International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET)

Volume 8, Issue 1, January 2017, pp. 241248, Article ID: IJMET_08_01_026

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=8&IType=1
ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359
IAEME Publication

OPTIMIZATION OF PROCESS PARAMETERS USING

AHP AND VIKOR WHEN TURNING AISI 1040 STEEL
WITH COATED TOOLS
D. Bhanu Prakash
Research Scholar (PP M.E 020),
Rayalaseema University, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh, India

Dr. G. Krishnaiah
Professor, SV University, Tirupathi, Andhra Pradesh, India

ABSTRACT
In our previous work, optimal machining parameter selection during turning of AISI 1040 steel
using coated tools with the help of Taguchi Method as well as the use of MCDM techniques
TOPSIS with AHP were discussed. The disadvantage of Taguchi Method and the advantage of
MCDM technique i.e. TOPSIS with AHP were demonstrated and optimal parameter selection was
done. In the current work, MCDM technique VIKOR in combination with AHP is used to optimize
machining parameters. It was found that the result is in good agreement with that obtained when
using TOPSIS with AHP for the same. The current article demonstrates the application of VIKOR
with AHP using CVD coated cutting tool data. The same was applied for the data obtained using
PVD coated tool.
Key words: AHP, VIKOR, Fuzzy linguistic variables, PVD Tool, CVD Tool, Optimization,
Turning.
Cite this Article: D. Bhanu Prakash and Dr. G. Krishnaiah. Optimization of Process Parameters
Using AHP and VIKOR when Turning AISI 1040 Steel with Coated Tools. International Journal
of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 8(1), 2017, pp. 241248.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=8&IType=1

1. INTRODUCTION
VIKOR, expanded as Vlse Kriterijuska Optimizacija I Komoromisno Resenje, was introduced by
Opricovic [1] for civil engineering purposes. It was latter applied for many applications. Abbas Mardani, et
al [2] did a detailed literature survey on this methodology of optimization. As a part of their survey, they
reviewed the work in 15 major areas relating, namely Manufacturing, Construction Management, Material
Selection, Performance Evaluation, Health-Care, Supply Chain, Tourism Management, Service Quality,
Sustainability and Renewable Energy, Water Resources Planning, Marketing, Risk and Financial
management, Operation Management, Human Resource Management, other application areas. Their
survey also indicated that most of the work in manufacturing related to equipment selection. Stanujkic, et
al [3] compared SAW, ARAS, COPRAS, MOORA, GRA, CP, VIKOR and TOPSIS techniques and
indicated the reasons of variations in rankings obtained by using different methodologies. Singaravel, et al
[4] optimized the cutting parameters during turning of EN25 steel with carbide tools using combined

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 241 editor@iaeme.com

 D. Bhanu Prakash and Dr. G. Krishnaiah

MOORA and Entropy method. Petkovic, et al [5] used COPRAS MCDM technique for proper selection of
machining process of ceramic materials. Aykut Kentli & Serhat Akba [6] used AHP with Information
Axiom for selection of lathes. They also stated that AHP and VIKOR were also used for the same by other
researchers.
Wang & Chang [7] explained with example how Fuzzy VIKOR can be used for solving MCDM
problems. Seyhan Nisel [8] used VIKOR to rank various graduate business schools in US. Somasundaram
[9] used AHP and VIKOR to optimize maintenance cycles to avoid unnecessary delays as well as
expenditure with high frequency maintenance cycles. Jui-Kuei Chen and I-Shuo Chen[10] used VIKOR to
process information relating to various universities so as to guide the establishment of a new university.
Rajesh Kumar and Bharat Chandra [11] used combined VIKOR and Entropy Weight for optimizing
process parameters during EDM of Al18% SiCp Metal matrix composite. Yadav [12] used VIKOR
optimizing EDM. Johns [13] investigated into optimization of process parameters when machining AISI
304, AISI 410, EN 31 and H21 using molybdenum wire electrode using combined AHP and VIKOR
technique. Tavakkoli Moghaddam and Mousavi [14] used Delphi method for identifying influential
criteria, AHP for assigning weights and VIKOR for selecting the optimal values of criterial when solving
plant location problem. Hakimiasl, et al [15] used combined AHP and VIKOR methodology for selecting
supplier of solar panels. During this process, 10 parameters like Cost, quality, delivery, different
performance criteria are optimized.
Shirpurkar, et al [16] did a detailed literature survey on optimization of cutting parameters during
turning operations. Their survey indicated that there are no attempts in using VIKOR with AHP for the
same. Raman, et al [17] performed optimization of process parameter using AHP and VIKOR when
turning EN24 steel. The literature survey done by various researchers which is presented in this paper as
well as the literature survey done by the authors of the current work indicate that very less amount of work
is done implementing combined AHP and VIKOR MCDM technique for optimization of turning
parameters. Thus, it is decided to investigate into use AHP and VIKOR for optimizing process parameters
when machining AISI 1040 steel using coated tool inserts.

2. OBJECTIVE
In authors previous work[18], [19], investigations were performed to investigate the effect of each factors
(Speed, Feed, Depth of Cut) on various parameters (Surface Roughness, Material Removal Rate and Power
Consumption). For this, optimum factor values are calculated using Taguchi techniques for each parameter
and combined effect is studied using interaction plots. Also combined AHP & TOPSIS MCDM techniques
are applied for optimizing speed feed and depth of cut. In the current work, we are trying to verify the
result of AHP & TOPSIS by optimizing the same data using AHP & VIKOR.

3. METHODOLOGY
The CVD & PVD data used in [19] is being used for the current work. Data and calculations for CVD tool
are only discussed here. The same procedure can be applied to that of PVD tool. Speed (rpm), Feed
(mm/rev) and Depth of Cut (mm) are to be optimized and the parameters being measured are Surface
Roughness (m), Power Consumption (W) and Material Removal Rate (m3/min). Just as for AHP &
TOPSIS, only parameters shall be analyzed for optimization using AHP & VIKOR. As stated in [19] the
objectives are:
Minimize surface Roughness
Minimize Power Consumption
Maximize Material Removal Rate

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 242 editor@iaeme.com

Optimization of Process Parameters Using AHP and VIKOR when Turning AISI 1040 Steel with Coated Tools

Table 1 L27 orthogonal array with process parameters and target parameters for CVD Tool
Surface Material Power
Depth of
No Speed Feed Roughness Removal Rates Consumption
Cut
Ra (m) (mm^3/min) (kW)
1 740 0.09 0.15 2.8422 0.75 9.3416
2 740 0.09 0.1 4.7161 0.394737 11.75489
3 740 0.09 0.05 2.8118 0.266667 10.3628
4 740 0.07 0.15 4.1796 0.4 10.5261
5 740 0.07 0.1 4.8156 0.674157 8.74391
6 740 0.07 0.05 4.6386 0.514286 7.73641
7 740 0.05 0.15 5.2697 0.580645 9.164832
8 740 0.05 0.1 4.1441 0.45283 7.66528
9 740 0.05 0.05 3.9445 0.514286 5.3281
10 580 0.09 0.15 2.73 0.761905 7.286254
11 580 0.09 0.1 5.8497 0.461538 5.01187
12 580 0.09 0.05 2.8809 0.48 6.17281
13 580 0.07 0.15 4.8045 0.643432 7.848
14 580 0.07 0.1 4.2464 0.571429 6.72485
15 580 0.07 0.05 3.733 0.45 8.766383
16 580 0.05 0.15 6.985 0.638298 5.445271
17 580 0.05 0.1 4.3915 0.633803 4.361176
18 580 0.05 0.05 3.9445 0.327273 5.12973
19 450 0.09 0.15 3.4964 0.461538 7.659078
20 450 0.09 0.1 3.7343 0.164384 4.970542
21 450 0.09 0.05 1.972 0.338028 7.3297
22 450 0.07 0.15 5.4475 0.474308 3.792101
23 450 0.07 0.1 3.9944 0.645161 4.56132
24 450 0.07 0.05 2.518 0.116732 5.37698
25 450 0.05 0.15 5.1373 1.929825 6.42373
26 450 0.05 0.1 2.6061 0.098361 5.61887
27 450 0.05 0.05 2.8618 0.106572 3.709838

Normalization of parameters is then performed on the table 1 using equation (1).

max yi ( k ) yi (k )
For minimization criterion X i ( k ) =
max yi ( k ) min yi (k )
(1)
yi ( k ) min yi ( k )
For maximization criterion X i (k ) =
max yi ( k ) min yi (k )

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 243 editor@iaeme.com

 D. Bhanu Prakash and Dr. G. Krishnaiah

Table 2 Normalized Parameter Values

Normalized Ra Normalized PC Normalized MRR
0.82250 1.00000 0.00448
0.89108 0.79277 0.01003
0.64845 0.84329 0.03605
0.87351 0.76271 0.00000
0.59657 0.89416 0.29856
0.60652 0.82351 0.12499
0.51735 0.91904 0.29236
0.60652 0.79885 0.22710
0.30670 0.98977 0.20527
0.81869 0.69385 0.20838
0.22647 0.83816 0.19830
1.00000 0.55005 0.13086
0.54630 0.62523 0.25830
0.84879 0.55545 0.36230
0.00000 0.78429 0.29481
0.69591 0.50911 0.19830
0.56671 0.50834 0.19354
0.46806 0.49950 0.22710
0.43497 0.48563 0.29761
0.64871 0.37147 0.19200
0.36858 0.66266 1.00000
0.82641 0.29997 0.35580
0.83248 0.17304 0.09190
0.43275 0.37426 0.31439
0.34217 0.32194 0.26333
0.55962 0.15274 0.16470
0.45260 0.00000 0.16182

It may be noted that the weights specified in [18] are also being used in the current work. The weight
calculation procedure is also the same as described in [18]. The fuzzy linguistic variables are described in
table 3. Figure 1 shows the Fuzzy Triangular Membership Function. Pairwise comparison matrix for
responses in terms of linguistic variables is shown in Table 4 and pairwise comparison matrix in terms of
triangular fuzzy numbers is given in Table 5. Table 6 shows the weights computed using the procedure
given in [18].

Table 3 Fuzzy Linguistic Variables

Linguistic Triangular Fuzzy
Variables Numbers
Extremely Low (0, 0, 0.1)
(EL)
Very Low (VL) (0, 0.1, 0.3)
Low (L) (0.1, 0.3, 0.5)
Medium (M) (0.3, 0.5, 0.7)
High (H) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
Very High (VH) (0.7, 0.9, 1)
Extremely High (0.9, 1, 1)
(EH)

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 244 editor@iaeme.com

 Optimization of Process
cess Parameters Using AHP and VIKOR when
hen Turning AISI 1040 Steel with Coated Tools

Figure 1: Fuzzy Triangular Membership Functions

Table 4 Pairwise Comparison matrix for Responses in terms

terms of Linguistic Variables
Priorities MRR Ra PC
MRR 1 VH EH
Ra 1/VH 1 H
PC 1/EH 1/H 1

Table 5 Pairwise Comparison Matrix in Terms of Triangular Fuzzy numbers

Priorities MRR Ra PC
MRR (1, 1, 1) (0.7, 0.9, 1) (0.9, 1, 1)
Ra (1, 1.111, 1.429) (1, 1, 1) (0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
PC (1, 1, 1.111) (1.111, 1.429, 0.2) (1, 1, 1)

Table 6 GA values of various properties

Criteria BNP values Weight
MRR 0.843 0.257
Ra 0.855 0.260
PC 1.587 0.483
Once the weights are determined and normalized values of parameters are computed,
co positive ideal and
negative ideal solutions are to be now determined by using equation (2) & (3) as given in [14] for each
parameter.
max f ij , for maximization
f j+ = i (2)
min
i
f ij , for minimization

max f ij , for minimization

f = i
j

(3)
min
i
f ij , for maximization

Calculate the utility measure (S

( ij) of each parameter for each experiment using the expression (4),
combined utility measure (Si) using expression (5) and regret measure (R ( i) of each experiment for each
parameter using expression (6). VIKOR index (Q ( i) is then computed using expression (7). The weight in
expression (7) is taken as 0.5. The experiments are then ranked in descending order of VIKOR index. The
final ranked matrix is shown in table 6.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.
IJMET/index.asp 245 editor@iaeme.com
 D. Bhanu Prakash and Dr. G. Krishnaiah

w j ( f j+ f ij )
Sij = (4)
(f j
+
f j )

n
Si = Sij (5)
j =1

Ri = max Sij (6)

j

Qi = ( Si S + ) ( S S + ) + (1 ) ( Ri R + ) (R
R+ ) (7)

where
S + = min Si
i

S = max Si
i
+
R = min Ri
i

R = max Ri
i

Utility Utility Utility Utility Regret

S. VIKOR
Measure Measure Measure Measure Measure Rank
No Index
Ra MRR PC Si Ri
2 0.1424 0.2152 0.4832 0.8407 0.4832 1.0000 1
4 0.1146 0.2144 0.4094 0.7383 0.4094 0.7893 2
3 0.0436 0.2331 0.3996 0.6763 0.3996 0.7164 3
7 0.1711 0.1891 0.3276 0.6878 0.3276 0.6143 4
5 0.1476 0.1760 0.3023 0.6259 0.3023 0.5172 5
1 0.0452 0.1654 0.3382 0.5488 0.3382 0.5019 6
15 0.0914 0.2074 0.3037 0.6025 0.3037 0.4976 7
13 0.1470 0.1803 0.2485 0.5758 0.2485 0.3864 8
6 0.1384 0.1984 0.2418 0.5786 0.2418 0.3785 9
16 0.2601 0.1810 0.1042 0.5454 0.2601 0.3763 10
8 0.1127 0.2070 0.2376 0.5573 0.2376 0.3520 11
19 0.0791 0.2058 0.2372 0.5221 0.2372 0.3188 12
26 0.0329 0.2567 0.1147 0.4043 0.2567 0.2401 13
11 0.2012 0.2058 0.0782 0.4852 0.2058 0.2354 14
20 0.0914 0.2474 0.0757 0.4146 0.2474 0.2352 15
21 0.0000 0.2231 0.2174 0.4405 0.2231 0.2210 16
24 0.0283 0.2541 0.1001 0.3826 0.2541 0.2159 17
14 0.1180 0.1904 0.1811 0.4895 0.1904 0.2152 18
18 0.1024 0.2246 0.0853 0.4122 0.2246 0.1972 19
10 0.0393 0.1637 0.2148 0.4178 0.2148 0.1869 20
12 0.0472 0.2032 0.1479 0.3983 0.2032 0.1507 21
22 0.1803 0.2040 0.0049 0.3893 0.2040 0.1436 22
27 0.0462 0.2556 0.0000 0.3017 0.2556 0.1431 23
9 0.1024 0.1984 0.0972 0.3979 0.1984 0.1428 24
17 0.1256 0.1817 0.0391 0.3463 0.1817 0.0687 25
23 0.1049 0.1801 0.0511 0.3361 0.1801 0.0567 26
25 0.1643 0.0000 0.1630 0.3272 0.1643 0.0237 27

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 246 editor@iaeme.com

 Optimization of Process Parameters Using AHP and VIKOR when Turning AISI 1040 Steel with Coated Tools

The optimal values of Speed, Feed and Depth of Cut are thus of experiment number 2 which are 740
rpm, 0.09mm/rev and 0.1mm respectively. These are in good agreement with that determined using AHP
& TOPSIS [18]. The same method is applied for PVD data also, and it was found that the result is in good
agreement with that of AHP & TOPSIS.

5. CONCLUSIONS
Many MCDM techniques are used for optimizing cutting parameters. But very little work is done in
implementing the same for turning AISI 1040 steel using coated tools and that too with combined AHP &
VIKOR technique. This paper validates the optimization result obtained using AHP & TOPSIS in our
previous work using AHP & VIKOR. Detailed discussion on the procedure implemented for optimization
is given in section 4. It was found that the optimization results of AHP & TOPSIS are in good agreement
with those obtained using AHP & VIKOR.

REFERENCES
[1] S. Opricovic, Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems, Fac. Civ. Eng. Belgrade, vol. 2,
no. 1, pp. 521, 1998.
[2] A. Mardani, E. K. Zavadskas, K. Govindan, A. A. Senin, and A. Jusoh, VIKOR technique: A
systematic review of the state of the art literature on methodologies and applications, Sustain., vol. 8,
no. 1, pp. 138, 2016.
[3] S. Dragisa, D. Bojan, and D. Mira, Comparative analysis of some prominent MCDM methods: A case
of ranking Serbian banks, Serbian J. Manag., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 213241, 2013.
[4] B. Singaravel, T. Selvaraj, and S. Vinodh, Multi-Objective Optimization of turning parameters using
the combined MOORA and entropy method, Trans. Can. Soc. Mech. Eng., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 101111,
2016.
[5] D. Petkovic, M. Madic, and G. Radenkovic, Selection of the most suitable non-conventional machining
processes for ceramics machining by using MCDMs, Sci. Sinter., vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 229235, 2015.
[6] A. Kentli and S. Akba, Lathe Selection Using Analytic Hierarchy Process And Information Axiom,
in CBU International Conference On Innovations In Science And Education, 2016, pp. 852856.
[7] T. Wang and T.-H. Chang, Fuzzy VIKOR as an Aid for Multiple Criteria Decision Making.
[8] S. Nisel, An Extended VIKOR Method for Ranking Online Graduate Business Programs, Int. J. Inf.
Educ. Technol., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 103107, 2014.
[9] S. Kumanan, Selecting the best maintenance strategy using AHP and VIKOR approaches, in
International Conference on Advances in Industrial Engineering Applications -ICAIEA 2010, 2010, no.
April, pp. 16.
[10] J. Chen and I. Chen, VIKOR Method for Selecting Universities for Future Development Based on
Innovation, J. Glob. Bus. Issues, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 5359, 2008.
[11] R. K. Bhuyan and B. C. Routara, Optimization the machining parameters by using VIKOR and Entropy
Weight method during EDM process of Al18% SiCp Metal matrix composite, Decis. Sci. Lett., vol. 5,
no. 2, pp. 269282, 2016.
[12] S. K. Yadav, Optimization of green electro-discharge machining using VIKOR, NIT, Rourkela, 2013.
[13] D. Johns, Multi Response Optimization Of Wire Electric Discharge Machining With Analytic
Hierarchy Process, Thapar University, Patiala.
[14] S. M. Mousavi, M. Heydar, and P. O. Box, An Integrated Ahp-Vikor Methodology For Plant Location
Selection, IJE Trans. B Appl., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 127137, 2011.
[15] M. Hakimiasl, M. S. Amalnick, F. Zorriassatine, and A. Hakimiasl, Green Supplier Evaluation by
Using an Integrated Fuzzy AHP- VIKOR Approach, vol. x, no. x, pp. 12841300, 2016.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 247 editor@iaeme.com

 D. Bhanu Prakash and Dr. G. Krishnaiah

[16] P. P. Shirpurkar, S. R. Bobde, V. V Patil, and B. N. Kale, Optimization of Turning Process Parameters
by Using Tool Inserts- A Review, Int. J. Eng. Innov. Technol., vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 216223, 2012.
[17] R. Kumar, R. Kumar, G. Soni, and S. Chhabra, Optimization of Process Parameters During CNC
Turning by Using AHP & VIKOR Method, Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 2, no. 12, pp. 34783480,
2013.
[18] D. B. Prakash, G. Krishnaiah, and N. V. S. Shankar, Optimization of Process Parameters Using AHP
and TOPSIS When Turning AISI 1040 Steel Using Coated Tools, Int. J. Mech. Eng. Technol., vol. 7,
no. 6, pp. 114122, 2016.
[19] D. B. Prakash, G. Krishnaiah, and N. V. S. Shankar, Optimization of Process Parameters Using
Taguchi Techniques When Turning AISI 1040 Steel Using Coated Tools, Int. J. Mech. Eng. Technol.,
vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 114122, 2016.
[20] D Bhanu Prakash, Dr. G Krishnaiah and N V S Shankar , Optimization of Process Parameters Using
Taguchi Techniques when Turning AISI 1040 Steel with Coated Tools. International Journal of
Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 7(6), 2016, pp. 114122.
[21] D Bhanu Prakash, Dr. G Krishnaiah and N V S Shankar , Optimization of Process Parameters Using
AHP and TOPSIS When Turning AISI 1040 Steel with Coated Tools. International Journal of
Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 7(6), 2016, pp. 483492.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 248 editor@iaeme.com