Mahdi, I M; Arafat, H; Ebid, A M and El-Kadi, A F (2023) Decision model to identify the optimum retaining wall type for restricted highway projects sites. International Journal of Construction Management, 23(8), pp. 1387-1394. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Choosing the suitable soil retaining system is the key to optimizing the design of the restricted sites highway projects. Many parameters are involved in identifying the optimum choice. This research approaches a decision support system (DSS) to determine the level of suitability of each alternative in order to identify the most optimal choice. In this approach, an integration of the value engineering hypothesis with the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is implemented to form the DSS to determine the relative importance of the factors affecting selection. This research includes four of the most applied retaining wall types: cemented sand, stone gravity wall, RC cantilever wall and the mechanically stabilized wall (MSW). The developed DSS was verified via four case studies of highway projects in the construction stage. In three out of the four case studies, the optimal choice was in accordance with the proposed DSS. The research also showed that fully slopped embankments are the optimum choice for unrestricted sites up to a certain land cost, beyond which fully retained embankments became the optimum choice.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytical hierarchy process; decision support system; highway projects; restricted sites; retaining walls; value engineering |
| Index terms: | retaining wall, value engineering, highway construction, sand, suitability, case study, decision support, analytical hierarchy process, land cost, embankment, integration, relative importance |
| Subjects: | risk assessment, value management, decision analysis, organizational analysis, real estate economics, structural engineering, building materials, civil engineering, infrastructure and transport systems, design criteria, data collection methods, decision-making and optimization |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Urban Studies, Design Practice, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here