by researchers when developing their proposed techniques such as model and
measurements uncertainties. Trends and gaps in the current research and future
research directions are identified and discussed in this chapter, and a number of
considerations to promote further developments in this important field of research
are presented. The desired outcome of this chapter is to serve as a useful resource for
researchers and practitioners involved in sensor network design for leak/burst
detection and localisation and in the development/adoption of leak/burst detection
and localisation techniques.
Keywords Leak and burst detection and localisation, Literature review, Pressure
and flow sensors, Sensor network design
1 Introduction
The problem of leak and pipe burst events in water distribution systems (WDSs) is a
compelling issue for water companies worldwide. Leak and pipe burst events not
only cause economic losses to water companies [1] but also represent an environmental issue (i.e. waste of water and energy) and a potential risk to public health
[2]. Furthermore, they have a negative impact on water companies’ operational
performance, customer service and reputation. Currently, a wide range of leak/
burst event detection and location techniques exists that are based on various
principles [3–7]. However, none is ideal, and the number of techniques currently
practised by water companies is limited. In many cases, pipe bursts are brought to the
attention of a water company only when someone calls in to report a visible event.
Water companies embracing modern leakage management technologies devote
considerable manpower and resources to proactive detecting and localising leaks
and pipe bursts by utilising techniques that make use of highly specialised hardware
equipment (e.g. leak noise correlators, acoustic sensors mounted on inline pipeline
inspection gauges, ground penetrating radars, etc.). Despite some of these techniques
being the most accurate ones used today [6], they are also costly, labour-intensive
and slow to run. Consequently, much research has been focused on finding inexpensive (i.e. numerical) techniques that can help the water companies significantly
reducing the leaks/bursts’ lifecycle by making them aware of the occurrence of these
events much faster and guiding the water company personnel straight to the problem
areas.
In the above scenario (and bearing in mind that in the last decade the importance
of a proactive approach to network management and near real-time assets monitoring have become apparent as water companies have had to deal with tightening
regulatory and budgetary constraints), it is clear that instrumentation and analytics
can play a vital role in addressing the aforementioned issues. In the UK, and as
recommended internationally by the International Water Association (IWA), WDSs
are divided into District Metered Areas (DMAs), which may consist of
28
M. Romano
measurements uncertainties. Trends and gaps in the current research and future
research directions are identified and discussed in this chapter, and a number of
considerations to promote further developments in this important field of research
are presented. The desired outcome of this chapter is to serve as a useful resource for
researchers and practitioners involved in sensor network design for leak/burst
detection and localisation and in the development/adoption of leak/burst detection
and localisation techniques.
Keywords Leak and burst detection and localisation, Literature review, Pressure
and flow sensors, Sensor network design
1 Introduction
The problem of leak and pipe burst events in water distribution systems (WDSs) is a
compelling issue for water companies worldwide. Leak and pipe burst events not
only cause economic losses to water companies [1] but also represent an environmental issue (i.e. waste of water and energy) and a potential risk to public health
[2]. Furthermore, they have a negative impact on water companies’ operational
performance, customer service and reputation. Currently, a wide range of leak/
burst event detection and location techniques exists that are based on various
principles [3–7]. However, none is ideal, and the number of techniques currently
practised by water companies is limited. In many cases, pipe bursts are brought to the
attention of a water company only when someone calls in to report a visible event.
Water companies embracing modern leakage management technologies devote
considerable manpower and resources to proactive detecting and localising leaks
and pipe bursts by utilising techniques that make use of highly specialised hardware
equipment (e.g. leak noise correlators, acoustic sensors mounted on inline pipeline
inspection gauges, ground penetrating radars, etc.). Despite some of these techniques
being the most accurate ones used today [6], they are also costly, labour-intensive
and slow to run. Consequently, much research has been focused on finding inexpensive (i.e. numerical) techniques that can help the water companies significantly
reducing the leaks/bursts’ lifecycle by making them aware of the occurrence of these
events much faster and guiding the water company personnel straight to the problem
areas.
In the above scenario (and bearing in mind that in the last decade the importance
of a proactive approach to network management and near real-time assets monitoring have become apparent as water companies have had to deal with tightening
regulatory and budgetary constraints), it is clear that instrumentation and analytics
can play a vital role in addressing the aforementioned issues. In the UK, and as
recommended internationally by the International Water Association (IWA), WDSs
are divided into District Metered Areas (DMAs), which may consist of
28
M. Romano