The construction industry is a vital part of the modern economic system. Construction work often has significant negative impacts on the environment and sustainable economic development, such as degradation of the environment, depletion of resources, and waste generation. Therefore, environmental concerns must be taken into account when evaluating and making decisions in the construction industry. In this regard, sustainable construction is considered as the best way to avoid resource depletion and address environmental concerns. Selection of sustainable building materials is an important strategy in sustainable construction that plays an important role in the design and construction phase of buildings. The assessment of experts is one of the most important steps in the material selection process, and their subjective judgment can lead to unpredictable uncertainty. The existing methods cannot effectively demonstrate and address uncertainty. This paper proposes an integrated Dempster-Shafer (DS) theory of evidence and the ARAS method for selecting sustainable materials under uncertainty. The Dempster-Shafer Evidence Theory is a relatively new and appropriate tool for substantiating decisions when information is nonspecific, ambiguous, or conflicting. The Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) method has many advantages to deal with MCDM problems with non-commensurable and even conflicting criteria and to obtain the priority of alternatives based on the utility function. The proposed method converts experts’ opinions into the basic probability assignments for real alternatives, which are suitable for DS evidence theory. It uses the ARAS method to obtain final estimation results. Finally, a real case study identifying the priority of using five possible alternative building materials demonstrates the usefulness of the proposed approach in addressing the challenges of sustainable construction. Four main criteria including economic, social, environmental, and technical criteria and 25 sub-criteria were considered for the selection of sustainable materials. The specific case study using the proposed method reveals that the weight of economic, socio-cultural, environmental, and technical criteria are equal to 0.327, 0.209, 0.241, and 0.221, respectively. Based on these results, economic and environmental criteria are determined as the most important criteria. The results of applying the proposed method reveal that aluminum siding with a final score of 0.538, clay brick with a score of 0.494, and stone façade with a final score of 0.482 are determined as the best alternatives in terms of sustainability.
Assessing the vulnerability of buildings in flood-prone areas is a key issue when evaluating the risk induced by flood events, particularly because of its proved direct influence on the loss of life during catastrophes. A comprehensive methodology for risk assessment of buildings subject to flooding is nevertheless still missing. Bearing this in mind, a new set of experiments have been performed at TU Delft with the aim of spreading more light on dynamics of flood-induced loads and their effects on buildings and to provide the CDF community with state of the art bench-marks. In this paper, a briefly overview is given of flood induced load on buildings; the new experimental work is then presented, together with results from preliminary analysis. Initial results suggest that use of existing prediction methods might be unsafe and that impulsive loading might be critical for both the assessment of the vulnerability of existing structures and the design of new flood-proof buildings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.