Identifying and prioritizing Internet of Things (IoT) capabilities for the operation and maintenance of mining tunnels using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method

Bahrami, Vajiheh; Fattahi, Reza; Bahrami, Hanieh

doi:10.48306/juem.2025.488843.1060

Identifying and prioritizing Internet of Things (IoT) capabilities for the operation and maintenance of mining tunnels using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method

Authors

Vajiheh Bahrami ¹

Reza Fattahi ²

Hanieh Bahrami ³

¹ Master's Student in Industrial Engineering, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran

² Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Higher Education Complex of Bam, Bam, Iran

³ Bachelor's Student in Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Higher Education Complex of Bam, Bam, Iran

https://doi.org/10.48306/juem.2025.488843.1060

Abstract

Tunnel operation and maintenance includes a set of activities carried out to maintain the safety, proper functioning, and useful life of tunnels during operation. This research aims to identify and prioritize IoT applications in the operation and maintenance of tunnels using multi-criteria decision-making methods. The Delphi method was employed to identify the criteria and sub-criteria. After implementing the Delphi method, the main criteria were categorized into three groups, and their respective sub-criteria were identified. Subsequently, data were collected using pairwise comparison questionnaires and analyzed using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. The results revealed that the security criterion, with a weight of 0.6404, holds the highest level of importance, followed by the maintenance and repair criterion with a weight of 0.2332, and the processing criterion with a weight of 0.1265, ranking second and third, respectively. Among the sub-criteria of security, the visibility of personnel and machinery ranked first. In the maintenance and repair sub-criteria, preventive maintenance of the tunnel structure ranked first, and updating information and data ranked last. Additionally, among the sub-criteria for tunnel processing operations, field analysis, exploration, and anomaly reporting ranked first, while preventing the waste of mineral resources ranked last compared to other sub-criteria. These results indicate that in high-risk environments such as mining tunnels, safety and preventive maintenance take precedence, while mineral resource efficiency is considered a lower priority.

Keywords

Internet of Things (IOT)

Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods

Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method

Maintenance

Tunnel construction

1.Banica, L., Burtescu, E., & Enescu, F. (2017). The impact of internet-of-things in higher education. Scientific Bulletin-Economic Sciences, 16(1), 53-59.

2. Francisti, J., Balogh, Z., Reichel, J., Magdin, M., Koprda, Š., & Molnár, G. (2020). Application experiences using IoT devices in education. Applied Sciences, 10(20). https://doi.org/10.3390/app10207286

3.Čolaković, A., & Hadžialić, M. (2018). Internet of Things (IoT): A review of enabling technologies, challenges, and open research issues. Computer Networks, 144, 17-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2018.07.017

4.Kahlert, M. (2016). Understanding customer acceptance of Internet of Things services in retailing: An empirical study about the moderating effect of degree of technological autonomy and shopping motivations. In.

5. Akyildiz, I. F., & Jornet, J. M. (2010). The Internet of nano-things. IEEE Wireless Communications, 17, 58–63.

6.Orosz, B., Kovács, C., Karuović, D., Molnár, G., Major, L., Vass, V., Szűts, Z., & Námesztovszki, Z. (2019). Digital education in digital cooperative environments. Journal of Applied Technical and Educational Sciences, 9(4), 55-69. https://doi.org/10.24368/jates.v9i4.149

7. Asseo, I., Johnson, M., Nilsson, B., Chalapathy, N., & Costello, T. J. (2016). The Internet of things: Riding the wave in higher education. EDUCAUSE Review, 51, 11-33.

8. Ramazani, R., & Mo'oudi Sefat, M. R. (2021). Ranking the threats of the Internet of Things in military environments. National Security Scientific Journal, 11(39), 199-228.

9. Zandieh, H., & Gerami, M. (2020). The impact of the Internet of Things on the innovation process and services in organizations. Information and Communication Technology in Police, 1(1), 49-66.

10.Ghanbarnejad, M., Rostgari Pour, H., Saleh, S., & Delrooz, K. (2019). Analytical study of the Internet of Things in learning environments: Applications, requirements, and challenges from the perspective of experts. Educational Technology and Learning, 3(9), 1-22.

11. Bahrami Zenooz, P., Faqihi, M., & Alborzi, M. (2019). Identification and prioritization of effective factors on the application of the Internet of Things in open government. Public Policy Journal in Management, 11(37), 16-25.

12.Ronaghi, M. H., & Hosseini, F. (2018). Identifying and ranking IoT services in the health domain. Health Management Journal, 21(73), 106-117.

13.Mircea, M., Stoica, M., & Ghilic-Micu, B. (2021). Investigating the impact of the Internet of Things in higher education environment. IEEE Access, 9, 33396-33409. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3060964

14.Abed, S., Alyahya, N., & Altameem, A. (2020). IoT in education: Its impacts and its future in Saudi universities and educational environments. In The Internet of Things in the Digital Economy (pp. 47-62). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0029-9_5

15.Majeed, A., & Ali, M. (2018). How Internet-of-Things (IoT) is making university campuses smart? QA higher education (QAHE) perspective. In 2018 IEEE 8th Annual Computing and Communication Workshop and Conference (CCWC) (pp. 1-6).

16.Mohammadzadeh, A. K., Ghafoori, S., Mohammadian, A., Mohammadkazemi, R., Mahbanooei, B., & Ghasemi, R. (2018). A fuzzy analytic network process (FANP) approach for prioritizing Internet of Things challenges in Iran. Technology in Society, 53, 124-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.01.007

17.Verma, P., & Sood, S. (2017). Internet of Things-based student performance evaluation framework. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1-18.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2017.1407824

18. Ganesh, B., Loganathan, S., Thiyaku, T., Venkatesh, T., & Thiagarajan, T. (2024). Design of a wireless underground sensor network for tunnel rescuing. DOI: 10.1109/accai61061.2024.10602252.

19. Zhou, C., Damiano, N., Whisner, B., & Reyes, M. (2017). Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) applications in underground coal mines. Mining Engineering, 69(12), 50–56. https://doi.org/10.19150/me.7919

20. Dargahi, M., & Rostamabadi, S. (2019). Stability analysis and design of tunnel maintenance systems for the Behesht Abad diversion dam. Tunnel Journal, 36, 19-31.

21. Pourhashemi, S. M., Sadat, M., & Tarem, M. (2018). Evaluation of the safety risk management model in the construction of traffic tunnels in Tehran: A case study of the Arash-Esfandiar-Niyayesh tunnel. Tunnel Journal, 35, 27-39.

22. Fattahi, R., Naderi, M. R., & Seyedi, E. (2024). Evaluating scenarios for the management of construction debris caused by an earthquake (case study of Tehran). Journal of Urban Management and Environmental Engineering, 1(4), 49-66.

23. Padash, A., Vahidi, H., Nematollahi, H., & Fattahi, R. (2020). Analyzing and evaluating industrial ecology development model in Iran.

24. Nejad, F. L., Zadeh, H. R., Fattahi, R., & Vahidi, H. (2013). Assessment and strategic planning for indoor and outdoor sports with the application of SWOT analysis and AHP in fuzzy environment.

25. Alizadeh, S. M., Hadji, M. S. M., & Fattahi, R. (2016). A model for measurement and calculation of waste in production flow layout using fuzzy logic.

26.فتاحی، رضا، نادری، محمدرضا، سیدی، احسان. بررسی سناریوهای مدیریت نخاله‌های ساختمانی ناشی از زلزله (مطالعه موردی شهر تهران)، فصلنامه علمی مدیریت محیط زیست شهری،1402؛ 1 (4): 49-66. doi: 10.48306/jumee.2024.436541.1031

27. Fattahi, R., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R., Khalilzadeh, M., Shahsavari-Pour, N., & Soltani, R. (2021). Risk assessment by a new FMEA model based on an extended AHP method under a fuzzy environment. Environmental Energy and Economic Research, 5(4), 1-14.

28. Padash, A., Vahidi, H., Fattahi, R., & Nematollahi, H. (2021). Analyzing and evaluating industrial ecology development model in Iran using FAHP-DPSIR. International Journal of Environmental Research, 15(4), 615-629.

29. Padash, A., Fattahi, R., & Vahidi, H. (2024). A novel hybrid risk assessment approach under fuzzy environment in the steel industry. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 133, 108655.

30.Seiti, H., Hafezalkotob, A., & Fattahi, R. (2018). Extending a pessimistic–optimistic fuzzy information axiom-based approach considering acceptable risk: Application in the selection of maintenance strategy. Applied Soft Computing, 67, 895-909.

31.Fattahi, R., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R., Khalilzadeh, M., Shahsavari-Pour, N., & Soltani, R. (2020). A novel FMEA model based on fuzzy multiple-criteria decision-making methods for risk assessment. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 33(5), 881-904.

32.Fattahi, R., & Khalilzadeh, M. (2018). Risk evaluation using a novel hybrid method based on FMEA, extended MULTIMOORA, and AHP methods under fuzzy environment. Safety Science, 102, 290-300.