Selection of Robotic Grippers Under MCDM Environment: An Optimized Trade Off Technique

  • Anirudha Bhattacharjee
  • Bikash Bepari
  • Subhasis Bhaumik
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 543)

Abstract

The chapter circumscribes off-line soft computing decision support tool in selection of robotic grippers depending upon a set of qualitative and quantitative parameters. To ascertain the relative suitability among a set of robotic grippers, being the alternatives, was adjudged on the basis of grip to weight ratio, grip to power input, degrees of freedom, number of sensors, task completion deftness (speed of actuation), price and control strategy. Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) tools like Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and VIšekriterijumsko KOmpromisno Rangiranje (VIKOR) methodologies were implemented to substantiate the selection process. The solution with regards to the selection problem reveals higher order of consistency.

Keywords

Robotic grippers MCDM AHP TOPSIS VIKOR 

References

  1. 1.
    J.K. Salisbury, D. Brock, P. O’Donnell, in Using Articulated Hand to Manipulate Objects, ed. by M. Brady. Robotic Science, (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1996), pp. 540–562Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R.V. Rao, B.K. Patel, M. Parnichkun, Industrial robot selection using a novel decision making method considering objective and subjective preferences, Robot. Auton. Syst. 59(6), 367–375 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Opricovic, G-H. Tzeng, Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 156(2), 445–455 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. Venkata Rao, A decision making methodology for material selection using an improved compromise ranking method Mater. Des. 29(10), 1949–1954 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    P. Chatterjee, V.M. Athawale, S. Chakraborty, Selection of materials using compromise ranking and outranking methods Mater. Des. 30(10), 4043–4053 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Z. Yue, An extended TOPSIS for determining weights of decision makers with interval numbers, Knowl.-Based Syst. 24(1), 146–153 (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A.A. Bazzazi, M. Osanloo, B. Karimi, Deriving preference order of open pit mines equipment through MADM methods: application of modified VIKOR method, Expert Syst. Appl. 38(3), 2550–2556 (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Jahan, F. Mustapha, M.Y. Ismail, S.M. Sapuan, M. Bahraminasab, A Comprehensive VIKOR method for material selection, Mater. Des. 32( 3), 1215–1221 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Z. Yue, Extension of TOPSIS to determine weight of decision maker for group decision making problems with uncertain information. Expert Syst. Appl. 39(7) 6343–6350 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Bahraminasab, A. Jahan, Z. Yue, Material selection for femoral component of total knee replacement using comprehensive VIKOR. Mater. Des. 32(8–9), 4471–4477 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    T.L. Satty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Opricovic, Multi-criteria Optimization of Civil Engineering Systems. Technical report, Belgrade (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anirudha Bhattacharjee
    • 1
  • Bikash Bepari
    • 2
  • Subhasis Bhaumik
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Production EngineeringJadavpur UniversityKolkataIndia
  2. 2.Department of Production EngineeringHaldia Institute of TechnologyHaldiaIndia
  3. 3.Department of Aerospace Engineering and Applied MechanicsBengal Engineering and Science UniversityShibpurIndia

Personalised recommendations