Abstracts – Browse Results

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 16 results ...

Ali, A K (2019) A case study in developing an interdisciplinary learning experiment between architecture, building construction, and construction engineering and management education. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 2040–59.

Chan, D W, Olawumi, T O and Ho, A M (2019) Critical success factors for building information modelling (BIM) implementation in Hong Kong. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 1838–54.

Chen, Y, Yin, Y, Browne, G J and Li, D (2019) Adoption of building information modeling in Chinese construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 1878–98.

Gao, J, Ren, H and Cai, W (2019) Risk assessment of construction projects in China under traditional and industrial production modes. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 2147–68.

Iskandar, K A, Hanna, A S and Lotfallah, W (2019) Modeling the performance of healthcare construction projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 2023–39.

Jin, R, Zou, P X, Li, B, Piroozfar, P and Painting, N (2019) Comparisons of students’ perceptions on BIM practice among Australia, China and UK. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 1899–923.

Laryea, S (2019) Procurement strategy and outcomes of a new universities project in South Africa. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 2060–83.

Lavikka, R H, Kyrö, R, Peltokorpi, A and Särkilahti, A (2019) Revealing change dynamics in hospital construction projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 1946–61.

Lee, C (2019) Financing method for real estate and infrastructure development using Markowitz’s portfolio selection model and the Monte Carlo simulation. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 2008–22.

Manu, P, Mahamadu, A, Booth, C, Olomolaiye, P O, Coker, A, Ibrahim, A and Lamond, J (2019) Infrastructure procurement capacity gaps in Nigeria public sector institutions. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 1962–85.

Marefat, A, Toosi, H and Mahmoudi Hasankhanlo, R (2019) A BIM approach for construction safety: applications, barriers and solutions. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 1855–77.

Nadafi, S, Moosavirad, S H and Ariafar, S (2019) Predicting the project time and costs using EVM based on gray numbers. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 2107–19.

Pantzartzis, E, Price, A and Edum Fotwe, F (2019) Roadmap layers and processes: resilient and sustainable care facilities. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 1986–2007.

Panwar, A, Tripathi, K K and Jha, K N (2019) A qualitative framework for selection of optimization algorithm for multi-objective trade-off problem in construction projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 1924–45.

  • Type: Journal Article
  • Keywords: Optimization; Scheduling; Construction project; Questionnaire survey;
  • ISBN/ISSN: 0969-9988
  • URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-06-2018-0246
  • Abstract:
    The purpose of this paper is to develop a qualitative framework for the selection of the most appropriate optimization algorithm for the multi-objective trade-off problem (MOTP) in construction projects based on the predefined performance parameters. Design/methodology/approach A total of 6 optimization algorithms and 13 performance parameters were identified through literature review. The experts were asked to indicate their preferences between each pair of optimization algorithms and performance parameters. A multi-criteria decision-making tool, namely, consistent fuzzy preference relation was applied to analyze the responses of the experts. The results from the analysis were applied to evaluate their relative weights which were used to provide a ranking to the algorithms. Findings This study provided a qualitative framework which can be used to identify the most appropriate optimization algorithm for the MOTP beforehand. The outcome suggested that non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA) was the most appropriate algorithm whereas linear programming was found to be the least appropriate for MOTPs. Originality/value The devised framework may provide a useful insight for the construction practitioners to choose an effective optimization algorithm tool for preparing an efficient project schedule aiming toward the desired optimal improvement in achieving the various objectives. Identification of the absolute best optimization algorithm is very difficult to attain due to various problems such as the inherent complexities and intricacies of the algorithm and different class of problems. However, the devised framework offers a primary insight into the selection of the most appropriate alternative among the available algorithms.

Roberts, C, Edwards, D J, Hosseini, M R, Mateo-Garcia, M and Owusu-Manu, D (2019) Post-occupancy evaluation: a review of literature. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 2084–106.

Wu, C, Chen, C, Jiang, R, Wu, P, Xu, B and Wang, J (2019) Understanding laborers’ behavioral diversities in multinational construction projects using integrated simulation approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(09), 2120–46.