Cilt 11 Sayı 3 (2023): Business & Management Studies: An International Journal
Makaleler

Endüstri 4.0 kapsamında robot seçimi: SWARA ve bulanık TOPSIS yöntemlerinin entegrasyonuyla metal mutfak eşyası imalatında bir uygulama

PDF
  • Mehri Banu Erdem,
  • Alaeddin Koska
Mehri Banu Erdem
Dr., Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye
Alaeddin Koska
Dr., Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v11i3.2252

Yayınlanmış 2023-09-24

Anahtar Kelimeler

  • Endüstri 4.0, Akıllı Robot, SWARA, Bulanık TOPSIS
  • Industry 4.0, Smart Robot, SWARA, Fuzzy TOPSIS

Nasıl Atıf Yapılır

Erdem, M. B., & Koska, A. (2023). Endüstri 4.0 kapsamında robot seçimi: SWARA ve bulanık TOPSIS yöntemlerinin entegrasyonuyla metal mutfak eşyası imalatında bir uygulama. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 11(3), 752–771. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v11i3.2252

Telif Hakkı (c) 2023 Mehri Banu Erdem- Alaeddin Koska

Creative Commons License

Bu çalışma Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License ile lisanslanmıştır.

Özet

Endüstriyel üretim, üreticilerin artan müşteri talebini karşılamasına ve küresel pazarda rekabet gücünü korumasına yardımcı olmak için sürekli olarak gelişmektedir. Üretimdeki robotik uygulamalar, işletmeler için daha fazla koruma, kalite ve sürdürülebilirlik üretmektedir. Sektördeki birçok üretim süreci, büyük bir hassasiyet ve hızla çalışan akıllı robotlar tarafından kolaylaştırılmıştır. Bu çalışma metal mutfak eşyası imalatı yapan bir işletmede robot değerlendirme ve seçimi problemini çözmeyi amaçlamıştır. Aynı zamanda robot seçim ölçütlerinin ağırlıklarını belirlemek amaçlanmıştır. İşletme imalatta kullandığı mevcut makineyi akıllı robotla değiştirmek ve daha fonksiyonlu bir robota yatırım yapmak istemektedir. Yatırım maliyeti yüksek ve geri dönüşü pahalıya mal olduğu için alternatifler arasında doğru kararı vermekte zorlanmaktadır. Bu bağlamda robot seçim ve değerlendirme kararında işletmeye destek olmak çalışmanın ana amacını oluşturmaktadır. Çalışmada çok kriterli karar verme yöntemlerinden olan SWARA ve bulanık TOPSIS yöntemleri entegre edilerek kullanılmıştır. İşletmenin seçim yapmak istediği üç alternatif akıllı robot mevcuttur. Yapılan analizler sonucu bu alternatiflerden birisi işletmeye en uygun seçim olarak önerilmiştir.

PDF

İndirmeler

İndirme verileri henüz mevcut değil.

Referanslar

  1. Agarwal, S., Chakraborty, S., Prasad, K., & Chakraborty, S. (2021). A rough multi-attributive border approximation area comparison approach for arc welding robot selection. Jordan Journal of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering, 15(2). 169-180.
  2. Aliakbari Nouri, F., Khalili Esbouei, S., ve Antucheviciene, J. (2015). A hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS for technology selection. Informatica, 26(3), 369-388.
  3. Alinezhad, A., Makui, A., Kiani Mavi, R., & Zohrehbandian, M. (2011). An MCDM-DEA approach for technology selection. Journal of Industrial Engineering International, 7(12), 32-38. 10.30495/JIEI.2022.1944196.1175
  4. Athawale, V. M., & Chakraborty, S. (2011). A comparative study on the ranking performance of some multi-criteria decision-making methods for industrial robot selection. International journal of industrial engineering computations, 2(4), 831-850. doi: 10.5267/j.ijiec.2011.05.002
  5. Bader, F., & Rahimifard, S. (2020). A methodology for the selection of industrial robots in food handling. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 64, 102379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2020.102379
  6. Bao, H., & Shi, X. (2022). Robot selection using an integrated MAGDM model based on ELECTRE method and linguistic q-rung orthopair fuzzy information. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/1444486
  7. Bhangale, P. P., Agrawal, V. P., & Saha, S. K. (2004). Attribute based specification, comparison and selection of a robot. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 39(12), 1345-1366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2004.05.020
  8. Bhattacharya, A., Sarkar, B., ve Mukherjee, S. K. (2005). Integrating AHP with QFD for robot selection under requirement perspective. International journal of production research, 43(17), 3671-3685. DOI: 10.1080/00207540500137217
  9. Bairagi, B., Dey, B., Sarkar, B., & Sanyal, S. (2014). Selection of robot for automated foundry operations using fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approaches. International Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management, 9(3), 221-232. https://doi.org/10.1080/17509653.2014.880076
  10. Braglia, M., & Petroni, A. (1999). Evaluating and selecting investments in industrial robots. International Journal of Production Research, 37(18), 4157-4178. https://doi.org/10.1080/002075499189718
  11. Chatterjee, P., Athawale, V. M., & Chakraborty, S. (2010). Selection of industrial robots using compromise ranking and outranking methods. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 26(5), 483-489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2010.03.007
  12. Chen, C. T. (2000). Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy sets and systems, 114(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00377-1
  13. Chodha, V., Dubey, R., Kumar, R., Singh, S., & Kaur, S. (2022). Selection of industrial arc welding robot with TOPSIS and Entropy MCDM techniques. Materials Today: Proceedings, 50, 709-715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.04.487
  14. Chu, T. C., & Lin, Y. C. (2003). A fuzzy TOPSIS method for robot selection. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 21, 284-290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001700300033
  15. Costa, D. S., Mamede, H. S., & da Silva, M. M. (2023). A method for selecting processes for automation with AHP and TOPSIS. Heliyon, 9(3).
  16. Devi, K. (2011). Extension of VIKOR method in intuitionistic fuzzy environment for robot selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(11), 14163-14168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.22
  17. Evans, L., Lohse, N., ve Summers, M. (2013). A fuzzy-decision-tree approach for manufacturing technology selection exploiting experience-based information. Expert systems with applications, 40(16), 6412-6426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.05.047
  18. Ghorabaee, M. K. (2016). Developing an MCDM method for robot selection with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 37, 221-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2015.04.007
  19. Gitinavard, H., Mousavi, S. M., Vahdani, B., & Siadat, A. (2016). A new distance-based decision model in interval-valued hesitant fuzzy setting for industrial selection problems. Scientia Iranica, 23(4), 1928-1940. 10.24200/SCI.2016.3938
  20. Goel, R., ve Gupta, P. (2020). Robotics and industry 4.0. a roadmap to ındustry 4.0: smart production, Sharp Business and Sustainable Development, 157-169. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14544-6_9
  21. Hamzeh, R., & Xu, X. (2019). Technology selection methods and applications in manufacturing: A review from 1990 to 2017. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 138, 106123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.106123
  22. Huang, Z., Shen, Y., Li, J., Fey, M., ve Brecher, C. (2021). A survey on AI-driven digital twins in industry 4.0: Smart manufacturing and advanced robotics. Sensors, 21(19), 6340. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21196340
  23. Hwang, C. L., Yoon, K., Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey, 58-191. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9_3
  24. İç, Y. T., Yurdakul, M., Günyar, A., & Önel, H. (2017). Endüstriyel Robot Seçimi İçin Bir Karar Destek Sistemi. Makina Tasarım ve İmalat Dergisi, 15(2), 92-105.
  25. Iç, Y., Atalay, K., & Yurdakul, M. (2021). Kararsız Bulanık TOPSIS Yöntemi ile Endüstriyel Robot Seçimi. Bulanık Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri, Mehmet Kabak, Babek Erdebli (Ed.), Bulanık çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri, Erişim adresi: https://avesis.gazi.edu.tr/yayin/16cb160c-d7c6-4d1e-8198-0e30077d003c/bulanik-cok-kriterli-karar-verme-yontemleri, Nobel, Ankara, 129-140.
  26. Jahanshahloo, G. R., Lotfi, F. H., & Izadikhah, M. (2006). Extension of the TOPSIS method for decision-making problems with fuzzy data. Applied mathematics and computation, 181(2), 1544-1551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2006.02.057
  27. Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R. P., & Suman, R. (2021). Substantial capabilities of robotics in enhancing industry 4.0 implementation. Cognitive Robotics, 1, 58-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogr.2021.06.001
  28. Kao, C., & Liu, S. T. (2022). Group decision making in data envelopment analysis: A robot selection application. European Journal of Operational Research, 297(2), 592-599.
  29. Kahraman, C., Çevik, S., Ates, N. Y., ve Gülbay, M. (2007). Fuzzy multi-criteria evaluation of industrial robotic systems. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 52(4), 414-433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2007.01.005
  30. Karande, P., Zavadskas, E., & Chakraborty, S. (2016). A study on the ranking performance of some MCDM methods for industrial robot selection problems. International Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations, 7(3), 399-422. DOI: 10.5267/j.ijiec.2016.1.001
  31. Karsak, E. E. (2008). Robot selection using an integrated approach based on quality function deployment and fuzzy regression. International Journal of Production Research, 46(3), 723-738. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540600919571
  32. Keršuliene, V., Zavadskas, E. K., ve Turskis, Z. (2010). Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step‐wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA). Journal of business economics and management, 11(2), 243-258. Doi:10.3846/jbem.2010.12
  33. Kumar, V., Kalita, K., Chatterjee, P., Zavadskas, E. K., & Chakraborty, S. (2022). A SWARA-CoCoSo-based approach for spray painting robot selection. Informatica, 33(1), 35-54. 10.15388/21-INFOR466
  34. Mondal, S., & Chakraborty, S. (2013). A solution to robot selection problems using data envelopment analysis. International journal of industrial engineering computations, 4(3), 355-372. doi: 10.5267/j.ijiec.2013.03.007
  35. Mondal, S., Kuila, S., Singh, A. K., & Chatterjee, P. (2017). A complex proportional assessment method-based framework for industrial robot selection problem. Int J Res Sci Eng, 3(2), 368-378.
  36. Narayanamoorthy, S., Geetha, S., Rakkiyappan, R., & Joo, Y. H. (2019). Interval-valued intuitionistic hesitant fuzzy entropy based VIKOR method for industrial robots selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 2019, 121: 28-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2018.12.015
  37. Nasrollahi, M., Ramezani, J., & Sadraei, M. (2020). A FBWM-PROMETHEE approach for industrial robot selection. Heliyon, 6(5), e03859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03859
  38. Parameshwaran, R., Kumar, S. P., & Saravanakumar, K. (2015). An integrated fuzzy MCDM based approach for robot selection considering objective and subjective criteria. Applied Soft Computing, 26, 31-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2014.09.025
  39. Piippo, P., Torkkeli, M., & Tuominen, M. (1999, July). Use of GDSS for selection of technology: new integrated CAD-system for an entire company. In PICMET'99: Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology. Proceedings Vol-1: Book of Summaries (IEEE Cat. No. 99CH36310) 1(13), IEEE. 10.1109/PICMET.1999.807689
  40. Rashid, T., Beg, I., & Husnine, S. M. (2014). Robot selection by using generalized interval-valued fuzzy numbers with TOPSIS. Applied Soft Computing, 21, 462-468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2014.04.002
  41. Rao, R. V. (2007). Decision making in the manufacturing environment: using graph theory and fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods (Vol. 2, p. 294). London: Springer.
  42. Sampathkumar, S., Augustin, F., Kaabar, M. K., & Yue, X. G. (2023). An integrated intuitionistic dense fuzzy Entropy-COPRAS-WASPAS approach for manufacturing robot selection. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 15(3), 16878132231160265.
  43. Sen, D. K., Datta, S., & Mahapatra, S. S. (2016). Extension of PROMETHEE for robot selection decision making: Simultaneous exploration of objective data and subjective (fuzzy) data. Benchmarking: An International Journal. 4(2013), 355-372. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-08-2015-0081
  44. Shahrabi, M. (2014). identification and selection of robot using FAHP and FTOPSIS hybrid model. International Journal of Modern Engineering Sciences, 3(1), 16-28.
  45. Shih, H. S. (2008). Incremental analysis for MCDM with an application to group TOPSIS. European journal of operational research, 186(2), 720-734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.02.012
  46. Şahin, M. (2020). A Hybrid Multi-criteria Decision Approach for Industrial Robot Selection. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.818275
  47. Wang, Y. J., & Lee, H. S. (2007). Generalizing TOPSIS for fuzzy multiple-criteria group decision-making. Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 53(11), 1762-1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2006.08.037
  48. Wu, H. Y., Tzeng, G. H., & Chen, Y. H. (2009). A fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluating banking performance based on Balanced Scorecard. Expert systems with applications, 36(6), 10135-10147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.01.005
  49. Zhou, F., Wang, X., & Goh, M. (2018). Fuzzy extended VIKOR-based mobile robot selection model for hospital pharmacy. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 15(4), https://doi.org/10.1177/1729881418787315