Comparison of two methods in multi-criteria decision-making: application in transmission rod material selection

H. Thinh, N. Mai
{"title":"Comparison of two methods in multi-criteria decision-making: application in transmission rod material selection","authors":"H. Thinh, N. Mai","doi":"10.21303/2461-4262.2023.003046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Transmission rod is an indispensable part in diesel and gasoline engines. Its job is to convert rotation into translational motion or vice versa. The transmission rod material selection plays a very important role, affecting its working function and durability. This study was conducted to compare two Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods in transmission rod material selection. They are PIV (Proximity Indexed Value) method, and FUCA (Faire Un Choi Adéquat) method. Seven types of steel commonly used in transmission rods were reviewed for ranking, inclusive of: 20 steel, 40 steel, 45 steel, 18Cr2Ni4WA steel, 30 CrMoA steel, 45Mn2 steel and 40CrNi steel. Nine parameters were used as criteria to evaluate each steel including minimum yield strength, ultimate tensile strength, minimum elongation ratio, contraction ratio, modulus of elasticity, mean coefficient of thermal expansion, thermal conductivity, specific thermal capacity, and density. The weights of the criteria were calculated using three methods inclusive of MEAN weight method, Entropy weight method and MEREC weight method (Method based on the Removal Effects of Criteria). Each MCDM method was combined with the three weight methods mentioned above to rank the alternatives. The obtained results show that when using both PIV and FUCA methods to rank the alternatives, the best and worst alternatives are found regardless of the weight of the criteria. The best alternative determined using the PIV method is also the best alternative determined using the FUCA method. It means that the two PIV and FUCA methods have been shown to be equally effective. Among the seven transmission rod materials reviewed, 20 steel was identified as the best, and 40CrNi steel was identified as the worst","PeriodicalId":11804,"journal":{"name":"EUREKA: Physics and Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EUREKA: Physics and Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21303/2461-4262.2023.003046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Transmission rod is an indispensable part in diesel and gasoline engines. Its job is to convert rotation into translational motion or vice versa. The transmission rod material selection plays a very important role, affecting its working function and durability. This study was conducted to compare two Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods in transmission rod material selection. They are PIV (Proximity Indexed Value) method, and FUCA (Faire Un Choi Adéquat) method. Seven types of steel commonly used in transmission rods were reviewed for ranking, inclusive of: 20 steel, 40 steel, 45 steel, 18Cr2Ni4WA steel, 30 CrMoA steel, 45Mn2 steel and 40CrNi steel. Nine parameters were used as criteria to evaluate each steel including minimum yield strength, ultimate tensile strength, minimum elongation ratio, contraction ratio, modulus of elasticity, mean coefficient of thermal expansion, thermal conductivity, specific thermal capacity, and density. The weights of the criteria were calculated using three methods inclusive of MEAN weight method, Entropy weight method and MEREC weight method (Method based on the Removal Effects of Criteria). Each MCDM method was combined with the three weight methods mentioned above to rank the alternatives. The obtained results show that when using both PIV and FUCA methods to rank the alternatives, the best and worst alternatives are found regardless of the weight of the criteria. The best alternative determined using the PIV method is also the best alternative determined using the FUCA method. It means that the two PIV and FUCA methods have been shown to be equally effective. Among the seven transmission rod materials reviewed, 20 steel was identified as the best, and 40CrNi steel was identified as the worst
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
多标准决策中两种方法的比较:在传动杆材料选择中的应用
传动杆是柴油和汽油发动机中不可或缺的部件。其作用是将旋转运动转换为平移运动,反之亦然。传动杆材料的选择起着非常重要的作用,会影响其工作功能和耐用性。本研究对传动杆材料选择中的两种多标准决策(MCDM)方法进行了比较。这两种方法分别是 PIV(近似指数值)法和 FUCA(Faire Un Choi Adéquat)法。对输电杆常用的七种钢材进行了排序,包括20 钢、40 钢、45 钢、18Cr2Ni4WA 钢、30 CrMoA 钢、45Mn2 钢和 40CrNi 钢。评价每种钢材的标准有九个参数,包括最小屈服强度、极限抗拉强度、最小伸长率、收缩率、弹性模量、平均热膨胀系数、热导率、比热容和密度。标准权重采用三种方法计算,包括 MEAN 权重法、熵权重法和 MEREC 权重法(基于标准去除效应的方法)。将每种 MCDM 方法与上述三种权重法相结合,对备选方案进行排序。结果表明,在使用 PIV 和 FUCA 方法对备选方案进行排序时,无论标准的权重如何,都能找到最佳和最差的备选方案。使用 PIV 方法确定的最佳备选方案也是使用 FUCA 方法确定的最佳备选方案。这说明 PIV 和 FUCA 两种方法的效果相当。在审查的七种传动杆材料中,20 号钢被认定为最佳材料,而 40CrNi 钢被认定为最差材料。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
EUREKA: Physics and Engineering
EUREKA: Physics and Engineering Engineering-Engineering (all)
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
78
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Application of the multi-criteria analysis method mairca, spotis, comet for the optimisation of sustainable electricity technology development Investigation and establishment of rational geometric factors of die in the deep drawing without a blank holder A rheophysical study of the non-newtonian behavior of water flow in thin channels Study of the influence of the technical level of railway vehicles on braking characteristics The study of the efficiency evaluation of the ventilation system of the poultry house in the summer
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1