Buku

Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 835
Productivity Analysis of Horizontal Directional Drilling

Muhammad Adel1 and Tarek Zayed2
1
Graduate Student, Dept. of Building, Civil & Environmental Engineering,
Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3G 1M7.
E-mail: mu_mahmo@encs.concordia.ca
2
Associate Professor, Dept. of Building, Civil & Environmental Engineering,
Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3G 1M7.
E-mail: zayed@bcee.concordia.ca
Abstract: With the rapid increase of new installations, replacement and repairs of
pipe utilities, the demand for trenchless excavation methods with minimum
disruption to the public such as horizontal directional drilling (HDD) has increased.
Canadian National Research Council reports that rehabilitation of municipal water
systems would cost $28 billion from year 1997 to 2012 (NRC 2004). Contractors,
engineers, and decision makers are always facing a challenge of how to estimate the
cost of new pipe installation using the HDD due to the presence of subjective factors.
The HDD process involves a large number of factors to be considered for
productivity prediction and cost estimation. Therefore, an emergent need for
developing a dedicated HDD productivity model is currently undertaken to meet
industrial needs. The presented research aims at identifying the main factors that
affect productivity of HDD operations and designing a productivity model. A
neurofuzzy approach is utilized to design the HDD productivity prediction model for
underground pipe installations in clay soil. The neurofuzzy system is developed based
on actual project data that are collected through interviews, phone calls and
questionnaire surveys. Results show that crew and operator skills and pipe diameter
greatly affect the HDD productivity and the project as a whole.
Introduction
An enormous task was added to the utility service companies (i.e., power,
telecommunications, water mains, and sewer) in Canada and USA since the
beginning of this century for maintaining, repairing the existing utilities and
constructing the new installation due to the increase in demand. These operations had
proven to be expensive, especially in the crowded urban areas. The total activity cost
includes the costs of the ground surface repair (i.e., sidewalks, pavement, brick
paving) and the social costs due to the disruption to traffic and unfavourable impact
on nearby activities (Ariaratnam et al, 1999).
To face the urgent demand of the aged utilities’ replacement or renovation and the
environmental constrains, the municipalities and utility companies as well as
contractors stared to seek other alternatives to install or repair their underground
assets. Trenchless Technology (TT) proved to be what they were looking for
according to its various ranges of methods, materials, and equipments. Canadian
Downloaded 13 Sep 2011 to 132.205.59.19. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
National Research Council emphasized that only rehabilitation of the municipal water
systems would cost $28 billion from year 1997 to 2012 (NRC 2004).
Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) is a trenchless technique that proposes several

benefits over traditional open-cut. The HDD was originally developed by the oil
industry in the United States; this technique is now widely used for installing all
pressure pipes under obstacles such as motorways, large rivers, airport runways, etc.
A steerable drill bit of 90 mm diameter usually starts digging from the earth surface
and generates a pilot hole. Upon completion, the pilot string is removed and a rotating
reamer is attached to travel back along the pilot hole. Consequent reaming continues
until the required diameter is achieved. Recently, in the last 15 years, the directional
drilling industry in North America has grown from a small revolutionary group of
contractors operating a few directional drilling rigs to a well established, extensive,
multibillion dollar industry (Allouche et al., 2000; Ariaratnam and Allouche, 2000;
Ariaratnam, 2005). Almost in 15 years time, horizontal directional drilling (HDD)
industry in North America has grown from a bunch of contractors concerned with a
few directional drilling units operations to a multibillion-dollar industry (Kirby et al.,
1997).
Canada and the USA today are facing a growing problem in rehabilitating its
decaying underground utility systems (Ali et al., 2007). Currently, HDD has become
the most favourite method for new underground conduits and pipelines installations
(Lueke and Ariaratnam, 2005). The number of HDD contractors has increased as a
result of the growth in size and difficulty of the HDD projects, thus there is a growing
need for developing a dedicated model design to meet the special industrial needs due
to the increase of complexity and size of the projects currently undertaken and
implemented using HDD. The society is influenced by the great development of
underground infrastructure, environmental concerns, and economic trends, which
resulted in the technology advancement to achieve the most efficient and cost
effective utility installation, reparation, renovation and maintenance (Allouche et al.
2003). Contractors, engineers, and decision makers are always facing a challenge of
how to estimate the cost of new pipe installation using the HDD due to the presence
of many qualitative factors. HDD is a process that involves a large number of factors
that need to be considered for productivity prediction and cost estimation.
Productivity of trenchless technology methods is usually predicted using heuristic
techniques and experts opinions (common practices) without considering the
subjective factors’ effect. Contractors always use their experience in estimating
production rates. In addition, the industry lacks models that predict productivity of
the trenchless techniques (Ali et al., 2007). Allouche et al. (2000) stated that the
subsurface conditions and pipe diameter are the two main factors affecting
productivity in utility projects. Allouche et al., 2003 stated that over 49 HDD
contractors, engineers, and consultants showed the growing demand for the HDD
productivity model(s). Importance of different HDD packages is shown in Table 1.
Dubey et al. (2006) developed a simplified deterministic productivity assessment

model for HDD. They implemented their application based on two projects only in
which two regression linear models are designed between bore length and cycle time.
The soil type, rig size, pipe material and diameter greatly affect the drilling, pre-
reaming and pull back times. Other factors, such as weather condition, contractor’s
experience and job management conditions considered as efficiency factors. On the
other hand, Allouche et al. (2003) developed two computerized applications tailored
to the HDD industry. The first is an integrated data management system that
combines asset management, cost control, estimation and project-tracking
capabilities, to enable decision makers to intimately monitor field performance in
terms of expenses and productivity. The second is a simulation model developed to
optimize the utilization of drilling rigs and hydro-vacuum trucks on large-scale urban
projects.
Table 1: Current needs for devoted HDD software (Allouche et al., 2003)
Software Package Yes % Somewhat % No% Rank
Project Tracking 51 47 2 1
Cost Control 49 42 9 2
Project Management 42 50 8 3
Asset Management 39 50 11 4
Cost Estimation 41 44 15 5
Accordingly, both qualitative and quantitative parameters - that affect horizontal

directional drilling productivity - were investigated in order to identify the main
factors that affect the productivity of horizontal directional drilling operations,
thereby to refine the HDD process and obtain productivity. In addition, estimating the
productivity of horizontal directional drilling projects under different soil conditions
should be studied. Therefore, the presented research in this paper has the following
objectives: (1) Identify the important factors that affect the productivity of horizontal
directional drilling operation and (2) Develop a productivity model.
Neurofuzzy Approach
The integration of neural network and fuzzy logic are receiving the attention to
develop real-world applications (Medsker L., 1996). Neurofuzzy approach refers to
hybrids of artificial neural networks and fuzzy logic. The application of the
neurofuzzy technique is based on the integration of the explicit knowledge
representation of the fuzzy logic with the learning power of neural networks (Simon
and Biro, 2005). The mechanism of neurofuzzy system can be simply explained as;
having the input vector consisting of a set of fuzzy values, as well as having the
connection weights of the nodes to the nodes in the previous layer in fuzzy values.
Where, the weights and input values are each represented by membership function. A
further summation process is implemented to find the product of the membership
function of the fuzzy inputs and weights, and then add the resulting membership
functions to get another single that represents the integration of weighted fuzzy inputs
to the node. Lastly, a final operation takes place on the resultant finding out a crisp
value for the node output (Medsker L., 1996). Crisp value is a numerical
deterministic value of the factor effect. The process of converting crisp input value to
fuzzy value and vice versa are called fuzzification and defuzzification, respectively.
Neural and fuzzy systems are model-free function estimators that can be adjusted or
trained for improved performance, where they are by nature readily implemented
with parallel processing techniques. Neural networks consist of connection among a
distribution of nodes. On the other hand, fuzzy systems process rules that associate, in
parallel, fuzzy inputs with fuzzy output sets (Medsker L., 1996).
Georgy et al. (2005) presented a study utilizing neurofuzzy intelligent systems for
predicting the engineering performance. The system employed statistical variable
reduction techniques to develop linear regression models of similar engineering
performance prediction scheme. Georgy et al. (2005) utilized neurofuzzy systems as
credible approach for predicting engineering performance, based on their ability to
model nonlinearity. The developed regression model that depict the whole set of
input variables was not feasible due to the significant number of inputs. The
neurofuzzy system showed fewer deviations from the actual outputs than regression
models. The accuracy of the models is affected by the limited data set available
during model development. Increasing the volume of actual project data could
improve the models.
Research Methodology
The developed research methodology is shown in Figure 1. Data collection and
analysis comes along with the intensive literature review on; factors affecting
productivity of TT methods with a focus on HDD in addition to the previous models
developed to calculate their productivity, and neurofuzzy modeling technique. A new
automated HDD productivity prediction model is developed, followed by conclusion
and future work needed for the present research.
Model Development
This paper utilized the neurofuzzy technique in developing the HDD Productivity
Prediction (HDDPP) model in clay soil. The Fuzzy neural network model has three
main functions fuzzifier, fuzzy rules, and evaluator/defuzzifier. The starting layers
process crisp input data of the eight input modeling parameters and implement
membership functions of each parameter. Therefore, crisp input data transforms into
membership function values, which are the output of the first layer of nodes. The
hidden middle layer(s) includes fuzzy rules operating on the fuzzified input. Finally,
the last layer(s) collects the results of applying the rules, and defuzzify the results to
get the crisp value representing the HDDPP.
The presented study focuses on both quantitative and qualitative factors affecting
productivity calculation in addition to the activity cycle time. The thorough literature
review, as well as the industry experts input, comes out with identifying thirteen
main factors to be the most significant factors affecting HDD productivity (Figure 2);
operation/crew skills, safety regulations, rig size, machine condition, slurry flow rate,
steering problems, soil types, unseen obstacles, site/ weather conditions, pipe
diameter, pipe length, pipe depth and pipe type. These factors are sub-divided from
four main categories; management, mechanical, environmental and pipe conditions.
Due to data limitations, this research only focuses on analyzing the relationship
between activities cycle time and the eight most comprehensive factors (i.e.
operation/crew skills, pipe diameter, rig size, machine condition, unseen obstacles,
pipe length and the site/ weather conditions) as well as identifying their relevant
impact on productivity.
The collected data are clustered according to the eight identified input parameters.
These eight input parameters are clustered into four levels as shown in (Figure 2).
The first level identifies the working soil type, which are limited to clay soil. The
second input cluster level defines the pipe condition and the operational conditions,
which leads to the third level of the pipe length and diameter representing the pipe
conditions and the rig size, machine condition, site/weather conditions and
operator/crew skills representing the operational conditions.
Data Collection
The main set of collected data includes, real HDD project data, representing the
project input variables, cycle time and productivity measures, which is identified in
the problem formulation stage. This set of data is used to train the structure
connections of the neurofuzzy system to properly relate the defined HDD input
variables with the corresponding productivity measures.
Figure 1: Schematic Methodology of Studying HDD Productivity Prediction
Figure 2: Modeling Data Clustering
A questionnaire was designed based on literature review and interviewing

construction industry professionals to investigate the most effective factors on HDD
productivity. Questionnaire was sent to professionals, consultants, contractors and
equipment operators in HDD technique. The first part was designed to collect the
participant’s and project’s information. The second part collects the effect of various
factors on productivity using a unified fuzzy performance scale. The participants
were given the possibility to add more factors and evaluate their impact. The last part
collects the HDD cycle time duration. Approximately, 220 questionnaires were sent
to professionals in USA, Canada, UK and South Africa; however only 12% replied
(28 individuals replied with multiple soil types). Almost twenty percent of this data
(Two projects from each soil type) were excluded from the modeling phase and used
only for validation purposes. Collected data was organized and analyzed according to
the various soil types and to be applicable by the modeling neurofuzzy tool. Based on
the received questionnaires, the HDD productivity prediction model was developed.
Model Implementation
The model mechanism is basically divided into training and validation phases. The
training starts by both qualitative and quantitative data entry in terms of parameter
weights and cycle time/production rate, respectively. The model was developed using
MATLAB ver. 7.0 using the neurofuzzy tool box ANFIS. Data entry layer takes both
crisp and fuzzy factors and process all factors to the training process, which starts by
data fuzzification where the degree of each parameter is determined. The data are
then proceeded to be trained via ANN. The fuzzy outcome is then diffuzified, where
the crisp input parameter variable is determined given its degree of membership. In
other words, the functions performed by the Fuzzy neural networks are fuzzify
system inputs, defuzzify model outputs and develop a structure weight that properly
represent the nonlinear relationships across the model inputs and outputs (Figure 3).
This system is able to build relationships between the factors affecting the HDD
process and the overall productivity. Therefore, the model can predict HDD process
productivity given a specified set of project input variables (parameters), with an
adequate error percent.
The Clay FNN model considered seven input parameters, i.e. operation and crew
skills, pipe diameter, rig size, machine condition, site and weather conditions, pipe
length and unseen obstacles; where all factors had three membership functions except
for the operator/crew skills and rig size, which had only two membership functions.
The clay model was trained and tested via 40 data points; of which 32 were used in
training and 8 in testing phase. Furthermore, clay FNN model was developed based
on 1992 nodes, 7776 linear parameters, 57 nonlinear parameters, 32 training data
pairs, and 972 fuzzy rules.
The developed model is tested after the modeling phase, where the neurofuzzy
system, splits the modeling data into training and testing data. Eight of the total
collected data points are unexposed to the neurofuzzy system during the training
phase to be used for testing purposes. Afterwards, the testing data set is used to
predict productivity and compare results with the real time productivity in which it
showed robust results with an average validation of 96%.
Conclusion
Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) has proven itself in the underground
construction market as one of the most effective TT methods for new underground
pipe/cable installations. Due to HDD competitive market conditions, client
expectations, and technological advancements, an emergent need for HDD
contractors has risen to identify the major factors that affect the HDD productivity.
There is insufficient information in the literature regarding models and software for
the HDD productivity analysis. Therefore, a productivity prediction model for HDD
projects was developed using the neurofuzzy system. The model helped experts to
estimate and predict the project duration. It is found that crew and operator skills, soil
type and pipe diameter were the most significant factors affecting HDD productivity,
while pipe length and weather conditions had the least effect.
This model was a tool for experts and professionals to help them justify their
productivity calculation by quantifying some of the subjective factors effect. This will
better impact their schedule and cost estimation of HDD works. Moreover, it provides
researchers and experts with the most significant factors that contribute to HDD
installations. The developed neurofuzzy methodology and model can be used in
similar research applications.
Figure 3: Basic Architecture of Clay FNN Model
REFRENCES
Ali, S., Zayed, T. and Hegab, M. (2007). “Modeling the Effect of Subjective Factors
on Productivity of Trenchless Technology Application to Buried Infrastructure
Systems,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE,
October, Vol. 133, pp. 743-748.
Allouche, E., Ariaratnam, S. and Lueke, J. (2000). “Horizontal Directional Drilling:
Profile of an Emerging Industry,” Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, ASCE, January/February, Vol. 126, No. 1, pp. 68-76.
Allouche, E., Ariaratnam, S. and Macleod, C. (2003). “Software for Planning and
Cost Control in Directional Drilling Projects,” Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, ASCE, July/August, Vol. 129, No. 4 pp. 446-453.
Ariaratnam, S. (2005).” Invited Presentation Development of Good Practices for
Horizontal Directional Drilling “, Toward 21st Century for Trenchless
Technology, Guangzhou, China.
Ariaratnam, S., Lueke, J. and Allouche, E. (1999). “Utilization of Trenchless
Construction Methods by Canadian Municipalities,” Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, ASCE, March/April, Vol. 125, No. 2, pp. 76-86.
Ariaratnam, S. and Allouche, E. (2000). “Suggested practices for installations using
horizontal directional drilling,” Practice Periodical on Structural Design and
Construction, ASCE, November, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 142-149.
Dubey, B., Gupta, M. and Zayed, T. (2006). “Deterministic Productivity Model for
Horizontal Directional Drilling,” INFRA 2006, Quebec City, QC, Canada,
November 20-22.
Georgy, M., Chang, L. and Zhang L. (2005). “Prediction of Engineering
Performance: A Neurofuzzy Approach,” Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, ASCE, May, 131 (5), pp. 548-557.
Kirby, M., Kramer, S., Pittard, G. and Mamoun, M. (1997). ‘‘Design Guidelines and
Procedures for Guided Horizontal Drilling, Part II,’’ No-Dig Engineering, 3(4),
pp. 13–15.
Lueke, J. and Ariaratnam, S. (2005). “Surface Heave Mechanisms in Horizontal
Directional Drilling,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
ASCE, May, Vol. 131, No. 5, pp. 540-547.
Lawson, G. (2003). “Water and Sewer Construction with Horizontal Directional
Drilling Equipment,” American Society of Civil Engineers, May 8, pp. 1472-
1480.
Medsker, L. (1996). “Microcomputer Applications of Hybrid Intelligent Systems,”
Journal of Network and Computer Applications, Vol. 19, pp 213-234.
National research council of Canada (NRC), 2004. “Assessing Canada’s
Infrastructure Needs: A Review of Key Studies” September 2004 <
http://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/research-recherche/rresul/rs/rs09_e.shtml> surfed
on Dec. 2006
Simon, A. and Biro, D. (2005). “About Neurofuzzy Module of the FuzzyTECH 5.5
Software”. Online Edition at College of Nyíregyháza, Proc. of 6th International
Symposium of Hungarian Researchers on Computational Intelligence, Budapest,
http://bmf.hu/conferences/SAMI2005/Agnes.pdf.

Buku

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Buku

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Pipelines 2009: Infrastructure's Hidden Assets © 2009 ASCE 835

Productivity Analysis of Horizontal Directional Drilling

Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) is a trenchless technique that proposes several

Dubey et al. (2006) developed a simplified deterministic productivity assessment

Accordingly, both qualitative and quantitative parameters - that affect horizontal

Figure 1: Schematic Methodology of Studying HDD Productivity Prediction

Figure 2: Modeling Data Clustering

A questionnaire was designed based on literature review and interviewing

Figure 3: Basic Architecture of Clay FNN Model

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi