Developing a multi-criteria decision support system based on fuzzy analytical hierarchical process (AHP) method for selection of appropriate high-strength wastewater treatment plant

Document Type: Research Paper


1 Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Chemical and Petroleum engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran


The selection of an optimum treatment process for high-strength wastewater is complicated. Familiarity with wastewater treatment methods is not enough to design a plant and requires a multidisciplinary knowledge base. In this research, five alternative wastewater treatment methods for high-strength wastewater were investigated and ranked based on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) fuzzy method: upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) + membrane bioreactor (MBR), UASB + extended aeration (EA), anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR), anaerobic lagoon (ANL) + aerated lagoon (AL), and sequencing batch reactor (SBR) + ABR. These treatment methods were ranked based on five criteria, namely energy consumption, effluent total suspended solids (TSS), effluent chemical oxygen demand (COD), cost, and level of technology. The different options of the wastewater treatment plant were rated by expert decision-makers in this field. The results show that for typical high-strength wastewater, the use of an UASB reactor followed by a MBR is the most appropriate alternative for treating the wastewater.


Main Subjects

[1] Hazrati H, Shayegan J (2011) Optimizing OLR and HRT in a UASB reactor for pretreating high-strength municipal wastewater. Chemical engineering transaction 24, 1285-1290.

[2] Hedayati Moghaddam, A Sargolzaei J (2012) A mini-review over diverse methods used in starchy wastewater treatment. Recent patents on chemical engineering 5(2), 95-102.

[3] Moghaddam AH, Sargolzaei J (2015) Biofilm development on normal and modified surface in a hybrid SBR-based bioreactor. Journal of the Taiwan institute of chemical engineers 49, 165-171

[4] Chowdhury P, Viraraghavan T, Srinivasan A (2010) Biological treatment processes for fish processing wastewater–A review. Bioresource technology 101(2), 439-449.

[5] Salminen E, Rintala J (2002) Anaerobic digestion of organic solid poultry slaughterhouse waste–a review. Bioresource technology 83(1), 13-26.

[6] Demirel B, Yenigun O, Onay TT (2005) Anaerobic treatment of dairy wastewaters: a review. Process biochemistry 40(8), 2583-2595.

[7] Sarkar, B., Chakrabarti, P. P., Vijaykumar, A, Kale, V. (2006). Wastewater treatment in dairy industries- possibility of reuse. Desalination, 195(1), 141-152.

[8] Karadag, D., Köro─člu, O. E., Ozkaya, B., Cakmakci, M. (2015). A review on anaerobic biofilm reactors for the treatment of dairy industry wastewater. Process biochemistry, 50(2), 262-271.

[9] Cecconet D, Molognoni D, Callegari A, Capodaglio AG (2018) Agro-food industry wastewater treatment with microbial fuel cells: Energetic recovery issues. International journal of hydrogen energy 43(1), 500-511.

[10] Kiker, G. A., Bridges, T. S., Varghese, A., Seager, T. P., Linkov, I. (2005). Application of multicriteria decision analysis in environmental decision making.Integrated environmental assessment and management: An international journal, 1(2), 95-108.

[11] Askari, N., Farhadian, M., Razmjou, A. (2015). Decolorization of ionic dyes from synthesized textile wastewater by nanofiltration using response surface methodology.  Advances in environmental technology, 2, 85-92

[12] Chen, M. F., Tzeng, G. H., Ding, C. G. (2008). Combining fuzzy AHP with MDS in identifying the preference similarity of alternatives. Applied soft computing, 8(1), 110-117.

[13] Kalbar, P. P., Karmakar, S., Asolekar, S. R. (2012). Selection of an appropriate wastewater treatment technology: A scenario-based multiple-attribute decision-making approach. Journal of environmental management, 113, 158-169.

[14] Abrishamchi, A., Ebrahimian, A., Tajrishi, M., Mariño, M. A. (2005). Case study: application of multicriteria decision making to urban water supply. Journal of water resources planning and management, 131(4), 326-335.

[15] Karimi, A. R., Mehrdadi, N., Hashemian, S. J., Nabi-Bidhendi, G. R., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R. (2011). Using of the fuzzy topsis and fuzzy ahp methods for wastewater treatment process selection. International journal of academic research, 3(1), 737-745.

[16] Karimi, A. R., Mehrdadi, N., Hashemian, S. J., Bidhendi, G. N., Moghaddam, R. T. (2011). Selection of wastewater treatment process based on the analytical hierarchy process and fuzzy analytical hierarchy process methods. International journal of environmental science and technology, 8(2), 267-280.

[17] Pophali, G. R., Chelani, A. B., Dhodapkar, R. S. (2011). Optimal selection of full scale tannery effluent treatment alternative using integrated AHP and GRA approach. Expert systems with applications, 38(9), 10889-10895.

[18] Chang, D. Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European journal of operational research, 95(3), 649-655.