Building Value Assessment and Protection Model under Catastrophe Risk

Authors

  • Can Shen
  • Chenlu Wang
  • Zixuan Zhao

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/r13rty23

Keywords:

Risk Management, EWM-AHP, Catastrophe Risk, Value Assessment.

Abstract

In recent years, with the change in the global environment, the frequency of catastrophes has been increasing, which poses a great threat to people's property and life safety. Many landmark buildings have high historical or economic value, and it is important to assess the value of these buildings and develop conservation plans. To evaluate the value of the building, this article first established the POT model to evaluate the risk of the building location. Then, based on the EWM-AHP method, we selected the first-level indicators and the second-level indicators to establish the value evaluation model of the building and used the logic function to establish the protection model through data fitting. According to the comprehensive analysis of the risk assessment and the value assessment of the building, the building protection measures are divided into three types: unprotected, reinforced, and relocated. It is applied to the church of San Marco in Venice, and it is concluded that the area needs to be reinforced. The establishment of the model is of great significance to the evaluation and protection of buildings.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ünel F B, Yalpır Ş. Valuations of building plots using the AHP method[J]. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 2019.

Wang L, Li W, Feng W, et al. Fire risk assessment for building operation and maintenance based on BIM technology[J]. Building and Environment, 2021, 205: 108188.

Sun R, Zhang S Q, Wang C X, etc. Risk analysis of drought loss in Sichuan Province [J]. Meteorological science and technology,2021,49(02):260-268.

Shao T W, Ran G H. Agricultural natural disasters based on POT-GPD loss distribution VAR estimation [J]. Statistical research,2011.28(7):79-83.

Saputra M P A, Sukono, Chaerani D. Estimation of maximum potential losses for digital banking transaction risks using the extreme value-at-risks method[J]. Risks, 2022, 10(1): 10.

Cebrian A C, Denuit M, Lambert P. Generalized pareto fit to the society of actuaries’ large claims database[J]. North American Actuarial Journal,2003.7(3):18-36.

Kumar R, Singh S, Bilga P S, et al. Revealing the benefits of entropy weights method for multi-objective optimization in machining operations: A critical review[J]. Journal of materials research and technology, 2021, 10: 1471-1492.

Prieto A J, Vásquez V, Silva A, et al. Protection value and functional service life of heritage timber buildings[J]. Building research & information, 2019, 47(5): 567-584.

Berardi U, Jafarpur P. Assessing the impact of climate change on building heating and cooling energy demand in Canada[J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2020, 121: 109681.

Zhu Y, Tian D, Yan F. Effectiveness of entropy weight method in decision-making[J]. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2020, 2020: 1-5.

Shao M, Han Z, Sun J, et al. A review of multi-criteria decision making applications for renewable energy site selection[J]. Renewable Energy, 2020, 157: 377-403.

Darko A, Chan A P C, Ameyaw E E, et al. Review of application of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in construction[J]. International journal of construction management, 2019, 19(5): 436-452.

Leal J E. AHP-express: A simplified version of the analytical hierarchy process method[J]. MethodsX, 2020, 7: 100748.

Downloads

Published

16-05-2024