IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i22p7515-d676304.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Criteria Analysis of a Developed Prefabricated Footing System on Reactive Soil Foundation

Author

Listed:
  • Bertrand Teodosio

    (Institute of Sustainable Industries and Liveable Cities, Victoria University, Melbourne 3011, Australia)

  • Francesco Bonacci

    (Cardno, Melbourne 3000, Australia)

  • Seongwon Seo

    (Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Australia)

  • Kasun Shanaka Kristombu Baduge

    (Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Australia)

  • Priyan Mendis

    (Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Australia)

Abstract

The need for advancements in residential construction and the hazard induced by the shrink–swell reactive soil movement prompted the development of the prefabricated footing system of this study, which was assessed and compared to a conventional waffle raft using a multi-criteria analysis. The assessment evaluates the structural performance, cost efficiency, and sustainability using finite element modelling, life cycle cost analysis, and life cycle assessment, respectively. The structural performance of the developed prefabricated system was found to have reduced the deformation and cracking by approximately 40%. However, the cost, GHG emission, and embodied energy were higher in the prefabricated footing system due to the greater required amount of concrete and steel than that of the waffle raft. The cost difference between the two systems can be reduced to as low as 6% when prefabricated systems were installed in a highly reactive sites with large floor areas. The life cycle assessment further observed that the prefabricated footing systems consume up to 21% more energy and up to 18% more GHG emissions. These can significantly be compensated by reusing the developed prefabricated footing system, decreasing the GHG emission and energy consumption by 75–77% and 55–59% with respect to that of the waffle raft.

Suggested Citation

  • Bertrand Teodosio & Francesco Bonacci & Seongwon Seo & Kasun Shanaka Kristombu Baduge & Priyan Mendis, 2021. "Multi-Criteria Analysis of a Developed Prefabricated Footing System on Reactive Soil Foundation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-31, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:22:p:7515-:d:676304
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/22/7515/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/22/7515/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sharma, Aashish & Saxena, Abhishek & Sethi, Muneesh & Shree, Venu & Varun, 2011. "Life cycle assessment of buildings: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 871-875, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. G. Gnanachandrasamy & C. Dushiyanthan & T. Jeyavel Rajakumar & Yongzhang Zhou, 2020. "Assessment of hydrogeochemical characteristics of groundwater in the lower Vellar river basin: using Geographical Information System (GIS) and Water Quality Index (WQI)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 759-789, February.
    2. Deng, S. & Wang, R.Z. & Dai, Y.J., 2014. "How to evaluate performance of net zero energy building – A literature research," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1-16.
    3. Mastrucci, Alessio & Marvuglia, Antonino & Leopold, Ulrich & Benetto, Enrico, 2017. "Life Cycle Assessment of building stocks from urban to transnational scales: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 316-332.
    4. Kim, Rakhyun & Tae, Sungho & Roh, Seungjun, 2017. "Development of low carbon durability design for green apartment buildings in South Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 263-272.
    5. Shi, Qian & Lai, Xiaodong & Xie, Xin & Zuo, Jian, 2014. "Assessment of green building policies – A fuzzy impact matrix approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 203-211.
    6. Fahlstedt, Oskar & Temeljotov-Salaj, Alenka & Lohne, Jardar & Bohne, Rolf André, 2022. "Holistic assessment of carbon abatement strategies in building refurbishment literature — A scoping review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    7. Belen Moreno Santamaria & Fernando del Ama Gonzalo & Matthew Griffin & Benito Lauret Aguirregabiria & Juan A. Hernandez Ramos, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of Dynamic Water Flow Glazing Envelopes: A Case Study with Real Test Facilities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, April.
    8. Kai Lan & Alice Favero & Yuan Yao & Robert O. Mendelsohn & Hannah Szu-Han Wang, 2025. "Global land and carbon consequences of mass timber products," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-12, December.
    9. Skandalos, Nikolaos & Wang, Meng & Kapsalis, Vasileios & D'Agostino, Delia & Parker, Danny & Bhuvad, Sushant Suresh & Udayraj, & Peng, Jinqing & Karamanis, Dimitris, 2022. "Building PV integration according to regional climate conditions: BIPV regional adaptability extending Köppen-Geiger climate classification against urban and climate-related temperature increases," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    10. Carine Lausselet & Johana Paola Forero Urrego & Eirik Resch & Helge Brattebø, 2021. "Temporal analysis of the material flows and embodied greenhouse gas emissions of a neighborhood building stock," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(2), pages 419-434, April.
    11. Rodríguez-Soria, Beatriz & Domínguez-Hernández, Javier & Pérez-Bella, José M. & del Coz-Díaz, Juan J., 2015. "Quantitative analysis of the divergence in energy losses allowed through building envelopes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1000-1008.
    12. Abdul Mujeebu, Muhammad & Alshamrani, Othman Subhi, 2016. "Prospects of energy conservation and management in buildings – The Saudi Arabian scenario versus global trends," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 1647-1663.
    13. Jozef Švajlenka & Mária Kozlovská, 2021. "Factors Influencing the Sustainability of Wood-Based Constructions’ Use from the Perspective of Users," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-16, November.
    14. Leslie Ayagapin & Jean Philippe Praene, 2020. "Environmental Overcost of Single Family Houses in Insular Context: A Comparative LCA Study of Reunion Island and France," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, October.
    15. Petrovic, Bojana & Myhren, Jonn Are & Zhang, Xingxing & Wallhagen, Marita & Eriksson, Ola, 2019. "Life cycle assessment of a wooden single-family house in Sweden," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 251(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Cabeza, Luisa F. & Rincón, Lídia & Vilariño, Virginia & Pérez, Gabriel & Castell, Albert, 2014. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 394-416.
    17. Crawford, Robert H. & Bartak, Erika L. & Stephan, André & Jensen, Christopher A., 2016. "Evaluating the life cycle energy benefits of energy efficiency regulations for buildings," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 435-451.
    18. Martínez-Rocamora, A. & Solís-Guzmán, J. & Marrero, M., 2016. "LCA databases focused on construction materials: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 565-573.
    19. Guillén-Lambea, Silvia & Rodríguez-Soria, Beatriz & Marín, José M., 2016. "Review of European ventilation strategies to meet the cooling and heating demands of nearly zero energy buildings (nZEB)/Passivhaus. Comparison with the USA," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 561-574.
    20. Fenner, Andriel Evandro & Kibert, Charles Joseph & Woo, Junghoon & Morque, Shirley & Razkenari, Mohamad & Hakim, Hamed & Lu, Xiaoshu, 2018. "The carbon footprint of buildings: A review of methodologies and applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1142-1152.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:22:p:7515-:d:676304. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.