Multi-Criteria Analysis of Design Solutions in Architecture and Engineering: Review of Applications and a Case Study

Abstract

The primary goal of this paper is to present the application potential of MCDM/MCDA (multi-criteria decision-making/multi-criteria decision analysis) methods in the field of architecture and urban planning and in energy efficient construction, especially in the context of sustainable development paradigm. The first part of this paper is devoted to literature studies pertaining to multi-criteria decision-making support in the selected fields. On the basis of the delivered review, it was demonstrated that the most popular methods belonging to the MCDM/MCDA group that have been used so far for the purpose of resolving selected decision-making challenges, is the AHP (analytic hierarchy process) method with modifications, TOPSIS (technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution) method, as well the up-and-coming COPRAS (complex proportional assessment) method. In addition, by reviewing the literature, it was found that MCDM/MCDA methods constitute an effective support tool at the stage of evaluating and selecting project solutions, and are especially helpful in framing various social, economic, environmental criteria that are permanently linked to the rule of sustainable development. The empirical section of this paper, through a case study, presents a comparative analysis of the classical AHP method with its extension onto fuzzy sets. The case study pertained to the criteria for the location of single-family residential buildings with solar installations.

Fuzzy and Interval AHP Approaches in Sustainable Management for the Architectural Heritage in Smart Cities

“…For example, Turkis et al discuss the significance and nature of cultural heritage and the existing methods for its valuation from the perspective of sustainable development in cities [97]. As new methods and numerous modifications of existing ones are continuously developing that include various techniques and mathematical tools, MCDM is a universal means of support in decision-making processes in urban planning, construction, and architecture [98][99][100].…”

The Selection of Anchoring System for Floating Houses by Means of AHP Method

“…The subject of this research is a comparative analysis of the weights for the selection [37] of anchoring system for floating house by means of AHP method. The analysis using AHP method was conducted in SuperDecisions program [38] and using AHP-OS software [39].…”

“…Each of the main criteria includes sub-criteria presented in Figure 2. A hierarchical structure tree was developed, in which the following levels were distinguished: Criteria: the construction/completion expenditure C1 (T), the cost of ownership C2 (T), the repair cost C3 (T), the time of designing C4 (C), the time of the constructing/builing C5 (C), the exploitation time C6 (C), the damage C7 (R), the flood C8 (R), the drought C9 (R), the intentional human activity C10 (R), ), the proximity of the water way C11 (G), the depth of the water area C12 (G), the size of the water area C13 (G), the shores' types C14 (G), the speed of the current C15 (G), the natural waving C16 (G), a type of the ground C17 (G), icing of the water area C18 (G); • Alternatives: mooring piles, booms, mooring lines, deadweight using elastic connectors [37].…”

Uptake and Dissemination of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods in Civil Engineering—Lessons from the Literature

“…However, there are few published comparisons of methods in design and management contexts, that compare more than two methods. One example is [29] that lists 33 papers describing applications in (i) architecture, (ii) urban planning and (iii) energy-efficient construction which were the keywords in her literature review. While 17 methods were mentioned in the papers reviewed, AHP was used 16 times, much more than any of the other methods.…”

“…This is understandable, given the widely different data requires of many of the methods, that would make an objective comparison difficult. However, there are substantive reviews focused on specific aspects of Civil Engineering, such as [37] in relation to sustainability in Bridge Design, or [29] in relation to energy efficient building design. Therefore, for this paper, an alternative way to explore the usefulness of MCDA methods is to assess published information on their usage in civil engineering practice to determine the most widely used methods and the application areas in which they are used.…”