Primena fazi algoritama u komparativnoj evaluaciji projektovanja raskrsnica

  • Oualid Largueche Department of Civil Engineering, University of Mustapha Stambouli, Mascara, People's Democratic Republic of Algeria; Institution of Geomatics, Ecology and Environment Research Laboratory (LGEO2E), Mascara, Algeria.
  • Mostefa Lallam Department of Civil Engineering, University of Mustapha Stambouli, Mascara, People's Democratic Republic of Algeria; Laboratory Mechanics of Structures, University of Tahri Mohamed, Bechar, Algeria. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0022-6646
  • Miloud Driss Department of Civil Engineering, University of Mustapha Stambouli, Mascara, People's Democratic Republic of Algeria; Laboratory of water technic science, University of Mascara, Algeria. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9727-7353
  • Mohammed Amine Hamadouched Department of Economics, University of Mustapha Stambouli, Mascara, People's Democratic Republic of Algeria; Institution of Geomatics, Ecology and Environment Research Laboratory (LGEO2E), Mascara, Algeria. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6009-2726
Ključne reči: raskrsnica, fazi analitički hijerarhijski proces (FAHP), alternativna projektna rešenja, kriterijumi, nivo usluge, složeni pokazatelj performansi (CPI)

Sažetak


Uvod/cilj: Urbane saobraćajne raskrsnice su izuzetno složeni čvorovi u transportnim mrežama zbog ukrštanja više, često međusobno konfliktnih, saobraćajnih tokova. Upravljanje takvim tokovima predstavlja značajan izazov, što dovodi do problema poput promenljivih vremena zadržavanja i vraćanja saobraćaja, naročito kod preopterećenih raskrsnica. Budući da ovakve raskrsnice često deluju kao uska grla, tačne kratkoročne prognoze saobraćajnih tokova su ključne za efikasno planiranje i ublažavanje zagušenja. Cilj ove studije je da predloži robustan okvir za višekriterijumsku evaluaciju projektovanja raskrsnica kako bi se podržalo optimizovano urbano planiranje i upravljanje saobraćajem.

Metode: Da bi se odgovorilo na inherentne složenosti i neizvesnosti u vezi sa evaluacijom ovakvih rešenja, u ovom istraživanju se primenjuje fazi analitički hijerarhijski proces (FAHP). Ova metoda je posebno pogodna za kontekste u kojima se stručne evaluacije, koje često uključuju kvalitativne kriterijume poput uklapanja u pejzaž ili uticaja na lokalnu ekonomiju, ne mogu izraziti sa apsolutnom preciznošću. Naš pristup integriše fazi logiku radi upravljanja subjektivnošću i neodređenošću u evaluacijama, kao i kvantitativnim faktorima poput troškova i zasićenosti saobraćaja. Na osnovu opsežnog pregleda literature i utvrđenih standarda u oblasti saobraćajnog inženjeringa i urbanog planiranja, razvijena je sveobuhvatna mreža od 32 kriterijuma i potkriterijuma koji obuhvataju ključne aspekte kao što su bezbednost saobraćaja, nivo usluge i protok saobraćaja. Eksperti dodeljuju težinske vrednosti ovim kriterijumima, a one se zatim obrađuju pomoću FAHP metode kako bi se dobio globalni pokazatelj performansi. Ovaj pokazatelj omogućava rangiranje i poređenje različitih projektnih rešenja.

Rezultati: Primena FAHP okvira dovodi do izračunavanja globalnog pokazatelja performansi koji omogućava objektivno rangiranje alternativnih rešenja za raskrsnice. Metodologija pruža strukturiran pristup za balansiranje više, često konfliktnih, kriterijuma u složenim okruženjima odlučivanja. Praktična primenljivost metode prikazana je kroz studiju slučaja raskrsnice Šetija, u kojoj je uspešno identifikovana optimalna konfiguracija od više predloženih varijanti. Ovo potvrđuje svestranost FAHP metode u evaluaciji performansi unutar složenih urbanih sistema.

Zaključak: Ova studija uspešno pozicionira FAHP unutar šireg okvira višekriterijumske analize odlučivanja (MCDA) i nudi originalnu primenu u oblasti projektovanja raskrsnica. Integracijom fazi logike, metodologija efikasno upravlja neizvesnošću u vezi sa kvalitativnim i kvantitativnim kriterijumima evaluacije, što je posebno korisno kada je teško doći do preciznih stručnih procena. Predloženi okvir predstavlja robustan i višedimenzionalan alat za urbaniste i saobraćajne inženjere, i omogućava informisanije i optimizovanije odluke o infrastrukturi u složenim urbanim raskrsnicama.

Reference

Abdullah, M.S. & Asmael, B.M. 2023. Application of AHP to prioritize urban road scenarios in Baghdad. Journal of Engineering and Sustainable Development, 27(1), pp.15–24.

Bandyopadhyay, S. (2021). A novel Multi-Criteria decision analysis technique incorporating demanding essential characteristics of existing MCDA techniques. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1163422/v1

Barić, D. & Starčević, D. 2015. Strategic planning of road infrastructure using multi-criteria analysis. Promet – Traffic & Transportation, 27(1), pp.37–45. Available at: https://doi.org/10.7307/ptt.v27i1.1514.

Barić, D., Pilko, H. & Dragčević, V. 2007. The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in traffic infrastructure investment planning. Promet – Traffic & Transportation, 19(5), pp.305–311.

Barić, D., Pilko, H. & Županović, D. 2016. Application of the AHP method in traffic planning for the purpose of comparing road design alternatives. Tehnički vjesnik – Technical Gazette, 23(6), pp.1717–1723. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17559/TV-20140716141532.

Chamoli, S. (2015). Hybrid FAHP (fuzzy analytical hierarchy process)-FTOPSIS (fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity of an ideal solution) approach for performance evaluation of the V down perforated baffle roughened rectangular channel. Energy, 84, pp.432–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.03.007

Chan, H.K., Sun, X. and Chung, S. (2019). When should fuzzy analytic hierarchy process be used instead of analytic hierarchy process? Decision Support Systems, 125, p.113114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2019.113114

Cowan, R. (1987). An extension of Tanner's results on uncontrolled intersections. Queueing Systems.

Dean, M. (2020). Multi-criteria analysis. In: Advances in Transport Policy and Planning, pp.165–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.atpp.2020.07.001

Dean, M. (2021). Participatory multi-criteria analysis methods: Comprehensive, inclusive, transparent and user-friendly? An application to the case of the London Gateway Port. Research in Transportation Economics, 88, p.100887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2020.100887

Dean, M., Hickman, R. and Chen, C. (2018). Testing the application of participatory MCA: The case of the South Fylde Line. Transport Policy, 73, pp.62–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.10.007

Gühnemann, A., Laird, J.J. and Pearman, A.D. (2012). Combining cost-benefit and multi-criteria analysis to prioritise a national road infrastructure programme. Transport Policy, 23, pp.15–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.05.005

Guler, S.I. and Menendez, M. (2016). Methodology for estimating capacity and vehicle delays at unsignalized multimodal intersections. International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology, 5(4), pp.257–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtst.2017.03.002

Ha, Q.M., Fugate, B.S. & Kazemi, H. 2015. Supplier selection using Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS: A case study in supply chain management. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 76(1–4), pp.432–442. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-014-6265-3.

Henke, I., Cartenì, A. and Di Francesco, L. (2020). A Sustainable Evaluation Processes for Investments in the Transport Sector: A Combined Multi-Criteria and Cost–Benefit Analysis for a New Highway in Italy. Sustainability, 12(23), p.9854. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12239854

Hickman, R. and Dean, M. (2017). Incomplete cost – incomplete benefit analysis in transport appraisal. Transport Reviews, 38(6), pp.689–709. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2017.1407377

Lallam, M. and Mammeri, A. (2023). Fuzzy analytical hierarchy damage assessment in old reinforced concrete buildings: case study. Section Building Structures & Structural Mechanics, 23(2), pp.20–26. https://doi.org/10.35181/tces-2023-0010

Lallam, M., Djebli, A. and Mammeri, A. (2023). Fuzzy Analytical hierarchy process for assessing damage in old masonry buildings: a case study. International Journal of Architectural Heritage, pp.1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2023.2295885

Lallam, M., Mammeri, A. and Djebli, A. (2021). Fuzzy analytical hierarchy processes for damage state assessment of arch masonry bridge. Civil Engineering Journal, 7(11), pp.1933–1946. https://doi.org/10.28991/cej-2021-03091770

Liu, Y. and Wu, Y. (2009). Research on Traffic Capacity Impairment Mechanism of Supersaturated Complex Intersections & Fluctuation Pattern of Travel Delay. In: ICICTA '09: Proceedings of the 2009 Second International Conference on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation. IEEE Computer Society, USA, 3, pp.728–731. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICICTA.2009.641

Liu, Y., Eckert, C.M. and Earl, C. (2020). A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making with subjective judgements. Expert Systems With Applications, 161, p.113738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113738

Otković, I.I., Karleuša, B., Deluka-Tibljaš, A., Šurdonja, S. and Marušić, M. (2021). Combining traffic microsimulation modeling and Multi-Criteria analysis for sustainable Spatial-Traffic planning. Land, 10(7), p.666. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10070666

Qu, W., Li, J., Yang, L., Li, D., Liu, S., Zhao, Q. and Qi, Y. (2020). Short-Term intersection traffic flow forecasting. Sustainability, 12(19), p.8158. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198158

Ren, J., Manzardo, A., Toniolo, S. & Scipioni, A. 2019. Sustainability evaluation of urban energy systems: A novel hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 112, pp.117–129. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.041.

Sari, F. and Şen, M. (2021). Highway route planning via least cost path algorithm and multi criteria decision analysis integration, a comparison of AHP, TOPSIS and VIKOR. International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics, 9(2), pp.27–38. https://doi.org/10.30897/ijegeo.900200

Singh, M.P., Singh, P. and Singh, P. (2024). Multi-criteria decision analysis for route alignment planning using Geographical Information System (GIS) and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Chinese Journal of Urban and Environmental Studies, 12(01). https://doi.org/10.1142/s2345748124500064

Objavljeno
2026/01/23
Rubrika
Originalni naučni radovi