IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/waterr/v38y2024i12d10.1007_s11269-024-03888-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enhanced Methods for Evaluating Water-inrush Risk from Underlying Aquifers: Incorporating Dynamic Weight Theory and Uncertainty Analysis Model

Author

Listed:
  • Ning Li

    (China University of Mining and Technology-Beijing
    China University of Mining and Technology-Beijing)

  • Wenfeng Du

    (China University of Mining and Technology-Beijing)

Abstract

Accurately gauging the risk of water inrush from underlying aquifers is paramount for ensuring safety in coal mine production. This paper presents an Improved Vulnerability Index Model for water-inrush (IVIM), a risk evaluation system built upon eight factors influencing coal-floor water inrush events. Firstly, the Combined Weight Method (CWM) was utilized to establish static comprehensive weights. Then, the Dynamic Weight Theory (DWT) facilitated the construction of a zoning variable weight model to determine the dynamic weights of controlling factors. Finally, the Uncertainty Analysis Model (UAM) was employed to create a linear uncertainty measure function for determining risk levels. The model was applied to the Qipanjing Mine in Inner Mongolia and compared against the Traditional Vulnerability Index Model (TVIM). Results indicated higher inrush risks in the southern and western parts of the study area compared to the eastern and northern sections, with geological structural regions exhibiting significantly greater risks. Monitoring water pressure and detecting fracture structures represent critical priorities. Compared to TVIM, IVIM yielded a 28% proportion of relative danger and danger zones, surpassing the 19% identified by TVIM. The model’s effectiveness was validated utilizing the Fitting Rate of Water-inrush Points (FRWP), with IVIM achieving a 100% FRWP—significantly exceeding TVIM’s 66.67%. IVIM effectively addresses the issue of localized weight variation in the study area and risk area outline under uncertain working conditions, aspects overlooked by TVIM. This method demonstrates a significant advantage in assessing the risk of water inrush from aquifers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ning Li & Wenfeng Du, 2024. "Enhanced Methods for Evaluating Water-inrush Risk from Underlying Aquifers: Incorporating Dynamic Weight Theory and Uncertainty Analysis Model," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 38(12), pages 4615-4631, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:waterr:v:38:y:2024:i:12:d:10.1007_s11269-024-03888-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11269-024-03888-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11269-024-03888-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11269-024-03888-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hedi Mahmoudpour & Somaye Janatrostami & Afshin Ashrafzadeh, 2023. "Optimal Design of Groundwater Quality Monitoring Network Using Aquifer Vulnerability Map," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 37(2), pages 797-818, January.
    2. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. James J. H. Liou & Perry C. Y. Liu & Huai-Wei Lo, 2020. "A Failure Mode Assessment Model Based on Neutrosophic Logic for Switched-Mode Power Supply Risk Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, December.
    2. Zarei, Esmaeil & Khan, Faisal & Abbassi, Rouzbeh, 2021. "Importance of human reliability in process operation: A critical analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    3. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Ramin Bazrafshan & Fatih Ecer & Çağlar Karamaşa, 2022. "The Suitability-Feasibility-Acceptability Strategy Integrated with Bayesian BWM-MARCOS Methods to Determine the Optimal Lithium Battery Plant Located in South America," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(14), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Paul, Ananna & Shukla, Nagesh & Trianni, Andrea, 2023. "Modelling supply chain sustainability challenges in the food processing sector amid the COVID-19 outbreak," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PA).
    5. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    6. Martín-García, Jaime & Gómez-Limón, José A. & Arriaza, Manuel, 2024. "Conversion to organic farming: Does it change the economic and environmental performance of fruit farms?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    7. Salimi, Negin & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Evaluating firms’ R&D performance using best worst method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 147-155.
    8. Željko Stević & Irena Đalić & Dragan Pamučar & Zdravko Nunić & Slavko Vesković & Marko Vasiljević & Ilija Tanackov, 2019. "A new hybrid model for quality assessment of scientific conferences based on Rough BWM and SERVQUAL," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 1-30, April.
    9. Wu, Xingli & Liao, Huchang, 2021. "Modeling personalized cognition of customers in online shopping," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    10. Ravindra Singh Saluja & Varinder Singh, 2023. "Attribute-based characterization, coding, and selection of joining processes using a novel MADM approach," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 60(2), pages 616-655, June.
    11. Zheng Yuan & Baohua Wen & Cheng He & Jin Zhou & Zhonghua Zhou & Feng Xu, 2022. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis to Rural Spatial Sustainability Evaluation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-31, May.
    12. Kavitha, S. & Satheeshkumar, J. & Amudha, T., 2024. "Multi-label feature selection using q-rung orthopair hesitant fuzzy MCDM approach extended to CODAS," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 148-173.
    13. Junli Zhang & Guoteng Wang & Zheng Xu & Zheren Zhang, 2022. "A Comprehensive Evaluation Method and Strengthening Measures for AC/DC Hybrid Power Grids," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-20, June.
    14. Hamzeh Soltanali & Mehdi Khojastehpour & Siamak Kheybari, 2023. "Evaluating the critical success factors for maintenance management in agro-industries using multi-criteria decision-making techniques," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 949-968, June.
    15. Yossi Hadad & Baruch Keren & Dima Alberg, 2023. "An Expert System for Ranking and Matching Electric Vehicles to Customer Specifications and Requirements," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-18, May.
    16. Jen-Jen Yang & Yen-Ching Chuang & Huai-Wei Lo & Ting-I Lee, 2020. "A Two-Stage MCDM Model for Exploring the Influential Relationships of Sustainable Sports Tourism Criteria in Taichung City," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-16, March.
    17. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    18. Faruk Dayi & Ali Cilesiz & Mustafa Yucel, 2024. "Strategic Management of Clean Energy Investments: Financial Performance Insights by Using BWM-based VIKOR and TOPSIS Methods," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 14(5), pages 566-574, September.
    19. Besharati Fard, Moein & Moradian, Parisa & Emarati, Mohammadreza & Ebadi, Mehdi & Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Abdoulmohammad & Klemeŝ, Jiří Jaromír, 2022. "Ground-mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: A case study Guilan province," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    20. Aleksandar Aleksić & Danijela Tadić, 2023. "Industrial and Management Applications of Type-2 Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Techniques Extended with Type-2 Fuzzy Sets from 2013 to 2022," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-24, May.

    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:spr:waterr:v:38:y:2024:i:12:d:10.1007_s11269-024-03888-8. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.