Multiattributes Decision – Full Analytical Criteria Method – Selecting Solution for Network Issues

1. Problem Definition

In previous blog, I use Non Compensatory Model and Compensatory Model as decision making tools, to make decision on what project should be carried out to fix a transmission network issue. In this blog I am using Full Analytical Criteria Method for my decision making selection process using the problem in blog week 6.

2. Development of Feasible Alternatives

As per in Blog week 6, there are 5 project options for this issues. The list is as follow:

1. Project A: Install 2 x 50MVA transformers at Blackberry Substation and 1 x 50MVA at iPhone Substation
   
2. Project B: Build Docomo Substation with 1 x 50MVA Transformer and install 2x 50MVA Transformer at BlackBerry Substation and install 1x 50MVA Transformer at iPhone Substation
   
3. Project C: Install 2x 100MVA transformers at BlackBerry Substation and 1x 50MVA transformers at iPhone Substation
   
4. Project D: Build Docomo Substation with 2 x 100MVA Transformer and install 1x 50MVA Transformer at iPhone Substation
   
5. Project E: Install 2x 100MVA transformers at BlackBerry Substation and relocate 1x 50MVA from BlackBerry Substation to iPhone Substation
   

3. Alternatives Outcomes

The parameters that may impact the projects are listed in Table 1.

Project	Develop. Cost	Maint. Cost		Environmental Issue		# of Staging	Finish Year
A	72.0	5.55		vegetation clearing		3	2033
B	87.2	5.90		vegetation clearing, possible native artefact		3	2033
C	71.6	5.50		vegetation clearing		4	2032
D	94.9	6.50		vegetation clearing, possible native artefact		3	2030
E	42.0	5.50		vegetation clearing		4	2032

Table 1. Project to Parameter Matrix

4. Selection of Criteria

The selection will be based on the comparison between project parameters importance against each other and between each project. The rank of importance is following the list below:

1 = Equally important.

5 = More important/preferred.

10 = Much more important/preferred

1/5 = Less important/preferred.

1/10 = Much less important/preferred.

The above rank is used to value the level of importance between project parameters against each other and between each project.

5. Analysis of the Alternatives

For project which does not represent a number (i.e. environmental issue), a number is assigned. For this instance, the assignment is as follow:

Vegetation clearing                =    2

Vegetation clearing, possible native artefact     =    1

The importance comparison between project parameters can be seen in Table 3.

Table 3. Project parameter comparison

The importance comparison between each project can be seen in Table 4.

Table 4. Project comparison.

From each of the tables above, weighted values are calculated for the project parameters and each projects. Multiplication of the weighted factor of the parameter with the weighted factor of each project can be seen in Table 5. Table 5 also shows the sum of each weighted value of the project parameters for each project in column Total Row. These values represent the project ranking.

Table 5. Weighted values and project ranking

6. Selection of Preferred Alternative

Based on total project scoring as shown in Table 5, Project E is having the biggest score. It means Project E should be selected as preferred options.

7. Performance Monitoring & Post Evaluation of Results

The Full Analytical Criteria Method result is similar to the Compensatory Model and the Non Compensatory Model. This is understandable, because Project E in general is dominance compare to other projects. On the next blog, I am going to evaluate this project using Analytic Hierarchy Process.

References

Wibisono, H. (Sept 6, 2013). W2_HWB_Full Analytical Criteria Method. Retrieved from: http://simatupangaace2014.wordpress.com/2013/09/06/w2_hwb_full-analytical-criteria-method/

Sullivan, W. G., Wicks, E. M., & Koelling, C. P. (2012). Engineering Economy (15th ed.)  (pp.551-569). Boston: Prentice Hall.

Quality America’s Online Knowledge Center. (n.d). Full Analytical Method. Retrieved from http://www.qualityamerica.com/knowledgecenter/qualityimprovementtools/full_analytical_method.asp

Syque Quality. (n.d). Full Criteria Analytical Method. Retrieved from http://www.syque.com/improvement/Analytical%20Criteria%20Method.htm

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-AU
X-NONE
X-NONE

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;}

Daroeso, S. S., (Oct 9, 2013). W6_SSD_Non Compensatory Decision Making – Selecting Transmission Projects. Retrieved from: http://simatupangaace2014.wordpress.com/2013/10/09/w6_ssd_non-compensatory-decision-making-selecting-transmission-projects/