Puust UWJ 2010

This article was downloaded by: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution - Superceded by 916427733]
On: 3 June 2010

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 911724993]
Publisher Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Urban Water Journal
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713734575
A review of methods for leakage management in pipe networks
R. Puusta; Z. Kapelanb; D. A. Savicb; T. Koppela

a
Department of Mechanics, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia b School of Engineering,
Computing and Computer Science, Centre for Water Systems, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
Online publication date: 24 February 2010
To cite this Article Puust, R. , Kapelan, Z. , Savic, D. A. and Koppel, T.(2010) 'A review of methods for leakage
management in pipe networks', Urban Water Journal, 7: 1, 25 45

To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/15730621003610878
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15730621003610878
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Urban Water Journal

Vol. 7, No. 1, February 2010, 2545
RESEARCH ARTICLE
A review of methods for leakage management in pipe networks
R. Puusta*, Z. Kapelanb, D.A. Savicb and T. Koppela
a
Department of Mechanics, Tallinn University of Technology, Ehitajate tee 5, Tallinn, 19086, Estonia; bSchool of Engineering,
Computing and Computer Science, Centre for Water Systems, University of Exeter, Harrison Building, North Park Road,
Exeter EX4 4QF, UK
Downloaded By: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution - Superceded by 916427733] At: 09:25 3 June 2010
(Received 15 August 2009; nal version received 4 November 2009)

Leakage in water distribution systems is an important issue which is aecting water companies and their customers
worldwide. It is therefore no surprise that it has attracted a lot of attention by both practitioners and researchers
over the past years. Most of the leakage management related methods developed so far can be broadly classied as
follows: (1) leakage assessment methods which are focusing on quantifying the amount of water lost; (2) leakage
detection methods which are primarily concerned with the detection of leakage hotspots and (3) leakage control
models which are focused on the eective control of current and future leakage levels. This paper provides a
comprehensive review of the above methods with the objective to identify the current state-of-the-art in the eld and
to then make recommendations for future work. The review ends with the main conclusion that despite all the
advancements made in the past, there is still a lot of scope and need for further work, especially in area of real-time
models for pipe networks which should enable fusion of leakage detection, assessment and control methods.
Keywords: distribution system; leakage assessment; leakage control; leakage detection; pipe network; water
distribution systems; leakage model, pressure-dependent leakage
1. Introduction
Leakage occurs in all water distribution systems
nowadays. As noted by William Hope long time ago
(1892), there is no water-supply in which some
unnecessary waste does not exist and there are few
supplies, if any, in which the saving of a substantial
proportion of that waste would not bring pecuniary
advantage to the Water Authority.
The amount of water leaked in water distribution
systems varies widely between dierent countries,
regions and systems, from as low as 37% of
distribution input in the well maintained systems in
The Netherlands (Beuken et al. 2006) to 50 percent in
some undeveloped countries and less well maintained
systems (Lambert 2002; Mamlook and Al-Jayyousi
2003).
Leakage is not just an economical issue as it is often
perceived and presented by water companies but it is
also an environmental, sustainability and potentially a
health and safety issue. As noted by Colombo and
Karney (2002), leakages cause inecient energy
distribution through the network (thus wasting energy
used for pumping the water) and, also, may aect
*Corresponding author. Email: raido@sta.ttu.ee

ISSN 1573-062X print/ISSN 1744-9006 online
2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/15730621003610878
http://www.informaworld.com
water quality by introducing infection into water

distribution networks in low pressure conditions.
A number of past, review type papers exist in the
eld of leakage modelling and management. One of the
earliest review papers is the paper by Morris (1967)
which provided an overview of potential causal factors
leading to water pipe breaks. A report summarising
dierent leakage control policies can be found in
Goodwin (1980). Comparisons of the key attributes of
dierent leak detection methods are given by Cist and
Schutz (2001). Another review and classication of
leakage detection methods is reported by Liou et al.
(2003). A review of calibration methods in water
pipelines (including leaks) can be also found in
Kapelan (2002) and Savic et al. (2009).
Unlike the existing approaches mentioned above,
which are focusing on a particular leakage issue
(usually leakage detection), this paper looks wider by
considering the overall leakage management process.
The objective of this paper is to review the methods
and models developed in the past used in dierent
phases of this process, from becoming aware of the
leak existence to controlling the level of leakage in the
26
R. Puust et al.
system. It is hoped that this way the new promising

research areas will be found as they often exist along
the boundaries of current research areas. More
specically, this review looks into past methods and
models developed that can be used to either assess,
detect or control leakage in distribution (and other)
pipe systems. The main objective is to identify the
advantages and disadvantages of all existing approaches and to then use the observations made to
suggest possible future research work in the eld.
The paper is laid out as follows. After this
introduction, the relevant background information is
presented in section 2. This is followed by the review of
leakage assessment methods in section 3, detection
methods in section 4 and leakage control methods in
section 5. Finally, the main conclusions are drawn in
section 6 of the paper.
2. Background
Dierent denitions of leakage in distribution systems
exist. The most frequently used one denes the leakage
as (amount of) water which escapes from the pipe
network by means other than through a controlled
action (Ofwat 2008). Water leakage in distribution
systems is typically classied into background and
burst related leakage (ODay 1982). Bursts (i.e. main
breaks) represent structural pipe failures and background leaks represent the water escaping through
inadequate joints, cracks, etc. Leaks can also exist in
service reservoirs and tanks.
Leakage in distribution systems can be caused by a
number of dierent factors. Some examples include
bad pipe connections, internal or external pipe corrosion or mechanical damage caused by excessive pipe
load (e.g. by trac on the road above or by a third
party working in the system). Other common factors
that inuence leakages are ground movement, high
system pressure, damage due to excavation, pipe age,
winter temperature, defects in pipes, ground conditions
and poor quality of workmanship. Therefore, the
presence of leakage may damage the infrastructure and
cause third party damage, water and nancial losses,
energy losses and health risks.
Leakage is dependent on system pressure. Basically, the higher the pressure, the larger the leak ow
and vice versa. Initially, an orice type equation
(Wiggert, 1968) was used to describe this relationship.
Although the orice equation is still widely used in
many research studies, the user must be aware that the
equation can lead to misleading results when the
pipe in question is not made of a rigid material
(Greyvenstein and van Zyl 2005) or when the pressure
is negative (Todini 2003). Lately, a more generalised
leak owpressure equation has been adopted which
allows specifying leakage exponent dierent from 0.5

(Germanopoulos 1985). It has been shown that the
value of this exponent depends on the type of leak,
pipe material behaviour, soil hydraulics and water
demand (Cassa et al. 2005; Greyvenstein and Van Zyl
2005; Walski et al. 2006; Noack and Ulanicki 2006).
For example Van Zyl and Clayton (2005) note that
when leakage is analysed as pressure dependent,
demand should follow the same procedure. More on
leakage as a hole in a pipe and its characteristics can be
found in Beck et al. (2005a,b) and Coetzer et al. (2006).
Various studies about the pressure dependent leakage
modelling can be found from the literature. Modelling
based on leak discharge coecient and leak area can
be found from the articles by May (1994), Vela et al.
(1995), Simpson and Vitkovsky (1997), Vitkovsky and
Simpson (1997), Dunlop (1999), Hernandez et al.
(1999), Stathis and Loganathan (1999), Alonso et al.
(2000), Rossman (2000), Ulanicki et al. (2000),
Ulanicka et al. (2001), Vitkovsky et al. (2003a) and
Verde (2005). Modelling that also included pipe
characteristics can be found from Germanopoulos
(1985, 1995), Vairavamoorthy and Lumbers (1998),
Martinez et al. (1999), Reis and Chaudry (1999),
Tucciarelli et al. (1999), Ainola et al. (2000) and Dias
et al. (2005).
3. Leakage assessment methods
The objective of leakage assessment (i.e. water audit) is
to estimate the quantity of water lost in the system
analysed without worrying where the leaks are actually
located. The assessment methods developed so far can
be broadly classied into the following two main
groups: (a) top-down leakage assessment methods and
(b) bottom-up leakage assessment methods.
3.1.
Top-down approaches
The objective of top-down leakage assessment approaches is to estimate the leakage in a particular
system by evaluating dierent components of the
overall water balance, primarily the water consumed
for dierent purposes. The two main approaches used
are the IWA approach (Lambert and Hirner 2000) and
the approach used by the OFWAT in the UK.
Although quite similar, there are some dierences
between the two approaches due to slightly dierent
terminology and denitions used for some water
balance components.
More information about the general leakage
assessment can be found from Stenberg (1982),
Thornton (2002), Farley and Trow (2003) and Scott
and Barrufet (2003). The latest reports about average
losses in the UK (based on areas operated by dierent
27
Urban Water Journal
water service companies) can be found in (AHL 2006).

The latest guidance notes on leak location and
repair are published in Pilcher (2003) and Pilcher
et al. (2007).
Despite the simplicity of a top-down type leak
assessment, the leakage estimate obtained via this
method is referred to as a crude estimate. Gathering
such information helps to decide what the next step in
leakage studies should be for a particular network but
it does not help to bound potential leak areas,
let al.one locate leaks.
3.2. Bottom-up approaches
Bottom-up type leakage assessment can be considered the second part of the audit process. This
procedure is implemented when the company has
conrmed the data used in the top-down portion. It
includes every area of the companys operation:
billing records, distribution system, accounting principles etc. The audits main purpose is to nd out
the eciency of the water distribution system and
the measures needed to achieve these. Bottom-up
audits require the most accurate and up-to-date data
possible.
Bottom-up real loss assessment can be carried out
in two dierent ways: (a) 24 Hour Zone Measurement
(HZM) or (b) Minimum Night Flow (MNF) analysis.
HZM needs a temporary isolated area of the distribution network that is supplied from one or two inow
points only. In these areas, 24-h inow measurements
shall always be logged along with pressure measurements. MNF in urban situations normally occurs
during the early morning period, usually between 02:00
and 04:00 h (Liemberger and Farley 2004). The
estimation of the real loss component is carried out
by subtracting legitimate night uses from the MNF. To
get a satisfactory estimate of the daily leakage,
Stenberg (1982) has found that night leakage ow
rates should then be multiplied by 20 h. This assumption does not take into account that pressure is not
constant over a period of time. Therefore Lambert
(2001) suggests using a method called xed and variable
area discharges (FAVAD). This method uses the
following equation:
q k Hb
in pressure can then be computed by FAVAD

concept as:
L1 =L2 H1 =H2 b
where L1 and L2 are leakage rates and H1, H2 are

pressure heads at respective times. Thereafter leakage
can be simulated over the full 24-h period (see
Figure 1).
At the end of the real loss assessment process, the
advantage of the combined top-down, bottom-up and
component analysis (Table 1) that were introduced in
the early 1990s (Farley and Trow 2003) becomes
obvious. Several countries have had their own measures or indicators. For example the sample measures
could be: percentage of average daily ow (USA,
France); m3/km of mains/hours (German, Japan);
litres/property/hour (UK) and litres/service connection/hour. The problem is that those indicators do not
take account of component analysis techniques therefore additional performance measures have to be used.
Comparison of some additional performance measures
can be found in Tuhovcak et al. (2005). Performance
indicators should count the possibility of consumption
decreases seasonally or annually (non-revenue water
does not) and also take into account pressure relations
in the pressure zone. Therefore recommended indicators should always indicate its robustness. Robustness
can be dened with a level and a function (Table 2).
The most commonly used leak index nowadays is
infrastructure leakage index (ILI) (Lambert 2003;
Farley and Trow 2003). The advantages of using ILI
are that it can be consistently applied across a range of
utilities and that it is a measure of what can be
achieved given the condition of the infrastructure. Its
key disadvantage is that it is not easily understood by
non-technical readers. Additionally it does not take
into account the relative costs of leakage management
Where q volume rate per unit length; k Cdb (2g)b;

b leakage exponent; Cd discharge coecient;
b width of the slot; g gravitational acceleration;
H pressure head. Leak exponents vary, being close
to 0.5 with xed area leakage path (hole in pipe) and
1.5 with variable leakage path (crack in pipe). The
increase or decrease of real losses due to a change
Figure 1. Leakage modelling (24 h) based on minimum

night ow measurement. Adapted from Liemberger and
Farley (2004, Figure 2).
28
Table 1.
R. Puust et al.
IWA standard for international water balance and terminology.
Authorized
consumption
Billed
Unbilled
System input
volume
Water
losses
Apparent
losses
Real
losses
Billed metered consumption (including water exported)

Billed unmetered consumption
Unbilled metered consumption
Unbilled unmetered consumption
Unauthorized consumption
Customer metering inaccuracies
Leakage on transmission and/or distribution mains
Leakage and overows at utilitys storage tanks
Leakage on service connections up to point of customer
metering
Revenue
water
Non-revenue
water
Table 2. Recommended indicators for real losses and non-revenue water (adapted from Liemberger and Farley (2004,
Figure 4)).
Function
Level
Financial: NRW
by Volume
Operational:
Apparent
Losses
Operational: Real
Losses
1 (Basic)
1 (Basic)
1 (Basic)
Operational: Real
Losses
2 (Intermed.)
Financial: NRW
by cost
Operational: Real
Losses
3 (Detailed)
3 (Detailed)
Performance Indicator
Comments
Volume of NRW [% of System Input

Volume]
[m3/service connection/year] or:
[m3/km of mains/year] (only if service
connection density is 520/m)
[litres/service connection/day] or:
[litres/km of mains/day] (only if service
connection density is 520/km)
[litres/service connection/day/m pressure]
or:
[litres/km of mains day/m pressure] (only
if service connection density is 520/
km)
Value of NRW [% of annual cost of
running system]
Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI)
Can be calculated from simple water balance,

not too meaningful
Best of the simple traditional performance
indicators, useful for targer setting, limited
use for comparisons between systems
(and other marginal costs, like environmental costs)

and it is not able to dene what level of reduction is
economically feasible. An additional advantage of
calculating an ILI index is that it can be used to
calculate the leakage exponent (Thornton and Lambert 2005):
b 1:5 1 0:65=ILI
p
100
where p the percentage of rigid pipes in network.

Using Equation (3) the calculation for dierent
leakage exponents for dierent networks/countries/
regions can be found (see Table 3).
Although classical minimum night ow analysis
(Araujo et al. 2003a; Covas et al. 2006a; Garcia et al.
2006) can reduce real losses (leakage) considerably,
there are many other methods of leak assessments that
could possibly be used depending on network architecture (see Puust 2007). In addition to water audits the
Easy to calculate indicator if the ILI is not

known yet, useful for comparisons between
systems
Allows dierent unit costs for NRW
components, good nancial indicator
Ratio of Current Annual Real Losses to
Unavoidable Annual Real Losses, most
powerful indicator for comparisons between
systems
assessment can be done also using some statistical

analysis for detecting the magnitude of leaks (Buchberger and Nadimpalli 2004). This is expected to be
more accurate but with a cost of a need of continuous,
high resolution measurements of discharge at one or
more locations within the district metering area
(DMA). This can be problematic in some cases because
the high resolution data measurements are not used
very often within a DMA and the location of data
acquisition systems must be carefully planned in such
case studies (Vitkovsky et al. 2003c; Kapelan et al.
2003c, 2005; Behzadian et al. 2009).
4.
Leakage detection methods
Historically, leakage assessment studies have been

carried out to quantify total losses including, if
possible, real and apparent losses. This was followed
by the development of leakage detection methods with
the aim to detect and locate leaks. Although some
29
Urban Water Journal

Table 3.
Summary of exponents b derived from eld tests (adapted from Garzon-Contreras and Thornton (2006, Table 1)).
Country
Number of zones tested
United Kingdom (1970s)

Japan (1979)
Brazil (1998)
United Kingdom (2003)
Cyprus (2005)
Brazil (2006)
17
20
13
75
15
17
Totals
0.70
0.63
0.52
0.36
0.64
0.73
157
leakage detection methods have been around for years,

because of constant development, they are getting
increasingly high tech and sophisticated than ever
before. Still, regardless of whether the methods are
equipment or non-equipment based, it is common
practice to use some leak detection method in
conjunction with other methods.
4.1. Leakage awareness methods
The term leak awareness is used to explain the
discovery of a leak in a particular area within the
network. It does not give any information about its
precise location. Usually a hydraulic model is needed
for the leakage awareness test. Various hydraulic
models have been proposed to detect leaks in water
distribution systems. Those methods usually involve
calibration/optimisation techniques to analyse the
dierent areas of the network. The problem is
formulated as a constrained optimisation problem of
weighted least- square type to minimise the objective
function E:
P
X
Q

2 X

2
wh hm

h
w q qm
i
i
i qi
i1
i1
N
X

2
wp pm
i pi
Range of exponents b
k1
where P and Q are the number of pressure, ow

measurement respectively, hm
i is the measured head at
node i, hi is the computed head at node i, qm
i is the
measured ow at pipe i, qi is the computed ow at pipe
i, pm
i is the prior estimate (pseudo measurement), pi is
the prior estimate and N is the number of prior
estimate, w is a weight factor for pressure/ow and
prior estimate part. Prior estimates were introduced
into the minimisation problem by Kapelan (Kapelan
2002; Kapelan et al. 2000, 2003a,b, 2004) to avoid the
ill-posed problem (that is there is no solution, no
unique solution or the solution is unstable), to improve
the accuracy of the estimated calibration parameters
to
to
to
to
to
to
Average exponent b
1.68
2.12
2.79
2.95
2.83
2.42
1.13
1.15
1.15
1.01
1.47
1.4
0.36 to 2.95
1.14
and to increase the speed of the convergence process.

It should be noted that prior estimates work better
with pipe friction factors as these are less sensitive than
leak eective areas.
The minimisation of Equation (4) gives the solution
to an inverse problem (Pudar and Liggett 1992; Stathis
and Loganathan 1999). Various minimisation algorithms have been used to minimise the objective
function, Equation (4). When steady state regime is
used, both pressure and ow measurements can be
used. In a transient ow regime ow measurements are
dicult to use because most ow meters do not react
instantaneously to a change in ow (Chen, 1995). Early
adoptions of uid transients for leak detection can be
found from Wiggert (1968), Nicholas (1990), Liggett
(1993), Liggett and Chen (1994).
The use of uid transients for leak detection has
gained popularity over the last decade as a massive
amount of data can be gathered in a very short period
of time therefore ensuring that the inverse problem will
always be over-determined. Another good advantage
over steady-state calculation is that pressure waves are
less aected by friction than the general ow and thus
the precise friction values become less important to the
calculation. Therefore, using transients, the leak
detection and calibration (friction factors) can be
done simultaneously, thus providing a solution to the
problem of unknown or poorly known friction. Fluid
transients are used to probe the pipeline in much the
same way as radar and sonar are applied to locate and
identify objects. The reason why methods based on
transients are mainly used on single, grounded
pipelines is that an uncertainty of the system does
aect the results considerably (pressure wave reections from each feature of the pipe). For undergrounded pipes the systems architecture can be hardly
followed thus its applicability in such situations is still
questionable.
A number of hydraulic transient-based techniques
for detecting and locating existing leaks are described
in the literature: leak reection method (LRM)
(Jonsson 1995, 2003; Brunone 1999, Brunone and
Ferrante 1999, 2001, 2004; Covas and Ramos 1999),
30
R. Puust et al.
inverse transient analysis (ITA) (Liggett and Chen

1994; Liou 1994; Vitkovsky et al. 2000; Kapelan et al.
2003a,b; Covas et al. 2001, 2003, 2005b; Covas and
Ramos 2001; Stephens et al. 2004; Wang et al. 2006;
Soares et al. 2007), impulse response analysis (IRA)
(Liou 1998; Vitkovsky et al. 2003b; Kim 2005),
transient damping method (TDM) (Wang et al. 2002,
2003), frequency domain response analysis (FRM)
(Mpesha et al. 2001, 2002; Stoianov et al. 2001;
Ferrante and Brunone 2001a,b, 2003a, b; Covas et al.
2005a; Ferrante et al. 2005; Lee et al. 2003, 2005a,b,
2006; Zecchin et al. 2005, 2006). The main objective of
all transient leak detection methods is the same to
extract information about the presence of a leak from
the measured transient trace. A transient event is
generated either by system elements (i.e. inline valves
and pumps) or special devices (for example solenoid
side discharge valves).
In the leak reection method (LRM), a transient
wave is travelling along a pipeline and it is partially
reected at the leak. The location of the leak can be
then identied from the measured pressure trace
(Figure 2). The magnitude from the leak depends on
the ratio between the size of the generated transient
wave and the size of the leak orice. LRM methods are
so far used only in single pipe case studies in
laboratory conditions.
The inverse transient analysis method (ITA) was
rst introduced by Liggett and Chen (1994). The ITA
uses least-squares regression between modelled and
measured transient pressure traces. The leak is usually
modelled at network nodes and the minimisation of the
deviation between the measured and calculated pressures produces a solution of leak location and size
(Figure 3). The ITA method is a well-researched topic
Figure 2. Pressure time-history at the leak during transient

due to the closure of the end valve. Even though the transient
attenuates quickly, the risk of compromising water quality
exists (where pressure falls below tank level, h0 and the
ambient pressure external to the leak, pext is higher than the
internal pipe pressure at the leak, pe). Adapted from Brunone
and Ferrante (2004, Figure 1).
but since its introduction, the main eort has been

focused on the development of the mathematical part
of the technique and not on experimental validation or
eld testing. Some limited experiences from laboratory
and elds tests can be found from Vitkovsky et al.
(2001), Stephens et al. (2004), Covas et al. (2005b) and
Saldarriaga et al. (2006). As with LRM, the tests are
made on single pipeline rather than on a network.
Application diculties lie in the fact that ITA needs an
accurate modelling of the transients and boundary
conditions of the pipe system. To address the latter, a
greater emphasis should be directed toward analysis of
errors and strategies to deal with the uncertainties in
general (Vitkovsky et al. 2007). Model error is the most
likely limiting factor in successful eld application of
ITA and its results should never be presented without
quantication of their uncertainty.
The impulse response analysis (IRA) is based on the
fact that the transient propagation along the pipeline is
aected by the friction of the pipe wall and other loss
elements such as leaks. This eect results in damping of
the transient wave. A leak can be detected when a
transient damping in the same pipeline is compared
with and without a leak (Figure 4). The lack of
information about tests in real pipeline systems where
noisy data would be used makes it a less important
method when compared with LRM and ITA. It has
one advantage when the comparison should be made
with TDM or FRM. Namely, in IRA no discretization
of the pipeline is needed and the shape of the generated
transient is not important.
In the transient damping method (TDM) it is
analytically derived that friction related transient
damping in a pipeline without a leak is exactly
exponential and the corresponding damping in a
pipeline containing a leak is approximately exponential
(Wang et al. 2002). The rate of the leak-induced
damping depends on leak characteristics, the pressure
in the pipe, the location of the transient generation
point and the shape of the generated transient. Tests
on a laboratory pipeline showed successful leak
detection (Figure 5) but in a real situation, friction is
not the only cause of transient damping. Transient
damping can be caused by other physical elements like
joints, connections, re hydrants and pipe wall
deterioration products. The modelling of these elements can be complicated and in some cases even
impossible. Therefore it may be dicult to estimate the
leak-free damping for a real pipeline.
The frequency response method (FRM) uses the
analysis of transient response in the frequency domain.
Fourier transforms are used to transform time-domain
data into the frequency domain. Leak location can be
obtained when the dominant frequencies of no-leak
and leaking pipelines are compared (Figures 6 and 7).
Urban Water Journal
31
Figure 3. Transient analysis for leak detection. Head variations measured at the same nodes for no-leak case studies (a,b) and
for leak case studies (c,d). Considerable head damping can be seen when leaks exist in the system. Adapted from Vitkovsky et al.
(2001, Figures 3, 4).
Figure 4. Impulse response functions for the non-leaking (a) and leaking (b) cases. The rst leak-induced reection for the
leaking case determines the correct location and size of the leak. The secondary reection is negligible compared to the main leak
reection. Adapted from Vitkovsky et al. (2003b, Figure 4).
Performance of the method is strongly inuenced by

the shape of the transient and the measurement
location. As with other methods based on transients,
only pipeline applications of frequency response
analysis are presented in the literature. Some of the
case studies that are based on pressure transients are
summarised in Table 4.
There are many other leak awareness methods but
only three of them have been applied to pipe networks
(Saldarriaga et al. 2006; Deagle et al. 2007; Wu and
Sage 2007). It should be noted that most of them are
very rarely used and/or do not have any practical tests
made to support the idea. One of the reasons why these
model based techniques are not so widely used could

be because of the low ow rates in pipelines that
eliminate the possible use of commonly used pressure
measurement devices that are cheap and easily
manageable, but not eective when used in low ow
conditions.
When leak awareness methods are under discussion
it should be also mentioned that very few of them are
probabilistic ones. In that respect, the Bayesian system
identication methodology has been used by Poulakis
et al. (2003), Rougier (2005) and Puust et al. (2006).
The main reason to use a Bayesian interface in leakage
studies is that normally we are dealing with dierent
32
R. Puust et al.
Figure 5. Fourier series analysis of transients measured from pipeline without leak (a) and with leak (b). By analysing the
damping of harmonic components the leak can be identied. Through the ratios of leak damping rates the leak location can be
calculated. Adapted from Wang et al. (2002, Figure 9).
Figure 6. Continuous wavelet transform (CWT) and discrete wavelet transform (DWT) for no-leak (a,b) and for leak (c,d) case
studies. It is possible to show the presence of the leak of diameter equal to 1.49 mm in both cases. It is observed that chains of
maxima appear in gures (c) and (d) in correspondence with the instants t 1.23 s and t 3.23 s, which are not present in (a)
and (b). Adapted from Ferrante et al. (2005, Figures 25).
33
Urban Water Journal
Figure 7. Impact of changing leak size and position on the frequency response diagram extracted at the inline valve at
downstream boundary: (a) leak at 700 m, Cdb 0.00014 m2; (b) Cdb 0.00028 m2; (c) leak at 1400 m, Cdb 0.00014 m2; (d)
no leak. Adapted from Lee et al. (2005a, Figure 6).
Table 4.
Eciency ranges of various leak detection methodologies using pressure transients.
Transient
methodology
Case study
Inspection range
(pipeline length)
Detectable
leak size
Location
precision
Transient pressure
wave height
Reference
LRM
ITA
ITA
IRA
TDM
FRM
Laboratory
Real
Real
Numerical
Laboratory
Numerical
135 m
5936 m
network
20,000 m
37.2 m
2,000 m
0.04 l/s
3 l/s
1 l/s
10 l/s
0.01 l/s
4.73 l/s
1.9 m
50 m
4.85%*
2000 m
0.38 m
5500 m
44 m
13 m
7m
2m
2m
26 m
Jonsson (2003)
Covas et al. (2005b)
Saldarriaga et al. 2006
Liou (1998)
Wang et al. (2002)
Lee et al. (2005a)
*Leak size error.

Note: This table is for general guidance only based on data that is available from given references. It may not reect the best solution for that
particular technology that is currently available.
kinds of errors that cannot always be included in

calculations. Therefore to make more sense, the nal
discrete value is bounded with a certain probability
that gives us more information about the result
reliability. The drawback is that usually such procedures need a great deal of computer power for
calculations. In general, probabilistic models are used
also to conduct criticality analysis, where small cracks
in pipes might cause the overall failure of much larger
systems (like cooling systems in nuclear power plants,
Rahman et al. 1997).
Great eort has been made so far in the development of model based leak detection methodologies.
Whilst this development will continue, it is obvious
that some methods will be suitable for application to
simple systems only (e.g., single pipelines). An example
of this is transient based methodologies. Because of
their limitations when applied to network systems it is
clear that development of transient based methodologies for leakage control will be limited to single
pipelines. For a general reference about leakage
control please see section 5.
34
4.2.
R. Puust et al.
Leakage localisation methods
Leak localising is an activity that identies and

prioritises the areas of leakage to make pinpointing
of leaks easier. Some methods/techniques that belong
to this group are: acoustic logging (Moyer 1983; Hough
1988; Rajtar and Muthiah 1997; Hessel et al. 1999;
Hunaidi and Chu 1999; Miller et al. 1999; Lockwood
2003; Shimanskiy 2003; Bracken and Hunaidi 2005;
Muggleton et al. 2006), step-testing (Farley and Trow
2003; Pilcher et al. 2007), ground motion sensors and
ground penetrating radars (Hunaidi 1998; Lockwood
et al. 2003; OBrien et al. 2003).
The most well-known and eective leak localising
method is step-testing and it has been used by several
water utility companies for quite some time. Steptesting is an activity whereby the area is subdivided by
the systematic closing of valves during the period of
minimum night ow. Depending on the methodology
used, step-testing may cause backsiphonage, the risk of
inltration of ground water and some parts of the
network can be without water for a period of time. Not
all networks are planned with the possibility of future
step-testing in mind and therefore it may be dicult to
apply. Because of a need of careful planning, night
work involving the step-testing has been replaced by
acoustic logging during the 1990s (Pilcher et al. 2007).
Acoustic logging (AL) is performed using vibration
sensors or hydrophones, which are temporarily or
permanently attached to the pipe ttings. The distance
between each other typically varies between 200 and
500 m. As with step-testing the data is collected at
night times, usually between 02:00 and 04:00 h.
Downloaded data will then be analysed statistically
for detection of leak signals (Figure 8). Although a
wide area may be covered quickly, for a successful leak
detection good skill is required. The fact that quiet
leaks may not be heard and the background noise cant

be ignored makes it dicult to apply in certain
situations.
The application of ground penetrating radar (GPR)
for leak location has been given a lot of attention
during the last few years (Farley 2008). Ground
penetrating radar inspection is a non-destructive
geophysical method that produces a continuous
cross-sectional prole or record of subsurface features
(Figure 9). Methods like this could be used to locate
leaks in water pipes by detecting either underground
voids created by leaking water as it circulates near the
pipe or by detecting anomalies in the pipe depth as
measured by radar. GPR has evolved for some years
now. It has been previously described as a time
consuming methodology but recent studies show that
along transmission main routes it can be carried out at
1530 km/h, depending on location and trac. As
GPR technology is similar in principle to seismic and
ultrasound techniques, the main disadvantage comes
from the fact that anomalies like metal objects in the
ground can lead to false conclusions and it might not
be applicable in cold climates. Some developed GPR
technologies have a penetration capability of up to 2 m
into the ground. For example in northern European
countries the water pipe bottom should be laid down in
some occasions at least 1.8 m deep to avoid water
freezing. Therefore GPR technology cannot give
trustworthy results on those extreme occasions and in
situations where main pipes are excavated even deeper
into the ground. It should be still noted that this
methodology is a good alternative in situations when
large diameter or non-metallic pipes need monitoring.
In summary, leakage localisation methods can be
used on their own or before/following the application
of some other method. For example, if a hydraulic
model of the analysed system is available then some
Figure 8. Results of acoustic noise loggers in two consecutive days (after repairs): line with crosses noise amplitude and
line with dots noise dispersion. Leakage situation corresponds to line with crosses above line with dots. Adapted from
Covas et al. (2006b, Figure 8).
Urban Water Journal

numerical (i.e. inexpensive) leak detection method may
be used before the leak localisation method, to narrow
the area searched for the leak. However, if the
hydraulic model is not available (or not updated
regularly) then a leak localisation method could be
used on its own.
In general district audits are labour-intensive and
costly, since they are performed at night. A more
recent trend is that permanent ow meters are installed
that are connected telemetrically to a supervisory
control and data acquisition (SCADA) system. The
transmitted ow rate data are automatically analysed
to detect unusual increases in ow patterns (Mounce
et al. 2009). Based on experience with water system, the
increase in ow rate can be explained by leakage or
not. District audits and step testing help identify areas
of the distribution system that have excessive leakage.
No information about the exact location of leaks is
given. When step-testing or SCADA system is not
available, some other technology is needed that can be
used for leak localisation with a reasonable time. The
reasonable time to detect leakage varies depending on
the leak ow rate. Small leaks are more dicult to
locate, especially when using acoustic logging for
plastic pipes. As a consequence, the GPR technology
was developed (any pipe material can be surveyed) and
various studies published demonstrate promising
performance. GPR is probably one of the key
technologies studied in Europe currently (WATERPIPE 2009).
4.3.
Leakage pinpointing methods
Leakage pinpointing methods include methodologies

that are the most accurate in todays leak detection
surveys. Three main groups described here are based
35
on (a) leak noise correlators (Grunwell and Ratclie

1981; Cascetta and Vigo 1992; Gao et al. 2004, 2005,
2006; Hunaidi et al. 2004; Muggleton et al. 2004,
Muggleton and Brennan, 2004, 2005); (b) gas injection
(Field and Ratclie 1978; Hunaidi et al. 2000; Farley
and Trow 2003); and (c) pig-mounted acoustic sensing
(EPSRC 2002; McNulty 2001; Mergelas and Henrich
2005). The historical appearance of leakage pinpointing methodologies is given in Figure 10.
Leak noise correlators (LNC) are the most common
technique for leak location that was rst introduced
commercially into the marketplace in the late 1970s
(Thornton 2002). Their technology has been improved
over the last few years quite considerably. The Water
Research Centre (WRC) in England was one of the
leading research institutions to apply the methodology
onto real pipelines. To correlate the sound from a leak,
two microphones are located in contact with the pipe
or valve stems at the same time, with one microphone
on each side of the leak (Grunwell and Ratclie 1981;
Stenberg 1982). The sound is compared in the
correlator, which is capable of determining the
dierence in time for sound to reach the correlator.
Knowing the speed of sound in the pipe, it is then easy
to calculate the distance to the leak, which will be
independent of the geophone, trac noise, etc. For
accurate leak localisation the pipe system should be
known precisely as a leak correlating in a branched
section tend to show a leak on a tee and not at its exact
location. Such misleading information aects mainly
excavation costs and man-hours needed for a repair.
The latest versions of leak noise correlators can
accurately locate a leak to within 1 metre in most
pipe sizes. The distance between the sensors can be as
high as 3000 m but it depends highly on pipe material.
For plastic pipes this methodology is quite
Figure 9. Left image: Continuous-wave radar principle shown on the left image. Right image: GPR image showing water
accumulation from a leak. Adapted from Farley (2008, Figure 1). Single frequency f0 transmitted by radar is received back from
moving targets slightly dierent frequency f0 Df. By rejecting f0, only moving objects (such as leaking water) are detected.
36
Figure 10.
R. Puust et al.
Several leak detection methods by historical appearance. Adapted from Pilcher et al. (2007, Figure 17).
questionable as distance between the sensors should be

quite small: 15100 m, making this method very slow.
The method works best with clean, small diameter
metallic pipes in high water pressure areas where hard
pipe backll is used.
In a tracer gas technique (TGT), a non-toxic, waterinsoluble and lighter-than-air gas, such as helium or
hydrogen, is injected into an isolated section of a water
pipe. This is followed by ground scanning with a highly
sensitive gas detector which should identify any traces
of escaped gas from the leak point(s) (Figure 11).
Although this method is widely used for machinery
testing, it is normally prohibitive for leak detection
because of the high cost. Its eectiveness comes from
aspects that through TGT multiple leak locations can
be found in a single pipe section or at a branched pipe
systems where noise correlation techniques usually
fails or gives misleading results. The main disadvantage in addition to high costs are that the gas could be
trapped near the ceiling of water-lled pipes and thus
could not escape if leaks were not near the top of the
pipe.
The pipe pig-mounted acoustic (PMA) technique
has also been used for leak detection (McNulty 2001;
EPSRC 2002). This technique requires the insertion of
a microphone (or a pair of microphones) under
pressure into the main. The velocity of water carries
the microphone to the leak position whereas the noise
and its position are continuously recorded. Some latest
technology examples can be found from ChastainHowley (2005) and Fletcher (2008). Inline pigs are used
to carry dierent kinds of sophisticated measuring
devices such as magnetic ux leakage (Mukhopadahyay and Srivastava 2000), hydroscopes (Makar and
Chagon 1999) or ultrasonic tools (Willems and
Barbian 1998) along the pipeline. In general these
tools need clean pipes and therefore it is dicult to
apply this methodology to old pipes where there may
be heavy corrosion. Access to the inside of the pipeline
is also needed. Attention must be paid to the fact that
Figure 11. Recording of a typical leak response when tracer

gas technique is used Adapted from EPRI (1989, Figure 2).
Response time depends on gas that is used and a magnitude
of the response depends on a gas volume that was injected.
as pigs are in contact with the pipe inner wall their

eect on the water quality must be considered before a
survey is performed.
Leak pinpointing techniques are the most precise
technologies currently available for leak detection. It
should be remembered that such a precision comes
with very high costs in terms of equipment owning or
renting and man-hours needed for surveys to be
carried out. Considering this and the length of time
needed for implementation, it is recommended to use
leak pinpointing techniques in conjunction with some
leakage awareness or localisation method. Table 5
brings out some general guidance when leak localisation or pin-pointing technique should be chosen.
5.
Leakage control models
Leakage control models can be generally classied into

the following two main groups: (a) passive (reactive)
leakage control and (b) active leakage control. A
passive leakage control is a policy of responding only
37
Urban Water Journal

Table 5.
Eciency ranges of various leak localisation and pinpointing techniques.
Localisation
Step-test
AL
GPR
Pinpointing
LNC
TGT
PMA
Inspection range
Detectable leak size
Precision
DMA
200500 m
1m
excessive
*0.003 l/s
*0.33 l/s
limited
3075 m*
n/a
152000 m
up to 1 m
up to 2000 m
*0.03 l/s
n/a
*0.00030.003 l/s
50.6 m
51 m
50.5m
Reference
Rajtar and Muthiah (1997)
Hunaidi et al. (1998)
Mergelas and Henrich (2005)
*Depends on inspection range.
to leaks and bursts reported by the public (in some

cases also by a companys own sta). Active leakage
control concerns management policies and processes
used to locate and repair unreported leaks from the
water company supply system and customer supply
pipes.
Many water utilities still take a passive attitude of
waiting for a problem to arise and repairing it only
when leaks become self-evident. For example, the
appearance of water on the ground surface following
pipe failure is visually detected by the sta or reported
by customers. Manual location techniques are then
used to identify the actual location of the failure. This
presents inevitable problems for customers (Ramos
et al. 2001). Passive policy is very straightforward and
simple to use but it does not involve any systematic
action. Therefore this kind of acting is reasonable only
in such water systems where there are very low leakage
levels, the average loss is constantly below 1015%.
Even in low loss cases it is advisable to use some more
advanced technology at the same time (like SCADA
system) as when using passive policy the overall loss
can easily raise to 40%.
Active leakage policy involves the techniques like:
active leakage control and active pressure management. There are also sectorisation and economic
intervention but those are not discussed here. The
most appropriate leakage control policy will mainly be
dictated by the characteristics of the network and local
conditions, which may include nancial constraints on
equipment and other resources (Farley and Trow
2003). The nal choice of the method is also based
on economic considerations. Term economically
viable can be dened with an economic curve of
leakage (ELL) analysis that is described in Figure 12.
The most widely used active leakage control
methodology on single pipelines is based on pressure
transients (Misiunas et al. 2003, 2005a,b, 2006). The
lack of their commercial availability gives them more
attention from the research side and any system-wide
conclusions are hard to be made. The main drawbacks
using transients were already discussed in section 4.1.
Figure 12. Typical economic level of leakage (ELL)

analysis. Economically feasible leakage level compared with
net present value (NPV) costs. There are also some level of
leakages (background losses) that are not possible to
eliminate at all. Adapted from Tripartite Group (2002,
Figure 4.1).
Additional comment made here is that in on-line leak

detection situations there are always pressure signal
from normal operations (for example transients caused
by pump start-up, valve closures, etc.) and those
should be carefully eliminated from automatic reports.
A sample of an on-line leak analysis through pressure
traces is given in Figure 13. Active policy applications
on network studies are much more dicult to apply.
From recent research papers the more promising are
those that combine hydraulic modelling software, GIS
and SCADA system into one package (Tabesh and
Delavar 2003). With advanced SCADA systems and
large asset, customer and maintenance databases,
water service providers are facing the challenge of
eciently extracting useful information from data.
Data mining techniques can be used for dierent
purposes. For example, articial neural network
(ANN) models can be used for demand forecasting
(Bougadis et al. 2005) and for scanning large amounts
of data like operational variable and historical records
to identify a failure event (Mounce and Machell 2006;
38
R. Puust et al.
Figure 13. On-line leak analysis. Comparison of pressure traces measured with and without leakage (a). The change in
dierence between the two traces (a) indicates the presence of a leak. The actual dierence between measured pressures can be
analysed to get better resolution as shown in (b). Adapted from Misiunas et al. (2006, Figures 9, 10).
Table 6.
Technique
SE
GIS
SA
ANN
MNFA
A snapshot of various leakage control techniques applied to real data.

Hydraulic
model
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Network size
Burst
detection
size
Leak size
error
Detection
time
DMA
DMA (1533 properties)
200 homes
DMA
DMA
8.383 l/s
18.1 l/s
0.063 l/s
5 l/s
5 l/s
n/a
10%
n/a
10%
20%
n/a
n/a
n/a
2.5h
n/a
Reference
Carpentier et al. (1991)
Tabesh and Delavar (2003)
Buchberger and Nadimpalli (2004)
Mounce et al. (2007)
SE state esitmation; SA statistical analysis; MNFA minimum night ow analysis.
Aksela et al. 2009; Mounce et al. 2007, 2008, 2009) or

to estimate failure patterns. A sample of other active
control techniques applied onto real data is presented
in Table 6. There are many other methodologies for
active leakage control that are not so commonly used
and therefore not discussed here. For a list of dierent
active leakage technologies please see Puust (2007). In
general, available active leakage control techniques are
either expensive (and time consuming) or have a long
leak detection and location time. Active leakage
control techniques are used regularly to survey the
system for leaks and hence to reduce the time elapsed
between the burst occurrence and its repair thus
reducing the number of potential customer complaints.
The main drawback of the active leakage control is
that it is labour intensive and expensive.
Active pressure management has been called a wellproven method that has an eect on the whole network
or pressure zone. Previously it has been shown that
leakage is tightly coupled with network pressure
(Equation 1). Therefore when overall pressure is
reduced, the same happens to leakage. One should
still be aware that in such conditions the leak detection

itself is quite challenging because of a reduced leak
ow. Pressure reduction in water distribution systems
is normally achieved through pressure reducing valves
(see Figure 14). The objective of pressure reduction is
to ensure the target pressure at any given zone/area/
node satises the customers. When pressure reduction
is made dynamically over a period of time, some
computer algorithm/program can denitely make this
step easier. For example genetic algorithms are used
for that purpose in Reis et al. (1997). There are many
other optimisation techniques available in the literature that can achieve this but their mathematical
advances are out of scope in this review.
6.
Conclusions and future work recommendations
Leakage assessment, detection and control methods

have come a long way since their introduction in the
mid 1950s. Based on the review completed and
presented here, the following main conclusions and
future work recommendations are made.
Urban Water Journal
Figure 14. Rate of leakage (with and without optimised

valve control, i.e. pressure regulation). Lines OBJ1 and
OBJ2 indicates dierent optimisation model types. Adapted
from Vairavamoorthy and Lumbers (1998, Figure 6).
Bottom-up leakage assessment methods are still

preferred to top-down approaches despite the fact that
they are much more data hungry and time consuming
to use. The main value of top-down approaches is seen
in making fast system-level leakage assessments but
also in verifying/controlling the results obtained by
using bottom-up methods. A certain novel value is seen
in integrating these methods, especially bottom-up
methods, with pressure-driven hydraulic models of
these systems (e.g., see Giustolisi et al. 2008). Finally,
both approaches are expected to benet in the future
from explicit uncertainty analysis used to characterise
and quantify the major sources of errors involved in
the leakage assessment process. This should be made
possible with the constant increase in better yet
cheaper computational power available.
When it comes to leakage detection methods,
signicant advances have been made in the past in
both equipment-based and numerical models. The
hardware based methods (e.g., leak noise correlators)
still remain superior in terms of detection accuracy but
also remain much more expensive to use than the
numerical models. Further developments of the
promising equipment-based leak detection methods
are envisaged (e.g., pig-mounted acoustic sensing
devices and/or ground penetrating radars).
With regard to the use of various transient based
methods for leakage detection it should be noted that
these methods had limited success so far, typically in
simpler pipe systems only. It is envisaged that transient
simulation models need to be developed further before
they can be utilised for leakage detection and assessment in more complex pipe systems.
The further development of other numerical (i.e.
non-equipment) based methods is envisaged, especially
the on-line type methods for real-time detection and
diagnosis of leaks caused by pipe bursts in networks.
This should be made possible by the latest developments in the pressure and ow sensor technology
39
which should enable water companies to install larger

number of more accurate and cheaper devices in the
near future. The latest advancements made in the
development of water quality (e.g., turbidity) sensors
could be potentially utilised too, through additional
information available (e.g., turbidity tends to increase
signicantly during pipe burst events). The most
promising techniques in the context of on-line models
include various Articial Intelligence techniques, e.g.,
articial neural networks for pressure/ow signal
forecasting, wavelets for signal de-noising and fuzzy
sets and Bayesian networks for improved inference
analysis. Note that the successful development of the
above real-time models will enable merging the leak
detection and assessment techniques, pressure-driven
hydraulic solvers and active leakage control methods.
Finally, an integral part of the above should be the
development of novel sampling design methods for
locating pressure and ow sensors in pipe networks so
that better detection and diagnosis results can be
obtained for both background and especially burst
related leaks.
Acknowledgements
The rst author would like to acknowledge the nancial
support from the Estonian Science Foundation (ETF7646).
References
Ainola, L., Koppel, T., Tiiter, K., and Vassiljev, A., 2000.
Water network model calibration based on grouping
pipes with similar leakage and roughness estimates. In:
Proceedings of Joint Conference on Water Resources
Engineering and Water Resources Planning & Management. Minneapolis, USA.
(AHL) Authority of the House of Lords, 2006. Water
Management. In: 8th Report of Session 200506. London:
Science and Technology Committee.
Aksela, K., Aksela, M., and Vahala, R., 2009. Leakage
detection in a real distribution network using a SOM.
Urban Water Journal, 6 (4), 279289.
Alonso, J.M., Alvarruiz, F., Guerrero, D., Hernandez, V.,
Ruiz, P.A., Vidal, A.M., Martinez, F., Vercher, J., and
Ulanicki, B., 2000. Parallel computing in water network
analysis and leakage minimization. Journal of Water
Resources Planning and Management, 126 (4), 251260.
Araujo, L.S., Coelho, S.T., and Ramos, H.M., 2003a.
Estimation of distributed pressure-dependent leakage
and consumer demand in water supply networks. In:
Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances
in Water Supply Management. London: Balkema.
Beck, S.B.M., Curren, M.D., Sims, N.D., and Stanway, R.,
2005a. Pipeline network features and leak detection by
cross-correlation analysis of reected waves. Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering, 131 (8), 715723.
Beck, S.B.M., Bagshaw, N.M., and Yates, J.R., 2005b.
Explicit equations for leak rates through narrow cracks.
International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 82
(7), 565570.
40
R. Puust et al.
Behzadian, K., Kapelan, Z., Savic, D.A., and Ardeshir, A.,

2009. Stochastic sampling design using multiobjective genetic algorithm and adaptive neural networks. Environmental Modelling and Software, 24 (4),
530541.
Beuken, R.H.S., Lavooij, C.S.W., Bosch, A., and Schaap,
P.G., 2006. Low leakage in the Netherlands conrmed.
In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual Water Distribution
Systems Analysis Symposium. Cincinnati, USA.
Bougadis, J., Adamowski, K., and Diduch, R., 2005. Shortterm municipal water demand forecasting. Hydrological
Processing, 19 (1), 137148.
Bracken, M. and Hunaidi, O., 2005. Practical aspects of
acoustical leak location on plastic and large diameter
pipe. In: Leakage 2005 Conference Proceedings. Halifax,
Canada.
Brunone, B., 1999. Transient test-based technique for
leak detection in outfall pipes. ASCE Journal of
Water Resources Planning and Management, 125 (5),
302306.
Brunone, B. and Ferrante, M., 1999. On leak detection in
single pipes using unsteady-state tests. In: Proceedings of
the IASTED International Conference: Modeling and
Simulation (MS 0 99). Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Brunone, B. and Ferrante, M., 2001. Detecting leaks in
pressurized pipes by means of transients. Journal of
Hydraulic Research, 39 (5), 539547.
Brunone, B. and Ferrante, M., 2004. Pressure wave as a tool
for leak detection in closed conduits. Urban Water
Journal, 1 (2), 145155.
Buchberger, S.G. and Nadimpalli, G., 2004. Leak estimation
in water distribution systems by statistical analysis of
ow readings. Journal of Water Resources Planning and
Management, 130 (4), 321329.
Carpentier, P. and Cohen, G., 1991. State estimation and
leak detection in water distribution networks. Civil
Engineering Systems, 8 (4), 247257.
Cascetta, F. and Vigo, P., 1992. Location and assessment of
water leakage. Measurement Control, 25 (11), 269275.
Cassa, A.M., Van Zyl, J.E., and Laubscher, R.F., 2005. A
numerical investigation into the behaviour of leak
openings in uPVC pipes under pressure. In: Proceedings
of CCWI2005, Water Management for the 21st Century.
Exeter, UK.
Chastian-Howley, A., 2005. Transmission main leakage: how
to reduce the risk of a catastrophic failure. In: Leakage
2005 Conference Proceedings. Halifax, Canada.
Chen, L.-C., 1995. Pipe network transient analysis the
forward and inverse problems. Thesis (PhD). Cornell
University.
Cist, D.B. and Schutz, A.E., 2001. State of the art for pipe &
leak detection. Report by Geophysical Survey Systems,
Inc.
Coetzer, A.J., Van Zyl, J.E., and Clayton, C.R.I., 2006. An
experimental investigation into the turbulent-ow hydraulics of small circular holes in plastic pipes. In:
Proceedings of the 8th Annual Water Distribution Systems
Analysis Symposium. Cincinnati, USA.
Colombo, A.F. and Karney, B.W., 2002. Energy and costs of
leaky pipes: Toward comprehensive picture. Journal of
441450.
Covas, D. and Ramos, H., 1999. Leakage detection in single
pipelines using pressure wave behaviour. In: Proceedings
of Water Industry Systems: modelling and optimization
applications. Baldock: Research Studies Press Ltd.
Covas, D. and Ramos, H., 2001. Hydraulic transients used

for leakage detection in water distribution systems. In:
Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Water Pipeline
Systems: Managing Pipeline Assets in an Evolving
Market. York, UK.
Covas, D., Stoianov, I., Butler, D., Maksimovic, C.,
Graham, N., and Ramos, H., 2001. Leakage
detection in pipeline systems by inverse transient
analysis from theory to practice. In: Proceedings of
Water Software Systems: theory and applications. Leicester, UK.
Covas, D., Graham, N., Maksimovic, C., Ramos, H.,
Kapelan, Z., Savic, D., and Walters, G., 2003. An
assessment of the application of inverse transient analysis
for leak detection: Part II Collection and application of
experimental data. In: Proceedings of the International
Conference on Advances in Water Supply Management.
London: Balkema.
Covas, D., Ramos, H., and de Almeida, A.B., 2005a.
Standing wave dierence method for leak detection in
pipeline systems. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 131
(12), 11061116.
Covas, D., Ramos, H., Young, A., Graham, N., and
Maksimovic, C., 2005b. Uncertainties of leak detection
by means of hydraulic transients: from the lab to the
eld. In: Proceedings of CCWI2005, Water Management
for the 21st Century. Exeter, UK.
Covas, D., Ramos, H., Lopes, N., and Almeida, A.B., 2006a.
Water pipe system diagnosis by transient pressure
signals. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual Water
Distribution Systems Analysis Symposium. Cincinnati,
USA.
Covas, D., Jacob, A., and Ramos, H., 2006b. Bottom-up
analysis for assessing water losses: A case study. In:
Analysis Symposium. Cincinnati, USA.
Deagle, G., Green, A., Scrivener, J., and Tansley, N., 2007.
Advanced tools for burst location. Water Management
Challenges in Global Change. Ulanicki et al. (eds),
London: Taylor & Francis, 307312.
Dias, N., Covas, D., and Ramos, H., 2005. Leakage
reduction and customer level of service improvement
by pressure management. In: Proceedings of CCWI2005,
Water Management for the 21st Century. Exeter, UK.
Dunlop, E.J., 1999. A dynamic hydraulic model for water
distribution network simulation. In: Proceedings of
Water Industry Systems: modelling and optimization
applications. Baldock: Research Studies Press Ltd.
EPRI, 1989. Condenser leak detection by using SF6 as a
tracer gas. Electric Power Research Institute. Technical
Report RP1689.
EPSRC Engineering Programme Network in Trenchless
Technology, 2002. Underground mapping, pipeline location technology and condition assessment. Birmingham:
Infrastructure Engineering and Management Research
Centre.
Farley, M., 2008. Finding dicult leaks. International Water
Association Specialist Group Ecient Operation and
Management. Available from: http://www.iwaom.org
[Accessed 21 January 2009].
Farley, M. and Trow, S., 2003. Losses in water distribution
networks. London: IWA Publishing.
Ferrante, M. and Brunone, B., 2003a. Pipe system diagnosis and leak detection by unsteady-state tests. 1.
Harmonic analysis. Advances in Water Resources, 26 (1),
95105.
Urban Water Journal

Ferrante, M. and Brunone, B., 2003b. Pipe system diagnosis
and leak detection by unsteady-state tests. 2.
Wavelet analysis. Advances in Water Resources, 26 (1),
107116.
Ferrante, M., Brunone, B., and Rossetti, A.G., 2001a.
Harmonic analysis of pressure signal during transients
for leak detection in pressurized pipes. In: Proceedings
ofthe 4th International Conference on Water Pipeline
Systems. York, UK: BHR Group Limited.
Ferrante, M., Brunone, B., and Rossetti, A.G., 2001b. Leak
detection in pressurized pipes by means of wavelet
analysis. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Water Pipeline Systems. York, UK: BHR
Group Limited.
Ferrante, M., Brunone, B., Meniconi, S., and Almadori, C.,
2005. Wavelet analysis of numerical pressure signals for
leak monitoring. In: Proceedings of CCWI2005, Water
Management for the 21st Century. Exeter, UK.
Field, D.B. and Ratclie, B., 1978. Location of leaks in
pressurised pipelines using sulphur hexauoride as a
tracer. Water Research Centre. Technical Report 80.
Fletcher, R., 2008. SmartBallTM a new approach in pipeline
leak detection. In: Proceedings of the International
Pipeline Conference. Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Gao, Y., Brennan, M.J., Joseph, P.F., Muggleton, J.M., and
Hunaidi, O., 2004. A model of the correlation function of
leak noise in buried plastic pipes. Journal of Sound and
Vibration, 277 (12), 133148.
Gao, Y., Brennan, M.J., Joseph, P.F., Muggleton, J.M., and
Hunaidi, O., 2005. On the selection of acoustic/vibration
sensors for leak detection in plastic water pipes. Journal
of Sound and Vibration, 283 (35), 927941.
Gao, Y., Brennan, M.J., and Joseph, P.F., 2006. A
comparison of time delay estimators for the detection
of leak noise signals in plastic water distribution pipes.
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 292 (35), 552570.
Garcia, V.J., Cabrera, E., and Cabrera, E.Jr, 2006. The
minimum night ow method revisited. In: Proceedings of
the 8th Annual Water Distribution Systems Analysis
Symposium. Cincinnati, USA.
Garzon-Contreras, F. and Thornton, J., 2006. Pressureleakage relationships in urban water distribution systems.
Systems Analysis Symposium. Cincinnati, USA.
Germanopoulos, G., 1985. A technical note on the inclusion
of pressure dependent demand and leakage terms in
water supply network models. Civil Engineering and
Environmental Systems, 2, 171179.
Germanopoulos, G., 1995. Valve control regulation for
reducing leakage. Improving eciency and reliability in
water distribution systems. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Giustolisi, O., Savic, D.A., and Kapelan, Z., 2008. Pressuredriven demand and leakage simulation for water
distribution networks. ASCE Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, 134 (5), 626635.
Goodwin, S.J., 1980. The results of the experimental
programme on leakage and leakage control. Water
Research Centre. Technical Report 154.
Greyvenstein, B. and Van Zyl, J.E., 2005. An experimental
investigation into the pressure leakage relationship of
some failed water pipes. In: Leakage 2005 Conference
Proceedings. Halifax, Canada.
Grunwell, D. and Ratclie, B., 1981. Location of underground leaks using the leak noise correlator. Water
Research Centre. Technical Report 157.
41
Hernandez, V., Martinez, F., Vidal, A.M., Alonso, J.M.,

Alvarruiz, F., Guerrero, D., Ruiz, P.A., and Vercher, J.,
1999. HIPERWATER: A high performance computing
EPANET-based demonstrator for water network simulation and leakage minimisation. In: Proceedings of Water
Industry Systems: modelling and optimization applications. Baldock: Research Studies Press Ltd.
Hesssel, G., Schmitt, W., Van Der Vorst, K., and Weiss, F.P., 1999. A neural network approach for acoustic leak
monitoring in the VVER-440 pressure vessel head.
Progress in Nuclear Energy, 34 (3), 173189.
Hope, W., 1892. The waste of water in public supplies, and
its prevention. Proceedings of the Institute of Civil
Engineers And Municipal Engineers, (republished 1996),
115 (2), 6875.
Hough, J.E., 1988. Leak testing of pipelines uses pressures
and acoustic velocity. Oil & Gas Journal, 21, 3541.
Hunaidi, O., 1998. Ground-penetrating radar for detection of
leaks in buried plastic water distribution pipes. In:
Proceedings of 7th International Conference on GroundPenetrating Radar. Lawrence, KS, USA.
Hunaidi, O. and Chu, W.T., 1999. Acoustical characteristics
of leak signals in plastic water distribution pipes. Applied
Acoustics, 58 (3), 235254.
Hunaidi, O., Chu, W., Wang, A., and Guan, W., 2000.
Detecting leaks in plastic pipes. Journal American Water
Works Association, 92 (2), 8294.
Hunaidi, O., Bracken, M., Gambino, T., and Fricke, C.,
2004. Acoustic methods for locating leaks in municipal
water pipe networks. In: International Conference on
Water Demand Management. Dead Sea, Jordan.
Jonsson, L., 1995. Leak detection in pipelines using hydraulic
transients laboratory measurements. Department of
Water Resources Engineering, University of Lund,
Sweden.
Jonsson, L., 2003. Hydraulic transients in a pipeline with a
leak. VA-FORSK Rapport 28.
Kapelan, Z., Savic, D.A., and Walters, G.A., 2000. Inverse
transient analysis in pipe networks for leakage detection
and roughness calibration. In: Proceedings of International Symposium: Water Network Modelling for Optimal
Design and Management. Exeter, UK.
Kapelan, Z., 2002. Calibration of WDS hydraulic models.
Thesis (PhD). University of Exeter.
Kapelan, Z.S., Savic, D.A., and Walters, G.A., 2003a. A
hybrid inverse transient model for leakage detection and
roughness calibration in pipe networks. Journal of
Hydraulic Research, 41 (5), 481492.
Kapelan, Z., Savic, D., Walters, G.A., Covas, D., Graham,
I.N., and Maksimovic, C., 2003b. An assessment of the
application of inverse transient analysis for leak detection: Part I Theoretical considerations. In: Proceedings
of the International Conference on Advances in Water
Supply Management. London: Balkema.
Kapelan, Z., Savic, D.A., and Walters, G.A., 2003c. Multiobjective sampling design for water distribution model
calibration. ASCE Journal of Water Resources Planning
and Management, 129 (6), 466479.
Kapelan, Z., Savic, D.A., and Walters, G.A., 2004.
Incorporation of prior information on parameters in
inverse transient analysis for leak detection and roughness calibration. Urban Water Journal, 1 (2), 129143.
Kapelan, Z., Savic, D., and Walters, G., 2005. Optimal
sampling design methodologies for water distribution
model calibration. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 131
(3), 190200.
42
R. Puust et al.
Kim, S.H., 2005. Extensive development of leak detection

algorithm by impulse response method. Journal of
Lambert, A., 2001. What do we know about pressure:leakage
relationships in distribution systems? In: Proceedings of
IWA Conference System Approach to leakage control and
water distribution system management. Brno, Czech
Rebublic.
Lambert, A., 2002. Water losses management and techniques. Water Science and Technology: Water Supply, 2 (4),
120.
Lambert, A., 2003. Assessing non-revenue water and its
components: a practical approach. Water 21, August,
5051.
Lambert, A. and Hirner, W., 2000. Losses from water supply
systems: Standard terminology and recommended performance measures. Available from: www.iwahq.org [Accessed 21 August 2009].
Lee, P.J., Vitkovsky, J.P., Lambert, M.F., Simpson, A.R.,
and Liggett, J.A., 2003. Frequency response coding for
the location of leaks in single pipeline systems. In:
Proceedings of PEDS 2003 (Pumps, Electromechanical
Devices and Systems Applied to Urban Water Management). Valencia, Spain.
Lee, P.J., V tkovsky, J.P., Lambert, M.F., Simpson, A.R.,
and Liggett, J.A., 2005a. Frequency domain analysis for
detecting pipeline leaks. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 131 (7), 596604.
Lee, P.J., V tkovsky, J.P., Lambert, M.F., Simpson, A.R.,
and Liggett, J., 2005b. Leak location using the pattern
of the frequency response diagram in pipelines: a
numerical study. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 284
(35), 10511073.
Lee, P.J., Lambert, M.F., Simpson, A.R., Vitkovsky, J.P.,
and Liggett, J., 2006. Experimental verication of the
frequency response method for pipeline leak detection.
Journal of Hydraulic Research, 44 (5), 693707.
Liemberger, R. and Farley, M., 2004. Developing a nonrevenue water reduction strategy Part 1: Investigating
and assessing water losses. In: Proceeding of IWA WWC
2004 Conference. Marrakech, Morocco.
Liggett, A., 1993. Network monitoring and the algorithmic
location of leaks under steady and unsteady conditions.
In: Water supply systems: State of the art and future
trends. Southampton: Computational Mechanics.
Liggett, J.A. and Chen, L.-C., 1994. Inverse transient
analysis in pipe networks. ASCE Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, 120 (8), 934955.
Liou, C.P., 1998. Pipeline leak detection by impulse
response extraction. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 120
(4), 833838.
Liou, J.C.P., 1994. Mass imbalance error of waterhammer
equations and leak detection. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 116 (1), 103109.
Liou, J.C.P., Hall, R.J., and McMahon, M.C., 2003.
Hazardous liquid leak detection techniques and
processes. General Physics Corporation. Report
No. DTRS56-02-D-70037-01.
Lockwood, A., Murray, T., Stuart, G., and Scudder, L.,
2003. A study of geophysical methods for water leak
location. In: Proceedings of PEDS 2003 (Pumps,
Electromechanical Devices and Systems Applied to Urban
Water Management). Valencia, Spain.
Makar, J.M. and Chagnon, N., 1999. Inspecting systems for
leaks, pits, and corrosion. Journal American Water
Works Association, 91 (7), 3646.
Mamlook, R. and Al-Jayyous, O., 2003. Fuzzy sets analysis

for leak detection in infrastructure systems: a proposed
methodology. Cleaning Techniques and Environmental
Policy, 6 (1), 2631.
Martinez, F., Signes, M., Savall, R., Andres, M., and
Ponz, R., 1999. Construction and use of a dynamic
simulation model for the Valencia metropolitan
water supply and distribution network. In: Proceedings of Water Industry Systems: modelling and
optimization applications. Baldock: Research Studies
Press Ltd.
May, J., 1994. Pressure dependent leakage. World Water and
Environmental Engineering, October, 10.
McInnis, D. and Karney, B.W., 1995. Transients in distribution networks: eld tests and demand models. Journal
of Hydraulic Engineering, 121 (3), 218231.
McNulty, J.G., 2001. An acoustic-based system for detecting,
locating and sizing leaks in water pipelines. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Water Pipeline
Systems: Managing Pipeline Assets in an Evolving
Market. York, UK.
Mergelas, B. and Henrich, G., 2005. Leak locating method
for precommissioned transmission pipelines: North
American case studies. In: Leakage 2005 Conference
Proceedings. Halifax, Canada.
Miller, R.K., Pollock, A.A., Watts, D.J., Carlyle, J.M.,
Tafuri, A.N., and Yezzi, J.J. Jr, 1999. A reference
standard for the development of acoustic emission
pipeline leak detection techniques. NDT&E International,
32 (1), 18.
Misiunas, D., V tkovsky, J., Olsson, G., Simpson, A.R., and
Lambert, M.F., 2003. Pipeline burst detection and
location using a continuous monitoring technique. In:
Misiunas, D., V tkovsky, J., Olsson, G., Simpson, A., and
Lambert, M., 2005a. Pipeline break detection using
pressure transient monitoring. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 131 (4), 316325.
Misiunas, D., V tkovsky, J., Olsson, G., Lambert, M., and
Simpson, A., 2005b. Failure monitoring in water
distribution networks. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IWA
Conference on Instrumentation, Control and Automation.
Busan, Korea.
Misiunas, D., Lambert, M., and Simpson, A., 2006.
Transient-based periodical pipeline leak diagnosis. In:
Analysis Symposium. Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Morris, R.E. Jr, 1967. Principal causes and remedies of water
main breaks. In: Southwest Section Meeting, Austin,
Texas, October19, 782798.
Mounce, S.R. and Machell, J., 2006. Burst detection using
hydraulic data from water distribution systems with
articial neural networks. Urban Water Journal, 3 (1),
2131.
Mounce, S.R., Boxall, J.B., and Machell, J., 2007. An
artical neural network/fuzzy logic system for DMA
ow meter data analysis providing burst identication and size estimation. Water Management Challenges in Global Change. Ulanicki et al. (eds), London:
Taylor & Francis, 313320.
Mounce, S.R., Boxall, J.B., and Machell, J., 2008. Online
application of ANN and fuzzy logic system for burst
detection. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual Water
Distribution Systems Analysis Symposium. Kruger National Park, South Africa.
Urban Water Journal

Mounce, S.R., Boxall, J., and Machell, J., 2009. Development and verication of an online articial intelligence
system for detection of bursts and other abnormal ows.
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management.
Published online 15 May 2009.
Moyer, E., Male, J.W., Moore, C., and Hock, G., 1983.
The economics of leak detection and repair a case
study. Journal American Water Works Association, 75
(1), 2935.
Mpesha, W., Gassman, S.L., and Chaudhry, M.H., 2001.
Leak detection in pipes by frequency response method.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 127 (2), 134147.
Mpesha, W., Chaudhry, M.H., and Gassman, S.L., 2002.
Leak detection in pipes by frequency response method
using a step excitation. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 40
(1), 5562.
Muggleton, J.M. and Brennan, M.J., 2004. Leak noise
propagation and attenuation in submerged plastic
water pipes. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 278 (3),
527537.
Muggleton, J.M. and Brennan, M.J., 2005. Axisymmetric
wave propagation in buried, uid-lled pipes: eects of
wall discontinuities. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 281
(35), 849867.
Muggleton, J.M., Brennan, M.J., and Linford, P.W., 2004.
Axisymmetric wave propagation in uid-lled pipes:
wavenumber measurements in vacuo and buried pipes.
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 270 (12), 171190.
Muggleton, J.M., Brennan, M.J., Pinnington, R.J., and Gao,
Y., 2006. A novel sensor for measuring the acoustic
pressure in buried plastic water pipes. Journal of Sound
and Vibration, 295 (35), 10851098.
Mukhopadhyay, S. and Srivastava, G.P., 2000. Characterisation of metal loss defects from magnetic ux leakage
signals with discrete wavelet transform. NDT&E International, 33 (1), 5765.
Nicholas, R.E., 1990. Leak detection on pipelines in unsteady
ow.Forum on unsteady ow. In: 1990 winter annual
meeting of ASME. New York, USA.
Noack, C. and Ulanicki, B., 2006. Modelling of soil
diusibility on leakage characteristics of buried pipes.
Systems Analysis Symposium. Cincinnati, OH, USA.
OBrien, E., Murray, T., and McDonald, A., 2003. Detecting
leaks from water pipes at a test facility using groundpenetrating radar. In: Proceedings of PEDS 2003
(Pumps, Electromechanical Devices and Systems Applied
to Urban Water Management). Valencia, Spain.
ODay, D.K., 1982. Organizing and analyzing leak and break
data for making main replacement decisions. AWWA
Journal of the American Water Works Association, 74
(11), 589594.
Ofwat, 2008. International comparison leakage. Available
from:
http://www.ofwat.gov.uk/regulating/reporting/
rpt_int_08leakageintro [Accessed 25 February 2009].
Pilcher, R., 2003. Leak detection practices and techniques: a
practical approach. Water 21, December, 4445.
Pilcher, R., Hamilton, S., Chapman, H., Ristovski, B., and
Strapely, S., 2007. Leak location and repair guidance
notes. In: International Water Association. Water Loss
Task Forces: Specialist Group Ecient Operation and
Management. Bucharest, Romania.
Poulakis, Z., Valougeorgis, D., and Papadimitriou, C., 2003.
Leakage detection in water pipe networks using a
Bayesian probabilistic framework. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics 18, 2003, pp. 315327.
43
Pudar, R.S. and Liggett, J.A., 1992. Leaks in pipe networks.

ASCE Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 118 (7), 1031
1046.
Puust, R., 2007. Probabilistic leak detection in pipe networks
using the SCEM-UA. Thesis (PhD). Tallinn University of
Technology.
Puust, R., Kapelan, Z., Savic, D., and Koppel, T., 2006.
Probabilistic leak detection in pipe networks using the
SCEM-UA algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual
Water Distribution Systems Analysis Symposium. Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Rahman, S., Ghadiali, N., Wilkowski, M., and Paul, D.,
1997. A computer model for probabilistic leak-rate
analysis of nuclear piping and piping welds. International
Journal of Pressure Vessels & Piping, 70 (3), 209221.
Rajtar, J. and Muthiah, R., 1997. Pipeline leak detection
system for oil and gas owlines. Journal of Manufacturing
Science and Engineering, Transactions of ASME, 19 (1),
105109.
Ramos, H., Reis, C., Ferreira, C., Falcao, C., and Covas, D.,
2001. Leakage control policy within operating management tools. In: Proceedings of Water Software Systems:
theory and applications. Leicester, UK.
Reis, L.F.R. and Chaudhry, F.H., 1999. Hydraulic characteristics of pressure reducing valves for maximum
reduction of leakage in water supply networks. In:
Proceedings of Water Industry Systems: modelling and
optimization applications. Baldock: Research Studies
Press Ltd.
Reis, L.F.R., Porto, R.M., and Chaudhry, F.H., 1997.
Optimal location of control valves in water supply
networks by genetic algorithm. Journal of Water
Rossman, L.A., 2000. Epanet2 User Manual. Washington,
USA: US EPA.
Rougier, J., 2005. Probabilistic leak detection in pipelines
using the mass imbalance approach. Journal of Hydraulic
Research, 43 (5), 556566.
Saldarriaga, J.G., Fuentes, D.A.A., and Galvis, L.F.C.,
2006. Implementation of the hydraulic transient and
steady oscillatory ow with genetic algorithms for
leakage detection in real water distribution networks.
Systems Analysis Symposium. Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Savic, D.A., Kapelan, Z., and Jonkergouw, P., 2009. Quo
vadis water distribution model calibration? Urban Water
Journal, 6 (1), 322.
Scott, S.L. and Barrufet, M.A., 2003. Worldwide assessment
of industry leak detection capabilities for single & multiphase pipelines. Project report prepared for the minerals
management service under the MMS/OTRC cooperative
research agreement, 1435-01-99-CA-31003, Task Order
18133, August 6.
Shimanskiy, S., Iljima, T., and Naoi, Y., 2003. Development
of microphone leak detection technology on Fugen NPP.
Progress in Nuclear Energy, 43 (14), 357364.
Simpson, A.R. and Vitkovsky, J.P., 1997. A review of pipe
calibration and leak detection methodologies for water
distribution networks. In: Water in the Balance: Proceedings of the Australian Water & Wastewater Association
17th Federal Convention. Melbourne, Australia.
Soares, A.K., Covas, D.I.C., and Reis, L.F.R., 2007. Inverse
transient analysis for leak detection in a PVC pipe
network. In: Proceedings of CCWI 2007 and SUWM
2007 Conference: Water Management Challenges in
Global Change. Leicester, UK.
44
R. Puust et al.
Stathis, J.A. and Loganathan, G.V., 1999. Analysis of

pressure-dependent leakage in water distribution systems. Analysis of pressure-dependent leakage in water
distribution systems. In: Preparing for the 21st Century,
29th Annual Water Resources Planning and Management
Conference. Tempe, AZ, USA.
Stenberg, R., 1982. Leak detection in water supply systems.
Stockholm, Sweden: The Swedish Water and Waste
Water Works Association.
Stephens, M., Lambert, M.F., Simpson, A.R., Vitkovsky,
J.P., and Nixon, J., 2004. Field tests for leakage, air
pocket, and discrete blockage detection using inverse
transient analysis in water distribution pipes. In: Proceedings of the 6th Water Distribution Systems Analysis
Symposium, World Water and Environmental Resources
Congress, ASCE. Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Stoianov, I., Karney, B., Covas, D., Maksimovic, C., and
Graham, N., 2001. Wavelet processing of transient
signals for pipeline leak location and quantication. In:
Proceedings of Water Software Systems: theory and
applications. Leicester, UK.
Tabesh, M. and Delavar, M.R., 2003. Application of
integrated GIS and hydraulic models for unaccounted
for water studies in water distribution systems. In:
Thornton, J., 2002. Water loss control manual. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Thornton, J. and Lambert, A., 2005. Progress in practical
prediction of pressure: leakage, pressure: burst frequency
and pressure: consumption relationships. In: Leakage
2005 Conference Proceedings. Halifax, Canada.
Todini, E., 2003. A more realistic approach to the extended
period simulation of water distribution networks. In:
Tripartite Group, 2002. Best practice principles in the
economic level of leakage calculation. Tripartite Group.
Available from: http://www.ofwat.gov.uk [Accessed 22
January 2009].
Tucciarelli, T., Criminisi, A., and Termini, D., 1999. Leak
analysis in pipeline systems by means of optimal valve
regulation. ASCE Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 125
(3), 277285.
Tuhovcak, L., Svoboda, M., Svitak, Z., and Tothova, K.,
2005. The technical audit of water distribution network
using the dierent leakage indicators. In: Leakage 2005
Conference Proceedings. Halifax, Canada.
TWDB, 2005. Water loss manual. Austin, TX, USA: Texas
Water Development Board.
TWDB, 2007. Water audit reporting form. Texas Water
Development Board. Available from: http://www.twdb.
state.tx.us/assistance/conservation/Municipal/Water_
Audit/HB3338ReportingForm.pdf [Accessed 3 April
2007].
Ulanicka, K., Bounds, P., Ulanicki, B., and Rance, J., 2001.
Pressure control of a large scale water distribution
network with interacting water sources a case study.
In: Proceedings of Water Software Systems: theory and
applications. Leicester, UK.
Ulanicki, B., Bounds, P.L. M., Rance, J.P., and Reynolds,
L., 2000. Open and closed loop pressure control for
leakage reduction. Urban Water, 2 (2), 105114.
Vairavamoorthy, K. and Lumbers, J., 1998. Leakage reduction in water distribution systems: optimal valve control.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 124 (1), 11461154.
Van Zyl, J.E. and Clayton, C.R.I., 2005. The eect of

pressure on leakage in water distribution systems. In:
Proceedings of CCWI2005, Water Management for the
21st Century. Exeter, UK.
Vela, A.F., Espert, V., and Fuertes, V.S., 1995. General
overview of unaccounted for water in water distribution
systems. Improving eciency and reliability in water
distribution systems. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Verde, C., 2005. Accommodation of multi-leak location in a
pipeline. Control Engineering Practice, 13 (8), 10711078.
Vitkovsky, J.P. and Simpson, A.R., 1997. Calibration and
leak detection in pipe networks using inverse transient
analysis and genetic algorithms. Research Report No. R
157: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Adelaide.
V tkovsky, J.P., Simpson, A.R., and Lambert, M., 2000.
Leak detection and calibration using transients and
genetic algorithms. Journal of Water Resources Planning
and Management, 126 (4), 262265.
Vitkovsky, J.P., Lambert, M.F., Simpson, A.R., and Wang,
X.J., 2001. An experimental verication of the inverse
transient technique. In: Conference on Civil Engineering
Hydraulics. Hobart, AustraliaInstitution of Engineers.
Vitkovsky, J.P., Liggett, J.A., Simpson, A.R., and Lambert,
M.F., 2003a. Optimal measurement site locations for inverse transient analysis in pipe networks. Journal of Water
Vitkovsky, J.P., Lee, P.J., Stephens, M.L., Lambert, M.F.,
and Simpson, A.R., 2003b. Leak and blockage detection
in pipelines via an impulse response method. In:
Proceedings of PEDS 2003 (Pumps, Electromechanical
Devices and Systems Applied to Urban Water Management). Valencia, Spain.
Vitkovsky, J.P., Liggett, J.A., Simpson, A.R., and Lambert,
M.F., 2003c. Optimal measurement site locations for
inverse transient analysis in pipe networks. Journal of
480492.
Vitkovsky, J.P., Lambert, M.F., Simpson, A.R., and Liggett,
J.A., 2007. Experimental observation and analysis of
inverse transients for pipeline leak detection. Journal of
519530.
Walski, T., Bezts, W., and Posluszny, E.T., 2006. Modeling
leakage reduction through pressure control. Journal
American Water Works Association, 98 (4), 147155.
Wang, X.-J., Lambert, M.F., Simpson, A.R., Liggett, J.A.,
and Vitkovsky, J.P., 2002. Leak detection in pipelines
using the damping of uid transients. Journal of
Wang, X.-J., Simpson, A.R., Lambert, M.F., Vitkovsky,
J.P., and Liggett, J.A., 2003. Simulation of transients in a
looped laboratory pipe network. In: Proceedings of
PEDS 2003 (Pumps, Electromechanical Devices and
Systems Applied to Urban Water Management). Valencia, Spain.
Wang, X.-J., Simpson, A.R., and Lambert, M.F., 2006. An
analytical solution for the transients in a pipeline with a
variable boundary condition: leak detection in pipe
networks using coded transients. In: Proceedings of the
8th Annual Water Distribution Systems Analysis Symposium. Cincinnati, OH, USA.
WATERPIPE, 2009. Global change and ecosystemsec
research project WATERPIPE. Available from: http://
www.waterpipe-eu.org [Accessed 21 August 2009].
Urban Water Journal
Wiggert, D.C., 1968. Unsteady ows in lines with distributed

leakage. ASCE Journal of the Hydraulics Division, 94
(HY1), 143161.
Willems, H. and Barbian, O.A., 1998. Operational experience
with inline ultrasonic crack inspection of German crude
oil pipelines. In: Proceedings of the 7th European
Conference on NDT. Copenhagen, Denmark.
Wu, Z.Y. and Sage, P., 2007. Pressure dependent demand
optimization for leakage detection in water distribution
systems. Water Management Challenges in Global Change.
Ulanicki et al. (eds), London: Taylor & Francis, 353361.
45
Zecchin, A.C., White, L.B., Lambert, M.F., and Simpson,

A.R., 2005. Frequency-domain hypothesis testing approach to leak detection in a single uid line. In:
Proceedings of CCWI2005, Water Management for the
21st Century. Exeter, UK.
Zecchin, A.C., Lambert, M.F., Simpson, A.R., and White,
L.B., 2006. Laplace-domain comparison of linear models
of a reservoir-pipe-valve system with a leak. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual Water Distribution Systems
Analysis Symposium. Cincinnati, OH, USA.

Puust UWJ 2010

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Puust UWJ 2010

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

This article was downloaded by: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution - Superceded by 916427733]

On: 3 June 2010

Urban Water Journal

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:

A review of methods for leakage management in pipe networks

R. Puusta; Z. Kapelanb; D. A. Savicb; T. Koppela

management in pipe networks', Urban Water Journal, 7: 1, 25 45

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Urban Water Journal

(Received 15 August 2009; nal version received 4 November 2009)

*Corresponding author. Email: raido@sta.ttu.ee

water quality by introducing infection into water

system. It is hoped that this way the new promising

allows specifying leakage exponent dierent from 0.5

Urban Water Journal

water service companies) can be found in (AHL 2006).

in pressure can then be computed by FAVAD

where L1 and L2 are leakage rates and H1, H2 are

Where q volume rate per unit length; k Cdb (2g)b;

Figure 1. Leakage modelling (24 h) based on minimum

Billed metered consumption (including water exported)

Volume of NRW [% of System Input

Can be calculated from simple water balance,

(and other marginal costs, like environmental costs)

where p the percentage of rigid pipes in network.

Easy to calculate indicator if the ILI is not

assessment can be done also using some statistical

Leakage detection methods

Historically, leakage assessment studies have been

Urban Water Journal

Number of zones tested

United Kingdom (1970s)

leakage detection methods have been around for years,

where P and Q are the number of pressure, ow

and to increase the speed of the convergence process.

inverse transient analysis (ITA) (Liggett and Chen

Figure 2. Pressure time-history at the leak during transient

but since its introduction, the main eort has been

Urban Water Journal

Performance of the method is strongly inuenced by

model based techniques are not so widely used could

Urban Water Journal

Eciency ranges of various leak detection methodologies using pressure transients.

*Leak size error.

kinds of errors that cannot always be included in

Leak localising is an activity that identies and

leaks may not be heard and the background noise cant

Urban Water Journal

Leakage pinpointing methods

Leakage pinpointing methods include methodologies

on (a) leak noise correlators (Grunwell and Ratclie

questionable as distance between the sensors should be

Figure 11. Recording of a typical leak response when tracer

as pigs are in contact with the pipe inner wall their

Leakage control models

Leakage control models can be generally classied into

Urban Water Journal

Eciency ranges of various leak localisation and pinpointing techniques.

Detectable leak size

*Depends on inspection range.

to leaks and bursts reported by the public (in some

Figure 12. Typical economic level of leakage (ELL)

Additional comment made here is that in on-line leak