POSTER PRESENTATION_BRICKS SELECTION THROUGH MANAGEMENT APPROACH BY AHP, RII, IMP.I.

1. CRITERIA FRAMEWORK FOR BRICKS SELECTION
CL – Clay Bricks
 CS - Cost
 TM - Time
 QL - Quality
 QN – Quantity
HHFAB - Human Hair Fly Ash (FAL –G)
Bricks
 CS - Cost
 TM - Time
 QL - Quality
 QN – Quantity
FAB - Fly Ash (FAL –G) Bricks
 CS - Cost
 TM - Time
 QL - Quality
 QN – Quantity
SBAB - Sugarcane Bassage Ash Bricks
 CS - Cost
 TM - Time
 QL - Quality
 QN - Quantity
CONCLUSIONS
The problem solution result shows that fly ash brick is best. 1st to 3rd factor’s rank according to the current views of respondents for fly ash (FAL-G) bricks:
 Analytic Hierarchy Process: 1st - Cost, 2nd - Delivery, 3rd – Quality
 Relative Importance Index method: 1st - Delivery, 2nd - Cost, 3rd – Quality
 Relative Importance Index (IMP.I.): 1st - Quantity, 2nd - Quality.
 The proposed methodology can also be applied to any other selection problem involving multiple Criteria.
BRICKS SELECTION THROUGH MANAGEMENT APPROACH BY AHP, RII, IMP.I.
Ashish H. Makwana1, Dr. Jayeshkumar Pitroda2,*
1Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Marwadi Education Foundation, Rajkot, Gujarat
2Associate professor, PG Coordinator Construction Engineering and Management, Civil Engineering Department, BVM Engineering College,
Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat
BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION
 Brick is the oldest manufactured building material and much of its history is
lost in antiquity. The oldest Burnt or fired bricks have been found on the sites
of the ancient cities of Babylonia, some of which are Estimated to be about
6000 years old.
 This research paper presents a response based comparison of fly-ash bricks,
clay bricks, human hair fly ash bricks, Sugarcane bassage ash bricks. Data
are collected through distributed survey questionnaire to brick manufacture
and then analyzed by various techniques such as Analytic Hierarchy Process,
Relative Important Index and Important Index.
 Such a research study may prove to be beneficial to all the agencies involved
in construction and also act as a foundation for future research studies.
TYPES OF BRICKS
 Clay Bricks - Clay bricks are used in a wide range of buildings for housing to
factories, and in the construction of tunnels, waterways, bridges etc.
 Fly ash generated during the combustion of coal for energy production is one
of the industrial by-products and it is recognized as an environmental
pollutant. Fly ash is mixed with cement, sand, water and chemical admixture
to prepared Fly ash bricks.
 In human hair bricks, human hair is used in fly ash bricks as fiber so it is also
known as fiber fly ash bricks.
 Sugar-cane bagasse is a fibrous waste-product of the sugar refining industry,
along with ethanol vapor. Sugar-cane bagasses is mixed with cement, sand,
water and chemical admixture to prepared Sugar-cane bagasse bricks.
NEED OF THE RESEARCH
 Present approach lacks management approach so there is a need of such
approach which can be applied through scientific methodology for bricks
selection.
OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH
 To identify main factors affecting bricks and evaluate by Analytic Hierarchy
Process (AHP), Relative Important Index (RII) and Important Index (IMP.I.).
 To achieve optimization by comparison of Analytic Hierarchy Process
(AHP), Relative Important Index (RII) and Important Index (IMP.I.).
Figure 1: Framework of various brick
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
 Survey Questionnaire was prepared in the form of numeric value for each
criterion and distributed to selected stakeholders and then data of the
collected survey was analyzed by Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP),
Relative Important Index (RII) and Important Index (IMP.I.).
ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP)
 The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a structured technique for organizing
and analyzing complex decisions. Based on mathematics and psychology, it
was developed by Thomas L. Saaty in the 1970s and has been extensively.
AHP APPLICATION
(i) Choice, (ii) Ranking, (iii) Prioritization, (iv) Resource allocation, (v) Quality
management
STEP BY STEP PROCEDURE OFAHP
Step 1: Model the problem as a hierarchy containing the decision goal, the
alternatives for reaching it, criteria for evaluating the alternatives.
Step 2: Establish priorities among elements of the hierarchy making series of
judgments based on comparisons of elements.
Step 3: These judgments to yield a set of overall priorities for the hierarchy.
Step 4: Check the consistency of the judgments.
Step 5: Come to final decision based on the results of this process.
Intensity of
Importance
Definition Explanation
1 Equal Importance Two activitiescontribute equally to the objective
2 Weak or slight
3
Moderate
importance
Experience and judgement slightly favour one
activity over another
4 Moderate plus
5
Strong
importance
Experience and judgement strongly favour one
activity over another
6 Strong plus
7 Very strong
An activity is favoured very strongly over another;
its dominance demonstrated in practice
8 Very, very strong
9
Extreme
importance
The evidence favouring one activity over another
is of the highest possible order of affirmation
Reciprocals of
Above
(1-9)
A reasonable assumption
Table 1: Fundamental Scale of Absolute Numbers
(Source: Saaty. T. L., Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process, Int. J. Services
Sciences, 2008, Volume-1, No.-1, pg.83-98, Pittsburgh, PA-15260, USA)RELATIVE IMPORTANCE INDEX (RII) METHOD
 Relative Importance Index method helps to determine the relative importance
of the various factors affecting brick selection. The four scales ranging from
1 (Very important) to 4 (Not important) is adopted and it is transformed to
relative importance indices (RII) for each factor as follows:
Where: W = weight given to each factor by the respondents and ranges from 1 to
4, A = highest weight = 4; N = total number of respondents
𝐑𝐈𝐈 =
𝚺𝐖
𝐀 ∗ 𝐍 …………………………………………………………………..(1)
IMPORTANCE INDEX (IMP.I.) METHOD
 Assaf and Al-Hejji (2006) used this Importance Index (IMP.I.) as a function
of severity & frequency to rank the causes of delay of large construction
projects of Saudi Arabia.
 Frequency Index (F.I.): A formula is used to rank risk event based on
frequency of occurrence as identified by the participants.
Where, a = constant expressing weighting given to each response (ranges from 1
for always up to 4 for rarely); n = frequency of the responses; N = total number
of responses
 Severity Index (S.I.): A formula is used to rank risk event based on severity
as indicated by the participants.
Where, a = constant expressing weighting given to each response (ranges from 1
for extreme up to 4 for little) ; n = frequency of the responses; N = total number
of responses
 Importance Index (IMP.I.): The importance index of each event is calculated
as a function of both frequency and severity indices, as follows:
𝐅𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐱 𝐅. 𝐈. % = 𝚺 𝐚
𝐧
𝐍
∗
𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝟒 …………..(2)
𝐒𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐱 𝐒. 𝐈. % = 𝚺 𝐚
𝐧
𝐍
∗
𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝟒 …………..(3)
𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐱 𝐈𝐌𝐏. 𝐈. % =
[𝐅. 𝐈. % ∗ 𝐒. 𝐈. % ]
𝟏𝟎𝟎 ..(4)
Group Criteria of Brick Selection AHP RANK RII RANK IMP.I RANK
Clay Bricks
Cost 0.0243 10 0.5 6 21.875 12
Delivery 0.019 14 0.625 4 28.125 10
Quality 0.0136 16 0.5625 5 35.1563 6
Quantity 0.0229 11 0.4375 7 28.125 10
Human Hair (Fiber) Fly Ash Bricks
Cost 0.0222 13 0.5 6 38.6719 4
Delivery 0.0299 9 0.5625 5 31.6406 8
Quality 0.0225 12 0.4375 7 24.6094 11
Quantity 0.0185 15 0.5625 5 31.25 9
Fly Ash (FAL –G) Bricks
Cost 0.123 1 0.75 2 37.5 5
Delivery 0.1226 2 0.8125 1 19.1406 13
Quality 0.1122 3 0.6875 3 47.2656 2
Quantity 0.0999 5 0.5 6 60.9375 1
Sugarcane Bassage Ash Bricks
Cost 0.1008 4 0.5625 5 42.9688 3
Delivery 0.0942 6 0.5 6 35.1563 6
Quality 0.0819 8 0.5625 5 32.8125 7
Quantity 0.0927 7 0.5625 5 21.875 12
SURVEY SAMPLE SIZE = 64
Figure 2: Criteria Rank - Comparison between AHP, RII and IMP.I. Techniques
REFERENCES
 A.H. Makwana, J. Pitroda, An Approach for Ready Mixed Concrete Selection for Construction Companies through Analytic Hierarchy Process, International
Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology [IJETT, Global Impact Factor (GIF) value - 0.537], ISSN: 2231-5381, Volume - 4, Issue - 7, July 2013, pg.no.: 2878
- 2884.
 A.H. Makwana, J. Pitroda, Ready Mixed Concrete Selection for Infrastructure Development through Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in the New Millennium,
International Journal of Management, (IJM, Peer Review Journal, Impact Factor - 6.9017), ISSN: 0976-6502 (Print), ISSN: 0976-6510 (Online), Volume - 4, Issue -
5, September - October 2013, pg.no.: 109-126.
 A.H. Makwana, J. Pitroda, An Integrated Approach for Enhancing Ready Mixed Concrete utility using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), International Journal of
Management Research and Development (IJMRD), (IJMRD, Peer Review Journal, Impact Factor - 6.9882), ISSN 2248 - 938X (Print), ISSN: 2248 - 9398 (Online),
Volume - 4, Number - 1, January - March (2014), pg.no. 30-39.
 A.B. Prajapati, S.P. Panchal, B.B. Ladva, A.H. Makwana, J.Pitroda, “Unified Approach for Enhancing Ready Mixed Concrete Utility by Analytic Hierarchy Process
(AHP) in Charotor Region of Central Gujarat”, Journal of International Academic Research for Multidisciplinary (JIARM, Peer Review Journal, Impact Factor -
1.393), ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume - 1, Issue - 11, December 2013, pg.no. 325 - 341.
 A.H. Makwana, R.M. Mata, Dr. J.R. Pitroda, Source Identification and Minimization of Waste in Building Construction Using RII and IMP.I. Method, International
Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”, ISBN: 978-81-929339-3-1, S.N. Patel Institute of Technology & Research
Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli, 09th April 2016, pg.no.231 – 246.
 A.H. Makwana, J. Pitroda, An Integrated Approach for Enhancing Ready Mixed Concrete Selection using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Technique for
order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), International Journal of Management (IJM), Journal Impact Factor (2013): 6.9071 (Calculated by GISI),
Volume: 4, Issue: 5, January - March (2014), Pages: 47-52.
 A.P. Mohitea , T.R. Mohiteb , K.M. Mathakaric , S.B. Khotd, A Review Paper on “Multicriteria Decision Making Approaches and Criterion” Used in Supplier
Selection and Evaluation, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT), ISSN: 2278-0181, Vol. 3 Issue 1, January – 2014, pg.no.2425-
2434.
 B. Daxini, Dr. R.B. Bhatt, Dr. J. Pitroda, An Approach for Supplier Selection for Construction Companies Through Analytical Hierarchy Process, International
Journal of Scientific Research, Voulme-2, Issue-5, May-2013, ISSN: 2277-8179, DOI: 10.15373/22778179/MAY2013/60, May 2013, pg.no.177-179.
 Dr. J.R. Pitroda, A.H. Makwana, N.M. Prajapati, Analysis of Factors Affecting Human Resource Management of Construction Firms Using RII Method, IMP.I.
Method and RIR Method, International Conference on: “Engineering: Issues, opportunities and Challenges for Development”, ISBN: 978-81-929339-3-1, S. N.
Patel Institute of Technology & Research Centre, Umrakh, Bardoli, 09th April 2016, pg.: 1 – 11.
International Conference on Sustainable Construction and Building Materials
National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal, Mangalore - 575 025, Karnataka, India
Table 2: Criteria Rank - Comparison between AHP, RII and IMP.I. Techniques
Scope of the Research
 The scope of this research work of brick selection is considered for three cities
of Gujarat Region of India: Rajkot, Ahmedabad and Vadodara.
n =
m
1 +
m − 1
N
m =
1.6452
× 0.5 × (1 − 0.5
0.12
m =
z2
× p × (1 − p
ε2
n =
67.65
1 +
67.65 − 1
1257
n = 64
m = 67.65
Where, n, m, and N = the sample size of the limited, unlimited,
and available population, respectively.
Where, z = the statistic value for the confidence level used, p = the value
of the population proportion that is being estimated; and ε = the
sampling error of the point estimate. Because the value of p is unknown