Computers and Concrete

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Selecting optimized concrete structure by Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

  • Ebrahimi, Morteza (Department of Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University) ;
  • Hedayat, Amir Ahmad (Department of Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University) ;
  • Fakhrabadi, Hamed (Department of Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research of Tehran)
  • Received : 2017.05.12
  • Accepted : 2018.09.04
  • Published : 2018.09.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Increase in population and its daily increasing in our today society results in an increase in housing demand while traditional methods are not applicable. The project preparation and realization processes, based on theoretical and empirical studies, a creation of goods, services, and technologies, are the most important human activities. Selection of effective technological systems in construction is a complex multi-criteria decision-making task. Many decision-makers refuse innovations once faced with similar difficulties. Therefore, using modern materials and methods in this industry is necessary. Modern methods increase quality and construction speed in addition to decrease energy consumption and costs. One of the problems in the way of any project is selecting construction system compatible with the project needs and characteristics. In the present research, different concrete structures such as common reinforced concrete (RC) structure, prefabricated, Insulating Concrete Formwork (ICF), 3D Panel and Tunnel Concrete Formwork (TCF) for buildings with limited floors in Iran are studied and compared from the viewpoint of different criteria like cost, time, applicability and technical characteristics with industrialization approach. Therefore, some questionnaires filled out by construction industry experts in order to compare criteria and sub-criteria in addition to evaluation of optimized structural systems. Then, results of the questionnaires ranked by Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the most effective alternative selected. The AHP results show that 3D Panel system 36.5%, ICF 21.7%, TCF 19.03%, prefabricated system 13.3% and common RC system 9.3% are the most and the least efficient systems respectively.

Keywords

References

  1. Amin Zadeh, R. and Mohseni Mahani, A. (2013), "New approach in building industrialization with the new 3D system of panels", Proceedings of the First National Conference on Architecture, Civil Engineering and Urban Environment, Hamadan.
  2. Aouadni, S., Rebai, A. and Turskis, Z. (2017), "The Meaningful Mixed Data TOPSIS (TOPSIS-MMD) method and its application in supplier selection", Stud. Inform. Control, 26(3), 353-363.
  3. Aqa Khani, B., Qazi Nejadiyan, A. and Darvishi, M. (2014), "3D panel of solutions for industrial production of lightweight buildings," Conference of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Sustainable Management, Tehran.
  4. Ayatollahi, S.R. (2009), "Construction of pre-fabricated structures earthquake resistant", Yazd University, Technical Office of Yazd Governor, Yazd.
  5. Balali, V., Zahraie, B. and Roozbahani, A. (2014), "A comparison of AHP and PROMETHEE family decision making methods for selection of building structural system", Am. J. Civil Eng. Arch., 2(5), 149-159. https://doi.org/10.12691/ajcea-2-5-1
  6. Dan, D., Sun, L., Yang, Z. and Xie, D. (2014), "The application of a fuzzy inference system and analytical hierarchy process based online evaluation framework to the Donghai Bridge Health Monitoring System.", Smart Struct. Syst., 14(2), 129-144. https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2014.14.2.129
  7. Das, S., Chew, M.Y.L. and Poh, K.L. (2010), "Multi-criteria decision analysis in building maintainability using analytical hierarchy process", Constr. Manage. Econ., 28(10), 1043-1056. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2010.501806
  8. Erkayman, B. and Ozkal, F.M. (2016), "Evaluation of framed building types based on the combination of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy MOORA methods", Chall. J. Struct. Mech., 2(2), 101-108.
  9. Farokhzadeh, B., Attaeian, B., Akhzari, D., Razandi, Y. and Bazrafshan, O. (2015), "Combination of Boolean logic and Analytical Hierarchy Process methods for locating underground dam construction ", ECOPERSIA, 3(3), 1065-1075.
  10. Golabchi, M. and Mazaheriyan, H. (2010), Building New Technologies, Tehran, Tehran University Press.
  11. Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Zavadskas, E.K. and Turskis, Z. (2013), "Design of products with both International and Local perspectives based on Yin-Yang balance theory and SWARA method", Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja, 26(2), 153-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2013.11517613
  12. Ishizaka, A. and Labib, A. (2009), "Analytic hierarchy process and expert choice: Benefits and limitations", Or Insight, 22(4), 201-220 https://doi.org/10.1057/ori.2009.10
  13. Jin, C.H. (2014), "Research on the risk evaluation of construction stage base on analytical hierarchy process for building engineering projects", Adv. Mater. Res., 1046, 135-138. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1046.135
  14. Juhua, L., Lishou, T. and Yuan, L. (2011), "Application of AHP method in building construction and cultural combined-by human living environment construction of PengAn as the background", Management and Service Science (MASS), International Conference on IEEE, 1-4.
  15. Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Zavadskas, E.K., Olfat, L. and Turskis, Z. (2015), "Multi-criteria inventory classification using a new method of evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS)", Informatica, 26(3), 435-451. https://doi.org/10.15388/Informatica.2015.57
  16. Kuzman, M.K., Vratusa, V. and Groselj, P. (2014), "Comparison of different construction types for public buildings applying the analytic hierarchy process", Adv. Mater. Res., 875, 910-916.
  17. Lin, C.C., Wang, W.C. and Yu, W.D. (2008), "Improving AHP for construction with an adaptive AHP approach (A3)", Auto. Constr., 17(2), 180-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2007.03.004
  18. Lin, S.C.J., Ali, A.S. and Bin Alias, A. (2015), "Analytic hierarchy process decision-making framework for procurement strategy selection in building maintenance work", J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 29(2), 1-13.
  19. Ma'soumi, A. and Mohammad Kari, B. (2008), TCF Reinforced Concrete System, Building and Housing Research Center.
  20. Mohammad Kari, B. and Khalili Jahromi, K. (2008), "ICF system, Studying and evaluating several proposed systems in mass production projects of residential buildings", Building and Housing Research Center, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Research Report, Publication Number: K-493.
  21. Mohammadi, F., Sadi, M.K., Nateghi, F., Abdullah, A. and Skitmore, M. (2014), "A hybrid quality function deployment and cybernetic analytic network process model for project manager selection", J. Civil Eng. Manage., 20(6), 795-809. https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2014.945952
  22. Peldschus, F., Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z. and Tamosaitiene, J. (2010), "Sustainable assessment of construction site by applying game theory", Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 21(3), 223-237.
  23. Peydayesh, M. and Labaf Zadeh, M.S. (2013), Concrete Buildings Technology, Iran Printing and Publishing Textbooks Company, Tehran, Iran.
  24. Qodsi Pour, H. (2013), Analytical Hierarchy Process, Issues About Multi-Criteria Decision-Making, 11th Edition, Amirkabir Industrial University, Tehran, Iran.
  25. Saaty, R.W. (1987), "The analytic hierarchy process-what it is and how it is used", Math. Model., 9(3), 161-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8
  26. Saaty, T.L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York.
  27. Saaty, T.L. (1988), "What is the Analytic Hierarchy Process?", Mathematical Models for Decision Support, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 109-121.
  28. Saaty, T.L. (1990), "How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process", Eur. J. Oper. Res., 48(1), 9-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I
  29. Salamiyan, M. and Qale'h Noei, M. (2013), "The advantages of constructing a building by TCF from the perspective of construction management", Proceedings of the Seventh National Congress of Civil Engineering, Shahid Nikbakht Faculty of Engineering, Zahedan.
  30. Saparauskas, J., Kazimieras Zavadskas, E. and Turskis, Z. (2011), "Selection of facade's alternatives of commercial and public buildings based on multiple criteria", Int. J. Strategic Prop. Manage., 15(2), 189-203. https://doi.org/10.3846/1648715X.2011.586532
  31. Shi, L., Zhang, R.F., Xie, Q.Y. and Fu, L.H. (2009), "Improving Analytic Hierarchy Process applied to fire risk analysis of public building", Chin. Sci. Bull., 54(8), 1442-1450.
  32. Sivilevicius, H., Zavadskas, E.K. and Turskis, Z. (2008), "Quality attributes and complex assessment methodology of the asphalt mixing plant", Baltic J. Road Bridge Eng., 3(3), 161-166. https://doi.org/10.3846/1822-427X.2008.3.161-166
  33. Smith, T. and Testa, C. (2004), "Design process in building prefabrication", Translated by Alireza Jazbi, Khak Publication, Tehran.
  34. Triantaphyllou, E. and Mann, S.H. (1995), "Using the analytic hierarchy process for decision making in engineering applications: some challenges", Int. J. Indus. Eng.: Appl. Pract., 2(1), 35-44.
  35. Turskis, Z., Lazauskas, M. and Zavadskas, E.K. (2012), "Fuzzy multiple criteria assessment of construction site alternatives for non-hazardous waste incineration plant in Vilnius city, applying ARAS-F and AHP methods", J. Environ. Eng. Landsc. Manage., 20(2), 110-120. https://doi.org/10.3846/16486897.2011.645827
  36. Vaidya, O.S. and Kumar, S. (2006), "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications", Eur. J. Oper. Res., 169(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.028
  37. Vichare, V.K., Aher, M.C. and Devalkar, R.V. (2015), "Application of analytical hierarchy process in construction of residential building project", IJMTER, 2(7), 862-867.
  38. Wong, J.K.W. and Li, H. (2008), "Application of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in multi-criteria analysis of the selection of intelligent building systems", Build. Environ., 43(1), 108-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.11.019
  39. Yoon, K.P. and Hwang, C.L. (1995), Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction, Sage Publications, London.
  40. Zagorskas, J., Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., Burinskiene, M., Blumberga, A. and Blumberga, D. (2014), "Thermal insulation alternatives of historic brick buildings in Baltic Sea Region", Energy Build., 78, 35-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.04.010
  41. Zahedi, F. (1986), "The analytic hierarchy process-a survey of the method and its applications", Interf., 16(4), 96-108. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.16.4.96
  42. Zavadskas, E.K., Antucheviciene, J., Saparauskas, J. and Turskis, Z. (2013a), "MCDM methods WASPAS and MULTIMOORA: verification of robustness of methods when assessing alternative solutions", Econ. Comput. Econ. Cyber. Stud. Res., 47(2), 5-20.
  43. Zavadskas, E.K., Kaklauskas, A., Turskis, Z. and Kalibatas, D. (2009), "An approach to multi-attribute assessment of indoor environment before and after refurbishment of dwellings", J. Environ. Eng. Landsc. Manag., 17(1), 5-11. https://doi.org/10.3846/1648-6897.2009.17.5-11
  44. Zavadskas, E.K., Mardani, A., Turskis, Z., Jusoh, A. and Nor, K. M. (2016), "Development of TOPSIS method to solve complicated decision-making problems-An overview on developments from 2000 to 2015", Int. J. Inform Technol. Dec. Mak., 15(03), 645-682. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622016300019
  45. Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., Volvaciovas, R. and Kildiene, S. (2013b), "Multi-criteria assessment model of technologies", Stud. Inform. Control, 22(4), 249-258.
  46. Zavadskas, E.K., Vilutiene, T., Turskis, Z. and Saparauskas, J. (2014), "Multi-criteria analysis of projects' performance in construction", Arch. Civil Mech. Eng., 14(1), 114-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acme.2013.07.006