Application of MADM in a fuzzy environment for selecting the best barrier for offshore wells

Highlights? A solution to the aggregation of different expert opinions in offshore safety. ? Findings of all the important cost and benefit criteria in offshore safety analysis. ? Prioritisation of offshore well barriers (risk control options). ? Feasibility study of FMADM approach in offshore safety management. A fuzzy Multi Attribute Decision Making (FMADM) method, which is suitable for treating group decision making problems in a fuzzy environment, is proposed for ranking offshore well barriers from a cost-benefit view point. It is obvious that much knowledge in the real world is fuzzy rather than precise. MADM decision data is usually fuzzy, crisp, or a combination of the two. A useful model is proposed here in order to handle both fuzzy and crisp data. Imprecision and ambiguity in the calculation of a performance rating are incorporated into MADM whereby fuzzy set theory provides a mathematical framework for modeling them. Human opinions often conflict in group decision-making. The purpose of fuzzy MADM is to aggregate the conflicting opinions. In general, one expert's opinion for a given attribute may be different from others'. Therefore, it is necessary to develop an appropriate method of aggregating multiple experts' opinions, taking into account a degree of importance of each expert in the aggregation procedure. The weights of all attributes and experts are estimated using a Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP). Finally, the best well barrier or risk control option (RCO) with respect to cost and benefit is selected using a Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method.

[1]  Kjell Corneliussen.  Well Safety. Risk Control in the Operational Phase of Offshore Wells , 2006 .

[2]  Serge Boverie,et al.  Fuzzy Modelling and Control of a GDI Engine , 2000 .

[3]  Deng Yong.  Plant location selection based on fuzzy TOPSIS , 2006 .

[4]  R. Ramanathan,et al.  Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages , 1994 .

[5]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[6]  Ahti Salo,et al.  Interactive decision aiding for group decision support , 1995 .

[7]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty , 2002, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[8]  Sunan Huang,et al.  Railway risk assessment - the fuzzy reasoning approach and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approaches: A case study of shunting at Waterloo depot , 2007 .

[9]  H. Zimmermann,et al.  Quantifying vagueness in decision models , 1985 .

[10]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Fuzzy linear programming technique for multiattribute group decision making in fuzzy environments , 2004, Inf. Sci..

[11]  Frank Crawley.  Layer of Protection Analysis: Simplified Process Risk Assessment Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 2003 270 pp, £88, ISBN 0 8169 0811 7 , 2004 .

[12]  Ludmil Mikhailov,et al.  A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[13]  Kyung S. Park,et al.  Tools for interactive multiattribute decisionmaking with incompletely identified information , 1997 .

[14]  Soung Hie Kim,et al.  An interactive procedure for multiple attribute group decision making with incomplete information: Range-based approach , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[15]  G. Anandalingam,et al.  A multiagent multiattribute approach for conflict resolution in acid rain impact mitigation , 1989, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[16]  Dušan Teodorović.  Multicriteria ranking of air shuttle alternatives , 1985 .

[17]  Jin Wang,et al.  Approximate TOPSIS for vessel selection under uncertain environment , 2011, Expert Syst. Appl..

[18]  Chen-Tung Chen,et al.  A fuzzy approach to select the location of the distribution center , 2001, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[19]  Celik Parkan,et al.  Decision making under partial probability information , 1994 .

[20]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  Reference point approach for multiple decision makers , 2005, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[21]  Chen-Tung Chen,et al.  Aggregation of fuzzy opinions under group decision making , 1996, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[22]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  A hierarchy fuzzy MCDM method for studying electronic marketing strategies in the information service industry , 1998 .

[23]  T. Saaty.  How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[24]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Managing non-homogeneous information in group decision making , 2005, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[25]  Soung Hie Kim,et al.  Group decision making procedure considering preference strength under incomplete information , 1997, Comput. Oper. Res..

[26]  Z. Xu,et al.  On consistency of the weighted geometric mean complex judgement matrix in AHP , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[27]  Wolfgang Hauke.  Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making (Fuzzy-MADM) , 1998 .

[28]  Wan Chul Yoon,et al.  Establishing strict dominance between alternatives with special type of incomplete information , 1997 .

[29]  E. Stanley Lee,et al.  An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making , 2007, Math. Comput. Model..

[30]  Soung Hie Kim,et al.  Interactive group decision making procedure under incomplete information , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[31]  R. Yager.  On a general class of fuzzy connectives , 1980 .

[32]  Stelios H. Zanakis,et al.  Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[33]  Chen-Tung Chen,et al.  Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment , 2000, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[34]  Luiz Moutinho,et al.  Analytical hierarchy process , 1994 .

[35]  Ching-Lai Hwang,et al.  Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making - Methods and Applications , 1992, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems.