Criticality Index of Building Systems Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Technique
Department of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri Iskandar, 31750 Tronoh Perak, Malaysia
One of the most significant step in building structure maintenance decision is the physical inspection of the facility to be maintained. The physical inspection involved cursory assessment of the structure and ratings of the identified defects based on expert evaluation. The objective of this paper is to describe present a novel approach to prioritizing the criticality of physical defects in a residential building system using multi criteria decision analysis approach. A residential building constructed in 1985 was considered in this study. Four criteria which includes; Physical Condition of the building system (PC), Effect on Asset (EA), effect on Occupants (EO) and Maintenance Cost (MC) are considered in the inspection. The building was divided in to nine systems regarded as alternatives. Expert's choice software was used in comparing the importance of the criteria against the main objective, whereas structured Proforma was used in quantifying the defects observed on all building systems against each criteria. The defects severity score of each building system was identified and later multiplied by the weight of the criteria and final hierarchy was derived. The final ranking indicates that, electrical system was considered the most critical system with a risk value of 0.134 while ceiling system scored the lowest risk value of 0.066. The technique is often used in prioritizing mechanical equipment for maintenance planning. However, result of this study indicates that the technique could be used in prioritizing building systems for maintenance planning
© Owned by the authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2014
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.