| Summary: | 碩士 === 大同大學 === 工程管理碩士在職專班 === 102 === The Armed Forces of Republic of China implemented the evaluation and reinforcement for old building in accordance with the Programs of Building Seismic Assessment and Reinforcing Scheme announced by the Executive Yuan in 2008. Due to that there were many reinforcement methods and case engineers usually proposed the reinforcement schemes based on the methods they were familiar with, although the enhanced capabilities to resist earthquakes for buildings all reached the seismic resistance standards, the inconvenience in use and in the future maintenance and management might still be caused for units as the actual using status and the subsequent operation and maintenance of each building were not considered at first.
The perspectives and factors determined hierarchical structure was established according to the results from literature reviews and interviews of experts, and Overall weights as Construction (0.6926), Operation (0.1535) and Maintenance (0.1539) were obtained by the questionnaire survey conducted to users and the application of Analysis Hierarchy Process (AHP) analysis. The important factors which take the top five overall average values in sequence were 1) Explosion resistance, water proofing, pipelines and building degradation amount of improvement (0.2064), 2) Project costs (0.1273), 3) Level of difficulty supervises (0.1251), 4) Level of difficulty construction method (0.1233) and 5) Term of construction period (0.1106). Then arranged the construction engineers, technicians and construction vendors to attend the expert questionnaire survey designed according to the Likert scale questionnaire which is based on the dimension measurement for the five enforcement methods. In addition, the score of each factor was obtained by referencing the ratio approach and by considering with the point view of the relative performance. The seismic enforcement method which was most suitable for the living quarters for the army was gained by judging the relative performance of each construction method. At the same time, differing from the definition of the absolute efficiency, not only the performance benchmarking (Optimal Decision) among all methods could be confirmed but meanwhile the improvement basis could be provided to the methods with low performance for enhancing efficiency.
The results showed that 1) the users thought the construction perspective and Explosion resistance, water proofing, pipelines and building degradation amount of improvement factors were most important of all and could determine the difficulty level of the subsequent operation and maintenance, 2) the experts of this industry thought that the steel cladding method was more expensive in construction but had more advantages of better explosion resistance and durability, lower subsequent maintenance cost and minor affect on ventilation and lighting, etc.. The research combined the comments and opinions of users and experts to establish the rating scales. These rating scales provided the head of the authorized unit with better understanding about the actual needs and required designers to submit better enforcement proposals for further making the most suitable decision.
|
|---|
