A Decision-Making Framework for Selecting Rapid Prototyping Processes in Resource-Constrained Industries Using AHP-GRA

V. E. Kothawade; V. P. Wani; H. A. Chavan

doi:10.48084/etasr.13905

Authors

V. E. Kothawade Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mumbai Education Trust Bhujbal Knowledge City, Institute of Engineering, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Maharashtra, India
V. P. Wani Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mumbai Education Trust Bhujbal Knowledge City, Institute of Engineering, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Maharashtra, India https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6340-5417
H. A. Chavan Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mumbai Education Trust Bhujbal Knowledge City, Institute of Engineering, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Maharashtra, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0060-3229

Volume: 15 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 28687-28692 | December 2025 | https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.13905

Received: 7 August 2025 | Revised: 23 August 2025 | Accepted: 9 September 2025 | Online: 3 October 2025

Corresponding author: V. E. Kothawade

Abstract

Small-scale industries often hesitate to use Rapid Prototyping (RP) technologies. These technologies come with specific challenges, such as capital investment, expertise, availability, and materials. Traditional machining and forming methods take a lot of time and require significant labor. These limitations reduce the effectiveness of these processes in the fast-paced environment of Industry 4.0. RP provides many advantages that address these issues, as it significantly cuts down product development time, labor needs, and design complexity. However, small-scale industries still face multiple challenges when trying to implement RP. The adoption of RP is often cautious in many industrial settings due to limited access to services, lack of expertise, and high initial costs. To address these challenges, this study presents a systematic research approach that includes an analytical study to help resource-constrained industries choose the best RP process. This work uses a hybrid AHP-GRA model that follows a performance-based and empirically tested method. This approach offers a clear decision-making framework and promotes the use of RP methods among small-scale industries. The findings indicate that SLA (Stereolithography) is the most suitable method, achieving the highest weighted Grey Relational Grade (GRG) of 0.8617. This is followed by SLS (Selective Laser Sintering) with a GRG value of 0.6988, 3DP (3D Printing) with a GRG value of 0.4894, and FDM (Fused Deposition Modeling) with a GRG value of 0.3946.

Keywords:

AHP, GRA, decision support system, Rapid Prototyping (RP), process selection, small-scale industries

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

I. Gibson, D. Rosen, B. Stucker, and M. Khorasani, Additive Manufacturing Technologies. Springer International Publishing, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56127-7

J. P. Kruth, M. C. Leu, and T. Nakagawa, "Progress in Additive Manufacturing and Rapid Prototyping," CIRP Annals, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 525–540, 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)63240-5

B. Berman, "3-D printing: The new industrial revolution," Business Horizons, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 155–162, Mar. 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2011.11.003

H. S. Byun and K. H. Lee, "A decision support system for the selection of a rapid prototyping process using the modified TOPSIS method," The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 26, no. 11–12, pp. 1338–1347, Nov. 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-004-2099-2

M. Palanisamy, A. Pugalendhi, and R. Ranganathan, "Selection of suitable additive manufacturing machine and materials through best–worst method (BWM)," The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 107, no. 5–6, pp. 2345–2362, Mar. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-05110-6

G. N. Levy, R. Schindel, and J. P. Kruth, "Rapid manufacturing and rapid tooling with layer manufacturing (LM) technologies: State of the art and future perspectives," CIRP Annals, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 589–609, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60206-6

M. Younas et al., "Multi-objective optimization for sustainable turning Ti6Al4V alloy using grey relational analysis (GRA) based on analytic hierarchy process (AHP)," The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 105, no. 1–4, pp. 1175–1188, Nov. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04299-5

T. P. T. Le, V. T. Dinh, T. Q. D. Nguyen, D. B. Vu, and T. T. Vu, "Application of the Multi-Criteria Decision Method to Find the Best Input Factors for Electrical Discharge Machining 90CrSi Tool Steel using Graphite Electrodes," Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 18883–18888, Dec. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.9114

J. J. Thakkar, "Introduction," in Multi-Criteria Decision Making, vol. 336, Springer Singapore, 2021, pp. 1–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4745-8_1

D. Ren, J. K. Choi, and K. Schneider, "A multicriteria decision-making method for additive manufacturing process selection," Rapid Prototyping Journal, vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 77–91, Dec. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-11-2021-0302

K. Ransikarbum, R. Pitakaso, N. Kim, and J. Ma, "Multicriteria decision analysis framework for part orientation analysis in additive manufacturing," Journal of Computational Design and Engineering, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1141–1157, Jul. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jcde/qwab037

M. Sartini, M. Luca, F. Claudio, and M. Marco, "A multi-criteria decision-making approach to optimize the part build orientation in additive manufacturing," Proceedings of the Design Society, vol. 3, pp. 293–302, Jul. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2023.30

C. Yang and B. Chen, "Supplier selection using combined analytical hierarchy process and grey relational analysis," Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 926–941, Oct. 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/17410380610688241

V. G. Venkatesh, A. Zhang, E. Deakins, S. Luthra, and S. Mangla, "A fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS approach to supply partner selection in continuous aid humanitarian supply chains," Annals of Operations Research, vol. 283, no. 1–2, pp. 1517–1550, Dec. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-2981-1

J. Raigar, V. S. Sharma, S. Srivastava, R. Chand, and J. Singh, "A decision support system for the selection of an additive manufacturing process using a new hybrid MCDM technique," Sādhanā, vol. 45, no. 1, Dec. 2020, Art. no. 101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-020-01338-w

G. H. Lin, C. A. Chuang, C. L. Tan, S. F. Yeo, and F. Y. Wu, "Supplier selection criteria using analytical hierarchy process (AHP)-based approach: a study in refractory materials manufacturers," Industrial Management & Data Systems, vol. 123, no. 6, pp. 1814–1839, May 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-06-2022-0370

M. Lahdhiri, A. Babay, and M. Jmali, "Multi-criteria Decision Making Using Hybrid methods for Supplier Selection in the Clothing Industry," Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 23–34, Mar. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ftee-2022-0004

J. Hallak, "Optimizing construction supplier selection in conflict-affected regions: a hybrid multi-criteria framework," Operations Management Research, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 1270–1294, Dec. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12063-024-00505-0

M. A. Ara, M. S. Tamanna, M. Ali, A. Amin, and Md. A. Shabur, "A hybrid AHP and statistical validation approach for sustainable supplier selection in apparel industry," Discover Sustainability, vol. 6, no. 1, Jun. 2025, Art. no. 538. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01416-1

A. Çalik, S. T. Onifade, and A. A. Alola, "Evaluating Supply Resilience Performance of an Automotive Industry during Operational Shocks: A Pythagorean Fuzzy AHP-VIKOR-Based Approach," Systems, vol. 11, no. 8, Aug. 2023, Art. no. 396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11080396

S. H. Gökler and S. Boran, "A novel resilient and sustainable supplier selection model based on D-AHP and DEMATEL methods," Journal of Engineering Research, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 57–67, Mar. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jer.2023.07.015

M. Tolooie, M. Alvandi, and M. S. Arani, "Sustainable supplier evaluation and selection in developing countries: an integrated fuzzy framework," International Journal of Integrated Supply Management, vol. 15, no. 2, 2022, Art. no. 151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJISM.2022.121952

M. Chandra, F. Shahab, V. Kek, and S. Rajak, "Selection for additive manufacturing using hybrid MCDM technique considering sustainable concepts," Rapid Prototyping Journal, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 1297–1311, Jun. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-06-2021-0155

K. E. K. Vimal, S. Vinodh, P. Brajesh, and R. Muralidharan, "Rapid prototyping process selection using multi criteria decision making considering environmental criteria and its decision support system," Rapid Prototyping Journal, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 225–250, Mar. 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-03-2014-0040

Y. Qin, Q. Qi, P. Shi, P. J. Scott, and X. Jiang, "Selection of materials in metal additive manufacturing via three-way decision-making," The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 126, no. 3–4, pp. 1293–1302, May 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-10966-5

K. M. A. Algunaid and J. Liu, "Decision support system to select a 3D printing process/machine and material from a large-scale options pool," The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 121, no. 11–12, pp. 7643–7659, Aug. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-022-09362-2

"Wohlers Report 2023," Wohlers Associates, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://wohlersassociates.com/.

A. Gebhardt, J. Kessler, and L. Thurn, 3D Printing: Understanding Additive Manufacturing, 2nd ed. München: Carl Hanser Verlag GmbH & Co. KG, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3139/9781569907030

T. L. Saaty, "Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process," International Journal of Services Sciences, vol. 1, no. 1, 2008, Art. no. 83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590