Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investigation and prioritization of risk factors in the collision of two passenger trains based on fuzzy COPRAS and fuzzy DEMATEL methods

  • Methodologies and Application
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Identifying the critical risk factors in train accidents play a vital role in the prevention of their recurrence in the future. However, this is a complex procedure due to the fact that it includes decision making and depends on a large number of relevant factors. In order to resolve this problem, first, this study made an effort to identify the risk factors in the collision of two passenger trains near the “Haft Khan Station” between Semnan and Damghan using the interview technique and the questionnaire survey technique which focused on railway industry experts’ opinions and treated them as decision makers. Second, it developed a new framework of risk assessment by prioritizing the identified risk factors in the collision of two passenger trains in order to remedy all of the deficiencies and to improve the safety of railway transportation. Therefore, risk assessment of contributory factors in the collision was based on multi-criteria decision-making approaches such as fuzzy complex proportional assessment (COPRAS) and fuzzy decision making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL). Accordingly, the study prioritized the risk factors in the collision of two passenger trains including management, individual and environmental conditions, and reaction to events regarding Fuzzy COPRAS and Fuzzy DEMATEL. Finally, sensitivity analysis indicated that the fuzzy DEMATEL had a better performance than the fuzzy COPRAS method. More specifically, it: (a) prioritized the risk factors in a better way due to its higher Spearman’s ranking correlation coefficient; (b) facilitated the cause-effect analysis; and (c) was in line with the real collected observation data. In regard to Fuzzy DEMATEL model, the results showed that the critical risk factor with the highest rank was the stop of the front train at the back of the hill. Moreover, the critical risk factor with the lowest rank was the absence of the installation of the Balise system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aher SB, Tiwari DR (2018) Railway disasters in India: causes, effects and management. Int J Rev Res Soc Sci 6(2):125–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Akyuz E, Celik E (2015) A fuzzy DEMATEL method to evaluate critical operational hazards during gas freeing process in crude oil tankers. J Loss Prev Process Ind 38:243–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2015.10.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Tmeemy SMH, Abdul-Rahman H, Harun Z (2012) Contractors’ perception of the use of costs of quality system in Malaysian building construction projects. Int J Project Manag 30(7):827–838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.12.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amoozad Mahdiraji H, Arzaghi S, Stauskis G, Zavadskas EK (2018) A hybrid fuzzy BWM-COPRAS method for analyzing key factors of sustainable architecture. Sustainability 10(5):1626. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • An M, Huang S, Baker CJ (2007) Railway risk assessment-the fuzzy reasoning approach and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approaches: a case study of shunting at waterloo depot. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part F J Rail Rapid Transit 221(3):365–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • An M, Lin W, Huang S (2013) An intelligent railway safety risk assessment support system for railway operation and maintenance analysis. Open Transp J 7(1):27–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asgari A (2016) The train of crisis. Retrieved 5 Dec 2016. http://disasterman.Blogfa.Com/?p=4 (in Persian)

  • Baradaran V (2017) Assessment and prioritizing the risks of urban rail transportation by using grey analytical hierarchy process (GAHP). Int J Transp Eng 4(4):255–273. https://doi.org/10.22119/ijte.2017.44430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bausys R, Zavadskas EK, Kaklauskas A (2015) Application of neutrosophic set to multicriteria decision making by COPRAS. Econ Comput Econ Cybern Stud Res 49(2):84–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Baysari MT, McIntosh AS, Wilson JR (2008) Understanding the human factors contribution to railway accidents and incidents in Australia. Accid Anal Prev 40(5):1750–1757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braut GS, Solberg Ø, Njå O (2014) Organizational effects of experience from accidents. Learning in the aftermath of the Tretten and Åsta train accidents. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 69:354–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buck L (1963) Errors in the perception op railway signals. Ergonomics 6(2):181–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Can GF, Toktas P (2018) A novel fuzzy risk matrix based risk assessment approach. Kybernetes 47(9):1721–1751. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-12-2017-0497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang B, Chang CW, Wu CH (2011) Fuzzy DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection criteria. Exp Syst Appl 38(3):1850–1858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edkins GD, Pollock CM (1997) The influence of sustained attention on railway accidents. Accid Anal Prev 29(4):533–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eftekhari A, Mirzaei S, Norouzinia R, Atighechian G (2018) Investigating the factors affecting the collision of two passenger trains: a case study. J Disaster Emerg Res 1(2):59–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans AW (2011) Fatal train accidents on Europe’s railways: 1980–2009. Accid Anal Prev 43(1):391–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.09.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farsnews agency (2016) Details of the collision of passenger trains at the seventh channel/2 major errors due to the incident 2016. Retrieved 26 Nov 2016 http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13950906001729 (in Persian)

  • Gitinavard H, Mousavi SM, Vahdani B (2017) Soft computing-based new interval-valued hesitant fuzzy multi-criteria group assessment method with last aggregation to industrial decision problems. Soft Comput 21(12):3247–3265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-015-2006-9

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Grassi A, Gamberini R, Mora C, Rimini B (2009) A fuzzy multi-attribute model for risk evaluation in workplaces. Saf Sci 47(5):707–716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2008.10.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadj-Mabrouk H (2019) Contribution of artificial intelligence to risk assessment of railway accidents. Urban Rail Transit 5(2):104–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han Y, Deng Y (2018) An enhanced fuzzy evidential DEMATEL method with its application to identify critical success factors. Soft Comput 22(15):5073–5090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hani Tabai B, Bagheri M, Sadeghi-Firoozabadi V, Shahidi V, Mirasadi H (2018) Impact of train drivers’ cognitive responses on rail accidents. Transp Res Rec 2672(10):260–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatefi SM (2018) Strategic planning of urban transportation system based on sustainable development dimensions using an integrated SWOT and fuzzy COPRAS approach. Glob J Environ Sci Manag 4(1):99–112. https://doi.org/10.22034/gjesm.2018.04.01.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E (1999) Accident analysis and barrier functions. Project TRAIN, IFE

  • Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) (2016) From the railroad, a preliminary report of the incident involving passenger trains was published 2016. Retrieved 27 Nov 2016. http://www.isna.ir/news/95090704432 (in persian)

  • Jeng JF (2015) Generating a causal model of supply chain collaboration using the fuzzy DEMATEL technique. Comput Ind Eng 87:283–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khairnar KF, Ingle ST, Wagh ND, Ingale LT (2011) Monitoring of railway traffic pollution and health effects on exposed population. Nat Environ Pollut Technol 10(3):377–384

    Google Scholar 

  • Klockner K, Toft Y (2015) Accident modelling of railway safety occurrences: the safety and failure event network (SAFE-Net) method. Procedia Manuf 3:1734–1741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kontovas CA, Psaraftis HN (2009) Formal safety assessment: a critical review. Mar Technol 46(1):45–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumru M, Kumru PY (2013) Fuzzy FMEA application to improve purchasing process in a public hospital. Appl Soft Comput 13(1):721–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2012.08.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin RJ (2013) Using fuzzy DEMATEL to evaluate the green supply chain management practices. J Clean Prod 40:32–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.06.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu X, Barkan CP, Saat MR (2011) Analysis of derailments by accident cause: evaluating railroad track upgrades to reduce transportation risk. Transp Res Rec 2261(1):178–185. https://doi.org/10.3141/2261-21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luthra SK, Govindan K, Kharb RK, Mangla SK (2016) Evaluating the enablers in solar power developments in the current scenario using fuzzy DEMATEL: an Indian perspective. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 63:379–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsumoto M (2006) Learning from past railway accidents—progress of train control. Jpn Railw Transp Rev 43(44):88–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsumoto A, Michitsuji Y, Tobita Y (2016) Analysis of train-overturn derailments caused by excessive curving speed. Int J Railw Technol 5:27–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mentes A, Akyildiz H, Yetkin M, Turkoglu N (2015) A FSA based fuzzy DEMATEL approach for risk assessment of cargo ships at coasts and open seas of Turkey. Saf Sci 79:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.05.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patil SK, Kant R (2014) A hybrid approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL and FMCDM to predict success of knowledge management adoption in supply chain. Appl Soft Comput 18:126–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patil M, Shinde D, Hailkar S (2017) Risk management in railway projects. Int Res J Eng Technol 4(6):1811–1817

    Google Scholar 

  • Profillidis VA (2006) Railway management and engineering. Aldershot. Ashgate, Hampshire

    Google Scholar 

  • Redmill F (2002) Risk analysis-a subjective process. Eng Manag J 12(2):91–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach S, Viale A (2006) Application of a human error framework to conduct train accident/incident investigations. Accid Anal Prev 38(2):396–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2005.10.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez L, Pinedo Zamalloa C, López Orbe I, Aguado Castrillo M, Astorga Burgo J, Higuero Aperribay MV et al (2016) Eurobalise-train communication modelling to assess interferences in railway control signalling systems. Netw Protoc Algorithms 8:58–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roozbahani A, Ghased H, Shahedany MH (2020) Inter-basin water transfer planning with grey COPRAS and fuzzy COPRAS techniques: a case study in Iranian Central Plateau. Sci Total Environ 726:138499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadeghi J, Akbari B (2006) Field investigation on effects of railway track geometric parameters on rail wear. J Zhejiang Univ Sci A 7(11):1846–1855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salamatnews (2016) Rail crash rates in Iran are 18 times the world average. Retrieved 26 Nov 2016. http://www.salamatnews.com/news/199195/ (in Persian)

  • Seker S, Zavadskas EK (2017) Application of fuzzy DEMATEL method for analyzing occupational risks on construction sites. Sustainability 9(11):2083. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9112083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sekulova J, Nedeliakova E (2015) Risks assessment in railway passenger transport in relation to cutomers. Department of Railway Transport Faculty of PEDAS University of Žilina in Žilina, pp 79–89

  • Shieh JI, Wu HH, Huang KK (2010) A DEMATEL method in identifying key success factors of hospital service quality. Knowl Based Syst 23(3):277–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2010.01.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun YQ (2018) Mitigating train derailments due to sharp curve and overspeed. Front Mech Eng 4:8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sussman ED, Raslear TG (2007) Railroad human factors. Rev Hum Fact Ergon 3(1):148–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toklu MC (2017) Determination of customer loyalty levels by using fuzzy MCDM approaches. Acta Phys Pol, A 132(3):650–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai SB, Chien MF, Xue Y, Li L, Jiang X, Chen Q, Zhou J, Wang L (2015) Using the fuzzy DEMATEL to determine environmental performance: a case of printed circuit board industry in Taiwan. PLoS ONE 10(6):e0129153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turla T, Liu X, Zhang Z (2019) Analysis of freight train collision risk in the United States. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part F J Rail Rapid Transit 233(8):817–830. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954409718811742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyrell D, Jacobsen K, Martinez E, Perlman AB (2006) Train-to-train impact test of crash energy management passenger rail equipment: structural results. ASME Int Mech Eng Congr Expos 47780:35–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood P, Waterson P (2014) Systems thinking, the Swiss Cheese Model and accident analysis: a comparative systemic analysis of the Grayrigg train derailment using the ATSB, AcciMap and STAMP models. Accid Anal Prev 68:75–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.07.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ünver M, Cil I (2020) Material selection by using fuzzy complex proportional assessment. Emerg Mater Res 9(1):93–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Urry J (2016) Mobilities: new perspectives on transport and society. Routledge, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ward SC, Chapman C (2003) Project risk management: processes, techniques and insights, 2nd edn. Wiely, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wu WW, Lee YT (2007) Developing global managers’ competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Exp Syst Appl 32:499–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu HY, Tzeng GH, Chen YH (2009) A fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluating banking performance based on Balanced Scorecard. Exp Syst Appl 36(6):10135–10147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.01.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yazdani M, Alidoosti A, Zavadskas EK (2011) Risk analysis of critical infrastructures using fuzzy COPRAS. Econ Res Ekonomska istraživanja 24(4):27–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2011.11517478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yazdani M, Wang ZX, Chan FT (2020) A decision support model based on the combined structure of DEMATEL, QFD and fuzzy values. Soft Comput 24:1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavadskas EK, Kaklauskas A (1996) Determination of an efficient contractor by using the new method of multicriteria assessment. In International symposium for “the organization and management of construction”. Shaping theory and practice, pp 94–104

  • Zhan Q, Zheng W, Zhao B (2017) A hybrid human and organizational analysis method for railway accidents based on HFACS-Railway Accidents (HFACS-RAs). Saf Sci 91:232–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.08.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang W, Deng Y (2019) Combining conflicting evidence using the DEMATEL method. Soft Comput 23(17):8207–8216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou Q, Huang W, Zhang Y (2011) Identifying critical success factors in emergency management using a fuzzy DEMATEL method. Saf Sci 49(2):243–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Authors declare that the study did not receive any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

    Araz Hasheminezhad, Farhad Hadadi & Hamid Shirmohammadi

Authors
  1. Araz Hasheminezhad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Farhad Hadadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hamid Shirmohammadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Araz Hasheminezhad.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Communicated by V. Loia.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hasheminezhad, A., Hadadi, F. & Shirmohammadi, H. Investigation and prioritization of risk factors in the collision of two passenger trains based on fuzzy COPRAS and fuzzy DEMATEL methods. Soft Comput 25, 4677–4697 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-05478-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-05478-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation