Structural safety evaluation of commercial buildings in operation andmaintenance phase based on combined empowerment and improved TOPSIS

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.10.1605

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to prevent structural safety accidents in commercial buildings during the operation and maintenance phase and enhance the objectivity and accuracy of structural safety assessments for commercial buildings, the following steps were taken: First, a structural safety evaluation system for the operation and maintenance phase of commercial buildings was established. The weights of each evaluation indicator within the system were determined using a combined objective-subjective weighting method based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Criteria Importance Through Intercriteria Correlation (CRITIC) method. Second, by incorporating the improved TOPSIS method with interval numbers, the interval values of safety evaluation indicators corresponding to different structural safety levels of commercial buildings were determined, yielding relative proximity values under different safety condition levels. Finally, taking a commercial complex building in Changsha City as an example, the safety condition was evaluated based on on-site inspection data, and the results were compared with those from the inspection report issued by a professional inspection institution after appraisal to verify the accuracy and applicability of the established indicator system and calculation results. The study indicates that by combining industry standards and expert experience to establish the evaluation indicator system, and using the combined weighting method and the interval-based TOPSIS evaluation method improved with interval numbers on the basis of existing research, the objectivity and accuracy of structural safety assessment for commercial buildings can be enhanced.

Key words: commercial building, operations and maintenance phase, structural safety evaluation, combination weighting, technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS)

CLC Number:

X913.4安全系统工程

CHEN Dachuan, DUAN Xiaofeng, CHEN Mingsi, WEN Zhengdong, SHI Jinsong. Structural safety evaluation of commercial buildings in operation andmaintenance phase based on combined empowerment and improved TOPSIS[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(10): 140-148.

Figures/Tables 8

Fig.1

Fig.2

Table 1

Table 2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Table 3

Table 4

References 13

[1]	路世昌, 倪照鹏, 刘鑫, 等. 大型商业综合体消防安全管理探讨[J]. 消防科学与技术, 2019, 38(12): 1752-1755.
	LU Shichang, NI Zhaopeng, LIU Xin, et al. Study on fire safety management of large commercial complexes[J]. Fire Science and Technology, 2019, 38(12): 1752-1755.
[2]	刘勇, 徐志胜, 赵望达. 商业综合体人员密度调查与分析[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2015, 11(5): 175-180.
	LIU Yong, XU Zhisheng, ZHAO Wangda. Investigation and analysis on personnel density in commercial complex[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2015, 11(5): 175-180.
[3]	乔雄, 刘文高, 倪伟淋, 等. 基于爆破荷载等效施加方法的振动波形预测与古建筑安全评估[J]. 地震工程学报, 2024, 46(1): 16-25.
	QIAO Xiong, LIU Wen'gao, NI Weilin, et al. Prediction of vibration waveform and a safety assessment of ancient buildings based on the equivalent simulation method of blasting load[J]. China Earthquake Engineering Journal, 2024, 46(1): 16-25.
[4]	杨斯玲, 黄和平, 刘伟, 等. 基于结构熵权和修正证据理论的装配式建筑施工安全风险评价[J]. 安全与环境工程, 2019, 26(6): 143-149, 153.
	YANG Siling, HUANG Heping, LIU Wei, et al, Safety risk assessment of prefabricated building construction based on structure entropy weight and modified evidence theory[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2019, 26(6): 143-149, 153.
[5]	HUAN Junzhong, MA Donghui, WANG Wei, et al. Safety-state evaluation model based on structural entropy weight-matter element extension method for ancient timber architecture[J]. Advances in Structural Engineering, 2020, 23(6): 1087-1097. doi: 10.1177/1369433219886085
[6]	SHEN Zhouyang, PAN Peng, ZHANG Dongbin, et al. Rapid structural safety assessment using a deep neural network[J]. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2022, 26(5): 2625-2641. doi: 10.1080/13632469.2020.1785586
[7]	周海怡, 鲍全贵, 叶茂, 等. 基于组合赋权法的城市桥梁可靠性模糊综合评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(增1): 156-161.
	ZHOU Haiyi, BAO Quangui, YE Mao, et al. Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of urban bridge reliability based on combination weighting method[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(S1):156-161. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.S1.2494
[8]	GB 50292—2015, 民用建筑可靠性鉴定标准[S].
	GB 50292-2015, Standard for appraisal of reliability of civil buildings[S].
[9]	江杰, 汤娟, 甘雨, 等. 基于组合赋权法的建筑结构安全评价[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2021, 21(17): 7278-7285.
	JIANG Jie, TANG Juan, GAN Yu, et al. Safety evaluation of building structure based on combination weighting method[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2021, 21(17): 7278-7285.
[10]	魏海霞, 赵明, 祝杰. 基于模糊层次分析法的建筑结构安全评价体系研究[J]. 水利与建筑工程学报, 2019, 17(5): 181-186, 198.
	WEI Haixia, ZHAO Ming, ZHU Jie. Safety evaluation system of building structure based on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process[J]. Journal of Water Resources and Architectural Engineering, 2019, 17(5): 181-186, 198.
[11]	HWANG C L, YOON K. Multiple attribute decision making methods and applications[M]. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 1981: 12-23.
[12]	陈文强, 杨睿孜, 赵宇飞, 等. 基于组合权重-TOPSIS的岩质边坡稳定性评价[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2022, 22(3): 1198-1206.
	CHEN Wenqiang, YANG Ruizi, ZHAO Yufei, et al. Rock slope stability evaluation based on combined weighted and TOPSIS[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2022, 22(3):1198-1206.
[13]	段在鹏, 李帆, 郭进, 等. 城市易涝区房屋结构安全集成预警模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(7):173-180. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.07.0759
	DUAN Zaipeng, LI Fan, GUO Jin, et al. Integrated warning model for structural safety of buildings in urban waterlogged area[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(7):173-180. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.07.0759

第一层次指标	第二层次指标	第一层次指标权重	第二层次指标主观权	第二层次指标一致性检验	第二层次指标客观权重	第二层次指标综合权重
M₁	N₁₁	0.368	0.38	通过	0.31	0.464
	N₁₂		0.46		0.21	0.380
	N₁₃		0.07		0.18	0.050
	N₁₄		0.09		0.30	0.106
M₂	N₂₁	0.232	0.09	通过	0.24	0.087
	N₂₂		0.05		0.26	0.052
	N₂₃		0.54		0.25	0.541
	N₂₄		0.32		0.25	0.321
M₃	N₃₁	0.123	0.25	通过	0.22	0.225
	N₃₂		0.05		0.28	0.057
	N₃₃		0.58		0.25	0.594
	N₃₄		0.12		0.25	0.123
M₄	N₄₁	0.166	0.69	通过	0.48	0.797
	N₄₂		0.25		0.28	0.168
	N₄₃		0.06		0.24	0.035
M₅	N₅₁	0.076	0.64	通过	0.45	0.758
	N₅₂		0.08		0.31	0.065
	N₅₃		0.28		0.24	0.177
M₆	N₆₁	0.035	0.28	通过	0.42	0.342
	N₆₂		0.07		0.26	0.053
	N₆₃		0.65		0.32	0.605

第一层次指标	第二层次指标	指标取值
第一层次指标	第二层次指标	A级	B级	C级	D级
M₁	N₁₁	(1.0,2.0]	(0.95,1.0]	(0.9,0.95]	(0,0.9]
	N₁₂	(1.0,2.0]	(0.95,1.0]	(0.9,0.95]	(0,0.9]
	N₁₃	(0,1]	(1,2]	(2,5]	(5,10]
	N₁₄	(1.0,2.0]	(0.95,1.0]	(0.90,0.95]	(0,0.9]
M₂	N₂₁	(1.0,2.0]	(0.95,1.0]	(0.9,0.95]	(0,0.9]
	N₂₂	(0,1/300]	(1/300,1/250]	(1/250,1/200]	(1/200,1/10]
	N₂₃	(75,100] 连接方式正确, 无缺陷	(50,75] 连接方式正确, 局部表面有缺陷	(25,50] 连接方式不当, 结构构件有缺陷	(0,25] 连接方式不当, 构件明显有严重缺陷
	N₂₄	(0,0.1]	(0.1,0.5]	(0.5,1]	(1,10]
M₃	N₃₁	(1.0,2.0]	(0.95,1.0]	(0.9,0.95]	(0,0.9]
	N₃₂	(0,1/300]	(1/300,1/275]	(1/275,1/250]	(1/250,1/10]
	N₃₃	(75,100] 连接方式正确, 无缺陷	(50,75] 连接方式正确, 局部表面有缺陷	(25,50] 连接方式不当, 结构构件有缺陷	(0,25] 连接方式不当, 构件明显有严重缺陷
	N₃₄	(0,0.1]	(0.1,0.5]	(0.5,0.7]	(0.7,10]
M₄	N₄₁	(0,12]	(12,24]	(24,35]	(35,50]
	N₄₂	(0,1/250]	(1/250,1/200]	(1/200,1/100]	(1/100,1/10]
	N₄₃	(0,0.1]	(0.1,0.5]	(0.5,1]	(1,10]
M₅	N₅₁	(1/30,1/10]	(1/35,1/30]	(1/40,1/35]	(0,1/40]
	N₅₂	(0,1/300]	(1/300,1/275]	(1/275,1/250]	(1/250,1/10]
	N₅₃	(0,0.1]	(0.1,0.2]	(0.2,0.4]	(0.4,10]
M₆	N₆₁	(75,100] 楼梯无变形, 强度满足要求	(50,75] 楼梯变形较小, 强度满足要求	(25,50] 楼梯局部破损、变形严重,局部强度不满足要求	(0,25] 楼梯大部分破损、变形严重,不满足要求
	N₆₂	(75,100] 门窗强度高,无变形	(50,75] 门窗强度较高,基本无变形或变形较小	(25,50] 门窗强度一般,部分门窗变形严重	(0,25] 门窗强度差,多数门窗变形严重
	N₆₃	(75,100] 屋顶强度和刚度良好,无破损	(50,75] 屋顶强度和刚度良好,破损较小	(25,50] 屋顶强度和刚度一般,破损裂缝明显	(0,25] 屋顶强度和刚度较差,破损裂缝明显

E	结构安全等级
(0,0.439 8]	D
(0.439 8,0.530 3]	C
(0.530 3,0.620 5]	B
(0.620 5,1]	A

第一层次指标	第二层次指标	指标取值
M₁	N₁₁	[0.93,0.98]
	N₁₂	[0.96,1.02]
	N₁₃	[2,3.45]
	N₁₄	[0.90,1.02]
M₂	N₂₁	[0.95,1.03]
	N₂₂	[1/300,1/250]
	N₂₃	[70,80]
	N₂₄	[0.1,0.3]
M₃	N₃₁	[0.95,1.03]
	N₃₂	[0,1/300]
	N₃₃	[75,85]
	N₃₄	[0.1,0.3]
M₄	N₄₁	[15,18]
	N₄₂	[0,1/250]
	N₄₃	[0.1,0.3]
M₅	N₅₁	[1/35,1/30]
	N₅₂	[0,1/300]
	N₅₃	[0.1,0.3]
M₆	N₆₁	[80,90]
	N₆₂	[75,80]
	N₆₃	[85,90]

[1]	ZHU Lianbo, YU Zhiqi, TAO Yu, FANG Haixiang. Maturity evaluation of safety management in smart construction site based on trio spaces [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(9): 36-44.
[2]	CAO Yanxi, MA Hongyan, WANG Shun. Fire temperature field prediction in commercial buildings based on FDS [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(8): 213-218.
[3]	HAO Hongxun, ZHAO Zehai, HUANG Cheng, XU Jiahui. Situational awareness evaluation of flight trainees based on combined weighting cloud model [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(10): 36-43.
[4]	XIE Kefan, ZUO Lingyu, PENG Huatao. Key patent analysis of China's power grid intelligent safety technology [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(9): 59-68.
[5]	JIANG Fuchuan, YANG Hao, WANG Hao, JIN Fengchun, AN Zewen. Coal mine safety investment decision model based on combination empowerment and SPA-TOPSIS [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(8): 86-92.
[6]	WANG Lili, GU Qiuli. Study on multidimensional quantification of individual workload of controllers [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(6): 1-9.
[7]	PAN Hanchuan, LIU Danyang, ZHANG Yurui, LIU Zhigang, SHANG Bin. Urban rail transit line operation safety evaluation based on combined weighting-extension cloud method [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(4): 160-166.
[8]	ZHOU Enyi, TAN Lu, HU Jinrong. Fire safety assessment of urban buildings [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(3): 179-185.
[9]	ZHOU Haiyi, BAO Quangui, YE Mao, ZHU Shengwen, LIN Yingdian. Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of urban bridge reliability based on combination weighting method [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(S1): 156-161.
[10]	SHI Hongkai, QI Yun, ZHANG Guoen, JIANG Xiaoyu, HE Xiang, SUN Yuanhang. Risk assessment of coal and gas outburst based on combination weighting and grey clustering [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(S1): 52-57.
[11]	ZHANG Rendong, ZHANG Lijing, TAO Gang. Research on inherent safety of chemical process based on fuzzy reasoning-combination weighting [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(8): 149-155.
[12]	LIU Xin, LI Shuyu, WANG Haining. Research on emergency supplies classification and reserve strategy for chemical industry parks based on Kraljic matrix [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(11): 221-230.
[13]	ZHANG Miao. Risk assessment of metro operation based on G1-EW combination weighting cloud model [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(6): 163-170.
[14]	KUANG Yujie, ZHAO Jiahong. Location and routing of dangerous goods' storage and transportation under continuous time-varying risks [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(4): 185-191.
[15]	LUO Fuzhou, YUAN Huiqing, ZHANG Yang. Assessment on fire safety resilience of old industrial building regeneration projects [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(3): 167-173.