IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i11p5876-d560754.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design of Pumping Stations Using a Multicriteria Analysis and the Application of the AHP Method

Author

Listed:
  • Diana S. Sánchez-Ferrer

    (Department of Hydraulic Engineering and Environment, Universitat Politécnica de Valéncia, 46022 Valencia, Spain)

  • Christian X. Briceño-León

    (Department of Hydraulic Engineering and Environment, Universitat Politécnica de Valéncia, 46022 Valencia, Spain)

  • Pedro L. Iglesias-Rey

    (Department of Hydraulic Engineering and Environment, Universitat Politécnica de Valéncia, 46022 Valencia, Spain)

  • F. Javier Martínez-Solano

    (Department of Hydraulic Engineering and Environment, Universitat Politécnica de Valéncia, 46022 Valencia, Spain)

  • Vicente S. Fuertes-Miquel

    (Department of Hydraulic Engineering and Environment, Universitat Politécnica de Valéncia, 46022 Valencia, Spain)

Abstract

The pumping station is a very important hydraulic system in urban water supplies because the pumps raise the water head, ensuring the minimum pressure required in drinking water systems. In the design of a pumping station, one of the most important criteria is the number of pumps. However, in the traditional design, this criterion is defined arbitrarily. The other criteria are defined from the number of pumps and can produce a design that is not optimal. In addition, the traditional design does not consider the importance of the environment in choosing the pumps. The objective of this paper is to define a new design methodology for pumping stations. It has been developed using a multicriteria analysis in which nine criteria are evaluated. The application of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) allows for finding an optimal solution. These design criteria have been associated in three cluster factors: technical factors; environmental factors; and economic factors. The results obtained allow us not only to validate the methodology but also to offer a solution to the problem of determining the most suitable model and the number of pumps for a pumping station.

Suggested Citation

  • Diana S. Sánchez-Ferrer & Christian X. Briceño-León & Pedro L. Iglesias-Rey & F. Javier Martínez-Solano & Vicente S. Fuertes-Miquel, 2021. "Design of Pumping Stations Using a Multicriteria Analysis and the Application of the AHP Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:5876-:d:560754
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/5876/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/5876/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yungyu Chang & Gyewoon Choi & Juhwan Kim & Seongjoon Byeon, 2018. "Energy Cost Optimization for Water Distribution Networks Using Demand Pattern and Storage Facilities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, April.
    2. Sally J. Medland & Richard R. Shaker & K. Wayne Forsythe & Brian R. Mackay & Greg Rybarczyk, 2020. "A multi-Criteria Wetland Suitability Index for Restoration across Ontario’s Mixedwood Plains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-21, November.
    3. Wolfgang Ossadnik & Stefanie Schinke & Ralf H. Kaspar, 2016. "Group Aggregation Techniques for Analytic Hierarchy Process and Analytic Network Process: A Comparative Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 421-457, March.
    4. Saaty, Thomas L., 2006. "Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 557-570, January.
    5. Anna Kurbatova & Hani Ahmed Abu-Qdais, 2020. "Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to Select Waste to Energy Technology for a Mega City: The Case of Moscow," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michal Gluszak & Remigiusz Gawlik & Malgorzata Zieba, 2019. "Smart and Green Buildings Features in the Decision-Making Hierarchy of Office Space Tenants: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Study," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-16, July.
    2. Laila Oubahman & Szabolcs Duleba, 2022. "A Comparative Analysis of Homogenous Groups’ Preferences by Using AIP and AIJ Group AHP-PROMETHEE Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Sirirat Sae Lim & Hong Ngoc Nguyen & Chia-Li Lin, 2022. "Exploring the Development Strategies of Science Parks Using the Hybrid MCDM Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-29, April.
    4. Andreas Schiessl & Richard Müller & Rebekka Volk & Konrad Zimmer & Patrick Breun & Frank Schultmann, 2020. "Integrating site-specific environmental impact assessment in supplier selection: exemplary application to steel procurement," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(9), pages 1409-1457, November.
    5. Iva Ridjan Skov & Noémi Schneider & Gerald Schweiger & Josef-Peter Schöggl & Alfred Posch, 2021. "Power-to-X in Denmark: An Analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-14, February.
    6. M Tavana & M A Sodenkamp, 2010. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis model for advanced technology assessment at Kennedy Space Center," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(10), pages 1459-1470, October.
    7. Leanda C. Garvie & David J. Lee & Biljana Kulišić, 2024. "Towards a Bioeconomy: Supplying Forest Residues for the Australian Market," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-19, January.
    8. Vijay Pereira & Umesh Bamel, 2023. "Charting the managerial and theoretical evolutionary path of AHP using thematic and systematic review: a decadal (2012–2021) study," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 635-651, July.
    9. Tasneem Bani-Mustafa & Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Dominique Vasseur & Francois Beaudouin, 2020. "A hierarchical tree-based decision-making approach for assessing the relative trustworthiness of risk assessment models," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 234(6), pages 748-763, December.
    10. Kuei-Hu Chang & Yung-Chia Chang & Kai Chain & Hsiang-Yu Chung, 2016. "Integrating Soft Set Theory and Fuzzy Linguistic Model to Evaluate the Performance of Training Simulation Systems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-29, September.
    11. Ivona Ivić & Anita Cerić, 2024. "Mitigation Measures for Information Asymmetry between Participants in Construction Projects: The Impact of Trust," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-27, August.
    12. Paweł Karczmarek & Witold Pedrycz & Adam Kiersztyn, 2021. "Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process in a Graphical Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 463-481, April.
    13. Nora Sharkasi & Nguyen Vo Hien Chau & Jay Rajasekera, 2023. "Export Potential Analysis of Vietnamese Bottled Coconut Water by Incorporating Criteria Weights of MCDM into the Gravity of Trade Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-26, July.
    14. Meng-Shiunn LEE, 2012. "Critical success factors influencing the transformation of the agricultural biotechnology industry in Taiwan," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 58(6), pages 249-263.
    15. Tim H¨ofer & Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Reinhard Madlener, 2020. "Using Value-Focused Thinking and Multicriteria Decision Making to Evaluate Energy Transition Alternatives," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 330-355, December.
    16. Munim, Ziaul Haque & Duru, Okan & Ng, Adolf K.Y., 2022. "Transhipment port's competitiveness forecasting using analytic network process modelling," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 70-82.
    17. Yu-Yu Ma & Chia-Liang Lin & Hung-Lung Lin, 2023. "Ranking of Service Quality Index and Solutions for Online English Teaching in the Post-COVID-19 Crisis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-24, September.
    18. Mingshen Shao & Dong Xu & Yuchao Wang & Ziyi Wang & Xingzhou Liang & Li Li, 2022. "Quantitative evaluation of weathering degree through Fuzzy-AHP method and petrophysics analysis for sandstone carvings," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 112(2), pages 1547-1566, June.
    19. Hsiao, Yao-Jen & Chen, Jyun-Long & Huang, Cheng-Ting, 2021. "What are the challenges and opportunities in implementing Taiwan's aquavoltaics policy? A roadmap for achieving symbiosis between small-scale aquaculture and photovoltaics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    20. Muhammad Ali Musarat & Wesam Salah Alaloul & Nasir Hameed & Dhinaharan R & Abdul Hannan Qureshi & Mohamed Mubarak Abdul Wahab, 2022. "Efficient Construction Waste Management: A Solution through Industrial Revolution (IR) 4.0 Evaluated by AHP," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:5876-:d:560754. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.