Application of FUCA Method for Multi-Criteria Decision Making in Mechanical Machining Processes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31181/oresta051022061dKeywords:
MCDM, FUCA method, Mechanical machiningAbstract
Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) is a very useful tool to find the best solution among many solutions. For most MCDM methods, the data must be normalized. However, the data normalization method has a significant influence on the results of ranking solutions. Choosing the right data normalization method is sometimes complicated. In many MCDM methods, FUCA is known as the method without using normalize the data. However, the FUCA method has a small limitation. All publications that were applied this method have not mentioned this limitation. In this study, this limitation was overcome and then used for multi-criteria decision making in some cases in the mechanical processing field. The ranked results of the solutions when determined by the FUCA method are compared with those ones when using other MCDM methods. The sensitivity analysis was also performed. The results show that the FUCA method can be used for multi-criteria decision making in mechanical machining. It is also expected to be successful when applying in other fields. The works in the future were mentioned in the last section of this article as well.
Downloads
References
Aytekin, A. (2021). Comparative Analysis of the Normalization Techniques in the Context of MCDM Problems. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 4(2), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame210402001a
Baydas, M. (2022). The effect of pandemic conditions on financial success rankings of BIST SME industrial companies: a different evaluation with the help of comparison of special capabilities of MOORA, MABAC and FUCA methods. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 10(1), 245-260. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v10i1.1997
Baydas, M. (2022). Comparison of the Performances of MCDM Methods under Uncertainty: An Analysis on Bist SME Industry Index. OPUS – Journal of Society
Research, 19(46), 308-326. https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1064280
Baydas, M., Elma, O.E., & Pamucar, D. (2022). Exploring the specific capacity of different multi criteria decision making approaches under uncertainty using data from financial markets. Expert Systems with Applications, 197, 116775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.116755
Baydas, M., & Pamucar, D. (2022). Determining Objective Characteristics of MCDM Methods under Uncertainty: An Exploration Study with Financial Data. Mathematics, 10(7), 1115. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10071115
Bobar, Z., Bozanic, D., Djuric, K., & Pamucar, D. (2020). Ranking and Assessment of the Efficiency of Social Media using the Fuzzy AHP-Z Number Model - Fuzzy MABAC. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 17(3), 43-70.
Bozanic, D., Milic, A., Tesic, D., Sałabun, W., & Pamucar, D. (2021). D numbers – fucom – fuzzy rafsi model for selecting the group of construction machines for enabling mobility. FACTA UNIVERSITATIS - Mechanical Engineering, 19(3), 447 – 471. https://doi.org/10.22190/FUME210318047B
Dimic Srđan, H., & Ljubojevic Srđan, D. (2019). Decision making model in forest road network management. Military Technical Courier, 67(1), 93-115. https://doi.org/10.5937/vojtehg67-18446
Ersoy, N. (2021). Selecting the Best Normalization Technique for ROV Method: Towards a Real Life Application. Gazi University Journal of Science, 34(2) 592-609. https://doi.org/10.35378/gujs.767525
Fernando, M.M.L, Escobedo, J.L.P., Azzaro-Pantel, C., Pibouleau, L., Domenech, S., & Aguilar-Lasserre, A. (2011). Selecting the best alternative based on a hybrid multiobjective GA-MCDM approach for new product development in the pharmaceutical industry. IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Multicriteria Decision-Making (MDCM), https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5949271
Krishnan, A.R. (2022). Past efforts in determining suitable normalization methods for multi-criteria decision-making: A short survey. Frontiers in Big Data, 5, 990699. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2022.990699
Lakshmi, T.M, & Venkatesan, V.P. (2014). A Comparison of Various Normalization in Techniques for Order Performance by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). International Journal of Computing Algorithm, 3(3), 255-259.
Lamba, M., Munjal, G., & Gigras, Y. (2022). A MCDM-based performance of classification algorithms in breast cancer prediction for imbalanced datasets. International Journal of Intelligent Engineering Informatics, 9(5), 425-454. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIEI.2021.10044779
Le, H.A., Hoang, X.T., Trieu, Q.H., Pham, D.L., & Le, X. H. (2020). Determining the Best Dressing Parameters for External Cylindrical Grinding Using MABAC Method. Applied scicences, 12(16), 8287. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12168287
Malkin, S. & Guo, C. (2008). Grinding technology: Theory and Applications of Machining with Abrasives (2nd Edition). New York: Industrial Press.
Marinescu, I.D., Hitchiner, M.P., Uhlmann, E., Rowe, W.B., & Inasaki, I. (2006). Handbook of machining with grinding wheels. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b19462
Muhammad, L.J., Badi, I., Haruna, A.A., & Mohammed, I.A. (2021). Selecting the Best Municipal Solid Waste Management Techniques in Nigeria Using Multi Criteria Decision Making Techniques. Reports in Mechanical Engineering, 2(1), 180-189. https://doi.org/10.31181/rme2001021801b
Nguyen, V.C, Nguyen, T.D, & Tien, D.H. (2021). Cutting Parameter Optimization in Finishing Milling of Ti-6Al-4V Titanium Alloy under MQL Condition using TOPSIS and ANOVA Analysis. Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, 11(1), 6775-6780. https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.4015
Ouattara, A., Pibouleau, L., Azzaro-Pantel, C., Domenech, S., Baudet, P., & Yao, B. (2022). Economic and environmental strategies for process design. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 36, 174-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2011.09.016
Palczewski, K., & Sałabun, W. (2019). Influence of various normalization methods in PROMETHEE II: an empirical study on the selection of the airport location. Procedia Computer Science, 159, 2051-2060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.378
Pamucar, D., Behzad, M., Bozanic, D., & Behzad, M. (2021). Decision making to support sustainable energy policies corresponding to agriculture sector: Case study in Iran's Caspian Sea coastline. Journal of Cleaner Production, 292, 125302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125302
Singh, R., Dureja, J.S, Dogra, M., & Randhawa, J.S. (2019). Optimization of machining parameters under MQL turning of Ti-6Al-4V alloy with textured tool using multi-attribute decision-making methods. World Journal of Engineering, 16(5), 648–659. https://doi.org/10.1108/WJE-06-2019-0170
Stanujkic, D., Zavadskas, E.K., Karbasevic, D., Smarandache, F., Turskis, Z. (2017). The use of the PIvot Pairwise RElative Criteria Importance Assessment method for determining the weights of criteria. Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 20(4), 116-133.
Trung, D.D. (2022). Development of data normalization methods for multi-criteria decision making: applying for MARCOS method. Manufacturing review, 9, 22. https://doi.org/10.1051/mfreview/2022019
Varatharajulu, M., Duraiselvam, M., Bhuvanesh Kumar, M., Jayaprakash, G., & Baskar, N. (2021). Multi criteria decision making through TOPSIS and COPRAS on drilling parameters of magnesium AZ91. Journal of Magnesium and Alloys, 8(38), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jma.2021.05.006
Wen, Z., Liao, H., & Zavadskas, E.K. (2020). MACONT: Mixed Aggregation by Comprehensive Normalization Technique for Multi-Criteria Analysis. Informatica, 31(4), 857-880. https://doi.org/10.15388/20-INFOR417
Zopounidis, C., & Doumpos, M. (2017). Multiple Criteria Decision Making - Applications in Management and Engineering. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39292-9
