Traditional and Integrated MCDM Approaches for Assessment and Ranking of Laser Cutting Conditions

Miloš Madić; Goran Petrović; Dušan Petković; Predrag Janković

doi:10.31181/smeor11202422

Authors

Miloš Madić Faculty of Mechanical Engineering in Niš, University of Niš, Aleksandra Medvedeva 14, 18000 Niš, Serbia Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2310-2590
Goran Petrović Faculty of Mechanical Engineering in Niš, University of Niš, Aleksandra Medvedeva 14, 18000 Niš, Serbia Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3562-9576
Dušan Petković Faculty of Mechanical Engineering in Niš, University of Niš, Aleksandra Medvedeva 14, 18000 Niš, Serbia Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1871-7144
Predrag Janković Faculty of Mechanical Engineering in Niš, University of Niš, Aleksandra Medvedeva 14, 18000 Niš, Serbia Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9951-4500

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31181/smeor11202422

Keywords:

CO2 laser cutting, MCDM, Robust decision making rule, AISI 316L stainless steel

Abstract

Multiple benefits and advantages that offer laser cutting technology are difficult to achieve if the laser cutting parameter conditions are not adequately set. Determining laser cutting conditions is not trivial task considering large number of controllable inputs, existence of multiple process performances which are often mutually opposed as well as effects of noise factors. Different scientific methods and engineering approaches represent more sophisticated approaches which aid assessment and determination of the most favourable (optimized) cutting conditions. This study is focused assessment and ranking of laser cutting conditions in CO₂ laser cutting of AISI 316L stainless steel. Based on kerf width and surface roughness experimental data and estimation of material removal rate (MRR) and total variable costs, four criteria in the multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) model were considered. For solving the developed model, six well-known MCDM methods were applied, and in addition, in order to overcome ranking inconsistency, robust decision-making rule was developed upon which final ranking was obtained.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Riveiro, A., Quintero, F., Boutinguiza, M., Del Val, J., Comesaña, R., Lusquiños, F., & Pou, J. (2019). Laser cutting: A review on the influence of assist gas. Materials, 12(1), 157. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12010157.

Madić, M., Jovanović, D., & Janković, P. (2024). Fiber laser cutting technology: pilot case study in mild steel cutting. Spectrum of Mechanical Engineering and Operational Research, 1(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.31181/smeor1120241.

Ding, H., Wang, Z., & Guo, Y. (2020). Multi-objective optimization of fiber laser cutting based on generalized regression neural network and non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm. Infrared Physics and Technology, 108, 103337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infrared.2020.103337.

Huang, S., Fu, Z., Liu, C., & Li, J. (2023). Multi-objective optimization of fiber laser cutting quality characteristics of glass fiber reinforced plastic (GFRP) materials. Optics & Laser Technology, 167, 109720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2023.109720.

Kechagias, J. D., Ninikas, K., Vakouftsi, F., Fountas, N. A., Palanisamy, S., & Vaxevanidis, N. M. (2024). Optimization of laser beam parameters during processing of ASA 3D-printed plates. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 130(1), 527-539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-12711-4.

Rajamani, D., & Tamilarasan, A. (2021). On process analysis and optimisation of Nd: YAG laser cutting characteristics of Ti-6Al-4V alloy using RSM and NSGA-II. International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management, 35(5), 389-406. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMTM.2021.121569.

Dehkordi, M. H. R., Jasim, D. J., Al-Rubaye, A. H., Akbari, M., Bagherzadeh, S. A., Ghazi, M., & Mohammadkarimi, H. (2023). Modeling and multiobjective optimization of thermal effects of fiber laser cutting of Inconel 600 sheet by employing the ANN and multi-objective PSO algorithm. Journal of Laser Applications, 35(4), 042060. https://doi.org/10.2351/7.0001231.

Vora, J., Chaudhari, R., Patel, C., Pimenov, D. Y., Patel, V. K., Giasin, K., & Sharma, S. (2021). Experimental investigations and Pareto optimization of fiber laser cutting process of Ti6Al4V. Metals, 11(9), 1461. https://doi.org/10.3390/met11091461.

Ürgün, S., Yiğit, H., Fidan, S., & Sınmazçelik, T. (2024). Optimization of laser cutting parameters for PMMA using metaheuristic algorithms. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 49(4-6), 12333–12355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-023-08627-6.

Rao, R. V., Rai, D. P., & Balic, J. (2017). A multi-objective algorithm for optimization of modern machining processes. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 61, 103-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2017.03.001.

Begic-Hajdarevic, D., Ficko, M., Cekic, A., Klancnik, S., & Cohodar, M. (2019, October). Multi-response optimization of laser cutting parameters using grey relational analysis. In Proceedings of the 30th International DAAAM Symposium, Zadar, Croatia (pp. 23-26). https://doi.org/10.2507/30th.daaam.proceedings.023.

Turkkan, Y. A., Aslan, M., Tarkan, A., Aslan, Ö., Yuce, C., & Yavuz, N. (2023). Multi-objective optimization of fiber laser cutting of stainless-steel plates using Taguchi-based grey relational analysis. Metals, 13(1), 132. https://doi.org/10.3390/met13010132.

Senthilkumar, V., Adinarayanan, A., & Jagatheesan, K. (2023). Grey Relational Analysis (GRA) for optimization of CO2 laser cutting of stainless steel. Materials Today: Proceedings, 72, 2437-2442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.09.439.

Madić, M., Antucheviciene, J., Radovanović, M., & Petković, D. (2017). Determination of laser cutting process conditions using the preference selection index method. Optics & Laser Technology, 89, 214-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2016.10.005.

Zavadskas, E. K., Chakraborty, S., Bhattacharyya, O., & Antucheviciene, J. (2015). Application of WASPAS method as an optimization tool in non-traditional machining processes. Information Technology and Control, 44(1), 77-88. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.itc.44.1.7124.

Das, P. P., & Chakraborty, S. (2020). Application of superiority and inferiority multi-criteria ranking method for parametric optimization of laser cutting processes. Process Integration and Optimization for Sustainability, 4(4), 409-427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-020-00129-4.

Srinivasan, D., Ramakrishnan, H., Balasundaram, R., & Ravichandran, M. (2023). Optimization of laser cutting process parameters on SS347 using GRA and TOPSIS. Surface Review and Letters, 30(06), 2350039. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218625X23500397.

Trajković, A., & Madić, M. (2023). Application and comparison of MCDM methods for the assessment of fiber laser cutting. Innovative Mechanical Engineering, 2(3), pp 42-53.

Chakraborty, S., & Chakraborty, S. (2022). A scoping review on the applications of MCDM techniques for parametric optimization of machining processes. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 29(6), 4165-4186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-022-09731-w.

Madić, M., Petrović, G., Petković, D., Antucheviciene, J., & Marinković, D. (2022). Application of a robust decision-making rule for comprehensive assessment of laser cutting conditions and performance. Machines, 10(2), 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines10020153.

Madić, M., Radovanović, M., Nedić, B., & Gostimirović, M. (2018). CO2 laser cutting cost estimation: mathematical model and application. International Journal of Laser Science: Fundamental Theory & Analytical Methods, 1(2). 169-183.

Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 41(11), 1073-1076.

Pamučar, D. S., Božanić, D., & Ranđelović, A. (2017). Multi-criteria decision making: An example of sensitivity analysis. Serbian Journal of Management, 12(1) 1-27. https://doi.org/10.5937/sjm12-9464.

Hadad, Y., Keren, B., & Alberg, D. (2024). Handling the inconsistency in ranking customers via several multi-criteria ranking methods. International Journal of Business Forecasting and Marketing Intelligence, 9(1), 50-79. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBFMI.2024.135719.

Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2010). A new additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method in multicriteria decision‐making. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(2), 159-172. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2010.10.

Zhang, L., Qu, B., Gao, H., & Zhang, J. (2021, September). Ranking consistency analysis and evaluation of multiple attribute decision making method. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 2031, No. 1, p. 012047). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2031/1/012047.

Aydin, F., & Gümüş, B. (2022). Comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods for the assessment of optimal SVC location. Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Technical Sciences, 70(2) p. e140555. https://doi.org/10.24425/bpasts.2022.140555.