Selection of 3D printing technologies for prosthesis production with multi-criteria decision making methods

dc.authoridebiri, ufukcan/0000-0001-8667-4898
dc.authoridYAZICI, Emre/0000-0002-3661-2119
dc.authoridALAKAS, Haci Mehmet/0000-0002-9874-7588
dc.contributor.authorAlakas, Haci Mehmet
dc.contributor.authorYazici, Emre
dc.contributor.authorEbiri, Ufukcan
dc.contributor.authorKizilay, Berat Alperen
dc.contributor.authorOruc, Onur
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-21T16:44:20Z
dc.date.available2025-01-21T16:44:20Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.departmentKırıkkale Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractToday, innovations are emerging in every field that comes with the constantly developing technology. 3D printers, among the developing technologies and making essential contributions, are significant in fields such as industry and health. 3D printers are used in many areas and provide various benefits, especially flexibility in production. 3D printers provide flexibility in producing products using multiple technologies according to the effect produced. However, differentiating the methods and alternatives creates an alternative selection problem for decision-makers. In this study, which is examined in this context, 3D printer technologies used in prosthesis production will be discussed. The study aims to find the most suitable prosthetic construction technology by comparing the 3D printer technologies used in prosthesis production to minimize the machine cost for prosthesis, eliminate mold production for personal prosthesis production, reduce production time, and customize. Five criteria were determined in selecting the 3D printer technology used in prosthesis production, and ten alternative technologies were listed according to the criteria. The criterion weights are calculated using the Analytical Hierarchy Process, a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making method-alternatives ranked by TOPSIS and PROMETHEE. The most suitable alternative was selected for prosthesis production. A decision-making procedure is proposed for decision-makers. The study demonstrates its originality by presenting analysis with multi-criteria decision-making methods to evaluate alternative 3D printers for prosthesis production.
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) within the scope of 2209 A University Students Research Projects Support Program. Author EY is a 100/2000 The Council of Higher Education (CoHE) PhD Scholar i; Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK); Council of Higher Education (CoHE) PhD Scholar in Operations Research subdivision; [100/2000]
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) within the scope of 2209 A University Students Research Projects Support Program. Author EY is a 100/2000 The Council of Higher Education (CoHE) PhD Scholar in Operations Research subdivision.
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s12008-023-01489-0
dc.identifier.endpage927
dc.identifier.issn1955-2513
dc.identifier.issn1955-2505
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85169152035
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.startpage911
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-023-01489-0
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12587/25433
dc.identifier.volume18
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001060043900001
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSpringer Heidelberg
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Interactive Design and Manufacturing - Ijidem
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.snmzKA_20241229
dc.subject3D printer technologies; Prosthesis; Analytic hierarchy process; TOPSIS; PROMETHEE; Multi-criteria decision-making
dc.titleSelection of 3D printing technologies for prosthesis production with multi-criteria decision making methods
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar