A new hybrid fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluation of construction equipment with sustainability considerations

• Autorzy: Ghorabaee M. K. , Amiri M. , Zavadskas E. K. , Antucheviciene J.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.1016/j.acme.2017.04.011

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Because of the possible harmful effects of construction equipment on the environment, evaluation of them can be considered as a helpful activity to move toward the sustainability in construction. This evaluation process could involve some alternatives and some criteria in a discrete decision space. In this study, a new hybrid multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach is proposed to deal with this evaluation process in the fuzzy environment. We present fuzzy extensions of the SWARA (Step-wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis) and CRITIC (CRiteria Importance Through Intercriteria Correlation) methods for determining subjective and objective weights of criteria. Based on these extended methods and the fuzzy EDAS (Evaluation based on Distance from Average Solution) method, a new hybrid approach is proposed. In this approach, the subjective and objective criteria weights are combined to determine more justified weights for criteria. The proposed approach is applied to a case study of construction equipment evaluation with sustainability considerations. To examine the result of evaluation, a sensitivity analysis is performed based on varying criteria weights. A comparison is also made between the results of the proposed approach and some existing MCDM methods. These analyses show the stability and validity of the results and efficiency of the proposed approach.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

construction equipment; sustainability; fuzzy EDAS; fuzzy SWARA; fuzzy CRITIC

PL

sprzęt budowlany; rozwój zrównoważony; ochrona środowiska

• Wydawca: Springer ; Wrocław University of Science and Technology
• Czasopismo: Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering
• Rocznik: 2018
• Tom: Vol. 18, no. 1
• Strony: 32--49
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 46 poz., rys., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Ghorabaee M. K.

• Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran

autor

Amiri M.

• Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran

autor

Zavadskas E. K.

• Department of Construction Technology and Management, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania

autor

Antucheviciene J.

• Department of Construction Technology and Management, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania

Bibliografia

• [1] D.A. Day, N.B.H. Benjamin, Construction Equipment Guide, Wiley, 1991.
• [2] P. Lewis, W. Rasdorf, H.C. Frey, S.-H. Pang, K. Kim, Requirements and incentives for reducing construction vehicle emissions and comparison of nonroad diesel engine emissions sata sources, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 135 (5) (2009) 341–351.
• [3] S. El Haggar, Sustainable Industrial Design and Waste Management: Cradle-to-cradle for Sustainable Development, Academic Press, 2010.
• [4] W.M. Adams, The future of sustainability: re-thinking environment and development in the twenty-first century, Report of the IUCN renowned thinkers meeting, 2006.
• [5] S. Goodhew, Sustainable Construction Processes: A Resource Text, John Wiley & Sons, 2016.
• [6] H. Yan, Q. Shen, L.C.H. Fan, Y. Wang, L. Zhang, Greenhouse gas emissions in building construction: a case study of One Peking in Hong Kong, Building and Environment 45 (4) (2010) 949–955.
• [7] H. Zhao, N. Li, Risk evaluation of a UHV power transmission construction project based on a cloud model and FCE method for sustainability, Sustainability 7 (3) (2015) 2885–2914.
• [8] A. Passer, H. Kreiner, P. Maydl, Assessment of the environmental performance of buildings: a critical evaluation of the influence of technical building equipment on residential buildings, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 17 (9) (2012) 1116–1130.
• [9] F. Giustozzi, G.W. Flintsch, M. Crispino, Environmental impact analysis of low-carbon road-foundation layers, International Journal of Sustainable Transportation 9 (1) (2015) 73–79.
• [10] A. del Caño, M. Pilar de la Cruz, D. Gómez, M. Pérez, Fuzzy method for analysing uncertainty in the sustainable design of concrete structures, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 22 (7) (2016) 924–935.
• [11] V. Yepes, T. García-Segura, J.M. Moreno-Jiménez, A cognitive approach for the multi-objective optimization of RC structural problems, Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering 15 (4) (2015) 1024–1036.
• [12] M.S. Ali, M.S. Aslam, M.S. Mirza, A sustainability assessment framework for bridges – a case study: Victoria and Champlain Bridges, Montreal, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering 12 (11) (2016) 1381–1394.
• [13] J. Curiel-Esparza, J. Canto-Perello, Selecting utilities placement techniques in urban underground engineering, Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering 13 (2) (2013) 276–285.
• [14] M.H. Rafiei, H. Adeli, Sustainability in highrise building design and construction, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 25 (13) (2016) 643–658.
• [15] M. Goldenberg, A. Shapira, Systematic evaluation of construction equipment alternatives: case study, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 133 (1) (2007) 72– 85.
• [16] K. Schabowicz, B. Hoła, Application of artificial neural networks in predicting earthmoving machinery effectiveness ratios, Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering 8 (4) (2008) 73–84.
• [17] A. Jrade, N. Markiz, A Decision-Support Model Utilizing a Linear Cost Optimization Approach for Heavy Equipment Selection, Construction Research Congress, 2012, pp. 100–109.
• [18] M.V.S. Phogat, A.P. Singh, Selection of equipment for construction of a hilly road using multi criteria approach, Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences 104 (2013) 282–291.
• [19] S. Hasan, A. Bouferguene, M. Al-Hussein, P. Gillis, A. Telyas, Productivity and CO2 emission analysis for tower crane utilization on high-rise building projects, Automation in Construction 31 (2013) 255–264.
• [20] B. Heidari, L.C. Marr, Real-time emissions from construction equipment compared with model predictions, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 65 (2) (2015) 115–125.
• [21] B.-S. Kim, Y.-W. Kim, Configuration of earthwork equipment considering environmental impacts, cost and schedule, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 22 (1) (2016) 73–85.
• [22] M. Waris, M. Shahir Liew, M.F. Khamidi, A. Idrus, Criteria for the selection of sustainable onsite construction equipment, International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 3 (1) (2014) 96–110.
• [23] D. Jato-Espino, E. Castillo-Lopez, J. Rodriguez-Hernandez, J.C. Canteras-Jordana, A review of application of multi-criteria decision making methods in construction, Automation in Construction 45 (2014) 151–162.
• [24] L.A. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets, Information and Control 8 (1965) 338– 353.
• [25] J. Antucheviciene, Z. Kala, M. Marzouk, E.R. Vaidogas, Solving civil engineering problems by means of fuzzy and stochastic MCDM methods: current state and future research, Mathematical Problems in Engineering (2015), http://dx.doi. org/10.1155/2015/362579, Article ID 362579.
• [26] F. Aliakbari Nouri, S. Khalili Esbouei, J. Antucheviciene, A hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS for technology selection, Informatica 26 (3) (2015) 369–388.
• [27] C.-N. Liao, Y.-K. Fu, L.-C. Wu, Integrated FAHP, ARAS-F and MSGP methods for green supplier evaluation and selection, Technological and Economic Development of Economy 22 (5) (2016) 651–669.
• [28] P. Jaskowski, S. Biruk, R. Bucon, Assessing contractor selection criteria weights with fuzzy AHP method application in group decision environment, Automation in Construction 19 (2) (2010) 120–126.
• [29] M. Keshavarz Ghorabaee, Developing an MCDM method for robot selection with interval type-2 fuzzy sets, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 37 (2016) 221–232.
• [30] S. Ebrahimnejad, H. Hashemi, S. Mousavi, B. Vahdani, A new interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy model to group decision making for the selection of outsourcing providers, Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research 49 (2) (2015) 256–277.
• [31] İ. Önden, A.Z. Acar, F. Eldemir, Evaluation of the logistics center locations using a multi-criteria spatial approach, Transport (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/16484142.2016.1186113.
• [32] A. Balin, H. Baraçli, A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making methodology based upon the interval type-2 fuzzy sets for evaluating renewable energy alternatives in Turkey, Technological and Economic Development of Economy (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2015.1056276.
• [33] A. Mardani, A. Jusoh, E.K. Zavadskas, Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications–Two decades review from 1994 to 2014, Expert Systems with Applications 42 (8) (2015) 4126–4148.
• [34] N.H. Zardari, K. Ahmed, S.M. Shirazi, Z.B. Yusop, Weighting Methods and their Effects on Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model Outcomes in Water Resources Management, Springer International Publishing, 2014.
• [35] V. Keršuliene, E.K. Zavadskas, Z. Turskis, Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA), Journal of Business Economic and Management 11 (2) (2010) 243–258.
• [36] D. Diakoulaki, G. Mavrotas, L. Papayannakis, Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: the critic method, Computers & Operations Research 22 (7) (1995) 763– 770.
• [37] M. Keshavarz Ghorabaee, E.K. Zavadskas, L. Olfat, Z. Turskis, Multi-criteria inventory classification using a new method of evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS), Informatica 26 (3) (2015) 435–451.
• [38] M. Keshavarz Ghorabaee, E.K. Zavadskas, M. Amiri, Z. Turskis, Extended EDAS method for fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making: an application to supplier selection, International Journal of Computers Communications & Control 11 (3) (2016) 358–371.
• [39] H.J. Zimmermann, Fuzzy set theory, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics 2 (3) (2010) 317–332.
• [40] Y.-J. Wang, H.-S. Lee, Generalizing TOPSIS for fuzzy multiple-criteria group decision-making, Computers & Mathematics with Applications 53 (11) (2007) 1762–1772.
• [41] S.-J. Chen, C.-L. Hwang, Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Springer, Berlin/ Heidelberg, 1992.
• [42] Y.-M. Wang, J.-B. Yang, D.-L. Xu, K.-S. Chin, On the centroids of fuzzy numbers, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 157 (7) (2006) 919– 926.
• [43] M. Ma, A. Kandel, M. Friedman, A new approach for defuzzification, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 111 (3) (2000) 351– 356.
• [44] C.-T. Chen, Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision- making under fuzzy environment, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 114 (1) (2000) 1–9.
• [45] M. Keshavarz Ghorabaee, E.K. Zavadskas, M. Amiri, A. Esmaeili, Multi-criteria evaluation of green suppliers using an extended WASPAS method with interval type-2 fuzzy sets, Journal of Cleaner Production 137 (2016) 213–229.
• [46] E.K. Zavadskas, V. Podvezko, Integrated determination of objective criteria weights in MCDM, International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making 15 (2016) 267– 283.

Uwagi

PL

Opracowanie rekordu w ramach umowy 509/P-DUN/2018 ze środków MNiSW przeznaczonych na działalność upowszechniającą naukę (2018)