Mund, A T (2002) An evaluation framework for exterior envelope wall systems for the homebuilding industry. PhD thesis, Arizona State University, USA.
Abstract
Homes built using innovative exterior envelope wall systems feature improved energy efficiency, maintainability, interior comfort, and fire safety when compared to homes built using the currently widespread platform framing system. However, a significant disconnection exists between the benefits of these innovative wall systems and their use in the homebuilding industry in the United States. This study developed an evaluation framework for exterior envelope wall systems. The proposed framework is based on methodologies often suggested in literature as holding promise for contributing to increased demand and adoption of building systems. Multiattribute decision analysis (MADA) and utility theory as well as artificial intelligence tools are applied in the framework as follows: (1) a set of attributes that characterizes wall systems is identified for the framework, (2) analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is used to determine the relative weights of the attributes, (3) a neural network is utilized to aid in the prediction of thermal performance (one of the attributes), (4) Likert scales and models specifically developed for the evaluation framework are utilized to score the performances of the wall systems on the various other attributes, (5) utility theory is utilized to normalize the attribute performance scores under consideration of decision-maker value systems, and (6) the resulting attribute utilities are aggregated using an additive weighted utility model. The framework, which is divided into a part for homebuyer evaluations and a part for homebuilder evaluations, proves to be usable to demonstrate relative advantages/disadvantages of exterior envelope wall systems. A case study further demonstrates that there is no linear relationship between performance and decision-maker satisfaction. This fact, although intuitive, clearly demonstrates the usefulness of using utility theory, in addition to attribute weighing, as a means of capturing decision-maker value systems and producing meaningful evaluation results.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Sawhney, A and Fafitis, A |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | efficiency; utility theory; analytical hierarchy process; case study; building industry; homes; utilities; artificial intelligence; fire safety; builder; United States; decision analysis; energy efficiency; multiattribute decision analysis; neural network |
| Index terms: | analytical hierarchy process, fire safety, artificial intelligence, building industry, building system, comfort, decision analysis, artificial intelligence tool, utilities, relative advantage, efficiency, energy efficiency, case study, platform, satisfaction, methodology, Likert scale, thermal performance, neural network, utility theory, framing, builder, United States, multiattribute decision analysis, maintainability, evaluation |
| Subjects: | economic theory, industry analysis, decision-making and optimization, decision analysis, occupational health and safety management, digital design, health safety and environment, Geography, performance management, maintenance engineering, research methods, project delivery, conceptual models, data analysis and analytics, energy systems, artificial intelligence, sustainability and energy, practitioner, innovation studies, engineering systems, construction type, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Quality Management, Risk Management, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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