Skip to main content

A Novel Stochastic Approach for Optimization of Diversion System Dimension by Considering Hydrological and Hydraulic Uncertainties

Abstract

This study proposes a new stochastic approach for optimizing diversion system design and its construction schedule by considering different hydrological and hydraulic uncertainties sources. For this purpose, a multi-objective optimization-simulation model was developed to evaluate the failure of a diversion system to flood. Two objective functions, the expected flood damage (EFD) and cost-benefit (CB) index of a diversion system, are optimized in this study using a non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II). The approach is tested for four different compositions of uncertainties (Base Case, Case1, Case2, and Case3) to estimate their impacts based on distance index (D) and the boxplot. Finally, finance constraints are evaluated based on the construction period of the project. The Karun-4 dam, located in Iran, is considered as the case study. The obtained results demonstrate that the hydrological uncertainty with \({D}_{case2}^{basecase}=21.335\) and \({IQR}_{basecase}=2.1M\) has the highest effect on the Pareto optimal front and the hydraulic uncertainty of downstream cofferdam with \({D}_{case3}^{basecase}=5.789\) and \({IQR}_{case2}=1.8M\) has the lowest effect on the Pareto optimal front. The best value of the CB index is related to the base case (66.42%) using the pseudo weight factor. The study indicates that the total investment of the water diversion system is lower than the consultant's plan by 20.23%, 18.33%, 17.28%, and 18.81% when the different components of uncertainty are considered. An implementation period of 6-year and 11-year is the best option for no financial constraints and financial constraints, respectively. The stochastic simulation-optimization approach proposed in the present study provides decision-makers reliable insight into planning dam construction.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Availability of Data and Materials

Please contact the corresponding author for data requests.

Code Availability

Please contact the corresponding author for code requests.

References

  1. Afshar A, Barkhordary A, Mariño MA (1994) Optimizing river diversion under hydraulic and hydrologic uncertainties. J Water Resour Plan Manag 120:36–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Afshar A, Rasekh A, Afshar MH (2009) Risk-based optimization of large flood-diversion systems using genetic algorithms. Eng Optim 41:259–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ahmadi Najl A, Haghighi A, Vali Samani HM (2016) Simultaneous Optimization of Operating Rules and Rule Curves for Multireservoir Systems Using a Self-Adaptive Simulation-GA Model. J Water Resour Plan Manag 142:04016041. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Alahdin S, Ghafouri HR, Haghighi A (2019) Multi-reservoir System Operation in Drought Periods with Balancing Multiple Groups of Objectives. KSCE J Civ Eng 23:914–922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-018-0109-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ardeshirtanha K, Sharafati A (2020) Assessment of water supply dam failure risk: development of new stochastic failure modes and effects analysis. Water Resour Manag 1–15

  6. Ashofteh P-S, Haddad OB, Loáiciga HA (2015) Evaluation of Climatic-Change Impacts on Multiobjective Reservoir Operation with Multiobjective Genetic Programming. J Water Resour Plan Manag 141:04015030. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Beygi S, Tabesh M, Liu S (2019) Multi-Objective Optimization Model for Design and Operation of Water Transmission Systems Using a Power Resilience Index for Assessing Hydraulic Reliability. Water Resour Manag 33:3433–3447. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-019-02311-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brown PH, Magee D, Wolf AT (2009) Modeling the costs and benefits of dam construction from a multidisciplinary perspective. J Environ Manage 90:S303–S311. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2008.07.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Deb K (2001) Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. John Wiley & Sons

    Google Scholar 

  10. Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6:182–197. https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.996017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dumedah G, Berg AA, Wineberg M, Collier R (2010) Selecting Model Parameter Sets from a Trade-off Surface Generated from the Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm-II. Water Resour Manag 24:4469–4489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-010-9668-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Farajvand M, Kiarostami V, Davallo M, Ghaedi A (2019) Simultaneous extraction of Cu2+ and Cd2+ ions in water, wastewater, and food samples using solvent-terminated dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction: optimization by multiobjective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition. Environ Monit Assess 191:287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-019-7383-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gabriel-martin I, Sordo-ward A, Garrote L, Castillo LG (2017) Influence of initial reservoir level and gate failure in dam safety analysis. Stochastic approach. J Hydrol 550:669–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.05.032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gen M, Cheng R (2000) Genetic algorithms and engineering optimization. Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  15. Iran ministry of energy (2008) Karun IV dam and power planet report.Report Number 338202/3290/13363. Tehran, Iran

  16. Javadi S, Hashemy Shahdany SM, Neshat A, Chambel A (2020) Multi-parameter risk mapping of Qazvin aquifer by classic and fuzzy clustering techniques. Geocarto Int 1–23

  17. Karamouz M, Doroudi S, Ahmadi A, Moridi A (2009) Optimal design of water diversion system: A case study. In: Proceedings of World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2009 - World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2009: Great Rivers

  18. Karamouz M, Doroudi S, Moridi A (2016) An Optimal Design for Dimensions of Water Diversion System in Dams using and Analyzing Hydraulic Uncertainties and Hydrologic Risk. Iranian Hydraulic Association

  19. Karamouz M, Doroudi S, Moridi A (2018) Developing a Model for Optimizing the Geometric Characteristics of Water Diversion Systems. J Irrig Drain Eng 144:4017062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kharanagh SG, Banihabib ME, Javadi S (2020) An MCDM-based social network analysis of water governance to determine actors’ power in water-food-energy nexus. J Hydrol 581:124382

  21. Kourakos G, Mantoglou A (2011) Simulation and Multi-Objective Management of Coastal Aquifers in Semi-Arid Regions. Water Resour Manag 25:1063–1074. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-010-9677-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Liu D, Hu Z, Guo W et al (2018) Multi-Attribute Group-Decision on a Construction Diversion Scheme for Hydropower Projects Based on Perception Utility. Energies 11:3027. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11113027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Malmir M, Javadi S, Moridi A et al (2021) A new combined framework for sustainable development using the DPSIR approach and numerical modeling. Geosci Front 12:101169

  24. Marengo H, Arreguin FI, Aldama AA, Morales V (2013) Case study: Risk analysis by overtopping of diversion works during dam construction: The La Yesca hydroelectric project, Mexico. Struct Saf 42:26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2013.01.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mays LW (2005) Water resources engineering, 2005th edn. John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mousavi SJ, Anzab NR, Asl-Rousta B, Kim JH (2017) Multi-objective optimization-simulation for reliability-based inter-basin water allocation. Water Resour Manag 31:3445–3464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Padgett JE, Dennemann K, Ghosh J (2010) Risk-based seismic life-cycle cost-benefit (LCC-B) analysis for bridge retrofit assessment. Struct Saf 32:165–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2009.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Patterson JH, Brian Talbot F, Slowinski R, Wegłarz J (1990) Computational experience with a backtracking algorithm for solving a general class of precedence and resource-constrained scheduling problems. Eur J Oper Res 49:68–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90121-Q

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Peterson S (2005) Construction accounting and financial management

  30. Rasekh A, Afshar A, Afshar MH (2010) Risk-Cost Optimization of Hydraulic Structures: Methodology and Case Study. Water Resour Manag 24:2833–2851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-010-9582-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sharafati A, Azamathulla HM (2018) Assessment of Dam Overtopping Reliability using SUFI Based Overtopping Threshold Curve. Water Resour Manag 32:2369–2383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Sharafati A, Yaseen ZM, Pezeshki E (2020) Strategic Assessment of Dam Overtopping Reliability Using a Stochastic Process Approach. J Hydrol Eng 25:4020029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Sharafati A, Yaseen ZM, Shahid S (2021) A novel simulation–optimization strategy for stochastic‐based designing of flood control dam: A case study of Jamishan dam. J Flood Risk Manag 14:e12678

  34. Singh RM (2011) Design of Barrages with Genetic Algorithm Based Embedded Simulation Optimization Approach. Water Resour Manag 25:409–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-010-9706-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Song Z, Liu Q, Hu Z (2020) Decision-Making Framework, Enhanced by Mutual Inspection for First-Stage Dam Construction Diversion Scheme Selection. Water Resour Manag 34:563–577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-019-02461-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Su H-T, Tung Y-K (2013) Flood-Damage-Reduction Project Evaluation with Explicit Consideration of Damage Cost Uncertainty. J Water Resour Plan Manag 139:704–711. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)wr.1943-5452.0000291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Ward FA (2012) Cost–benefit and water resources policy: a survey. Water Policy 14:250–280. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2011.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Xie B, Ma Y, Wan J et al (2018) Modeling and multi-objective optimization for ANAMMOX process under COD disturbance using hybrid intelligent algorithm. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:20956–20967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2056-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Xue JP, Hu ZG (2015) Harmonious allocation model of the river diversion standard under synchronous construction of hydropower stations. Appl Mech Mater 744–746:1082–1091. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.744-746.1082

  40. Yazdi J, Golian S, Roohi M (2017) Determining Checkdams Layout for Flood Mitigation Using Simulation-Optimization Approach. Int J Environ Res 11:395–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Yazdi J, Moridi A (2018) Multi-Objective Differential Evolution for Design of Cascade Hydropower Reservoir Systems. Water Resour Manag 32:4779–4791. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-018-2083-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Ahmad Sharafati participated in coordination, aided in the interpretation of results, and paper editing. Siyamak Doroudi proposed the topic, carried out the investigation, modeling and participated in drafting the manuscript. Shamsuddin Shahid carried out the visualization and paper editing. Ali Moridi helped in data gathering and paper editing. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmad Sharafati.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sharafati, A., Doroudi, S., Shahid, S. et al. A Novel Stochastic Approach for Optimization of Diversion System Dimension by Considering Hydrological and Hydraulic Uncertainties. Water Resour Manage 35, 3649–3677 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-021-02909-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • NSGA-II
  • Optimization
  • Project schedule
  • Risk analysis
  • Diversion system
  • Dam construction