Volume 8, Issue 4 (Winter 2022)                   johe 2022, 8(4): 14-21 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Mousavi S M, Jahadi Naeini M, Haghighat M, Behzadi Nezhad F. Weighting and prioritizing of indicators affecting resilience in the fire-induced emergencies in combined cycle power plant using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. johe 2022; 8 (4) : 2
URL: http://johe.umsha.ac.ir/article-1-740-en.html
1- Occupational Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
2- Occupational Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
3- Department of Occupational Health Engineering, Behbahan Faculty of Medical Sciences, Behbahan, Iran
4- Environment Management (HSE), Ahvaz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahvaz, Iran , behzadinezhad_f@mapnaMD1.com
Abstract:   (2060 Views)
Background and Objective: Increasing the level of resilience is one of the approaches to reduce the consequences of fire. Resilience is one of the most important and practical concepts in crisis management that has been considered in recent years.The current study was aim to identify and prioritize of indicators affecting resilience in the event of fire-induced emergencies in combined cycle power plant using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP).
Materials and Methods: By reviewing the texts and semi-structured interviews with 15 experts, 20 effective indicators in fire resilience in the combined cycle power plant were identified and classified into three main groups based on the McManus’ model. In the next step, the weights of the indices of each group were determined using the FAHP method. Finally, the first three indicators of each group were selected for final prioritization and pairwise comparisons were performed between them again.
Results: The results showed that three indicators of structural stability (w=0.168), senior management awareness of roles and responsibilities (W = 0.145), risk perception and acceptance (W = 0.138) play the most important role. And logistics support index (0.069) is the least important in determining the level of resilience.
Conclusion: By recognizing the effective indicators in determining the level of resilience against fire in emergency situations, decision makers could define and implement corrective and preventive measures to improve safety and increase resilience based on priority.
Article number: 2
Full-Text [PDF 900 kb]   (1145 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research Article | Subject: Safety

1. Gorjian S, Zadeh BN, Eltrop L, Shamshiri RR, Amanlou Y. Solar photovoltaic power generation in Iran: Development, policies, and barriers. Rene Sust Ene Rev. 2019;106:110-23. [DOI]
2. Orme GJ, Venturini M. Property risk assessment for power plants: Methodology, validation and application. Ener. 2011;36(5):3189-203. [DOI]
3. Sadeghi A, Jabbari M, Rezaeian M, Alidoosti A, Eskandari D. Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment in a Combined Cycle Power Plant. Ir J Chem Chem Eng Research Article. 2020;6(104):303-311. [DOI]
4. Al Saffar IQ, Ezzat AW. Qualitative Risk Assessment of Combined Cycle Power Plant Using Hazards Identification Technique. J Mech Eng Res Devel. 2020;43(2):284-93.
5. Hajibashi FA, Arabkoohsar A, Babaelahi M. Risk assessment, dynamic analysis and multi-objective optimization of a solar-driven hybrid gas/steam power plant. J Ther Anal Calor. 2020,2:1-17. [DOI]
6. Harris LB, Taylor AH. Rain‐shadow forest margins resilient to low‐severity fire and climate change but not high‐severity fire. Ecos. 2020;11(9):e03258. [DOI]
7. Catalan C, Robert B, editors. Evaluation of organizational resilience: application in Quebec. Proceedings of the fourth resilience engineering symposium France; 2011.
8. Yu DJ, Schoon ML, Hawes JK, Lee S, Park J, Rao PSC, et al. Toward general principles for resilience engineering. Risk Ana. 2020;40(8):1509-37. [DOI]
9. Shah AA, Gong Z, Pal I, Sun R, Ullah W, Wani GF. Disaster risk management insight on school emergency preparedness–a case study of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Int J Dis Risk Red. 2020;51:101805. [DOI]
10. Lee AV, Vargo J, Seville E. Developing a tool to measure and compare organizations’ resilience. Natu Haz Rev. 201;14(1):29-41. [DOI]
11. Mousavi SM, Abbasi M, Yazdanirad S, Yazdanirad M, Khatooni E. Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS method as a technique for prioritizing noise control solutions. Noi Con Eng J. 2019;67(6):415-21. [DOI]
12. mousavi sm, karimi a, zakerian sa, jahadi naeini m. Identifying and ranking the criteria affecting the performance of the Permit to work system in an oil refinery using a fuzzy delphi methode and FAHP approach. J Occupa Hyg Eng. 2021;8(1):37-45.
13. Jafari Nodoushan R, Jafari MJ, Shirali GA, Khodakarim S, Khademi Zare H, Hamed Monfared AA. Identifying and ranking of organizational resilience indicators of refinery complex using fuzzy TOPSIS. Heal Saf Work. 2017;7(3):219-32.
14. Shirali GA, Nematpour L. Evaluation of resilience engineering using super decisions software. Heal Promo Persp. 2019;9(3):191. [DOI]
15. Cutter SL, Barnes L, Berry M, Burton C, Evans E, Tate E, et al. A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Glo Envir Chan. 2008;18(4):598-606. [DOI]
16. Deshmukh S, Sunnapwar V, editors. Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) for green supplier selection in Indian industries. Proceedings of international conference on intelligent manufacturing and automation; 2019: Springer. [DOI]
17. Mousavi SM, Jahadi Naeini M, Yazdani Rad S, Haghighat M. Identification and Ranking of Noise Control Solutions by Using Fuzzy Delphi approach, Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Analysis (FAHP) and Fuzzy Vikor in an Oil Refinery. Arch Occupa Heal. 2021;5(1):913-20.
18. Moradirad R, Haghighat M, Yazdanirad S, Hajizadeh R, Shabgard Z, Mousavi SM. Selection of the most suitable sound control method using fuzzy hierarchical technique. J Heal Saf Work. 2019;8(4):371-82.
19. Askaripoor T, Kazemi E, Aghaei H, Marzban M. Evaluating and comparison of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process in ranking and quantitative safety risk analysis (case study: a combined cycle power plant). Saf Prom Inj Prev. 2015;3(3):169-74. [DOI]
20. Akaa OU, Abu A, Spearpoint M, Giovinazzi S. A group-AHP decision analysis for the selection of applied fire protection to steel structures. Fi Saf J. 2016;86:95-105. [DOI]
21. Omidvar M, Mazlomi A, MohammadFam I, Rahimi Foroushani A, Nirumand F. Development of a framework for assessing organizational performance based on resilience engineering and using fuzzy AHP method: A case study of petrochemical plant. Heal Saf Work. 2016;6(3):43-58.
22. Pinion C, Brewer S, Douphrate D, Whitehead L, DelliFraine J, Taylor WC, et al. The impact of job control on employee perception of management commitment to safety. Saf Sci. 2017;93:70-5. [DOI]
23. Ntzeremes P, Kirytopoulos K. Evaluating the role of risk assessment for road tunnel fire safety: A comparative review within the EU. J Tra Trans Eng. 2019;6(3):282-96. [DOI]
24. Hosseini N, Givehchi S, Maknoon R. Cost-based fire risk assessment in natural gas industry by means of fuzzy FTA and ETA. J Los Prev Proc Indu. 2020;63(1):104025. [DOI]
25. Park J, Sung K, Li L, Choi J, Kim D, Lee SH, et al. Numerical Study of Fire Behavior Induced by Gas Leakage in Combined Cycle Power Plant. J ILA Kor. 2015;20(2):107-13. [DOI]
26. Obrenovic B, Jianguo D, Khudaykulov A, Khan MAS. Work-family conflict impact on psychological safety and psychological well-being: A job performance model. Fron Psych. 2020;11(2):475-481. [DOI] [PubMed]
27. Kanta L, Zechman E, Brumbelow K. Multiobjective evolutionary computation approach for redesigning water distribution systems to provide fire flows. J Wat ResPla Mana. 2012;138(2):144-52.
28. Zare A, Yazdani Rad S, Dehghani F, Omidi F, Mohammadfam I. Assessment and analysis of studies related human error in Iran: A systematic review. Heal Saf Work. 2017;7(3):267-78.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Occupational Hygiene Engineering

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb