SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 1

Entropi ve SAW Yöntemlerinin Bütünleştirilmesiyle Bir Süt Ürünleri Fabrikasında Makine Seçimi

Machine Selection in a Dairy Product Company with Entropy and SAW Methods Integration

Aşkın ÖZDAĞOĞLU
Enis YAKUT
Sezai BAHAR
Pages
341–359
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This study aims to find the best machine alternative among the three machine offerings according to twelve evaluation criteria by integrating entropy method with SAW method

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Machine selection is an important and difficult process for the firms, and its results may generate more problems than anticipated.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In order to find the best alternative, managers should define the requirements of the factory and determine the necessary criteria.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This study aims to find the best machine alternative among the three machine offerings according to twelve evaluation criteria by integrating entropy method with SAW method
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Machine selection is an important and difficult process for the firms, and its results may generate more problems than anticipated. In order to find the best alternative, managers should define the requirements of the factory and determine the necessary criteria. On the other hand, the decision making criteria for choosing the right equipment may vary according to the type of the manufacturing facility, market requirements, and consumer assigned criteria. This study aims to find the best machine alternative among the three machine offerings according to twelve evaluation criteria by integrating entropy method with SAW method

Özet

Makine seçimi firmalar için önemli ve zor bir süreç olup, bu süreç sonunda firmalar hiç beklemedikleri problemlerle karşılaşabilirler. Firma yöneticileri, en iyi alternatifi bulmak için, fabrikanın ihtiyaçlarını belirlemeli ve gerekli kriterleri saptamalıdır. Diğer yandan, doğru makine seçimini yapabilmek için gerekli kriterler; üretim tesisine, pazar gereksinimlerine ve müşteriler tarafından belirlenen kriterlere göre değişebilmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, entropi ve basit toplamlı ağırlıklandırma (SAW) yöntemlerinin birlikte kullanılması ile üç farklı tedarikçi firmanın sunduğu üç farklı makine arasında on iki farklı değerlendirme kriterinin bir arada göz önüne alınarak tercih yapılmasıdır

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZDAĞOĞLU, A., YAKUT, E., BAHAR, S. (2022). Entropi ve SAW Yöntemlerinin Bütünleştirilmesiyle Bir Süt Ürünleri Fabrikasında Makine Seçimi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 1, 341–359. https://ajindex.com/articles/490521

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. AFSHARI, A., MOJAHED, M., & YUSUFF, R. M. (2010). ‘‘Simple additive weighting approach to personnel selection problem’’, International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 1, 5, 511-515.
  2. ALEMI-ARDAKANI, Mohammad. MILANI, Abbas S. YANNACOPOULOS, Spiro, SHOKOUHI, Golnaz. (2016), “On the effect of subjective, objective and combinative weighting in multiple criteria decision making: A case study on impact optimization of composites”, Expert Systems with Applications, 46, 426–438.
  3. BAZZAZI, Abbas Aghajani. OSANLOO, Morteza. KARIMI, Behrooz. (2011), “Deriving preference order of open pit mines equipment through MADM methods: Application of modified VIKOR method”, Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 2550–2556.
  4. CHEN, Ting. JIN, Yiying. QIU, Xiaopeng. CHEN, Xin. (2014), “A hybrid fuzzy evaluation method for safety assessment of food-waste feed based on entropy and the analytic hierarchy process methods”, Expert Systems with Applications, 41, 7328–7337.
  5. EROL, Ismail. FERRELL Jr., WILLIAM G. (2009), “Integrated approach for reorganizing purchasing: Theory and a case analysis on a Turkish company”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 56, 1192–1204.
  6. EROL, İsmail. SENCER, Safiye. ÖZMEN, Aslı. SEARCY, Cory. (2014), “Fuzzy MCDM framework for locating a nuclear power plant in Turkey”, Energy Policy, 67, 186–197.
  7. EROL, İsmail. (2004), “Toplam Kalite Yönetimi ve Tam Zamanında Üretim Yaklaşımlarının Satınalma İşlevi ile İlişkilendirilmesi, Bütünsel Bir Yaklaşım Önerisi ve Örnek Olay Analizi”, Endüstri Mühendisliği Dergisi, 15, 4, 2-18.
  8. HABTEMARIAM, Bereket Tesfamariam. FANG, Qinhua. (2016), “Zoning for a multiple-use marine protected area using spatial multi-criteria analysis: The case of the Sheik Seid Marine National Park in Eritrea”, Marine Policy, 63, 135–143.
  9. HAGURA, Yoshio, et al. (2011) “Quantification of grittiness of yogurt using flow characteristics indexes”, Procedia Food Science, 1, 594-600.
  10. HAMZADAYI, Alper. YILDIZ, Gokalp. (2016), “Hybrid strategy based complete rescheduling approaches for dynamic m identical parallel machines scheduling problem with a common server”, Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 63, 104–132.
  11. GENCER, Cevriye; GÜRPINAR, Didem. (2007), “Analytic network process in supplier selection: A case study in an electronic firm”, Applied Mathematical Modelling, 31, 11, 2475-2486. http://www.raw-milk-facts.com/homogenization_T3.html, (28.10.2016). http://physics.info/viscosity/, (28.10.2016).
  12. KALISZEWSKI, I. PODKOPAEV, D. (2016),