rural road network layout designing in a county area. The method is applied to the rural road network layout designing of Shayang County, China.

In this research, we combined factor rating method with Prim’s and Steiner tree algorithms and geometry to obtain an optimal pipeline distance for the West African Gas pipeline.

Data: WGS 84 AutoCad map (of the pipeline route and the grid coordinates) was obtained from the West African Gas Pipeline Company (WAGPCo) (P. Nnamah, Accra, Ghana. Grid coordinates data of WAGP in AutoCad ). Figure 1 shows, in AutoCAd map, the thirteen (13) labeled WAGP nodes consisting of nine (9) R & M stations and four (4) subsea tie-ins, in addition to four (4) shore crossing points (which are not labeled) and pipeline segments. Table 1 shows the grid and the WGS-84 coordinates of the pipeline nodes. The location listing is movement from left to right along the pipeline shown in Fig. 1 and from Takoradi R & M station to Alagbado Tee. Table 2 depicts the internodal distances and pipeline diameters of the pipeline segments. Column 1 shows that the pipeline consists of offshore and onshore segments as well as offshore and onshore laterals which respectively are segments from offshore and onshore to shore crossings. Link lines are auxiliary onshore segments. Columns 2 and 3 show the end-point locations of each pipeline segment. The total length of the pipeline is 788.90 km. From Table 2, the maximum diameter of onshore pipeline segment is 76.20 cm (7.62x10G 4 km) and that of offshore is 50.80 cm (5.08x10G 4 km). The respective per length unit curved surface areas of pipeline are 2.3939x10G 3 and 1.5959x10G 3 /km. Table 3 is the WAGP grid coordinates of the nodes in Table 1 converted to kilometers. Node G is the connection source representing the gas distribution source.

COMPUTATIONAL EXPERIENCE

The distances between all pairs of nodes were computed using the Euclidean distance formula. The results are shown in Table 4. Prim’s algorithm was then used to find the internodal distances that form a minimum

68

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 3(2): 67-73, 2011

Table 2: Pipeline nodes, length of segments and pipeline diameters of WAGP

Segment type

From

To

Length (km)

Diameter

Onshore mainline (Nigeria)

Alagbado ‘Tee’ (G) Midline Isolation Valve (V) Lagos Beach Compr. Station(E)

Midline Isolation Valve (V) Lagos Beach Compr. Station (E) Cotonou Offshore Subsea Tie-in (D)

115.32

30 in (76.2 cm) 30 in (76.2 cm)

12.18

Offshore mainline

86.93

20 in (50.8 cm) base case or

 

18

in (45.7 cm)

 

Cotonou Offshore Subsea Tie-in (D)

Lome` Offshore Subsea Tie-in (C)

106.60

20 in (50.8 cm) base case or

 

18

in (45.7 cm)

 

Lome` Offshore Subsea Tie-in (C)

Tema Offshore Subsea Tie-in (B)

153.40

20 in (50.8 cm) base case or

 

18

in (45.7 cm)

 

Tema Offshore Subsea Tie-in (B)

Takoradi Subsea Tie-in (A)

221.00

20 in (50.8 cm)

Subtotal

695.43

Offshore laterals

Cotonou Offshore Subsea Tie-in(D) Lome` Offshore Subsea Tie-in(C)

Cotonou Shore Crossing (D!)

15.06

8 in (20.3 cm)

Lome

R & M Station (L)

19.80

10 in (25.4 cm) base case or

 

18

in (45.7 cm)

 

Tema Offshore Subsea Tie-in (B) Takoradi Subsea Tie-in(A)

Tema

Shore Crossing (B!)

16.48

18 in (45.7 cm)

Takoradi Shore Crossing (A!)

19.06

20 in (50.8 cm) base case or

 

18

in (45.7 cm)

Subtotal

70.40

Offshore total

765.83

 

Cotonou Shore Crossing(D!) Lome Shore Crossing(C!)

Cotonou R & M Station (K) Lome R & M Station (L)

5.10

8 in (20.3 cm)

Onshore laterals

0.15

10 in (25.4 cm) base case or

 

18

in (45.7 cm)

 

Tema Shore Crossing(B!) Takoradi Shore Crossing(A!)

Tema R & M

Station (T)

0.52

18 in (45.7 cm)

Takoradi R & M Station (F)

0.90

20 in (50.8 cm) base case or

 

18

in (45.7 cm)

Subtotal

6.67

Link lines

Cotonou R & M Station (K)

Site of Future CEB Facility at Maria Gleta (M) CEB Power Plant (Y)

9.50

10 in (25.4 cm) base case or 18 in (20.3) 8 in (20.3 cm) base case or

Lom R & M Station (L)

6.90

 

10

in (25.4 cm)

Link lines total

16.40

Grand total

788.90

The shore crossing points are indicated with (! )

788.90 The shore crossing points are indicated with ( ! ) Fig. 1: WGS 84 AutoCAD

Fig. 1: WGS 84 AutoCAD map

points by

indicated with ( ! ) Fig. 1: WGS 84 AutoCAD map points by of the WAGP,

of

the WAGP, R & M stations are represented by

by of the WAGP, R & M stations ar e represented by subsea tie-ins by and

subsea tie-ins by

R & M stations ar e represented by subsea tie-ins by and shore crossing spanning tree.

and shore crossing

spanning tree. The internodal distances of the MST are shown Table 4 as bold and in brackets. Figure 2 depicts the graphical representation of the MST in matlab figure window. The total length of the MST was obtained to be 712.3 km. Segments AB, CD are offshore. Segments TL, KM, ME, EV and VG are onshore. From Fig. 2 segment BC (149.02 km) is alternative to segment TL (140.65 km). Similarly, segment DE (97.50 km) is alternative to ME (75.59 km). WAGPCo (2004b) reports on factors that impact offshore and onshore

pipeline segments. We used cost-benefit analysis to compare offshore and onshore pipeline segments. This comparison is relevant when an onshore pipeline segment in the MST had an alternative. Table 5 shows the relative impact of these factors. These factors are evaluated for offshore and onshore segments using factor rating method as a tool for locating alternatives to the MST pipeline segments TL and ME. These factors have been assigned weights from 0 to 1 and their weighted score calculated. The “halo effect” in rating scales has been considered when scores were being

69

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 3(2): 67-73, 2011

750 V G M K 700 E D C 650 T 600 B F 550
750
V
G
M
K
700
E
D
C
650
T
600
B
F
550
A
500
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
x(km)
Fig. 2: Calculated
MST
representation of West African ga
k my )(
pipeline network 750 WAGP V G M <120° K 700 Y L E D C
pipeline network
750
WAGP
V
G
M
<120°
K
700
Y
L E
D
C
650
T
600
B
F
550
A
500
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900

x(km)

Fig. 3: Adjusted MST of WAGP, arrow head points to angle less than 120º

750 WAGP V G M K 700 Y S4 E L S3 D 650 C
750
WAGP
V
G
M
K
700
Y
S4
E
L
S3
D
650
C
T
S2
600
B
550
F S1
A
500
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
)mk(y

x(km)

Fig. 4: Steiner Spanning Tree for the WAGP are the Steiner points and are offshore

750 WAGP V G M K 700 Y E L S 4 S 2 650
750
WAGP
V
G
M
K
700
Y
E
L
S
4
S
2
650
T
S
2
600
F
550
S
1
500
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
mk )(y

x(km)

Fig. 5: Steiner Minimum Tree (SMT) of a total length 707.75 km accounting for minimum cost and distance

Table 3: Grid coordinates of nodes of the WAGP

Node

x(km)

y(km)

F

241.89

550.38

A

259.13

540.30

B

439.67

612.67

T

440.39

626.53

C

579.64

663.82

L

570.29

680.47

Y

570.22

680.90

D

680.39

687.98

K

675.95

706.25

M

681.22

710.57

E

756.81

709.91

V

760.16

720.04

G

862.85

744.38

assigned to these factors (Gay, 1999). From Table 6, the

rated pipeline segment for the offshore is 7.21 and is less

than that of the onshore which is 7.35. The offshore

segment has the least negative impact and hence is the preferred path.

From the pipeline rating and the fact that BC and DE are respective alternatives to TL and ME, the MST is adjusted with such replacements leading to adjusted MST total of 723.29 km. Figure 3 is a matlab plot of the adjusted MST of the WAGP with BC replacing TL and DE replacing ME. We modified the adjusted MST using Steiner tree algorithm. Every T-junction and L-junction with angle less than 120º was converted to a Steiner point by using

Simpson’s method (Herring, 2004). Converting the T-

junctions or L-junctions to Steiner points we obtained the

Steiner Spanning Tree combined with the adjusted MST

points as shown in Fig. 4. The total length of the Steiner Spanning Tree is 738.19 km. The geographical and the grid coordinates of the Steiner points are shown in Table 7. The offshore nodes A, B, C and D are not demand centres nor production points and so they are removed to allow for direct flow from S 4 toS 3 ,S 3 to S 2 andS 2 to S 1 . The geometric property of direct edges being shorter than sum of two edges in a triangle is used (Stewart, 2008). Figure 5 depicts the resulting matlab plot.

Topological equivalence: Two systems are topologically

equivalent if there exist homeomorphic transformation

from one system to the other (Clooman, 1989). Our SMT

of Fig. 5 and WAGP tree system of Fig. 1 are

topologically equivalent when the nodes A, B, C and D of Fig. 1 are, respectively replaced by S 1 ,S 2 ,S 3 , and S 4 of Fig. 5. The nodes of the two systems are topologically equivalent when the adjacency list of the two systems is matched. This is illustrated in columns 1 and 6 of Table 8. The nodes in columns 2 and 7 are adjacent nodes. Table 8 shows that the two systems are diagraphs and thus satisfy the indegree and outdegree theorem (Lipschutz and Lipson, 2007), and for each system, the sum of indegree

70

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 3(2): 67-73, 2011

Table 4: Matrix of internodal distances showing edges of the MST

Nodee

F

A

B

T

C

L

Y

D

K

M

E

V

G

F

4

19.97

207.38

203.30

356.29

353.23

353.32

459.58

461.20

467.62

539.07

545.33

650.56

A

19.97

4

194.50

200.73

341.49

341.27

341.39

146.40

448.64

455.14

525.79

532.29

637.28

B

207.38

194.50

4

16.68

149.02

147.23

147.30

252.22

254.14

260.64

331.71

337.99

443.20

T

203.30

20073

16.6

4

144.16

140.65

140.75

247.74

248.68

255.07

327.22

333.16

438.59

C

356.29

341.49

149.02

144.16

4

19.10

19.511

103.61

105.24

111.82

183.07

189.07

294.444

L

353.23

341.27

147.23

140.65

19.10

4

0.44

110.36

108.76

114.94

188.83

193.95

299.46

Y

353.32

341.39

147.30

140.75

19.51

0.44

4

110.40

108.73

114.90

188.83

193.93

299.44

D

459.58

146.40

252.22

247.74

103.61

110.36

110.40

4

18.81

22.61

79.50

85.97

190.98

K

461.20

448.64

254.14

248.68

105.24

108.76

108.73

18.81

4

6.81

80.94

85.33

190.75

M

467.62

455.14

260.64

255.07

111.82

114.944

114.90

22.61

6.81

4

75.59

79.51

184.75

E

539.07

525.79

331.71

327.22

183.07

188.83

188.831

79.50

80.94

75.59

4

10.67

111.50

V

545.33

532.29

337.99

333.16

189.07

193.93

193.93

85.97

85.33

79.51

10.67

4

105.54

G

650.566

637.28

443.20

438.59

294.44

299.46

299.44

190.98

190.75

184.75

111.50

105.54

4

Table 5: Comparative advantage of potential impact on both offshore and onshore segments

 

Factors

Offshore

Onshore

Environmental

 

Fast laying process with little disturbances. Crosses less sensitive areas. Higher pressure to delivery points. Greater outputs. Less risks due to difficult accessibility. Lower presence of humans in the proximity. Higher investments Lower operational costs. No fuel and gas needed

 

Slow laying process with much disturbances Crosses much sensitive areas. Lower pressure to delivery points Lower outputs Higher risks due to easy access Easy repair and maintenance. Higher investments Higher operational costs Fuel and gas needed.

Technological

Security

Economical

 

WAGPCo (2004b)

 

Table 6: Ratings of the factors which impact on offshore and onshore pipeline segments

Factor score

-----------------------------------------------

Weighted score

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Factor

Offshore

Onshore

Rating ratio

Offshore

Onshore

Laying process with little disturbances Crosses sensitive areas. Pressure to delivery points Greater outputs of gas. Risks due to accessibility

10

6

0.18

1.80

1.08

7

11

0.12

0.84

1.32

9

6

0.15

1.35

0.90

6

5

0.07

0.42

0.35

2

7

0.08

0.16

0.56

Presence

of humans in the proximity

5

8

0.10

0.50

0.80

Investments Operational costs Repair and maintenance

9

11

0.12

1.08

1.32

5

7

0.10

0.50

0.70

7

4

0.08

0.56

0.32

Total

1.0

7.21

7.35

Table 7: Grid and geographical coordinates of S 1 , S 2 , S 3 and S 4

 

Grid coordinates (x , y)

 

Latitude

Longitude

S 1 (249 750.1799, 543 774.4451) S 2 (440 658.9333, 617 432.8707) S 3 (581 177.6222, 668 291.0011) S 4 (685 068.6184, 695 779.3449)

 

4º 54' 56.7178" N 5º 35' 08.4733" N 6º 02' 43.8061" N 6º 17' 31.2037" N

1º 35' 23.760.6" W 0º 07' 51.1102" E 1º 24' 00.8006" E 2º 20' 22.5955" E

Table 8: WAGP tree table of indegree and outdegree vertex with edges

Actual design of WAGP

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authors SMT design of the WAGP network

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vertex

Adjacencysts

Outdegree

Indegree

Edges

Vertex

Adjacency lists

Outdegree

Indegree

Edges

F

-

0

1

FA

F

- F T, S 1 - S 2 ,L L - S 3 ,K M - S 4 E

0

1

FS

A

F

1

1

AB

S

1

1

1S 1 S 2 1S 2 T

B

T, A

2

1

BT

S

2

2

T

-

0

1

BC

T

0

1

S 3 S 2 LS 3 YL S 3 S 4 S 3 K KM S 4 E EV VG -

C

B, L

2

1

CL

S 3

2

1

L

Y

Y

1

1

LY

Y

1

Y

-

0

1

CD

Y

0

1

D

C, K

2

1

DK

S 4

2

1

K

M

1

1

KM

K

1

1

M

-

0

1

DE

M

0

1

E

D

1

1

EV

E

1

1

V

E

1

1

VG

V

1

1

G

V

1

0

-

GV

 

1

-

Sum

12

12

12

Sum

 

12

12

12

71

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 3(2): 67-73, 2011

is 12 and the sum of outdegree is also 12. Hence the two systems are different but represent the same information.

DISCUSSION

Prim’s algorithm for MST solution of the WAGP gathering system resulted in a pipeline distance of 712.30 km, which is a reduction over the WAGP total distance of 788.90 km. We introduced cost-benefit analysis by using factor rating to find an alternative cheaper path. This resulted in onshore segment TL and ME being replaced by BC and DE, respectively producing an adjusted MST pipeline distance of 723.29 km. Using the per length unit pipeline curved surface areas, the curved areas for TL (0.33670 km 2 ) and ME (0.18095 km 2 ) are respectively higher than BC (0.23825 km 2 ) and DE (0.15560 km 2 ). Hence BC and DE have least material cost. This confirms the cost aspect of the factor rating method. Steiner tree algorithm was used on the adjusted MST to obtain Steiner points S 1 , S 2 , S 3 an S 4 , which gave Steiner spanning tree of total length 738.19 km when the MST points are added. Following Bern and Graham (1989), nodes A, B, C and D were replaced by S 1 , S 2 , S 3 and S 4 , respectively. The geometric property of direct edges being shorter than sum of two edges in a triangle is used (Stewart, 2008). This resulted in an SMT with shorter distance of 707.75 km. The Steiner ratio of the SMT to the MST is 0.9936. That of the SMT to the adjusted MST is 0.9785. These values could not be used to judge Gilbert and Pollack (1968) conjectured upper bound of 0.866 since our Steiner points were obtained from the adjusted MST. However, the optimal distance of 707.75 km is 10.3% reduction over the WAGP distance and from Clooman (1989), the topological equivalence achieved means our solution is both of shorter distance and the least cost.

CONCLUSION

The findings in this study provide an optimal onshore/offshore pipeline design of 707.75 km. The SMT length obtained is from the segments addition result of FS + S S 2 +S T + S S 3 +S L + LY +S S 4 + S K+KM + S E + EV+VG which gives a 10.3% reduction over the WAGP design. We used a construction approach that utilizes Prim’s algorithm, factor rating method, Steiner tree algorithm and geometry to reach optimality and is the first study that combines factor rating method with Prim’s algorithm and Steiner tree algorithm on both onshore and offshore platforms to arrive at the least cost and minimum distance. The study also shows the topological equivalence of the WAGP and our design by using adjacency listing. In

72

addition both pipeline systems have the same number of edges, indegreees and out degrees and hence can be compared in terms of distance and cost.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to acknowledge the onshore engineer Mr. Rubson Mawunyo, the Chief Lead Surveyor Mr. Paul Nnamah, formerly of the WAGP company for providing the data for this paper and Prof. I.A Adetunde of University of Mines and Technology, Tarkwa, Ghana for his valuable suggestions and seeing through the publication of this study.

REFERENCES

Agarwal, D., 2010. Kruskal Algorithm. Technical Collection. Retrieved from: http://sites.google.com/ site/mytechnicalcollection/algorithms/graphs/mini mum-spanning-trees/kruskal-s-algorithm, (Accessed on: November 13, 2010). Arogundade, O.T. and A.T. Akinwale, 2009. On the Application of Prim’s Algorithm to a Profit-Oriented Transportation System in Rural Areas of Nigeria. University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, 37: 4-9. Retrieved from: http://www.google.com.gh/search? hl=en&q=Application+of+Prims+Algorithm+to+Tr

ansportation+network%2C+By+Akinwale+And+A

rogundade&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai, (Accessed on: November 09, 2010). Bern, M.W. and R.L. Graham, 1989. The shortest network problem. Sci. Am., 260: 84-89. Borçvka, O., 1926. Contribution to the solution of a problem of economical construction of electrical networks (in Czech). Elektronický Obzor, 15:

153-154.

Brimberg, J., N. Mladenovic, H. Pierre, L. Keh-Wei, M. Breton, 2003. An oil pipeline design problem. Oper. Res., 51(2): 228-239. Clooman, T.J., 1989. Topological Equivalence of optical crossover networks and modified data manipulator networks. Appl. Opt., 28: 2494-2498. Dott, D.R., 1997. Optimal Network Design for Natural Gas Pipelines. University of Calgary, Alberta, pp:

57-90. Retrieved from: http://dspace.ucalgary.ca/ bitstream/1880/ 26992/1/31387Dott.pdf, (Accessed on: June 26, 2009). Gay, L.R., 1999. Educational Research. 5th Edn., Prentice Hall, New York, pp: 156, 273. Graham, R.L. and P. Hell, 1985. On the history of minimum spanning tree problem. Ann. History Comput., 7(1): 43-51. Gilbert, E.N. and H.O. Pollak, 1968. Steiner minimal trees. J. Soc. Indus. Appl. Math., 16(1): 1-29. Herring, M., 2004. The Euclidean Steiner Tree Problem. Denison University, Ohio, pp: 3-4.

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 3(2): 67-73, 2011

Hochbaum, D.S. and A. Segev, 1989. Analysis of a flow problem with fixed charges. Networks, 19(3):

291-312.

Ivanov, A.O. and A.A. Tuzhilin, 1994. Minimal Networks: The Steiner Problem and its Generalizations. CRC Press, Florida. Jayawant, P. and K. Glavin, 2009. Minimum spanning trees. Involve, 2(4): 437-448. Kruskal, J.B., 1956. on the shortest spanning subtree of a graph and the traveling salesman problem. Proc. Am. Math. Soc., 7(1): 48-50. Li, J., W. Liu and Y. Bao, 2008. Genetic Algorithm for seismic topology optimization of lifeline network systems. Earthquake Eng. Struct. D., 37(11):

1295-1312.

Lipschutz, S. and M. Lipson, 2007. Schaum’s Outline of Discrete Mathematics. 3rd Edn., McGraw Hill, New York, pp: 203. Lurie, M.V., 2008. Modelling of Oil Product and Gas Pipeline Transportation. Wiley, London. Nie, X., S. Zhu, H. Wang and F. Huang, 2010. A new method of rural road network layout designing in the county: Generating algorithm of rectilinear steiner tree. International Conference on: Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation (ICICTA). May 11-12, Changsa, China, 1: 37-41. Prim, R.C., 1957. Shortest connection networks and some generalizations. Bell Sys. Tech. J., 36: 1389-1401.

73

Schrijver, A., 1996. On the History of Combinatorial Optimization (till 1960). CWI and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, pp: 27. Stewart, I., 2008. Steiner Ratio Conjecture. University of Warwick, Coventry. Retrieved from: http://dev. whydomath.org/Reading_Room /ian_stewart/Stei nerRatio.pdf, (Accessed on: November 13, 2010). WAGPCo, 2004a. Ghana Final Draft Rev 1. West African Gas Pipeline Environmental Impact Assessment. E981, 6: 47. WAGPCo, 2004b. Nigeria Final Draft Rev 1. West African Gas Pipeline Environmental Impact Assessment. E981, 7: 240-241. WAGPCo, 2010. The Pipeline System. Retrieved from:

http://www.wagpco.com/index.php?option=com_c

ontent&view=article&id=122&Itemid=85&lala=en,

(Accessed on: November 10, 2010). Wikipedia, 2008. Pipeline Transport. Retrieved from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipeline_transport, (Accessed on: November 31, 2010). Wikipedia, 2010. Borçvka's Algorithm. Retrieved from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bor%C5%AFvka's_al

gorithm, (Accessed on: November 10, 2010). Zachariasen, M., 1998. Algorithms for plane steiner tree problems. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen.