# Determining the Best Dressing Parameters for External Cylindrical Grinding Using MABAC Method
## 1 Introduction
In this paper, more than 120 scientific papers are reviewed while investigating the implementations of various MCDM techniques in solving parametric optimization problems of turning, drilling, and milling processes. This review paper would serve as a knowledge base for determining the best experimental design plan to be deployed ([PERSON]'s L9, L18, or L27 orthogonal array); difficult-to-cut advanced engineering materials to be machined (composites, aluminum, titanium, and their alloys); input parameters for turning, drilling, and milling processes, and corresponding responses to study their interaction effects, MCDM tools, and subjective and objective criteria weighting techniques to be used; and the possibility of integrating with other mathematical tools to deal with an uncertain decision-making environment. [PERSON] et al. [35] presented the results of a study conducted to determine the best supplier of gearboxes in the Indian iron and steel industry. In this study, a design of experiments (DoE)-based metamodel is developed to connect the computed MABAC scores to the criteria under consideration. Competing suppliers are ranked using a rough-MABAC-DoE-based metamodel, which also simplifies the computational steps when new suppliers are added to the decision-making process. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [32] used the TOPSIS (technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution) method to select levels of dressing parameters for a better surface finish in cylindrical angular grinding of En-31 parts. In this study, four input parameters, including the dressing cross feed rate, the dressing depth of cut, the width of the diamond dresser, and the drag angle of the dresser were investigated. However, only three solutions with a surface finish criterion are provided for the MCDM problem. [PERSON]. [PERSON] et al. [33] carried out a comparison study on MCDM for the dressing process when internal grinding SKD11 steel. Four MCDM methods, TOPSIS, MARCOS (measurement of alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution), EAMR (evaluation by an area-based method of ranking), and MAIRCA (multi-attributive ideal-real comparative analysis), as well as two weight calculation methods, entropy and MEREC, were used in this study. It can be recognized from the above analysis, that while there have been various applications of MCDM methods for different mechanical machining processes, no studies have been conducted to determine the best dressing mode for external cylindrical grinding. This paper, hence, presents a study on MCDM for the dressing process in cylindrical external grinding. In this work, three criteria were chosen for the investigation: RS, wheel life T, and roundness Rn. In addition, to solve the MCDM problem, the MABAC method was selected. Furthermore, the MEREC and entropy methods were used to determine the weights of the criteria. As a result, the MABAC method has been successfully used \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**No.**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Input Factors**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Symbol**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Unit**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Levels**} \\ \cline{5-6}  & & & **1** & **2** & **3** & **4** \\ \hline
1 & Coarse dressing depth & \(a_{r}\) & mm & 0.03 & 0.04 & - & - \\
2 & Coarse dressing passes & \(n_{r}\) & - & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 \\
3 & Fine dressing depth & \(a_{f}\) & mm & 0.005 & 0.01 & 0.015 & 0.02 \\
4 & Fine dressing passes & \(n_{f}\) & times & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 \\
5 & Non-feeding dressing & \(n_{0}\) & - & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 \\
6 & Dressing feed rate & \(S_{d}\) & m/min & 1 & 1.5 & - & - \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Input factors. to determine the best dressing mode in external cylindrical grinding. This result is also verified by using TOPSIS and MARCOS methods for comparison.