Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods for Selection of Lightweight Material for Railway Vehicles

This paper deals with the selection of the optimal material for railway wagons, from among three different steel and three aluminium based materials, by using four different Multicriteria Decision Making Methods (MCDM) and comparing their ranking of the materials. We analysed: Dual-Phase 600 steel,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Materials 2022-12, Vol.16 (1), p.368
Main Authors: Sharma, Varun, Zivic, Fatima, Adamovic, Dragan, Ljusic, Petar, Kotorcevic, Nikola, Slavkovic, Vukasin, Grujovic, Nenad
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aerospace industry
Aluminum
Aluminum alloys
Aluminum base alloys
Corrosion resistance
Decision making
Design
Dual phase steels
Ductility
Friction stir welding
High strength steel
Lightweight
Material properties
Mechanical properties
Methods
Modulus of elasticity
Multiple criterion
Porous materials
Railroads
Ranking
Rankings
Steel
Strain hardening
Tensile strength
TWIP steels
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This paper deals with the selection of the optimal material for railway wagons, from among three different steel and three aluminium based materials, by using four different Multicriteria Decision Making Methods (MCDM) and comparing their ranking of the materials. We analysed: Dual-Phase 600 steel, Transformation-Induced Plasticity (TRIP) 700 steel, Twinning-Induced Plasticity (TWIP) steel, Aluminium (Al) alloys, Al 6005-T6, and Al 6082-T6, and porous Al structure with closed cells. Four different MCDM methods were used: VIKOR, TOPSIS, PROMETTHEE and the Weighted aggregated sum product assessment method (WASPAS). Key material properties that were used in the MCDM analysis were: density, yield strength (Y.S.), tensile strength (T.S.), Y.S./T.S. ratio, Youngs modulus (Y.M.), cost and corrosion resistance (C.R.). Research results indicate that aluminium and its alloys prove to be the most suitable material, based on setup criteria. Advanced steels also achieved good ranking, making them a valid option, immediately behind lightweight aluminium alloys. Porous aluminium did not perform well, according to the used MDCM methods, mainly due to the significantly lower strength exhibited by the porous structures in general.
ISSN:1996-1944
1996-1944
DOI:10.3390/ma16010368