IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v10y2022i5p811-d763457.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Evaluation: Brief Review and Innovation Model Based on Fuzzy Logic and MCDM

Author

Listed:
  • Stevan Djenadic

    (Faculty of Mining and Geology, University of Belgrade, 11120 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Milos Tanasijevic

    (Faculty of Mining and Geology, University of Belgrade, 11120 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Predrag Jovancic

    (Faculty of Mining and Geology, University of Belgrade, 11120 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Dragan Ignjatovic

    (Faculty of Mining and Geology, University of Belgrade, 11120 Belgrade, Serbia)

  • Dejan Petrovic

    (Technical Faculty in Bor, University of Belgrade, 19210 Bor, Serbia)

  • Ugljesa Bugaric

    (Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Belgrade, 11120 Belgrade, Serbia)

Abstract

The risk assessment of engineering systems represents an important part of the quality of service and dependability. The existing methods for risk evaluation use crisp sets for rating partial indicators’ proposition and their cumulative products as an overall indicator. In this paper, existing FMEA and FMECA methods have been improved using the fuzzy expert system for calculating the risk priority number. The application of fuzzy logic allows the use of linguistic descriptions for risk analysis. In this way, the state of the system in terms of risks and consequences is better described. The settings of the fuzzy systems are based on the application of two multi-criteria decision-making methods. The AHP method was used to define the mutual relationship of the impact of partial indicators (occurrence, severity, and detectability) on risk. In this way, subjectivity in risk assessment is reduced. In the composition of the fuzzy model, the TOPSIS method is introduced to reduce the dissipation of results, which contributes to the accuracy of the outcome. This contributes to the accuracy of the results. The results were verified through a case study of a complex engineering system—bucket-wheel excavators. The risk was observed from the aspect of the danger of damage and the danger of downtime. The initial information for weak points of ES is defined according to historical damage events and statistics of downtime. Expert knowledge was used for weak points grading in the model. Additional model verification was performed using similar methods, using the same input data. The innovative model, presented in the paper, shows that it is possible to correct different weights of risk indicators. The obtained results show less dispersion compared with other existing methods. Weak points with increased risk have been located, and an algorithm has been proposed for risk-based maintenance application and implementation.

Suggested Citation

  • Stevan Djenadic & Milos Tanasijevic & Predrag Jovancic & Dragan Ignjatovic & Dejan Petrovic & Ugljesa Bugaric, 2022. "Risk Evaluation: Brief Review and Innovation Model Based on Fuzzy Logic and MCDM," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-26, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:5:p:811-:d:763457
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/5/811/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/5/811/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yeter, B. & Garbatov, Y. & Guedes Soares, C., 2020. "Risk-based maintenance planning of offshore wind turbine farms," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    2. Konstantinos, Ioannou & Georgios, Tsantopoulos & Garyfalos, Arabatzis, 2019. "A Decision Support System methodology for selecting wind farm installation locations using AHP and TOPSIS: Case study in Eastern Macedonia and Thrace region, Greece," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 232-246.
    3. Carless, Travis S. & Redus, Kenneth & Dryden, Rachel, 2021. "Estimating nuclear proliferation and security risks in emerging markets using Bayesian Belief Networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    4. Ivan Jankovic & Stevan Djenadic & Dragan Ignjatovic & Predrag Jovancic & Tomislav Subaranovic & Ivica Ristovic, 2019. "Multi-Criteria Approach for Selecting Optimal Dozer Type in Open-Cast Coal Mining," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-16, June.
    5. Miroslav Crnogorac & Miloš Tanasijević & Dušan Danilović & Vesna Karović Maričić & Branko Leković, 2020. "Selection of Artificial Lift Methods: A Brief Review and New Model Based on Fuzzy Logic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15, April.
    6. An, Jaehyung & Mikhaylov, Alexey & Jung, Sang-Uk, 2021. "A Linear Programming approach for robust network revenue management in the airline industry," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    7. Stevan Djenadic & Dragan Ignjatovic & Milos Tanasijevic & Ugljesa Bugaric & Ivan Jankovic & Tomislav Subaranovic, 2019. "Development of the Availability Concept by Using Fuzzy Theory with AHP Correction, a Case Study: Bulldozers in the Open-Pit Lignite Mine," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-18, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nebojša Gnjatović & Srđan Bošnjak & Aleksandar Stefanović, 2022. "Analysis of the Dynamic Response as a Basis for the Efficient Protection of Large Structure Health Using Controllable Frequency-Controlled Drives," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-38, December.
    2. Chia-Nan Wang & Nhat-Luong Nhieu & Chen-Te Chiang & Yen-Hui Wang, 2024. "Assessing Southeast Asia countries’ potential in the semiconductor supply chain: an objectively weighting multi-criteria decision-making approach," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Miljan Gomilanovic & Milos Tanasijevic & Sasa Stepanovic, 2022. "Determining the Availability of Continuous Systems at Open Pits Applying Fuzzy Logic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-24, September.
    2. Sadeghian, Omid & Mohammadpour Shotorbani, Amin & Mohammadi-Ivatloo, Behnam & Sadiq, Rehan & Hewage, Kasun, 2021. "Risk-averse maintenance scheduling of generation units in combined heat and power systems with demand response," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    3. Mohammed Ifkirne & Houssam El Bouhi & Siham Acharki & Quoc Bao Pham & Abdelouahed Farah & Nguyen Thi Thuy Linh, 2022. "Multi-Criteria GIS-Based Analysis for Mapping Suitable Sites for Onshore Wind Farms in Southeast France," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-26, October.
    4. Philip E. Tetlock & Christopher Karvetski & Ville A. Satopää & Kevin Chen, 2024. "Long‐range subjective‐probability forecasts of slow‐motion variables in world politics: Exploring limits on expert judgment," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), March.
    5. Sylwester Kozak, 2021. "The Impact of COVID-19 on Bank Equity and Performance: The Case of Central Eastern South European Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-15, October.
    6. Maarten Wolsink, 2020. "Framing in Renewable Energy Policies: A Glossary," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-31, June.
    7. Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Jarosław Wątróbski & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-40, December.
    8. Olga Porro & Francesc Pardo-Bosch & Núria Agell & Mónica Sánchez, 2020. "Understanding Location Decisions of Energy Multinational Enterprises within the European Smart Cities’ Context: An Integrated AHP and Extended Fuzzy Linguistic TOPSIS Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-29, May.
    9. Jahangiri, Mehdi & Rezaei, Mostafa & Mostafaeipour, Ali & Goojani, Afsaneh Raiesi & Saghaei, Hamed & Hosseini Dehshiri, Seyyed Jalaladdin & Hosseini Dehshiri, Seyyed Shahabaddin, 2022. "Prioritization of solar electricity and hydrogen co-production stations considering PV losses and different types of solar trackers: A TOPSIS approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 889-903.
    10. Styliani Karamountzou & Dimitra G. Vagiona, 2023. "Suitability and Sustainability Assessment of Existing Onshore Wind Farms in Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, January.
    11. Sara Mehrab Daniali & Sergey Evgenievich Barykin & Farzin Mohammadbeigi Khortabi & Olga Vladimirovna Kalinina & Olga Anatolievna Tcukanova & Elena Konstantinovna Torosyan & Svetlana Poliakova & Sergey, 2022. "An Employee Competency Framework in a Welfare Organization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-20, February.
    12. Zaffar Ahmed Shaikh & Polina Datsyuk & Laura M. Baitenova & Larisa Belinskaja & Natalia Ivolgina & Gulmira Rysmakhanova & Tomonobu Senjyu, 2022. "Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Renewable Energy Firm’s Profitability and Capitalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-15, June.
    13. Bacha Kebede Debela, 2022. "Inter-Organizational Bench-Learning to Respond to Climate Change and Reduce Trade-Offs in Urban Drinking Water Supply: The Case of Grade 2B Municipalities in Oromia National Regional State, Ethiopia," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(3), pages 21582440221, September.
    14. Kanato Tamashiro & Talal Alharbi & Alexey Mikhaylov & Ashraf M. Hemeida & Narayanan Krishnan & Mohammed Elsayed Lotfy & Tomonobu Senjyu, 2021. "Investigation of Home Energy Management with Advanced Direct Load Control and Optimal Scheduling of Controllable Loads," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-14, November.
    15. Konstantinos Ioannou & Dimitrios Myronidis, 2021. "Automatic Detection of Photovoltaic Farms Using Satellite Imagery and Convolutional Neural Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, May.
    16. Rasmus Dovnborg Frederiksen & Grzegorz Bocewicz & Grzegorz Radzki & Zbigniew Banaszak & Peter Nielsen, 2024. "Cost-Effectiveness of Predictive Maintenance for Offshore Wind Farms: A Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-24, June.
    17. Alaa Alden Al Mohamed & Sobhi Al Mohamed & Moustafa Zino, 2023. "Application of fuzzy multicriteria decision-making model in selecting pandemic hospital site," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-22, December.
    18. Nikita Moiseev & Aleksander Sorokin & Natalya Zvezdina & Alexey Mikhaylov & Lyubov Khomyakova & Mir Sayed Shah Danish, 2021. "Credit Risk Theoretical Model on the Base of DCC-GARCH in Time-Varying Parameters Framework," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(19), pages 1-12, September.
    19. Liang Cui & Ye Xu & Ling Xu & Guohe Huang, 2021. "Wind Farm Location Special Optimization Based on Grid GIS and Choquet Fuzzy Integral Method in Dalian City, China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-13, April.
    20. Gao, Jing & Wang, Chao & Wang, Zhanwu & Lin, Jin & Zhang, Runkai & Wu, Xin & Xu, Guangyin & Wang, Zhenfeng, 2024. "Site selection decision for biomass cogeneration projects from a sustainable perspective: A case study of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:5:p:811-:d:763457. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.