Comparison of multi-criteria decision-making methods for selection of optimum passive design strategy

被引:11
作者
Rachman, Arinda P. [1 ]
Ichwania, Chalila [1 ]
Mangkuto, Rizki A. [2 ]
Pradipta, Justin [3 ]
Koerniawan, M. Donny [4 ]
Sarwono, Joko [2 ]
机构
[1] Inst Teknol Bandung, Fac Ind Technol, Engn Phys Program, Jl Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
[2] Inst Teknol Bandung, Fac Ind Technol, Built Environm Performance Engn Res Grp, Jl Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
[3] Inst Teknol Bandung, Fac Ind Technol, Engn Phys Res Grp, Jl Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
[4] Inst Teknol Bandung, Sch Architecture Planning & Policy Dev, Bldg Technol Res Grp, Jl Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
关键词
Passive design; Comparison; Sensitivity analysis; Criteria weights variation; OPTIMIZATION; BUILDINGS; PERFORMANCE;
D O I
10.1016/j.enbuild.2024.114285
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
In the pursuit of achieving high-performance building design, the selection of the most suitable passive design strategies often involves the use of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods to address multiple conflicting criteria simultaneously. However, identifying the appropriate MCDM method for a specific building design context poses a challenge, as methods commonly effective in other contexts may not yield equivalent results. This study evaluates five MCDM methods (AHP, COPRAS, TOPSIS, VIKOR, and WSM) to understand their sensitivity in recommending the best solution. The considered criteria are energy demand, thermal comfort and daylight availability. The sensitivity analysis involves the impact of the variability of assigned weights on the rank shifting given by the considered MCDM method and the sensitivity of each criterion to weights variability. The findings reveal that implementing a fair-weight allocation leads to similar top 5 solutions among all MCDM methods. However, when a negative shift is applied to each criterion weight, AHP demonstrates greater robustness to weight variability compared to the other methods evaluated, while VIKOR is the most sensitive to weight variation.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 64 条
[41]   A multi-criterion decision analysis framework for sustainable energy retrofit in buildings [J].
Ongpeng, Jason Maximino C. ;
Rabe, Brian Immanuel B. ;
Razon, Luis F. ;
Aviso, Kathleen B. ;
Tan, Raymond R. .
ENERGY, 2022, 239
[42]  
Opricovic S, 2004, EUR J OPER RES, V156, P445, DOI [10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1, 10.1016/s0377-2217(03)00020-1]
[43]   Green Supplier Selection in an Uncertain Environment in Agriculture Using a Hybrid MCDM Model: Z-Numbers-Fuzzy LMAW-Fuzzy CRADIS Model [J].
Puska, Adis ;
Bozanic, Darko ;
Nedeljkovic, Miroslav ;
Janosevic, Miljojko .
AXIOMS, 2022, 11 (09)
[44]  
Rachman A, 2023, P BUILDING SIMULATIO, P714
[45]   Passive design strategies and performance of Net Energy Plus Houses [J].
Rodriguez-Ubinas, Edwin ;
Montero, Claudio ;
Porteros, Maria ;
Vega, Sergio ;
Navarro, Inaki ;
Castillo-Cagigal, Manuel ;
Matallanas, Eduardo ;
Gutierrez, Alvaro .
ENERGY AND BUILDINGS, 2014, 83 :10-22
[46]   Metamodeling and multicriteria analysis for sustainable and passive residential building refurbishment: A case study of French housing stock [J].
Romani, Zaid ;
Draoui, Abdeslam ;
Allard, Francis .
BUILDING SIMULATION, 2022, 15 (03) :453-472
[47]  
Saaty T.L., 1980, ANAL HIERARCHY PROCE
[48]   A New Coefficient of Rankings Similarity in Decision-Making Problems [J].
Salabun, Wojciech ;
Urbaniak, Karol .
COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE - ICCS 2020, PT II, 2020, 12138 :632-645
[49]   Passive Energy-Saving Optimal Design for Rural Residences of Hanzhong Region in Northwest China Based on Performance Simulation and Optimization Algorithm [J].
Shao, Teng ;
Zheng, Wuxing ;
Cheng, Zheng .
BUILDINGS, 2021, 11 (09)
[50]   Optimizing automated shading systems for enhanced energy performance in cold climate zones: Strategies, savings, and comfort [J].
Shum, Caitlyn ;
Zhong, Lexuan .
ENERGY AND BUILDINGS, 2023, 300