Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Volume 2016, Article ID 1718257, 10 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/1718257
Research Article

Risk Analysis Based on AHP and Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation for Maglev Train Bogie

Engineering Research Center of Maglev Technology, College of Mechatronics Engineering and Automation, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China

Received 15 September 2015; Revised 17 December 2015; Accepted 22 December 2015

Academic Editor: Jurgita Antucheviciene

Copyright © 2016 Chengxin Fan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. J.-W. Han, J.-D. Kim, and S.-Y. Song, “Fatigue strength evaluation of a bogie frame for urban maglev train with fatigue test on full-scale test rig,” Engineering Failure Analysis, vol. 31, pp. 412–420, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. P. Cui, J. Li, and D. S. Liu, “Carrying capacity for the electromagnetic suspension low-speed maglev train on the horizontal curve,” Science China Technological Sciences, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1082–1087, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets,” Information and Computation, vol. 8, pp. 338–353, 1965. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  4. T. L. Saaty, “A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 234–281, 1977. View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  5. J.-F. Chen, H.-N. Hsieh, and Q. H. Do, “Evaluating teaching performance based on fuzzy AHP and comprehensive evaluation approach,” Applied Soft Computing Journal, vol. 28, pp. 100–108, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. A. Ishizaka and A. Labib, “Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 14336–14345, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. B. Srdjevic and Y. D. P. Medeiros, “Fuzzy AHP assessment of water management plans,” Water Resources Management, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 877–894, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. Q. Nian, S. Shi, and R. Li, “Research and application of safety assessment method of gas explosion accident in coal mine based on GRA-ANP-FCE,” Procedia Engineering, vol. 45, pp. 106–111, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  9. S. Su, X. Chen, S. D. DeGloria, and J. Wu, “Integrative fuzzy set pair model for land ecological security assessment: a case study of Xiaolangdi Reservoir Region, China,” Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 639–647, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. C.-H. Yeh, H. Deng, and Y.-H. Chang, “Fuzzy multicriteria analysis for performance evaluation of bus companies,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 126, no. 3, pp. 459–473, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at Scopus
  11. A. Roozbahani, B. Zahraie, and M. Tabesh, “Integrated risk assessment of urban water supply systems from source to tap,” Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 923–944, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. Z. Song, H. Zhu, G. Jia, and C. He, “Comprehensive evaluation on self-ignition risks of coal stockpiles using fuzzy AHP approaches,” Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 78–94, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. J. Yang, H. Sun, L. Wang, L. Li, and B. Wu, “Vulnerability evaluation of the highway transportation system against meteorological disasters,” Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 96, pp. 280–293, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  14. Z. Ren, Fatigue Analysis and Simulation of Maglev Bogie in Low-Medium Speed Maglev Train, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, China, 2005.
  15. C. Huang, W. Xu, S. Yao, and B. Zheng, “Low-medium speed maglev train bogie anti-roll beam structure optimization,” Rolling Stock, vol. 51, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  16. B. Tong, Risk Analysis of the Critical Systems in Medium-Low Speed Maglev Train and its Application Research, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, China, 2014.
  17. J. K. Levy, “Multiple criteria decision making and decision support systems for flood risk management,” Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 438–447, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at Scopus
  18. Y. Han, W. Zhou, and X. Zhang, “Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of the adaptability of an expressway system,” Journal of Highway and Transportation Research and Development, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 97–103, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  19. H. Yuan and W. Cai, “The model combined the BT project and land development risk assessment research,” Systems Engineering Procedia, vol. 1, pp. 250–256, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  20. E. Cagno, F. Caron, and A. Perego, “Multi-criteria assessment of the probability of winning in the competitive bidding process,” International Journal of Project Management, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 313–324, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. C. A. Ericson, Hazard Analysis Techniques for System Safety, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2005.
  22. International Electrotechnical Commission, IEC 62278: Railway Applications—Specification and Demonstration of Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety (RAMS), IEC Central Office, Geneva, Switzerland, 2002.
  23. G.-S. Liang, “Fuzzy MCDM based on ideal and anti-ideal concepts,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 112, no. 3, pp. 682–691, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. E. Triantaphyllou and L. Chi-Tun, “Development and evaluation of five fuzzy multiattribute decision-making methods,” International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 281–310, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at Scopus
  25. D. Dubois and H. Prade, “Operations on fuzzy numbers,” International Journal of Systems Science, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 613–626, 1978. View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  26. E. K. Zavadskas and J. Antucheviciene, “Multiple criteria evaluation of rural building's regeneration alternatives,” Building and Environment, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 436–451, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. X. Yihong and S. Mengju, “Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of beverage enterprise risks from system engineering perspective,” Systems Engineering Procedia, vol. 3, pp. 240–248, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  28. O. S. Vaidya and S. Kumar, “Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 169, no. 1, pp. 1–29, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus