Evaluating the sustainability of soil improvement techniques in foundation substructures
[EN] The soil is not always suitable or competent to support a direct shallow foundation in construction. In many cases, to avoid costly deep foundations, it is indicated to replace, improve, or reinforce such soil. This paper focuses on evaluating the contribution to sustainability between differen...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2022 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV) |
| Repositorio: | RiuNet. Repositorio Institucional de la Universitat Politécnica de Valéncia |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:riunet.upv.es:10251/190210 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://riunet.upv.es/handle/10251/190210 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Sustainability Construction Multi-criteria decision analysis Life cycle assessment Modern methods of construction Soil improvement Foundations ELECTRE IS TOPSIS COPRAS INGENIERIA DE LA CONSTRUCCION 09.- Desarrollar infraestructuras resilientes, promover la industrialización inclusiva y sostenible, y fomentar la innovación |
| Sumario: | [EN] The soil is not always suitable or competent to support a direct shallow foundation in construction. In many cases, to avoid costly deep foundations, it is indicated to replace, improve, or reinforce such soil. This paper focuses on evaluating the contribution to sustainability between different soil improvement techniques and the outcome of their application to the foundation of a single-family house as an alternative to the one built. The life-cycle performance in sustainability is compared between the baseline design (without intervention), backfilling and soil compaction, soil-cement columns, rigid inclusion of micropiles, and nailing of precast joists. To characterize sustainability, a set of 37 indicators is proposed that integrate the economic or environmental aspects of each design alternative and its social impacts. A sustainability ranking is obtained for the different alternatives based on the ELECTRE IS method for multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM). The sensitivity of the obtained results is evaluated against different MCDM methods (TOPSIS, COPRAS) and different criteria weights. The evaluation provides a cross-cutting view, comparing the ability and reliability of each technique to prioritize the ground consolidation solution that best contributes to the sustainability in the design of a building's substructure. |
|---|