1. O'Rourke, T.D.J.B.-W.-N.A.o.E.-. .2007. Critical infrastructure, interdependencies, and resilience. 37(1): p. 22.
2. Gleick, P.H.J.W.p. 2006, Water and terrorism.. 8(6): p. 481-503.
3. Bennett,B.T.,2018.Understanding, assessing, and responding to terrorism: Protecting critical infrastructure and personnel.: John Wiley & Sons.
4. Haimes, Y.Y. and T.J.R.A. Longstaff, 2002. The role of risk analysis in the protection of critical infrastructures against terrorism. 22(3): p. 439-444.
5. Singg, R.N. and Webb, B.R.1979.Use of Delphi methodology to access goals and social impact of a watershed project 15(1): p. 136-143.
8. Gallego-Ayala, J., D.J.P. Juízo, and P.A.B.C. 2011. Chemistry of the Earth, Strategic implementation of integrated water resources management in Mozambique: An A’WOT analysis. 36(14-15): p. 1103-1111.
9. Okeola, O. and B.J.J.o.K.S.U.-E.S. Sule, 2012. Evaluation of management alternatives for urban water supply system using Multicriteria Decision Analysis. 24(1): p. 19-24.
10. Yoo, D.G., et al., 2014. Rehabilitation priority determination of water pipes based on hydraulic importance. 6(12): p. 3864-3887.
11. Chung, E.-S.Won,K. Kim,Y. Lee, H. 2014. Water resource vulnerability characteristics by district’s population size in a changing climate using subjective and objective weights. 6(9): p. 6141-6157.
12. Maiolo, M. and D.J.C.E. Pantusa, 2018. Infrastructure Vulnerability Index of drinking water systems to terrorist attacks. 5(1): p. 1456710.
13. White, R., et al., 2016. Towards comparable cross-sector risk analyses: A re-examination of the Risk Analysis and Management for Critical Asset Protection (RAMCAP) methodology. 14: p. 28-40.
14. Washington, A. 2009. All-Hazards risk and resilience: prioritizing critical infrastructures using the RAMCAP Plus [hoch] SM approach. ASME.
15. Maschio, G. and M.F. Milazzo, 2008 Risk evaluation of terrorist attacks against chemical facilities and transport systems in urban areas, in Resilience of Cities to Terrorist and other Threats., Springer. p. 37-53.
16. Saaty, T.L.J.I.j.o.s.s., 2008. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. 1(1): p. 83-98.
17. Saaty, T.L.J.M.s., 1990. An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper “remarks on the analytic hierarchy process”. 36(3): p. 259-268.
18. Saaty, T.L.J.E.j.o.o.r., 1990. How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. .48(1): p. 9-26.
19. Roozbehani A, Zahraee B, Tabesh M. Integrated risk assessment of urban water supply systems from soureces to tap,Stochastic environmental Reseach and risk assessment,2013,24(4),p.923-944.19.
20. Nakhaie et al., Risk Assessment of Urban Water Supply Systems of the Country Against Threats Using RAMCAP. 2017. 28 (4): p. 10-20.9In persian)
21 اسداله فردی، غ شیخعلی، م امام زاده س آسیب پذیری تاسیسات اب رسانی با روش تلفیق AHP و RAMCAP مجله عمران امیر کبیر ، با شناسه : 10.22060/ceej.2019.15289.5873
Identification and Prioritization of the Criteria and Indicators of the Urban Water System by AHP and RAMCAP
Majid Sheykhali 1, Gholamreza Asadollahfardi 2 *, Seyyed Shahab Emamzadeh 3
1- Master's degree, Hydraulic Structural Engineering, Kharazmi University, Tehran
2- Professor, Civil Engineering, Kharazmi University, Tehran
3- Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering, Kharazmi University, Tehran
* Tehran, fardi@khu.ac.ir, 09121192424
Abstract
Urban water supply and distribution systems consist of supply sources, main transmission lines, refineries, storage tanks and water distribution systems to a wide range of consumers, and therefore constitute the basic infrastructure in each city. In times of war and bombardment in cities, the system of functional infrastructure of infrastructure is damaged very shortly for a very short time; these facilities are created and exploited at a very high cost, which causes them to stop production and service to citizens and economic and social losses. According to the definition of the Social Security and Emergency Preparedness Canada, critical infrastructure, networks, facilities and information and physical services are interrelated, which, if disrupted or destroyed, will have a serious impact on the health, safety, security and economy of the community. The steps of the RAMCAP approach to assessing the assets of a water supply facility from the passive defense perspective are the first step of identifying the asset and the second step of analyzing asset value. In the asset value analysis section based on the definition criteria, for each asset, a value number is quantitatively derived from the AHP method. To achieve the goals of each research, the use of a scientific and systematic research method is essential. The research method used in this research is "descriptive-analytic" which has been used to integrate the two methods of RAMCAP and the AHP hierarchical analysis process, which is one of the decision-making methods. The main objective of this research is to identify and prioritize critical and critical assets of water supply facilities including reservoirs, transmission and distribution networks, refineries, dams, tanks, wells, rivers, based on economic value criteria , Functional and unique value through the AHP hierarchical compilation method and Risk Analysis and Management for Critical Asset Protection )RAMCAP(.Based on the combined method of Amir Kabir Dam, Taleghan Dam, Lotyan dam, Lar dam, Mamlo dam, Nimrod Dam, Ziarat dam, Shahid Ghafour Dam, wells, springs, rivers, No. 1 treatment plant (Jalaliyeh), No. 2 treatment plant (No. 3 and No. 4), No. 5, No. 5, No. 6, No. 7 (Sohanak), Seahqeraniyeh Sewage Treatment Plant, Municipality Sewage Treatment Plant, Zargand Sewage Treatment Plant, Gheitariyya Sewage Treatment Plant, Ghods Town Sewage Treatment Plant, Shosh Sewage Treatment Plant , Ekbatan sewage treatment plant, pumping stations, storage tanks, water distribution network BRsany system were critical of Tehran. Super Decisions Software Version 2.8 (2015) was used to obtain value numbers and prioritize each asset in the AHP method. Based on the defined economic value criteria, the value of the Letian dam and the Amir Kabir dam and Taleghan Dam respectively were 0.1477, 0.1359 and 0.1109, respectively, in the first to third positions, respectively, and the distribution network and reservoirs were ranked respectively 24 and 25 were assigned 0.0046 and 0.0045, respectively.
Keywords: Water supply, asset value, AHP, RAMCAP
مهندسی عمران مدرس