Framework for Designing Sustainable Structures through Steel Beam Reuse
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Design for Reuse (DfR)
2.2. Material Bank for Managing Reusable Material Information
2.3. BIM-Based Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Cost
3. Method
3.1. Material Bank Database
3.2. Design Support Tool
3.2.1. Solution Generation
3.2.2. Evaluation of a Solution through LCA and LCC
4. Case Study
5. Discussion
- The use of reusable materials can reduce the CO2 emissions of construction projects. This case study shows that CO2 can be reduced by up to 77%. Although they will depend on the type of construction project and the assumed situation, the results of this study support the conclusions of previous studies [37,63] that material reuse is one of the most effective strategies for reducing CO2 emissions. In particular, most of the CO2 generated during the life cycle of the NBT is generated during the manufacturing process of the material, and reuse is effective because it can most directly reduce the CO2 generated from manufacturing (Figure 10). In the case of the initial Alternative (A), the column, adjustable beam, and rafter beam were replaced with 175, 200, and 200 reusable materials, respectively (Figure 8). The use of reusable materials caused CO2 to be generated due to the modification and longer distance for transportation, but the production of new materials was reduced. Eventually, Alternative (D), with no reuse, generated about 420 tons of CO2, whereas Alternative (A) generated 95 tons of CO2, resulting in a CO2 reduction effect of about 325 tons. In this study, the use of carbon-intensive steel beams reduced carbon emissions significantly, however, the reduction in the CO2 production may vary depending on the type of material. For example, when less CO2 is generated during manufacturing or recycling, the effect of reducing CO2 that can be obtained through reuse may be lower than that obtained with steel beams.
- Material reuse can increase the cost of the project. As a result of this case study, the cost of the alternatives created through the proposed framework was higher in all cases than when no reusable materials were considered. The project costs of Alternatives (A) and (D) were about USD 378 and 270 thousand, respectively. The case study shows that the application of reusable materials increases the cost by up to 40%. In some cases, CO2 and cost reduction cannot be achieved simultaneously when reusable materials are applied. This is consistent with the designers’ concerns [28,29,31] regarding the economic uncertainty of reusable materials. It was proven that reuse is sometimes more expensive than manufacturing new materials [52,74]. Previous studies generated optimal solutions by focusing primarily on the production process of the material without considering the cost of modification for reusable materials [41,42,47]. However, the results of this study show that it is necessary to review the economic feasibility of the previous optimal solutions throughout the life cycle. For example, if the scope of the cost assessment is limited to the material production process, it appears that the cost of the project can be reduced through reuse. However, there are several items that incur costs when reusing materials, such as transportation and modification.
- The process of modifying reusable materials must be included in the cost assessment process. The cost of purchasing reusable materials is generally lower than that of new materials. However, the cost of the entire project may increase due to the cost incurred in the modification process of reusable materials into the desired shape, size, and quality [44,75]. Processing costs can vary greatly, depending on the type, region, and labor cost of the project. In this study, it was observed that as the amount of reusable material increased, the cost for modification increased, and eventually the whole cost of the project increased, compared to the case without reuse (Figure 11). In addition, since it is not easy to determine the remaining life of reusable materials in practice, inspection costs for this may be added. As such, the incidental costs incurred by using reusable materials act as barriers to reuse [29,30,31]. Therefore, from the planning stage, the modification and inspection costs of reusable materials must be considered. In addition, research on automation and simplification of reusable material inspection should be carried out to reduce the cost of reuse projects.
- The most promising strategy to reduce CO2 and cost at the same time is to use the reusable material without changing its shape. However, excessive constraints on the shape of the material can increase the design difficulty and cost. In fact, designers are hesitant to use reusable materials due to concerns about the increase in design difficulty [28,29,31,32]. Therefore, it is necessary to assist the designer through the development of a design tool to generate a design in a required form while minimizing the processing of reusable materials.
- Above all, data on deconstructed structures and reusable materials should be obtained for the operation of the proposed framework. This is because the entire framework will not work without data on reusable materials in the material bank. In particular, materials used in buildings that are about to be deconstructed are not likely to be digitized in the form of a BIM model. Therefore, research should be conducted on a method for automatically constructing existing building and material data and so creating a comprehensive database containing significant amounts of material bank assets. The use of visual data [76], such as photographs or laser scanning data [77], enables the automatic generation of BIM models of existing buildings and will help to increase the number of BIM models, which are assets of material banks.
6. Conclusions
- This study proposed a generalized design framework for reusing steel beams that have a significant environmental impact, thereby enabling the creation of a steel structure design plan and a material procurement plan using reusable materials.
- The case study shows that the reuse of materials is an effective strategy to reduce the CO2 generation of construction projects.
- The results of the case study also show that practical concerns about the economic uncertainty of material reuse are valid. The framework of this study can help project stakeholders overcome this through economic evaluation over the entire life cycle.
- For the application of reusable materials, methods to measure the life and quality of materials with low costs are required. Concerns about the quality of materials and rising costs due to inspection act as barriers to the reuse of materials [28,52]. Therefore, a method for tracking and ensuring material quality and inspecting materials with low costs is also required. Structural health monitoring technology using sensor and vision technology [82] and material monitoring information management technology using RFID, BIM, and digital twin can be considered for automated inspection and reduction of inspection costs.
- The material bank should contain detailed construction process information. For example, the material bank of this study only contains information about the type of connection of the steel beams. However, to construct a structure using steel beams, information on the shape of the connection and the specification of the connecting member is required. In particular, if reusable materials were connected by bolted joints in the past and there is perforation at the joint, the information must be provided to the designer in advance. In addition, information on the connection of materials is needed to determine the reusability of structures and materials. This is because the reusability is affected by the ease of disassembly of the structure, and the difficulty of disassembly varies depending on the connection type of the material [74]. The evaluation of the difficulty of disassembly will help determine whether it is possible to actually extract and use reusable materials from the structure to be deconstructed.
- Optimization of the design plan using reusable materials and the material procurement plan needs to be performed. Because the number of alternatives that can be explored through the designer’s iterative design process is limited, many alternatives need to be explored through the computational optimization process and optimal alternatives derived.
- The precision of LCA and LCC analyses needs to be improved. For example, catering to the inflation rate in the cost evaluation process improves the accuracy of the analysis. Limitations of this study arise owing to the experimental assumptions and limitations of the scope of the LCC analysis. In addition, if data on the flow of materials after the deconstruction of the structure are obtained, it will be possible to evaluate all stages of the life cycle and accurately analyze the benefits of reuse and recycle. Therefore, a more precise analysis will need to be performed in the future.
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Work | Emission Source | Description | Value | Unit |
---|---|---|---|---|
Construction, deconstruction | Crane car | Work time per station | 0.536 | h/station |
Crane car | 5-ton crane car fuel efficiency | 5.1 | L/h | |
Diesel fuel | CO2 emissions of diesel fuel | 2.677 | kg/L | |
- | Construction work cost | 429 | USD/ton | |
- | Deconstruction work cost | 383.47 | USD/ton | |
Modification | Band saw machine | Power consumption of band saw machine | 7.2 | kW |
Band saw machine | Work time per unit | 1/4000 | hour/ea | |
Electricity | CO2 emission from electricity use | 0.495 | kg/kWh | |
Band saw machine | CO2 emission per cutting | 0.0007974 | kg/ea | |
- | Cutting modification cost | 289.02 | USD/ton | |
Bending machine | Power consumption of bending machine | 8.4 | kW | |
- | Work time per unit length | 1/1080 | h/m | |
Bending machine | CO2 emission from 1 m bending | 0.00385 | kg/m | |
- | Bending modification cost | 784.48 | USD/ton | |
Manufacture | Blast furnace | CO2 emission from component manufacturing | 2340 | kg/ton |
- | Component purchase cost | 689.95 | USD/ton | |
- | Purchase cost of reusable steel beam | 429 | USD/ton | |
Transportation | Truck | 25-ton truck fuel efficiency | 23 | L/h |
Diesel fuel | CO2 emission of diesel fuel | 2.677 | kg/L | |
- | Transportation cost per hour | 84.89 | USD/h |
References
- Carvalho, J.P.; Bragança, L.; Mateus, R. Optimising building sustainability assessment using BIM. Autom. Constr. 2019, 102, 170–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ozcan-Deniz, G.; Zhu, Y. Multi-objective optimization of greenhouse gas emissions in highway construction projects. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2017, 28, 162–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ness, D.; Swift, J.; Ranasinghe, D.C.; Xing, K.; Soebarto, V. Smart steel: New paradigms for the reuse of steel enabled by digital tracking and modelling. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 98, 292–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Construction and Demolition Waste (CDW). Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/construction_demolition.htm (accessed on 29 September 2020).
- Chi, B.; Lu, W.; Ye, M.; Bao, Z.; Zhang, X. Construction waste minimization in green building: A comparative analysis of LEED-NC 2009 certified projects in the US and China. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 256, 120749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akinade, O.O.; Oyedele, L.O.; Ajayi, S.O.; Bilal, M.; Alaka, H.A.; Owolabi, H.A.; Arawomo, O.O. Designing out construction waste using BIM technology: Stakeholders’ expectations for industry deployment. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 180, 375–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tuladhar, R.; Yin, S. Sustainability of using recycled plastic fiber in concrete. In Use of Recycled Plastics in Eco-Efficient Concrete, 1st ed.; Pacheco-Torgal, F., Khatib, J., Colangelo, F., Tuladhar, R., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2019; pp. 441–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- OECD HIGHLIGHTS Global Material Resources Outlook to 2060—Economic Drivers and Environmental Consequences. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/environment/waste/highlights-global-material-resources-outlook-to-2060.pdf (accessed on 20 September 2020).
- Cho, S.-H.; Chae, C.-U. The comparative study on the environmental impact assessment of construction material through the application of carbon reducing element-focused on global warming potential of concrete products. KIEAE J. 2015, 15, 147–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- 2017 Energy Consumption Survey. Available online: http://www.keei.re.kr/keei/download/ECS2017.pdf (accessed on 5 November 2020).
- Analysis on the Transition of Steel Demand Structure and Its Implications. Available online: https://www.kiet.re.kr/part/sDownload.jsp?s_idx=39603 (accessed on 5 November 2020).
- Cho, S.; Na, S. The reduction of CO2 emissions by application of high-strength reinforcing bars to three different structural systems in South Korea. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- 2050 Long-Term Low Emission Development Strategy (LEDS). Available online: http://me.go.kr/home/file/readDownloadFile.do?fileId=188872&fileSeq=2 (accessed on 5 November 2020).
- Geissdoerfer, M.; Savaget, P.; Bocken, N.M.P.; Hultink, E.J. The Circular Economy—A new sustainability paradigm? J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 143, 757–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Koutamanis, A. Building information modeling for construction and demolition waste minimization. Adv. Constr. Demolition Waste Recycl. 2020, 101–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paz, D.H.F.; Lafayette, K.P.V.; Sobral, M.C.M. Management of construction and demolition waste using GIS tools. Adv. Constr. Demolition Waste Recycl. 2020, 121–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whicher, A.; Harris, C.; Beverley, K.; Swiatek, P. Design for circular economy: Developing an action plan for Scotland. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 3237–3248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Construction and Demolition Waste: Challenges and Opportunities in a Circular Economy. Available online: https://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/waste/waste-management/construction-and-demolition-waste-challenges (accessed on 29 September 2020).
- Kirchherr, J.; Reike, D.; Hekkert, M. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 127, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeheyis, M.; Hewage, K.; Alam, M.S.; Eskicioglu, C.; Sadiq, R. An overview of construction and demolition waste management in Canada: A lifecycle analysis approach to sustainability. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2013, 15, 81–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kirschen, M.; Risonarta, V.; Pfeifer, H. Energy efficiency and the influence of gas burners to the energy related carbon dioxide emissions of electric arc furnaces in steel industry. Energy 2009, 34, 1065–1072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steel Scrap Introduction. Available online: http://www.kosia.kr/iron/iron_01.php (accessed on 5 November 2020).
- Dongkuk Steel Environmental Report 2019. Available online: http://www.dongkuk.com/upload/promotion/print/f06eac15-77ff-40f7-9713-7bb18527fda6.pdf (accessed on 5 November 2020).
- Jouri, K. Design for Deconstruction in the Design Process: State of the Art. Buildings 2018, 8, 150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Akinade, O.O.; Oyedele, L.O.; Ajayi, S.O.; Bilal, M.; Alaka, H.A.; Owolabi, H.A.; Bello, S.A.; Jaiyeoba, B.E.; Kadiri, K.O. Design for Deconstruction (DfD): Critical success factors for diverting end-of-life waste from landfills. Waste Manag. 2017, 60, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hradil, P.; Talja, A.; Wahlström, M.; Huuhka, S.; Lahdensivu, J.; Pikkuvirta, J. Re-Use of Structural Elements; VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland: Espoo, Finland, 2014; ISBN 9789513881979. [Google Scholar]
- Burgan, B.A.; Sansom, M.R. Sustainable steel construction. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2006, 62, 1178–1183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Densley Tingley, D.; Cooper, S.; Cullen, J. Understanding and overcoming the barriers to structural steel reuse, a UK perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 148, 642–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rose, C. Systems for Reuse, Repurposing and Upcycling of Existing Building Components; UCL (University College London): London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Gorgolewski, M.; Ergun, D. Closed-loop materials systems. In Proceedings of the Sustainable Buildings Conference, Coventry University, Coventry, UK, 18–21 August 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Allwood, J.M.; Cullen, J.M.; Carruth, M.A.; Cooper, D.R.; McBrien, M.; Milford, R.L.; Moynihan, M.C.; Patel, A.C. Sustainable Materials: With both Eyes Open; UIT: Cambridge, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Hemström, K.; Palm, D.; Lindblom, J.; Vegas, I.J.; Lisbona, A.; Horckmans, L.; Ratman-kłosińska, I.; Ferrando, V. Characterisation of supply chain for reused building components in Europe. In Proceedings of the WASCON 2012 Conference, Göteborg, Sweden, 30 May–1 June 2012; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Pieroni, M.P.P.; McAloone, T.C.; Pigosso, D.C.A. Business model innovation for circular economy and sustainability: A review of approaches. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 215, 198–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moynihan, M.C.; Allwood, J.M. The flow of steel into the construction sector. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2012, 68, 88–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steel Statistics—Steel Products Production. Available online: https://www.kosa.or.kr/eng/ (accessed on 5 November 2020).
- Dunant, C.F.; Drewniok, M.P.; Sansom, M.; Corbey, S.; Cullen, J.M.; Allwood, J.M. Options to make steel reuse profitable: An analysis of cost and risk distribution across the UK construction value chain. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 183, 102–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iacovidou, E.; Purnell, P. Mining the physical infrastructure: Opportunities, barriers and interventions in promoting structural components reuse. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 557–558, 791–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Energy GHG Total Information Platform Service—Steel—Industry Introduction. Available online: http://tips.energy.or.kr/overconsector/overconsector_view_01.do?code_num=MI&ch_code_num=MI01 (accessed on 5 November 2020).
- Korea LCI DB. Available online: http://www.epd.or.kr/eng/lci/lciIntro00.do (accessed on 16 July 2019).
- Buragienė, S.; Šarauskis, E.; Romaneckas, K.; Sasnauskienė, J.; Masilionytė, L.; Kriaučiūnienė, Z. Experimental analysis of CO2 emissions from agricultural soils subjected to five different tillage systems in Lithuania. Sci. Total Environ. 2015, 514, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pongiglione, M.; Calderini, C. Material savings through structural steel reuse: A case study in Genoa. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2014, 86, 87–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brütting, J.; Desruelle, J.; Senatore, G.; Fivet, C. Design of truss structures through reuse. Structures 2019, 18, 128–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brütting, J.; Senatore, G.; Schevenels, M.; Fivet, C. Optimum design of frame structures from a stock of reclaimed elements. Front. Built Environ. 2020, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, A.K.; Wang, Y.; Alvarado, J.L. Facilitating industrial symbiosis to achieve circular economy using value-added by design: A case study in transforming the automobile industry sheet metal waste-flow into Voronoi facade systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 234, 1033–1044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gorgolewski, M. The implications of reuse and recycling for the design of steel buildings. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 2006, 33, 489–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilmore, P.C.; Gomory, R.E. A linear programming approach to the cutting stock problem-part II. Oper. Res. 1963, 11, 863–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bertin, I.; Mesnil, R.; Jaeger, J.M.; Feraille, A.; Le Roy, R. A BIM-based framework and databank for reusing load-bearing structural elements. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cai, G.; Waldmann, D. A material and component bank to facilitate material recycling and component reuse for a sustainable construction: Concept and preliminary study. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2019, 21, 2015–2032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jayasinghe, L.B.; Waldmann, D. Development of a BIM-based web tool as a material and component bank for a sustainable construction industry. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Honic, M.; Kovacic, I.; Rechberger, H. Improving the recycling potential of buildings through material passports (MP): An Austrian case study. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 217, 787–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arora, M.; Raspall, F.; Cheah, L.; Silva, A. Residential building material stocks and component-level circularity: The case of Singapore. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 216, 239–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smeets, A.; Wang, K.; Drewniok, M. Can Material Passports lower financial barriers for structural steel re-use? IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 2019, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hollberg, A.; Genova, G.; Habert, G. Evaluation of BIM-based LCA results for building design. Autom. Constr. 2020, 109, 102972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, R.; Costa, A.A.; Silvestre, J.D.; Pyl, L. Integration of LCA and LCC analysis within a BIM-based environment. Autom. Constr. 2019, 103, 127–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eleftheriadis, S.; Mumovic, D.; Greening, P. Life cycle energy efficiency in building structures: A review of current developments and future outlooks based on BIM capabilities. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 67, 811–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kensek, K. BIM guidelines inform facilities management databases: A case study over time. Buildings 2015, 5, 899–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ding, L.; Zhou, Y.; Akinci, B. Building Information Modeling (BIM) application framework: The process of expanding from 3D to computable nD. Autom. Constr. 2014, 46, 82–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeong, K.; Ji, C.; Koo, C.; Hong, T.; Park, H.S. A model for predicting the environmental impacts of educational facilities in the project planning phase. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 107, 538–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Organization for Standardization. Environmental Management: Life Cycle Assessment; Principles and Framework ISO14040; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- International Organization for Standardization. Environmental Management: Life Cycle Assessment; Requirements and Guidelines ISO14044; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- U.S. Life Cycle Inventory Database. Available online: https://www.nrel.gov/lci/ (accessed on 16 July 2019).
- Chardon, S.; Brangeon, B.; Bozonnet, E.; Inard, C. Construction cost and energy performance of single family houses: From integrated design to automated optimization. Autom. Constr. 2016, 70, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeung, J.; Walbridge, S.; Haas, C. The role of geometric characterization in supporting structural steel reuse decisions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 104, 120–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Industry Foundation Classes IFC4 Official Release. Available online: https://standards.buildingsmart.org/IFC/RELEASE/IFC4/ADD2_TC1/HTML/ (accessed on 30 August 2020).
- Salem, O.; Shahin, A.; Khalifa, Y. Minimizing cutting wastes of reinforcement steel bars using genetic algorithms and integer programming models. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2007, 133, 982–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.H.; Huang, H.C.; Cai, H.Y.; Chen, P.F. A Genetic Algorithm Approach for the Multiple Length Cutting Stock Problem. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 1st Global Conference on Life Sciences and Technologies (LifeTech), Osaka, Japan, 12–14 March 2019; pp. 162–165. [Google Scholar]
- Gurobi Cutting Stock Problem with Multiple Master Rolls. Available online: https://www.gurobi.com/resource/cutting-stock-problem-with-multiple-master-rolls-2/ (accessed on 30 August 2020).
- EN 15978:2011. Sustainability of Construction Works—Assessment of Environmental Performance of Buildings—Calculation Method; The British Standards Institution: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Broun, R.; Menzies, G.F. Life cycle energy and environmental analysis of partition wall systems in the UK. Procedia Eng. 2011, 21, 864–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ahn, H.; Kim, I.; Park, J.-B.; Lee, J.H.; Kim, G.S. Analysis of research trend and development direction on domestic and international noise barriers. J. Korean Soc. Environ. Eng. 2012, 34, 847–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Better Steel, Lower Impacts. Available online: https://www.buildinggreen.com/feature/better-steel-lower-impacts (accessed on 5 November 2020).
- McNeel Rhinoceros. Available online: https://www.rhino3d.com (accessed on 5 November 2020).
- Asuni VisualARQ. Available online: https://www.visualqrq.com (accessed on 5 November 2020).
- Durmisevic, E.; Beurskens, P.R.; Adrosevic, R.; Westerdijk, R. Systemic view on reuse potential of building elements, components and systems-comprehensive framework for assessing reuse potential of building elements. In Proceedings of the International HISER Conference on Advances in Recycling and Management of Construction and Demolition Waste, Delft, The Netherlands, 21–23 June 2017; pp. 275–280. [Google Scholar]
- Gorgolewski, M. Designing with reused building components: Some challenges. Build. Res. Inf. 2008, 36, 175–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Volk, R.; Stengel, J.; Schultmann, F. Building Information Modeling (BIM) for existing buildings—Literature review and future needs. Autom. Constr. 2014, 38, 109–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yang, L.; Cheng, J.C.P.; Wang, Q. Semi-automated generation of parametric BIM for steel structures based on terrestrial laser scanning data. Autom. Constr. 2020, 112, 103037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vesikari, E.; Landolfo, R. Durability and Service Life Prediction Methodologies. In Proceedings of the Seminar of the COST Action C25 on Sustainability of Constructions-Integrated Approach to Life-Time Structural Engineering, Dresden, Germany, 6–7 October 2008; pp. 4.3–4.10. [Google Scholar]
- International Organization for Standardization. Buildings and Constructed Assets—Service Life Planning—Part 2: Service Life Prediction Procedures ISO 15686-2; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Akanbi, L.A.; Oyedele, L.O.; Akinade, O.O.; Ajayi, A.O.; Davila Delgado, M.; Bilal, M.; Bello, S.A. Salvaging building materials in a circular economy: A BIM-based whole-life performance estimator. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 129, 175–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keller, P.; McConnell, J.; Schumacher, T.; Thostenson, E.T. Construction Stress Monitoring Using a Wireless Sensor Network to Evaluate Reuse Potential of Structural Steel. J. Struct. Eng. 2019, 145, 04019143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bao, Y.; Chen, Z.; Wei, S.; Xu, Y.; Tang, Z.; Li, H. The State of the Art of Data Science and Engineering in Structural Health Monitoring. Engineering 2019, 5, 234–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Categories | Attribute | Description | Reference |
---|---|---|---|
General information | Identifier | Identification code for each beam | [47,49] |
Usage | Previous usage of steel beam (ifcColumn/ifcBeam) | [47,49] | |
Specification | Specification code (American Society for Testing and Materials, Korean Standard, etc.) | - | |
Reusability | Purchase availability of steel beam (True/False) | [49,63] | |
Location | Current location of steel beam (longitude and latitude) | [49] | |
Unit cost | Unit cost of steel beam | [47,63] | |
Geometry (shape) | Type | Shape of profile (Asymmetric/I/Circle/C/Ellipse/I/L/Rectangle/ Trapezium/T/U/Z) | [64] |
Dimensions | Width x Height x Web thickness x Flange thickness | [47,49,63] | |
Radius | Radius of circular profile | - | |
Length | Length of steel beam | [47,49,63] | |
Curvature | Curvature of steel beam | - | |
Physical properties | Material | Type of material | [47,49,50,63] |
Connection type | Type of connection before disassembly (Rivet/Bolted/Welded) | [25] | |
Unit weight | Weight of steel beam per 1 m | [47,49,50] | |
Yield strength | Yield strength of steel beam | [47,49,63] | |
Tensile strength | Tensile strength of steel beam | [47,49,63] | |
Extension | Extension value of steel beam | [47,49,63] | |
Remaining life | Predicted remaining life of the steel beam | [50,63] | |
Chemical properties | Chemical composition | Chemical composition data table of steel beam | [49] |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kim, S.; Kim, S.-A. Framework for Designing Sustainable Structures through Steel Beam Reuse. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9494. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229494
Kim S, Kim S-A. Framework for Designing Sustainable Structures through Steel Beam Reuse. Sustainability. 2020; 12(22):9494. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229494
Chicago/Turabian StyleKim, Seongjun, and Sung-Ah Kim. 2020. "Framework for Designing Sustainable Structures through Steel Beam Reuse" Sustainability 12, no. 22: 9494. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229494