A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods for Integrated Rehabilitation Prioritization
The decisions taken in rehabilitation planning for the urban water networks will have a long lasting impact on the functionality and quality of future services provided by urban infrastructure. These decisions can be assisted by different approaches ranging from linear depreciation for estimating the economic value of the network over using a deterioration model to assess the probability of failure or the technical service life to sophisticated multi-criteria decision support systems. Subsequently, the aim of this paper is to compare five available multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods (ELECTRE, AHP, WSM, TOPSIS, and PROMETHEE) for the application in an integrated rehabilitation management scheme for a real world case study and analyze them with respect to their suitability to be used in integrated asset management of water systems. The results of the different methods are not equal. This occurs because the chosen score scales, weights and the resulting distributions of the scores within the criteria do not have the same impact on all the methods. Independently of the method used, the decision maker must be familiar with its strengths but also weaknesses. Therefore, in some cases, it would be rational to use one of the simplest methods. However, to check for consistency and increase the reliability of the results, the application of several methods is encouraged.
Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods for Integrated Rehabilitation Prioritization
The decisions taken in rehabilitation planning for the urban water networks will have a long lasting impact on the functionality and quality of future services provided by urban infrastructure. These decisions can be assisted by different approaches ranging from linear depreciation for estimating the economic value of the network over using a deterioration model to assess the probability of failure or the technical service life to sophisticated multi-criteria decision support systems. Subsequently, the aim of this paper is to compare five available multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods (ELECTRE, AHP, WSM, TOPSIS, and PROMETHEE) for the application in an integrated rehabilitation management scheme for a real world case study and analyze them with respect to their suitability to be used in integrated asset management of water systems. The results of the different methods are not equal. This occurs because the chosen score scales, weights and the resulting distributions of the scores within the criteria do not have the same impact on all the methods. Independently of the method used, the decision maker must be familiar with its strengths but also weaknesses. Therefore, in some cases, it would be rational to use one of the simplest methods. However, to check for consistency and increase the reliability of the results, the application of several methods is encouraged.
Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods for Integrated Rehabilitation Prioritization
Franz Tscheikner-Gratl (author) / Patrick Egger (author) / Wolfgang Rauch (author) / Manfred Kleidorfer (author)
2017
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
Metadata by DOAJ is licensed under CC BY-SA 1.0
Decision support method for multi-criteria selection of bridge rehabilitation strategy
| British Library Online Contents | 2008
Decision support method for multi-criteria selection of bridge rehabilitation strategy
| Online Contents | 2008
Decision support method for multi-criteria selection of bridge rehabilitation strategy
| Online Contents | 2008
Decision support method for multi-criteria selection of bridge rehabilitation strategy
| Online Contents | 2008