Daliri, F., Seraji, H., Kholghi, M., Dehghanipour, A. (2013). Prioritizing sub-watersheds flooding intensity for structural Damaging Flood control and managing. Desert, 18(2), 153-162.
F. Daliri; H. S. Seraji; M. Kholghi; A. H. Dehghanipour. "Prioritizing sub-watersheds flooding intensity for structural Damaging Flood control and managing". Desert, 18, 2, 2013, 153-162.
Daliri, F., Seraji, H., Kholghi, M., Dehghanipour, A. (2013). 'Prioritizing sub-watersheds flooding intensity for structural Damaging Flood control and managing', Desert, 18(2), pp. 153-162.
Daliri, F., Seraji, H., Kholghi, M., Dehghanipour, A. Prioritizing sub-watersheds flooding intensity for structural Damaging Flood control and managing. Desert, 2013; 18(2): 153-162.
Prioritizing sub-watersheds flooding intensity for structural Damaging Flood control and managing
1University of Power and Water Technology, Tehran, Iran
2Irrigation Eng. Department, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
3Expert of Civil Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Nowadays multicriteria decision making (MCDM) methods are a useful tool for investigating natural resources and to address problems related to hydro systems. The goal of this research was to assess the Daliri Standardization Method (DSM) to prioritize and make selections for application to MCDM. And to compare the DSM method with the Utility Additive (UTA) method. The (DSM) method, unlike the (UTA) method, lines up choices without incorporating a decision-maker. Moreover, by conditioned weights, linear or exponential functions, the choices partial additive function is formulated in the Lingo program and finally, the total additive function is used to make priorities among the choices. In this study, 47 sub-watersheds in eastern Khurasan province were evaluated according to 25-year return periods for flood, lag time and fatal-cost damage. Results of the (DSM) method were accompanied by all multi-component goals in subbasins based on real data. The utility function of each method was compared with data relating to the Kan river northwest of Tehran, and comparison showed that 80 percent of the results were the same, so the DSM method can be considered as more logical and sensible than the UTA method. This evaluation was made without consideration of site variation, so it can be used effectively in watershed flood management to prevent investment in low priority sub-basins.
Top