An Integrated Soft Computing Method Based on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Environment to Appraise the Urban Bridge Maintenance Models

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Civil Engineering, Qeshm Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qeshm, Iran.

2 Technical and Engineering Faculty, University of Qom, Iran

3 Department of Civil Engineering, Qeshm Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qeshm, Iran

Abstract

In today's world, communication between different communities is a must. One of the mechanisms of communication between humans has been the use of the bridge industry. Bridges can have an impact on the communication between two sections or two different geographical areas. In this study, it was found that the use of bridges includes two operations of bridge construction or bridge reconstruction. Due to resource constraints and issues related to the location of the new area and the exorbitant construction costs, the reconstruction of old bridges is considered a suitable approach. Therefore, some important candidate factors are existed for reconstruction of old bridges that should rank to help managers for get an efficient decision. Meanwhile, this study proposed an intuitionistic fuzzy integrated-based compromise solution (CS) and DEMATEL approach to rank the candidate by computing experts’ weights and determining criteria importance, respectively. In addition, the proposed approach is developed based on last aggregation approach to prevent the data loss during the preferences integration. Besides, a real case study of the bridge maintenance operation is proposed in Rasht city of Iran to represent the implementation procedure of the proposed IF-integrated approach. The results indicate that the pipeline project of water supply lines is considered as the best candidate among the four maintenance models candidate. Finally, the proposed method was compared with TOPSIS method to indicate the validity and the efficiency of the proposed method and emphasize its appropriateness.

Keywords

References

       [1]        Mousavi, S. M., A new interval-valued hesitant fuzzy pairwise comparison–compromise solution methodology: an application to cross-docking location planning. Neural Computing and Applications, 2019. 31(9), p. 5159-5173.
       [2]        Gitinavard, H., Ghodsypour, S. H., & Akbarpour Shirazi, M., A bi-objective multi-echelon supply chain model with Pareto optimal points evaluation for perishable products under uncertainty. Scientia Iranica, 2019. 26(5), p. 2952-2970.
       [3]        Freudendal-Pedersen, M., Sustainable urban futures from transportation and planning to networked urban mobilities. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2020. 82, p. 302310.
       [4]        Mousavi, S. M., et al., A new decision model for cross-docking center location in logistics networks under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy uncertainty. Transport, 2019. 34(1), p. 30-40.
       [5]        Lessoff, A., Urban History and the Transnational Perspective. Yearbook of Transnational History, 2020. 179.
       [6]        Gitinavard, H., Strategic Evaluation of Sustainable Projects based on Hybrid Group Decision Analysis with Incomplete Information. Journal of Quality Engineering and Production Optimization, 2019. 4(2), p. 17-30.
       [7]        Mousavi, S. M., Gitinavard, H., & Siadat, A., A new hesitant fuzzy analytical hierarchy process method for decision-making problems under uncertainty. IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 2014. p. 622-626.
       [8]        Gitinavard, H., & Mousavi, S. M., Evaluating construction projects by a new group decision-making model based on intuitionistic fuzzy logic concepts. International Journal of Engineering, 2015. 28(9), p. 1312-1319.
       [9]        Maksymenko, O. P., et al., Multilaser spot tracking technology for bridge structure displacement measuring. Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 2021. 28(3).
     [10]      Dorfeshan, Y., & Mousavi, S. M., A novel interval type-2 fuzzy decision model based on two new versions of relative preference relation-based MABAC and WASPAS methods (with an application in aircraft maintenance planning). Neural Computing and Applications, 2020. 32(8), p. 3367-3385.
     [11]      Bojović, A., Marković, Z., Mora, et al., Railway road bridge across the Danube in Novi sad–Design and construction. The Eight International Conference" Bridges in Danube Basin" (pp. 139-149). 2014. Springer Vieweg, Wiesbaden.
     [12]      Zhang, W., & Wang, N., Bridge network maintenance prioritization under budget constraint. Structural Safety, 2017. 67, p. 96-104.
     [13]      Mousavi, S. M., Shams, H., & Ahmadi, S., Simultaneous optimization of repair and control-limit policy in condition-based maintenance. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 2017, 28(1), p. 245-254.
     [14]      Gitinavard, H., & Mousavi, S. M., A new balancing and ranking method based on hesitant fuzzy sets for solving decision-making problems under uncertainty. International Journal of Engineering, 2015. 28(2), p. 214-223.
     [15]      Gitinavard, H., Shirazi, M. A., & Zarandi, M. H. F., Sustainable feedstocks selection and renewable products allocation: A new hybrid adaptive utility-based consensus model. Journal of Environmental Management, 2020. 264.
     [16]      Yang, D. Y., & Frangopol, D. M., Life-cycle management of deteriorating bridge networks with network-level risk bounds and system reliability analysis. Structural Safety, 2020. 83.
     [17]      Tarighat, A., & Miyamoto, A., Fuzzy concrete bridge deck condition rating method for practical bridge management system. Expert Systems with Applications, 2009. 36(10), p. 12077-12085.
     [18]      Gattulli, V., & Chiaramonte, L., Condition assessment by visual inspection for a bridge management system. Computer‐Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 2005. 20(2), p. 95-107.
     [19]      Ryall, M., Bridge management. 2009. CRC Press.
     [20]      Mousavi, S. M., et al., A two-phase fuzzy decision making methodology for bridge scheme selection. IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 2008. p. 415-419.
     [21]      Gitinavard, H., & Akbarpour Shirazi, M., An extended intuitionistic fuzzy modified group complex proportional assessment approach. Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, 2018. 11(3), p. 229-246.
     [22]      Gholami, M., Sam, A. R. B. M., & Yatim, J. M., Assessment of bridge management system in Iran. Procedia Engineering, 2013. 54, p. 573-583.
     [23]      Nanjo, A., et al., A structure database and its application: Maintenance Information Management System and bridge management system of Hanshin Expressway. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 2005. 1(4), p. 285-294.
     [24]      Wan, C., et al., Development of a bridge management system based on the building information modeling technology. Sustainability, 2019. 11(17), p. 45-83.
     [25]      De Jonge, B., & Scarf, P. A., A review on maintenance optimization. European journal of operational research, 2020. 285(3): p. 805-824.
     [26]      Mousavi, S. M., et al., Solving robot selection problem by a new interval-valued hesitant fuzzy multi-attributes group decision method. International Journal of Industrial Mathematics, 2016. 8(3), p. 231-240.
     [27]      Ebrahimnezhad, S., Gitinavard, H., & Sohrabvandi, S., A new extended analytical hierarchy process technique with incomplete interval-valued information for risk assessment in IT outsourcing. International Journal of Engineering, 2017. 30(5), p. 739-748.
     [28]      Gertsbakh, I., Reliability theory: with applications to preventive maintenance. Springer, 2013.
     [29]      Ebrahimnejad, S., et al., Selection of IT outsourcing services’ activities considering services cost and risks by designing an interval-valued hesitant fuzzy-decision approach. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 2017b. 32(6), p. 4081-4093.
     [30]      Gitinavard, H., Makui, A., & Jabbarzadeh, A., Interval-valued hesitant fuzzy method based on group decision analysis for estimating weights of decision makers. Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, 2016. 9(3), p. 96-110.
     [31]      Xiang, L., Energy network dispatch optimization under emergency of local energy shortage with web tool for automatic large group decision-making. Energy, 2017. 120, p. 740-750.
     [32]      Ren, J. Sustainability prioritization of energy storage technologies for promoting the development of renewable energy: A novel intuitionistic fuzzy combinative distance-based assessment approach. Renewable Energy, 2018. 121, p. 666-676.
     [33]      Jeong, J. S., & Ramírez-Gómez, Á., Optimizing the location of a biomass plant with a fuzzy-DEcision-MAking Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (F-DEMATEL) and multi-criteria spatial decision assessment for renewable energy management and long-term sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018. 182, p. 509-520.
     [34]      Gomes, I. L. R., et al., Decision making for sustainable aggregation of clean energy in day-ahead market: Uncertainty and risk. Renewable Energy, 2019. 133, p. 692-702.
     [35]      Fathipour, F., & Saidi-Mehrabad, M., A multi-objective energy planning considering sustainable development by a TOPSIS-based augmented e-constraint. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 2018. 10(3).
     [36]      Kofinas, P., Dounis, A. I., & Vouros, G. A., Fuzzy Q-Learning for multi-agent decentralized energy management in microgrids. Applied Energy, 2018. 219, p. 53-67.
     [37]      Rashidi, K., & Cullinane, K. A comparison of fuzzy DEA and fuzzy TOPSIS in sustainable supplier selection: Implications for sourcing strategy. Expert Systems with Applications, 2019. 121, p. 266-281.
     [38]      Rani, P., et al., A novel approach to extended fuzzy TOPSIS based on new divergence measures for renewable energy sources selection. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020. 257.
     [39]      Solangi, Y. A., Longsheng, C., & Shah, S. A. A., Assessing and overcoming the renewable energy barriers for sustainable development in Pakistan: An integrated AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach. Renewable Energy, 2021. 173, p. 209-222.
 
Advances in Industrial Engineering
Volume 55, Issue 3
July 2021
Pages 307-322

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics