IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v10y2022i23p4489-d986752.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal Parameters Selection in Advanced Multi-Metallic Co-Extrusion Based on Independent MCDM Analytical Approaches and Numerical Simulation

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Fernández

    (Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED), 28040 Madrid, Spain)

  • Álvaro Rodríguez-Prieto

    (Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED), 28040 Madrid, Spain)

  • Ana M. Camacho

    (Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED), 28040 Madrid, Spain)

Abstract

Multi-material co-extrusion is a complex thermo-mechanical forming process used to obtain bimetallic billets. Its complexity is due to the combination of diffusion phenomena in the interface of both materials together with the high temperature and pressure generated and the different flow stress characteristics created by the joining of dissimilar materials. Accordingly, the selection of optimal process parameters becomes key to ensure process feasibility. In this work, a comparison among different multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methodologies, together with different weighting methods, were applied to the simulation results by using DEFORM3D© software to select the optimal combination of process parameters to fulfil the criteria of minimum damage, extrusion force, and tool wear, together with the maximum reduction in the average grain size.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Fernández & Álvaro Rodríguez-Prieto & Ana M. Camacho, 2022. "Optimal Parameters Selection in Advanced Multi-Metallic Co-Extrusion Based on Independent MCDM Analytical Approaches and Numerical Simulation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(23), pages 1-26, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:23:p:4489-:d:986752
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/23/4489/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/23/4489/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shih-Chia Chang & Hsu-Hwa Chang & Ming-Tsang Lu, 2021. "Evaluating Industry 4.0 Technology Application in SMEs: Using a Hybrid MCDM Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Chia-Nan Wang & Ching-Yu Yang & Hung-Chun Cheng, 2019. "Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model for Supplier Evaluation and Selection in a Wind Power Plant Project," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-15, May.
    3. Irina Vinogradova, 2019. "Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Methods as a Part of Mathematical Optimization," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-21, October.
    4. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    5. Sangeeta Pant & Anuj Kumar & Mangey Ram & Yury Klochkov & Hitesh Kumar Sharma, 2022. "Consistency Indices in Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Review," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, April.
    6. Amir Karbassi Yazdi & Yong Tan & Cristi Spulbar & Ramona Birau & Jorge Alfaro, 2022. "An Approach for Supply Chain Management Contract Selection in the Oil and Gas Industry: Combination of Uncertainty and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(18), pages 1-20, September.
    7. Stefan Hajkowicz & Kerry Collins, 2007. "A Review of Multiple Criteria Analysis for Water Resource Planning and Management," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 21(9), pages 1553-1566, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Serafim Opricovic, 2009. "A Compromise Solution in Water Resources Planning," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(8), pages 1549-1561, June.
    2. Máximo Méndez & Mariano Frutos & Fabio Miguel & Ricardo Aguasca-Colomo, 2020. "TOPSIS Decision on Approximate Pareto Fronts by Using Evolutionary Algorithms: Application to an Engineering Design Problem," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-27, November.
    3. S. L. Razavi Toosi & J. M. V. Samani, 2017. "Prioritizing Watersheds Using a Novel Hybrid Decision Model Based on Fuzzy DEMATEL, Fuzzy ANP and Fuzzy VIKOR," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(9), pages 2853-2867, July.
    4. Alireza Shahrasbi & Mehdi Shamizanjani & M. H. Alavidoost & Babak Akhgar, 2017. "An Aggregated Fuzzy Model for the Selection of a Managed Security Service Provider," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 625-684, May.
    5. Vicent Penadés-Plà & Tatiana García-Segura & José V. Martí & Víctor Yepes, 2016. "A Review of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods Applied to the Sustainable Bridge Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-21, December.
    6. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Bączkiewicz, Aleksandra & Sałabun, Wojciech, 2022. "New multi-criteria method for evaluation of sustainable RES management," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    7. Hojatollah Khedrigharibvand & Hossein Azadi & Dereje Teklemariam & Ehsan Houshyar & Philippe Maeyer & Frank Witlox, 2019. "Livelihood alternatives model for sustainable rangeland management: a review of multi-criteria decision-making techniques," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 11-36, February.
    8. Hassan Hashemi & Jalal Bazargan & S. Mousavi, 2013. "A Compromise Ratio Method with an Application to Water Resources Management: An Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(7), pages 2029-2051, May.
    9. Ignacio González García & Alfonso Mateos Caballero, 2021. "A Multi-Objective Bayesian Approach with Dynamic Optimization (MOBADO). A Hybrid of Decision Theory and Machine Learning Applied to Customs Fraud Control in Spain," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(13), pages 1-23, June.
    10. Yi Peng, 2015. "Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 234(1), pages 95-110, November.
    11. Zheng, Guozhong & Wang, Xiao, 2020. "The comprehensive evaluation of renewable energy system schemes in tourist resorts based on VIKOR method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    12. Milad Zamanifar & Seyed Mohammad Seyedhoseyni, 2017. "Recovery planning model for roadways network after natural hazards," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 87(2), pages 699-716, June.
    13. Pedro Ponce & Citlaly Pérez & Aminah Robinson Fayek & Arturo Molina, 2022. "Solar Energy Implementation in Manufacturing Industry Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Fuzzy TOPSIS and S4 Framework," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-19, November.
    14. Kaveh Madani & Laura Read & Laleh Shalikarian, 2014. "Voting Under Uncertainty: A Stochastic Framework for Analyzing Group Decision Making Problems," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(7), pages 1839-1856, May.
    15. Wenyao Niu & Yuan Rong & Liying Yu & Lu Huang, 2022. "A Novel Hybrid Group Decision Making Approach Based on EDAS and Regret Theory under a Fermatean Cubic Fuzzy Environment," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(17), pages 1-30, August.
    16. Hisham Alidrisi, 2021. "An Innovative Job Evaluation Approach Using the VIKOR Algorithm," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, June.
    17. Madson Bruno da Silva Monte & Danielle Costa Morais, 2019. "A Decision Model for Identifying and Solving Problems in an Urban Water Supply System," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 33(14), pages 4835-4848, November.
    18. Abbas Keramati & Fatemeh Shapouri, 2016. "Multidimensional appraisal of customer relationship management: integrating balanced scorecard and multi criteria decision making approaches," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 217-251, May.
    19. María Pilar de la Cruz López & Juan José Cartelle Barros & Alfredo del Caño Gochi & Manuel Lara Coira, 2021. "New Approach for Managing Sustainability in Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-27, June.
    20. Zheng Yuan & Baohua Wen & Cheng He & Jin Zhou & Zhonghua Zhou & Feng Xu, 2022. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis to Rural Spatial Sustainability Evaluation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-31, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:23:p:4489-:d:986752. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.