Evaluation types of exterior walls to reconstruct Iran earthquake areas (Ahar Heris Varzeqan) by using AHP and fuzzy methods

International Journal of Strategic Property Management

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 328-340

  Hosseini, Seyed Teimor ^a   Lale Arefi, Shahin ^b   Bitarafan, Mahdi ^c   Abazarlou, Sajjad ^d   Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras ^e  

^a University of Doa   (Iran)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MOHAGHEGH ARDABILI   (Iran)

^c Shakhes Pajouh Research Institute   (Iran)

^d ISLAMIC AZAD UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

^e VILNIUS GEDIMINAS TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY   (Lithuania)

Author keywords

AHP; Earthquake; Exterior wall; Fuzzy; Reconstruct

Indexed keywords

EID: 84978891165     PISSN: 1648715X     EISSN: 16489179     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3846/1648715X.2016.1190794     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. P.O.Akadiri, ; P.O.Olomolaiye, ; E.A.Chinyio, 2013. Multi-criteria evaluation model for the selection of sustainable materials for building projects, Automation in Construction 30: 113–125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016Zj.autcon.2012.10.004
2. M.L.Albert, ; A.E.Elwi, ; J.J.R.Cheng, 2001. Strengthening of unreinforced masonry walls using FRPs, Journal of Composites for Construction 5(2): 76–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2001)5:2(76)
3. R.Azari-N, ; Y.-W.Kim, 2012. Comparative assessment of life cycle impacts of curtain wall mullions, Building and Environment 48: 135–145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.09.010
4. M.A.Badri 2001. A combined AHP-GP model for quality control systems, International Journal of Production Economics 72: 27–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(00)00077-3
5. V.Bagocius, ; E.K.Zavadskas, ; Z.Turskis, 2014. Sequence determining of construction of the offshore wind farm construction applying permutation method, E & M: Ekonomie a Management 17(3): 50–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2014-3-005
6. W.Batayneh, ; A.Owais, ; M.Nairoukh, 2013. An intelligent fuzzy based tracking controller for a dual-axis solar PV system, Automation in Construction 29: 100–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.09.006
7. R.E.Bellman, ; L.A.Zadeh 1977. Local and fuzzy logics, in J.M.Dunn, ; G.Epstein, (Eds.). Modern uses of multiple-valued logic, Dordrecht, Netherlands: Reidel, 103–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1161-7_6
8. M.Betti, ; G.Bartoli, ; M.Orlando, 2010. Evaluation study on structural fault of a Renaissance Italian palace, Engineering Structures 32(7): 1801–1813. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016d.engstruct.2010.03.001
9. M.Betti, ; A.Vignoli, 2008a. Assessment of seismic resistance of a basilica-type church under earthquake loading: modelling and analysis, Advances in Engineering Software 39(4): 258–283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016d.advengsoft.2007.01.004
10. M.Betti, ; A.Vignoli, 2008b. Modelling and analysis of a Romanesque church under earthquake loading: assessment of seismic resistance, Engineering Structures 30(2): 352–367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016Zj.engstruct.2007.03.027
11. A.Brencich, 2010. Deep trench, landslide and effects on the foundations of a residential building: a case study, Engineering Structures 32(7): 1821–1829. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.02.019
12. P.A.Calderon, ; J.M.Adam, ; I.Paya-Zaforteza, 2009. Failure analysis and remedial measures applied to a RC water tank, Engineering Failure Analysis 16(5): 1674–1685. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2008.12.004
13. A.M.Ceci, ; A.Contento, ; L.Fanale, ; D.Galeota, ; V.Gattulli, ; M.Lepidi, 2009. Structural performance of the historic and modern buildings of the University of L’Aquila during the seismic events of April, Engineering Structures 32(7): 1899–1924. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.12.023
14. C.Chai, ; J.De Brito, ; G.P.Lima; A.Silva, 2015. Statistical modelling of the service life prediction of painted surfaces, International Journal of Strategic Property Management 19(2): 173–185. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/1648715X.2015.1031853
15. J.-S.Chou, ; P.Anh-Duc, ; H.Wang, 2013. Bidding strategy to support decision-making by integrating fuzzy AHP and regression-based simulation, Automation in Construction 35: 517–527. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.06.007
16. M.Dagdeviren, 2008. Decision making in equipment selection: an integrated approach with AHP and PRO- METHEE, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 19: 397–406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10845-008-0091-7
17. J.J.Del Coz Díaz, ; P.J.García Nieto, ; A.Lozano Martín-ez-Luengas, ; J.L.Suarez Sierra, 2010. A study of the collapse of a WWII communications antenna using numerical simulations based on design of experiments by FEM, Engineering Structures 32(7): 1792–1800. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.09.011
18. D.Dubois, ; H.Prade, 1980. Fuzzy sets systems: theory and applications. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
19. Earthquake-Report.com. 2012. Earthquakes Iran (Tabriz, Ahar, Varzghan, Heris area) [online]. Available at: http://earthquake-report.com/2012/08/11/extreme-ly-dangerous-shallow-earthquake-in-the-greater-ta-briz-iran-area/ [accessed] include 27/08/2012
20. C.H.Efstathiades, ; M.Zygomalas, ; C.C.Baniotopoulos, 2003. Glass-aluminium curtain-wall system: optimization with respect to serviceability criteria, in Proceedings of the Xth international conference on metal structures, oct. 2003, Timisoara, 282–289.
21. C.Efstathiades, Ch.; C.C.Baniotopoulos, ; P.Nazark, ; L.Ziemianski, ; G.E.Stavroulakis, 2007. Application of neural networks for the structural health monitoring in curtain-wall systems, Engineering Structures 29: 3475–3484.
22. M.R.Ehasani, ; H.Saddatmanesh, ; J.I.Velazquez-Dimas, 1999. Behavior of retrofitted URM walls under simulated earthquake loading, Journal of Composites for Construction 3(3): 134–142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1999)3:3(134)
23. M.R.Ehsani, ; H.Saadatmanesh, ; A.Al-Saidy, 1997. Shear behavior of URM retrofitted with FRP overlays, Journal of Composites for Construction 1(1): 17–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1997)1:1(17)
24. A.Esmaeili, ; R.A.Kahnali, ; R.Rostamzadeh, ; E.K.Zavadskas, ; A.Sepahvand, 2014. The formulation of organizational strategies through integration of freeman model, SWOT, and fuzzy MCDM methods: a case study of oil industry, Transformations in Business & Economics 13(3C): 602–627.
25. A.M.Fathy, ; J.Planas, ; J.M.Sancho, 2009. A numerical study of masonry cracks, Engineering Failure Analysis 16(2): 675–689. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2008.02.011
26. R.Folić, ; D.Zenunović, 2010. Durability problem of RC structures in Tuzla industrial zone — two case studies, Engineering Structures 32(7): 1846–1860. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.03.004
27. N.Gudiene, ; A.Banaitis, ; V.Podvezko, ; N.Banaitiene, 2014. Identification and evaluation of the critical success factors for construction projects in Lithuania: AHP approach, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 20(3): 350–359. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2014.914082
28. H.R.Hamilton, ; C.W.Dolan, 2001. Flexural capacity of glass FRP strengthened composite masonry walls, Journal of Composites for Construction 5(3): 170–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2001)5:3(170)
29. G.Işiklar, ; G.Buyukozkan, 2007. Using a multi-criteria decision making approach to evaluate mobile phone alternatives, Computer Standards & Interfaces 29: 265–274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2006.05.002
30. S.Ivorra, ; F.J.Pallares, ; J.M.Adam, ; 2009. Dynamic behaviour of a modern bell tower — a case study, Engineering Structures 31(5): 1085–1092. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.01.002
31. D.Jato-Espino, ; E.Castillo-Lopez, ; J.Rodriguez-Hernandez, ; J.C.Canteras-Jordana, 2014. A review of application of multi-criteria decision making methods in construction, Automation in Construction 45: 151–162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.05.013
32. L.-S.Kang, ; S.-K.Kim, ; H.-S.Moon, ; H.-S.Kim, 2013. Development of a 4D object-based system for visualizing the risk information of construction projects, Automation in Construction 31: 186–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.11.038
33. A.Kaufmann, ; M.M.Gupta, 1985. Introduction to fuzzy arithmetic, theory and applications. 2nd ed. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
34. I.Kaya, ; C.Kahraman, 2014. A comparison of fuzzy multicriteria decision making methods for intelligent building assessment, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 20(1): 59–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2013.801906
35. V.Kersuliene, ; Z.Turskis, 2014. A hybrid linguistic fuzzy multiple criteria group selection of a chief accounting offices, Journal of Business Economics and Management 15(2): 232–252. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2014.903201
36. S.Kildiene, ; E.K.Zavadskas, ; J.Tamosaitiene, 2014. Complex assessment model for advanced technology deployment, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 20(2): 280–290. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2014.904813
37. Y.Korany, ; R.Drysdale, 2006. Rehabilitation of masonry walls using unobtrusive FRP techniques for enhanced out-of-plane seismic resistance, Journal of Composites for Construction 10(3): 213–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2006)10:3(213)
38. D.Kriksciuniene, ; V.Sakalauskas, ; S.Strigunaite, ; S.Masteika, 2015. Project performance evaluation by modified analytic hierarchy process model, Transformations in Business & Economics 14(1): 192–211.
39. V.Kutut, ; E.K.Zavadskas, ; M.Lazauskas, 2014. Assessment of priority alternatives for preservation of historic buildings using model based on ARAS and AHP methods, Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering 14(2): 287–294. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016d.acme.2013.10.007
40. O.S.Kwon, ; E.Kim, 2010. Case study: analytical investigation on the failure of a two-story RC building damaged during the 2007 Pisco-Chincha earthquake, Engineering Structures 32(7): 1876–1887. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016d.engstruct.2009.12.022
41. C.J.Lakhmi, ; N.M.Martin, 1998. Fusion of neural networks, fuzzy systems and genetic algorithms: industrial applications. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press LLC.
42. W.F.Lee, ; K.Ishihara, 2010. Forensic diagnosis of a shield tunnel failure, Engineering Structures 32(7): 1830–1837. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016d.engstruct.2010.03.012
43. T.H.Y.Li, ; S.T.Ng, ; M.Skitmore, 2013. Evaluating stakeholder satisfaction during public participation in major infrastructure and construction projects: a fuzzy approach, Automation in Construction 29: 123–135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016Zj.autcon.2012.09.007
44. P.B.Lourenço, ; K.J.Krakowiak, ; F.M.Fernandez, ; L.F.Ramos, 2007. Failure analysis of Monastery of Jeronimos, Lisbon: how to learn from sophisticated numerical models, Engineering Failure Analysis 14(2): 280–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2006.02.002
45. R.J.Machado, ; A.F.Rocha, 1992. Hybrid architecture for fuzzy connectionist expert systems, in A.Kandel, ; G.Langholz, (Eds.). Hybrid architectures for intelligent systems. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
46. M.Medineckiene, ; E.K.Zavadskas, ; F.Bjork, ; Z.Turskis, 2015. Multi-criteria decision-making system for sustainable building assessment/certification, Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering 15(1): 11–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acme.2014.09.001
47. K.Nassar, ; O.Hosny, 2013. Fuzzy clustering validity for contractor performance evaluation: application to UAE contractors, Automation in Construction 31: 158–168.
48. K.S.Numayr, ; Y.S.Al Rjoub, ; A.M.Qudah, ; K.Al-Deen, ; I.Bsisu, 2012. Resistance of exterior threedimensional walls to high velocity projectiles, Composites: Part B 43: 3431–3435. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.01.027
49. F.Robert, 1995. Neural fuzzy systems. Abo Akademi University.
50. L.T.Saaty, 1980. The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw Hill Company.
51. K.K.Sasaki, ; T.Paret, ; J.C.Araiza, ; P.Hals, 2010. Failure of concrete T-beam and box-girder highway bridges subjected to cyclic loading from traffic, Engineering Structures 32(7): 1838–1845. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.01.006
52. S.-S.Shi, ; S.-C.Li, ; L.-P.Li, ; Z.-Q.Zhou, ; J.Wang, 2014. Advance optimized classification and application of surrounding rock based on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and Tunnel seismic Prediction, Automation in Construction 37: 217–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.08.019
53. R.Simanaviciene, ; R.Liaudanskiene, ; L.Ustinovichius, 2014. Assessing reliability of design, construction, and safety related decisions, Automation in Construction 39: 47–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.11.008
54. E.Siozinyte, ; J.Antucheviciene, ; V.Kutut, 2014. Upgrading the old vernacular building to contemporary norms: multiple criteria approach, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 20(2): 291–298. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2014.904814
55. H.Sivilevicius, ; L.Maskeliunaite, 2014. The numerical example for evaluating the criteria describing the quality of the trip by international train, E & M: Ekonomie a Management 17(2): 73–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2014-2-006
56. P.Tiago, ; E.Julio, 2010. Case study: damage of an RC building after a landslide — inspection, analysis and retrofitting, Engineering Structures 32(7): 1814–1820. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.02.018
57. T.C.Triantafillou, 1998. Strengthening of masonry structures using epoxy bonded FRP laminated, Journal of Composites for Construction 2(2): 107–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(1998)2:2(96)
58. B.Vodopivec, ; R.Zarnic, ; J.Tamosaitiene, ; M.Lazauskas, ; J.Selih, 2014. Renovation priority ranking by multi-criteria assessment of architectural heritage: the case of castles, International Journal of Strategic Property Management 18(1): 88–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/1648715X.2014.889771
59. J.J.Wang, ; D.L.Yang, 2007. Using a hybrid multi-criteria decision aid method for information systems outsourcing, Computers & Operation Research 34: 3691–3700. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2006.01.017
60. C.R.Willis, ; Q.Yang, ; R.Seracino, ; M.C.Griffith, 2009. Damaged masonry walls in two-way bending retrofitted with vertical FRP strips, Construction and Building Materials 23(4): 1591–1604. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.09.007
61. A.Yazdani-Chamzini, ; M.Razani, ; S.H.Yakhchali, ; E.K.Zavadskas, ; Z.Turskis, 2013. Developing a fuzzy model based on subtractive clustering for road header performance prediction, Automation in Construction 35: 111–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2013.04.001
62. A.Yazdani-Chamzini, 2014a. An integrated fuzzy multi criteria group decision making model for handling equipment selection, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 20(5): 660–673. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2013.802714
63. A.Yazdani-Chamzini, 2014b. Proposing a new methodology based on fuzzy logic for tunnelling risk assessment, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 20(1): 82–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2013.843583
64. A.Yazdani-Chamzini, ; S.Shariati, ; S.-H.Yakhchali, ; E.K.Zavadskas, 2014. Proposing a new methodology for prioritising the investment strategies in the private sector of Iran, Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja 27(1): 320–345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2014.947150
65. L.A.Zadeh, 1972. A fuzzy-set-theoretic interpretation of linguistic hedges, Journal of Cybernetics 2: 4–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01969727208542910
66. L.A.Zadeh, 1973. Outline of a new approach to the analysis of complex systems and decision processes, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 3: 28–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1973.5408575
67. E.K.Zavadskas, ; Z.Turskis, ; V.Bagocius, 2015. Multicriteria selection of a deep-water port in the Eastern Baltic Sea, Applied Soft Computing 26: 180–192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2014.09.019