Evaluating the Feasibility of Using Roof Types in Multi-Story Buildings in Terms of Quality, Cost, and Time

Authors

  • Mehdi Ali Aghazadeh Rudsari * Department of Civil Engineering, Lahijan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Lahijan, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.48314/jcase.v2i3.67

Abstract

In this study, the evaluation of the possibility of using this type of roof in multi-story buildings in terms of quality, cost, and time was considered. In this regard, various types of roof systems, both traditional and modern, including beam and block roofs -chromite-concrete slabs- uboot and cobox, etc., were initially evaluated and prioritized using the AHP method and AHP SOLVER software based on various technical, economic, and executive criteria. Subsequently, roof systems were evaluated for 2, 5, 10, and 12-story buildings. The results of the analysis showed that overall, the Kubiax and Ubot roofs are ranked first and second as two new roofs. Given that the weights obtained for these two ceilings are equal to each other, it is possible to unanimously consider these two ceilings to be ranked first. The beam and block roof with a weight of 0.174 was in second place. The composite roof with a weight of 0.141 was the third option, and finally the concrete slab option with a weight of 0.135 was the fourth option. The chromite roof with a weight of 0.122 was in last place. Also, as it was determined, for the beam and block roof, after optimizing the 2, 5, 10, and 12-story structures, the weight of the 5, 10, and 12-story structures increased by 3.24, 7.87, and 9.42 times, respectively, compared to the 2-story structure .For the concrete slab roof, after optimizing the 2, 5, 10, and 12-story structures, the weight of the 5, 10, and 12-story structures increased by 3.36, 8.23, and 9.85 times, respectively, compared to the 2-story structure. The weight of the structure was reduced by a maximum of about 30% when the roof was a U-shaped roof compared to a concrete slab roof. For 2- and 5-story structures, the structural weight reduction ratio (Roof weight and its optimization and, as a result, the impact on the structural weight) was 20 percent, for 10-story structures this ratio was 25 percent, and for 12-story structures this ratio was 30 percent.

Keywords:

Traditional roof system, Modern roof system, AHP method, Cubix roof, Concrete slab

References

  1. [1] Jeyarajan, S., & Richard Liew, J. Y. (2016). Robustness analysis of 3D Composite buildings with semi-rigid joints and floor slab. Structures, 6, 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2016.01.005
  2. [2] Vijaykumar, D., & Jawalkar, G. (2019). Comparative analysis of RCC flat slab with post-tensioned flat slab. International journal of scientific research in science, engineering and technology, 6(3), 2395–1990. https://doi.org/10.32628/IJSRSET196356
  3. [3] V, I., K, S., & J, L. (2018). Dynamic analysis of multistory RCC building frame with flat slab and grid slab. International journal of trend in scientific research and development, 2(4), 1143–1148. https://doi.org/10.31142/ijtsrd14269
  4. [4] Bahrami, A., Rashid, S. M. P., Comitti, A., Vijayakumaran, H., Nejabatmeimandi, M., Seixas, L., … & Behzadian, K. (2024). Sustainable structures and buildings.
  5. [5] Tavares, V., Lopes, C. N., & Freire, F. (2018). Embodied energy and greenhouse gas emissions analysis of a prefabricated modular house: The “Moby” case study. Journal of cleaner production, 212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.028
  6. [6] Mokhlis, I., & Asaad, Z. (2024). Comparative study of high rise building using ETABS, SAFE and SAP2000. Construction and building materials. http://dx.doi.org/10.1234/abcd.1234
  7. [7] Wang, J., Wang, X., Shou, W., Chong, H. Y., & Guo, J. (2016). Building information modeling-based integration of MEP layout designs and constructability. Automation in construction, 61, 134–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.10.003
  8. [8] Chasanudin, M., Sundari, T., Yulianto, T., Nugroho, M., & Ramadhani, R. (2023). Cost and time comparison analysis of conventional slab with half slab Method for PT. AMP surabaya office building construction. Civilla : Journal teknik sipil universitas Islam lamongan, 8, 145–156. http://dx.doi.org/10.30736/cvl.v8i2.1101
  9. [9] Ardeshir, A., Khodabandeh Lou, A., & Deldade, R. (2017). Selecting the optimal building roof system using the topsis method. International conference on civil engineering, architecture and urban planning of contemporary iran. Tehran, Iran. Civilica. (In Persian). https://civilica.com/doc/708934
  10. [10] Abd. Hamid, Z., Mohamad Kamar, K. A., Mohd. Zain, M. Z., Ghani, K., & Rahim, A. H. A. (2008). Industrialized building system (IBS) in Malaysia: The current state and R&D initiatives. Malaysian construction research journal (MCRJ), 2, 1–13. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285109284
  11. [11] Shadfar, A., & Mohammadi Golafshani, E. (2017). Feasibility study of optimal use of modern roof systems in concrete frame projects using the ideal option similarity method. The fourth national conference on construction and project management. Tehran, Iran. Civilica. (In Persian). https://civilica.com/doc/717046
  12. [12] Ciampoli, M., Petrini, F., & Augusti, G. (2011). Performance-based wind engineering: Towards a general procedure. Structural safety, 33(6), 367–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2011.07.001
  13. [13] Bakhshizadeh, P., & Adib, A. (2017). Comparison of the cost of constructing steel frame buildings with a fixed plan and different number of floors and different lateral load-bearing and roof systems. The fourth national conference on recent achievements in civil engineering, architecture and urban planning. Tehran, Iran. Civilica. (In Persian). https://civilica.com/doc/719287
  14. [14] Pons, O., & Aguado, A. (2012). Integrated value model for sustainable assessment applied to technologies used to build schools in Catalonia, Spain. Building and environment, 53, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.01.007
  15. [15] Marinković, S., Josa, I., Braymand, S., & Tosic, N. (2023). Sustainability assessment of recycled aggregate concrete structures: A critical view on the current state‐of‐knowledge and practice. Structural concrete, 24, 1956–1979. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/suco.202201245

Published

2025-10-03

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 4 (2025): Journal of Civil Aspects and Structural Engineering

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Aghazadeh Rudsari, M. A. (2025). Evaluating the Feasibility of Using Roof Types in Multi-Story Buildings in Terms of Quality, Cost, and Time. Journal of Civil Aspects and Structural Engineering, 2(4), 234-244. https://doi.org/10.48314/jcase.v2i3.67

Similar Articles

41-45 of 45

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.