CC BY-NC 3.0 Polska

Haulage System Selection for Parvadeh Coal mine Using Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods

Mohsen Safari 2  ,  
Shahrood University of Technology, Department of Mining Engineering,Iran
Birjand University of Technology
Mining Science 2019;26:69–89
One of the key components of any project, especially mining projects, is the selection and design of haulage equipment. In most mining activities, which sometimes contain the mining machinery, haulage costs form a major part of the operating expenses so that the issue becomes a matter of concern for mine managers. The process of selecting the haulage system is not a crystal clear one because of various factors affecting the selection, leading to the complexity and multi-criterion characteristic of it. Therefore, the use of multi-criterion decision-making methods can help to solve this problem. The TOPSIS, AHP, VIKOR methods among the multi-criterion decision-making methods are some options based on priority ranking. In this paper, the loading systems of conveyors, wagons and winches as well as the locomotives and wagons are investigated. Then, the aforementioned systems are used to make a hybrid based on eight criteria, which yields the best loading system for the Parvadeh coal mine in Tabas. In order to use the above methods, some integration techniques were utilized because the results were not consistent with each other in some cases. After integrating the results of the ranking methods, the conveyor haulage system was eventually introduced as the best option.
Mohsen Safari   
Birjand University of Technology
1. AGHAJANI A., OSANLOO M., October 2007, Application of AHP–TOPSIS method for loading-haulage equipment selection in open pit mines, [in:] XXVII International Mining Convention, Mexico, pp. 12–16.
2. AKYUZ E., KARAHALIOS H., CELIK M., 2015, Assessment of the maritime labour convention com-pliance using balanced scorecard and analytic hierarchy process approach, Maritime Policy and Management, 42(2), pp. 145–162.
3. BASÇETIN A., 2004, An application of the analytic hierarchy process in equipment selection at Orhaneli open pit coal mine, Mining Technology, 113(3), pp. 192–199.
4. CHEN S.J., HWANG C.L., 1992, Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods, [in:] Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 289–486.
5. DESPODOV Z., MITIĆ S., PELTEČKI D., 2011, Application of the AHP method for selection of a trans-portation system in mine planning, Podzemni radovi, (19), pp. 93–99.
6. ELSAYED E.A., SHAIK DAWOOD A.K., KARTHIKEYAN R., 2017, Evaluating Alternatives through the Application of Topsis Method with Entropy Weight, International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT), Vol. 46(2).
7. ISHIZAKA A., LABIB A., 2009, Analytic hierarchy process and expert choice: Benefits and limitations, Or Insight, 22(4), pp. 201–220.
8. JAHANSHAHLOO G.R., LOTFI F.H., IZADIKHAH M., 2006, Extension of the TOPSIS method for decision-making problems with fuzzy data, Applied Mathematics and Computation, 181(2), pp. 1544–1551.
9. KARAHALIOS H., 2017, The application of the AHP-TOPSIS for evaluating ballast water treatment systems by ship operators, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 52, pp. 172–184.
10. KARAHALIOS H., YANG Z.L., WILLIAMS V., WANG J., 2011, A proposed System of Hierarchical Scorecards to assess the implementation of maritime regulations, Safety Science, 49(3), pp. 450–462.
11. MATSUI K., 2001, Underdround Mining Transportation System, Civil Engineering.
12. MAVI R.K., GOH M., MAVI N.K., 2016, Supplier selection with Shannon entropy and fuzzy TOPSIS in the context of supply chain risk management, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 235, pp. 216–225.
13. MIZRAK ÖZFIRAT P., ÖZFIRAT M.K., MALLI T., 2017, Selection of coal transportation mode from the open pit mine to the thermic power plant using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process, Transport, pp. 1–8.
14. OPRICOVIC S., TZENG G.H., 2004, Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), pp. 445–455.
15. POWELL F., MORETON G., 1984, An evaluation of brake block materials for underground locomotives. International Conference on Tribology in Mineral Extraction, Paper C349/84 – Institution of Mechanical Engineers.
16. SAATY T.L., 1980, The analytic hierarchy process: planning. Priority Setting. Resource Allocation, MacGraw-Hill, New York International Book Company.
17. SAATY T.L., 1994, How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process, Interfaces, 24(6), pp. 19–43.
18. SAFARI M., ATAEI M., KHALOKAKAIE R., KARAMOZIAN M., 2010, Mineral processing plant location using the analytic hierarchy process – a case study: the Sangan iron ore mine (phase 1), Mining Science and Technology (China), 20(5), pp. 691–695.
19. SAHEBI A., JALALIFAR H., EBRAHIMI M., ABDOLREZAEE A., 2010, Stability analysis of Tabas coal mine roadway using empirical and numerical methods.
20. TAJVIDI ASR E., HAYATY M., RAFIEE R., ATAIE M., JALALI S.E., 2015, Selection of Optimum Tunnel Support System Using Aggregated Ranking of SAW, TOPSIS and LA Methods, International Journal of Applied Operational Research – An Open Access Journal, 5(4), pp. 49–63.
21. TZENG G.H., HUANG J.J., 2011, Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications, CRC Press.
22. ΤZIMOPOULOS C., ZORMPA D., EVANGELIDES C., 2013, Multi Criteria Decision Making Using VIKOR Method. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology.
23. Underground locomotive haulage Mines Topic Report, 1991, Available free from HM Inspectorate of Mines, St Anne’s House, Stanley Precinct, Bootle L20 3RA.
24. VEISI H., LIAGHATI H., ALIPOUR A., 2016, Developing an ethics-based approach to indicators of sustainable agriculture using analytic hierarchy process (AHP), Ecological Indicators, 60, pp. 644–654.
25. WALKER S.C., 2012, Mine winding and transport, Elsevier.
26. YETKIN M.E., SIMSIR F., OZFIRAT M.K., OZFIRAT P.M., YENICE H., 2016, A fuzzy approach to selecting roof supports in longwall mining, South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 27(1), pp. 162–177.
27. YOON K.P., HWANG C.L., 1995, Multiple attribute decision making: an introduction, Vol. 104, Sage publications.
Copy url
Sign up for email alerts