Application of fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods for risk evaluation of gas transmission facility

Today, the use of risk assessment methods in various industries is expanding, as there are currently more than 70 different types of qualitative and quantitative risk assessment methods in the world. These methods are usually used to identify, control and mitigate the effects of hazards. Organizations should be able to select one or a combination of several types of risk assessment methods that are explored and studied in this article. In some cases, and for the direction of some sensitive processes, especially in the chemical industry, the production of explosive and combustion products such as the gas transmission company should be analyzed before determining the type of method of all methods and the best approach with regard to financial resources, requires qualitative or quantitative or qualitative and quantitative information, time limits, trained personnel limitations, the type of application of the risk identification method, the advantages, and disadvantages of each of these systems. Generally, acceptable risk levels are different for each organization or individual, depending on financial and economic resources, technological constraints, experienced human resources, discretion and management, and underlying risks such as hidden risks. Organizations usually require a system that, in addition to assessing their activities and processes can help them determine the risk situation, determine risk tolerance criteria, and accurately determine the exact risk of their processes, and ... lead them, depending on the complexity of the activity of each industry, the type of system that can bring them to the target. Is different. In this study, the assessment of the risks of gas Transmission facilities in the 9 regions, has been studied and reviewed. After identifying the various activities of the facility, which included three safety measures for equipment, personal and environmental health, and 28 sub-criteria, from previous studies and surveys, and staff comments. Then, using AHP, the fuzzy questionnaire was completed. Pairwise comparison of criteria and sub-criteria by experts and the use of excel software resulted in the weight of the sub-criteria and the compatibility rate. Then, using the verbal variables, five boost pressure facility with Fuzzy TOPSIS was ranked according to the relevant criteria, and the Rasht boost pressure gained the first rank.

Keywords:

Risk Assessment , fuzzy AHP , Fuzzy TOPSIS , Gas Transmission Facility