• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Heliyon >Human risk assessment of Panchet Dam in India using TOPSIS and WASPAS Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods
【2h】

Human risk assessment of Panchet Dam in India using TOPSIS and WASPAS Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods

机译：使用TOPSIS和WASPAS多准则决策（MCDM）方法评估印度Panchet大坝的人类风险

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Every river dam activity has definite beneficial effects but cannot circumvent its negative impact in the long run. The Panchet dam has been commissioned as a multipurpose river valley project under the authority of Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC) across the river Damodar at the border of West Bengal and Jharkhand states of India in 1959 to overcome some problems like flood control, supply of irrigation, domestic and industrial water, hydroelectric power generation etc. But it has now become a threat to the surrounding people, due to rapid sedimentation and reduction in its water holding capacity. Human risk assessment of the dam thus claims importance and such an effort is executed in this work using Delphi Questionnaire and two Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods viz. Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment (WASPAS). At first 9 human risk alternatives (A1-A9) of the dam are identified using Delphi Questionnaire and rated them in order to prioritize using TOPSIS and WASPAS methods. Risk prioritization results of TOPSIS and WASPAS show somewhat differences. The integrated ‘Mean-Rank’ method is applied to provide final priority ranking of the risk alternatives and the result is: A3 > A9 > A8 > A4, A6 > A1 > A7 > A5 > A2 (when WASPAS parameter λ = 0); A3 > A9 > A4, A8 > A2 > A6 > A1 > A5, A7 (when WASPAS parameter λ = 1); A3 > A9 > A8 > A4, A6 > A1 > A2 > A5 > A7 (when WASPAS parameter λ = 0.5). In all cases, A3 (Population Displacement) alternative ranks first and is identified as the top most risk prone alternative among all. The risk of displacement of people due to further inundation of land is rising gradually. This has motivated us for assessment of other human risks of the dam in the work.
机译：每条河流大坝的活动都有一定的有利影响，但从长远来看，不能避免其不利影响。 1959年，在达莫达河谷公司（DVC）的委托下，潘切特水坝在印度西孟加拉邦和贾坎德邦交界处穿越达莫达河，作为一项多功能河谷项目，以克服防洪，灌溉供应等问题。 ，以及工业和工业用水，水力发电等。但是由于迅速沉积并降低了其持水能力，它现在已经成为对周围人的威胁。因此，对大坝的人类风险评估具有重要意义，并且在这项工作中使用Delphi问卷调查和两种多标准决策（MCDM）方法进行了这项工作。类似于理想解决方案（TOPSIS）和加权汇总和产品评估（WASPAS）的订单偏好技术。首先使用Delphi问卷确定大坝的9种人类风险替代方案（A1-A9）并对其进行评级，以便使用TOPSIS和WASPAS方法进行优先排序。 TOPSIS和WASPAS的风险优先级排序结果显示出一些差异。集成的“均值排名”方法用于提供风险替代方案的最终优先级排序，结果为：A3> A9> A8> A4，A6> A1> A7> A5> A2（当WASPAS参数λ= 0时）； A3> A9> A4，A8> A2> A6> A1> A5，A7（当WASPAS参数λ= 1时）; A3> A9> A8> A4，A6> A1> A2> A5> A7（当WASPAS参数λ= 0.5时）。在所有情况下，A3（人口迁移）替代方案都排名第一，并且被认为是所有人群中风险最高的替代方案。由于土地被进一步淹没而导致人们流离失所的风险正在逐步增加。这促使我们评估工作中大坝的其他人为风险。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号