2012
DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/kem.522.103
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multi-Criteria Decision-Making and its Analysis for Machining Process of Mine Fans Impellers

Abstract: Green manufacturing is a new model to solve current environmental problems in manufacturing, and the process route determination of the product machining process is one of the key problems. According to the existing machining process and equipment of mine fans impellers, analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is used to assist in building the optimized decision-making model and multi-criteria assessment indicator system and help draw decision. It is concluded that processing technology route of using steel plate sta… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Conversely, ASAS-SN discoveries have median offsets of 4.9 arcsec and 2.6 kpc, indicating that ASAS-SN is less biased against discoveries close to the host nucleus than either comparison group. The three other professional groups with the most discoveries in our comparison sample are CRTS (Drake et al 2009), MASTER (Gorbovskoy et al 2013) and LOSS (Li et al 2000), which either do not use difference imaging or ignore central regions of galaxies in their searches, and this likely contributes to their larger offsets. As we pointed out in Holoien et al (2017), however, ASAS-SN continues to find a higher rate of tidal disruption events than other surveys (see Holoien et al 2016c,b), including those that do use difference imaging, which implies that the avoidance of the central regions of galaxies is still fairly common in surveys other than CRTS, MASTER and LOSS.…”
Section: Sample Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conversely, ASAS-SN discoveries have median offsets of 4.9 arcsec and 2.6 kpc, indicating that ASAS-SN is less biased against discoveries close to the host nucleus than either comparison group. The three other professional groups with the most discoveries in our comparison sample are CRTS (Drake et al 2009), MASTER (Gorbovskoy et al 2013) and LOSS (Li et al 2000), which either do not use difference imaging or ignore central regions of galaxies in their searches, and this likely contributes to their larger offsets. As we pointed out in Holoien et al (2017), however, ASAS-SN continues to find a higher rate of tidal disruption events than other surveys (see Holoien et al 2016c,b), including those that do use difference imaging, which implies that the avoidance of the central regions of galaxies is still fairly common in surveys other than CRTS, MASTER and LOSS.…”
Section: Sample Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The majority were discovered by PTF, and additional SNe were found by the Lick Observatory Supernova Search (Li et al 2000;Filippenko et al 2001), the Puckett Observatory Supernova Search, 14 the La Silla Quest survey (LSQ; Baltay et al 2013), the Catalina Real-time Transient Survey (Drake et al 2009a), the Italian Supernova Search Project, 15 and the Panoramic Survey Telescope and Rapid Response System (Pan-STARRS; Hodapp et al 2004). For three SNe (SN 2011ef, SN 2012an, andLSQ 12fwb), no spectra are publicly available, and we rely on the classification published in Astronomer's Telegrams and Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams by Blanchard et al (2011), Chen et al (2012, and Hadjiyska et al (2012).…”
Section: Sample Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is also a renewed interest in completely characterizing the galaxies in the nearby universe, within 10 Mpc. In nearby galaxies, both amateurs and automated surveys (e.g., KAIT/LOSS [63,64]) are finding many supernovae. For these SNe, archival searches have revealed pre-explosion images of about a dozen supernova progenitor stars, allowing a better understanding of which types of massive stars lead to which kinds of core-collapse supernovae (e.g., [28,36,65,66]).…”
Section: Nearby Supernova Ratementioning
confidence: 99%