ارزیابی زیست‌ محیطی، اقتصادی، فنی و اجرایی انواع سیستم‌های رایج دیوارچینی در ایران، با استفاده از روش تحلیل سلسه مراتبی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه عمران، دانشکده مهندسی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

2 گروه مهندسی عمران، دانشکده مهندسی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

3 معاون گروه مهندسی عمران

چکیده

نیاز روز افزون ساختمان‌سازی و مصرف بالای انرژی در این بخش از یک سو و اهمیت محیط‌ زیست و توسعه‌ی پایداراز سوی دیگر، ضرورت تأمل بیشتردرانتخاب روش‌های ساخت ونوع مصالح مصرفی دراین صنعت را یادآورمی‌شود. دیوارها به‌ عنوان تقسیم کنندگان فضای داخلی و محافظان حریم پیرامونی، از جمله مهمترین اجزاء ساختمانی هستند. با توجه به اهمیت استفاده‌ی حداکثر از فضا، صرف کمترین هزینه و افزایش سرعت اجرا، تولید کنندگان به ارائه‌ی انواع مختلفی از مصالح سازنده‌ی دیوار پرداخته‌اند. بدیهی است که در چنین شرایطی، ارزیابی و سنجش گزینه‌های موجود به روشی علمی،کمک شایانی به صنعت ساختمان کشور خواهد کرد. تحقیق حاضربدین منظور، بادرنظرگرفتن چهارمعیار «زیست‌ محیطی»، «اقتصادی»، «فنی» و «اجرایی»، به بررسی وانتخاب گزینه‌ی بهینه‌ی دیوارچینی ازمیان پنج گزینه‌ی رایج «آجرهای فشاری»، «بلوک‌های سفالی»، «بلوک‌های بتن سبک گازی»، «پانل‌های سه‌ بعدی» و «صفحات گچی» پرداخته است. براین اساس به جهت ارزیابی گزینه‌های موجود، ابتداهریک از معیارها به چندین زیرمعیار تقسیم شدند؛ و از آنجاکه تصمیم‌گیری براساس معیارهای ّکمی وکیفی متعدد، نیازمند روش‌های علمی و قابل اطمینان است؛ از روش‌ تحلیل سلسله مراتب (AHP )،به‌ عنوان یکی از بهترین روش‌های ارزیابی چند معیاره، استفاده شد. نتایج تحلیل‌ها دلالت بر آن دارد که از میان گزینه‌های مورد بررسی، صفحات گچی با امتیاز نسبی 0/368 بهترین گزینه‌ی دیوارچینی هستند؛ همچنین، امتیاز نسبی بلوک‌های بتن سبک گازی، بلوک‌های سفالی، آجرهای فشاری و پانل‌های سه‌ بعدی به ترتیب برابر 0/177 ،0/152 ،0/151 و 0/144 به دست آمدند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Environmental, economical, technical and operational assessments of common types of separating wall systems in Iran using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hadi madadighollehzoo 1
  • Shahnaz Danesh 2
  • Mohammadreza Tavakkolizadeh 3
1 Civil Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, mashhad, iran
2 Department of Civil Engineering,Faculty of Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
3 Deputy Chair of Civil Engineering Department
چکیده [English]

The construction techniques and types of materials used in construction sites are very important considering mechanical, environmental and economic issues. Separating different parts of a building from each other and protect the interior space from the outside environment requires effective walls. To satisfy the needs of construction projects such as lowering the cost, increasing the speed and minimizing the overall energy consumption of building, construction material industries produce and introduce different types of separating walls for buildings. This research was conducted to assess the environmental, economical, technical and operational impacts of different types of separating walls. Five different types of walls, including solid clay (SC) bricks, hollow clay (HC) blocks, autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC) blocks, three-dimensional (3D) sandwich panels and gypsum boards were investigated in this regard. The goal was to find the most effective type of separating wall among the choices investigated. Each of the fore-mentioned criteria were divided into several sub-criteria, and the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), as one of the best-known multi-criteria decision-making methods, was implemented in the assessments. Evaluations were based on both qualitative and quantitative criteria. Technical data and information were used for quantitative criteria and different types of questionnaires were developed regarding the qualitative criteria. The results of this study, based on all criteria, showed that the gypsum board with the relative priority value of 0.368, is the best choice between the assessed separating walls. The calculated relative priority values of AAC blocks, HC blocks, SC bricks, and 3D panels were 0.177, 0.152, 0.151 and 0.144 respectively.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Analytical hierarchy process
  • Environmental impacts
  • Economical impacts
  • Technical and Operational impacts
  • Separating wall systems

مراجع

[1]  A. Ranjbar, S. A. Torabi, F. Hakimpour, Urban waste landfill site selection using a hybrid MADM approach based on AHP, Journal of geomatics science and technology, 4(2) (2014) 217-230.
[2]  A. Asghrian Najafabadi, T. Mesri, Prioritization of waste disposal methods using AHP analytical hierarchy process, in: First conference on environmental refining technologies, Sharif university of technology, Tehran, Iran, (2011).
[3]  M. Tafti, N. Mehrdadi, A. Torabian, H. Neyeb, Determination of important quality parameters in urban wastewater treatment plants using analytical hierarchy process (AHP), in: International conference on science, engineering and environmental technologies, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran, (2015).
[4]  M. Ghasemi, N. Mehrdadi, S. Rasi-Nezami, The choice of anaerobic treatment process for dairy wastewater using analytical hierarchy process (AHP), in: 10th international congress on civil engineering, Tabriz university, Tabriz, Iran, (2011).
[5]  G. Zahedi, H. Jangali, M. Abolhassani, Analytical hierarchy of air pollution control systems, in: 12th Iranian national chemical engineering congress, Sahand industrial university, Tabriz, Iran, (2008).
[6]  B. Reza, R. Sadiq, K. Hewage, Sustainability assessment of flooring systems in the city of Tehran: an AHPbased life cycle analysis, Construction and Building Materials, 25(4) (2011) 2053-2066.
[7]  S. Akoochekian, R. Khalatbari, The selection of materials for residential building facade in the hot and dry climate of Iran using fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP) method, Journal of Maremat & Memari-e Iran, 2(15) (2018).
[8]  S. Halakouee, Comparison of wall building materials using modern technologies LSF, ICF, 3D panel and block Leca in order to stylize walls of buildings using AHP decision method, in: National conference on civil engineering and architecture in urban management in 21st century, Karaj, Iran, (2018).
[9]  F. Zarei, M. J. Kazemini, B. Mardani, Determine the most suitable building roof system using the fuzzy hierarchy process analysis, in: 3rd national conference on civil engineering, architecture and urban development, Babol, Mazandaran, Iran, (2017).
[10] Z. Namdary, S. Rezaian, N. Jaafarzadeh, Environmental effects of brick kilns factories in Ghohab area of Esfahan, Iran. Journal of environmental science, 39(3) (2013).
[11] M. Azmoodeh, A. S. Moghadam, An investigation on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP): Optimum rehabilitation process of the unreinforced masonry buildings, Journal of civil engineering, Ferdowsi university of Mashhad, 23(1) (2011).
[12] M. Ramezanian, M. Bahrkazemi, Selection the best external wall of buildings for energy saving by AHP technique, Iranian journal of energy, 14(3) (2012).
[13] H. Ghodsipour, Analytical hierarchy process (AHP), Amir Kabir university of Technology, Tehran, Iran, (2016).
[14] D. Olsen, A. Khatami Firoozabadi (translator), Multicriteria decision-making methods, Marandiz, Tehran, Iran, (2008).
[15] Housing industrialization road map and strategic plan, General contractor of housing industrialization in Iran, MAPSA Co., Tehran, Iran, (2010).
[16]  Institute of standards and industrial research of Iran, Building bricks-criteria for energy consumption in production processes, ISIRI No. 7965, (2011).
[17] M. Delnavaz, M. R. Mirzahosini, H. Jan-nessari, Environmental impact of concrete industry in Iran, in: 13th national civil engineering students conference, Shahid Bahonar university of Kerman, Kerman, Iran, (2006).
[18] Curriculum and textbooks development office, The titles of technical and vocational courses in the academic year, Organization for educational research and planning, Ministry of education, Iran, (2011).
[19] Plan and budget organization, Base unit prices of building constructions, Presidential office, Tehran, Iran, (2011).
[20] Office of Iran planning for electricity and energy, Energy balance sheet 2011, Ministry of power, Iran, (2011).
[21] S. Forootani, Materials and building, Nashr-erowzaneh, Tehran, Iran, (2012).
[22] Plan and budget organization, Buildings specification code 55, Presidential office, Tehran, Iran, (2004).Plan and budget organization, The analysis of base unit prices of building constructions, Presidential office, Tehran, Iran, (2010).
 
نشریه مهندسی عمران امیرکبیر
دوره 52، شماره 5
مرداد 1399
صفحه 1313-1330

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار