Investigation of proper material selection for rainwater harvesting in squares having higher urban heat island effect potential: KBU Social Life Center example

Abstract

With the revolution in industrialization, the gas amount emitted into the atmosphere grew, causing global warming and climate change. This developing shift has a detrimental impact on natural resources and hastens their decline. Water is one of the natural resources that has been impacted. Water scarcity is becoming a problem due to causes known to be urbanization, population increase and climate change. With regards to sustainable architecture, rainwater collection from buildings for its efficient use, application of simple water treatment processes and its reuse are considered to be among the precautions that may be taken in order to save water. In addition to playing a role in reducing water resources, urbanization has another detrimental characteristic, such as creating heat islands with highly impermeable surfaces. Top cover designs that promote green spaces and minimize heat island impacts are the most effective way for minimizing the detrimental effects that heat islands have on outdoor thermal comfort in urban settings. Therefore, a top cover was proposed in this study for mitigating the effect of heat island observed in KBU Social Life Center square that may be characterized as a vast heat island within the campus, as well as to bring it in feature of collecting rainwater in its immense area. Materials to be used in the proposed top cover as well as the factors affecting the selection of material were determined in terms of efficiency in rainwater collection and the mitigation of urban heat island effect. A considerably optimum material that can be used in the cover was determined by one of the multi-criteria decision-making methods known to be PROMETHEE method. As a consequence of its pricing, roof efficiency, and albedo coefficient qualities, the polycarbonate panel material has been chosen as the most acceptable material to be used for the suggested top cover.

Keywords

• Material selection
• Rainwater harvesting
• Urban heat island
• Urban top cover

Project Number

FYL-2019-2077

References

1. 1. Karahan, A., Gri suyun değerlendirilmesi. IX. Ulusal Tesisat Mühendisliği Kongresi, 2011. p. 1155-1164.
2. 2. Aküzüm, T., B. Çakmak and Z. Gökalp, Türkiye’de su kaynakları yönetiminin değerlendirilmesi. International Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences, 2010. 3(1): p. 67-74 (in Turkish).
3. 3. Alpaslan, N., A. Tanik and D. Dölgen, Türkiye’de su yönetimi sorunlar ve öneriler. TÜSİAD, 2008. 9 (in Turkish).
4. 4. Bulut, S., and G. Şahin, Pedagojik formasyon öğrencilerinin su tüketim davranışları ile su ayak izlerinin incelenmesi. Akdeniz Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2020. 3(2), p. 53-70 (in Turkish).
5. 5. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), UNDP sustainable development goals 2030, 2015. [cited 2020 7 Aug]; Available from: www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development.
6. 6. Santamouris, M., Energy and climate in the urban built environment, Routledge, 2001. p. 145-159.
7. 7. Yilmaz, E. Y., and İ. T. D. Çiçek, Ankara şehrinde ısı adası oluşumu. Doctoral Dissertation, Ankara Üniversitesi SBE Coğrafya Anabilim Dalı, 2013 (in Turkish).
8. 8. Lin, T. P., A. Matzarakis and R. L. Hwang, Shading effect on long-term outdoor thermal comfort. Building and Environment, 2010. 45(1): p. 213-221.

9. 9. Göçer, Ö., A. Ö. Torun and M. Bakoviç, Kent dışı bir üniversite kampüsünün dış mekânlarında ısıl konfor, kullanım ve mekân dizim analizi. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 2018. 33(3): p. 853-874 (in Turkish).
10. 10. Aghamolaei, R. and M. H. Shamsi, Review of District-scale Energy Performance Analysis 2018.
11. 11. Li, G., X. Zhang, P. A. Mirzaei, J. Zhang and Z. Zhao, Urban heat island effect of a typical valley city in China: responds to the global warming and rapid urbanization. Sustainable cities and society, 2018. 38: p. 736-745.
12. 12. Mirzaei, P. A., Recent challenges in modeling of urban heat island. Sustainable cities and society, 2015. 19, 200-206.
13. 13. Özeren, Ö. and M. T. Kayili, Designing public squares to optimize human outdoor thermal comfort: a case study in Safranbolu. Journal of Awareness, 2021. 6(1): p. 13-20.
14. 14. Mahmoud, A. H. A., Analysis of the microclimatic and human comfort conditions in an urban park in hot and arid regions. Building and environment, 2011. 46(12): p. 2641-2656.
15. 15. Chen, L and E. NG, Edward, Outdoor thermal comfort and outdoor activities: A review of research in the past decade. Cities, 2012. 29(2): p. 118-125.
16. 16. European Environmental Agency (EEA), Urban adaptation to climate change in europe-challenges and opportunities for cities together with supportive national and european policies, 2012. [cited 2020 11 Aug]; Available from: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/urban-adaptation-to-climate-change.
17. 17. Akbari, H., S. Bretz, D. M. Kurn and J. Hanford, Peak power and cooling energy savings of high-albedo roofs. Energy and Buildings, 1997. 25(2): p. 117-126.
18. 18. Backenstow, D. E. and R. J. Gillenwater, U.S. Patent No. 4,649,686. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 1987.
19. 19. 19.Yilmaz E. M., Kurak İklimlerde içbükey çatı, 2017. [cited 2020 6 Jun]; Available from: https://www.konuttrend.com/mimari/kurak-iklimlere-icbukey-cati-h1242.html (in Turkish).
20. 20. Temizkan, S. and M. T. Kayili, Yağmur suyu toplama sistemlerinde optimum depolama yönteminin belirlenmesi: Karabük Üniversitesi Sosyal Yaşam Merkezi Örneği. El-Cezeri Journal of Science and Engineering, 2020. 8(1): p. 102-116 (in Turkish).
21. 21. T.C. Tarim ve Orman Bakanligi Karabük İl Tarım ve Orman Müdürlüğü, Karabük hakkında, 2020. [cited 2020 7 Mar.]; Available from: https://karabuk.tarimorman.gov.tr/Menu/26/Karabuk-Hakkinda (in Turkish).
22. 22. T.C. Tarim ve Orman Bakanligi Meteoroloji Genel Müdürlüğü, Karabük ili aylık-yıllık yağış verileri, Karabük Meteoroloji İl Müdürlüğü, 2019 (in Turkish).
23. 23. Karabük Üniversitesi, KBÜ 2019 yılı idari faaliyet raporu, 2019. [cited 2020 11 Jun]; Available from: https://strateji.karabuk.edu.tr/yuklenen/dosyalar/12634202030256.pdf (in Turkish).
24. 24. Okutan, A. E., Çatı kaplama malzemesi seçim kriterlerinin belirlenmesi, Master Thesis, İTÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 2007. p. 1-153 (in Turkish).
25. 25. Bektaş, İ. and A. E. Dinçer, Değişen iklim koşullarında çatı kaplama malzemelerinin verimliliğinin incelenmesi: Safranbolu Örneği, Erciyes Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 2017. 33(3): p. 35-53 (in Turkish).
26. 26. Genç, E., Çatı kaplama ürünlerinin seçiminde ürün bilgilerinin düzenlenmesi, Master Thesis, YTÜ FBE Mimarlık ABD, 2011. p. 1-156 (in Turkish).
27. 27. Hamurcu M. and T. Eren, Transportation planning with analytic hierarchy process and goal programming, International Advanced Researches and Engineering Journal, 2018. 02(02): p. 92-97.
28. 28. Tsou, C. S., Multi-objective inventory planning using MOPSO and TOPSIS. Expert Systems with Applications, 2008. 35(1-2): p.136-142.
29. 29. Chai, J., J. N. Liu and E. W. Ngai, Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: A systematic review of literature. Expert systems with applications, 2013. 40(10): p. 3872-3885.
30. 30. Wang, T. C. and H. D. Lee, Developing a fuzzy TOPSIS approach based on subjective weights and objective weights. Expert systems with applications, 2009. 36(5): p. 8980-8985.
31. 31. Autodesk Revit, Revit building information modelling, 2020.
32. 32. Temizkan, S., Kentsel ısı adası özelliği yüksek meydanlarda yağmur suyu hasadına yönelik uygun malzeme seçiminin araştırılması: KBÜ Sosyal Yaşam Merkezi örneği , Master Thesis, Karabük Üniversitesi, FBE, 2020. p. 1-124 (in Turkish).
33. 33. Senger, Ö. and Ö. K. Albayrak, Gri İlişki Analizi yöntemi ile personel değerlendirme. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 2016. 17: p. 235-258 (in Turkish).
34. 34. Özdemir, A. İ. and N. Y. Seçme, İki aşamali stratejik tedarikçi seçiminin bulanik topsis yöntemi ile analizi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2009. 11(2): p. 79-112 (in Turkish).
35. 35. Çagil, G., Küresel kriz sürecinde türk bankacılık sektörünün finansal performansının electre yöntemi ile analizi. Maliye ve Finans Yazıları, 2008. 1(93): p. 59-86 (in Turkish).
36. 36. Türker, A., Çok ölçütlü karar verme tekniklerinden" electre". Journal of the Faculty of Forestry Istanbul University, 1988. 38(3): p. 72-87 (in Turkish).
37. 37. Wang, J. J. and D. L. Yang, Using a hybrid multi-criteria decision aid method for information systems outsourcing. Computers & Operations Research, 2007. 34(12): p. 3691-3700.
38. 38. Genç, T., PROMETHEE yöntemi ve GAIA düzlemi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2013. 15(1): p. 133-154 (in Turkish).
39. 39. Balali, V., B. Zahraie, A. Hosseini and A. Roozbahani, Selecting appropriate structural system: Application of PROMETHEE decision making method. In 2010 Second International Conference on Engineering System Management and Applications. IEEE, 2010, p. 1-6 .
40. 40. Bottero, M., C. D’Alpaos and A. Oppio, Multicriteria evaluation of urban regeneration processes: an application of PROMETHEE method in Northern Italy. Advances in Operations Research, 2018. p. 1-12.
41. 41. Hu, J. and Y. Jiang, PROMETHEE method applied in the evaluation of urban air environmental quality. Journal of University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, 2012. 4: p. 318-322.
42. 42. Pan, W.H. and J.Q. Li, Application of AHP-PROMETHEE Method for Supplier Selection in Strategic Sourcing. Operations Research and Management Science, 2009. 2 (008).
43. 43. Bottero, M., F. Dell’Anna and M. Nappo, Evaluating tangible and intangible aspects of cultural heritage: An application of the promethee method for the reuse project of the Ceva–Ormea railway. In Seminar of the Italian Society of Property Evaluation and Investment Decision Springer, Cham, 2016. p. 285-295.
44. 44. Lakićević, M. D. and B. M. Srđević, Multiplicative version of Promethee method in assesment of parks in Novi Sad. Zbornik Matice srpske za prirodne nauke, 2017. 132: p. 79-86.
45. 45. Vujosevic, M. L. and M. J. Popovic, The comparison of the energy performance of hotel buildings using PROMETHEE decision-making method. Thermal Science, 2016. 20(1): p. 197-208.
46. 46. Dražić, J., D., Dunjić, V. Mučenski and I. Peško, Multi-criteria analysis of variation solutions for the pipeline route by applying the PROMETHEE method. Tehnički vjesnik, 2016. 23(2): p. 599-610.
47. 47. Yan-ming, C. Research on Evaluation of subcontractors of water project and Model established based on PROMETHEE method. Jilin Water Resources, 2015. 8(4).
48. 48. Dachowski, R. and K. Gałek, Selection of the best method for underpinning foundations using the PROMETHEE II method. Sustainability, 2020. 12(5373): p. 1-9.
49. 49. Balali, V., A. Mottaghi, O. Shoghli and M. Golabchi, Selection of appropriate material, construction technique, and structural system of bridges by use of multicriteria decision-making method. Transportation research record, 2014. 2431(1): p. 79-87.
50. 50. San Cristobal, J. R., Critical path definition using multicriteria decision making: PROMETHEE method. Journal of Management in Engineering, 2013. 29(2): p.158-163.
51. 51. Rezaei, J., Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega, 2015. 53: p. 49-57.
52. 52. Rezaei, J., Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model. Omega, 2016. 64: p. 126-130.
53. 53. Kim, T., Rainwater harvesting: the impact of residential-scale treatment and physicochemical conditions in the cistern on microbiological water quality. Doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, 2017. p . 1-144. 54. Lye, D. J., Rooftop runoff as a source of contamination: A review. Science of the total environment, 2009. 407(21): p. 5429-5434. 55. Alpaslan, N., A., Tanik and D. Dölgen, Türkiye’de su yönetimi: Sorunlar ve öneriler. TÜSİAD 2008. 09/469: p. 1-216 (in Turkish).