Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 8

Assignment on QTC

Question
Explain AHP by taking an example from a construction project perspective. Explanation should
identify the objective, steps in performing the AHP for that particular situation and arrive at a
solution.

Prepared By

Avdesh Rawat
CPM GRP-2
Sem-2
A13559018113
1. The Analytic Hierarchy Process and its Foundation

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a methodology for structuring, measurement and

synthesis. The AHP has been applied to a wide range of problem situations: selecting among

competing alternatives in a multi-objective environment, the allocation of scarce resources, and

forecasting. Although it has wide applicability, the axiomatic foundation of the AHP carefully

delimits the scope of the problem environment (Saaty 1986). It is based on the well-defined

mathematical structure of consistent matrices and their associated right-eigenvector's ability to

generate true or approximate weights, Mirkin (1979), Saaty (1980, 1994).

The prime use of the AHP is the resolution of choice problems in a multi-criteria

environment. In that mode, its methodology includes comparisons of objectives and alternatives

in a natural, pairwise manner. The AHP converts individual preferences into ratio-scale weights

that are combined into linear additive weights for the associated alternatives. These resultant

weights are used to rank the alternatives and, thus, assist the decision maker (DM) in making a

choice or forecasting an outcome. The AHP employs three commonly agreed to decision making

steps: (1) Given i = 1, …, m objectives, determine their respective weights wi, (2) For each

objective i, compare the j = 1, …, n alternatives and determine their weights w ij with respect to

objective i, and (3) Determine the final (global) alternative weights (priorities) W j with respect to

all the objectives by Wj = w1jw1 + w2jw2 + … + wmjwm. The alternatives are then ordered by the

Wj, with the most preferred alternative having the largest Wj. The various decision

methodologies

(AHP, Electre, Multi-Attribute Utility Theory) are differentiated by the way they determine the

objective and alternative weights, as prescribed by each one’s axiomatic or rule-based structure.

The general validity of the AHP, and the confidence placed in its ability to resolve multi-
objective decision situations, is based on the many hundreds [now thousands] of diverse

applications in which the AHP results were accepted.

The AHP is more than just a methodology for choice situations. It is not just another analysis

tool. The best way we can explain the AHP is to describe its three basic functions: (1) structuring

complexity, (2) measuring on a ratio scale, and (3) synthesizing.

2. The Development of the AHP

In the late 1960’s, Thomas L. Saaty, an OR pioneer, was directing research projects for the Arms

Control and Disarmament Agency at the U.S. Department of State. Saaty's research agenda, and

very generous budget, enabled him to recruit some of the world’s leading game and utility

theorists and economists. In spite of the talents of the people recruited (three members of the

team, Gerard Debreu, John Harsanyi, and Reinhard Selten, have since won the Nobel Prize),

Saaty was disappointed in the results of the team's efforts. Saaty (1996) later recalled:

“Two things stand out in my mind from that experience. The first is that the theories and

models of the scientists were often too general and abstract to be adaptable to particular

weapon tradeoff needs.


3. EXAMPLE OF CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY WITH REAPECT TO
AHP

3.1 INTRODUCTION
Safety management is a managerial function which safeguards that all safety risks have

been recognized measured& satisfactorily moderated by using the computers to conduct

quality control and risk management of construction for a construction site office. This

method involved actual construction site status inspection records and tracking of

improvement measures, controls measures in construction progress. In construction

industry risk is frequently denoted to as the existence of potential or actual threats or

chances that influence the objectives of a project during construction commissioning or

at a time of use. It is essential to detect all risks involved at all phases of the project so as

their assessment and analysis can be complete accordingly

The management of industrial health and safety in construction consist of unique

challenges. Features of the industry such as dynamic work environment. Construction

safety management techniques have developed significantly following the employment

health and safety act of 1970. Safety research usually operates under the fundamental

assumptions that simply put on more safety programs will create better results.

Construction safety risk management is not where a firm produces revenue but it is a

place does generate profit by decreasing safety risk and thus the possible for loss. In

effect safety risk management structure can be used as a firm approach by Construction

Company to can be earned a competitive position of finest advantage.

3.2 LITERATURE SURVEY

The huge mainstream of construction safety literature emphases on identifying and

describing the several methods of improving site safety strategies such as job hazard
analysis. Each of the publication discussed above operates under the same fundamentals

such as a firm should implement as many safety program elements as their budget

permits.

The determination of this system is to assist construction companies to improve a

standardized quality control and risk management system. To conduct threat

identification, risk calculation and risk control according to the risk management

procedures.

3.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1) Risk & safety identification in construction management

2) Qualitative and quantitative risk analysis.

3) Usage of Analytic Hierarchy Process

3.4 METHODOLOGY

Literature survey was done and based on that risks in construction were identified,

depending on those impacts questioner was developed, analysed from 50 engineers based

on the results ranking was given using (AHP)analytical hierarchy process

Literature survey

Selection of topic

Identification of safety risks

Questioner survey

AHP process

Conclusion
Results and Discussion

3.5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION


The questioner was simplified and solved using analytical hierarchy process by that the
ranking was given.

Ranking Criteria
Quality Quantity Training

Quality 1 2 4

Quantity 1/2 1 3

Training 1/4 1/3 1

Sum 1.75 3.33 8

NORMALISED COLUMN SUMS=

0.58 0.6 0.5


0.28 0.3 0.38
0.14 0.1 0.12

PRIORITY VECTOR X=

0.56
0.32
0.12

Criteria
Quality =0.56
Quantity =0.32
Training =0.12

Calculation of consistency ratio


AX=λmax

A X AX
1 2 4 0.56 1.68

0.5 1 3 0.32 0.98
0.25 0.33 1 0.12 0.36
AX/X=λmax
λmax=3.02 (Avg. of ax and x)
C.I= (λmax-n)/ (n-1)
= (3.02-3)/ (3-1)
=0.02/2

=0.01
CR=CI/RI
RI=0.52 for n=3
RI= (0.01/0.52)=0.019
CR≤ 0.1
8

Ranking Alternatives
Quality Equipment Experience Identify hazard Priority vector
Equipment 1 1/3 4 0.31
Experience 3 1 3 0.57
Identify hazard ¼ 1/3 1 0.12

Quantity Equipment Experience Identify hazard Priority vector


Equipment 1 5 3 0.64
Experience 1/5 1 2 0.20
Identify hazard 1/3 ½ 1 0.16

Training Equipment Experience Identify hazard Priority vector


Equipment 1 4 3 0.62
Experience ¼ 1 2 0.22
Identify hazard 1/3 ½ 1 0.16

Criteria Quality Quantity Training Priority x Rank


Equipment 0.31 0.64 0.62 0.56 0.45
Experience 0.57 0.20 0.22 X 0.32 = 0.40
Identify hazard 0.12 0.16 0.16 0.12 0.15

According to the result obtained on case study through analytic hierarchy process (AHP)

that the preference was given in an order that the equipment, experience and hazard

respectively with quality, quantity and training of workers. In case of equipment quantity,

training and quality comes in an order to be in 45% of total work. Whereas in case of

experience Quality, training and quantity respectively are in order to be in 40% of total

work. And finally in case of hazard identification quantity, training and quality

respectively are in order to be remaining part of percentage of work.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi