Advertisement

Prediction of Operation Efficiency of Water Treatment Plant with the Help of Multi-criteria Decision-making

  • Sudipa Choudhury
  • Apu Kumar Saha
Original Paper

Abstract

Nearly a quarter-million people in the earth do not have access to drinking water. Within the 2.5% of water available in the World, only 1 % is utilizable. Due to the various organic and inorganic pollutants in the water, one of the main reasons for nearly 80% of the three million early deaths observed in the developing countries, are due to drinking of contaminated water. That is why, performance of water treatment plants which treats the surface or waste water and supplies to the consumers is required to be regularly monitored so that eminence of the treated water can be ensured. There are various methods available to evaluate the performance of water treatment plants. But most of these methods are subjective and absolute. All the parameters are given equal significance which makes most of the existing methods partially representative of the actual scenario. The present study proposes a new index-based method for evaluation of the performance of the surface water treatment plants. The index was developed with compensatory Multi-criteria decision-making methods to make the index relative as well as objective. According to the results, labor efficiency and length and density of pipelines were found to be the most and least significant parameter in regulating the performance of water treatment plants. The new method was applied to evaluate the performance of a densely populated urban surface water treatment plant. The results from the case study encourage further application of the method.

Keywords

Multi-criteria decision-making method Water treatment plant Risk factors 

References

  1. 1.
    Drechsel P, Keraita B (eds) (2014) Irrigated urban vegetable production in Ghana: characteristics, benefits and risk mitigation. IWMI, ColomboGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arshad A et al (2012) Performance evaluation of the water treatment plants of Islamabad – Pakistan. Arch Environ Sci 6:111–117Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Imran A (2012) New Generation Adsorbents for Water Treatment. Chem Rev 112(10):5073–5091Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yengejeh et al (2014) Cost/benefit evaluation of wastewater treatment plant types (SBR, MLE, oxidation ditch), case study: Khouzestan, Iran, Bulletin of Environment. Pharmacol Life Sci 4(1):55–60Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Triantaphyllou E et al (1995) Using the analytic hierarchy process for decision making in engineering applications: some challenges. Int J Ind Eng: Appl Pract 2(1):35–44Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vidal LA, Sahin E, Martelli N, Berhoune M, & Bonan B (2010) Applying AHP to select drugs to be produced by anticipation in a chemotherapy compounding unit. Expert Syst Appl 37(2):1528–1534Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grandzol JR (2005) Improving the faculty selection process in higher education: a case for the analytic hierarchy process. IR Applications, vol 6. Association for Institutional Research (NJ1), TallahasseeGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dong Q et al (2016) An orders-of-magnitude AHP supply chain risk assessment framework. Int J Prod Econ 182:144–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Morano P et al (2016) Cultural heritage valorization: an application of AHP for the choice of the highest and best use. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 223:952–959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chaudhary P et al (2016) Application of an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in the GIS interface for suitable fire site selection: a case study from Kathmandu Metropolitan City, Nepal. Socio Econ Plan Sci 53:60–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khalil N., et al., (2016), Ranking the indicators of building performance and the users’ risk via Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP): Case of Malaysia, Ecological Indicators, 71:567–576Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Locatelli G, Mancini M (2012) A framework for the selection of the right nuclear power plant. Int J Prod Res, 50(17):4753–4766.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Berrittella M et al (2007) An analytic hierarchy process for the evaluation of transport policies to reduce climate change impacts. Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (Milano)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    McCaffrey J (2005) Test Run-The analytic hierarchy process. MSDN Magazine, Skokie, p 139–146Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Walailak A et al (2002) "An Application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process to International Location Decision- Making" . In Gregory, Mike. Proceedings of The 7th Annual Cambridge International Manufacturing Symposium: Restructuring Global Manufacturing. Cambridge, England: University of Cambridge, 1–18Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Atthirawong W, MacCarthy B (2002) An application of the analytical hierarchy process to international location decision-making. In: Proc. of the 7th International Sym. on ManufacturingGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dey PK (2003) Analytic Hierarchy Process Analyzes Risk of Operating Cross-Country Petroleum Pipelines in India. Natural Hazards Review 4(4):213–221Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Steiguer JE, Duberstein J, Lopes V (2003) The analytic hierarchy process as a means for integrated watershed management. In First interagency conference on research on the watersheds. Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Benson, Ariz, pp 734–740Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Putrus P (1990) Accounting for intangibles in integrated manufacturing (nonfinancial justification based on the analytical hierarchy process). Inf Strateg 6:25–30Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Boucher TO et al (1991) Multi-attribute evaluation within a present value framework and its relation to the analytic hierarchy process. Eng Econ 37:55–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wabalickis RN (1988) Justification of FMS with the analytic hierarchy process. J Manuf Syst 17:175–182. 25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cambron KE, Evans GW (1991) Layout design using the analytic hierarchy process. Comput Ind Eng 20(2):211–229.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wang L et al (1991) Analytic hierarchy process based on data flow problem. Comput Ind Eng 20:355–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Albert G et al (2016) Which smartphone’s apps may contribute to road safety? An AHP model to evaluate experts’ opinions. Transp Policy 50:54–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bartuskova T et al (2015) Application of AHP method in external strategic analysis of the selected organization. Procedia Econ Finance 30:146–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Xi J et al (2016) A traffic accident causation analysis method based on AHP-apriori. Procedia Eng 137:680–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Socaciu L et al (2016) PCM selection using AHP method to maintain thermal comfort of the vehicle occupants. Energy Procedia 85:489–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Colmenarejo MF et al (2006) Evaluation of municipal wastewater treatment plants with different technologies at Las Rozas, Madrid (Spain). J Environ Manag 81:399–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dorussen HL et al (1997) Feasibility of treatment of low polluted waste water in municipal waste water treatment plants. Water Sci Technol 35:73–78Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hou Y et al (2012) Carbonaceous and nitrogenous disinfection by-product formation in the surface and ground water treatment plants using Yellow River as water source. J Environ Sci 24(7):1204–1209Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kindle (1999), Enhancement of capacity and efficiency of a biological waste water treatment plant, Water Science and Technology, 40, 231–239Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Saaty T (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Saaty T (2003) Decision-making with the AHP: why is the principal eigenvector necessary. Eur J Oper Res 145(1):85–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sundara K et al (2010) Performance evaluation of waste water treatment plant. Int J Eng Sci Technol 2(12):7785–7796Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tomar M et al (2012) Use of AHP method in efficiency analysis of existing water treatment plants. Int J Eng Res Dev 7:42–51Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsNational Institute of TechnologyAgartalaIndia

Personalised recommendations