Next Article in Journal
Broadband PLC for Clustered Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) Architecture
Next Article in Special Issue
Modeling of Load Bearing Characteristics of Jacket Foundation Piles for Offshore Wind Turbines in Taiwan
Previous Article in Journal / Special Issue
A Review of Research on Large Scale Modern Vertical Axis Wind Turbines at Uppsala University
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Energies 2016, 9(7), 566; doi:10.3390/en9070566

A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs

1
Offshore Renewable Energy Centre, Cranfield University, Cranfield MK43 0AL, UK
2
Mechanical Engineering Research Center, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Valencia 46022, Spain
3
Sustainable Manufacturing Systems Centre, Cranfield University, Cranfield MK43 0AL, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Frede Blaabjerg
Received: 21 April 2016 / Revised: 4 July 2016 / Accepted: 7 July 2016 / Published: 21 July 2016
(This article belongs to the Collection Wind Turbines)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [1581 KB, uploaded 21 July 2016]   |  

Abstract

This paper presents an application and extension of multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods to account for stochastic input variables. More in particular, a comparative study is carried out among well-known and widely-applied methods in MCDM, when applied to the reference problem of the selection of wind turbine support structures for a given deployment location. Along with data from industrial experts, six deterministic MCDM methods are studied, so as to determine the best alternative among the available options, assessed against selected criteria with a view toward assigning confidence levels to each option. Following an overview of the literature around MCDM problems, the best practice implementation of each method is presented aiming to assist stakeholders and decision-makers to support decisions in real-world applications, where many and often conflicting criteria are present within uncertain environments. The outcomes of this research highlight that more sophisticated methods, such as technique for the order of preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS) and Preference Ranking Organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE), better predict the optimum design alternative. View Full-Text
Keywords: multi-criteria decision methods; wind turbine; support structures; weighted sum method (WSM); weighted product method (WPM); technique for the order of preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS); analytical hierarchy process (AHP); preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE); elimination et choix traduisant la realité (ELECTRE); stochastic inputs multi-criteria decision methods; wind turbine; support structures; weighted sum method (WSM); weighted product method (WPM); technique for the order of preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS); analytical hierarchy process (AHP); preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE); elimination et choix traduisant la realité (ELECTRE); stochastic inputs
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Kolios, A.; Mytilinou, V.; Lozano-Minguez, E.; Salonitis, K. A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs. Energies 2016, 9, 566.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Energies EISSN 1996-1073 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top