El Meouche, R; Abunemeh, M; Hijaze, I; Mebarki, A and Shahrour, I (2018) Developing optimal paths for evacuating risky construction sites. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 144(2): 04017099, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Construction sites are susceptible to damage due to the occurrence of natural and technological hazard events such as fire and thermal flux. Therefore, project planners must adopt innovative approaches for evacuating construction sites seamlessly. This research aims to develop a model to find the least-risk paths for evacuating sites in order to diminish losses, injuries, and fatalities. The model consists of two main processes. The first is the generation of an optimal site layout that aims to minimize the total risk using a genetic algorithm. The second process is running Dijkstra's algorithm to find the shortest safe path from any position on the construction site to the safe places. Spatial analysis tools are exploited in this research to generate the spatial risk maps and implement the least-cost path analysis. The model is implemented in a case study composed of numerous facilities. The results revealed that the proposed model is able to generate paths through least-risk zones, which will minimize the victims in cases of emergencies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction risk; evacuation; geographic information system; optimization; site layout |
| Index terms: | case study, planner, path analysis, geographic information system, fatalities, genetic algorithm, maps, site layout, injury, construction site |
| Subjects: | statistical analysis, health conditions and diseases, geographical techniques and analysis, algorithms, spatial and geospatial analysis, health risk and incident analysis, site logistics, work location, data collection methods, profession |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Site Management, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Roles and Professions |
| 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