EVALUATION OF EQUIPMENT INVESTMENT PROJECTS IN AIR DEFENCE SECTOR BY FUZZY ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS

Authors

  • Sezgin Kaplan
  • Feyzan Arıkan

Keywords:

Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process, Extent Analysis Method, Equipment Investment, Project Evaluation

Abstract

In this study,  an evaluation model was developed to prioritize the investment projects of the Air Supply and Maintenance Centers. These equipment procurement projects are requested for serving in repair and maintenance for the air force military systems. In order to state accurately the linguistic uncertainty in the pairwise comparison judgements of the alternatives, the Chang’s Extent Analysis Method[3] which is one of the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (Fuzzy AHP) techniques,  has been used as a priorizitation method. The project alternatives have been compared with each other in terms of totally fifteen sub-criteria which were hierarchically related to the four main criteria: potential contribution of the project to the air force lojistic system, economics of the project, risks through the project and technological contribution of the equipment. The candidate projects were compared by qualified experts’ through the querries. Differently from the other Chang’s method implimentations, the geometric average technique was performed to calculate the fuzzy weights, and also two different fuzzy comparison scales were used in this paper.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Laarhoven, P.J.M. ve Pedrycz W., (1983) “A fuzzy extension of saaty’s priority theory”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 229–241.
[2] Buckley, J.J., (1985) “Fuzzy hierarchical analysis”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 233–247.
[3] Chang, D.Y., (1996) “Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP”, European Journal of Operational Research, 95: 649–655.
[4] Wang Y.M., Elhag, T.M.S. ve Hua, Z., (2006) “A modified fuzzy logarithmic least squares method for fuzzy analytic hierarchy process”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 3055-3071.
[5] Xu, R., (2000) “Fuzzy least square priority method in the analytic hierarchy process”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 395-404.
[6] Mikhailov, L., (2003) Deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison judgements, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 365 -385.
[7] Cheng, C.H., (1996) “Evaluating naval tactical missile systems by fuzzy ahp based on the grade value of membership function”, European Journal of Operational Research, 343–350.
[8] Lee, M., Pham, H. ve Zhang, X., (1999) “A methodology for priority setting with application to software development process”, European Journal of Operational Research,118: 375–389.
[9] Leung, L.C. ve Cao, D., (2000) “On consistency and ranking of alternatives in fuzzy ahp”, European Journal of Operational Research, 102–113.
[10] Kuo, M.S., Liang, G.S. ve Huang W.C., (2006) “Extensions of the multicriteria analysis with pairwise comparison under a fuzzy environment”, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 268-285.
[11] Gu, X. ve Zhu, Q., (2006) “Fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making method based on eigenvector of fuzzy attribute evaluation space”, Decision Support Systems, 400-410.
[12] Kwong, C.K. ve Bai, H. (2003) “Determining the importance weights for the customer requirements in qfd using a fuzzy AHP with an extent analysis approach”, IEEE Transactions, 619-626.
[13] Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U. ve Ulukan, Z., (2003) “Multi-criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP”, Logistics Information Management, 382-394.
[14] Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U. ve Ruan, D., (2004) “Multi-attribute comparison of catering service companies using fuzzy ahp: the case of Turkey”, International Journal of Production Economics, 171–184.
[15] Bozdağ, C. E., Kahraman, C. ve Ruan, D., (2003) “Fuzzy group decision making for selection among computer integrated manufacturing systems”, Computers in Industry, 13–29.
[16] Büyüközkan, G., Kahraman, C. ve Ruan, D., (2004) “A fuzzy multi-criteria decision approach for software development strategy selection”, International Journal of General Systems, 259–280.
[17] Tang Y.C. ve Beynon M.J., (2005) “Application and development of a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process within a capital investment study”, Journal of Economics and Management, 207-230.
[18] Bozbura, F.T. ve Beskese, A., (2007) “Prioritization of organizational capital measurement indicators using fuzzy ahp”, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 44: 124–147.
[19] Bozbura, F.T., Beskese, A. ve Kahraman, C., (2007) “Prioritization of human capital measurement indicators using fuzzy ahp”, Expert Systems with Applications, 1-13.
[20] Akman, G. ve Alkan, A., (2006) “Tedarik zinciri yönetiminde bulanık ahp yöntemi kullanılarak tedarikçilerin performansının ölçülmesi: otomotiv yan sanayiinde bir uygulama”, İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 23-46.
[21] Chan, F.T.S. ve Kumar, N., (2007) “Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended ahp-based approach”, Omega, 35 (4): 417-431.
[22] Erensal , Y.C., Öncan, T. ve Demircan, M.L., (2006) “Determining key capabilities in technology management using fuzzy analytic process: a case study of Turkey”, Information Sciences, 2755–2770.
[23] Wang, Y.-M., Luo, Y., ve Hua Z., (2008) “On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications”, European Journal of Operational Research, 186(2), 735-747.

Downloads

Published

23-01-2012

How to Cite

[1]
S. Kaplan and F. Arıkan, “EVALUATION OF EQUIPMENT INVESTMENT PROJECTS IN AIR DEFENCE SECTOR BY FUZZY ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS”, JAST, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 23–33, Jan. 2012.

Issue

Vol. 5 No. 3 (2012)

Section

Articles

License

The manuscript with title and authors is being submitted for publication in Journal of Aeronautics and Space Technologies. This article or a major portion of it was not published, not accepted and not submitted for publication elsewhere. If accepted for publication, I hereby grant the unlimited and all copyright privileges to Journal of Aeronautics and Space Technologies.

I declare that I am the responsible writer on behalf of all authors.