Research code: 0009-0001-6811-3058
1- , AMINSHAREI.FA@GMAIL.COM
Abstract: (26 Views)
Background and Objective: Fire risk in the textile industry results from interactions among fuel sources, electrical and thermal equipment, human behavior, and protective capabilities. This study aimed to prioritize fire risks managerially by simultaneously considering risk criticality and control feasibility, and to assess the stability and convergent validity of the results.
Materials and Methods: Experts evaluated seven criteria and 12 fire risks. Criteria weights were determined using AHP, and alternatives were ranked using fuzzy TOPSIS. Sensitivity analysis included a one-at-a-time ±20% change in each criterion weight and a stress scenario with equal weights. Comparative validation was performed using VIKOR (v=0.5), and rank convergence was assessed via Spearman and Kendall coefficients.
Results: Severity of consequence (weight=0.4029) was the most important criterion. Oil accumulation (0.5527), human error (0.5511), electrical system fault (0.5464), and alarm/firefighting system weakness (0.5393) were the top four priorities. Across the ±20% scenarios, rank correlation with baseline ranged from 0.972 to 1.000; it decreased to 0.734 under equal weights, though the top two priorities remained unchanged. VIKOR showed very high convergence with fuzzy TOPSIS (ρ=0.993, τ=0.970; p<0.001), with only the third and fourth ranks interchanged.
Conclusion: Immediate management priority should target eliminating oil leakage/accumulation and reducing human errors, given their high risk, rapid implementability, and relatively low cost. Condition-based maintenance of electrical equipment and phased upgrading of alarm/firefighting systems should follow as capital-allocation priorities. Sensitivity analysis and VIKOR confirmed that the main rankings are stable and reliable under realistic changes
Materials and Methods: Experts evaluated seven criteria and 12 fire risks. Criteria weights were determined using AHP, and alternatives were ranked using fuzzy TOPSIS. Sensitivity analysis included a one-at-a-time ±20% change in each criterion weight and a stress scenario with equal weights. Comparative validation was performed using VIKOR (v=0.5), and rank convergence was assessed via Spearman and Kendall coefficients.
Results: Severity of consequence (weight=0.4029) was the most important criterion. Oil accumulation (0.5527), human error (0.5511), electrical system fault (0.5464), and alarm/firefighting system weakness (0.5393) were the top four priorities. Across the ±20% scenarios, rank correlation with baseline ranged from 0.972 to 1.000; it decreased to 0.734 under equal weights, though the top two priorities remained unchanged. VIKOR showed very high convergence with fuzzy TOPSIS (ρ=0.993, τ=0.970; p<0.001), with only the third and fourth ranks interchanged.
Conclusion: Immediate management priority should target eliminating oil leakage/accumulation and reducing human errors, given their high risk, rapid implementability, and relatively low cost. Condition-based maintenance of electrical equipment and phased upgrading of alarm/firefighting systems should follow as capital-allocation priorities. Sensitivity analysis and VIKOR confirmed that the main rankings are stable and reliable under realistic changes
Article number: 2
Type of Study: Research Article |
Subject:
Safety
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Articles Copyright © The Author(s).
Owned by Hamadan University of Medical Sciences.
Published by UMSHA Press
Journal Tel: +9881 38380090
Publisher Tel: +988138380548
Website: http://johe.umsha.ac.ir
Email: johe[at]umsha.ac.ir
