Environmental Informatics Archives, Volume 2 (2004), 781-790

EIA04-077
ISEIS Publication #002
© 2004 ISEIS - International Society for Environmental Information Sciences

Establishing an Optimization Model for Sewer System Layout

with Applied Genetic Algorithm
Huahn-Tyng Weng*, Shu-Liang Liaw, and Wan-Chi Huang
Graduate Institute of Environmental Engineering, National Central University, Chungli, 32054, Taiwan

Abstract. In this study, the genetic algorithm (GA) is firstly used to establish a combinatorial optimization model,
the Sewer System Optimization Model for Layout & Hydraulic (GA/SSOM/LH), to achieve the real optimal design
for urban sewer system considering the optimal problem of “network layout” and “hydraulic design” simultaneously.
The model concept combines the fundamental principles of GA to a generate possible network layout as well as a
developed “hydraulic design” optimization module, the Sewerage System Optimization model (SSOM), to find the
best sewer “system layout” that has checked the overall least-cost hydraulic design through possible alternative
network layout. SSOM is a 0-1 Mixed Integer Programming (MIP) applying a traditional algorithm, the Bounded
Implicit Enumeration (BIE), to solve each stage pipe to optimal size and slope stage by stage. Different from BIE
algorithm, GA codes ‘one chromosome’ to represent ‘one system layout’ parameter, is directly to operate the specific
coding strings ‘parameters’ and more robust to combine with SSOM module. Hence GA can evolve and generate
the optimization system layout quickly and ensure the solution closer to the global optimization in a ‘fast’ manner.
At last, an artificial case study on 73-node project was conducted to prove the optimum system layout generated by
GA/SSOM/LH model surpassing.

Keywords: Genetic Algorithm, Hydraulic Design, System Layout, 0-1 Mixed Integer Programming, Bounded
Implicit Enumeration, N-P Complete Problem,

1. Introduction

In order to reach the goal for higher household connection rate of sewer system in Taiwan area, the government is
going to invest more funding in the urban sewerage construction. Cost-effectiveness analysis has become an
important issue for the optimal design of sewer system. Sewer system is used to collect and transport sewage by
gravity from house lateral sewer to sewage treatment plants through a manholes connected network of hydraulically
designed sewer pipes, consisting of sewer pipe-network, manholes, pumping stations and other appurtenances. The
design of sewer system may be divided into two phases: (1) Selection of network layout, and (2) hydraulic design of
the sewer pipes in the selected layout (determination of discharge rates, pipe sizes and slopes, and invert elevations)
(Tekeli and Belkaya, 1986). Considering both the optimal problem of the two design phases would certainly find
an optimal “network layout” with the least-cost “hydraulic design” of sewer system, which will really achieve the
optimal sewer “system layout” for sewer design problem. Since simultaneous consideration of the optimal
“network layout” and “hydraulic design” phases is too complex, the optimal problem of sewer design has been to
deals with each phase separately. This approach may reduce the complexity of the design procedure, but final
design obtained may not be good enough when cost-effectiveness is in concern.
In practice, the design procedure is to manually generate an adapted network layout that will conform to
population served, street layout and local topography of the planning area, and then perform hydraulic design to find

* Corresponding author: tyng@ms14.hinet.net

 Environmental Informatics Archives, Volume 2 (2004), 781-790

the pipe sizes and excavation depths of the specific layout. Obviously, the design result is limited to the design
engineer's experience and intuition and only a very small portion of the alternatives is evaluated. The final design
is sometimes deficient and no guarantee to be the best of the design problem. Therefore, to find an optimal sewer
“system layout” is surely not an easy job for engineers. The difficulty is mainly due to two important factors: the
complexity of the system's environments and the huge amount of possible design alternatives. Particularly in the
large networks of urban sewer system, manual calculation would limit evaluation of alternative designs. This has
inspired many studies for computerized optimization model. With the various application algorithms and
mathematical models due to the aid of high speed computerized calculating, it will save the needs of
time-consuming compute for the cost-effective designs.
In the past three decades, he efforts on the developed optimization models for the optimal hydraulic design for the
development of a branched sewer system optimal design problem have been more extensive and compared to
practical approaches for their effectiveness and efficiency. However, the optimal system layout models available
for generating network layout and for completing hydraulic design indicates computational is difficult due to
requirements of excessive computer memory or execution time. Therefore, while most of, the models were
developed for optimal “hydraulic design” (Merrit & Bogan,1973; Dajani & Hasit,1974; Mays and Yen, 1975; Wen
and Kuo,1982; Gupta et al., 1983; Shih, 1983; Orth and Hsu, 1984; Orth, 1986; Liaw & Lin, 1990; Liaw, 1991;
Agbenowosi,1995; Charalambous＆Elimam, 1997; Greene et al., 1999; Swamee, 2001; Weng and Liaw, 2003); only
a few models were developed for the optimal “system layout”. This study, with focus on the optimization model of
the ‘system layout’, generalizes the optimization techniques adopted traditional theories, such as Heuristic Layout
(Liebman,1967), Dynamic Programming, DP (Argmar, Shamir & Spivak, 1973), Discrete Differential Dynamic
Programming, DDDP (Mays, Harry, Wenzwl & Liebman,1976; Wen and Shih, 1983), Shortest Path Algorithm
(Tekeli & Belkaya, 1986), Shortest Path Method, SPM with Bounded Implicit Enumeration, BIE (Liaw and
Lin,1990 ), Integer Programming, IP with Implicit Enumeration, IE (Liaw, 1991,1992,1993).
To improve the flaws of local optimum problem for optimal “system layout” model, Liaw and Weng (2003)
developed the Sewer system Optimization Model for Layout & Hydraulic Design (SSOM/LH) with considering
both the optimal problems of “network layout” and “hydraulic design” simultaneously. This ensured the solution
being the best global optimum by providing the optimal solution of the system layout with a 25-node (manhole) case
study. SSOM/LH is established as combinatorial algorithm, which is based on a developed optimization hydraulic
design module and the Sewerage system Optimization Model (SSOM) for the optimal hydraulic design of urban
sewer system. With applied a 0-1 Mixed Integer Programming (MIP) and Bounded Implicit Enumeration (BIE)
algorithm, SSOM can determine the each sewer pipe size of a gravity sewer system together, meet the design
objective and satisfy the hydraulic and technical constraints for a specific network layout in common use.
Recently, one of the Soft Computing, Genetic Algorithm (GA), has been applied popularly. With the robustness
efficiency, it seems to be an aid to researchers engaged in the environmental field of analyses (McKinney and Lin,
1992, 1993, 1994). In this study, GA will be applied to reestablish a combinatorial optimization model,
GA/SSOM/LH, to help SSOM/LH to generate some of good alternative network layouts more efficiently. This
paper will describe GA/SSOM/LH by way of the procedures of SSOM/LH.

2. The Procedure of Optimal Sewer System Layout (SSOM/LH)

This model includes a network layout generating procedures and connects the hydraulic design module, SSOM.
Both of the solution procedures are performed as a screening process. Therefore, the optimal System Layout
procedure of SSOM/LH can be described as follows,

2.1 The Developed Hydraulic Design Optimization Module, SSOM

SSOM was developed has completely discussed in other article (Weng and Liaw, 2003). Eq 1. is showed the
single objective equation of SSOM with applied 0-1 mixed integer programming.
n m n n
MinZ = ∑ ∑
i =1 j =1
Cost ( D ij , S ij , Hup i )X ij + ∑
i =1
MHc ( Hup i ) + ∑
i =1
PS i ( Q i , H i ) (1)

＊Dij is as the diameter of the j-th option of the i-th stage, Sij is as the optimal slope to the certain diameter, Hupi
is as the digging of the up stream of the pipe.
＊Xij is as the variety of the option between 0 and 1.

782
 Environmental Informatics Archives, Volume 2 (2004), 781-790

To minimize total cost Z including the cost of pipes Dij, of manholes MHc(Hupi), and of pump stationsPSi (Qi,
Hi). Once a sewer network layout is determined, the main work for the hydraulic design optimization module is to
select the size and slope of piping system and the amount of pump stations to meets the design criteria and the
minimal cost for construction and achieves the ultimate goal of cost-effectiveness. Therefore, the hydraulic design
problem can be treated as a serial multi-stage multi-option problem (Lin, 1990; and Liaw and Lin, 1991). The
stages represent the network of sewer pipes, and the options represent the available business pipe sizes of each stage.
See to Figure 1, Case#1, Case#2.., were responded to the variety of construction mode, such as open-cut method,
trenchless technologies, and the materials of the pipe; Constrain#1, Constrain#2., is responded to the limitation for
each stage, such as passing through a fixed depth. Dij was as the diameter of the j-th option of the i-th stage, Sij
was as the optimal slope to the certain diameter (here i = 1, 2…….n, j = 1, 2………m.). For each of the sewer
pipes, different business pipe sizes, Dij, are assigned as different options. Then, each pipe size was associated with
a minimal slope, Sij, which was obtained by comparing the slopes associated with the minimal cover depth, the
maximal flow velocity, the minimal flow velocity of partial flow, and the hydraulic of gravity flow (Benson, 1985;
Orth, H.M., 1986). Moreover, it has been considered in various construction modes and different piping material
constraints on each stage, such as passing through a fixed elevation, designating the site of a pumping station, and
the commercial piping diameter. The SSOM problem scheme can be established as Figure 1
Stage i=1 Stage i=2

option Case#1 Case#2 Case#3 Case#1 Case#2 Case#3

j(i)=1 D11S11 d11s11 …… D11S11 d11s11 ……

j(i)=2 D12S12 d12s12 …… MANHOL D12S12 d12s12 …… MANHOL

E E

j(i)=3 D13S13 d13s13 …… LIFT D13S13 d13s13 …… LIFT

STATION STATION
Constrain #1 Constrain #1
APPURTE APPURTE
N N
Constrain #2 ANCES Constrain #2 ANCES

Constrain #3 Constrain #3

Figure 1 SSOM problem scheme of a serial multi-stage multi-option hydraulic design problem

In this configuration, the hydraulic design problem can be solved with discrete optimization techniques. The
bounded implicit enumeration (BIE) algorithm is effective and efficient for solving of serial multi-stage multi-option
optimization problems (Chang and Liaw, 1990). The flow chart of the BIE algorithm, used in SSOM model, has
shown in Figure 2.
STA RT

D a ta In p u t

C a lc u la te th e flo w ra te o f m a n h o le fo r a fix e d s y s te m la y o u t

C a lc u la te th e fe a s ib le d ia m e te rs fo r e a c h p ip e

C a lc u la te th e s y s te m lo w e r b o u n d fo r e a c h s ta g e w ith
m in im a l p ip e c o s t a n d s h a ft c o s t

C a lc u la te th e in itia l fe a s ib le s o lu tio n

D e s ig n v a ria b le s
(p ip in g s iz e & s h a ft H y d ra u lic D e s ig n :
B IE A lg o rith m d e p th )
1 .C o n s t r a i n w i t h d e s i g n
(se arc h p ro ce d u re
c rite ria a n d p ra c tic a l
a n d a lte rn a tiv e
re q u ire m e n t
c o m p a riso n )
R e s u lts o f h y d ra u lic 2 .H y d r a u l i c a n a l y s i s
a n d c o s t a n a ly s is

D a ta O u tp u t

END

Figure 2 The BIE algorithm Flow Chart of SSOM

783
 Environmental Informatics Archives, Volume 2 (2004), 781-790

Figure 2 has shown the tunnel jacking method that was not to trench along piping line but only to dig a shaft (pit).
Different from open-cut method, the main design variables of SSOM were pipes size and shafts depth. For each of
the stages or sewer pipes, the minimal cost is obtained by selecting the minimal pipe diameter and the minimal
shafts depth of the stage considered. A practical sewer system construction case in Taipei was selected to compare
the differences between practical design method and SSOM. It showed that SSOM could get a cost-effective
design.

2.2 The optimal “network layout” procedure

The optimal “network layout” problem is similar to the optimal “hydraulic design” and can also be treated as a
serial multi-stage multi-option optimization problem. In the problem scheme, the stages represent the manhole
with a different flow direction of sewer pipes network, and the options represent the two or more available flow
directions of each manhole. In this configuration, the “network layout” problem can be solved with the tradition
enumeration algorithm and will be not to omit the possible alternative sewer system. For an example, in the
problem scheme, a stage represents a manhole with two-flow-direction (TFD). The TFD problem scheme of a
serial multi-stage multi-option network layout problems can be established as Figure 3。

Figure 3 The TFD problem scheme of a serial multi-stage multi-option network layout problem

In Figure 3, If only one flow direction can be chosen at each manhole or node, an option of a particular stage
represents the flow direction or the sewer pipe that can be selected. Therefore, the procedure for solving sewer
system layout problems is similar to that of hydraulic design problems.

2.3 The performance of SSOM/LH Procedure

Although, in this approach, the optimal solution obtained is undoubtedly the real optimal design of a sewer system
layout problem. It, however, is very inefficient and is almost impossible to solve even with a large mainframe or
super computer. For a sewer system with N two-flow-direction (TFD) manholes, if the optimization of a hydraulic
design problem requires one second of computation time, the time required to find the optimal solution will be 2N
seconds. Thus, for a moderate sewer system design problem, it may need several years to find the optimal design
with a large mainframe computer. If most of the TFD manholes can be fixed to one flow direction before the
problem solving process, the number of decision nodes will be reduced to a great extent. In this study, a heuristic
approach of engineer experience was used to eliminate the TFD nodes considering the population served, street
layout and local topography of the planning area, so that the number of alternative network will reduce
exponentially as the eliminated TFD nodes. This will make it possible to solve sewer system design problems with
microcomputers.

3. Applying GA to Sewer System Layout Optimization Model (GA/SSOM/LH)

If the optimization search procedure is unlikely to miss out any possible sewer design, the search feasible
solutions and association spaces will be necessary under the limit of time-definiteness though. Although the
above-mentioned solution of SSOM/LH obtained can be recommended as the real optimal sewer system layout with
a successful case study in 25-node, there was time-consuming compute for the optimal system layout combinatorial
algorithm that hybridized from the optimal “network layout” and “hydraulic design” procedure and can be treated as
a serial multi-stage multi-option optimization problem. The number of alternative combinations of the system will
thus increase exponentially as numbers of “stages” multiplied by “options”. Particularly, for optimization of urban
sewer system, the system components become too large thus will have the N-P complete problem. Moreover, the
robustness of combinatorial models appear more confined since traditional algorithms have the highly selectivity in
problems to be solved and limited in the scope of application. Therefore, an effective algorithm is the key to
establish the sewer system optimization model.
Researches in the recent years have adopted GA to solve the network system design optimization problem with an
increasing trend (Simpson et al. 1994; Halhal, et al., 1997; Savic and Walters 1997; Lin et al., 1997; Pilar

784
 Environmental Informatics Archives, Volume 2 (2004), 781-790

Montesinos et al. 1999, Dandy, et al., 2001). The concept of GA comes from “Survival of the fittest in natural
selection” of Darwin’s evolution and was advanced by John Holland in 1970s. Different from traditional algorithm,
GA work with a coding parameter string can search from a population of points not a single point, use objective
function information not derivatives or other auxiliary knowledge, use probabilistic transition rules not deterministic
rules, and to surpass their more traditional cousins in the quest for robustness. Therefore GA could successfully
solve the discontinuous, the non-differentiable, the non-convex, and the multiple peaks function optimization
problems. Figure 4.of the flow chart of a simple GA evolutional process shows how of GA yields good results in
many practical problems with three basic operators: (1) Reproduction (selection strings are copied according to
fitness values), (2) Crossover (members of reproduced strings are mated at random each pair of strings undergoes
crossing over) and (3) Mutation (occasional random alteration that are hard to settle by most of traditional analytic
and numerical optimized technologies) (Goldberg, 1989).

Figure 4 the Flow-Chart of simple GA evolutional process

In this study, GA will be applied to further the algorithmic efficiency of SSOM/LH and to reestablish a
combinatorial optimization model, GA/SSOM/LH, which combines the fundamental principles of GA to generate
possible “network layout” as well as based on SSOM, a developed urban sewer system optimization module for
checking “hydraulic design”. The scheme of GA/SSOM/LH evolutional process constructed is shown as Figure 5.

Figure 5 The scheme OF GA/SSOM/LH evolutional process

Figure 5 including the three main blocks: (1) population selection for coding strings, (2) evolution environment
for evaluation fitness, and (3) evolution computation for three basic operators of GA. In population selection block
process, GA/SSOM/LH is to arrange “one chromosome” to represent “one network layout” and to code the genes of
chromosome with specific binary coding becomes a ‘0’, ‘1’ strings parameter. Just using these coded strings, the

785
 Environmental Informatics Archives, Volume 2 (2004), 781-790

population was selected randomly to be the initial parents population, which was consisted of several chromosomes.
Then, under GA evolution environmental process block through executing the evolution computation process block
produce new generation and get some of good alternative network layouts. Finally, GA evolves into a offspring
population of generation by converge on the minimal cost fitness and determines the optimal sewer system. In
particular, GA evolution process code the unfixed nodes network layout only, for example TFD-system, it is very
important process to transfer TFD-system to the entire system layout for hydraulic design of SSOM at a forward
transferring block (see to Figure 5.). Hence, GA/SSOM/LH simulates genes to formulate different chromosomes,
evolve and generate ‘new offspring of population’ naturally, and allows the system to converge to the optimization
goal quickly. Additionally, the sewer network layout nodes and pipeline variables can be numbered easily.
Therefore, GA/SSOM/LH can generate the optimal alternative network layouts more efficiently and to eliminate
inferior alternative network layouts more economic on execution time than SSOM/LH.

4. Case study

For modeling test of GA/SSOM/LH, a DDDP Model case of sewer system contains 73 nodes (manholes) with
48-TFD was selected. The total nodes are laid out in the street corner and showed the TFD-nodes with a numerical
arrowhead (see Figure 6).
14 15 16 17 18 19

13 72 71 70 69 43 36

12 65 66 67 68 42 35

11 64 63 62 61 41 34

10 59 60 33

9 55 54 50 73 40 32

8 56 53 49 46 39 31 28

7 57 52 48 45 38 30 27 25

6 58 51 47 44 37 29 26 24

5 4 3 2 1 20 21 22 23

Figure 6 The street layout plan of 73 nodes-48 TFD case

According to the evolu tion process of GA/SSOM/LH, the 48-TFD-network layout case will be made the
arrangement for ‘one chromos ome’ with consisted of binary coding genes by using number “0 or 1” to represent the
two flow-direction options. Once the 48-TFD of fixed flow direction in the network layout, a numerical coded
string is to represent ‘one network layout’ of 48-TFD and to stand for association of 48-TFD of fixed flow direction
in the network layout. Before into the GA/SSOM/LH process, there are some operator parameters of GA, which
related to the convergence of evolution processing, should be set by a heuristic rule to speed the evolution
computation. For this case study, the GA algorithm parameters are set as follows: the number of generation is 100,
the number of population is 10, the mating rate is 0.5, the mutation rate is 0.02, as well as the objective of
optimization is 1/cost to fit the requirements for “Maximizing” and “Nonnegative” fitness function, and etc.
For the proof that GA/SSOM/LH are running with the best fitness and to ensure the solution closer to the global
optimization in a ‘fast’ manner, the given case of 73 nodes (manholes) with 48-TFD has been used by DDDP model
with the shortest sewer design (Shih, C.S. 1983). The result of DDDP Model Sewer design with the shortest pipeline
length, 3,882m in 48-TFD, is shown as Figure 7.
For the comparison with DDDP Model, this case study used the same cost function for the optimal hydraulic
design procedure. The cost function is shown in Eq.2

786
 Environmental Informatics Archives, Volume 2 (2004), 781-790

Cp = 0.051 + 0.383D2 + 0.0137H2 (2)

Where Cp is the construction cost, ten thousand NT dollars per meter, D is the pipe diameter, meter, and H is the
burial depth, meter.

14 15 16 17 18 19

13 72 71 70 69 43 36

12 65 66 67 68 42 35

11 64 63 62 61 41 34

10 59 60 33

9 55 54 50 73 40 32

8 56 53 49 46 39 31 28

7 57 52 48 45 38 30 27 25

6 58 51 47 44 37 29 26 24

5 4 3 2 1 20 21 22 23

Figure 7 Sewer design of DDDP Model (48-TFD 3,882m)

5. Results and Discussion

(1) The case study is successful through a Personal Computer tests and discovers the most cost-effective designs for
sewer system layout converges to the 93rd generation which string parameter is
‘111111000001101111111111110111001100000011111001.’ The computation found the total 1,620,000
combinations within 45 seconds for computation. Each network layout, which was generated in the
optimization procedure of GA/SSOM/LH, should be confirmed by the hydraulic design optimization module,
SSOM, and was calculated for construction cost. The optimization hydraulic computation with SSOM was
printed out at the end of 100th generation evolution (see Figure 8 Optimization Plan and Table 1 Hydraulic
computation).

787
 Environmental Informatics Archives, Volume 2 (2004), 781-790

14 15 16 17 18 19

13 72 71 70 69 43 36

12 65 66 67 68 42 35

11 64 63 62 61 41 34

10 59 60 33

9 55 54 50 73 40 32

8 56 53 49 46 39 31 28

7 57 52 48 45 38 30 27 25

6 58 51 47 44 37 29 26 24

5 4 3 2 1 20 21 22 23

Figure 8 GA/SSOM/LH optimal design plan (48-TFD 4,060m)

(2) The result of GA/SSOM/LH model obtained at the end of 100th generation evolution, the most cost-effective
system layout with pipeline length as 4,060m and cost as 1,297,820,000 NT$ correspondence to the shortest
pipeline length of 3,882m and cost of 1,752,050,000 NT$ generated by DDDP model, to save 30% in spite of the
extra 178m of pipeline. Therefore, the shortest sewer design is no guarantee to be a global optimum.

6. Conclusions

(1) The GA/SSOM/LH model established by this study uses the full network system as a chromosome, which was
coded to binary string parameter of number ‘0’ and ‘1’. The optimization method with GA for offspring of
greater fitness proves that it is able to obtain an optimal solution quickly and a more cost-effective optimization

system layout. The offspring population (secondary optimization designs) generated from GA/SSOM/LH and its
hydraulic analysis can be used as priority alternatives for reference.
(2) This study used GA evolution structure on the sewer system layout optimization and proved its efficacy in
utilizing the robustness of GA and convenience to solve more complicated pipeline system optimization problem
with hybrid algorithms.

788
 Environmental Informatics Archives, Volume 2 (2004), 781-790

Table 1 GA/SSOM/LH hydraulic computation

Acknowledgment.

Many thanks to Dr. Bi-Liang Lin, Assistant Prof. of Department of Civil Engineering in Ming-Hsin University of
Science & Technology of Taiwan, for his efforts on programming throughout the development of model.

References

Tekeli, T., and Belkaya, H. (1986). Computerized Layout Generation for Sanitary Sewers, J. of the Environ. Eng.

789
 Environmental Informatics Archives, Volume 2 (2004), 781-790

Div., ASCE, 112, 4, pp. 500-515.

Shih, C.S. (1983). Application of DDDP in Routing of Sewer System and Selecting of Pipe Size and Excavation
Depth, A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Engineering,
Cheng-Kung University, Taiwan. (in Chinese)
Mays, L.W., and B.C. Yen. (1975). Optimal Cost Design of Branched Sewer Systems, Water Resources Research, 11,
1, pp. 37-47.
Gupta, A., S.L. Mehndiratta, and P. Khanna (1983). Gravity Waste Water Collection Systems Optimization, J. of the
Environ. Eng. Div., ASCE, 109, 5, pp. 1195-1208.
Hsu, C.L. (1984). Computer Aided Design for Large Sewerage Systems, A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Engineering, AIT.
Lin, B.L. (1990). An Optimization Model for Sewer System Layout and Design, A Thesis Submitted in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Engineering, Tamkang University, Taiwan. (in
chinese)
Liaw, S.L., and Lin, B.L. (1991). Optimization of Sewer System: Hydraulic Design, International Conference on
Computer Application in Water Resources, Tamkang University, 2, pp. 77-84.
Liaw, S. L., (1991). Optimization of Sewer System：System Layout, International Conference on Computer
Application in Water Resources, Tamkang University, 2, pp. 157-164.
Swamee, P. K.(2001). Design of Sewer Line. Journal of Environmental Engineering., 127, 9, pp. 776-781.
Weng, H.T., and Liaw, S. L., (2003). An Optimization Model for Sewer Hydraulic Design Base on Novel Trenchless
Technology (SSOM), IWA Asia-Pacific Regional Conference, Bangkok, Thailand, October 19-23.
Weng, H.T., and Liaw, S. L., (2003). Studying a Sewer System Layout Optimization Model with Applied
Enumeration Algorithm (SSOM/LH), Proc. 16th Environ. Planning & Management Conf., Taiwan CIEnvE, Nov.
28-29. (in Chinese)
McKinney, D. C., and Lin, M. D.(1994). Genetic Algorithm Solution of Groundwater Management Models, Water
Resources Research, 30 , 6 , pp. 1897-1906.
Benson, R.E., (1985). Self-Cleaning Slope for Partially Full Sewers, Journal of the Environmental Engineering
Division, ASCE, 111, 6, pp. 925-928.
Orth, H.M. (1986), Model-Based Design of Water Distribution and Sewage Systems, 1st Ed., John Wiley & Sons,
New York, U.S.A.
Chang, S.Y. and Liaw, S.L., (1987). An Efficient Implicit Enumeration Algorithm for Multistage Systems, for
presentation at the TIMS/ORSA Joint National Meeting, New Orleans, LA, May 4-6,.
Simpson, A. R., Dandy, G. C., and Murphy L. J. (1994). Genetic Algorithms Compared to Other Techniques for Pipe
Optimization. J. Water Resour. Plann. Manage, ASCE, 120, 4, pp 423-443.
Halhal D., WALTERS G. A., and Savic D. A. (1997). Water Network Rehabilitation with Structured Messy Genetic
Algorithms. J. Water Resour. Piann. Manage, ASCE, 123, 3, pp 137-146.
Savic D. A. and Walters G. A. (1997). Genetic Algorithms for Least-Cost Design of Water Distribution Networks. J.
Water Resour. Plann. Manage, ASCE, 123, 2, pp 67-77.
Pilar Montesinos,Adela G.G., and Jose L. A. (1999). Water Distribution Network Optimization Using a Modified
Genetic Algorithms. Water Resour. RES.,35, 11, pp 3467-3473.
Dandy, G. C., and M. Engelhardt. (2001). Optimal Scheduling of Pipe Replacement Using Genetic Algorithms, J.
Water Resour. Piann. Manage, ASCE, 127, 4, pp. 214-223.
Goldberg, David E. and The University of Alabama. (1989). Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and
Machine Learning, 1st Ed., Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., U.S.A.

790