Gang Li
China Academy of Civil Aviation Science and Technology, Beijing, China
Yajing Wang
China Academy of Civil Aviation Science and Technology, Beijing, China
Zhenguo Ba
China Academy of Civil Aviation Science and Technology, Beijing, China
ABSTRACT
This study models the aero-engine health assessment problem as a Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) problem and proposes a two-step evaluation model, combining the technique of fuzzy AHP (fuzzy analytic hierarchy process) and TOPSIS (technique for order performance by similarity to idea solution). This study applies the fuzzy AHP method to determine relative weights of multiple evaluation criteria and synthesize the ratings of candidate aero-engines. Aggregated the evaluators attitude toward preference, then TOPSIS is employed to obtain a crisp overall performance value for each alternative to make a final decision. To illustrate how the approach is used for the aero-engine health assessment problem, an empirical study of a real case involving eleven evaluation criteria and ten initial commercial aero-engines of Air China is conducted. The case study demonstrates the effectiveness and feasibility of the proposed evaluation procedure.
PDF References Citation
Received: June 05, 2013;
Accepted: October 06, 2013;
Published: November 16, 2013
How to cite this article
Gang Li, Yajing Wang and Zhenguo Ba, 2013. A Hybrid Model for Aero-engine Health Assessment Based on Condition Monitoring Information. Journal of Applied Sciences, 13: 5524-5526.
DOI: 10.3923/jas.2013.5524.5526
URL: https://scialert.net/abstract/?doi=jas.2013.5524.5526
DOI: 10.3923/jas.2013.5524.5526
URL: https://scialert.net/abstract/?doi=jas.2013.5524.5526
REFERENCES
- Azadeh, A., S.F. Ghaderi and M.F. Ahmadabad, 2007. Multi criteria quality assessment of products by integrated DEA-PCA approach. Int. J. Reliab. Qual. Saf. Eng., 14: 201-218.
CrossRef - Cakir, O. and M.S. Canbolat, 2008. A web-based decision support system for multi-criteria inventory classification using fuzzy AHP methodology. Expert Syst. Applic., 35: 1367-1378.
CrossRefDirect Link - Chamodrakas, I., N. Alexopoulou and D. Martakos, 2009. Customer evaluation for order acceptance using a novel class of fuzzy methods based on TOPSIS. Expert Syst. Appl., 36: 7409-7415.
CrossRef - Csutora, R. and J.J. Buckley, 2001. Fuzzy hierarchical analysis: The Lambda-Max method. Fuzzy Set Syst., 120: 181-195.
CrossRef - Dagdeviren, M., S. Yavuz and N. Kilinc, 2009. Weapon selection using the AHP and TOPSIS methods under fuzzy environment. Expert Syst. Applic., 36: 8143-8151.
CrossRefDirect Link - Duran, O. and J. Aguilo, 2008. Computer-aided machine-tool selection based on a Fuzzy-AHP approach. Expert Syst. Appl., 34: 1787-1794.
CrossRef - Ertugrul, I. and N. Karakasoglu, 2009. Performance evaluation of Turkish cement firms with fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and TOPSIS methods. Expert Syst. Applic., 36: 702-715.
CrossRef - Gumus, A.T., 2009. Evaluation of hazardous waste transportation firms by using a two step fuzzy-AHP and TOPSIS methodology. Expert Syst. Applic., 36: 4067-4074.
CrossRef - Li, Y.P., M.Y. Chen and X.Y. Zhang, 2006. Parameter selection and queue rules research of civil aviation engine performance. J. Shanghai Univ. Eng. Sci., 20: 108-111.
CrossRef - Mikhailov, L., 2000. A fuzzy programming method for deriving priorities in the analytic hierarchy process. J. Oper. Res. Soc., 51: 341-349.
CrossRefDirect Link - Mikhailov, L. and P. Tsvetinov, 2004. Evaluation of services using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Applied Soft Comput., 5: 23-33.
CrossRefDirect Link - Wang, T.C. and T.H. Chang, 2007. Application of TOPSIS in evaluating initial training aircraft under a fuzzy environment. Exp. Syst. Applic., 33: 870-880.
CrossRef - Yu, W.W., L.P. Kang and C.S. Xu, 2007. Research on module performance assessment of aero-engine. Aeronautical Comput. Technique, 37: 18-20.
CrossRef - Zhou, J.H., Z.W. Zhong, M. Luo and C. Shao, 2009. Wavelet-based correlation modelling for health assessment of fluid dynamic bearings in brushless DC motors. Int. J. Adv. Manufact. Technol., 41: 421-429.
CrossRef