科研之友
微信
新浪微博
Facebook
分享链接
摘要
Decisions related to selecting the most suitable fire protection for steel structures subject to fully developed fires are critical to addressing design and construction uncertainties. Fire design stakeholders are faced with the challenge of managing their divergent opinions to make design decisions given the many options or engineered solutions available to meet performance objectives. This paper demonstrates the viability of a group-Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) as a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) technique for managing fire design stakeholder opinions on economic, safety, environmental and societal considerations toward selecting suitable fire protection for steel structures. Based on 22 structural fire design decision criteria gathered from literature and expert opinion, 36 New Zealand stakeholders from 12 fire design stakeholder categories have been interviewed to elicit ratings from their relative comparisons of the structural fire design decision criteria. The Geometric Mean Method-Analytic Hierarchy Process (GMM-AHP) is used to assess four applied fire protection options or alternatively to use unprotected steel. The results show the seamless aggregation of multiple stakeholder desires, the importance levels of different stakeholder opinions and the systematic approach in ranking the proposed fire protection options. The ranking shows that given a general selection of passive fire protection by stakeholders having equal weights, there is a stronger preference for the concrete encasement of steel.
- 出版日期2016-11
