Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Attribute-based characterization, coding, and selection of joining processes using a novel MADM approach

  • Application Article
  • Published:
OPSEARCH Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article aims to present a systematic and robust approach for joining process selection. The proposed approach identifies important attributes for this decision based on a literature survey. It is demonstrated that for most of the commercially available joining process choices, the specifications available from the suppliers of process equipment do not address all decision concerns. An approach to codifying the required specification information is suggested to aid in initiating the selection process. The demonstrated selection process consists of searching alternatives based on meeting the threshold of a set of critical attributes and then evaluation of choices by a novel multi-attribute decision-making (MADM) procedure, which is developed by hybridization of the Best-Worst Method (BWM), Sample Variance Analogy (SVA) and Multi-Objective Optimization on the basis of Ratio Analysis plus full Multiplicative form (MULTIMOORA) and is named as BWM-SVA-MULTIMOORA approach. The approach is demonstrated by an example of joining process selection for stainless steel-based components in a nuclear plant. Further, rank reversal and sensitivity analysis has been performed to demonstrate the robustness and stability of the ranking obtained.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

The raw/processed data required to reproduce these findings will be available on email request.

References

  1. Darwish, S.M., Al Tamimi, A., Al-Habdan, S.: A knowledge base for metal welding process selection. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 37, 1007–1023 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(96)00073-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Omar, M., Soltan, H.: A framework for welding process selection. SN Appl. Sci. 2, 1–12 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-2144-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Omar, M., Janada, K., Soltan, H.: FAQT: a precise system for welding process selection. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 1–14 (2022)

  4. Mathew, M., Patanwar, S.K., Gupta, S., Sachdev, T.: Performance evaluation of arc welding processes for the manufacturing of pressure vessel using novel hybrid MCDM technique. Int. J. Inf. Decis. Sci. 13, 235–253 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Maleki, H., Zahir, S.: A comprehensive literature review of the rank reversal phenomenon in the analytic hierarchy process. J. Multi-Criteria Decis. Anal. 20, 141–155 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.1479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Aires, R.F.D.F., Ferreira, L.: The rank reversal problem in multi-criteria decision making: a literature review. Pesqui. Oper. 38, 331–362 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1590/0101-7438.2018.038.02.0331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. LeBacq, C., Brechet, Y., Shercliff, H.R., Jeggy, T., Salvo, L.: Selection of joining methods in mechanical design. Mater. Des. 23, 405–416 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Esawi, A.M.K., Ashby, M.F.: Computer-based selection of joining processes methods, software and case studies. Mater. Des. 25, 555–564 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2004.03.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Taylor, W.A.: No Title. In: Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Problems. pp. 545–561 (1986)

  10. Wang, D.-K., Cao, J.-M., Deng, W., Yang, J.-F.: The application of expert system in welding process qualification. Beijing Gongye Daxue Xuebao J. Beijing Univ. Technol. 32, 769–772 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Arntz, K., Wegener, M., Liu, Y.: Computer aided manufacturing supported process planning of additive manufacturing by laser deposition welding. J. Laser Appl. 27, S14002 (2015). https://doi.org/10.2351/1.4823748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ravisankar, V., Balasubramanian, V., Muralidharan, C.: Selection of welding process to fabricate butt joints of high strength aluminium alloys using analytic hierarchic process. Mater. Des. 27, 373–380 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2004.11.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Balasubramanian, V., Varahamoorthy, R., Ramachandran, C.S., Muralidharan, C.: Selection of welding process for hardfacing on carbon steels based on quantitative and qualitative factors. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 40, 887–897 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-008-1406-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jafarian, M., Vahdat, S.E.: A fuzzy multi-attribute approach to select the welding process at high pressure vessel manufacturing. J. Manuf. Process. 14, 250–256 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2011.10.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mirhedayatian, S.M., Vahdat, S.E., Jelodar, M.J., Saen, R.F.: Welding process selection for repairing nodular cast iron engine block by integrated fuzzy data envelopment analysis and TOPSIS approaches. Mater. Des. 43, 272–282 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.07.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Saad, M.H., Darras, B.M., Nazzal, M.A.: Evaluation of welding processes based on multi-dimensional sustainability assessment model. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. Green Technol. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684-019-00184-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Saluja, R.S., Singh, V.: Subjective factors consideration in the selection of welding technique for welded tube manufacturing. In: Narayanan, R.G., Joshi, S.N., Dixit, U.S. (eds.) Advances in Computational Methods in Manufacturing. pp. 205–213. Springer Singapore, Singapore (2019)

  18. Saluja, R.S., Singh, V.: MADM-based approach for selection of welding process for aluminum tube manufacturing. In: Venkata Rao, R., Taler, J. (eds.) Advanced Engineering Optimization Through Intelligent Techniques, pp. 441–450. Springer Singapore, Singapore (2020)

  19. Saluja, R.S., Singh, V.: A fuzzy multi-attribute decision making model for selection of welding process for grey cast iron. Mater. Today Proc. 28, 1194–1199 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.01.108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kumar, A., Agrawal, V.P.: Attribute based specification, comparison and selection of electroplating system using MADM approach. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 10815–10827 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.06.141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Phaneendra Kiran, C., Clement, S., Agrawal, V.P.: Coding, evaluation and optimal selection of a mechatronic system. Expert Syst. Appl. 38, 9704–9712 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Prabhakaran, R.T.D., Babu, B.J.C., Agrawal, V.P.: Optimum selection of a composite product system using MADM approach. Mater. Manuf. Process. 21, 883–891 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1080/10426910600773472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rezaei, J.: Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: some properties and a linear model. Omega (United Kingdom). 64, 126–130 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.12.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Maniya, K., Bhatt, M.G.: A selection of material using a novel type decision-making method: preference selection index method. Mater. Des. 31, 1785–1789 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2009.11.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hafezalkotob, A., Hami-Dindar, A., Rabie, N., Hafezalkotob, A.: A decision support system for agricultural machines and equipment selection: a case study on olive harvester machines. Comput. Electron. Agric. 148, 207–216 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2018.03.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hafezalkotob, A., Hafezalkotob, A., Liao, H., Herrera, F.: An overview of MULTIMOORA for multi-criteria decision-making: theory, developments, applications, and challenges. Inf. Fusion 51, 145–177 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2018.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Brauers, W.K.M., Zavadskas, E.K.: The MOORA method and its application to privatization in a transition economy by a new method : the MOORA method. Control Cybern. 35, 445–469 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Karel Brauers, W.M., Kazimieras Zavadskas, E.: Robustness of MULTIMOORA: a method for multi-objective optimization. Informatica 23, 1–25 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Martinsen, K., Hu, S.J., Carlson, B.E.: Joining of dissimilar materials. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 64, 679–699 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2015.05.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kalpakjian, S.: Manufacturing Processes for Engineering Materials. Pearson Education India (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Veilleux Raymond, F., Petro Louis W.: Tool and manufacturing engineers hand-book. Manufacturing Management. 5, (1998) 4th edition Society of Manufacturing Engineers; ISBN 978-0-872633-06-3

  32. Guru, S., Mahalik, D.K.: A comparative study on performance measurement of Indian public sector banks using AHP-TOPSIS and AHP-grey relational analysis. Opsearch 56, 1213–1239 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12597-019-00411-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Agarwal, S., Kant, R., Shankar, R.: Exploring sustainability balanced scorecard for performance evaluation of humanitarian organizations. Clean. Logist. Supply Chain. 3, 100026 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clscn.2021.100026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Agarwal, S., Kant, R., Shankar, R.: Evaluating solutions to overcome humanitarian supply chain management barriers: a hybrid fuzzy SWARA–Fuzzy WASPAS approach. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 51, 101838 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Løken, E.: Use of multicriteria decision analysis methods for energy planning problems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 11, 1584–1595 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2005.11.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rezaei, J.: Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega (United Kingdom). 53, 49–57 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Chatterjee, S., Chakraborty, S.: A multi-attributive ideal-real comparative analysis-based approach for piston material selection. Opsearch (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12597-021-00536-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sharma, P., Singhal, S.: Analysis of facility layout alternatives using proposed integrated approach. Opsearch 54, 1–20 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12597-016-0266-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Brauers, W.K.M., Zavadskas, E.K.: Project management by multimoora as an instrument for transition economies. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. (2010). https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2010.01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Yan, J., Gao, M., Zeng, X.: Study on microstructure and mechanical properties of 304 stainless steel joints by TIG, laser and laser-TIG hybrid welding. Opt. Lasers Eng. 48, 512–517 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlaseng.2009.08.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Rajasekaran, R., Lakshminarayanan, A.K., Vasudevan, M., Vasantharaja, P.: Role of welding processes on microstructure and mechanical properties of nuclear grade stainless steel joints. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part L J. Mater. Des. Appl. 233, 2335–2351 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1177/1464420719849448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Tomas M, G.S.: Industrial laser solutions. Laser welding in tube production, https://www.industrial-lasers.com/articles/print/volume-29/issue-6/features/laser-welding-in-tube-production.html

  43. García-Cascales, M.S., Lamata, M.T.: On rank reversal and TOPSIS method. Math. Comput. Model. 56, 123–132 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2011.12.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Mufazzal, S., Muzakkir, S.M.: A new multi-criterion decision making (MCDM) method based on proximity indexed value for minimizing rank reversals. Comput. Ind. Eng. 119, 427–438 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.03.045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Aires, R.F.D.F., Ferreira, L.: A new approach to avoid rank reversal cases in the TOPSIS method. Comput. Ind. Eng. 132, 84–97 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.04.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Wang, X., Triantaphyllou, E.: Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods. Omega 36, 45–63 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2005.12.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Prakash, C., Barua, M.K.: Integration of AHP-TOPSIS method for prioritizing the solutions of reverse logistics adoption to overcome its barriers under fuzzy environment. J. Manuf. Syst. 37, 599–615 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2015.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Raigar, J., Sharma, V.S., Srivastava, S., Chand, R., Singh, J.: A decision support system for the selection of an additive manufacturing process using a new hybrid MCDM technique. Sadhana Acad. Proc. Eng. Sci. 45, 1–4 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-020-01338-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Arbabi, H., Vahedi-Nouri, B., Iranmanesh, S., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R.: A data-driven multi-criteria decision-making approach for assessing new product conceptual designs. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1177/0954405421991418

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering., K.K. Birla Goa Campus, BITS Pilani, Sancoale, Goa, India

    Ravindra Singh Saluja & Varinder Singh

Authors
  1. Ravindra Singh Saluja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Varinder Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

RSS: Problem conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing—original draft. VS: Resources, Supervision, Visualization, Writing—review & editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ravindra Singh Saluja.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not include any data from studies with humans or animals.

Consent to participate

All the author's consent has been taken while conducting research.

Consent to publish

All the author's consent has been taken for publishing this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saluja, R.S., Singh, V. Attribute-based characterization, coding, and selection of joining processes using a novel MADM approach. OPSEARCH 60, 616–655 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12597-023-00623-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12597-023-00623-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation