Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Selecting Optimal Welding Posture by AHP Method

Suman Das, Banerjee Debamalya, Mukherjee Shankarashis, Chakrabarty Sabarni

Abstract


Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) is the process of finding the best option from all of the feasible alternatives. Due to globalization, the welding industries and units are now forced to emphasize more on increasing productivity while decreasing the cost by right selection of body posture of welders. Appropriate selection of body posture of workers justifies labor saving, reducing postural stresses, improved product quality and increased production rate which enhanced overall productivity. Proper selection of the work posture is a complex decision-making problem involving multiple conflicting criteria. This research work represents a logical procedure to evaluate the best weld posture in terms of bodily discomfort, postural stresses and pulse rate of welders by using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. The result of AHP shows that the standing welding posture gives the best result because it possesses the higher score.

Keywords


AHP; bodily discomfort; postural stress; pulse rate; welding

Full Text:

PDF

References


Saaty TL. The Analytical Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw Hill; 1980.

Sun S. Assessing computer numerical control machines using data envelopment analysis. Int J Prod Res. 2002; 40: 2011–2039p.

Yurdalul M. AHP as a strategic decision-making tool to justify machine tool selection. J Mater Proc Technol. 2004; 146: 365–376p.

Ayağ Z, Özdemir RG. A fuzzy AHP approach to evaluating machine tool alternatives. J Intell Manuf. 2006; 17: 179–190p.

Saaty TL. Concepts, theory and techniques: rank generation, preservation and reversal in the analytic hierarchy process. Dec Sci. 1987; 18: 157–177p.

Lee M. Information security risk analysis methods and research trends: AHP and fuzzy comprehensive method. Int J Comput Sci Inf Technol. 2014; 6: 29–45p.

Alonso JA, Lamata MT. Consistency in the analytic hierarchy process: a new approach. Int J Uncert Fuzz Knowl Based Syst. 2006; 14(4): 445–459p.

Linkov I, Satterstrom FK, Steevens J, Ferguson E, Pleus RC. Multi-criteria decision analysis and environmental risk assessment for nanomaterials. J Nanoparticle Res. 2007; 9(4): 543–554p.

Ghasemzadeh F, Archer NP. Project portfolio selection through decision support. Dec Supp Syst. 2000; 29: 73–88p. Doi: 10.1016/S0167- 9236(00)00065-8.

Meade LM, Presley A.R&D project selection using the analytic network process. IEEE Trans Eng Manag. 2002; 49(1): 55–66. Doi: 10.1109/17.985748.

Yurdalul M. AHP as a strategic decision-making tool to justify machine tool selection. J Mater Proc Technol. 2004; 146: 365–376p.

Chan FTS, Swarnakar R, Tiwari MK. Fuzzy goal-programming model with an artificial immune system (AIS) approach for a machine tool selection and operation allocation problem in a flexible manufacturing system. Int J Prod Res. 2005; 43: 4147–4163p.

Durán O, Aguilo J. Computer-aided machine-tool selection based on a fuzzy-AHP approach. Expert Syst Appl. 2008; 34: 1787–1794p.

Demireli E. Topsis multi-criteria decision-making method: an examination on state owned commercial banks in Turkey. J Entrepren Dev. 2010; 5(1): 101–112p.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.37628/ijied.v4i2.756

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.