| Literature DB >> 27933231 |
Daniel O Aikhuele1, Faiz B M Turan1.
Abstract
In identifying to-be-improved product component(s), the customer/user requirements which are mainly considered, and achieved through customer surveys using the quality function deployment (QFD) tool, often fail to guarantee or cover aspects of the product reliability. Even when they do, there are always many misunderstandings. To improve the product reliability and quality during product redesigning phase and to create that novel product(s) for the customers, the failure information of the existing product, and its component(s) should ordinarily be analyzed and converted to appropriate design knowledge for the design engineer. In this paper, a new intuitionistic fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making method has been proposed. The new approach which is based on an intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS model uses an exponential-related function for the computation of the separation measures from the intuitionistic fuzzy positive ideal solution (IFPIS) and intuitionistic fuzzy negative ideal solution (IFNIS) of alternatives. The proposed method has been applied to two practical case studies, and the result from the different cases has been compared with some similar computational approaches in the literature.Entities:
Keywords: Exponential related function; Failure detection; Intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS; Intuitionistic fuzzy entropy; Product redesign
Year: 2016 PMID: 27933231 PMCID: PMC5101249 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-3446-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Intuitionistic fuzzy decision matrix for the product components
| Product components | Severity | Occurrence | Detection |
|---|---|---|---|
| PC1 | (0.45, 0.35) | (0.50, 0.30) | (0.20, 0.55) |
| PC2 | (0.65, 0.25) | (0.65, 0.25) | (0.55, 0.15) |
| PC3 | (0.45, 0.35) | (0.55, 0.35) | (0.55, 0.20) |
| PC4 | (0.75, 0.15) | (0.65, 0.20) | (0.35, 0.15) |
The exponentially related matrix, the distance measures and the relative closeness coefficients of the failure modes for the four components
| Product components | Severity ER | Occurrence ER | Detection ER |
|
|
| Ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PM1 | 0.418 | 0.386 | 0.348 | 0.357 | 0.224 | 0.385 | 4 |
| PM2 | 0.316 | 0.316 | 0.342 | 0.393 | 0.188 | 0.324 | 1 |
| PM3 | 0.418 | 0.378 | 0.348 | 0.359 | 0.222 | 0.382 | 3 |
| PM4 | 0.264 | 0.309 | 0.410 | 0.393 | 0.191 | 0.327 | 2 |
Intuitionistic fuzzy decision matrix for the product components
| Product components | Severity | Occurrence | Detection |
|---|---|---|---|
| PM1 | (0.337, 0.543) | (0.566, 0.290) | (0.386, 0.516) |
| PM2 | (0.380, 0.514) | (0.467, 0.467) | (0.418, 0.495) |
| PM3 | (0.421, 0.490) | (0.645, 0.204) | (0.124, 0.739) |
| PM4 | (0.519, 0.383) | (0.472, 0.464) | (0.373, 0.519) |
| PM5 | (0.329, 0.548) | (0.540, 0.344) | (0.244, 0.636) |
| PM6 | (0.235, 0.626) | (0.540, 0.344) | (0.277, 0.598) |
| PM7 | (0.129, 0.733) | (0.623, 0.218) | (0.148, 0.715) |
| PM8 | (0.171, 0.678) | (1.000, 0.000) | (0.240, 0.629) |
| PM9 | (0.472, 0.464) | (0.495, 0.413) | (0.161, 0.696) |
| PM10 | (0.579, 0.268) | (0.556, 0.312) | (0.519, 0.383) |
| PM11 | (0.279, 0.587) | (0.553, 0.335) | (0.337, 0.543) |
| PM12 | (0.400, 0.500) | (0.606, 0.256) | (0.358, 0.528) |
| PM13 | (0.287, 0.582) | (0.636, 0.208) | (0.532, 0.377) |
| PM14 | (0.306, 0.563) | (0.524, 0.371) | (0.232, 0.635) |
| PM15 | (0.421, 0.490) | (0.522, 0.400) | (0.051, 0.822) |
| PM16 | (0.376, 0.520) | (0.447, 0.477) | (0.358, 0.528) |
The exponentially related matrix, the distance measures and the relative closeness coefficients of the failure modes for the product components
| Product components | Severity ER | Occurrence ER | Detection ER |
|
|
| Ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PM1 | 0.543 | 0.358 | 0.509 | 0.322 | 0.278 | 0.463 | 4 |
| PM2 | 0.511 | 0.453 | 0.486 | 0.309 | 0.284 | 0.478 | 6 |
| PM3 | 0.482 | 0.312 | 0.770 | 0.285 | 0.358 | 0.557 | 13 |
| PM4 | 0.401 | 0.450 | 0.516 | 0.312 | 0.283 | 0.476 | 5 |
| PM5 | 0.549 | 0.381 | 0.640 | 0.284 | 0.325 | 0.534 | 11 |
| PM6 | 0.634 | 0.381 | 0.600 | 0.286 | 0.320 | 0.528 | 10 |
| PM7 | 0.763 | 0.322 | 0.739 | 0.266 | 0.374 | 0.584 | 15 |
| PM8 | 0.697 | 0.167 | 0.635 | 0.336 | 0.317 | 0.485 | 7 |
| PM9 | 0.450 | 0.421 | 0.717 | 0.267 | 0.350 | 0.567 | 14 |
| PM10 | 0.348 | 0.367 | 0.401 | 0.367 | 0.226 | 0.381 | 1 |
| PM11 | 0.592 | 0.373 | 0.543 | 0.306 | 0.296 | 0.492 | 8 |
| PM12 | 0.496 | 0.335 | 0.527 | 0.327 | 0.275 | 0.457 | 3 |
| PM13 | 0.585 | 0.316 | 0.394 | 0.362 | 0.240 | 0.399 | 2 |
| PM14 | 0.566 | 0.395 | 0.643 | 0.278 | 0.330 | 0.543 | 12 |
| PM15 | 0.482 | 0.405 | 0.888 | 0.244 | 0.413 | 0.628 | 16 |
| PM16 | 0.515 | 0.466 | 0.527 | 0.294 | 0.299 | 0.504 | 9 |
Ranking of failure in a complex product using different approaches
| Product components | Proposed model | Fuzzy TOPSIS model | IWF-TOPSIS | IFH-TOPSIS | RPN method |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PM1 | 4 | 9 | 10 | 7 | 6 |
| PM2 | 6 | 13 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| PM3 | 13 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 9 |
| PM4 | 5 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 3 |
| PM5 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 14 |
| PM6 | 10 | 15 | 14 | 15 | 10 |
| PM7 | 15 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 15 |
| PM8 | 7 | 2 | 15 | 4 | 13 |
| PM9 | 14 | 7 | 3 | 8 | 8 |
| PM10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| PM11 | 8 | 10 | 13 | 10 | 6 |
| PM12 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
| PM13 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 2 | 2 |
| PM14 | 12 | 14 | 12 | 14 | 10 |
| PM15 | 16 | 10 | 9 | 13 | 16 |
| PM16 | 9 | 15 | 6 | 12 | 5 |