Slide1 l.jpg
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 25

Priority-rating of Public Building Maintenance Work By Mohammad AL-Majed Abdul-Mohsen AL-Hammad Saleh Daffuaa King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 216 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Priority-rating of Public Building Maintenance Work By Mohammad AL-Majed Abdul-Mohsen AL-Hammad Saleh Daffuaa King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals. CONTENTS. Introduction Objectives of the Study Review of Literature Methodology Results and Discussion Summary and Conclusions.

Download Presentation

Priority-rating of Public Building Maintenance Work By Mohammad AL-Majed Abdul-Mohsen AL-Hammad Saleh Daffuaa King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Slide1 l.jpg

Priority-rating of Public Building Maintenance WorkByMohammad AL-MajedAbdul-Mohsen AL-HammadSaleh DaffuaaKing Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals


Contents l.jpg

CONTENTS

  • Introduction

  • Objectives of the Study

  • Review of Literature

  • Methodology

  • Results and Discussion

  • Summary and Conclusions


Introduction l.jpg

Introduction

  • In the absence of an established systematic approach, setting priorities for public maintenance projects occurs in a random way depending mainly on past experience

  • In-house maintenance

  • Contracting

  • Combination of both


Introduction cont l.jpg

Introduction (Cont.)

  • Limited financial resources

  • Long queue of projects waiting to be maintained

  • Lack of data among maintenance authorities

  • No systematic approach for setting priorities


Objectives l.jpg

Objectives

  • To identify criteria affecting Priority-rating

  • To utilize a methodology for obtaining a priority index of maintenance projects

  • To conduct a case study application


Review of literature l.jpg

Review of Literature

  • Highway maintenanceactivities

    - by optimization programming models

    - by neural network models

  • Building maintenance (limited literature)

    - A scarcity of data on the subject

  • General information

    - experience and judgment of engineers

    - written documents

    - priority indices


Methodology l.jpg

Methodology

  • The first objective of identifying Priority-rating criteria is achieved by :

  • - literature review

  • - field interviews

  • - questionnaire

  • The second objective of developing a methodology is achieved by :

  • - reviewing several methods on the subject


Methodology cont l.jpg

Methodology (Cont.)

  • The third objective of conducting a case study is achieved by :

    - selecting six sampling projects.

    - forming a committee of six members

    - questionnaire


Results and discussion l.jpg

Results and Discussion

  • Criteria affecting Priority-rating of public building maintenance work (23 criteria)

    - Building Performance Criteria (Group 1)

    - Managerial Criteria (Group 2)

  • Method of Priority-rating

    - Analytic Hierarchy Process AHP

  • A case study consisting of six projects


Results and discussion cont building performance criteria 12 criteria l.jpg

Results and Discussion (Cont.)Building Performance Criteria (12 criteria)

  • Boundary framework

  • Status of landscaping and outdoor areas

  • Interior finish & facades

  • Building enclosure systems

  • Horizontal circulation

  • Vertical circulation

  • Sanitation & hygiene level

  • Thermal comfort

  • Acoustic comfort

  • Visual comfort

  • Indoor air quality

  • Life safety concerns


Results and discussion cont managerial criteria 11 criteria l.jpg

Results and Discussion (Cont.)managerial Criteria (11 criteria)

  • Functioning of the building

  • Aesthetics

  • Location

  • Management desires

  • Frequency of complaints

  • Availability of in-house maintenance

  • Initial cost

  • Effect of delaying maintenance work

  • Use of the building

  • Life expectancy

  • Health & safety risk


Results and discussion cont l.jpg

Results and Discussion (Cont.)

Analytic Hierarchy ProcessAHP

“was introduced by Thomas Saaty in the early 1970s. The process addresses how to determine the relative importance of a set of activities in a multi-criteria setting through the use of linear composite indices”.


Results and discussion cont ahp method rj sum ci pij l.jpg

Results and Discussion (Cont.)AHP MethodRj = sum Ci * Pij

Rj : The overall importance of project j

Ci : The relative importance of criteria i

Pij : The relative importance of project j

with respect to criteria i


Results and discussion cont14 l.jpg

Results and Discussion (Cont.)

  • Relative importance of criteria groups 1 & 2 (Ci)

    • Paired Comparsions matrix (Figure 1)

    • Criteria relative importance (Ci) (g.1)-(Table 3)


Case study l.jpg

Case Study

  • Sampling projects (Table 2)

  • Scale of relative importance (Table 5)

  • Evaluation of projects Vs building performance criteria (Table 6)

  • Relative importance of projects Vs building performance criteria (Table 8)

  • Priority index of the projects (Table 10)


Conclusions l.jpg

Conclusions

  • 23 criteria were identified and subjectively classified into BPG and MG

  • Relative importance of BPG = 0.74 & MG = 0.26

  • The criteria of life safety concern, status of building enclosure systems, and Sanitation & hygiene level were the most important among BPG

  • The criteria of health & safety and Functioning of the building were the most important among MG


Conclusions cont l.jpg

Conclusions (Cont.)

  • The study presented a methods of the Analytic Hierarchy Process AHP

  • A case study consisting of six projects was conducted and indicated the following results :

    • AHP Rank : P4, P5, P2, P1, P3, P6


Slide25 l.jpg

Thank you


  • Login