WO2020077005A1 - Automated asset mangement and planning - Google Patents
Automated asset mangement and planning Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- WO2020077005A1 WO2020077005A1 PCT/US2019/055470 US2019055470W WO2020077005A1 WO 2020077005 A1 WO2020077005 A1 WO 2020077005A1 US 2019055470 W US2019055470 W US 2019055470W WO 2020077005 A1 WO2020077005 A1 WO 2020077005A1
- Authority
- WO
- WIPO (PCT)
- Prior art keywords
- projects
- project
- assets
- risk
- pipe
- Prior art date
Links
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0635—Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0631—Resource planning, allocation, distributing or scheduling for enterprises or organisations
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0631—Resource planning, allocation, distributing or scheduling for enterprises or organisations
- G06Q10/06315—Needs-based resource requirements planning or analysis
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q50/00—Systems or methods specially adapted for specific business sectors, e.g. utilities or tourism
- G06Q50/06—Electricity, gas or water supply
Definitions
- This patent specification generally relates to automated systems and automated methods for asset management and planning. More particularly to automated systems and automated methods for asset management and planning repair and replacement jobs for networks of underground pipes carrying a fluid to consumers.
- Pipe segments vary in length and construction projects have a range of minimum and maximum project size depending on various criteria (e.g. budgets, costs and availability of labor and equipment, other considerations such as governmental, social and environmental factors). Therefore, a job or project almost always includes replacing a number of connected pipes segments. Commonly, a human or team of humans will review the pipe segments having assigned scores or colors and to try to determine the best combinations of pipe segments that fit their project size goals. This method of“eye balling” and“pattern picking” manual review is not only painstakingly tedious, but can lead to inconsistent and inaccurate results.
- a method for planning projects for improving a network of interconnected managed assets.
- the method includes: receiving by a computer system a calculated risk of failure value for each of a plurality of the managed assets, the value being selected from a range that includes at least 10 different values; and searching through the plurality of assets and generating a plurality of potential improvement projects, each of the potential improvement projects including a plurality of the interconnected managed assets, wherein the generating of a potential improvement project is based at least in part on the risk of failure value of each of the managed assets included in the potential improvement project.
- the risk of failure value includes a value representing likelihood of failure, and the value can be expressed as a probability of failure percentage. According to some embodiments, the risk of failure value can also include a value representing consequence of failure and/or business risk exposure.
- the method can further include preprocessing.
- the preprocessing can include: merging shorter assets into longer assets; excluding groups of assets that are not worth searching; excluding assets having only a single interconnection and having low risk of failure value; and/or merging assets having similar risk of failure values.
- the method can further include postprocessing to add to potential project(s) an additional connected managed asset.
- the adding can be based on the risk of failure value of the managed asset to be added and/or whether a combined risk of failure value for the potential improvement project is increased or decreased by adding the managed asset.
- the postprocessing can also merge two or more potential improvement projects into a single potential improvement project.
- the interconnected managed assets are linear segments such as pipe segments and the potential improvement projects can be: pipe replacement projects, pipe rehabilitation projects, pipe inspection projects, leak detection project, and/or pipe condition assessment projects.
- the pipe segments can form a network for carrying water to consumers.
- the pipe segments are configured to carry fluid such as: fresh water; waste water; recycled water; brackish water; storm water; sea water; drinking water; steam; compressed air; oil; and/or natural gas.
- the method can also include: displaying on a graphical user interface the plurality of potential improvement projects; and receiving selections of, or modifications to one or more of the potential improvement projects from the user.
- the method can also include: displaying on a graphical user interface (e.g. map view and/or table view) potential
- improvement project plans each of which includes one or more potential
- a system for planning projects for improving a network of interconnected assets.
- the system includes: a database that stores a calculated risk of failure value for each of a plurality of the managed assets, the value being selected from a range that includes at least 10 different values; and a processing system configured to automatically search through the plurality of assets and generate a plurality of potential improvement projects, each of the potential improvement projects including a plurality of the interconnected managed assets, wherein the generation of a potential improvement project is based at least in part on the risk of failure value of each of the managed assets included in the potential improvement project.
- FIG. 1 is a conceptual diagram of job planner system, according to some embodiments.
- FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating some of the functions and workflow of a job planner platform, according to some embodiments
- FIG. 3 is diagram illustrating aspects of a user interface in a first project generation stage of a job planner, according to some embodiments
- FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating a user interface displaying the generation of project results by a job planner, according to some embodiments
- FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating a user interface displaying a table view of a project pool, according to some embodiments
- FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating a user interface displaying a more detailed view of a particular project in a project pool, according to some embodiments
- FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating a user interface displaying a map view for managing plans, according to some embodiments.
- FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating a user interface displaying a table view for managing, according to some embodiments.
- FIGs. 9A and 9B are diagrams illustrating merging shorter pipe segments to form a longer pipe segments in order to speed up a job planning searching process, according to some embodiments
- FIGs. 10A to 10C show three different possible pipe replacement jobs under consideration, according to some embodiments.
- FIGs. 1 1A-1 1 C are diagrams illustrating aspects of a scheme for a searching algorithm for job planning, according to some embodiments;
- FIGs. 12A and 12B are diagrams illustrating aspects of a caching algorithm for a job planning engine, according to some embodiments;
- FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating an example of a resulting project that is connected to pipe with high score.
- FIG. 14 is a diagram illustrating an example of a resulting project that is next to other resulting project(s).
- job planning systems and methods by water utility companies are described.
- the job planning techniques can be used to efficiently create asset management plans and visualize their impact using information generated from their existing pipeline risk data.
- the job planner can serve as a central hub connecting risk information to mitigation action.
- state-of-the-art risk information such as likelihood of failure (LOF) and business risk exposure (BRE) analysis.
- LEF likelihood of failure
- BRE business risk exposure
- the described job planner techniques can be used to remove inconsistency from“eye balling” and“pattern picking” through painstaking manually reviewing screen over a graphic information system (GIS) and streamline workflow of pipeline risk management.
- GIS graphic information system
- the described job planner techniques can“package” risk-based projects at preferable sizes with minimal effort from water utility company personnel. These projects can be used as either end point guideline for pipeline replacement or an entry point for targeted physical condition assessment, seamlessly integrating with water utilities existing risk management mitigation measures and strategy.
- Each utility has unique challenges and methods of selecting projects for their asset management plan. Accordingly, adopting a goal-oriented workflow, the described job planning system and methods can enable water utility planners to quickly generate projects that cover high risk water mains to fit their specific needs.
- the described job planning system and methods can: optimize main replacement projects that are reasonably sized for a variety of works; identify mains requiring upsize around new development projects; coordinate with upcoming paving plans for synchronized main replacement; and specify main materials to be phased out.
- LOF - likelihood or probability of failure of target asset (percentage or score is used in most cases, but estimated number of failure or failure ratio may be used as alternative); “COF” - consequence of failure of target asset (score or monetary value like dollar amount may be used);“BRE” - business risk exposure, derived from LOF and COF, usually defined as LOF x COF (the resulting value may be score, monetary value, etc.);“project” - a set of multiple assets to manage,“job” and“project” are used interchangeably herein;“job planner” - tool to generate project(s) automatically based on some values, such as LOF, BRE, etc., associated with each asset;“GIS” - geographic information system;“Plan” - a set of multiple projects; LOF/COF/BRE “rank” - rank of cohorts assigned by sorted LOF/COF/BRE, size of each cohort may not be the same;
- searching space a set of assets considered by the job planner (if the searching space is large than the job planner will take a relatively long time to generate project(s), and vice versa); and“score” - means values such as LOF, COF, BRE and the like.
- FIG. 1 is a conceptual diagram of job planner system, according to some embodiments.
- step 1 10 asset data associated with some score(s) to evaluate are imported into the job planner engine 100. Examples of asset data 102 shown are LOF, BRE and LOF rank for a number of pipe segments.
- step 1 12 the Job Planner Engine is configured (with some example configuration parameters 104 shown) and the Job Planner Engine is“run.”
- step 1 14 the resulting projects 106 are obtained.
- the projects 106 are added (if desired) to the project pool 108.
- plans are created and/or edited by adding and/or moving project(s) from / to the project pool. Shown are example plans 120.
- the user can edit the generated projects manually. For example, the user can add and/or remove a pipe segment(s) to/from a project.
- the user can sort and filter projects by size or other attribute in the project pool. For example, the user can sort projects by size and/or extract projects that contain pipes made of cast iron.
- the user can download projects and plans in various formats including csv, shapefile or an equivalent format such as gpkg.
- FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating some of the functions and workflow of a job planner platform, according to some embodiments.
- the workflow of the job planner can be described in three major stages:
- State 2 - View Project Pool (212): This stage enables user to manage a collection of projects before they are selected for specific asset management plans. Specific functions in this stage are also included in diagram 200. Being the project repository, this stage provides a“parking” site for project candidates as well as allowing potential refinement of individual projects before user move on to the next stage.
- Stage 3 - Manage Plan (214): The highest level of job planner stages, this stage allows users to create individual asset management plans tailored to specific goals. Specific functions in this stage are also included in diagram 200. This stage provides the most flexibility in levels of analysis and control, allowing the user to manage multiple plans, different risk management goals at the same time, without losing site of the overall picture of the utility and detailed information from each project.
- Stage 1 Generate Projects. This first stage is a foundation of a job planner. As a bottom layer, it serves as the landing page for new user of a job planner to generate projects and populate an empty project pool.
- FIG. 3 is diagram illustrating aspects of a user interface in a first project generation stage of a job planner, according to some embodiments.
- This stage allows user to define their projects with minimum input that is relevant to the utilities’ specific objectives.
- the map section 310 of the interface shows relevant risk information and pipe information based on user’s preference, including LOF, COF, BRE and pipe attributes data.
- colors such as red, orange, yellow, light blue and dark blue, can be used to denote five different levels of risk information for the various pipe segments in map section 310.
- the color coding can be assigned according a percentage of pipe length.
- One example is as follows: 3% of the pipe length having highest LOF is colored red; between 3%-10% of the pipe length having the next higher LOF is colored orange; between 10%-25% of the pipe length having the next higher LOF is colored yellow; between 25%-50% of the pipe length having the next higher LOF is light blue; and the 50% of the pipe length having the lowest LOF is colored dark blue.
- Step 1 Define Planning Boundary.
- utility planners can define the planning boundary through a drawing tool, or upload GIS information stored locally/online.
- the resulting planning boundary can be stored on the provider’s server by its name, allowing the user to reuse it in the future if desired.
- users can also upload GIS information and identify areas to be either included or excluded for generating projects. For example, user may want to upload GIS information for: future street paving projects to be prioritized for pipe replacement or rehabilitation candidate areas; current street paving projects already completed for moratorium periods that will not allow pipeline projects for at least 5 years; and/or new development areas that require focused pipeline replacement/upgrades based on risk mitigation consideration.
- custom risk profile(s) can be uploaded by the user.
- Step 2 Define Planning Scope.
- the user specifies a target amount of pipeline to be included for analysis.
- the pipeline planner at water utility could either choose to specify the pipeline scope by total length of pipe to be included in the analysis or using a percentage of the total network instead.
- the two fields are linked to each other so that as user make changes any one of the two fields, he/she will get an idea what it means both in terms of total length and proportion of the whole network.
- Step 3 Define Planning Criteria.
- customers can to take advantage of the LOF and BRE information generated through an existing machine learning algorithm.
- LOF can be used as the project selection criteria.
- BRE information can be selected instead.
- the user can take advantage of their own versions of risk analysis if desirable.
- the user can upload a shapefile or table containing custom risk criteria that can be linked to the cleaned pipe network and select custom risk criteria to generate projects.
- Step 4 Define Project Size.
- Public utilities sometimes contract out their pipeline work to third party construction contractors with specific project sizes in mind.
- the projects need to be neither too small nor too large.
- The“mini” projects that are too small are not optimal for contractors to bid because it cannot cover the cost of crew and equipment mobilization. On the contrary, if project sizes are too long, it can lead to concentrated risk by limiting the number of contractors working with the utility.
- the user can define both the minimum and maximum length of pipeline projects.
- maximum gap can be defined by utility if they choose to merge adjacent projects. This merging functionality can also be achieved in later stages in the future.
- FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating a user interface displaying the generation of project results by a job planner, according to some embodiments.
- the new projects generated through Stage 1 are shown in both table section 410 and map section 412.
- the background of the map section 412 can display different risk criteria as defined by user, such as LOF, COF, BRE or pipe attributes, to provide an anchor point for user analysis/evaluation of the resulting projects.
- colors such as red, orange, yellow, light blue and dark blue, can be used to denote five different levels of or risk information.
- the user can select the new projects from the results and add them to the project pool, either from the table in section 420 or from the map section 412.
- the table section 420 can be automatically highlighted when the user makes a selection on map section 412 and vice versa.
- the project“PJ101” is selected by the user (e.g. using mouse click) and the entry for PJ101 on both the table section 420 and the PJ101 marker on the map section 412 are highlighted, for example, with a yellow color.
- the project pool can display existing projects both in the table section 422 and on the map section 412.
- different colors and/or symbols can be used to distinguish new projects from existing projects.
- they When freshly generate projects are added to the project pool, they will be marked using a different color and/or marker, so that user can easily identify them as new members in the project pool. This way, if the user later decides to remove such projects from the pool, it is easy to select them during this process.
- the user can cancel or save the changes before leaving Stage 1 and going into other stages within Job Planner.
- the existing project pool can be downloaded to user’s local computer for further analysis and refinement.
- the user can upload any type of GIS shapefile for boundary delineation.
- Stage 2 View Project Pool. This stage is where utility planner manages potential project candidates for their asset management plan. The main
- Stage 1 which contains a direct linkage to Stage 2 at the completion of Stage 1 as described supra.
- FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating a user interface displaying a table view of a project pool, according to some embodiments.
- Projects can be managed in through table view and map view. Under table view, shown in FIG. 5, a summary of the project is provided in rows, including the project ID, pipe material, diameter and lengths, as well as risks associated with the projects. Under a map view (not shown), the relative locations of all the projects within the project pool can be reviewed and inspected by user. Like the map view in stage 1 , user can choose the backgrounds from various risk factors to pipe attributes as anchor points when evaluating the validity of these project candidates. Users can also click on individual projects in the map to see detailed information that’s contained in the table view above.
- any intrusive or non-intrusive field work related to pipe asset management can form a project or part of a project.
- the“unit cost” of the project can set by the user. This unit cost should be entered by the user depending on the expected cost for the type of project. The unit cost can also be entered or adjusted in screens in FIGs. 7 and 8.
- FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating a user interface displaying a more detailed view of a particular project in a project pool, according to some embodiments.
- View / Edit Project Details Users can have the opportunity to go a level deeper into the project details and inspect more information associated with a single project at pipe segment level.
- FIG. 6 shows a sample user interface of such a “project details” view.
- the project details functionality allows users to inspect individual pipe segments within the candidate project.
- the pipe attribute information and risk parameters from project level can be evaluated separately for each pipe segment, so that user can have a clear idea how each segment contributes to the project cost and system risk reduction.
- a user can make specific changes to the project at the user’s discretion, independent from pure risk analysis.
- specific project selection is not only tied to risk factors alone. Therefore, allowing user to edit specific projects by adding/removing certain sections of pipe provides necessary flexibility to create better, more practical projects.
- the project pool and project summary information can be downloaded to user’s local computer for further analysis and refinement.
- users can sort and filter projects within the pool by pipe attributes (material, age, diameter and etc.) and risk characters (LOF, COF, BRE), making it more convenient for user to identify projects that are targeting a specific asset management goal.
- pipe attributes material, age, diameter and etc.
- LEF, COF, BRE risk characters
- Stage 3 Manage Plans This stage is where utility planners can create, manage and modify their asset management plans aimed for business risk reduction and mitigation.
- the functionalities in this stage include: managing plans; viewing and editing plans; comparing plans; and merging / splitting plans.
- New users to Job Planner will need to create their first asset management plan by selecting projects from the project pool.
- Existing users who already has multiple plans in the system could also create plans by copying from an existing plan.
- the user can easily compare the business risk exposure 610 with the project cost 612 on the interface shown in FIG.
- project cost 612 is closely related to unit cost that can be entered or modified by the user in section 510 of FIGs. 5, 7 and 8.
- FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating a user interface displaying a map view for managing plans, according to some embodiments.
- FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating a user interface displaying a table view for managing, according to some
- Manage Plans Similarly to the management of the project pool, users can manage existing plans through either map view (e.g. FIG. 7) or table view (e.g. FIG. 8). Users can select one or multiple plans to be displayed on the map or in the table. On the map view (FIG. 7) users may select one project on the map to view specific information regarding that project. Projects that belong to different plans can be displayed in different colors and/or symbols.
- information can be provided similar to that provided in the project pool stage, such as project pipe attributes information and risk information.
- the manage plans stage e.g. in section 810) can provide a summary of the established plan under table view. This summary gives user information to the utility, such as total risk reduction, risk reduction efficiency, project cost, and return on investment for decision makers.
- asset management plans can be provided, including the statistical distribution of water main material, age, and diameter. This can allow utility planners to gain control over the unique objective of their individual plans and improve existing plans as new information becomes available.
- Project costs associated with water main projects are flexible due to different types of action, for example: replacement, rehabilitation, proactive leak detection, or other types of physical condition assessment.
- the manage plan stage allows user to update the project cost inside the platform to fit different activities. Comparing these with the monetized risk reduction measure will help utility planners make the best decisions to achieve the level-of-service goal at maximum efficiency in dollar and manpower.
- View / Edit Plans Plans can be thought of as essentially different pools of projects that can be viewed and edited in the same way as viewing and editing a project pool. For any specific plan, the individual projects can be removed from the plan or added into the plan from either table view or map view.
- Compare Plans puts information from multiple projects together so that users can identify similarities and differences across multiple plans based on the pipe composition, risk factors as well as project costs. Through comparison, utilities can decide on whether one plan can be used instead of another, or any improvements that could be made.
- merge/split plan functionality allows merging between multiple plans to fit the utility’s needs, as well as splitting plans to allow a smaller number of projects within plans is also possible in future product functions.
- plan management stage Since each plan carries several projects together, like the project pool, some functionalities that are offered with in the project pool stage are shared with plan management stage. These include viewing/editing projects and
- searching algorithm includes the following: (1 ) pre-processing to narrow the searching space; (2) running of the search engine; (3) post processing; and (4) generating planned projects. Following illustrates various aspects of how a job planner generates projects.
- a searching algorithm is described in the case where the target asset is water pipe, and the pipe connections are already calculated and known.
- Preprocessing The purpose of preprocessing is primarily to narrow searching space to speed up the process. According to some embodiments the preprocessing can include the following: (1 ) merging short pipes into longer pipes;
- FIGs. 9A and 9B are diagrams illustrating merging shorter pipe segments to form a longer pipe segments in order to speed up a job planning searching process, according to some embodiments.
- pipes whose pipe IDs are 1 , 2, 3 and 4 are relatively short. Merging them they are replaced with single long pipe segment (pipe ID 100001 ). By this simplification, data of asset linkages are simplified (4 rows to 1 row). The searching space is therefore downsized.
- pipe attributes such as material, install year, diameter may be considered.
- the algorithm may choose to merge pipes only if all of attributes are almost the same or exactly the same. Note that the score for the new pipe segment should be re-calculated.
- Further preprocessing can include finding and excluding groups of pipe segments that are not worth searching. If pipe segments are surrounded by pipe segments with very low scores, those pipe segments with or without surrounding pipe segments can be removed from searching space.
- a threshold can be pre defined or dynamically calculated. As an example of dynamic thresholds include: “mean value of the score/4”,“median value of the score/4”, or the score of pipe located at lowest N%.
- Another preprocessing technique can include dropping pipe segments having a low score, if not connected to multiple pipes.
- the pipe if the pipe is end of the pipe network and has a relatively low score, then the pipe segment can be excluded.
- a pre-defined threshold of the score, or dynamically calculated threshold of the score can be used. As described, supra, examples include:“mean value of the score/4”,“median value of the score/4”, or the score of pipe located at lowest N%.
- the threshold can be a pre-defined fixed value, or dynamically calculated.
- An example of a dynamically calculate threshold follows: (1 ) sort all pipes by their scores; (2) calculate the differences between immediate adjacent pipes (e.g.
- LOF and BRE are often used for asset condition assessment and job planning. But this information may not be sufficient for effective asset management (e.g. determining which pipes to replace). For example, pipes may be ranked with a number from 1 to 5, with“5” representing the highest LOF, and“1” representing the lowest LOF. A single Rank 5 segment, which has a high probability of breaking, can be found surrounded by Rank 1 pipes, which have a low probability of breaking.
- FIGs. 10A to 10C show three different possible pipe replacement jobs under consideration, according to some embodiments.
- 1 - P(1 -P si ) is the probability that one pipe breaks;
- P(1 -P si ) (1 -P Si ) (1 -Psi) (1 -Psi) is the probability that no pipes break;
- P Si 1 -(1 -P /.i ) / ' is the LOF/Segment of i th pipe;
- P /j is the LOF/Length of the i th pipe segment; and // is the length of the i th pipe segment.
- LOF/Construction is 0.87; in FIG. 10B, the LOF/Construction is 0.92; and in FIG. 13C the LOF/Construction is 0.95.
- the job of FIG. 10C will be the highest priority job of the three.
- FIGs. 1 1A-1 1 C are diagrams illustrating aspects of a scheme for a searching algorithm for job planning, according to some embodiments.
- the job planner searching engine scans all, or subset of combinations of pipes.
- the engine starts from each pipe segment (e.g. ⁇ ”) and searches all, or subset of each linked pipe segment recursively. The process continues until project length gets longer than a predetermined threshold (in FIG. 1 1 A after adding the third segment “4-1” the proposed project is“Long enough”).
- FIG. 1 1 A after adding the third segment “4-1” the proposed project is“Long enough”.
- FIG. 1 1 B shows a case where initially the result of a current branch is not long enough (adding segment“3-1” the project is “not long enough.” In this case the job planner engine searches another branch (adding“2-2”) and repeats the process.
- FIG. 1 1 C shows a case where a pipe segment (“4-1”) to add is longer than the threshold (“too long”), the pipe segment is discarded and job planner goes to the other branches.
- the job planner engine may stop searching based on other criteria. While searching, job planner engine recursively calculates a project-wise score(s) every time a pipe segment is added to the project being processed. Examples of the “score” include: LOF [%], LOF score, BRE [$], BRE score, LOF Rank, and BRE Rank, although other metrics can be used. Depending on score metric used, a project-wise score may be calculated differently.
- Job Planner may use the following equation: where N is the number of pipes contained in the project, and LOF, is LOF of i-th pipe segment in the project.
- LOF is LOF of i-th pipe segment in the project.
- BRE score Job Planner may use the following equation:
- N is the number of pipes contained in the project
- BRE is BRE of i-th pipe segment in the project.
- used score and equation to calculate project-wise score should be flexible, and may be customized by user.
- Caching Algorithm The computational time of a job planner engine can be very long because of its relatively large searching space. Preprocessing to reduce searching space may be used, as described supra. According to some
- a cache system can be used to reduce computational time. In short, cache system reuses previously calculated results.
- FIGs. 12A and 12B are diagrams illustrating aspects of a caching algorithm for a job planning engine, according to some embodiments.
- Each link has a cache container and caches the previous result of searching.
- the container will cache the data as follows. The longest sub-project following to the link, if the other following sub-projects are shorter or longer than some threshold(s).
- the sub-project 1210 is cached in cache container 1200. If there are more than sub project that meets the threshold criteria, then“the best sub-project” is cached. The “best” may be the sub-project with the highest LOF/Sub-Project, for example.
- FIG. 12A there are two sub-projects 1222 and 1224 that meet the threshold criteria.
- Sub-project 1222 is deemed better than sub-project 1224 by some criteria (e.g. highest LOF) and therefore sub-project 1222 is stored in cache container 1202.
- a subsequent search is being made for pipe segment“1”.
- the“start” box the two cache containers 1200 and 1202 are accessed and the project 1230 is generated quickly from the previously cached sub-projects.
- Post processing The purpose of post processing is generally to make sub-optimal results closer to global optimal results. Searching all of possible combinations is impractical. Accordingly the searching space should be somehow narrowed (as described supra with respect to preprocessing). Further, the searching algorithm can be designed to do a completely thorough search (e.g. to stop searching in a given direction in favor of a new direction when several pipe segments with low scores in a row are detected in the given direction). Accordingly, it can said that the searching algorithm approximately searches the best projects.
- the resulting project is connected to pipe with high score.
- the resulting project is next to other resulting project(s).
- a reason why such results can occur is that the job planner has decided to stop searching or change direction before adding the pipe within sequential complicated computations accidentally.
- FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating an example of a resulting project that is connected to pipe with high score.
- the pipe 1320 with high LOF next to the project 1310 can be a merged planned project. So as to avoid missing such pipe(s), the job planner can be configured to check for such pipes and to add them to the project if found. According to some embodiments, the job planner can use two types of criteria when deciding whether to add a pipe or not. It will check one or both of the following: (1 ) whether the pipe’s score is greater than a threshold, which is pre-defined or dynamically calculated; and (2) whether a normalized score (normalized with respect to project size, such as LOF/Len of project) of the project doesn’t decrease by adding the pipe.
- a threshold which is pre-defined or dynamically calculated
- a normalized score normalized with respect to project size, such as LOF/Len of project
- FIG. 14 is a diagram illustrating an example of a resulting project that is next to other resulting project(s).
- the resulting project 1410 is connected to another resulting project 1412.
- this can be resolved by automatically merging the two projects 1410 and 1412, provided that the total length of the merged project is not greater than allowed maximum size that the user has configured.
- the three steps can be run twice to enhance the final results.
- the difference between the 1 st run and the 2 nd run is that the 2 nd run is performed without pipes included in projects generated in 1 st run.
- the job planner can sometimes generate sub-optimal results.
- the 2 nd run has been found to help the job planner generate more thoroughly searched results.
- the job planner can compare the results of 1 st run and 2 nd run equally and generate final results.
- the described systems and methods can be applied to assets other than drinking water supply, such as pipes for carrying other fluid, such as waste water, recycled water, brackish water, storm water, sea water, steam, compressed air, oil and natural gas.
- the described systems and methods can be applied to networks of fiber cables, electrical wires, as well as to utility poles.
Abstract
Description
Claims
Priority Applications (4)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
CA3115457A CA3115457A1 (en) | 2018-10-09 | 2019-10-09 | Automated asset mangement and planning |
EP19871328.1A EP3864537A4 (en) | 2018-10-09 | 2019-10-09 | Automated asset mangement and planning |
JP2021519545A JP2022504497A (en) | 2018-10-09 | 2019-10-09 | Automated asset management and planning |
AU2019356932A AU2019356932A1 (en) | 2018-10-09 | 2019-10-09 | Automated asset mangement and planning |
Applications Claiming Priority (12)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US201862743483P | 2018-10-09 | 2018-10-09 | |
US201862743477P | 2018-10-09 | 2018-10-09 | |
US201862743485P | 2018-10-09 | 2018-10-09 | |
US62/743,485 | 2018-10-09 | ||
US62/743,477 | 2018-10-09 | ||
US62/743,483 | 2018-10-09 | ||
US16/365,466 | 2019-03-26 | ||
US16/365,466 US11720816B2 (en) | 2018-03-28 | 2019-03-26 | Predicting pipe failure |
US16/365,522 US20190301963A1 (en) | 2018-03-28 | 2019-03-26 | Processing data for predicting pipe failure |
US16/365,522 | 2019-03-26 | ||
US201962858266P | 2019-06-06 | 2019-06-06 | |
US62/858,266 | 2019-06-06 |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
WO2020077005A1 true WO2020077005A1 (en) | 2020-04-16 |
Family
ID=70164409
Family Applications (2)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2019/055470 WO2020077005A1 (en) | 2018-10-09 | 2019-10-09 | Automated asset mangement and planning |
PCT/US2019/055465 WO2020077000A1 (en) | 2018-10-09 | 2019-10-09 | Calculating consequence of failure |
Family Applications After (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2019/055465 WO2020077000A1 (en) | 2018-10-09 | 2019-10-09 | Calculating consequence of failure |
Country Status (5)
Country | Link |
---|---|
EP (2) | EP3864536A4 (en) |
JP (2) | JP2022504497A (en) |
AU (2) | AU2019356931A1 (en) |
CA (2) | CA3115457A1 (en) |
WO (2) | WO2020077005A1 (en) |
Citations (7)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US6556924B1 (en) * | 2000-07-27 | 2003-04-29 | Hydroscope Canada Inc. | Maintenance optimization system for water pipelines |
US20070083398A1 (en) * | 2005-10-07 | 2007-04-12 | Veolia Es Industrial Services, Inc. | System to manage maintenance of a pipeline structure, program product, and related methods |
US20110137704A1 (en) * | 2009-12-09 | 2011-06-09 | Infosys Technologies Limited | System and method for calculating a comprehensive pipeline integrity business risk score |
US20120209653A1 (en) | 2011-02-15 | 2012-08-16 | General Electric Company | Gas pipeline network configuration system |
US20140052421A1 (en) * | 2010-09-14 | 2014-02-20 | Massachusetts Institute Of Technology | System and method for water distribution modelling |
CN104281921A (en) * | 2014-10-10 | 2015-01-14 | 讯腾数码科技(北京)有限公司 | Method for obtaining dynamic risk evaluation data of city underground pipe network |
US20160103433A1 (en) * | 2014-10-08 | 2016-04-14 | General Electric Company | System and method to provide an intelligent pipeline management graphical user interface map display |
Family Cites Families (11)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
JP2006183274A (en) * | 2004-12-27 | 2006-07-13 | Yamaguchi Univ | Method and equipment for predicting damage to sewer pipe of sewer pipe network |
JP2009048384A (en) * | 2007-08-20 | 2009-03-05 | Hitachi Ltd | Facility management support system |
JP5283481B2 (en) * | 2008-10-30 | 2013-09-04 | 株式会社コンピュータシステム研究所 | Water infrastructure risk management support system, water infrastructure risk management support program, and storage medium |
JP5377174B2 (en) * | 2009-09-07 | 2013-12-25 | 株式会社東芝 | Leakage investigation target route extraction system |
US8510080B2 (en) * | 2012-01-23 | 2013-08-13 | Id Modeling, Inc. | System and method for monitoring and managing utility devices |
JP5802619B2 (en) * | 2012-07-06 | 2015-10-28 | 株式会社日立製作所 | Equipment maintenance management support system |
JP6273125B2 (en) * | 2013-11-12 | 2018-01-31 | 株式会社日立製作所 | Leakage investigation planning device, leakage investigation planning system, and leakage investigation planning method |
JP6181301B2 (en) * | 2014-06-11 | 2017-08-16 | 株式会社日立製作所 | Water leakage countermeasure support device and method |
JP6329497B2 (en) * | 2014-07-30 | 2018-05-23 | 株式会社日立製作所 | Pipeline renewal plan planning support system and pipe renewal plan planning support method |
US10275402B2 (en) * | 2015-09-15 | 2019-04-30 | General Electric Company | Systems and methods to provide pipeline damage alerts |
US9395262B1 (en) * | 2015-12-21 | 2016-07-19 | International Business Machines Corporation | Detecting small leaks in pipeline network |
-
2019
- 2019-10-09 CA CA3115457A patent/CA3115457A1/en active Pending
- 2019-10-09 EP EP19871106.1A patent/EP3864536A4/en active Pending
- 2019-10-09 EP EP19871328.1A patent/EP3864537A4/en active Pending
- 2019-10-09 JP JP2021519545A patent/JP2022504497A/en active Pending
- 2019-10-09 WO PCT/US2019/055470 patent/WO2020077005A1/en unknown
- 2019-10-09 AU AU2019356931A patent/AU2019356931A1/en active Pending
- 2019-10-09 WO PCT/US2019/055465 patent/WO2020077000A1/en unknown
- 2019-10-09 CA CA3115520A patent/CA3115520A1/en active Pending
- 2019-10-09 AU AU2019356932A patent/AU2019356932A1/en active Pending
- 2019-10-09 JP JP2021519650A patent/JP2022506013A/en active Pending
Patent Citations (7)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US6556924B1 (en) * | 2000-07-27 | 2003-04-29 | Hydroscope Canada Inc. | Maintenance optimization system for water pipelines |
US20070083398A1 (en) * | 2005-10-07 | 2007-04-12 | Veolia Es Industrial Services, Inc. | System to manage maintenance of a pipeline structure, program product, and related methods |
US20110137704A1 (en) * | 2009-12-09 | 2011-06-09 | Infosys Technologies Limited | System and method for calculating a comprehensive pipeline integrity business risk score |
US20140052421A1 (en) * | 2010-09-14 | 2014-02-20 | Massachusetts Institute Of Technology | System and method for water distribution modelling |
US20120209653A1 (en) | 2011-02-15 | 2012-08-16 | General Electric Company | Gas pipeline network configuration system |
US20160103433A1 (en) * | 2014-10-08 | 2016-04-14 | General Electric Company | System and method to provide an intelligent pipeline management graphical user interface map display |
CN104281921A (en) * | 2014-10-10 | 2015-01-14 | 讯腾数码科技(北京)有限公司 | Method for obtaining dynamic risk evaluation data of city underground pipe network |
Non-Patent Citations (1)
Title |
---|
See also references of EP3864537A4 |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
AU2019356931A1 (en) | 2021-05-13 |
CA3115457A1 (en) | 2020-04-16 |
JP2022504497A (en) | 2022-01-13 |
EP3864536A4 (en) | 2022-06-08 |
JP2022506013A (en) | 2022-01-17 |
CA3115520A1 (en) | 2020-04-16 |
AU2019356932A1 (en) | 2021-05-06 |
EP3864537A1 (en) | 2021-08-18 |
EP3864536A1 (en) | 2021-08-18 |
WO2020077000A1 (en) | 2020-04-16 |
EP3864537A4 (en) | 2022-06-08 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
Bao et al. | Review of public–private partnership literature from a project lifecycle perspective | |
Dikmen et al. | Using fuzzy risk assessment to rate cost overrun risk in international construction projects | |
Yun et al. | Critical organizational success factors for public private partnership projects–a comparison of solicited and unsolicited proposals | |
Gündüz et al. | Quantification of delay factors using the relative importance index method for construction projects in Turkey | |
EP3776444A1 (en) | Predicting pipe failure | |
Rueda-Cantuche et al. | Trade in services by GATS modes of supply: Statistical concepts and first EU estimates | |
Vaardini et al. | Study on cost overruns in construction projects: a review | |
US8880422B1 (en) | Energy high performance capability assessment | |
Ismail et al. | A public sector comparator (PSC) for value for money (VFM) assessment tools | |
Almarri et al. | An evaluation of the impact of risk cost on risk allocation in public private partnership projects | |
JP6613210B2 (en) | Human resource development support system | |
Assaf et al. | Key decision-making factors influencing bundling strategies: Analysis of bundled infrastructure projects | |
Bruner et al. | Tourists’ willingness to pay to visit Tanzania’s National Parks: a contingent valuation study | |
Khoso et al. | Decision criteria for assessment of contractors in prequalification phase of public projects | |
Rajeh | Impact of procurement systems on transaction costs: a structural equation modelling methodology | |
KR102291512B1 (en) | How to Create a Business Model for Managing Multiple Stores | |
US11893546B2 (en) | Automated asset management and planning | |
Marzouk et al. | Analyzing procurement route selection for electric power plants projects using SMART | |
AU2019356932A1 (en) | Automated asset mangement and planning | |
Ojo et al. | Significance of construction cost estimating risks in Nigeria | |
Hsieh | An empirical survey: Can green marketing really entice customers to pay more | |
Marzouk et al. | Measuring sensitivity of procurement decisions using superiority and inferiority ranking | |
Taye | Simulation Modeling of Cost Overrun in Construction Project in Ethiopia | |
Olanrewaju et al. | Procurement of maintenance management for public high rise residential buildings | |
Crist et al. | Manager’s guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
121 | Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application |
Ref document number: 19871328 Country of ref document: EP Kind code of ref document: A1 |
|
ENP | Entry into the national phase |
Ref document number: 3115457 Country of ref document: CA |
|
ENP | Entry into the national phase |
Ref document number: 2021519545 Country of ref document: JP Kind code of ref document: A |
|
NENP | Non-entry into the national phase |
Ref country code: DE |
|
ENP | Entry into the national phase |
Ref document number: 2019356932 Country of ref document: AU Date of ref document: 20191009 Kind code of ref document: A |
|
ENP | Entry into the national phase |
Ref document number: 2019871328 Country of ref document: EP Effective date: 20210510 |