Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

, Volume 38, Issue 9, pp 2579–2594 | Cite as

CAD/CAM System Selection: A Multi-Component Hybrid Fuzzy MCDM Model

  • V. Roshanaei
  • Behnam Vahdani
  • S. M. Mousavi
  • M. Mousakhani
  • G. Zhang
Research Article - Systems Engineering
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

In this article, for the purpose of solving the CAD/CAM software selection problem, a multi-component hybrid fuzzy MCDM model is proposed. The main contribution of this paper is to exquisitely and rigorously assemble the already proven techniques into a holistic MCDM model. First, we apply the hierarchy structure to simultaneously specify both the criteria and the sub-criteria along with their weights in CAD/CAMselection problem.Then,we take advantage of adaptive AHP approach (A3) tool to concurrently mitigate the inconsistency rate of the AHP matrices and enhance the computational time efficiency of the considered problem. Second, since the deterministic evaluations of alternatives versus criteria are challenging task, we utilize linguistic variables which are expressed as triangular fuzzy numbers to facilitate and expedite the evaluation process. To this end, a fuzzy approach is employed to obtain the overall performance of alternatives versus criteria. Last but not least, we put to use the concept of TOPSIS to acquire the closeness coefficient to determine the ranking order of all alternatives by calculating their distances to both positive ideal and negative ideal solutions. Finally, a case study is numerically solved in automotive industry in Iran to demonstrate the efficiency (computational time reduction) and effectiveness (inconsistency ratio reduction) of our proposed hybrid MCDM model.

Keywords

Fuzzy set theory MCDM Computer-aided design (CAD) Computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) Linguistic variables TOPSIS Adaptive AHP approach Genetic algorithm 
Open image in new window
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sarker R., Rahman S.M., Bignall B.: Application of multimedia technology in manufacturing: A review. Comput. Ind. 38, 43–52 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kannan G., Vinay V.P.: Multi-criteria decision making for the selection of CAD/CAM system. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. 2(3), 151–159 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shyur H.J.: COTs evaluation using modified TOPSIS and ANP. Appl. Math. Comput. 177, 251–259 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kontio, J.: A case study in applying a systematic method for cots selection. In: Proceedings of IEEE, ICSE-18, pp. 201–209 (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leung K.P.R.H., Leung H.K.N.: On the efficiency of domain based cots product selection method. Inf. Softw. Technol. 44, 703–715 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mikhailov L., Singh M.G.: Fuzzy analytic network process and its application to the development of decision support systems. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C Appl. Rev. 33, 33–41 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carney D.J., Wallnau K.C.: A basis for evaluation of commercial software. Inf. Softw. Technol. 40, 851–860 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Min H.: Selection of software: The analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 122, 42–52 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lai V.S., Trueblood R.P., Wong B.K.: Software selection: a case study of the application of the analytical hierarchical process to the selection of a multimedia authoring system. Inf. Manage. 36, 221–232 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chien C.F., Wang M.J.J., Wei C.C.: An AHP-based approach to ERP system selection. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 96, 47–62 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haq A.N., Kannan G.: Design of integration of supplier selection and multi echelon distribution inventory model in a built-to order supply chain environment. Int. J. Prod. Res. 44((10), 1963–1985 (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee J.W., Kim S.H.: Using analytic network process and goal programming for interdependent information system project selection. Comput. Oper. Res. 27, 367–382 (2000)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Teltumbde A.: A framework of evaluating ERP projects. Int. J. Prod. Res. 38, 4507–4520 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sarkis J., Sundarraj R.P.: Factors for strategic evaluation of enterprise information technologies. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 30, 196–220 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Davis M.A., Badri D., Davis D.: A comprehensive 0–1 goal programming model for project selection. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 19, 243–252 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wen H.T., Jun D.L., Jau Y.L., Sin J.L., Shaw M.J.: A MCDM approach for sourcing strategy mix decision in IT projects. Exp. Syst. Appl. 37, 3870–3886 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Semih Ö., Selin S.K., Elif I.: Long term supplier selection using a combined fuzzy MCDM approach: A case study for a telecommunication company. Exp. Syst. Appl. 36, 3887–3895 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wong W.K., Zeng X.H., Au W.M.R., Mok P.Y., Leung S.Y.S.: A fashion mix-and-match expert system for fashion retailers using fuzzy screening approach. Exp. Syst. Appl. 36, 1750–1764 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ya T.L., Chia L.L., Hsiao C.Y., Tzeng G.-H.: A novel hybrid MCDM approach for outsourcing vendor selection: A case study for a semiconductor company in Taiwan. Exp. Syst. Appl. 37, 4796–4804 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Au K.F., Wong W.K., Zeng X.H.: Decision model for country site selection of overseas clothing plants. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 29, 408–417 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lin C.C., Wang W.C., Yu W.D.: Improving AHP for construction with an adaptive AHP approach (A3). Autom. Constr. 17, 180–187 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mousavi, S.M.; Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R.; Heydar, M.; Ebrahimnejad, S.: Multi-criteria decision-making for plant location selection: an integrated Delphi-AHP-PROMETHEE methodology. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. (2011) doi: 10.1007/s13369-012-0361-8
  23. 23.
    Saaty, T.L.: The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. McGraw-Hill, New York (1980)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Goldberg, D.: Genetic Algorithm in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning. Addison-Wesley Publishing, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Michalewicz, Z.: Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolution Programs. Third ed. Springer, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Buckley J.J.: Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 17, 233–247 (1985)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kaufmann, A.; Gupta, M.M.: Introduction to Fuzzy Arithmetic: Theory and Applications. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Negi, D.S.: Fuzzy analysis and optimization. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Industrial Engineering, Kansas State University (1989)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zimmermann, H.J.: Fuzzy Set Theory and its Applications, second ed. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (1991)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vahdani B., Mousavi S.M., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R.: Group decision making based on novel fuzzy modified TOPSIS method. Appl. Math. Model. 35, 4257–4269 (2011)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mousavi, S.M.; Jolai, F.; Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R.: A fuzzy stochastic multi-attribute group decision-making approach for selection problems. Group Decis. Negot. (2011) doi: 10.1007/s10726-011-9259-1
  32. 32.
    Amiri M., Zandieh M., Vahdani B., Soltani R., Roshanaei V.: An integrated eigenvector–DEA–TOPSIS methodology for portfolio risk evaluation in the FOREX spot market. Exp. Syst. Appl. 37, 509–516 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vahdani B., Hadipour H.: Extension of the ELECTRE method based on interval-valued fuzzy sets. Soft Comput. 15(3), 569–579 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bellman B.E., Zadeh L.A.: Decision-making in a fuzzy environment. Manage. Sci. 17(4), 141–164 (1970)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hwang, C.L.; Yoon, K.: Multiple Attributes Decision Making Methods and Applications. Springer, New York (1981)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mojtahedi S.M.H., Mousavi S.M., Makui A.: Project risk identification and assessment simultaneously using multi-attribute group decision making technique. Saf. Sci. 48(4), 499–507 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Roshanaei
    • 1
  • Behnam Vahdani
    • 2
  • S. M. Mousavi
    • 3
  • M. Mousakhani
    • 4
  • G. Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems EngineeringUniversity of WindsorWindsorCanada
  2. 2.Faculty of Industrial and Mechanical Engineering, Qazvin BranchIslamic Azad UniversityQazvinIran
  3. 3.Young Researches Club, South Tehran BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran
  4. 4.Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Science and Research BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran

Personalised recommendations