Share This Article:

The Multiplicative Analytic Hierarchy Process (MIAHP) as a Quality Criterion Determining the Technological Value of the Egyptian Cotton Varieties

Abstract Full-Text HTML Download Download as PDF (Size:205KB) PP. 106-112
DOI: 10.4236/ajps.2010.12014    4,866 Downloads   9,452 Views   Citations

ABSTRACT

This study was undertaken to develop a numerical process that can be used as a quality criterion to determine the technological value of the Egyptian cotton varieties, which in turn would denote the end-use of their fibers. However the material used in the study comprised the 6 Egyptian cotton varieties Giza70, Giza80, Giza86, Giza88, Giza90 and Giza92. According to the local practice in Egypt, Giza70, Giza88 and Giza92 belong to the Extra-Long Staple (ELS) category, while Giza80, Giza86 and Giza90 are included under the Long Staple (LS) category. The regression analysis of the relationships between fiber properties and yarn skein strength (lea product) of the 2 carded ring counts 40 and 50 Ne, was employed to drive an equation for calculating the Multiplicative Analytic Hierarchy Process (MIAHP) values. The values of the MIAHP have been used as numerical determinations of the technological values of the Egyptian cotton varieties. Nevertheless, the findings of this study clarified that with respect to the criteria weights, the pair-wise comparisons denoted that fiber length properties of Egyptian cotton ranked first where they revealed the most dominant effect on yarn strength, while tensile properties ranked second with a relative weight close to that of fiber length. On the contrary, the relative weight of fiber fineness (micronaire reading) was found to be marginal. With regard to the relative weight of sub-criterion, the pair-wise comparisons indicated that the role of fiber tenacity as a determinant of yarn strength is much superior to that of fiber elongation. Further the global weights of the sub-criterion of fiber length pointed out that the UHML (upper half mean length) plays an important role in determining yarn strength of the Egyptian cotton comparing with either the UI (uniformity index) or the SFC (short fiber content). In conformity with the values of the MIAHP, it was found that in the order of descending rank, Giza88 ranked first, followed by Giza92, Giza70, Giza86, Giza80 and finally Giza90.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

K. Hussein, A. Hassan and M. Kamal, "The Multiplicative Analytic Hierarchy Process (MIAHP) as a Quality Criterion Determining the Technological Value of the Egyptian Cotton Varieties," American Journal of Plant Sciences, Vol. 1 No. 2, 2010, pp. 106-112. doi: 10.4236/ajps.2010.12014.

References

[1] A. Majumdar, B. Sarkar and P. K. Majumdar, “Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process for the Selection of Cotton Fibers,” Fibers and Polymers, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2004, pp. 297-302.
[2] A. Majumdar, P. K. Majumdar and B. Sarkar, “Determination of the Technological Value of Cotton Fiber: A Comparative Study of the Traditional and Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Approaches,” Autex Research Journal, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2005, pp. 71-80.
[3] T. L.Saaty, “Highlights and Critical Points in the Theory and Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 74, 1994, pp. 426-447.
[4] M. Da?deviren and I. Yüksel, “Personnel Selection Using Analytic Network Process,” ?stanbul ticaret üniversitesi fen bilimleri dergisi, Vol. l, No. 6, 2007, pp. 99-118.
[5] R.M.Reddy; M.M. Naidu, and P. Govindarajulu, “An Integrated Approach of Analytical Hierarchy Process Model and Goal Model (AHP-GP Model) for Selection of Software Architecture,” International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, Vol. 7, No. 10, 2007, pp. 101-112.
[6] M. M. Kamal, M. T. Ragab, M. A. Mahgoub and M. R. Abd El-Malek, “Quality Valuation of Egyptian Cotton Varieties,” Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Research, Vol. 80, No. 3, 2002, pp. 1231-1247.
[7] ASTM, “Test Method for Measurement of Cotton Fibers by High Volume Instruments (HVI),” American Society for Testing and Materials, Designation, Philadelphia, USA.
[8] N. R. Draper and H. Smith, “Applied Regression Analysis,” John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1966.
[9] T. L. Saaty, “The Analytic Hierarchy Process,” McGraw-Hill International, New York, 1980.
[10] T. L. Saaty, “Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” Management Science, Vol. 32, No. 7, 1983, pp. 841-855.
[11] T. L. Saaty, “How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 48, No. 9, 1990, pp. 9-26.

  
comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2018 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.