EKİPMAN SEÇİMİ PROBLEMİNDE PROMETHEE VE BULANIK PROMETHEE YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ANALİZİ

Yıl 2010, Cilt: 25 Sayı: 4, 0 - , 19.02.2013

Burcu Yılmaz , Metin Dağdeviren

Öz

İnsan, makine, malzeme gibi çok çeşitlilikte ve değişken özellikler gösteren bileşenlere sahip olan üretimsistemlerinin planlanması, yönetilmesi ve kontrol edilmesi genellikle zor ve karmaşık bir yapıya sahip olup,birden fazla etken tarafından etkilenen kararlar alınmasını gerektiren bir süreçtir. Bu tip süreçlerde karşılaşılanproblemler çok sayıda çelişen kriter içeren kompleks karar problemleri niteliğindedir. Bu gibi durumlardaanalitik bir bakış açısı sağlayan, probleme matematiksel ve mantıklı çözümler getirebilen çok kriterli kararverme yöntemlerinin uygulanması çözüm ve daha sonraki aşamalarda büyük yararlar sağlamaktadır. Ekipmanseçimi, etkin bir üretim sistemi için oldukça önemli bir konudur. Genellikle birbirine çok benzeyen pek çoktipteki ekipmanın arasından en doğru seçimi yapmayı çok sayıda kriterin göz önüne alınması ile birliktegerektiren, yorucu, karmaşık, zor bir karar verme problemidir. Bu çalışmada, bir işletmenin kaynak makinesiseçimi problemi, dilsel ifadelerle tanımlanan kriterlerin önceliklendirilmesini içeren çok kriterli bir karar vermeproblemi temelinde incelenmiştir. Yapılan uygulamada problem hem bulanık hem de kesin sayılarınkullanılmasıyla çözülerek alternatif ekipmanlar için hem kısmi hem de tam sıralama belirlenmiştir. Elde edilensonuçlar ile her iki durum karşılaştırmalı olarak ayrıntılı bir şekilde analiz edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ekipman seçimi, çok ölçütlü karar verme, PROMETHEE, Bulanık PROMETHEE

Kaynakça

• Dağdeviren, M., ve Eren, T., “Analytical
• Hierarchy Process and Use of 0-1 Goal
• Programming Methods in Selecting Supplier
• Firm”, J. Fac. Eng. Arch. Gazi Univ.,16 , 2, 41-
• , 2001.
• Kralawski, A., Pedrycz W., ve Nyström L.,
• “Fuzzy Neural Network as Instance Generator for
• Case-Based Reasoning System: An Example of
• Selection of Heat Exchange Equipment in Mixing
• Tanks”, Neural Computing & Applications, 8,
• –113, 1999.
• Kulak, O., Durmuşoglu, M. B., ve Kahraman, C.,
• “Fuzzy multiattribute equipment selection based
• on information axiom”, Journal of Materials
• Processing Technology, 169, 337–345, 2005.
• Dağdeviren, M., “Decision making in equipment
• selection: an ıntegrated approach with AHP and
• PROMETHEE”, Journal of Intelligent
• Manufacturing, 19, 397-406, 2008.
• Ayağ, Z., ve Özdemir, R. G., “A fuzzy AHP
• approach to evaluating machine tool
• alternatives”, Journal of Intelligent
• Manufacturing, 17, 179–190, 2006.
• Başçetin, A., ve Kesimal, A., “A new approach in
• selection of loading-hauling systems in surface
• mining”, 16th Mining Congress of Turkey,
• ISBN 975-395-310-0, 1999.
• Başçetin, A., “A decision support system for
• optimal equipment selection in open pit mining:
• Analytical Hierarchy Process”, İstanbul Üniv.
• Müh. Fak. Yerbilimleri Dergisi, 16, 2, 1-11,
• -
• Chan, F. T. S., Ip, R. W. L., ve Lau, H.,
• “Integration of expert system with analytic
• hierarchy process for the design of material
• handling equipment selection system”, Journal
• of Materials Processing Technology, 116, 137–
• , 2001.
• Manassero, G., Semeraro Q., ve Tolio T., “A new
• method to cope with decision makers' uncertainty
• in the equipment selection process”, CIRP
• Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 53, 1,
• -392, 2004.
• Chakraborty, S., ve Banik, D., “Design of a
• material handling equipment selection model
• using Analytical Hierarchy Process”, International Journal of Advanced
• Manufacturing Technologies, 28, 1237-1245,
• -
• İç, Y. T., ve Yurdakul, M., “Decision support
• system for selection of machining centers”, J.
• Fac. Eng. Arch. Gazi Univ, 23, 1, 85-95, 2008.
• Decision Lab, 1.01.0388, copyright © 1998-2000,
• Visual Decision Inc., Canada.
• <http://www.visualdecision.com>.
• Saaty, T., The Analytic Hierarchy Process,
• McGraw- Hill International Book Company,
• USA,1980.
• Schniederjans, M. J., ve Wilson, R.L., “Using the
• Analytic Hierarchy Process and Goal
• Programming- for Information System Project
• Selection”, Information & Management, 20, 5,
• -342, 1991.
• Suresh, N.C., ve Kaparthi, S., “Flexible
• AutomationInvestments: A Synthesis of Two
• Multi-Objective Modeling Approaches”,
• Computers & Industrial Engineering, 22, 3,
• -272, 1992.
• Ehie, I.C., ve Benjamin, C.O., “An Integrated
• Multiobjective Planning Model: A Case Study Of
• The Zambian Copper Mining Industry”,
• European J. of Operational Research, 68, 2,
• -172, 1993.
• Myint, S., ve Tabucanon, M.T., “A Multiple-
• Criteria Approach to Machine Selection for
• Flexible Manufacturing Systems”, International
• Journal of Production Economics, 33, 1-3, 121-
• , 1994.
• Ramanathan, R., ve Ganesh, L. S., “Energy
• Alternatives for Lighting in Households: An
• Evaluation Using An Integrated Goal
• Programming-AHP Model”, Energy, 20, 1, 63-
• , 1995.
• Ramanathan, R. ve Ganesh, L. S., “Energy
• Resource Allocation Incorporating Qualitative
• and Quantitative Criteria: An Integrated Model
• Using Goal Programming And AHP”, Socio-
• Economic Planning Sciences, 29, 3, 197-218,
• -
• Schniederjans, M.J., ve Garvin, T., “Using the
• Analytic Hierarchy Process and Multi-Objective
• Programming for the Selection of Cost Drivers in
• Activity-Based Costing”, European Journal of
• Operational Research, 100, 1, 72-80, 1997.
• Badri, M. A., “Combining the Analytic Hierarchy
• Process and Goal Programming for Global
• Facility Location-Allocation Problem”,
• International J. of Production Economics, 62,
• , 237-248, 1999.
• Badri, M. A., “A Combined AHP–GP Model for
• Quality Control Systems”, International
• Journal of Production Economics, 72, 1, 27-40,
• -
• Bowen, W.M., “Subjective Judgements and Data
• Envelopment Analysis in Site Selection”,
• Computers, Environment and Urban Systems,
• , 2, 133-144, 1990.
• Shang, J., ve Sueyoshi, T., “A Unified
• Framework for the Selection of a Flexible
• Manufacturing System”, European Journal of
• Operational Research, 85, 2, 297-315, 1995.
• Sinuany-Stern, Z., Mehrez, A. ve Hadad, Y., “An
• AHP/DEA Methodology for Ranking Decision
• Making Units”, International Transactions in
• Operational Research, 7, 2, 109-124, 2000.
• Yang, T., ve Kuo, C., “A Hierarchical AHP/DEA
• Methodology for the Facilities Layout Design
• Problem”, European Journal of Operational
• Research, 147, 1, 128-136, 2003.
• Mon, D., Cheng, C. ve Lin, J., “Evaluating
• Weapon System Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy
• Process Based on Entropy Weight”, Fuzzy Sets
• and Systems, 62, 2, 127-134, 1994.
• Chang, D., “Applications of the Extent Analysis
• Method on Fuzzy AHP”, European Journal of
• Operational Research, 95, 3, 649-655, 1996.
• Weck, M., Klocke, F., Schell, H., ve Rüenauver,
• E., “Evaluating Alternative Production Cycles
• Using the Extended Fuzzy AHP Method”,
• European Journal of perational Research, 100,
• , 351- 366, 1997.
• Zhu, K., Jing, Y., ve Chang, D., “A Discussion
• on Extent Analysis Method and Applications of
• Fuzzy AHP”, European Journal of Operational
• Research, 116, 2, 450-456, 1999.
• Kuo, R. J., Chi, S. C. ve Kao, S. S., “A Decision
• Support System for Locating Convenience Store
• Through Fuzzy AHP”, Computers & Industrial
• Engineering, 37, 1-2, 323-326, 1999.
• Leung, L. C. ve Cao, D., “On Consistency and
• Ranking of Alternatives in Fuzzy AHP”,
• European Journal of Operational Research,
• , 1, 102- 113, 2000.
• Yu, C.S., “A GP-AHP Method for Solving Group
• Decision-Making Fuzzy AHP Problems”,
• Computers & Operations Research, 29, 14,
• -2001, 2002.
• Bozdağ, C.E., Kahraman, C. ve Ruan, D., “Fuzzy
• Group Decision Making for Selection Among
• Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems”,
• Computers in Industry, 51, 1, 13-29, 2003.
• Kahraman, C., Ruan, D. ve Doğan, I., “Fuzzy
• Group Decision-Making for Facility Location
• Selection”, Information Sciences, 157, 135-153,
• -
• Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U. ve Ruan, D., “Multi-
• Attribute Comparison of Catering Service
• Companies Using Fuzzy AHP: The Case of
• Turkey”, Int. Journal Production Economics,
• , 171-184, 2004.
• Büyüközkan, G., Ertay, T., Kahraman, C. Ve
• Ruan, D., “Determining the Importance Weights
• for the Design Requirements in the House of
• Quality Using the Fuzzy Analytic Network Approach”, International Journal of Intelligent
• Systems, 19, 443-461, 2004.
• Kulak, O. ve Kahraman, C., “Fuzzy Multi-
• Attribute Selection Among Transportation
• Companies Using Axiomatic Design and
• Analytic Hierarchy Process”, Information
• Sciences, 170, 191-210, 2005.
• Tolga, E., Demircan, M.L. ve Kahraman, C.,
• “Operating System Selection Using Fuzzy
• Replacement Analysis and Analytic Hierarchy
• Process”, Int. J. of Production Economics, 97,
• -117, 2005.
• Dağdeviren, M., Akay, D., Çetinyokus, T. ve
• Kurt, M., “Bulanık Matematiksel Programlama
• Teknigi İle Bir İş Değerlendirme Uygulaması”,
• Teknoloji Z.K.Ü. Karabük Teknik Eğitim
• Fakültesi Dergisi, 5, 1-2,91-96,2002.
• Dağdeviren, M., Yüksel, İ., “Developing a Fuzzy
• Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Model for
• Behaviour Based Safety Management”,
• Information Sciences, 178, 6, 1717-1733, 2008.
• Saaty, T.,”The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic
• Network Processes”, MCDM XV-th Int. Conf.,
• Ankara, Turkey, 2000.
• Tam, M.C.Y. ve Tummala, V.M.R., ”An
• Application of the AHP in Vendor Selection of a
• Telecommunications System” The Int. J. of
• Management Science, 29, 2, 171-182, 2001.
• Saaty, T., The Analytic Hierarchy Process for
• Decision Making, Kobe, Japan, 1999.
• Saaty, T., Fundamentals of Decision Making
• and Priority Theory, RWS Publications,
• Pittsburgh, USA, 2000.
• Brans, J. P., ve Vincke, P. H., “A preference
• ranking organization method”, Management
• Science, 31, 647-656, 1985.
• Brans, J. P., Vincke, P. H., ve Mareschall, B.,
• “How to select and how to rank projects: The
• PROMETHEE method”, European Journal of
• Operational Research, 14, 228-238, 1986.
• Goumas, M., ve Lygerou, V., “An extension of
• the PROMETHEE method for decision making in
• fuzzy environment: Ranking of alternative energy
• exploitation projects”, European Journal of
• Operational Research, 123, 606-613, 2000.
• Geldermann J., Spengler, T., ve Rentz, O.,
• “Fuzzy outranking for environmental assessment.
• Case study: Iron and steel making industry”,
• Fuzzy Set Systems, 115, 45– 65, 2000.
• Le Téno, J., F., ve Mareschal, B., “An interval
• version of PROMETHEE for the comparison of
• building products’ design with ill-defined data on
• environmental quality”, Eur Journal of
• Operational Research, 109, 522–529, 1998.
• Bilsel, R., U., Büyüközkan, G., ve Ruan, D., “A
• fuzzy prefernce-ranking model for a quality
• evaluation of hospital web sites”, International
• Journal of Intelligent Systems, 21, 1181-1197,
• -
• Briggs, Th., Kunsch, P.L., ve Mareschal, B.,
• “Nuclear waste management: An application of
• the multicriteria PROMETHEE methods”,
• European Journal of Operational Research,
• , 110, 1990.
• Chou, W. C., Lin, W. T., ve Lin, C. Y.,
• “Application of fuzzy theory and PROMETHEE
• technique to evaluate suitable ecotechnology
• method: A case study in Shihmen Reservoir
• Watershed, Taiwan”, Ecological Engineering,
• , 269–280, 2007.
• Queiruga, D., Walther, G., Gonza’lez-Benito, J.,
• ve Spengler, T., “Evaluation of sites for
• thelocation of WEEE recycling plants in Spain”,
• Waste Management, 28, 1, 181–190, 2008.
• D’Avignon, G., ve Mareschal, B., “An
• application of the PROMETHEE and GAIA
• methods”, Mathematical and Computer
• Modelling, 12, (10–11), 1393–1400, 1989.
• Du Bois, Ph., Brans, J.P., Cantraine, F., ve
• Mareschal, B., “MEDICIS: An expert system for
• computer-aided diagnosis using the
• PROMETHEE multicriteria method”, European
• Journal of Operational Research, 39, 284–292,
• -
• Olson, D.L., “Comparison of three multicriteria
• methods to predict known outcomes”, European
• Journal of Operational Research, 130, 3, 576–
• , 2001.
• Rekiek, B., de Lit, P., ve Delchambre, A., “Hybrid
• assembly line design and user’s preferences”,
• International Journal of Production Research,
• , 5, 1095–1111, 2002.
• Baourakis, G., Doumpos, M., Kalogeras, N., ve
• Zopounidis, C., “Multicriteria analysis and
• assessment of financial viability of
• agribusinesses: The case of marketing cooperatives
• and juice-producing companies”,
• Agribusiness, 18, 4, 543–558, 2002.
• Albadvi, A., Chaharsooghi, S.K., ve Esfahanipour,
• A., “Decision making in stock trading: An
• application of PROMETHEE”, European
• Journal of Operational Research, 177, 673–683,
• -
• Hyde, K., Maier, H., ve Colby, C., “Incorporating
• uncertainty in the PROMETHEE MCDA
• method”, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision
• Analysis, 12, 245–259, 2003.
• Albadvi, A., “Formulating national information
• technology strategies: A preference ranking
• model using PROMETHEE method”, European
• Journal of Operational Research, 153, 290–
• , 2004.
• Johnson, M.P., “Spatial decision support for
• assisted housing mobility counseling”, Decision
• Support Systems, 41, 296–312, 2005.
• Zhang, G., Ni, Y., Churchill, J., ve Kokot, S.,
• “Authentication of vegetable oils on the basis of
• their physico-chemical properties with the aid of
• chemometrics”, Talanta, 70, 293–300, 2006.
• Iniestra, J. G., ve Gutiérrez, J.G., “Multicriteria
• decisions on interdependent infrastructure
• transportation projects using an evolutionarybased
• framework”, Applied Soft Computing, 9,
• –52, 2009.
• Mohamadabadi, H., S., Tichkowsky, G., ve
• Kumar, A., “Development of a multicriteria
• assesment model for ranking of renewable and
• non-renewable transportation fuel vehicles”,
• Energy, 34, 112-125, 2009.
• Brans, J. P., ve Mareschall, B., “The PROMCALC
• & GAIA decision support system for multi-criteria
• decision aid”, Decision Support Systems, 12,
• -310, 1994.
• Ballı, S., Karasulu, B., ve Korukoğlu, S., “En
• uygun otomobil seçimi problemi için bir bulanık
• PROMETHEE yöntemi uygulaması”,
• D.E.Ü.İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 22, 1, 139-147, 2007.
• DuBois D., ve Prade H., “Operations on fuzzy
• numbers”, Int J Syst Sci, 9, 613– 626, 1978.
• Brans, J. P., ve Mareschal, B., “How to decide
• with PROMETHEE”, Visual Decision Inc.,
• Montreal, Canada,
• http://www.visualdecision.com, 1998.
• Wang, J. J., ve Yang, D. L., “Using a hybrid
• multi-criteria decision aid method for information
• systems outsourcing”, Computers & Operation
• Research, 34, 3691-3700.