THE SELECTION OF MATERIAL IN DENTAL IMPLANT WITH ENTROPY BASED SIMPLE ADDITIVE WEIGHTING AND ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS METHODS

Year 2018, Volume: 36 Issue: 3, 731 - 740, 01.09.2018

Ercan Şenyiğit Bilal Demirel

Abstract

The aim of our study is the determination of the most suitable material to be used as a dental implant with the help of Entropy based Simple Additive Weighting and Analytical Hierarchy Process which are the two from multi-criteria decision making methods. Three important criteria in fulfilling this purpose have been chosen: young’s modulus, yield strength and hardness criteria. Materials alternatives are chrome cobalt, nickel, nickel titanium, titanium, and stainless steel. Of these alternatives, it has been tried to be determined the most suitable one for the sake of both health and transactional characteristics. At the end of our analysis, it was determined that the best material to be used in implant design is chromium cobalt according to the Entropy based Simple Additive Weighting and Analytic Hierarchy Process methods.

Keywords

Multi-criteria decision making, entropy based simple additive weighting method, analytic hierarchy process, material selection, dental implant

References

• [1] Öztürk D., Batuk F. (2007) Criterion weighting in multicriteria decision making, Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences 25 (1), 86-98.
• [2] Dağdeviren M., Eren T. (2001) Analytical Hierarchy Process and use of 0-1 goal programming methods in selecting supplier firm, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University 16 (2) 41-52.
• [3] Karaman B., Çerçioğlu H. (2015) 0-1 Goal programming aided AHP–VIKOR integrated method: An application of hospital investment project selection, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University 30 (4) 567-576.
• [4] Üstün A. K., Anagün A. S. (2016) Determination of importance weights of Istanbul’s Districts using Analytic Hierarchy Process, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University 31 (1) 119-128.
• [5] Yerlikaya M. A., Arıkan F. (2016) Constructing the performance effectiveness order of SME supports programmes via Promethee and Oreste techniques, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University 31 (4) 1007-1016.
• [6] Şenyiğit E., Demirel B. (2017) Determination of the material for the carbonated soft drink packaging with multi-criteria decision making methods, Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences 35 (3) 471-480.
• [7] Kwathani G., Kar A. K. (2017) Improving the Cosine Consistency Index for the analytic hierarchy process for solving multi-criteria decision making problems, Applied Computing and Informatics 13, 118–129.
• [8] Marttunen M., Lienert J., Belton V. (2017) Structuring problems for Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis in practice: A literature review of method combinations, European Journal of Operational Research 263, 1–17.
• [9] Ömürbek N., Karaatlı M., Balcı H.F. (2016) Analysing the Performances of Automotive Companies Using Entropy Based MAUT and SAW Methods, Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences Journal 31 (1), 227-255.
• [10] Urmak E. D., Çatal Y., Karaatlı M. (2017) Evaluation of the cities of forestry with the AHP based MAUT and SAW methods, Suleyman Demirel University The Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences 22 (2), 301-325.
• [11] Chu M-E., Shyu J., Tzeng G-H., Khosla R. (2017) Comparison among three analytical methods for knowledge communities group-decision analysis, Expert Systems with Applications 33, 1011–1024.
• [12] Kaliszewski I., Podkopaev D. (2016) Simple additive weighting—A metamodel for multiple criteria decision analysis methods, Expert Systems with Applications 54, 155–161.
• [13] Dey B., Bairagi B., Sarkar B., Sanyal S. K. (2017) Group heterogeneity in multi member decision making model with an application to warehouse location selection in a supply chain, Computers & Industrial Engineering 105, 101–122.
• [14] Mardani A., Zavadskas E. K., Khalifah Z., Zakuan N., Jusoh A., Nor K. M., Khoshnoudi M. (2017) A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 71, 216–256.
• [15] Demirel B., Şenyiğit E., Selection of material to use in dental implant design, in Proceedings of The International Conference on Material Science and Technology, October 2017, p. 288, NEVŞEHİR, TÜRKİYE.
• [16] Çalışkan H., Kurşuncu B., Kurbanoğlu C., Güven Ş.Y. (2013) Material selection for the tool holder working under hard milling conditions using different multi criteria decision making methods, Materials and Design 45, 473-479.
• [17] Mousavi-Nasab S. H., Sotoudeh-Anvari A. (2017) A comprehensive MCDM-based approach using TOPSIS, COPRAS and DEA as an auxiliary tool for material selection problems, Materials and Design, 121, 237-253.
• [18] Bhosale S. B., Bhowmik S., Ray A. (2018) Multi Criteria Decision Making For Selection Of Material Composition For Powder Metallurgy Process, Materials Today: Proceedings, 5, 4615–4620.
• [19] Jahan A., Edwards K. L. (2013) Weighting of dependent and target-based criteria for optimal decision-making in materials selection process: Biomedical applications, Materials and Design, 49, 1000–1008.
• [20] Şenyiğit E., Soylemez I., Atici U. (2017) Long-term supplier selection problem: a case study. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Humanities and Social Sciences, 3, 4, 182-189.
• [21] Al-Aomar R. (2010) A combined ahp-entropy method for deriving subjective and objective criteria weights. International Journal of Industrial Engineering: Theory, Applications and Practice, 17, 1, 12-24.