Method of Desulfurization Process Selection Based on Improved Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation: A Case Study of Papermaking Desulfurization in China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Establishment of the Evaluation Index System for the Desulfurization Process
2.1. Desulfurization Process Analysis
2.2. Establishment of Evaluation Index System for the Desulfurization Process
3. Research on the Uncertain Evaluation Method
3.1. Comparison of Various Commonly Used Evaluation Methods
3.2. Establishment of an Improved Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Model
3.2.1. The Determination of the Commentary Set
3.2.2. Weight Determination of the Evaluation Index
- Select samples of evaluation objects, each of which has indicators (12 indicators selected in this paper), and construct a judgment matrix:
- Find out the index ratio of the first object under the first evaluation index:
- The entropy of the evaluation index is defined as [41]:In order to make meaningful, it is stipulated that when , .
- Calculate the entropy value of the evaluation index. The entropy value of the first index is:The objective weights determined by the above steps are:
3.2.3. Weights Determined by the Analytic Hierarchy Process
Constructing the Judgment Matrix
Hierarchical Single Ranking and Consistency Test
- The judgment matrix is normalized by column: , where , the matrix is obtained.
- Calculate the average value of each row of matrix : , where , is the eigenvector.
- Calculate the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix: , in which represents the component of component .
- Consistency testing: Consistency testing refers to determining the allowable range of inconsistencies for . In order to ensure the rationality of weight distribution obtained by using analytic hierarchy process (AHP), the coordination of the importance of each element is checked to avoid conflicting situations. Since depends continuously on , the eigenvector corresponding to is used as the weight vector of the influence degree of the comparative factors on the upper factors. Therefore, the consistency index of judging matrix should be calculated. . The larger the value of , the worse the consistency. The random consistency ratio is defined as . The test formula is: . Among them, is the average random consistency index of matrix . The value of is only related to the order of matrix. The value of RI is shown in Table 5.
Hierarchical Total Sorting and Consistency Testing
3.2.4. Determination of Comprehensive Weight
3.2.5. Constructing a Fuzzy Evaluation Model
4. Application Case Validation
4.1. Analysis on Desulfurization of Biogas Power Generation Project in a Company
4.2. Information Collection of Desulfurization Process Schemes Classification and Indicators Evaluation of Each Process Schemes in the Company
4.3. Weight Determination of Rating Indicators
4.4. Comprehensive Evaluation Value of Desulfurization Process Schemes
, | , | . |
4.5. Comparing and Analyzing Each Process Plan
5. Conclusions and Prospect
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Sun, W.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, F.; Zhao, Y. Dynamic allocation of surplus byproduct gas in steel plant by dynamic programming with reduced state space algorithm. Eng. Opt. 2018, 50, 1578–1592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- You, J.; Wang, Y. Application of Improved Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation in Manufacturing BPR Appraisal System. J. Eng. Econ. 2016, 50, 1065–1069. [Google Scholar]
- Shoukat, U.; Pinto, D.D.D.; Knuutila, H.K. Study of Various Aqueous and Non-Aqueous Amine Blends for Hydrogen Sulfide Removal from Natural Gas. Processes 2019, 7, 160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, M.; Huang, Z.; Cai, Z. An Improved Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation for the Quality Evaluation of Enterprise Logistics Service. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Materials Engineering and Information Technology Applications, Qingdao, China, 28–29 November 2015; pp. 346–352. [Google Scholar]
- Shan, W.; Cai, S.; Liu, C. A New Comprehensive Evaluation Method for Water Quality: Improved Fuzzy Support Vector Machine. Water 2018, 10, 1303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, M.; Niu, D. Research on project post-evaluation of wind power based on improved ANP and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model of trapezoid subordinate function improved by interval number. Renew. Energy 2019, 132, 255–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, R.; Song, H.; Li, J. Research on settlement particle recognition based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method. EURASIP J. Image Video Process. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghorabaee, M.K.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Amiri, M.; Esmaeili, A. Multi-criteria evaluation of green suppliers using an extended WASPAS method with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 137, 213–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, J.; Chen, J.; Chen, Z.; Cao, J.; Wang, Q.; Zhao, L.; Zhang, H.; Xu, B.; Chen, G. Risk assessment of seismic hazards in hydraulic fracturing areas based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation and AHP method (FAHP): A case analysis of Shangluo area in Yibin City, Sichuan Province, China. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2018, 170, 797–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, W.; Xu, K.; Lian, J.; Bin, L.; Ma, C. Multiple flood vulnerability assessment approach based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method and coordinated development degree model. J. Environ. Manag. 2018, 213, 440–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Z.; Li, S.; Li, Z.; Chen, H. A Class of Multi-Label Feature Selection Algorithms Based on Information Entropy. J. Comput. Res. Dev. 2013, 50, 1177–1184. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, J.; Wu, D.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, M. Extension Evaluation of Green Building Project Management Performance Based on Entropy Weight Method. J. Eng. Manag. 2018, 32, 125–130. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, H.; Zheng, F.; Cai, Y. Airport Operation Risk Assessment Based on Entropy Weight Method. J. Chongqing Univ. Technol. 2016, 30, 177–184. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, Y.; Miao, Y.; Li, H. Enhancement Effect of Ordered Hierarchical Pore Configuration on SO2 Adsorption and Desorption Process. Processes 2019, 7, 173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, M.; Chen, D. Performance Evaluation of Medical Equipment Purchase Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation. J. Sci. Technol. Innov. Appl. 2016, 31, 33–34. [Google Scholar]
- Ning, L. Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation of Building Energy Conservation Scheme Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process. J. Sci. Technol. Innov. Appl. 2015, 30, 250. [Google Scholar]
- Jiang, A.; Dong, Y.; Yang, W.; Zhang, S.; Jia, N. Application of Three-Scale AHP-Entropy Optimal Portfolio Weighting Method in PPP Project Risk Assessment. J. Eng. Manag. 2017, 31, 62–67. [Google Scholar]
- Yan, X.; Zhang, B.; Chen, P. Evaluation of Tianjin Construction Industry Competitiveness Based on AHP-Entropy Weight TOPSIS Method. J. Eng. Manag. 2015, 29, 6–10. [Google Scholar]
- Wen, H.; Wu, L.; Mei, J. Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation of Guangzhou-Foshan Intercity Bus Satisfaction Based on Improved AHP Method. J. Sun Yat Sen Univ. 2018, 57, 64–71. [Google Scholar]
- Yu, Q.; Wang, Z.; Zheng, Z.; Zheng, G. Research on Comprehensive Evaluation of Water Quality of Yinma River Based on Improved Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method. J. Environ. Sci. Manag. 2017, 42, 169–173. [Google Scholar]
- Li, J.; Ruan, S.; Liu, K. Research on Financial Risk Analysis Model of Small and Micro Enterprises Based on Improved Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method. J. Oper. Res. Manag. 2015, 24, 217–224. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, X.; Yang, Z. Research on Credit Evaluation System Based on Improved Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method: An Empirical Study of Small and Medium-sized Listed Companies in China. J. Manag. Sci. Chin. 2015, 23, 146–153. [Google Scholar]
- Lou, P.; Yuan, L.; Hu, J.; Yan, J.; Fu, J. A Comprehensive Assessment Approach to Evaluate the Trustworthiness of Manufacturing Services in Cloud Manufacturing Environment. J. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 30819–30828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Sun, Z.; Han, L.; Mei, N. Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method for Energy Management Systems Based on an Internet of Things. J. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 21312–21322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, B.; Guo, D.; Zhang, X. An approach for evaluating cleaner production performance in iron and steel enterprises involving competitive relationships. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 142, 739–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, W.; Zhou, Y.; Lv, J.; Wu, J. Assessment of multi-air emissions: case of particulate matter (dust), SO2, NOx and CO2 from iron and steel industry of China. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 232, 350–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, W.; Xu, X.; Lv, Z.; Mao, H.; Wu, J. Environmental impact assessment of wastewater discharge with multi-pollutants from iron and steel industry. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 245, 210–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, T.; Li, J.; He, B. Drought assessment model based on Improved Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation. J. Comput. Appl. 2012, 32, 41–44. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Z. Optimization calculation of reverse energy consumption based on feature parameter of NC code. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2017, 93, 9–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, C.; Liu, M. Cost and Benefit Analysis of Desulfurization System in Power Plant. Telkomnika 2014, 12, 33–46. [Google Scholar] [Green Version]
- Miltner, M.; Makarukb, A.; Harasek, M. Selected. Methods of Advanced Biogas Upgrading. J. Chem. Eng. Trans. 2016, 52, 463–468. [Google Scholar]
- Ying, X.; Sun, Y.; Yuan, Z.; Kong, X.; Li, L. Research Progress of Biological Desulfurization Technology for Biogas. J. Appl. Environ. Biol. 2014, 20, 328–335. [Google Scholar]
- Makaruk, A.; Miltner, M.; Harasek, M. Biogas desulfurization and biogas upgrading using a hybrid membrane system - modeling study. Water Sci. Technol. 2013, 67, 326–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Xiao, C.; Ma, Y.; Ji, D.; Zang, L. Review of desulfurization process for biogas purification. J. Earth Environ. Sci. 2017, 100, 012177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allegue, L.B.; Hinge, J. Biogas Upgrading Evaluation of Methods for H2S Removal; Danish Technological Instute: Taastrup, Denmark, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Khoshnevisa, B.; Tsapekos, P.; Alfaro, N.; Díaz, I.; Fdz-Polanco, M.; Rafiee, S.; Angelidaki, I. A review on prospects and challenges of biological H2S removal from biogas with focus on biotrickling filtration and microaerobic desulfurization. Biofuel Res. J. 2017, 16, 741–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coppola, G.; Papurello, D. Biogas cleaning: Activated carbon regeneration for H2S removal. Clean Technol. 2018, 1, 40–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andevary, H.H.; Akbari, A.; Omidkhah, M. High efficient and selective oxidative desulfurization of diesel fuel using dual-function [Omim] FeCl4 as catalyst/extractant. Fuel Process. Technol. 2019, 185, 8–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Li, L.; Yang, S.; Gong, B. Research on government low carbon regulation guiding enterprise low carbon technological innovation under dynamic game theory. Chin. Manag. Sci. 2016, 24, 139–147. [Google Scholar]
- Wei, G.; Wei, Y. Similarity measures of Pythagorean fuzzy sets based on the cosine function and their applications. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 2018, 33, 634–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shannon, C.E. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 1948, 27, 379–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saaty, T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
Comparison Index | Dry Desulfurization | Wet Desulfurization | Biological Desulfurization |
---|---|---|---|
Scope of application | Low biogas flow and concentration | The biogas flow rate is small and the concentration is high | Low flow rate and high concentration of Biogas |
Installed power | – | High | 30–50% of wet process |
Operation cost | High, need to change filler regularly | Moderate | Only a small amount of electricity |
Area covered | Very small | More equipment and large area | Moderate |
Operation management | Simple operation, unattended | There is lots of equipment, which need special management. | Fully automatic operation, unattended |
Target Layer A | Criterion Level C | Index Level p | Index Requirements |
---|---|---|---|
Comprehensive evaluation of desulfurization methods | Economic performance C1 | One-time investment p1 | The lower the better |
Power consumption p2 | The lower the better | ||
Operation cost p3 | The lower the better | ||
Environmental Standardization C2 | Solution circulation p4 | The smaller the better | |
Desulfurization efficiency p5 | The higher, the better | ||
Effect of desulfurization p6 | The lower the better | ||
Organic sulfur removal p7 | The lower the better | ||
Side reaction of solution p8 | The lower the better | ||
Technological requirements C3 | Maximum sulfur content in biogas p9 | The higher, the better | |
Limit of biogas flow p10 | The more unlimited the better | ||
Process Control Requirements p11 | The more controllable the better | ||
Preparatory Period for Initial Operation of Device p12 | The sooner the better |
Methods | Advantages | Disadvantages |
---|---|---|
AHP | Combination of qualitative and quantitative. The principle is relatively simple. The reliability of evaluation results is high The error is small. | Quantitative limitation of evaluation object factors. Weight determination is susceptible to subjective factors. |
FCE | The model is simple and easy to understand. Quantitative evaluation results of uncertain information include abundant information Strong practicability. | Failure to effectively solve information overlap between indicators The determination of weight is subjective |
BP | It has the ability of self-adaptation. Fault tolerance. Realizable input. Arbitrary none of the output question. Linear mapping. | A lot of training books are needed. The accuracy of calculation results is low. |
DEA | Data and functional forms. No specific requirements. Information gain. The utilization rate is higher. Objectivity strong evaluation results are clear. | Very sensitive to data. Effective Decision Unit. Less information available. |
Scale | Meaning |
---|---|
1 | Comparing the two elements, they have the same importance |
3 | Compared with the two elements, one element is slightly more important than the other |
5 | Compared with the two elements, one element is obviously more important than the other |
7 | Compared with two factors, one factor is more important than the other |
9 | Compared with the two elements, one element is more important than the other |
2, 4, 6, 8 | The median of the above two adjacent judgments |
Reciprocal |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RI | 0 | 0 | 0.58 | 0.90 | 1.12 | 1.24 | 1.32 | 1.41 | 1.45 | 1.49 | 1.52 | 1.54 |
Index Level | Biological Desulfurization | Normal Wet Desulfurization | Wet + Biochemical (DDS) |
---|---|---|---|
One-time investment p1 | 1 | 0.25 | 0.25 |
Power consumption p2 | 0.25 | 1 | 0.5 |
Operation cost p3 | 0.75 | 1 | 0.375 |
Solution circulation p4 | 0.33 | 1 | 0.55 |
Desulfurization efficiency p5 | 0.78 | 0.55 | 1 |
Effect of desulfurization p6 | 0.89 | 0.55 | 1 |
Organic sulfur removal p7 | 0 | 0.4 | 1 |
Side reaction of solution p8 | 0.25 | 1 | 0.25 |
Maximum sulfur content in biogas p9 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 |
Limit of biogas flow p10 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Process control requirements p11 | 1 | 0.75 | 0.75 |
Preparatory period for initial operation of device p12 | 1 | 0.33 | 0.33 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, Z.; Wang, F.; Zhu, Y.; Gong, B. Method of Desulfurization Process Selection Based on Improved Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation: A Case Study of Papermaking Desulfurization in China. Processes 2019, 7, 446. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr7070446
Wang Z, Wang F, Zhu Y, Gong B. Method of Desulfurization Process Selection Based on Improved Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation: A Case Study of Papermaking Desulfurization in China. Processes. 2019; 7(7):446. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr7070446
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Zhiguo, Fei Wang, Yali Zhu, and Bengang Gong. 2019. "Method of Desulfurization Process Selection Based on Improved Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation: A Case Study of Papermaking Desulfurization in China" Processes 7, no. 7: 446. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr7070446