Volume 23 , Issue 1 , PP: 205-215, 2024 | Cite this article as | XML | Html | PDF | Full Length Article
Dionisio Ponce Ruiz 1 * , Giovanny Pineda Silva 2 , Maha Ibrahim 3
Doi: https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.230118
Full exploitation of offshore wind resources still needs to be completed despite their significant potential to reduce the impacts of climate change via the production of renewable power. Planning strategies that include wind resources, safety, economic, social, and government impacts are essential for advancing offshore wind generation projects. This study aims to evaluate the criteria for wind power plants and select the best turbine. This process has various conflict criteria, so the multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methodology deals with multiple criteria. The ARAS method is an MCDM method used to rank the alternatives. The ARAS method uses the single-valued neutrosophic set to deal with uncertain information. We gathered eleven criteria and fifteen alternatives. The results show the turbine resource is the best and the economic criterion is the worst. The sensitivity analysis is conducted to ensure the proposed model's results and show the strength of the proposed method. The results show the proposed model is suitable for selecting the best wind power plant.
Power Plant , Wind , Assessment Problem , MCDM , Neutrosophic Sets , ARAS Method.
[1] E. Muljadi, S. Pasupulati, A. Ellis, and D. Kosterov, “Method of equivalencing for a large wind power plant with multiple turbine representation,” in 2008 IEEE power and energy society general meeting-conversion and delivery of electrical energy in the 21st century, IEEE, 2008, pp. 1–9.
[2] E. H. Camm et al., “Characteristics of wind turbine generators for wind power plants,” in 2009 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting, IEEE, 2009, pp. 1–5.
[3] P. Li, W. Hu, R. Hu, Q. Huang, J. Yao, and Z. Chen, “Strategy for wind power plant contribution to frequency control under variable wind speed,” Renewable energy, vol. 130, pp. 1226–1236, 2019.
[4] D. Le Gourieres, Wind power plants: theory and design. Elsevier, 2014.
[5] E. Muljadi, C. P. Butterfield, J. Chacon, and H. Romanowitz, “Power quality aspects in a wind power plant,” in 2006 IEEE power engineering society general meeting, IEEE, 2006, pp. 8-pp.
[6] L.-R. Chang-Chien and Y.-C. Yin, “Strategies for operating wind power in a similar manner of conventional power plant,” IEEE transactions on energy conversion, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 926–934, 2009.
[7] Z. Wu et al., “State-of-the-art review on frequency response of wind power plants in power systems,” Journal of Modern Power Systems and Clean Energy, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2018.
[8] E. D. Castronuovo and J. A. P. Lopes, “On the optimization of the daily operation of a wind-hydro power plant,” IEEE Transactions on Power systems, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 1599–1606, 2004.
[9] G. Rediske, H. P. Burin, P. D. Rigo, C. B. Rosa, L. Michels, and J. C. M. Siluk, “Wind power plant site selection: A systematic review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 148, p. 111293, 2021.
[10] J. Ribrant and L. Bertling, “Survey of failures in wind power systems with focus on Swedish wind power plants during 1997-2005,” in 2007 IEEE power engineering society general meeting, IEEE, 2007, pp. 1–8.
[11] P. Rani, J. Ali, R. Krishankumar, A. R. Mishra, F. Cavallaro, and K. S. Ravichandran, “An integrated single-valued neutrosophic combined compromise solution methodology for renewable energy resource selection problem,” Energies, vol. 14, no. 15, p. 4594, 2021.
[12] K. M. Sallam and A. W. Mohamed, “Neutrosophic MCDM Methodology for Evaluation Onshore Wind for Electricity Generation and Sustainability Ecological,” Neutrosophic Systems with Applications, vol. 4, pp. 53–61, 2023.
[13] P. Liu and S. Cheng, “An extension of ARAS methodology for multi-criteria group decision-making problems within probability multi-valued neutrosophic sets,” International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, vol. 21, pp. 2472–2489, 2019.
[14] E. A. Adalı, T. Öztaş, A. Özçil, G. Z. Öztaş, and A. Tuş, “A new multi-criteria decision-making method under neutrosophic environment: ARAS method with single-valued neutrosophic numbers,” International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, vol. 22, no. 01, pp. 57–87, 2023.
[15] D. Stanujkic et al., “A single valued neutrosophic extension of the simple WISP method,” Informatica, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 635–651, 2022.
[16] A. R. Mishra, P. Rani, and A. Saha, “Single‐valued neutrosophic similarity measure‐based additive ratio assessment framework for optimal site selection of electric vehicle charging station,” International journal of intelligent systems, vol. 36, no. 10, pp. 5573–5604, 2021.
[17] Abdullah Ali Salamai, An Approach Based on Decision-Making Algorithms for Qos-Aware Iot Services Composition, Journal of Intelligent Systems and Internet of Things, Vol. 8 , No. 1 , (2023) : 08-16 Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/JISIoT.080101
[18] I. M. Hezam, A. R. Mishra, R. Krishankumar, K. S. Ravichandran, S. Kar, and D. S. Pamucar, “A single-valued neutrosophic decision framework for the assessment of sustainable transport investment projects based on discrimination measure,” Management Decision, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 443–471, 2023.
[19] E. Kazimieras Zavadskas, R. Baušys, and M. Lazauskas, “Sustainable assessment of alternative sites for the construction of a waste incineration plant by applying WASPAS method with single-valued neutrosophic set,” Sustainability, vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 15923–15936, 2015.
[20] N. Nabeeh, “Assessment and Contrast the Sustainable Growth of Various 1 Road Transport Systems using Intelligent Neutrosophic 2 Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model,” Sustainable Machine Intelligence Journal, vol. 2, 2023.
[21] Abedallah Z. Abualkishik,Rasha Almajed, Triangular Neutrosophic Multi-Criteria Decision Making AHP Method for Solar Power Site Selection, International Journal of Advances in Applied Computational Intelligence, Vol. 2 , No. 2 , (2022) : 08-15, Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/IJAACI.020201
[22] Ahmed Abdelhafeez, Hoda K. Mohamed, Skin Cancer Detection using Neutrosophic c-means and Fuzzy c-means Clustering Algorithms, Journal of Intelligent Systems and Internet of Things, Vol. 8 , No. 1 , (2023) : 33-42, Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/JISIoT.080103
[23] B. F. Yildirim and B. Adiguzel Mercangoz, “Evaluating the logistics performance of OECD countries by using fuzzy AHP and ARAS-G,” Eurasian Economic Review, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 27–45, 2020.
[24] Ahmed Abdelaziz,Alia N. Mahmoud Nova, Car Sharing Station Choice by using Interval Valued Neutrosophic WASPAS Method, International Journal of Advances in Applied Computational Intelligence, Vol. 2 , No. 2 , (2022) : 27-36, Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/IJAACI.020203
[25] Ç. Karamaşa, D. Karabasevic, D. Stanujkic, A. Kookhdan, A. Mishra, and M. Erturk, “An extended single-valued neutrosophic AHP and MULTIMOORA method to evaluate the optimal training aircraft for flight training organizations,” FACTA UNIVERSITATIS-SERIES MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, vol. 19, no. 3, 2021.
