Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

A fuzzy based decision model for nontraditional machining process selection


Manufacturing systems are processes in which inputs obtained from interior and exterior sources are transformed into an output by gathering inputs in an optimal way to guide the enterprises. Machining process plays a critical role in industry, and thus, directly affects the efficiency of the manufacturing systems. Due to different importance of the conflicting criterions, the multi-criteria decision-making methods are extremely useful in the selection process of the proper machining type. This study provides distinct systematic approaches in fuzzy and crisp environments to deal with the selection problem of proper machining process and proposes a decision support model for the guidance of decision makers to assess potentials of seven distinct nontraditional machining processes, namely laser beam machining, plasma arc machining, water jet machining, abrasive water jet machining, electrochemical machining, electrical discharge machining (EDM), and wire–EDM in the cutting process of carbon structural steel with the width of plate of 10 mm. The required data for decision and weight matrices are obtained via a questionnaire to specialists, as well as by deep discussions with experts and making use of past studies. Finally, an application of the proposed model is also performed via the SETED 1.0 software to show the applicability of the model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. 1.

    Cebi S, Kahraman C (2010) Developing a group decision support system based on fuzzy information axiom. Knowl-Based Syst 23:3–16

  2. 2.

    Montazer GA, Saremi HQ, Ramezani M (2009) Design a new mixed expert decision aiding system using fuzzy ELECTRE III method for vendor selection. Expert Syst Appl 36:10837–10847

  3. 3.

    Paksoy T, Pehlivan NY, Kahraman C (2012) Organizational strategy development in distribution channel management using fuzzy AHP and hierarchical fuzzy TOPSIS. Expert Syst Appl 39:2822–2841

  4. 4.

    Kaya T, Kahraman C (2011) Multicriteria decision making in energy planning using a modified fuzzy TOPSIS methodology. Expert Syst Appl 38:6577–6585

  5. 5.

    Das S, Chakraborty S (2011) Selection of non-traditional machining processes using analytic network process. J Manuf Syst 30:41–53

  6. 6.

    Yurdakul M, Cogun C (2003) Development of a multi-attribute selection procedure for non-traditional machining processes. J Eng Manuf 217:993–1009

  7. 7.

    Das CN, Chakraborty S (2008) A combined TOPSIS-AHP method based approach for non-traditional machining processes selection. J Eng Manuf 222:1613–1623

  8. 8.

    Sadhu A, Chakraborty S (2011) Non-traditional machining processes selection using data envelopment analysis (DEA). Expert Syst Appl 38:8770–8781

  9. 9.

    Cogun C (1993) Computer-aided system for selection of nontraditional machining operations. Comput Ind 22:169–179

  10. 10.

    Cogun C (1994) Computer aided preliminary selection of non-traditional machining processes. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 34:315–326

  11. 11.

    Chakroborty S, Dey S (2006) Design of an analytic-hierarchy-process-based expert system for non-traditional machining process selection. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 31:490–500

  12. 12.

    Chakroborty S, Dey S (2007) QFD-based expert system for non-traditional machining process selection. Expert Syst Appl 32:1208–1217

  13. 13.

    Chandrasselan ER, Jehadeesan R, Raajenthiren M (2008) Web-based knowledge base system for selection of non-traditional machining processes. Malays J Comput Sci 21:45–56

  14. 14.

    Chandrasselan ER, Jehadeesan R, Raajenthiren M (2008) A knowledge base for non-traditional machining process selection. Int J Technol 4:37–46

  15. 15.

    Roy B (1968) Classement et choix en presence de points de vue multiples (la methode ELECTRE). RIRO 8:57–75

  16. 16.

    Triantaphyllou E (2000) Multi-criteria decision making methods: a comparative study. Academic, Dordrecht

  17. 17.

    Vincke P (1992) Multicriteria decision aid. Wiley, West Sussex

  18. 18.

    Krohling RA, Campanharo VC (2011) Fuzzy TOPSIS for group decision making: a case study for accidents with oil spill in the sea. Expert Syst Appl 38:4190–4197

  19. 19.

    Yürekli H (2008) Use of the ELECTRE methods in the selection of attack helicopters. PhD Thesis, Istanbul

  20. 20.

    Hwang CL, Lai YJ, Liu TY (1993) A new approach for multiple objective decision making. Comput Oper Res 20:889–899

  21. 21.

    Chu TC, Lin YC (2003) A fuzzy TOPSIS method for robot selection. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 21:284–290

  22. 22.

    Ertuğrul İ, Karakaşoğlu N (2009) Performance evaluation of Turkish cement firms with fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and TOPSIS methods. Expert Syst Appl 36:702–715

  23. 23.

    Uygurtürk H, Korkmaz T (2012) Finansal performansın TOPSIS çok kriterli karar verme yöntemi ile belirlenmesi: Ana metal sanayi işletmeleri üzerine bir uygulama. Eskişehir Osmangazi Univ IIBF J 7:95–115

  24. 24.

    Brans JP, Vincke P, Mareschal B (1986) How to select and how to rank projects: the PROMETHEE method. Eur J Oper Res 24:228–238

  25. 25.

    Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Infect Control 8:338–353

  26. 26.

    Zadeh LA (2008) Is there a need for fuzzy logic? Inform Sci 178:2751–2779

  27. 27.

    Kaehler S D (2011) Fuzzy logic tutorial—an introduction. The newsletter of the Seattle Robotics Society. Accessed 25 Oct 2011

  28. 28.

    Sevkli M (2010) An application of the fuzzy ELECTRE method for supplier selection. Int J Prod Res 48:3393–3405

  29. 29.

    Chen CT (2000) Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst 114:1–9

  30. 30.

    Silver MS (1991) Systems that support decision makers: description and analysis. Wiley, West Sussex

  31. 31.

    Kou G, Shi Y, Wang S (2011) Multiple criteria decision making and decision support systems. Decis Support Syst 51:247–249

  32. 32.

    McQuade K (2009) “Door No.1, door No.2 or door No.3?” Accessed 03 Jan 2012

  33. 33.

    Valíček J, Hloch S, Kozak D, Tozan H, Yağımlı M (2011) Surfaces created by abrasive waterjet. Springer, İstanbul

  34. 34.

    Shanmugam D, Chen F, Siores E, Brandt M (2002) Comparative study of jetting machining technologies over laser machining technology for cutting composite materials. Compos Struct 57:289–296

  35. 35.

    Aliakbari A, Baseri H (2012) Optimization of machining parameters in rotary EDM process by using the Taguchi method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 62:1041–1053

  36. 36.

    Liao YS, Huang JT, Chen YH (2004) A study to achieve a fine surface finish in Wire-EDM. J Mater Process Technol 149:165–171

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Tolga Temuçin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Temuçin, T., Tozan, H., Vayvay, Ö. et al. A fuzzy based decision model for nontraditional machining process selection. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 70, 2275–2282 (2014).

Download citation


  • Multiple criteria decision-making
  • Fuzzy set theory
  • Nontraditional machining processes