A. Process configurations of membrane assisted wastewater treatment and

water reuse technologies

Figure A-1: Technology 1 (T1): Primary treatment + iMBR (Aerobic treatment + MF/UF) + Disinfection

Figure A-2: Technology 2 (T2): Primary treatment + iMBR (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic + MF/UF) +

Disinfection

Figure A-3: Technology 3 (T3): Primary treatment + CASP (Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF + Disinfection

Figure A-4: Technology 4 (T4): Primary treatment + CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF +

Disinfection

Figure A-5: Technology 5 (T5): Primary treatment + CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF +

NF/RO + Disinfection

Figure A-6: Technology 6 (T6): Primary treatment + Anaerobic treatment + MF/UF + Disinfection

Figure A-7: Technology 7 (T7): Primary treatment + iMBR (Anoxic + Aerobic + MF/UF) + NF/RO +

Disinfection

Figure A-8: Technology 8 (T8): Primary treatment + Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) +

MF/UF + Disinfection

Figure A-9: Technology 9 (T9): Primary treatment + Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) +

MF/UF + NF/RO + Disinfection

Figure A-10: Technology 10 (T10): Primary treatment + Coagulation/flocculation + sand filtration + MF/UF

+ NF/RO + Disinfection (Chlorination +UV)

B. An example of the survey evaluated by water reuse Expert 1 for Scenario 1:

Indirect potable water reuse in a developed community

Step 1: Please consider the title of the water reuse scenario: Indirect potable water reuse in a developed community

Step 2: Consider the water reuse criteria (Table B-1) and assign a weight for each criteria using the codes given in

Table B-2

For example, write MH if that water reuse criterion is Medium High, or write F if the criterion is Fair with respect to

the proposed scenario.

Step 3: Note in Table B-3, the 10 technologies that can be applied to the proposed water reuse scenario.

Step 4: Assign a rating to each technology under each criterion using the codes given in Table 2.

Step 5: Please return your filled Tables B-1 and B-3 to s.sadr@surrey.ac.uk

Table B-1. The weight of each water reuse criteria based on the water reuse scenario 1 (i.e. Indirect potable water reuse in a developed economy)

Codes Criteria Weights assigned by Expert 1C1 Capital cost FC2 Operation & Maintenance Cost HC3 Energy consumption H C4 Impact on environment HC5 community acceptance MHC6 Adaptability FC7 Ease of construction and deployment LC8 Land requirement MHC9 Level of complexity FC10 Water quality and reliability VH

Table B-2: Linguistic variables for the importance weight  Importance weight Code1 Very low VL2 Low L3 Medium low ML4 Fair F5 Medium high MH6 High H7 Very high VH

Table B-3(a).The rating of all technologies under each criteria

Criteria Technologies Rating by Expert 1

C1 Capital cost

T1 iMBR: Aerobic treatment + MF/UF FT2 MBR: Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic+ MF/UF ML T3 CASP (Anaerobic) + MF/UF ML T4 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF L T5 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF + NF/RO VL T6 Anaerobic treatment + MF/UF LT7 Primary treatment + MBR + NF/RO L T8 Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF F T9 Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF + NF/RO L T10 Coagulation/flocculation + sand filtration + MF/UF + NF/RO + UV ML 

C2Operation & Maintenance Cost

T1 iMBR: Aerobic treatment + MF/UF  FT2 MBR: Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic+ MF/UF F T3 CASP (Anaerobic) + MF/UF  MLT4 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF  LT5 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF + NF/RO VL T6 Anaerobic treatment + MF/UF  MLT7 Primary treatment + MBR + NF/RO VL T8 Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF ML T9 Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF + NF/RO L T10 Coagulation/flocculation + sand filtration + MF/UF + NF/RO + UV VL 

C3 Energy consumption

T1 iMBR: Aerobic treatment + MF/UF MHT2 MBR: Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic+ MF/UF MHT3 CASP (Anaerobic) + MF/UF F T4 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF ML T5 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF + NF/RO L T6 Anaerobic treatment + MF/UF ML T7 Primary treatment + MBR + NF/RO LT8 Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF ML T9 Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF + NF/RO VL T10 Coagulation/flocculation + sand filtration + MF/UF + NF/RO + UV VL 

C4 Impact on environment

T1 iMBR: Aerobic treatment + MF/UF MHT2 MBR: Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic+ MF/UF HT3 CASP (Anaerobic) + MF/UF MHT4 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF MHT5 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF + NF/RO MH T6 Anaerobic treatment + MF/UF MHT7 Primary treatment + MBR + NF/RO H T8 Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF FT9 Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF + NF/RO FT10 Coagulation/flocculation + sand filtration + MF/UF + NF/RO + UV MH

Table B-3(b).The rates of all technologies under all criteria

Criteria Technologies Rating by Expert 1

C5 community acceptance

T1 iMBR: Aerobic treatment + MF/UF LT2 MBR: Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic+ MF/UF MLT3 CASP (Anaerobic) + MF/UF VLT4 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF LT5 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF + NF/RO MHT6 Anaerobic treatment + MF/UF VLT7 Primary treatment + MBR + NF/RO VHT8 Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF MLT9 Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF + NF/RO MHT10 Coagulation/flocculation + sand filtration + MF/UF + NF/RO + UV H

C6 Adaptability

T1 iMBR: Aerobic treatment + MF/UF MHT2 MBR: Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic+ MF/UF MHT3 CASP (Anaerobic) + MF/UF MLT4 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF MLT5 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF + NF/RO MLT6 Anaerobic treatment + MF/UF MLT7 Primary treatment + MBR + NF/RO HT8 Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF HT9 Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF + NF/RO HT10 Coagulation/flocculation + sand filtration + MF/UF + NF/RO + UV H 

C7

Ease of construction and deployment

T1 iMBR: Aerobic treatment + MF/UF FT2 MBR: Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic+ MF/UF MHT3 CASP (Anaerobic) + MF/UF HT4 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF HT5 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF + NF/RO HT6 Anaerobic treatment + MF/UF HT7 Primary treatment + MBR + NF/RO FT8 Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF FT9 Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF + NF/RO FT10 Coagulation/flocculation + sand filtration + MF/UF + NF/RO + UV F 

C8 Land requirement

T1 iMBR: Aerobic treatment + MF/UF FT2 MBR: Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic+ MF/UF FT3 CASP (Anaerobic) + MF/UF FT4 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF FT5 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF + NF/RO FT6 Anaerobic treatment + MF/UF FT7 Primary treatment + MBR + NF/RO MLT8 Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF MLT9 Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF + NF/RO LT10 Coagulation/flocculation + sand filtration + MF/UF + NF/RO + UV L

Table B-3(c).The rates of all technologies under all criteria

Criteria Technologies Rating by Expert 1

C9 Level of complexity

T1 iMBR: Aerobic treatment + MF/UF MLT2 MBR: Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic+ MF/UF LT3 CASP (Anaerobic) + MF/UF LT4 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF LT5 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF + NF/RO VL T6 Anaerobic treatment + MF/UF L T7 Primary treatment + MBR + NF/RO MH T8 Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF HT9 Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF + NF/RO MHT10 Coagulation/flocculation + sand filtration + MF/UF + NF/RO + UV MH 

C10 Water quality and reliability

T1 iMBR: Aerobic treatment + MF/UF MLT2 MBR: Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic+ MF/UF FT3 CASP (Anaerobic) + MF/UF LT4 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF MLT5 CASP (Anaerobic + Anoxic + Aerobic) + MF/UF + NF/RO MH T6 Anaerobic treatment + MF/UF MLT7 Primary treatment + MBR + NF/RO VHT8 Chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF FT9 Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) + MF/UF + NF/RO VHT10 Coagulation/flocculation + sand filtration + MF/UF + NF/RO + UV VH

C. Numerical Example of Fuzzy Based TOPSIS

Suppose that in a particular region with particular cultural, environmental, and economic conditions, a

wastewater treatment plant for particular water reuse purpose is required. After preliminary screening of

technologies, three technologies remain for further evaluation:

T1: iMBR (anoxic + aerobic treatment + microfiltration) + disinfection

T2: iMBR (aerobic treatment + microfiltration) + reverse osmosis + disinfection

T3: Sequencing batch reactor + reverse osmosis + disinfection

A committee of three decision-makers, K1, K2, and K3 has been formed to conduct the survey and to select

the most suitable wastewater treatment technologies. Five water reuse criteria are:

C1: Water quality

C2: Level of Complexity

C3: Capital costs

C4: O&M costs

C5: Community acceptance

The proposed method is currently applied to solve this problem and the computational procedure is

summarized as follows:

Step 1: The decision-makers use the linguistic weighting variables to assess the importance of the criteria

and present it in Table C-1.

Step 2: The decision-makers use the linguistic rating variables to evaluate the rating of alternatives with

respect to each criterion and present it in Table C-2.

Step 3: Converting the linguistic evaluation (shown in Tables C-1 and C-2) into triangular fuzzy numbers to

construct the fuzzy decision matrix and determine the fuzzy weight of each criterion as Table C-3.

Table C-1: Importance weight of the criteria

Experts Criteria K1 K2 K3

C1 H VH MHC2 VH VH VHC3 VH H HC4 VH VH VHC5 F MH MH

Table C-2: Rating of technologies by water reuse experts under all criteria

Criteria Technologies

ExpertsE1 E2 E3

C1 T1 MG G MG

T2 G G MG

T3 VG G F

C2T1 G MG FT2 VG VG VGT3 MG G VG

C3T1 F G GT2 VG VG GT3 G MG VG

C4

T1 VG G VGT2 VG VG VG

T3 G VG MG

C5

T1 F F FT2 VG MG G

T3 G G MG

Table C-3: Fuzzy decision matrix of all technologies and weights of all criteria

 Criteria

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5

Tech

nolo

gies T1 (0.57, 0.77, 0.93) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.57, 0.77, 0.9) (0.83, 0.96, 1.0) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)

T2 (0.63, 0.83, 0.97) (0.9, 1.0, 1.0) (0.83, 0.97, 1.0) (0.9, 1.0, 1.0) (0.7, 0.9, 1.0)

T3 (0.63, 0.8, 0.9) (0.7, 0.9, 1.0) (0.7, 0.9, 1.0) (0.7, 0.9, 1.0) (0.63, 0.83, 0.97)

Weights (0.7, 0.9, 1.0) (0.9, 1.0, 1.0) (0.77, 0.93, 1.0) (0.9, 1.0, 1.0) (0.43, 0.63, 0.83)

Step 4: Constructing the normalized fuzzy decision matrix as Table C-4.

Step 5: Constructing the weighted normalized fuzzy decision matrix (Table C-5).

Step 6: Determine FPIS and FNIS:

A+¿=[ (1.0 ,1.0 ,1.0 ) , ( 1.0 ,1.0 , 1.0) , (1.0 ,1.0 ,1.0 ), (1.0 , 1.0 ,1.0 ) , (1.0 , 1.0 ,1.0 )] ¿

A−¿=[ ( 0.0 ,0.0 ,0.0 ), (0.0 , 0.0 , 0.0) , ( 0.0 ,0.0 ,0.0 ) , (0.0 ,0.0 , 0.0) , (0.0 , 0.0 ,0.0 )] ¿

Table C-4: Fuzzy normalized decision matrix

Criteria

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5Te

chno

logi

es T1 (0.59, 0.79, 0.96) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9) (0.57, 0.77, 0.9) (0.83, 0.97, 1) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)

T2 (0.65, 0.86, 1) (0.9, 1, 1) (0.83, 0.97, 1) (0.9, 1, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1)

T3 (0:65; 0:82; 0:93) (0.7, 0.9, 1.0) (0.7, 0.9, 1.0) (0.7, 0.9, 1.0) (0.63, 0.83, 0.97)

Table C-5: Fuzzy weighted normalized decision matrix

Criteria

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5

Tech

nolo

gies T1 (0.41, 0.71, 0.96) (0.45, 0.7, 0.9) (0.44, 0.72, 0.9) (0.75, 0.97, 1) (0.13, 0.32, 0.58)

T2 (0.46, 0.77, 1) (0.81, 1, 1) (0.64, 0.9, 1) (0.81, 1, 1) (0.3, 0.57, 0.83)

T3 (0.46, 0.74, 0.93) (0.63, 0.9, 1) (0.54, 0.84, 1) (0.63, 0.9, 1) (0.27, 0.52, 0.81)

Table C-6: Distance measurement

  A+ A-

T1 2.1 3.45T2 1.24 4.13T3 1.59 3.85

Step 7: Calculate the distance of each candidate from FPIS and FNIS, respectively, as Table C-8.

Step 8: Calculate the closeness coefficient of each candidate as

CC1 = 0:62; CC2 = 0:77; CC3 = 0:71:

Step 9: According to the closeness coefficient (Figure C-1), the ranking order of the three candidates is T2,

T3, and T1.

Closeness Coefficients0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.62

0.770.71

T1 T2 T3

Table C-1: Ranking of wastewater treatment technologies based on closeness coefficient