Višekriterijumski pristup izboru metode rudarenja

  • Gabrijela Popovic Megatrend univerzitet, Fakultet za menadžment, Zaječar
  • Bojan Djordjevic Megatrend univerzitet, Fakultet za menadžment, Zaječar
  • Dragan Milanovic Institut za rudarstvo i metalurgiju, Bor
Ključne reči: Group Decision Making||, ||Grupno odlučivanje, Čukaru Peki||, ||Čukaru Peki, underground mining method selection||, ||Izbor metode rudarenja, PIPRECIA-E||, ||PIPRECIA-E, Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making||, ||Višekriterijumsko odlučivanje,

Sažetak


zbor metode za podzemnu eksploataciju predstavlja veoma kompleksan zadatak za rudarske inženjere zato što izabrana metoda treba ispuniti tehničke, ekonomske i proizvodne zahteve. Uključivanje više kriterijuma koji uzimaju u obzir različite aspekte rudarske proizvodnje kao i grupno odlučivanje doprinosi povećanju pouzdanosti odluka i smanjenju subjektivnosti. Osnovni cilj ovog rada je predlaganje metodologije za izbor metode podzemne eksploatacije bazirane na PIPRECIA-E metodi (Extended Pivot Pairwise Relative Criteria Importance Assessment) i grupnom odlučivanju. Primenljivost predložene metodologije prikazana je pomoću numeričkog primera koji uključuje 3 osnovna kriterijuma, 18 podkriterijuma i 5 alternativnih metoda podzemne eksploatacije planiranih za primenu u Gornjoj zoni ležišta Čukaru Peki u Srbiji.

Reference

Alpay, S., & Yavuz, M. (2007). A decision support system for underground mining method selection. Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial, Engineering and Other Applications of Applied Intelligent Systems (pp. 334-343). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73325-6_33.

Alpay, S., & Yavuz, M. (2009). Underground mining method selection by decision making tools. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 24(2), 173-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2008.07.003.

Ataei, M., Jamshidi, M., Sereshki, F., & Jalali, S.M.E. (2008). Mining method selection by AHP approach. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy,108(12), 741-749.

Ataei, M., Shahsavany, H., & Mikaeil, R. (2013). Monte Carlo Analytic Hierarchy Process (MAHP) approach to selection of optimum mining method. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 23(4), 573-578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2013.07.017.

Bitarafan, M. R., & Ataei, M. (2004). Mining method selection by multiple criteria decision making tools. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 104(9), 493-498.

Bogdanovic, D., Nikolic, D., & Ilic, I. (2012). Mining method selection by integrated AHP and PROMETHEE method. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, 84(1), 219-233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0001-37652012005000013.

Dehghani, H., Siami, A., & Haghi, P. (2017). A new model for mining method selection based on grey and TODIM methods. Journal of Mining and Environment, 8(1), 49-60. https://doi.org/10.22044/jme.2016.626.

Gupta, S., & Kumar, U. (2012). An analytical hierarchy process (AHP)-guided decision model for underground mining method selection. International Journal of Mining, Reclamation and Environment, 26(4), 324-336. https://doi.org/10.1080/17480930.2011.622480.

Gupta, P., Mehlawat, M. K., Aggarwal, U., & Charles, V. (2018). An integrated AHP-DEA multi-objective optimization model for sustainable transportation in mining industry. Resources Policy (In Press).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.04.007.

Karadogan, A., Kahriman, A., & Ozer, U. (2008). Application of fuzzy set theory in the selection of underground mining method. Journal of The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 108(2), 73-79.

Karimnia, H., & Bagloo, H. (2015). Optimum mining method selection using fuzzy analytical hierarchy process–Qapiliq salt mine, Iran. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 25(2), 225-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2015.02.010.

Keršuliene, V., Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2010). Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new Step-wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis (SWARA). Journal of Business Economics and Management, 11(2), 243-258. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2010.12.

Liang, W., Zhao, G., & Hong, C. (2018). Selecting the optimal mining method with extended multi-objective optimization by ratio analysis plus the full multiplicative form (MULTIMOORA) approach. Neural Computing and Applications, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3405-5.

Liu, A. H., Dong, L., & Dong, L. J. (2010). Optimization model of unascertained measurement for underground mining method selection and its application. Journal of Central South University of Technology,17(4), 744-749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-010-0550-0.

Mahase, M. J., Musingwini, C., & Nhleko, A. S. (2016). A survey of applications of multi-criteria decision analysis methods in mine planning and related case studies. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 116(11), 1051-1056. http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/2411-9717/2016/v116n11a7.

Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., Nor, K., Khalifah, Z., Zakwan, N., & Valipour, A. (2015). Multiple criteria decision-making techniques and their applications – a review of the literature from 2000 to 2014. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 28(1), 516-571.

https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075139.

Milosavljević, M., Bursaća, M., & Tričković, G. (2018). Selection of the railroad container terminal in Serbia based on multi criteria decision-making methods. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 1(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame180101p.

Naghadehi, M. Z., Mikaeil, R., & Ataei, M. (2009). The application of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) approach to selection of optimum underground mining method for Jajarm Bauxite Mine, Iran. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(4), 8218-8226.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.10.006.

Namin, F. S., Shahriar, K., Bascetin, A., & Ghodsypour, S. H. (2012). FMMSIC: a hybrid fuzzy based decision support system for MMS (in order to estimate interrelationships between criteria). Journal of the Operational Research Society, 63(2), 218-231. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2011.24.

Nevsun Resources Ltd (2018). NI43-101 Technical Report - Pre-Feasibility Study for the Timok Project, Serbia. Bor, Serbia: Jakubec, J., Pittuck, M., Samoukovic, M., MacSporran, G., Manojlovic, P., Bunyard, M., Duinker, R., & Sucharda, M.

Pamučar, D., Lukovac, V., Božanić, D., & Komazec, N. (2018). Multi-criteria FUCOM-MAIRCA model for the evaluation of level crossings: case study in the Republic of Serbia. Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications, 1(1), 108-129. https://doi.org/10.31181/oresta190101s.

Popović, G., & Mihajlović, D. (2018). An MCDM approach to tourism project evaluation: The Upper Danube basin case. Thematic Proceedings „Modern Management Tools and Economy of Tourism Sector in Present Era“ (pp. 129-143). UDECOM. Belgrade, Serbia. https://doi.org/10.31410/tmt.2018.129.

Rahimdel, M. J., & Karamoozian, M. (2014). Fuzzy TOPSIS method to primary crusher selection for Golegohar Iron Mine (Iran). Journal of Central South University, 21(11), 4352-4359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-014-2435-0.

Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Samimi Namin, F., Shahriar, K., Ataee-Pour, M., & Dehghani, H. (2008). A new model for mining method selection of mineral deposit based on fuzzy decision making. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 108(7), 385-395.

Stanujkic, D., Magdalinovic, N., Milanovic, D., Magdalinovic, S., & Popovic, G. (2014). An efficient and simple multiple criteria model for a grinding circuit selection based on MOORA method. Informatica, 25(1), 73-93.

Stanujkic, D., Zavadskas, E. K., Karabasevic, D., Smarandache, F., & Turskis, Z. (2017). The use of the PIvot Pairwise RElative Criteria Importance Assessment method for determining the weights of criteria. Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 20(4), 116-133.

Stanujkic, D., Karabasevic, D., & Cipriana, S. (2018). An application of the PIPRECIA and WS PLP methods for evaluating website quality in hotel industry. Quaestus, 12, 190-198.

Stanujkic, D., Karabasevic, D., Zavadskas, E. K., Smarandache, F., & Cavallaro, F. (2019a). An approach to determining customer satisfaction in traditional Serbian restaurants. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 6(3), 1127-1138. http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2019.6.3(5).

Stanujkic, D., Zavadskas, E. K., Karabasevic, D., Milanovic, D., & Maksimovic, M. (2019b). An approach to solving complex decision-making problems based on IVIFNs: A case of comminution circuit design selection. Minerals Engineering, 138, 70-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mineng.2019.04.036.

Stević, Ž., Stjepanović, Ž., Božičković, Z., Das, D., & Stanujkić, D. (2018). Assessment of Conditions for Implementing Information Technology in a Warehouse System: A Novel Fuzzy PIPRECIA Method. Symmetry, 10(11), 586. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym10110586.

Velasquez, M., & Hester, P. T. (2013). An analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods. International Journal of Operations Research, 10(2), 56-66.

Vesković, S., Stević, Ž., Stojić, G., Vasiljević, M., & Milinković, S. (2018). Evaluation of the railway management model by using a new integrated model DELPHI-SWARA-MABAC. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering,1(2), 34-50. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame180101p.

Yavuz, M. (2015a). The application of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and Yager’s method in underground mining method selection problem. International Journal of Mining, Reclamation and Environment, 29(6), 453-475. https://doi.org/10.1080/17480930.2014.895218.

Yavuz, M. (2015b). Equipment selection based on the AHP and Yager's method. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 115(5), 425-433.

Yazdani-Chamzini, A., Yakchali, S. H., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2012). Using an integrated MCDM model for mining method selection in presence of uncertainty. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 25(4), 869-904.

Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., & Kildienė, S. (2014). State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20(1), 165-179. https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2014.892037.

Objavljeno
2020/01/17
Broj časopisa
Rubrika
Originalni naučni članak