Multi-criteria comparative analysis of selected repair solutions of a single-family residential building

openaccess, Vol. 602 (10) 2022 / czwartek, 27 października, 2022

(Open Access)

DOI: 10.15199/33.2022.10.12

Dziadosz Agnieszka, Baczyński Krzysztof, Rejment Mariusz, Wieczorek Damian. 2022. Multi-criteria comparative analysis of selected repair solutions of a single-family residential building. Volume 602. Issue 10. Pages 49-52. Article in PDF file

Accepted for publication: 28.09.2022 r.

The sustainable development strategy favors the pursuit of optimization of construction processes, including the optimal use of materials and technological solutions from the perspective of generating the maintenance costs of the building resulting from the different durability of the materials used and the impact of wear on the frequency of repairs. The aim of the work is a multi-criteria comparative analysis of the proposed types of repair works based on the assessment of the degree of technical wear of the building using the visual method. In order to select the best technology and materials for roofing and flooring, three different multi-criteria methods were used, i.e.: TOPSIS, AHP and PROMETHEE. On the basis of the obtained results, the most favorable solution was determined, while showing the usefulness of the methods used in the decisionmaking process.
  1. Celińska M, Wiatr T. Budownictwo zrównoważone z przykładem analizy kosztów w ujęciu LCC. Przegląd Budowlany. 2018; 11: 45 – 50.
  2. Dziadosz A, Meszek W. Selected aspects of determining of building facility deterioration for real estate valuation. ProcediaEngineering. 2015; 122: 266 – 273.
  3. Dziadosz A, Banach D, Meszek W, Rejment M. (2018). Impact of the adopted strategy on the result of multi-criteria analysis of technology solution based onAHP (BOCR). InMATECWeb of Conferences. 2018; 222: 01002. EDP Sciences.
  4. Plebankiewicz E, MeszekW, Zima K,Wieczorek D. Probabilistic and fuzzy approaches for estimating the life cycle costs of buildings under conditions of exposure to risk. Sustainability. 2019; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010226.
  5. Zima K, Przesmycka, A. Koncepcja zintegrowanej analizy kosztów i generowanego śladu węglowego w cyklu życia budynku. Przegląd Budowlany. 2021; 92: 42 – 48.
  6. Nowogońska B. A methodology for determining the rehabilitation needs of buildings. Applied Sciences. 2020; 10 (11): 3873.
  7. Konior J, Rejment, M. Correlation between Defects and Technical Wear of Materials Used in Traditional Construction. Materials. 2021; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14102482.
  8. Nowogońska B, Korentz J. Value of technical wear and costs of restoring performance characteristics to residential buildings. Buildings. 2022; 10 (1): 9.
  9. Plebankiewicz E, Leśniak A, Vitkova E, Hromadka V. Models for estimating costs of public buildings maintaining-review and assessment. Archives of Civil Engineering. 2022; 68 (1).
  10. Winniczek W. Wycena budynków i budowli podejściem odtworzeniowym, Wydawca CUTOB- -PZITB, Wrocław 1993.
dr inż. Agnieszka Dziadosz, Politechnika Poznańska, Wydział Inżynierii Lądowej i Transportu ORCID: 0000-0002-2258-4057
mgr inż. Krzysztof Baczyński, Politechnika Poznańska, Wydział Inżynierii Lądowej i Transportu
dr inż. Mariusz Rejment, Politechnika Wrocławska, Wydział Budownictwa Lądowego i Wodnego ORCID: 0000-0001-8230-3627
dr inż. Damian Wieczorek, Politechnika Krakowska, Wydział Inżynierii Lądowej ORCID: 0000-0002-3191-2438

dr inż. Agnieszka Dziadosz, Politechnika Poznańska, Wydział Inżynierii Lądowej i Transportu ORCID: 0000-0002-2258-4057

agnieszka.dziadosz@put.poznan.pl

Full paper:

DOI: 10.15199/33.2022.10.12

Article in PDF file