AN APPLICATION OF THE AHP METHOD FOR EVALUATION OF LEVEL CROSSING DESIGN IN A CONGESTED URBAN AREA: CASE STUDY LC SOKOLSKA IN ZAGREB, CROATIA

Publications

Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Transport Problems

Silesian University of Technology

Subject: Economics, Transportation, Transportation Science & Technology

GET ALERTS

eISSN: 2300-861X

DESCRIPTION

0
Reader(s)
0
Visit(s)
0
Comment(s)
0
Share(s)

VOLUME 16 , ISSUE 4 (December 2021) > List of articles

AN APPLICATION OF THE AHP METHOD FOR EVALUATION OF LEVEL CROSSING DESIGN IN A CONGESTED URBAN AREA: CASE STUDY LC SOKOLSKA IN ZAGREB, CROATIA

Danijela BARIĆ * / Antonija DŽAMBO

Keywords : Analytic Hierarchy Process; AHP, MCDM; level crossing; safety

Citation Information : Transport Problems. Volume 16, Issue 4, Pages 95-106, DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/tp-2021-063

License : (CC BY 4.0)

Received Date : 10-July-2020 / Accepted: 10-December-2021 / Published Online: 24-December-2021

ARTICLE

ABSTRACT

The AHP method(Analytic Hierarchy Process), as a part of the MultiCriteria Decision-Making (MCDM) process, is one of the most used methods worldwide for dealing with the complexity of transport project evaluation. A level crossing (LC) is a place where road and rail cross. Therefore, LC is a place where there isa high risk of accidents.The aimof this study is to develop an AHP model for evaluating the alternatives for the reconstruction of LC in a congested urban environment through the weighting of various interdisciplinary criteria and sub-criteria. The AHP model considers six criteria:safety, traffic indicators of the functional efficiency, costs, social benefits, ecology, the time required for reconstruction of LC and their 15 sub-criteria. The model has been tested on LC Sokolska, located in the city of Zagreb, Croatia. Three possible alternatives were proposed to suit the location and the traffic conditions. The alternatives were evaluated according to the developed AHP model and the Expert Choice software package.Asensitivity analysis was performed to confirm the acceptability of the optimal solution.

Content not available PDF Share

FIGURES & TABLES

REFERENCES

1. HŽ Infrastruktura. Statistics for 2020. HZ Infrastructure. Zagreb, 2021.

2. Implementation of measures to improve the safety of the most vulnerable traffic participants at level crossings. Zagreb, 2018. Available at: https://www.fpz.unizg.hr/projekt-sigurnost-nazcp/index.php/novosti/.

3. Džambo, A. Vrednovanje varijanata projektnih rješenja željezničko-cestovnog prijelaza Sokolska u Zagrebu primjenom metode Analitičkog hijerarhijskog procesa. Master thesis. University of Zagreb. Faculty of Transport and Traffic Sciences. 2019. 70 p. [In Croatian: Project Variants Evaluation of Sokolska Level Crossing in Zagreb by Applying Analytic Hierarchy Process].

4. Stojčić, M. & Zavadskas, E.K. & Pamučar, D. & Stević, Ž. & Mardani, A. Review Application of MCDM Methods in Sustainability Engineering: A Literature Review 2008-2018. Symmetry. 2019. Vol. 11(3). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11030350.

5. Kosijer, M. & Ivic, M. & Beloševic, I. & Pavlovic, N. & Opricovic, M. Fuzzy multicriteria decision-making in railway infrastructure planning and design. Građevinar. 2020. Vol. 72(4). P. 323-334.

6. Nowak, M. Investment projects evaluation by simulation and multiple criteria decision aiding procedure. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management. 2010. Vol. 11(3). P. 193-202.

7. Barić, D. & Čurepić, D. & Radačić, Ž. Implementation of relevant methods in assessing traffictechnological projects. Promet - Traffic - Traffico. 2007. Vol. 19(5). P. 329-336.

8. Saaty, T.L. Transport planning with multiple criteria: The analytic hierarchy process applications and progress review. Journal of Advanced Transportation. 1995. Vol. 29(1). P. 81-126. DOI: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/atr.5670290109.

9. Broniewicz, E. & Ogrodnik, K. Multi-criteria analysis of transport infrastructure projects. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2020. Vol. 83. P. 1-15.

10. Deluka-Tibljaš, A. & Karleuša, B. & Dragičević, N. Review of multicriteria-analysis methods application in decision making about transport infrastructure. Građevinar. 2013. Vol. 65(7). P. 619-631.

11. D’Orso, G. & Migliore, M. & Peri, G. & Rizzo, G. Using AHP methodology for prioritising the actions in the transport sector in the frame of SECAPs. In: Proceedings – 2020 IEEE International Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering and 2020 IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Europe, EEEIC / I and CPS Europe 2020. 2020.

12. Henke, I. & Cartenì, A. & Molitierno, C. & Errico, A. Decision-Making in the Transport Sector: A Sustainable Evaluation Method for Road Infrastructure. Sustainability. 2020. Vol. 12. P. 764. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030764.

13. Yannis, G. & Kopsacheili, A. & Dragomanovits, A. & Petraki, V. State-of-the-art review on multicriteria decision-making in the transport sector. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. 2020. Vol. 7(4). P. 413-431.

14. Saaty, T.L. How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research. 1990. Vol. 48(1). P. 9-26.

15. Saaty, T.L. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences. 2008. Vol. 1(1). P. 83-98.

16. Pilko, H. & Mandžuka, S. & Barić, D. Urban single-lane roundabouts: A new analytical approach using multicriteria and simultaneous multi-objective optimisation of geometry design, efficiency and safety. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies. 2017. Vol. 80. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0968090X17301304.

17. Barić, D. & Pilko, H. & Starčević, M. Introducing experiment in pedestrian behaviour and risk perception study at urban level crossing. International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion. 2018. Vol. 25(1). P. 102-112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17457300.2017.1341934.

EXTRA FILES

COMMENTS