SELECTION OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT WITH MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION MAKING METHOD FOR THE PURCHASE OPERATION IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

Year 2025, Volume: 13 Issue: 4, 1305 - 1317, 01.12.2025

Şahin Tolga Güvel

https://doi.org/10.36306/konjes.1610721

Abstract

In the construction industry, especially in infrastructure construction, the purchase of construction equipment is an important investment decision in terms of operational efficiency. In this process, many factors such as purchase cost, total working hour, model year, fuel consumption, service network, operation and maintenance cost, should be considered. Increasing the number of factors to be considered can make the decision-making process complex. In such cases, the use of decision support techniques will help decision makers to make the most accurate decision. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of the AHP technique in the purchase of heavy construction equipment in the construction sector. In the evaluation of the alternatives determined by the purchasing unit, eight criteria were used, four quantitative and four qualitative. Data regarding quantitative criteria were obtained through market research conducted by the purchasing department, and data regarding qualitative criteria were obtained through face-to-face surveys with four experts. For the analysis, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique, which is widely used for decision support purposes, was used, and the criterion with the highest importance weight was determined as the periodic maintenance cost. The results obtained from the study show that multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods are effective to help decision makers in the purchase of heavy equipment in the construction industry.

Keywords

Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) , Heavy Construction Equipment Purchasing , Multi-criteria Group Decision Making

Ethical Statement

The paper is carried out in accordance with ethical standards.

Supporting Institution

No specific funding for this study was received from commercial, public or non-profit organizations.

References

• X. Zhu, X. Meng, and M. Zhang, “Applıcatıon of multıple crıterıa decısıon makıng methods ın constructıon: a systematıc lıterature revıew,” Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 372–403, 2021.
• A. C. G. Kısa and S. Perçin, “Application of integrated fuzzy DEMATEL-fuzzy VIKOR approach to machine selection problem,” Journal of Yasar University, vol. 12, no. 48, pp. 249-256, 2017.
• A. Shapira and M. Goldenberg, “AHP-based equipment selection model for construction,” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., vol. 131, no. 12, pp. 1263-1273, 2005.
• M. Goldenberg and A. Shapira, “Systematic evaluation of construction equipment alternatives: case study,” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., vol. 133, no. 1, pp. 72-85, 2007.
• C. C. Sun, “A performance evaluation model by integrating fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 37, pp. 7745–7754, 2010.
• R. Karim and C. L. Karmaker, “Machine selection by AHP and TOPSIS methods,” American Journal of Industrial Engineering, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 7-13, 2016.
• J. Antuchevičienė, E. K. Zavadskas, and A. Zakarevičius, “Multiple criteria construction management decisions considering relations between criteria,” Technological and Economic Development of Economy, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 109–125, 2010.
• A. Y. Chamzini and S. H.Yakhchali, “Tunnel boring machine (TBM) selection using fuzzy multicriteria decision making methods,” Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, vol. 30, pp. 194–204, 2012.
• K. B. Kurtay, H. A. Dağıstanlı, and S. Erol, “Integration of analytical hierarchy process and gray relational analysis methods for plastic pipe and welding machine selection problem,” The Journal of Defense Sciences, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 267-291, 2021.
• B. G. Tolun and A. Tümtürk, “Machine selection using integration of AHP and grey relational analysis: application in agricultural machinery production enterprise,” Yönetim ve Ekonomi, vol:27, no. 1, pp. 21-34, 2020.
• S. Gürgen and İ. Altın, “Assessıng key factors ın marıne maın engıne selectıon usıng fuzzy AHP method,” Mersin Üniversitesi Denizcilik ve Lojistik Araştırmaları Dergisi, vol:5, no. 1, pp. 57-79, 2023.
• Z. Stirbanovic, D. Stanujkic, I. Miljanovic, D. Milanovic, “Application of MCDM methods for flotation machine selection”, Minerals Engineering, 137, p.140-146, 2019.
• J. Biluca, C. R. Aguiar, and F. Trojan, “Sorting of suitable areas for disposal of construction and demolition waste using GIS and ELECTRE TRI,” Waste Management, vol. 114, pp. 307–320, 2020.
• Y. Wang, S. Tao, X. Chen, F. Huang, X. Xu, X. Liu, and Y. Liu, “Method multi-criteria decision-making method for site selection analysis and evaluation of urban integrated energy stations based on geographic information system,” Renewable Energy, vol. 194, pp. 273-292, 2022.
• Ç. Karabıçak, A. İ. Boyacı, M. K. Akay, and B. Özcan, “Multi criteria decision making methods and an application for selectıon highway construction site,” Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, no.13, pp. 107-121, 2016.
• S. Dinç, M. Hamurcu, and T. Eren, “Multicriteria decision making aided 0-1 goal programming model for selection of station location in the Ankara-Sivas high speed rail line,” Demiryolu Mühendisliği Dergisi, vol. 9, pp. 1-16, 2019.
• E. İ. Çetin, Y. Akil, and A. I. Güler, “Decision making with fuzzy analytic hierarchy process in construction projects,” International Journal of Management Economics and Business, vol. 10, no. 23, pp. 173-190, 2014.
• S. Taşkaya and N. Ulutaş “Determining the most suitable restaurant areas for investment by GIS, the case of Tunceli,” OKU Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 134-141, 2021.
• M. U. Gumusay, G. Koseoglu, and T. Bakirman, “An assessment of site suitability for marina construction in Istanbul, Turkey, using GIS and AHP multicriteria decision analysis,” Environ Monit Assess, vol. 188, no. 677, pp.1-15, 2016.
• Z. Çolak, “A hybrid MCDM method for enhancing site selection for wind power plants in Turkey” Energy for Sustainable Development, vol. 82, pp.1-14, 2024.
• M. Shao, Z. Han, J. Sun, H. Gao, S. Zhang, Y. Zhao, “A novel framework for wave power plant site selection and wave forecasting based on GIS, MCDM, and ANN methods: A case study in Hainan Island, Southern China”, Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 299, pp.1-20, 2024
• H. A. Xuan, V. V. Trinh, K. Techato, K. Phoungthong, “Use of hybrid MCDM methods for site location of solar-powered hydrogen production plants in Uzbekistan”, Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, vol. 52, pp.1-12, 2022.
• Y. Aydın and T. Eren, “Supplier selectıon with multi criteria desicion making methods for strategic products in defense indusrty,” Omer Halisdemir University Journal of Engineering Sciences, vol. 7, no.1, pp. 129-148, 2018.
• I. T. Daulay and A. A. B.Dinariyana, “Application of a combination of AHP and TOPSIS methods in shipyard selection,” International Journal of Marine Engineering Innovation and Research, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 658-666, 2023.
• A. Jabbarzadeh, “Application of the AHP and TOPSIS in project management,” Journal of Project Management, vol. 3, pp. 125–130, 2018.
• E. W. L. Cheng and H. Li, “Contractor selection using the analytic network process,” Construction Management and Economics, vol. 22, no. 10, pp. 1021-1032, 2004.
• D. Seth, K. Nemani, S. Pokharel, and A. Y. A. Sayed, “Impact of competitive conditions on supplier evaluation: a construction supply chain case study,” Production Planning & Control, vol. 29, no.3, pp. 217-235, 2018.
• Q. Ma and H. Li, “A decision support system for supplier quality evaluation based on MCDM-aggregation and machine learning”, Expert Systems With Applications, vol. 242, pp.1-17, 2024.
• C. C. Lin, W. C. Wang, and W. D. Yu, “Improving AHP for construction with an adaptive AHP approach (A3),” Automation in Construction, vol. 17, pp. 180–187, 2008.
• Y. Yi, X. Fei, A. Fedele, M. C. Lavagnolo, A. Manzardo, “Decision support model for selecting construction and demolition waste management alternatives: A life cycle-based approach”, Science of the Total Environment, vol. 951, p.1-16, 2024.
• A. Sobotka, J. Sagan, “Decision support system in management of concrete demolition waste”, Automation in Construction, vol. 128, p.1-13, 2021.
• S. S. Lin, A. Zhou, S. L. Shen, “Optimal construction method evaluation for underground infrastructure construction”, Automation in Construction, vol. 152, pp.1-17, 2023.
• A. K. Abdullah and A. Alshibani, “Multi-criteria decision-making framework for selecting sustainable private partners for housing projects,” Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 112-140, 2022.
• K. Ateş and C. Şahin, “A hybrid fuzzy model to the ranking problem of companies operating R&D activities in technology innovation centers,” OKU Journal of The Institute of Science and Technology, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 1452-1468, 2023.
• M. Kokoç and S. Ersöz, “Comparison of AHP-TOPSIS and AHP-VIKOR methods in product selection in terms of inventory management,” International Journal of Engineering Research and Development, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 163-172, 2019.
• İ. Düzdar and S. Kolçak, “Lights-out manufacturing factors evaluation in terms of facility planning,” OKU Journal of The Institute of Science and Technology, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 994-1009, 2024.
• K. Baynal, Y. Şahin, and S. Taphasanoğlu, “Selectıon of white goods for luxury housing project with multi-criteria decision making techniques,” MANAS Journal of Social Studies, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 1871-1888, 2019.
• T. L. Saaty, “How to make a decision: The analytical hierarchy process,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 48, pp. 9-26, 1990.
• B. F. Dehaghi and A. Khoshfetrat, "AHP-GP approach by considering the Leopold Matrix for sustainable water reuse allocation: Najafabad case study, Iran," Periodica Polytechnica Civil Engineering, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 485–499, 2020.
• L. A. Ocampo, “A hierarchical framework for index computation in sustainable manufacturing,” Advances in Production Engineering & Management, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 40–50, 2015.
• R. Russo and R. Camanho, “Criteria in AHP: a systematic review of literature,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 55, pp. 1123-1132, 2015.
• T. L. Saaty, Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World, Third Revised Edition, Pittsburgh, RWS Publications, 2012.