Using the Analytic Hierarchical Process in Determining the Relative Importance of some Spatial Criteria to Locate Railway Track | ||
| Al-Rafidain Engineering Journal (AREJ) | ||
| Article 8, Volume 28, Issue 1, March 2023, Pages 89-98 PDF (981.76 K) | ||
| Document Type: Research Paper | ||
| DOI: 10.33899/rengj.2022.134691.1185 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Aseel Ibrahim Matti; Ayman A. Abdulmawjoud* | ||
| Civil Engineering Department, Collage of Engineering, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq | ||
| Abstract | ||
| In this study, the weights of a number of criteria that affect the selection of the railway track between Mosul and Fishkhabur on the Iraqi- Syrian- Turkish border are determined. These criteria include ground slope, water resources, irrigation canals, infrastructure services routes, land use, environmental impact, and soil bearing strength. A questionnaire is conducted for a group of decision makers, specialists and planners. The Analytic Hierarchical Process (AHP) technology developed by Saaty is implemented by using pairwise comparison among the criteria. This method is chosen due to its ease, accuracy and the existence of a specialized computer program to perform the mathematical calculations, incorporating weights for all forms, and extracting the final weight for choosing the path. The study shows that the water resources criterion of (29.7%) at a consensus rate of (57%) gets the highest relative importance followed by the ground slope criterion (21.3%) at a consensus of (49%). The environmental impact criterion of (6.9%) at a consensus rate of (53%) gets the lowest value of the relative importance. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP); Pairwise Comparison; Multi-Criteria Evaluation; Locating railway track | ||
| References | ||
|
T. T. Duc, “Using GIS and AHP Technique for Land-Use Suitability Analysis,” Int. Symp. Geoinformatics Spat. Infrastruct. Dev. Earth Allied Sci., 2006.
[2] E. Triantaphyllou and S. Mann, “Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decision Making in Engineering Applications: Some Challenges,” The International Journal of Industrial Engineering: Theory, Applications and Practice, vol. 2, pp. 35–44, 02 1995.
[3] M. Velasquez and P. Hester, “An analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods,” Int. J. Oper. Res., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 56–66, 2013.
[4] A. A. Darvishsefan, A. Setoodeh, and M. Makhdom, “Environmental consideration in railway route selection with GIS (Case study: Rasht-Anzali railway in Iran),” Map Asia, pp. 1–12, 2004.
[5] J. Ngunyi, C. N. Mundia, and M. K. Gachari, “Analysis of Standard Gauge Railway Using GIS and Remote Sensing,” Am. J. Geogr. Inf. Syst., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 54–63, 2017, doi: 10.5923/j.ajgis.20170602.02.
[6] S. Nataraj, “Analytic Hierarchy Process As a Decision-Support,” Inf. Syst., vol. VI, no. 2, pp. 16–21, 2005.
[7] I. M. Brunner, K. Kim, and E. Yamashita, “Analytic hierarchy process and geographic information systems to identify optimal transit alignments,” Transp. Res. Rec., no. 2215, pp. 59–66, 2011, doi: 10.3141/2215-06.
[8] J. Malczewski, GIS and M u l t i c r i t e r i a Decision Analysis. Canada.: John Wiley &c Sons, Inc, 1999.
[9] T. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw_Hill, New York, 1980. | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 197 PDF Download: 173 |
||