Bulletin of Earthquake Science and Engineering

Bulletin of Earthquake Science and Engineering

Evaluation and Prioritization of Seismic Retrofitting of Railway Infrastructures with Screening and Fuzzy TOPSIS Method (Case Study: Scope of Khorasan Railway Directorate)

Document Type : Research Article

Authors
Amir Hajimirzajan 1
Ebrahim Hadizadeh, Raeisi 2
Moayyad Norouzi 3
Milad Kazemian 4
1 Ph.D., Department of Industrial Engineering, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
2 Ph.D. Graduate, Department of Civil Engineering, Ayatollah Amoli Branch, Islamic Azad University, Amol, Iran.
3 M.Sc., School of Railway Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran.
4 M.Sc., Department of Civil Engineering, Transportation Highway, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran .
10.48303/bese.2024.2032651.1189
Abstract
Introduction
Railways serve as the lifelines of any nation’s transportation network, playing a fundamental role in the socioeconomic development of a country by facilitating the mass movement of passengers and freight. Given their vast geographical span, these networks are inherently exposed to unpredictable natural hazards, with earthquakes posing the most severe threat. A major seismic event can lead to prolonged blockages in the railway network, causing catastrophic financial losses, operational disruptions, and potential casualties. Consequently, preserving the structural integrity and enhancing the seismic resilience of vital infrastructures such as stations, bridges, tunnels, and railway blocks is of paramount importance. Khorasan Razavi province, characterized by high seismic vulnerability, is one of Iran’s most strategic logistical hubs. The rail network under the jurisdiction of the Khorasan Railway General Directorate manages an immense volume of passenger traffic heading to the metropolis of Mashhad, alongside critical international freight transit via the Sarakhs border terminal. Thus, proactively retrofitting these infrastructures against seismic forces is a vital necessity.
Methodology
Due to strict budgetary limitations and executive constraints, simultaneous retrofitting of the entire network is practically impossible. This necessitates a robust decision-making framework to evaluate and prioritize vulnerable assets. To address this, the present study proposes an integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approach under uncertainty. Initially, a panel of experts was convened to identify the most critical variables affecting structural vulnerability. Utilizing a Fuzzy Screening approach, the vast array of potential criteria was refined to pinpoint the most influential factors: seismic intensity of the region, proximity to active fault lines, infrastructural usage type (dedicated passenger, freight, or mixed-use), and the current structural resistance of the assets. Following criteria selection, the current state of each infrastructure category (stations, bridges, tunnels, and railway blocks) was linguistically evaluated by the expert panel using fuzzy logic to account for inherent human ambiguities. Furthermore, geospatial data mapping was employed to superimpose the province’s active faults and seismic intensity maps onto the Khorasan railway network topology. Finally, the Fuzzy Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (Fuzzy TOPSIS) was applied to calculate the relative closeness coefficients and establish the final retrofitting priority matrix.
Results and Discussion
The computational findings derived from the Fuzzy TOPSIS analysis provided a clear hierarchical roadmap for structural interventions. Among the railway blocks, the Torbat-Abumoslem and Abumoslem-Kashmar segments exhibited the highest urgency for seismic retrofitting, registering closeness coefficients (CC) of 0.25 and 0.28, respectively.
In terms of underground structures, the assessment indicated that all three tunnels located within the Khorasan district require moderate retrofitting interventions, yielding a uniform closeness coefficient of 0.544. For the critical bridge infrastructures, the Attar Bridge (CC = 0.322) and the Shahid Motahari Bridge (CC = 0.447) were identified as highly vulnerable points demanding immediate engineering attention. Similarly, the structural evaluation of passenger hubs revealed that both Neyshabur and Shahid Motahari stations share an identical closeness coefficient of 0.322, placing them at the forefront of the station retrofitting queue.
Conclusion
Overall, the synthesized results indicate that the railway axes stretching from Motahari Station to Mashhad, and from Mashhad toward Neghab, represent the most critical zones. Specifically, the intermediate blocks spanning from Fariman to Kashmar, alongside the Attar and Motahari bridges and the Neyshabur and Motahari stations, must be prioritized in the primary phases of the national seismic retrofitting budget allocation to ensure operational continuity and post-earthquake resilience.
Keywords
Seismic Retrofitting Prioritization
Railway Infrastructure
Fuzzy TOPSIS Method
Fuzzy Screening Method
Khorasan General Directorate of I.IR. Railways
Subjects
Abbas, M., Elbaz, K., Shen, S.-L., & Chen, J. (2021). Earthquake effects on civil engineering structures and perspective mitigation solutions: A review. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 14(19), 1-17.
Aghdasi, A., Abbaspour, M., & Ahmadi, A. (2022). Identifying and prioritizing the risks of urban rail transportation networks with emphasis on resilience (Case study: Tehran Metro). Journal of Health, 13(1), 110-122.
Alvioli, M., Falcone, G., Mendicelli, A., Mori, F., Fiorucci, F., Ardizzone, F., & Moscatelli, M. (2023). Seismically induced rockfall hazard from a physically based model and ground motion scenarios in Italy. Geomorphology, 429, 108652.
Amirteimoori, A., Allahviranloo, T., Zadmirzaei, M., & Hasanzadeh, F. (2023). On the environmental performance analysis: A combined fuzzy data envelopment analysis and artificial intelligence algorithms. Expert Systems with Applications, 224, 119953.
Amouzadeh Omrani, M., Hadizadeh, E., & Hajimirzajan, A. (2024). Investigating the causes and factors of railway accidents caused by the escape of a train carrying dangerous goods and its role in the Khayyam station accident. Road, 32(118), 75-90. doi: 10.22034/road.2023.359722.2082
Bahmanpour, H., & Ehsani, M. (2018). Underground transportation system risk assessment to mitigate vulnerability against natural disasters through intelligent urban management. International Journal of Human Capital in Urban Management, 3(3), 179-192. doi: 10.22034/ijhcum.2018.03.02
Banimahd, A., & Arbabi, F. (2013). Seismic vulnerability assessment and development of analytical fragility curves for railroads. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 14(4), 251-262.
Danciu, L., Nandan, S., Reyes, C., Basili, R., Weatherill, G., Beauval, C., Rovida, A., Vilanova, S., Şeşetyan, K., & Bard, P.-Y. (2021). The 2020 update of the European Seismic Hazard Model: Model overview (EFEHR Technical Report 001, v1.0.0).
Dubinin, E., & Kuksova, V. (2022). Safety assessment of technical objects and systems using fuzzy logic methods. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science.
Farahani, S., Shojaeian, A., Behnam, B., & Roohi, M. (2023). Probabilistic seismic multi-hazard risk and restoration modeling for resilience-informed decision making in railway networks. Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure, 1-22.
Hadizadeh Raisi, E., Esmaeilnia Amiri, M., Hajimirzajan, A., & Taherian, M. (2024). Hydrological and static analysis of reinforcing water bridges on Motahari-Kashmer railroad track with precast concrete pipes. Journal of Transportation Research, 21(3), 415-430. doi: 10.22034/tri.2023.393632.3147
Hadizadeh Raisi, E., Hajimirzajan, A., & Norouzi, M. (2024). Investigating and prioritizing the strengthening of rail transport infrastructure within the scope of the Khorasan Railway general administration against seismic hazards with a fuzzy logic approach. 9th International Conference on Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, Tehran, Iran.
Hwang, C., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multi-Objective Decision Making–Methods and Application: A state-of-the-art study. Springer-Verlag.
Izadikhah, M., Farzipoor Saen, R., Ahmadi, K., & Shamsi, M. (2021). How to use fuzzy screening system and data envelopment analysis for clustering sustainable suppliers? A case study in Iran. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 34(1), 199-229.
Javanbakht, M., & Hoseini, H. (2019). Analytical study on the network of transmission lines vulnerability in Khorasan Razavi province against earthquake. Journal of Spatial Analysis Environmental Hazards, 6(3), 15-26. doi: 10.29252/jsaeh.6.3.15
Jena, R., Pradhan, B., Beydoun, G., Sofyan, H., & Affan, M. (2020). Integrated model for earthquake     risk assessment using neural network and analytic hierarchy process: Aceh province, Indonesia. Geoscience Frontiers, 11(2), 613-634.
Joshi, D., Takeuchi, W., Kumar, N., & Avtar, R. (2024). Multi-hazard risk assessment of rail infrastructure in India under local vulnerabilities towards adaptive pathways for disaster resilient infrastructure planning. Progress in Disaster Science, 21, 100308.
Karimiparidari, S. (2014). Seismic Hazard Analysis in Iran (475 Years Return Period) [PhD Thesis]. International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology.
Karimiparidari, S., Zaré, M., & Memarian, H. (2011). New seismotectonic zoning map of Iran. Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Seismology and Earthquake Engineering (SEE6).
Karimiparidari, S., Zaré, M., Memarian, H., & Kijko, A. (2013). Iranian earthquakes, a uniform catalog with moment magnitudes. Journal of Seismology, 17, 897-911.
Kazemian, M., Hajimirzajan, A., Davari, A., Ghezelhesar, E. H. R., & Fischer, S. (2026). Risk Assessment and Response Prioritization for Railway Tunnels Using Integrated Fuzzy FMEA, CRITIC, and Fuzzy MARCOS Methods. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 23(1).
Khan, A. A. (2024). Earthquake geology of the East Anatolian Fault and its participation in a devastating earthquake. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 17(1), 48.
Mahdavinejad, M. J., & Javanrudi, K. (2012). Assessment of reducing earthquake damage in transportation networks of Greater Tehran case study: The northern Vali-Asr Street. Emergency Management, 1(1), 13-21.
Msaddek, M. H., Moumni, Y., Haji, T. A., Chenini, I., & Dlala, M. (2021). A fuzzy mathematical model for evaluation of rock-fracture and structural complexity: Application for southern Atlas in Tunisia. Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica, 56(3), 579-604.
Nekrasova, A., Kossobokov, V., & Podolskaia, E. (2023). Seismic risk assessment of the Lake Baikal railway infrastructure based on unified scaling law for earthquakes and anisotropic seismic impact.
Pandolfi, C., Taroni, M., de Nardis, R., Lavecchia, G., & Akinci, A. (2024). Combining seismotectonic and catalog‐based 3D models for advanced smoothed seismicity computations. Seismological Research Letters, 95(1), 10-20.
Pribadi, K., Abduh, M., Wirahadikusumah, R., Hanifa, N., Irsyam, M., Kusumaningrum, P., & Puri, E. (2021). Learning from past earthquake disasters: The need      for knowledge management system to enhance infrastructure resilience in Indonesia. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 64, 102424.
Sharon, M., Sagy, A., Kurzon, I., Marco, S., & Rosensaft, M. (2020). Assessment of seismic sources and capable faults through hierarchic tectonic criteria: Implications for seismic hazard in the Levant. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 20(1), 125-148.
Sinha, N., Priyanka, N., & Joshi, P. (2016). Using spatial multi-criteria analysis and ranking tool (SMART) in earthquake risk assessment: A case study of Delhi region, India. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 7(2), 680-701.
Sur, U., Singh, P., & Meena, S. R. (2020). Landslide susceptibility assessment in a lesser Himalayan road corridor (India) applying fuzzy AHP technique and earth-observation data. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 11(1), 2176-2209.
Szatmári, M., & Leitner, B. (2021). Vulnerability assessment and risk prioritization with HRVA method for railway stations. Transportation Research Procedia, 55, 1649-1656.
Taherian, A. R., & Kalantari, A. (2019). Risk-targeted seismic design maps for Iran. Journal of Seismology, 23(6), 1299-1311.
Talebi, M., Zare, M., Farsangi, E. N., Soghrat, M. R., Maleki, V., & Esmaeili, S. (2021). Development of risk-targeted seismic hazard maps for the Iranian plateau. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 141, 106506.
Torkamani, M., Kazemi, M., & Hajimirzajan, A. (2024). Evaluating the competencies of managers with a 360-degree model and examining the relationship between organizational performance and the manager's citizenship behaviour with different stakeholders. Road, 32(121), 425-446. doi: 10.22034/road.2024.429407. 2227
Tyagi, A., Nath, R. R., & Chaurasia, S. (2023). Application of fuzzy algorithm for assessing seismically induced landslide hazard for an important road corridor in the lower Indian Himalayas. EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts.
Vahid, R., Farnood Ahmadi, F., & Mohammadi, N. (2021). Earthquake damage modeling using cellular automata and fuzzy rule-based models. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 14(22), 1-14.
Var, S., Kartal, S. B., & Abut, Y. (2023). On the effects of earthquakes for Türkiye's railways. AS-Proceedings.
Wujian, Y., Xinxin, T., Zhijian, W., Ping, W., & Lin, K. (2023). Seismic response of concrete bridge of Lanzhou-Xinjiang high-speed railway under the near-fault strong earthquake. Structures.
Yehia, H. M. A. a.-S. (2024). The effect of domes produced through octa-h on absorbing harmful waves and reducing the risk of earthquakes. Journal of Geosciences, 12(1), 1-5.
Zare, M. (2017). Seismic hazard zoning in Iran: A   state-of-the-art on the studies during four decades. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 19(2), 71-101. http://www.jsee.ir/article_240762_087b6 fe5462b6 1c5ff5c62fe3eb70f09.pdf
Zarrineghbal, A., Zafarani, H., & Rahimian, M. (2021). Towards an Iranian national risk-targeted model for seismic hazard mapping. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 141, 106495.

  • Receive Date 24 July 2024
  • Revise Date 22 November 2024
  • Accept Date 25 November 2024