4.7 Article

A new approach to mining method selection based on modifying the Nicholas technique

期刊

APPLIED SOFT COMPUTING
卷 10, 期 4, 页码 1040-1061

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.asoc.2009.09.002

关键词

Mining method selection; AHP; Fuzzy sets theory; Nicholas technique; Optimum profit

资金

  1. IMIDRO
  2. KAVOSHGARAN Co., Tehran, Iran

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The main purpose of this paper is to represent a solution to the problem of mining method selection (MMS) in mining projects. To this aim, the well-known MMS technique of Nicholas has been modified so that in addition to eliminate its defects, it would be possible for mining engineers to easily assign their engineering judgments to unsteady and uncertain characteristics of mineral resources. So, in order to resolve the problems of weighting of the Nicholas technique, analytic hierarchy process (AHP) as the most similar multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) tool to Nicholas technique was applied. Due to inability of crisp numbers for assigning of decision maker (DM) judgments to ambiguities of mineral resources, trapezoidal fuzzy numbers also were used for better modeling of those ambiguities. Moreover, a two-step algorithm containing hierarchical technical-operational model (HTOM) and also hierarchical economical model (HEM), inspired by Nicholas technique, was proposed. These models include some new criteria which are added to the Nicholas technique. Therefore using fuzzy AHP (FAHP), mining alternatives are firstly ranked based on HTOM and then, the most profitable of those alternatives is selected by the HEM. As a case study, the north anomaly of Choghart iron mine was used to compare the proposed approach with the Nicholas technique. The results indicated that the proposed approach eliminated the problems of Nicholas technique. Proposed approach also introduces a profitable mining alternative to start the mining operations. It should be applied to avoid further feasibility studies in mining projects. (C) 2009 Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据