Mon, May 26, 2025
[Archive]
.png)
Volume 4, Issue 3 (9-2018)
jhehp 2018, 4(3): 131-137 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Farshadnia S M, Arghami S, Shahab Safa A, Majidi F. A Budgeting Model for the Safety Unit of an Under Construction Metro Station in Tehran Using a Robust Optimization. jhehp 2018; 4 (3) :131-137
URL: http://jhehp.zums.ac.ir/article-1-179-en.html
URL: http://jhehp.zums.ac.ir/article-1-179-en.html
1- Department of Health, Safety & Enviroment Management, School of Public Health, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran.
2- Department of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, School of Public Health, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran.
3- Department of Project Management Office of Pouyesh Dade Novin, Yazd, Iran.
2- Department of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, School of Public Health, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran.
3- Department of Project Management Office of Pouyesh Dade Novin, Yazd, Iran.
Abstract: (8085 Views)
Background: The construction of metro lines is a high-risk project. Using a budget-based model for the safety units of metro construction projects can help safety managers to spend optimal budget allocation. The purpose of this study was to plan a budget model based on safety unit performance in an under construction metro station for better budget allocation using robust optimization.
Methods: To design this model, budget dimensions were identified by the experts and based on causes and costs of accidents in the past year. Then, constraints of metro workshops were considered. The next step was involved in determining the importance of each dimension. Finally, the budgeting model was designed using Gurobi software. In order to prove the proposed budgeting model, as a case study, the model was implemented in one of the metro workshops.
Results: Considering existing constraints, the model revealed that the budget should be at least 4.370.478.000 rials. Surprisingly, the predicted budget amount was less than the expended amount in the safety unit of the project. However, budget allocation to dimensions was dramatically different.
Conclusion: The results showed that the robust optimization budgeting was functionally and economically optimal. Moreover, there is a need for logical budget distribution.
Methods: To design this model, budget dimensions were identified by the experts and based on causes and costs of accidents in the past year. Then, constraints of metro workshops were considered. The next step was involved in determining the importance of each dimension. Finally, the budgeting model was designed using Gurobi software. In order to prove the proposed budgeting model, as a case study, the model was implemented in one of the metro workshops.
Results: Considering existing constraints, the model revealed that the budget should be at least 4.370.478.000 rials. Surprisingly, the predicted budget amount was less than the expended amount in the safety unit of the project. However, budget allocation to dimensions was dramatically different.
Conclusion: The results showed that the robust optimization budgeting was functionally and economically optimal. Moreover, there is a need for logical budget distribution.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Subject:
Occupational and Industrial Health
Received: 2018/07/24 | Accepted: 2018/09/3 | Published: 2018/09/21
Received: 2018/07/24 | Accepted: 2018/09/3 | Published: 2018/09/21
References
1. Khosravi M, Kähkönen K. Management and Planning under Complexities of Metro Construction. Procedia Econ Finance. 2015; 21: 415-21. [Crossref]
2. Paschalidou A, Kassomenos P, Kelessis A. Tracking the Association between Metro-Railway Construction Works and PM Levels in an urban Mediterranean Environment. Sci Total Environ. 2016; 568: 1326-32. [Crossref]
3. Zhang L, Wu X, Skibniewski MJ, Zhong J, Lu Y. Bayesian-Network-Based Safety Risk Analysis in Construction Projects. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 2014; 131: 29-39. [Crossref]
4. Safaee MM, Kafi NS, Torkaman A. A Focus on the Contribution of Promoting TOD to Increasing Tehran's Public Spaces. Procedia Eng. 2016; 165: 126-33. [Crossref]
5. Manchao H, e Sousa RL, Müller A, Vargas Jr E, e Sousa LR, Xin C. Analysis of Excessive Deformations in Tunnels for Safety Evaluation. Tunnelling Undergr Space Technol. 2015; 45: 190-202. [Crossref]
6. Zhou Z, Goh YM, Li Q. Overview and Analysis of Safety Management Studies in the Construction Industry. Saf Sci. 2015; 72: 337-50. [Crossref]
7. Aminbakhsh S, Gunduz M, Sonmez R. Safety Risk Assessment Using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) during Planning and Budgeting of Construction Projects. J saf Res. 2013; 46: 99-105. [Crossref]
8. Ding L, Zhang L, Wu X, Skibniewski MJ, Qunzhou Y. Safety Management in Tunnel Construction: Case Study of Wuhan Metro Construction in China. Saf Sci. 2014; 62: 8-15. [Crossref]
9. Siyanbola TT. The Impact of Budgeting and Budgetary Control on the Performance of Manufacturing Company in Nigeria. J Bus Manag Soc Sci Res. 2013; 2(12): 8-16.
10. Hansen SC. A theoretical Analysis of the Impact of Adopting Rolling Budgets, Activity-Based Budgeting and Beyond Budgeting. Eur Account Rev. 2011; 20(2): 289-319. [Crossref]
11. Ghodsipour H. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP): Amirkabir University of Technology. Amirkabir Univ Technol. 2016: 25. [In Persion].
12. Asgharpour MJ. Multiple Criteria Decision Making: University of Tehran. Univ Tehran. 2015. [In Person].
13. Østergren K, Stensaker I. Management Control Without Budgets: a Field Study of ‘Beyond Budgeting’in Practice. Eur Account Rev. 2011; 20(1): 149-81. [Crossref]
14. Abolhallaje M, Mousavi SM, Jafari M. Implementation of Performance-Based Budgeting in the Health System: Luxury or Necessity? [Letter to the Editor]. Iran J Public Health. 2014; 43(11): 1593-4.
15. Wang X. Conditions to Implement Outcome-Oriented Performance Budgeting: Some Empirical Evidence. J Public Budgeting, Account Financ Manage. 1999; 11(4): 533-5. [Crossref]
16. Melkers J, Willoughby K. The State of the States: Performance-Based Budgeting Requirements in 47 out of 50. Public Adm Rev. 1998; 1(58): 66-73. [Crossref]
17. Charnes A, Cooper W. Studies In Mathematical and Managerial Economics. North-Holland Publishing Company; 1971: 166-80.
18. Zanakis SH. A Multicriteria Approach for Library Needs Assessment and Budget Allocation. Socioecon Plann Sci. 1991; 25(3): 233-45. [Crossref]
19. Sato Y. Optimal Budget Planning for Investment in Safety Measures of a Chemical Company. Int J Production Econ. 2012; 140(2): 579-85. [Crossref]
20. Leiras A, Hamacher S, Elkamel A. Petroleum Refinery Operational Planning Using Robust Optimization. Eng Optim. 2010; 42(12): 1119-31. [Crossref]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
© 2024 The Author(s)
