4.6 Article

Selection of a Sustainable Structural Beam Material for Rural Housing in Latin America by Multicriteria Decision Methods Means

Journal

APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL
Volume 12, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/app12031393

Keywords

material selection; naturals; composites; multicriteria decision; simulation; earthquake

Funding

  1. Parque de Energias Renovables - Universidad International SEK [P121819]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Latin America needs more accessible housing in rural areas, but cost, accessibility, and seismic events are challenges. To address this, the study suggests using affordable and seismic-resistant alternative materials. Bamboo was found to be the best choice based on mechanical, environmental, and price factors.
Latin America presents the need of more accessible housing in the rural areas of the region; however, problems that this populations have to face are cost, accessibility and seismic events that leave structural damages in the buildings of the population, raising the need of resisting permanent housing or temporary shelter. Moreover, the conventional steel materials are not always affordable, which makes us consider the utilization of alternative sustainable materials that are easier to reach and with a seismic resistance. In this sense, the conditions of an earthquake are simulated, specialized software selects and recreates candidate materials and multicriteria decision methods make the final selection of the best material to be evaluated in a simulation. In this way, it has been found that a beam must resist an effort of 5.96 MPa, candidate materials are composites and naturals, and considering mechanical, environmental and price aspects, the decision methods chose the bamboo as the best material. Lastly, another simulation validates the selection, allowing us to conclude that the multicriteria decision methods used succeeded to find the best alternative.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available