2013
DOI: 10.3390/en6063017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Combined Fuzzy-AHP and Fuzzy-GRA Methodology for Hydrogen Energy Storage Method Selection in Turkey

Abstract: Abstract:In this paper, we aim to select the most appropriate Hydrogen Energy Storage (HES) method for Turkey from among the alternatives of tank, metal hydride and chemical storage, which are determined based on expert opinions and literature review. Thus, we propose a Buckley extension based fuzzy Analytical Hierarchical Process (Fuzzy-AHP) and linear normalization based fuzzy Grey Relational Analysis (Fuzzy-GRA) combined Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methodology. This combined approach can be applie… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
68
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 125 publications
(68 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
0
68
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Giveñ r ij ¼ ðl ij ; m ij ; u ij Þ, the normalized performance rating can be calculated as (Gumus, Yayla, Celik, & Yildiz, 2013;Zhang & Liu, 2011):…”
Section: Supplier Selection (Phase Iii)mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Giveñ r ij ¼ ðl ij ; m ij ; u ij Þ, the normalized performance rating can be calculated as (Gumus, Yayla, Celik, & Yildiz, 2013;Zhang & Liu, 2011):…”
Section: Supplier Selection (Phase Iii)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Defuzzification formula (Definition 4) is applied tow j ; then the grey relational grade γ i is estimated by the relation (Gumus et al, 2013): Good (G) (7, 8, 9) 7 Very Good (VG) (8,9,10) where w j is the weight of the jth criterion, P n j¼1 w j ¼ 1 which are presented in Table 5. The alternatives can now be ranked in accordance with the value of grey relational grade.…”
Section: Supplier Selection (Phase Iii)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Buckley's fuzzy AHP algorithm is preferred to determine criteria weights since it is easy to extend to the fuzzy case, guarantees a unique solution to the reciprocal comparison matrix and the steps of this approach are relatively easier than the other fuzzy AHP approaches (Gumus 2009;Gumus et al 2013). The proposed trapezoidal interval type-2 fuzzy AHP (TIT2FAHP) in consideration with Buckley (1985) can be summarized as follows.…”
Section: Trapezoidal Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Ahpmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this section, the basic definitions of trapezoidal type-2 fuzzy sets (Mendel et al 2006;Lee, Chen 2008;Chen, Lee 2010;Celik et al 2013b), the procedure of AHP (Buckley 1985;Gumus 2009;Gumus et al 2013) and TOPSIS (Hwang, Yoon 1981;Chen 2000;Chen, Lee 2010;Nasab, Rostamy-Malkhalifeh 2010;Celik et al 2012) based on trapezoidal interval type-2 fuzzy sets are briefly introduced mathematically. …”
Section: The Integrated Mcdm Approach Based On Trapezoidal Interval Tmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In accordance with the features of risk evaluation index system, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is appropriate for determining the weights of indexes with a multi-levels structure [28]. AHP uses the pair-wise comparison method to construct the judgment matrixes for both the second level and the third level.…”
Section: The Risk Evaluation Model Based On Cloud Model and Fce Methomentioning
confidence: 99%