A study on multi-criteria decision-making in powder mixed electric discharge machining cylindrical shaped parts
In life as well as in engineering, many times, it is necessary to choose the best option among many different options. That will be more difficult when the criteria given for the selection contradict each other. For example, when external cylindrical grinding, the minimum surface roughness requirement necessitates a small depth of cut and feed rate. The material removal rate will be reduced in this case, and this requirement will conflict with the maximum material removal rate requirement. To solve the above problem, a very useful tool is multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM). In this paper, for the first time, MCDM results for powder mixed discharge machining (PMEDM) cylindrical parts of SKD11 tool steel with copper electrodes have been presented. In this work, eighteen experiments with the L18 (16×53) design using the Taguchi method were conducted. Six main input process parameters include the powder concentration, the pulse current, the servo voltage, the pulse on time, and the pulse off time. To select an alternative that simultaneously ensures two criteria including minimum surface roughness (RS) and maximum material removal speed (MRS), four different MCDM methods including MAIRCA (Multi-Attributive Ideal-Real Comparative Analysis), MARCOS (Measurement of Alternatives and Ranking according to Compromise Solution), TOPSIS (Technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution), and EAMR (Area-based Method of Ranking) and two methods of criteria weight calculation including MEREC (Method based on the Removal Effects of Criteria) and Entropy methods were selected. The results of MCDM when PMEDM SKD11 tool steel cylindrical parts with two methods for weight determination and four methods for solving MCDM problem were evaluated. In addition, the best alternative to ensure simultaneous minimum RS and maximum MRS was proposed.
Zolpakar, N. A., Yasak, M. F., Pathak, S. (2021). A review: use of evolutionary algorithm for optimisation of machining parameters. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 115 (1), 31–47. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-021-07155-7
Nobre, F. F., Trotta, L. T. F., Gomes, L. F. A. M. (1999). Multi‐criteria decision making–an approach to setting priorities in health care. Statistics in medicine, 18 (23), 3345–3354. doi: http://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19991215)18:23<3345::aid-sim321>3.0.co;2-7
Kou, G., Wu, W. (2014). Multi-criteria decision analysis for emergency medical service assessment. Annals of Operations Research, 223 (1), 239–254. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-014-1630-6
Alkharabsheh, A., Moslem, S., Oubahman, L., Duleba, S. (2021). An integrated approach of multi-criteria decision-making and grey theory for evaluating urban public transportation systems. Sustainability, 13 (5), 2740. doi: http://doi.org/10.3390/su13052740
Aydın, S., Kahraman, C. (2014). Vehicle selection for public transportation using an integrated multi criteria decision making approach: A case of Ankara. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 26 (5), 2467–2481. doi: http://doi.org/10.3233/ifs-130917
Wibowo, A. S., Permanasari, A. E., Fauziati, S. (2016). Combat aircraft effectiveness assessment using hybrid multi-criteria decision making methodology. 2016 2nd International Conference on Science and Technology-Computer (ICST). doi: http://doi.org/10.1109/icstc.2016.7877358
Petrović, I., Kankaraš, M. (2018). DEMATEL-AHP multi-criteria decision making model for the selection and evaluation of criteria for selecting an aircraft for the protection of air traffic. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 1 (2), 93–110. doi: http://doi.org/10.31181/dmame1802091p
Temiz, I., Calis, G. (2017). Selection of construction equipment by using multi-criteria decision making methods. Procedia Engineering, 196, 286–293. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.07.201
Antoniou, F., Aretoulis, G. N. (2018). Comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods in choosing contract type for highway construction in Greece. International journal of management and decision making, 17 (1), 1–28. doi: http://doi.org/10.1504/ijmdm.2018.10008499
Trung, D. D. (2021). Application of TOPSIS and PIV methods for multi-criteria decision making in hard turning process. Journal of Machine Engineering, 21, (4), 57–71. doi: http://doi.org/10.36897/jme/142599
Trung, D., Thinh, H. (2021). A multi-criteria decision-making in turning process using the MAIRCA, EAMR, MARCOS and TOPSIS methods: A comparative study. Advances in Production Engineering & Management, 16 (4), 443–456. doi: http://doi.org/10.14743/apem2021.4.412
Do Trung, D. (2022). Multi-criteria decision making under the MARCOS method and the weighting methods: applied to milling, grinding and turning processes. Manufacturing Review, 9 (3). doi: http://doi.org/10.1051/mfreview/2022003
Tran, Q.-P., Nguyen V.-N., Huang, S.-C. (2020). Drilling process on CFRP: multi-criteria decision-making with entropy weight using grey-TOPSIS method. Applied Sciences, 10 (20), 7207. doi: http://doi.org/10.3390/app10207207
Varatharajulu, M., Duraiselvam, M., Kumar, M. B., Jayaprakash, G., Baskar, N. (2021). Multi criteria decision making through TOPSIS and COPRAS on drilling parameters of magnesium AZ91. Journal of Magnesium and Alloys. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jma.2021.05.006
Phan, N. H., Muthuramalingam, T., Minh, N. D., Van Duc, N. (2022). Enhancing surface morphology of machined SKD61 die steel in EDM process using DEAR approach based multi criteria decision making. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 16 (3), 1155–1161. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-022-00859-4
Ray, A. (2015). A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making model for green electrical discharge machining. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. Springer, 33–43. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2217-0_4
Huu Phan, N., Muthuramalingam, T. (2020). Multi Criteria Decision Making of Vibration Assisted EDM Process Parameters on Machining Silicon Steel Using Taguchi-DEAR Methodology. Silicon, 13 (6), 1879–1885. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s12633-020-00573-4
Huu-Phan, N., Tien-Long, B., Quang-Dung, L., Duc-Toan, N., Muthuramalingam, T. (2019). Multi-Criteria Decision Making Using Preferential Selection Index in Titanium based Die-Sinking PMEDM. Journal of the Korean Society for Precision Engineering, 36 (9), 793–802. doi: http://doi.org/10.7736/kspe.2019.36.9.793
Jayaraj, J., Sundaresan, R., Chinnamuthu, S. (2019). Multi-criteria decision of W-powder mixed electro discharge drilling parameters using TOPSIS approach. Mechanics, 25 (1), 52–56. doi: http://doi.org/10.5755/j01.mech.25.1.22883
Naik, D. K., Khan, A., Majumder, H., Garg, R. K. (2018). Experimental Investigation of the PMEDM of Nickel Free Austenitic Stainless Steel: A Promising Coronary Stent Material. Silicon, 11 (2), 899–907. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s12633-018-9877-1
Dewan, P., Pradhan, B. (2014). Parametric Optimization of Powder EDM Process using Grey Relational Analysis and TOPSIS. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research and Development, 4, 1–10.
Tran, T.-H., Nguyen, M.-C., Luu, A.-T., Do, T.-V., Le, T.-Q., Vu, T.-T. et. al. (2020). Electrical Discharge Machining with SiC Powder-Mixed Dielectric: An Effective Application in the Machining Process of Hardened 90CrSi Steel. Machines, 8 (3), 36. doi: http://doi.org/10.3390/machines8030036
Pamučar, D. V., L., Lukovac, V. (2014). Selection of railway level crossings for investing in security equipment using hybrid DEMATEL-MARICА model. Proceedings of the XVI International Scientific-expert Conference on Railways, Railcon. Niš, Serbia, 89–92.
Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Puška, A., Chatterjee, P. (2020). Sustainable supplier selection in healthcare industries using a new MCDM method: Measurement of alternatives and ranking according to COmpromise solution (MARCOS). Computers & Industrial Engineering, 140, 106231. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.106231
Hwang, C.-L., Lai, Y.-J., Liu, T.-Y. (1993). A new approach for multiple objective decision making. Computers & Operations Research, 20 (8), 889–899. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(93)90109-v
Amiri, M., Antucheviciene, J. (2016). Evaluation by an area-based method of ranking interval type-2 fuzzy sets (EAMRIT-2F) for multi-criteria group decision-making. Transformations in Business and Economics, 15 (3 (39)), 76–95.
Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M. (2021). Assessment of distribution center locations using a multi-expert subjective-objective decision-making approach. Scientific Reports, 11 (1). doi: http://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-98698-y
Hieu, T. T., Thao, N. X., Thuy, L. (2019). Application of MOORA and COPRAS Models to Select Materials for Mushroom Cultivation. Vietnam Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 17 (4), 32–2331.
Copyright (c) 2022 Tran Huu Danh, Trieu Quy Huy, Pham Duc Lam, Nguyen Manh Cuong, Hoang Xuan Tu, Vu Ngoc Pi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Our journal abides by the Creative Commons CC BY copyright rights and permissions for open access journals.
Authors, who are published in this journal, agree to the following conditions:
1. The authors reserve the right to authorship of the work and pass the first publication right of this work to the journal under the terms of a Creative Commons CC BY, which allows others to freely distribute the published research with the obligatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this journal.
2. The authors have the right to conclude separate supplement agreements that relate to non-exclusive work distribution in the form in which it has been published by the journal (for example, to upload the work to the online storage of the journal or publish it as part of a monograph), provided that the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal is included.