IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v194y2009i3p629-636.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A multi-objective modeling approach for energetic material evaluation decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Schniederjans, Marc J.
  • Pantoya, Michelle L.
  • Hoffman, James J.
  • Willauer, Darrin L.

Abstract

To develop ordnance for military applications requires a decision process of selecting materials. Once selected a performance evaluation of the material composite formulations energetic properties is required. Tailoring the composite materials for a particular ordnance application requires selecting reactants that seek an optimized combination of economic costs and performance properties (e.g., energy release, temperature, and gas generation). A successful energetic material evaluation must identify reactants offering a good fit with performance requirements and an overall materials selection strategy. To aid energetic material users in making complex reactant selection decisions we introduce a modeling approach that combines the concepts of thermodynamics, economic costs, and goal programming. This study is unique in its application of goal programming in exploring this type of decision situation. A case study is used to illustrate the modeling approach. The results demonstrate the efficacy of the approach for evaluating formulations where performance properties are important.

Suggested Citation

  • Schniederjans, Marc J. & Pantoya, Michelle L. & Hoffman, James J. & Willauer, Darrin L., 2009. "A multi-objective modeling approach for energetic material evaluation decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(3), pages 629-636, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:194:y:2009:i:3:p:629-636
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(08)00145-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amouzegar, Mahyar A. & Moshirvaziri, Khosrow, 1999. "Determining optimal pollution control policies: An application of bilevel programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 100-120, November.
    2. Pramanik, Surapati & Roy, Tapan Kumar, 2007. "Fuzzy goal programming approach to multilevel programming problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(2), pages 1151-1166, January.
    3. Wang, Ying-Ming & Elhag, Taha M.S., 2007. "A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 458-471, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mahmoud A. Abo-Sinna & Ibrahim A. Baky, 2010. "Fuzzy Goal Programming Procedure to Bilevel Multiobjective Linear Fractional Programming Problems," International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences, Hindawi, vol. 2010, pages 1-15, March.
    2. He, Chao & Zhang, Quanguo & Ren, Jingzheng & Li, Zhaoling, 2017. "Combined cooling heating and power systems: Sustainability assessment under uncertainties," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 755-766.
    3. Frota Neto, J. Quariguasi & Bloemhof-Ruwaard, J.M. & van Nunen, J.A.E.E. & van Heck, E., 2008. "Designing and evaluating sustainable logistics networks," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 195-208, February.
    4. Amelia Bilbao-Terol & Mar Arenas-Parra & Raquel Quiroga-García & Celia Bilbao-Terol, 2022. "An extended best–worst multiple reference point method: application in the assessment of non-life insurance companies," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 5323-5362, November.
    5. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui & Zhang, Ren & Hong, Mei, 2015. "Generalized analytic network process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(1), pages 277-288.
    6. Josip Matejaš & Tunjo Perić & Danijel Mlinarić, 2021. "Which efficient solution in multi objective programming problem should be taken?," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 29(3), pages 967-987, September.
    7. Yibin Zhang & Kevin W. Li & Zhou-Jing Wang, 2017. "Prioritization and Aggregation of Intuitionistic Preference Relations: A Multiplicative-Transitivity-Based Transformation from Intuitionistic Judgment Data to Priority Weights," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 409-436, March.
    8. Lachhwani, Kailash, 2015. "Modified FGP approach for multi-level multi objective linear fractional programming problems," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 266(C), pages 1038-1049.
    9. Rizk M. Rizk-Allah & Mahmoud A. Abo-Sinna, 2021. "A comparative study of two optimization approaches for solving bi-level multi-objective linear fractional programming problem," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 58(2), pages 374-402, June.
    10. Kabak, Özgür & Ülengin, Füsun, 2011. "Possibilistic linear-programming approach for supply chain networking decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 209(3), pages 253-264, March.
    11. Hong Wang & Xiaodong Zhang, 2018. "A Decentralized Bi-Level Fuzzy Two-Stage Decision Model for Flood Management," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(5), pages 1615-1629, March.
    12. Dempe, S., 2011. "Comment to "interactive fuzzy goal programming approach for bilevel programming problem" by S.R. Arora and R. Gupta," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(2), pages 429-431, July.
    13. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "The analytic hierarchy process with interval preference statements," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 177-185.
    14. Huang, Shanshan & Suo, Cai & Guo, Junhong & Lv, Jing & Jing, Rui & Yu, Lei & Fan, Yurui & Ding, Yanming, 2023. "Balancing the water-energy dilemma in nexus system planning with bi-level and multi-uncertainty," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    15. Guo, Peijun & Tanaka, Hideo, 2010. "Decision making with interval probabilities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(2), pages 444-454, June.
    16. Mustapha Kaci & Sonia Radjef, 2023. "An adaptive method to solve multilevel multiobjective linear programming problems," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 33(3), pages 29-44.
    17. Ahn, Byeong Seok & Park, Haechurl, 2014. "Establishing dominance between strategies with interval judgments of state probabilities," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 53-59.
    18. Meimei Xia & Jian Chen, 2015. "Studies on Interval Multiplicative Preference Relations and Their Application to Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 115-144, January.
    19. Masatoshi Sakawa & Hideki Katagiri, 2012. "Stackelberg solutions for fuzzy random two-level linear programming through level sets and fractile criterion optimization," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 20(1), pages 101-117, March.
    20. Cheng, Chi-Bin, 2011. "Reverse auction with buyer-supplier negotiation using bi-level distributed programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 211(3), pages 601-611, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:194:y:2009:i:3:p:629-636. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.