Decision makers in the manufacturing sector frequently face the problem of assessing a wide range of alternative options and selecting one based on a set of conflicting attributes. There is a need for simple, systematic, and logical methods or mathematical tools to guide decision makers in considering a number of selection attributes and their interrelationships and in making right decisions. This paper proposes a novel multiple-attribute decision-making (MADM) method for solving the deterministic decision-making problems of the manufacturing environment. The method considers the objective weights of importance of the attributes as well as the subjective preferences of the decision maker to decide the integrated weights of importance of the attributes. Furthermore, the method uses fuzzy logic to convert the qualitative attributes into quantitative attributes. Three examples are presented to illustrate the potential of the proposed method.
TabucanonM. T., Multiple criteria decision making in industry (Amsterdam: Elsevier1989).
2.
RaoR. V., Decision making in the manufacturing environment using graph theory and fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods (London: Springer-Verlag2007).
3.
SaatyT. L., Analytical hierarchy process (New York, New York: McGraw Hill1980).
4.
SaatyT. L., Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with AHP (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: RWS Publications2000).
TriantaphyllouE., Multi-criteria decision making methods: A comparative study (London: Springer-Verlag2000).
7.
RoyB., ‘Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE)’la Revue d'Informatique et de Recherche Opérationelle (RIRO)8 (1961): 57–75.
8.
BransJ. P.MareschalB.VinckeP., ‘PROMETHEE: a new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis’: a new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysisProceedings of Operational Research (1984), pp. 477–490 (North Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam).
9.
OpricovicS.TzengG. H., ‘Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS’Eur. J. Oper. Res.156 (2002): 445–455.
10.
OpricovicS.TzengG. H., ‘Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods’Eur. J. Oper. Res.178 (2002): 514–529.
11.
DengJ. L., ‘Introduction to grey system theory’J. Grey Syst.1 (1981): 1–24.
12.
CharnesA.CooperW.RhodesE., ‘Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units’Eur. J. Oper. Res.2 (1971): 429–444.
13.
DurcanO.AguiloJ., ‘Computer-aided machine-tool selection based on a Fuzzy-AHP approach’Expert Syst. Applic.34 (2002): 1787–1794.
14.
DagdevirenM.YükselI., ‘Developing a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) model for behavior-based safety management’Inform. Sci.178 (2002): 1717–1733.
15.
MahdaviI.AmiriN. M.HeidarzadeA.NourifarR., ‘Designing a model of fuzzy TOPSIS in multiple criteria decision making’Appl. Math. Comput.206 (2002): 607–617.
16.
İçY. T.YurdakulM., ‘Development of a quick credibility scoring decision support system using fuzzy TOPSIS’Expert Syst. Applic.37 (2012): 567–574.
17.
ChenS. J.HwangC. L., ‘Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making - methods and applications’Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems (Berlin: Springer-Verlag1992).
18.
RaoR. V.ParnichkunM., ‘Flexible manufacturing system selection using a combinatorial mathematics-based decision-making method’Int. J. Prod. Res.47 (2002): 6981–6998 DOI: 10.1080/00207540802389227.
19.
ShannonC. E., ‘A mathematical theory of communication’Bell Syst. Tech. J.27 (1941): 379–423 and 623–656.
20.
EdwardsW.NewmanJ. R.ArkesH. R.HammondK. R., ‘Multiattribute evaluation' InJudgment and decision making: An interdisciplinary reader (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press1986).
21.
ManshadiB. D.MahmudiH.AbedianA.MahmudiR., ‘A novel method for materials selection in mechanical design: combination of non-linear normalization and a modified digital logic method’Mater. Des.28 (2002): 8–15.
22.
ZelenyM., Multiple criteria decision making (New York, New York: McGraw Hill1982).
23.
AshbyM. F.BrechetY. J. M.CebonD.SalvoL., ‘Selection strategies for materials and processes’Mater. Des.25 (2002): 51–67.
24.
AshbyM. F., Materials selection in mechanical design (New York, New York: Pergamon Press1995).
25.
AshbyM. F.JohnsonK., Materials and design: The art and science of materials selection in product design (Oxford, UK: Butterworth Heinemann2002).
26.
EdwardsK. L., ‘Selecting materials for optimum use in engineering components’Mater. Des.26 (2002): 469–473.
27.
SapuanS. M., ‘A knowledge-based system for materials selection in mechanical engineering design’Mater. Des.22 (2002): 687–695.
28.
AmenR.VomackaP., ‘Case-based reasoning as a tool for materials selection’Mater. Des.22 (2002): 353–358.
29.
ZhaX. F., ‘A web-based advisory system for process and material selection in concurrent product design for a manufacturing environment’Int. J. Adv. Mfg Technol.25 (2002): 233–243.
30.
JalhamI. S., ‘Decision-making integrated information technology (IIT) approach for material selection’Int. J. Comput. Applic. Technol.25 (2002): 65–71.
31.
ShanianA.SavadogoO., ‘A material selection model based on the concept of multiple attribute decision making’Mater. Des.27 (2002): 329–337.
32.
ShanianA.SavadogoO., ‘A non-compensatory compromised solution for material selection of bipolar plates for polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) using ELECTRE IV’Electrochim. Acta51 (2002): 5307–5315.
33.
ShanianA.SavadogoO., ‘TOPSIS multiple-criteria decision support analysis for material selection of metallic bipolar plates for polymer electrolyte fuel cell’J. Power Sourc.159 (2002): 1095–1104.
34.
RaoR. V., ‘A material selection model using graph theory and matrix approach’Mater. Sci. Engng A431 (2002): 248–255.
35.
ChanJ. W. K.TongT. K. L., ‘Multi-criteria material selections and end-of-life product strategy: a grey relational approach’Mater. Des.28 (2002): 1539–1546.
36.
RaoR. V., ‘A decision making methodology for material selection using an improved compromise ranking method’Mater. Des.29 (2002):1949–1954.
37.
ChatterjeeP.AthawaleV. M.ChakrabortyS., ‘Selection of materials using compromise ranking and outranking methods’Mater. Des.30 (2002): 4043–4053.
38.
KhabbazR. S.ManshadiB. D.AbedianA.MahmudiR., ‘A simplified fuzzy logic approach for materials selection in mechanical engineering design’Mater. Des.30 (2002): 687–697.
39.
ManiyaK.BhattM. G., ‘A selection of material using a novel type decision-making method: Preference selection index method’Mater. Des.31 (2012): 1785–1789.
40.
AgrawalV. P.KohliV.GuptaS., ‘Computer aided robot selection: the ‘multiple attribute decision making’ approach’Int. J. Prod. Res.29 (1991): 1629–1644.
41.
LiangG. H.WangM. J., ‘A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making approach for robot selection’Robot. Comput. Aided Mfg10 (1991): 267–274.
42.
KhoujaM., ‘The use of data envelopment analysis for technology selection’Comput. Ind. Engng28 (1991): 123–132.
43.
GohC. H., ‘Analytic hierarchy process for robot selection’J. Mfg Syst.16 (1991): 381–386.
44.
ParkanC.WuM. L., ‘Decision-making and performance measurement models with applications to robot selection’Comput. Ind. Engng36 (1991): 503–523.
45.
BragliaM.PetroniA., ‘Evaluating and selecting investments in industrial robots’Int. J. Prod. Res.37 (1991): 4157–4178.
46.
ChuT. C.LinY. C., ‘A fuzzy TOPSIS method for robot selection’Int. J. Adv. Mfg Technol.21 (2002): 284–290.
47.
BhangaleP. P.AgrawalV. P.SahaS. K., ‘Attribute based specification, comparison and selection of a robot’Mech. Mach. Theor.39 (2002): 1345–1366.
48.
KarsakE. E.AhiskaS. S., ‘Practical common weight multi-criteria decision making approach with an improved discriminating power for technology selection’Int. J. Prod. Res.43 (2002): 1537–1554.
49.
RaoR. V.PadmanabhanK. K., ‘Selection, identification and comparison of industrial robots using digraph and matrix methods’Robot. Comput. Integrated Mfg22 (2002): 373–383.
50.
RoweG. W., ‘Lubricant testing for grinding operations’Wear77 (1981): 73–80.
51.
SunJ.GeP.ZhenchangL., ‘Two-grade fuzzy synthetic decision-making system with use of an analytic hierarchy process for performance evaluation of grinding fluids’Tribol. Int.34 (2002): 683–688.
52.
RaoR. V.GandhiO. P., ‘Digraph and matrix method for selection, identification and comparison of metal-cutting fluids’Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology215 (2002): 25–33 DOI: 10.1243/1350650011541710.
53.
TanX. C.LiuF.CaoH. J.ZhangH., ‘A decision-making framework model of cutting fluid selection for green manufacturing and a case study’J. Mater. Process. Technol.129 (2002): 467–470.
54.
RaoR. V.PatelB. K., ‘Decision making in the manufacturing environment using an improved PROMETHEE method’Int. J. Prod. Res.48 (2012): 4665–4682 DOI: 10.1080/00207540903049415.
