dx.doi.org/10.22093/wwj.2017.81550.

2379
113

Jouranl of Water and Wastewater, Vol. 30, No.2, pp: 113-120

Strategic Management of Separation of Drinking Water

from Sanitation Water in the City of Yazd by Using
AHP and SWOT Analysis
F. Fotouhi Firoozabad1 , M. R. Ekhtesasi 2 , M. Sefid 3 , A. Morovati Sharifabadi 4

PhD in Watershed Science and Engineering, University of Yazd, Yazd, Iran

(Corresponding Author) farzaneh fotouhi@gmail com
( Prof , Department of Natural Resources, University of Yazd, Yazd, Iran
$ Assoc Prof , Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Yazd, Yazd, Iran
& Assist Prof , Department of Industrial Management, University of Yazd, Yazd, Iran

ID
(Received Apr. 23, 2017 Accepted Nov. 14, 2017)

To cite this article :

Fotouhi Firoozabad, F., Ekhtesasi, M. R., Sefid, M., Morovati Sharifabadi, A., 2019, “Strategic management of
fS
separation of drinking water from sanitation water in the city of yazd by using AHP and SWOT analysis.”
Journal of Water and Wastewater, 30(2), 113-120. Doi: 10.22093/wwj.2017.81550.2379 (In Persian)

Abstract
eo
In the current situation, water resources are facing quantitative and qualitative issues
which leave us with no other choice except to change our perspective towards
consumption management. Separating drinking water from sanitary water is one of the
components of the consumption quality management. This study was carried out based
v

on SWOT analysis and AHP. At first, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats
hi

of the separation of drinking water from sanitation water was obtained by survey of
experts’ opinions. Priorities among SWOT factors and inconsistency rate of matrices
were obtained by pairwise comparison matrices. In SWOT analysis the internal factor
c

evaluation matrix (IFE), the external factors evaluation (EFE) and the internal and
Ar

external factors (IE) were used. IFE and EFE matrices showed the final score of internal
and external factors as 2.51 and 1.78, respectively. This indicated that the condition in
Yazd is favorable in terms of internal factors while it is not positive in terms of using
opportunities or staying away from threats. According to the internal and external
factors, strategies are considered as drinking water distribution network (pipeline for
drinking water) (SO), Governmental centralized drinking water distribution network
(ST), private sector centralized drinking water distribution network (WO) and private
sector mobile distribution systems of drinking water (WT). IE matrix showed that the
Water and Sewage Company should choose the ST strategy (centralized drinking water
distribution network) to avoid the threats and as a solution to water scarcity in a 5- to
10-year horizon.

Keywords: Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), SWOT Analysis, Separation of Drinking

Water and Sanitation Water, Dual Water Distribution Network.

Journal of Water and Wastewater

Vol. 30, No. 2, 2019

www.SID.ir
 dx.doi.org/10.22093/wwj.2017.81550.2379 114

113-120 : 2 30

" B N; ! ; !" $ S C-@ 5 _

AHP SWOT Y IR@ $ # -;
8
F I 6. +N . + - 5'(O ' L 1+H k&_ 'L *
I % .( +)#& A %.

# , (# , (# 5 / , ( a*8 +) J K 2P 2 8j > =
farzaneh.fotouhi@gmail.com (4 EA 5 A# )
# , (# , (# 5 / ,+1 `l X* 5 R , 2) >F
# , (# , (# 5 / ,b R 5 R , >H
# , (# , (# 5 / ,+21 d ;# # 5 R , # 2) >L

ID
( / / / / )

: -" . / $ (0 " ' 1 " 2 3 4 "

'? A 0 1[ ' [ "12 )* ) [ )* h OHP B' C V " " . B' 2*r [ P( .K " H0 . .K ` R & .- ' 2* ( .
Doi: 10.22093/wwj.2017.81550.2379 .
fS
> =< (=) < )89 ( )* $:; " AHP ( SWOT l :dP !' H 0 2
eo
= T/ 6T9 e JM = J T9 JM 4= T- 8 . T- 4 L JM Z ,JM A P$ ƒ; C 8 N
T3 T• ,‚@L , _ l . 9 I AHP SWOT d o - a3 bU 5 . - Z P$ 4 3 P.
, T8 = T d = ' P6T- T : T- . M - FQ = I - R 69 e JM = J 9 JM H$/PN 4 3 eN
, T1Q T & T = 4 T3: N T = ,SWOT $1CN . 9 F- C 3: N 4 = - } L & $;3 } L
v

1Q & e ' ; EFE IFE 4 3 : N . 9 ' P6- 8 Q 1Q & 8 Q & =

= 4 T' e - _l 4 1Q & R = # e9 , 3 - r/‹• €/pr }$N N 8 Q
hi

^Q) J 9 JM A = N ' 6 /F9 9 34bN 6- , 8 Q 1Q & 8 N . - ‚@L l 4 , • &

aT ^T- N J T9 JM AT = N # ;6 4 3c6 $- ,(ST) J 9 JM A = N 6 # ;6 /F9 ,(SO) (J 9 JM „6
T T- 5T 4 T #T$ IE : N | 6 . - (WT) • Q a ^- N J 9 JM … C6 A = N (WO) • Q
c

, T;6" 4 3 C 69 e c - J 9 JM F; F8 4 - rg N p E # 6- JKL JM =-
Ar

T9 4 Te - e 5$ _ ' ;3 ' Z 4 3 " C N J 9 JM A = N 6 # ;6 /F9 – "

. 3 _ Q 6-

O+ # Q$0 Z 5 P 2 IN2 * $ O 2 O+ L PA5 ISWOT C ,5 I(AHP) 5 ' C ,5 :8 8 3!F $

'< ;
.(Office for improving the productivity and ' I $? -Q ) / o| ID # ƒ $ % n
.economy of water and sanitation, 2015) Y ) !& Q ) * ! ! ),; m|o|
Y @;Q 2 Y O ] * 5 ) &9 # .(David, 2005) )/ * ; ƒ
… % FM ; " 3 + ! V? V? & O = ,8 MD )/+ 3 I+ ML#
& < Y " &< . ! & ^ 6 @ S & / -! " /+ @ ) @;Q ! $.
. & F <, ! " ' V? ) /+ L I D 5 ) G

Journal of Water and Wastewater

Vol. 30, No. 2, 2019

www.SID.ir
 dx.doi.org/10.22093/wwj.2017.81550.2379 ...78 7 ' 78 b RV ` ;# #
115

& & Z P 8 " &. ; Q D @ "& & ƒ$% M8 & hkkŽ &: GF
/ +' & & " & - * & 6 & Q )9 -! ] ")
Y, T 0 ! > 4,! \ • # 4, ! $ & : )9 ' r%/ ^
^ &. ; Q D © P9 ] S -! U F ] ") 4, ! X a " & :H )9 U 8
.(Pahlavani et " 0 a - !* ),; ) & :H -: )9 U # ] ") 4,! X a " & :H) )9
.al., 2012) hkk‘ & .(Golabchi, 2009) &
" ! \ 4 6 * ^ Q& qx MD ! * N EG4 / &
$ 8$ I $P " ' Y ^% -! 0 - !* - ! ] ") H 4, ! Q & # a
) @ & ; Q) ' / (AHP) &, I D YF - FE ) S & . A
&. ; Q E O 1 A 4 &Z P 8 " A) & " ) - !0 " ! " Q Q
) . ! & ) ;. ' 7 Q ( D & ! - H ] ") 4, ! • # 3 Y I 9

ID
) !& & ! ! \ 4 )9 YF * - '7 8 • # M; H " I !
* p; F& DH ' 7 Q )9 8 ! F( ! !) - ! wZ ! ] ")
H -: , &7 H) , ] ") F 4,! .(Sarbandi Farahani, 2008)
.(Report of Plan of Company

* ^ % & '” A * H L " 0

D& " *
.Tamadon Karizi, 2017)
fShkkŽ
&) Q ?
&) Q ?
] ") F
.(Ilemobade et al., 2009) + /
2 C A ; 6 YF
M8 " '
„ & "
4
eo
Y -! ' P & ! - ! ] ") & ') ! ] ") F M8 Q &;- ) ?Z &4/
;. * p; . ) AHP SWOT I $P " ' . ' ) &) Q ?
0 & ) Q S ) Q) & ] " A w PS \ 6G ) ! > 0 & " "'
v

) ,- Y -! & - " ' Y 2 . ) !& ! S ˆk yk ' … ^Q) (¬

hi

8 - H F Y -! & & &; ]V Xa / ] ") F M 8 ;. )a A

. ) 2 CA * 7 0 " ] A &, 8 % M8 * ' /
F M 8 4$;. &FC 6 YF . ! & * N
c

"E # ; ! W hkfy 4 ] ")

Ar

+N C j 'L = kmq ;*;1 \ ] ") F M 8 .(Grigg et al., 2013)

& ] B " )/ * \/ ) & Y Y 2 ) ,- ^ ”) 9) 4
ffk # Y ! '")# 3 &F 5 ) . ); ;$D . & ! ] ") "
. &$ hzk )/ MD * &9 # &$ ) M9 ) ] ") F 4,!
E3 Y X a" ^@4 $ f/y # )a & ) H) ;. G * p; )
\/ I 9 ) !& ' Y & ] )Q YF % ) B &/ CA <; & )$-A . ! &
5 ) ) a Y I 8 A %, Y ?Z ) \/ $ 8$ I $P "& F 4, ! ^
f
. &$ ykkk F 4, ! % / . ' +' &,
1
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Journal of Water and Wastewater

Vol. 30, No. 2, 2019

www.SID.ir
 dx.doi.org/10.22093/wwj.2017.81550.2379 G *8 +B 2
116

5 ) C * &Q I ). & $ I ). ! •P &$ )a * N " *

& " q " F' - . ! A SWOT = @ZD @V * )Q Q ) I4/ s )a
\ 4 , ! r%/ IE &Q R&$ . ) ) & I4/ : ' &4
& $ I ). . D & @D) : Y ! - !
(E - S ) &Q I ). (ƒ@ V E)D u ? ) E ; ;
F, B"' & ! - " ! \ 4 '” A Q) AHP SWOT I $P 6 n V # 2 CA
* &Q " E 8 ? . ! I 4/ SWOT q ' !& ! S ƒ@V E)D I ). & , ! F, B
(E - S ƒ@V u ? E)D u ? ) SWOT I ). ) F , " &L B . !H L -
(AHP) & , $ 8$ I $P 6 " ' ' F / '7/ GV " !
^ V - . F E ) S Expert Choice Y H O† @ / AMB ( @S " ' ,
. ' I ). " \ &,8 " fCR F" ƒ@ V E) D I ). * p; ! - " ! \4

ID
F" ^ V &,8 " &Q " E 8 ? q f Q M B qx . ! * @ '” A * - S
^ V. & / SWOT &Q & $ I ). ^ V& Q "E 8 ? 6 " ' 7 / A
&Q & $ I ). & Q " E 8 ? q F" ,8 @ "\ ; Y I ). ;
E B S Žk @ZD ) k/f " ; SWOT
. & / F )!2 A
fS
I ;4 / A hk V # 2 CA .
&Q "E 8 ? q I 4/ $;Q "
'” A 0
I $P . !
q F" ^ V &Q &$ I ). " * @
eo
(IFE) + _ D #- +I 6% ; ; ; "' . ! H L AHP 6 Expert Choice Y H
\C & (IEF) & $ I ). & " q E) D u ? S E -q SWOT I $P 6
&$ S ƒ@ V E) D u ? q * . '” A &$ I ). I ). \ C & . ! - (SWOT)ƒ@V u ?
v

h Q .(David et al. 2015) & & " * '” A '” A ( S - ) &Q ( ƒ@V E)D) &$
hi

! " Q (E)D u ? ) &$ I ). & " q I ). & " q (IFE) & $ I ). & " q
" E) D * M - . & / Y -! ! - " ! \ 4 C . (EFE) &Q
" ) ,; I4 / I # 1F O " ' , ! 'F = - . ! ' @ ) SWOT q Q) ! -
c

& $ I ). & " q y Q . k/j‘ & - ' ; & Q )9 C H * ! r%/

Ar

Y -! ! - ! " Q (ƒ@V u ? ) I $P ) ! I 4/ (IE) &Q &$ q D

) ,; ' , ! ' F " ƒ@ V * M- . & / . F D
' ; e) ;L * p; . k/yg & - ' ; Q ) E , .
* 7 " .* ! h/zf ƒ@V E)D u ? & - PLI Q6 &A ;
Y -! L . / (h/z) B ) .!! F% !! '2 F .!!/" R6.6'!! D!!( LN ; ;
! - ! " Q '” A Q .8 5 ! J6 ? & .4 R '4I
u ? & $ I ). B " -! * )a ! - ! " Q , I $P
. E)D ( ƒ@ V E) D) & $ I ). & ! Y -!
1
& " qx . ! " > ( - S ) &Q I ).
Consistency Ratio (CR)

Journal of Water and Wastewater

Vol. 30, No. 2, 2019

www.SID.ir
 dx.doi.org/10.22093/wwj.2017.81550.2379 ...78 7 ' 78 b RV ` ;# #
117

AHP 6 "' SWOT &Q &$ I ). &Q " E 8 ? q ; '2

Table 1. Matrix of pair-wise comparisons for SWOT factors with AHP
Relative Relative
Strengths S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 Weaknesses W1 W2 W3 W4 W5
weight weight
S1 1 4.13 4.41 3.27 5.56 0.247 W1 1 3.29 1.97 1.09 2.26 0.164
S2 0.24 1 2.13 2.11 2.65 0.050 W2 0.30 1 1.74 1.67 1.26 0.055
S3 0.23 0.47 1 1.97 5.02 0.103 W3 0.51 0.57 1 1.72 1.81 0.114
S4 0.30 0.47 0.51 1 3.21 0.074 W4 0.92 0.60 0.58 1 1.33 0.088
S5 0.18 0.38 0.20 0.31 1 0.025 W5 0.44 0.79 0.55 0.75 1 0.078
CR=0.05 CR=0.03
Relative Relative
Opportunities O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 Threats T1 T2 T3 T4 T5
weight weight
O1 1 2.04 1.94 3.99 1.57 0.111 T1 1 1.01 2.73 2.82 1.69 0.130
O2 0.49 1 1.30 2.90 1.43 0.190 T2 0.99 1 3.01 3.54 3.00 0.044
O3 0.51 0.77 1 1.78 2.03 0.078 T3 0.37 0.33 1 1.13 1.48 0.148
O4 0.25 0.34 0.56 1 2.25 0.064 T4 0.35 0.28 0.88 1 1.19 0.123
O5 0.64 0.70 0.49 0.44 1 0.057 T5 0.59 0.33 0.67 0.84 1 0.054

ID
CR=0.04 CR=0.01

Y -! ! - ! " Q (E)D u ? ) &$ I ). & " q R '2

Table 2. Internal factors evaluation matrix (Strengths) of separation of drinking water

Strengths
fS
from sanitation water in the city of Yazd
Relative
Weight
Score Final Score
Effectiveness in solving the problem of water shortage 0.247 3.15 0.78
eo
Existence of necessary equipment and technical feasibility of the project 0.050 3.00 0.15
Variations in quality and quantity of water supplies and sanitation in the
0.103 3.50 0.36
city of Yazd in different seasons and months
Attention to managing water use and water saving 0.074 3.25 0.24
v

The existence of technical knowledge and the implementation of similar

0.025 2.95 0.07
projects in some European countries or cities of Iran
hi

Y -! ! - ! " Q (ƒ@V u ? ) &$ I ). & " q R '2

c

Table 3. Internal factors evaluation matrix (Weaknesses) of separation of drinking water

from sanitation water in the city of Yazd
Ar

Relative Final
Weaknesses Score
weight Score
Lack of funds 0.164 2.10 0.34
Shared structure for collection and treatment of water entering the
0.055 2.10 0.11
distribution networks
Short term chaos in pricing of water and providing inputs 0.114 1.40 0.16
Spatial distribution of water resources (wells and water lines) with different
0.088 1.55 0.14
quality and quantity in Yazd
Delayed organizational structure and institution 0.078 2.10 0.16
Sum - 2.51
Calculation of strengths and Mean R 2.51 R
weaknesses
Standard Deviation R 0.75 R
Journal of Water and Wastewater
Vol. 30, No. 2, 2019

www.SID.ir
 dx.doi.org/10.22093/wwj.2017.81550.2379 G *8 +B 2
118

Y -! ! - ! " Q ( S u ? ) &Q I ). & " q ;b '2

Table 4. External factors evaluation matrix (Opportunities) of separation of drinking water
from sanitation water in the city of Yazd

Opportunities Relative Score Final

weight Score
The need to improve the quality of drinking water in the current conditions 0.111 2.05 0.227
Unison with the resistive economy and protection of national resources 0.190 1.65 0.313
General acceptance and knowledge of water resources and ecological balance in the
0.078 1.70 0.133
public and officials
Acceptance and socio-cultural of participation of people and officials in project 0.064 2.25 0.144
The need to improve the quality of drinking water in the current conditions 0.057 2.20 0.125

Y -! ! - ! " Q( - u ? ) &Q I ). & " q ;c '2

Table 5. External factors evaluation matrix (Threats) of separation of drinking water
from sanitation water in the city of Yazd

ID
Threats Relative Score Final Score
weight
Lack of mental awareness and culture of conserving water 0.130 1.80 0.234
Dual or multiple residential urban texture 0.044 1.40 0.062
Lack of awareness of the quality of water resources 0.148 1.35 0.199
Lack of awareness of the quantity of water resources
Different views of the people and officials

Calculation of Opportunities and

Sum
fS 0.123
0.054
1
1.90
1.95
0.233
0.105
1.78
Mean 1.825
Threats
eo
Standard Deviation 0.307

(IE) +2 _ + _ z6.N D( LN ; ; ; (EFE) +2 _ D #- +I 6% ; ; ;

" qA - S ƒ@V E)D & ! " qA &Q I ). & " q " &Q I ). & "
v

IE q I $P F H L IFE EFE q 4 &Q I ). & " q g Q. !' (EFE)

hi

. ! A & $ R&Q I ). I $P q ; Y -! ! - ! " Q( S u ?)

2 A* ) &% A & q * &% A "' , ! 'F " S * M- . & /
c

(WT ST WO SO) C " ' FH )9 "& ) 5 ! ! G ),- " n 8#

Ar

E ; * 7 h/zf & - ' ; IFE q . I ). & " q z Q. k/yfy & - ' ;

. k/jz E ; @ 0 P h/zf -! ! - ! " Q ( - u ? ) &Q
E ; * 7 f/jj & - ' ; EFE q ' , ! 'F " - * M- . & / Y
. k/ykj E ; @ 0 P f/‘hz & - ' ; " 0 & )Q S ‰ & … & F H ."
.(f I4 !) ! I 4 / * ; n Y IE q f/j‘ - S & - ' ; e);L . k/hyg
GV " F * )F IE q . (h/z) B ) * 7 " $S . * )
\ 4 , \ ; ) # )% Y ' < I;. ) & I ). Y -! L
ST ' F C " ' A "> ! - ! & L @D) S &$ ). " 8)
& @ F D )9 & D C ; ) !& - ^ Q) &$ ). " + '-
&$ q f I4! . - " E)D u ? " ' .

Journal of Water and Wastewater

Vol. 30, No. 2, 2019

www.SID.ir
 dx.doi.org/10.22093/wwj.2017.81550.2379 ...78 7 ' 78 b RV ` ;# #
119

E) D u ? " * . )! ] ),; I4/ 4

& -" F)$Q ! - ! " F Improving Use the abilities to

environmental take advantage of
conditions using opportunities
IE q )Z ; . )! ' Q) -! 3 capabilities
(Offensive position)

Total EFE Score

(conservative position)
WO SO
# D )9 (& D ) ST C /Y
2.5
4, ! " ' ) ,; I4/ I# 4 * - V#
Reducing weaknesses Improvement of internal
SWOT q n . ! ] ") & 9 Y ; 2 and avoiding threats systems using external
(defensive position) opportunities
H .]D S fk " ; \8 ^ V F , ^$>
WT (competitive position)ST
Y F 4,! L ) S fk " ; @ZD
1
WT WO ST SO C @ZD H . . ! & 1 2 2.5 3 4
& )Q I 9 ! & S jk yk hz fk ^ Fig. 1. Internal and External matrix (IE) of separation of
ST C / IE q - P " drinking water from sanitation water in the city of Yazd
(David Fred R and David Forest R, 2015)

ID
E B ] ;L Q) L * ]D . D )9 " Q , (IE)&Q &$ q ; D`
" " & ,. . ! IS # ƒ$ % 2% F, Y -! ! - !
)9 & ) ;. ! ' 7 Q YF ! / H ]

!
2 CA
X Z &: GF„

& )S ! ' r %/
V # 2 CA „ . F D
' 7 Q 6 V # 2 CA .(Golabchi, 2009)
)9 & );.
fS ! -
/ IE
!
q
.
"
.
Q

D
&
,

)9
/ Y
(& D ) ST C
(IE) &Q
-!
eo
8 4,! $ & hkkŽ &: GF
F2 CA„ V #„ . ) F D )9 (SWOT) "'6'4N "RH. " C "=#Y D( LN ;b; ;
] ") F M 8 B * " hkfh <; & !\C YF -: &Q &$ I ). Q)
v

?Z ),- &, ”)9) 4 : !

V # 2 C A „ .(Grigg et al., 2012) e) * : ! ] ") F 4, ! :SO C
hi

„
! ' 7 Q6 hkkŽ & )!& ' " ( ! 4,!) H 4,! M 8
.(Sarbandi farahani, 2009) ? Z & );. ! - ! 4, ! E )S " I &/ 9)9
c

: ! 6 & 9 ' 7 Q :ST C . )!& H L

Ar

F.(G (&A ;b !^ I? 8 4,! 5 ) ! M 8 e) *

" Q , / 2 CA * „ . )!& * N -! ƒ$ % u ? & );. !
' ;. - ƒ@V Y -! ! - ! :( ! 6 & S) ' 7 Q :WO C
n M & S E) D * p; & 9 " & ! M9 &S) !
! . ^ +. . ! & H & %/ ¦ -! wZ & " % • #
? * V ! YA %A ' ) 2 %5 ) ! • P ] ") :WT C
+ &9 # * . )!& I ! &7 0 " Y: 2% Y 9 M 8 e) * :&S)
-!0 " / 2% + ! >0 & ! &S) ! & D &S)
* N + / * A + ) & )!& I ! ^9Z Q) . & 2%A H * s 0b $
' * N& " " ] " Y -! . )! " P & M : ) M Y -! Š)

Journal of Water and Wastewater

Vol. 30, No. 2, 2019

www.SID.ir
 dx.doi.org/10.22093/wwj.2017.81550.2379 G *8 +B 2
120

)! V. / -! ) & )Q ! & 8] !
) M Y -! . ? & );. ! - G L ! = S ] * " &9)S w PS Y \
I# " n 8# V # # . P & M : \ 4 ) Q ]D . +' YA %A
E) D u ?" * ) Q ) ,; I4 / &)Q S ! ),- •. ! - !
& -" F)$Q ! - ! " F " ! " Q . )!& ! ] ;
. )! ' Q) -! ? F, Bn @ t ! -
r % 4 *; V . ! ) ; 0
+A 'Y ;K !2% ) $Z " / ' :" @
n - D Q" $ * & H"3 9 ? F 8 ) ) !& ' V# # & ' : 01#
GV " H P ! n ! + &$T Q ) & ) ;. ' 7 Q . ! ) ' Y &7 !
& D2 C A* H L / ;# a Y ' ! L & ' -2Y 0 !

ID
. ; & " ^ ! ;& M & 4

References
David, E. 2005. The question environment, Routledge, London and New York.
fS
David, F. R., & David, F. R. 2015. Strategic management: Concepts and cases, 5th Ed., Francis Marion
University, Florence, USA.
Golabchi, M. 2009. Investigation the various systems of water supply and water distribution. Proceedings of. 3rd
eo
National Conference on Water and Wastewater, Water and Wastewater Co. of Iran, Tehran. (In Persian)
Grigg, N., Rogers, P. & Edmiston, S. 2013. Dual water systems: Characterization and performance for
distribution of reclaimed water, Water Research Foundation, Denever, CO.
Ilemobade, A.A., Adewumi, J.R. & van Zyl, J.E. 2009. Assessment of the feasibility of using a dual water
v

reticulation system in system in south Africa. Water Research Commission. Report. South Africa.
hi

Office for Improving the Productivity and Economy of Water and Sanitation. 2015. Reports, A look at water
resources in Iran and the world, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
Pahlavani, M., Jalili Ghazizadeh, M. & Fazeli, M. 2012. Investigating the hydraulic and qualitative basics of
c

dual water supply networks: Case study: Oskou city, East Azarbayejan Province. MSc Thesis, University of
Ar

Shahid Abaspour, Tehran. (In Persian)

Report of Plan of Company Tamadon Karizi. 2017. Performance evaluation of dual water distribution methods
in selected cities of Yazd province. Yazd, Iran. (In Persian)
Sarbandi Farahani, M. 2008. Construction of a separate network of drinking water from sanitary water in Qom.
Proceeding of 4th International Conference on Project Management, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)

Journal of Water and Wastewater

Vol. 30, No. 2, 2019

www.SID.ir