Multiple Criteria Assessment of Pile-Columns Alternatives


  • Saulius Sušinskas Faculty of Technologies, Kaunas University of Technology Panevėžys Institute, S. Daukanto g. 12–138, 37164 Panevėžys, Lithuania
  • Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas Dept of Construction Technology and Management, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, 10223 Vilnius, Lithuania
  • Zenonas Turskis Dept of Construction Technology and Management, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, 10223 Vilnius, Lithuania



pile-columns, foundation, alternative, decision making, multiple criteria, MCDM, entropy, weights, operation research, Additive Ratio ASsessment, ARAS


The paper presents the process of selection the pile-columns instalment alternative, which have to be the most appropriate and effective. The selection is based on a set of criteria: Mass, Cost of instalment, Labour expenditures, Machinery expenditures, Earthwork amount and Instalment tolerance. The criteria for evaluation are selected by taking into consideration the interests and goals of the client as well as factors that influence the efficiency of construction process. Their weights were determined by applying entropy method. The entropy is described as the casual value of the uncertainty which makes it more valuable in comparison with other factors. The solution of problem was made by applying Additive Ratio ASsessment (ARAS) method. The proposed technique could further be applied to substantiate the selection of effective alternative of structures, technologies, investments, etc.


Bhattacharya, S.; Bolton, M. D.; Madabhushi, S. P. G. 2005. A Reconsideration of the Safety of Piled Bridge Foundations in Liquefiable Soils, Soils and Foundations 45(4): 13–25.

Brauers, W. K. M.; Ginevičius, R. 2010. The Economy of the Belgian Regions Tested with MULTIMOOORA, Journal of Business Economics and Management 11(2): 173–209. doi:10.3846/jbem.2010.09

Brauers, W. K. M.; Ginevičius, R.; Podvezko, V. 2010. Regional Development in Lithuania Considering Multiple Objectives by the MOORA Method, Journal of Technological and Economic Development of Economy 16(4): 613–640. doi:10.3846/tede.2010.38

Hsieh, L.-F.; Wang, L.-H.; Huang, Y.-C.; Chen, A. 2010. An Efficiency and Effectiveness Model for International Tourist Hotels in Taiwan, The Service Industries Journal 30(13): 2183–2199. doi:10.1080/02642060903215030

Kalibatas, D.; Turskis, Z. 2008. Multicriteria Evaluation of Inner Climate by Using MOORA Method, Information Technology and Control 37(1): 79–83.

Kapliński, O. 2008. Usefulness and Credibility of Scoring Methods in Construction Industry, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 14(1): 21–28. doi:10.3846/1392-3730.2008.14.21-28

Kudzys, A.; Kliukas, R. 2010. Probability-Based Design of Spun Concrete Beam-Columns, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 16(4): 451–461. doi:10.3846/jcem.2010.51

Langston, C.; Wong, F. K. W.; Hui, E. C. M.; Shen, L.-Y. 2008. Strategic Assessment of Building Adaptive Reuse Opportunities in Hong Kong, Building and Environment 43(10): 1709–1718. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2007.10.017

Li, X. 2009. Multiobjective Optimization and Multiattribute Decision Making Study of Ship‘s Principal Parameters in Conceptual Design, Journal of Ship Research 53(2): 83–92.

Liu, P.; Zhang, X. 2011. Research on the Supplier Selection of a Supply Chain Based on Entropy Weight and Improved ELECTRE-III Method, International Journal of Production Research 49(3): 637–646. doi:10.1080/00207540903490171

Mamtani, G.; Green, G.; McDonald, S. 2006. Relative Reliability Risk Assessment Applied to Original Designs During Conceptual Design Phase, in Proc. of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering 220(6): 917–927. doi:10.1243/09544054JEM155

Maskeliūnaitė, L.; Sivilevičius, H.; Podvezko, V. 2009. Research on the Quality of Passenger Transportation by Railway, Transport 24(2): 100–112. doi:10.3846/1648-4142.2009.24.100-112

Pareto, V. 1971. Manual of Political Economy. New York: Augustus M. Kelley. 504 p. ISBN 0678008817

Peldschus, F. 2008. Experience of the Game Theory Application in Construction Management, Technological and Economic Development of Economy 14(4): 531–545. doi:10.3846/1392-8619.2008.14.531-545

Peldschus, F. 2009. The Analysis of the Quality of the Results Obtained with the Methods of Multi-Criteria Decisions, Technological and Economic Development of Economy 15(4): 580–592. doi:10.3846/1392-8619.2009.15.580-592

Peldschus, F.; Zavadskas, E. K.; Turskis, Z.; Tamosaitiene, J. 2010. Sustainable Assessment of Construction Site by Applying Game Theory, Inzinerine Ekonomika – Engineering Economics (3): 223–237.

Podvezko, V.; Mitkus, S.; Trinkūnienė, E. 2010. Complex Evaluation of Contracts for Construction, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 16(2): 287–297. doi:10.3846/jcem.2010.33

Radziszewska-Zielina, E. 2010. Methods for Selecting the Best Partner Construction Enterprise in Terms of Partnering Relations, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 16(4): 510–520. doi:10.3846/jcem.2010.57

Sasmal, S.; Ramanjaneyulu, K. 2008. Condition Evaluation of Existing Reinforced Concrete Bridges Using Fuzzy Based Analytic Hierarchy Approach, Journal Expert Systems with Applications 35(3): 1430–1443. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2007.08.017

Shannon, C. E. 1948. A Mathematical Theory of Communication, The Bell System Technical Journal 27: 379–423.

Sivilevičius, H. 2011. Application of Expert Evaluation Method to Determine the Importance of Operating Asphalt Mixing Plant Quality Criteria and Rank Correlation, The Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering 6(1): 48–58. doi:10.3846/bjrbe.2011.07

Taheriyoun, M.; Karamouz, M.; Baghvand, A. 2010. Development of an Entropy-Based Fuzzy Eutrophication Index for Reservoir Water Quality Evaluation, Iranian Journal of Environmental Health, Science and Engineering 7(1): 1–14.

Tomlinson, M. J.; Woodward, J. 2008. Pile Design and Construction Practice. 5th edition. Taylor & Francis. 568 p. ISBN 9780415385824.

Tonias, D. E.; Zhao, J. J. 2007. Bridge Engineering. 2th edition. McGraw-Hill. 488 p. ISBN 9780071459037. doi:10.3846/jcem.2010.30

Tupėnaitė, L.; Zavadskas, E. K.; Kaklauskas, A.; Turskis, Z.; Seniut, M. 2010. Multiple Criteria Assessment of Alternatives for Built and Human Environment Renovation, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 16(2): 257–266. doi: 10.3846/jcem.2010.30

Turskis, Z. 2008. Multi-Attribute Contractors Ranking Method by Applying Ordering of Feasible Alternatives of Solutions in Terms of Preferability Technique, Technological and Economic Development of Economy 14(2): 224–239. doi:10.3846/1392-8619.2008.14.224-239

Turskis, Z.; Zavadskas, E. K. 2010a. A Novel Method for Multiple Criteria Analysis: Grey Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS-G) Method, Informatica 21(4): 597–610.

Turskis, Z.; Zavadskas, E. K. 2010b. A New Fuzzy Additive Ratio Assessment Method (ARAS–F). Case Study: the Analysis of Fuzzy Multiple Criteria in Order to Select the Logistic Centers Location, Transport 25(4): 423–432. doi:10.3846/transport.2010.52

Turskis, Z.; Zavadskas, E. K.; Peldschus, F. 2009. Multi-Criteria Optimization System for Decision Making in Construction Design and Management, Inzinerine Ekonomika – Engineering Economics (1): 7–17.

Ye, J. 2010. Fuzzy Decision-Making Method Based on the Weighted Correlation Coefficient under Intuitionistic Fuzzy Environment, European Journal of Operational Research 205(1): 202–204. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2010.01.019

You, T.; Zi, H. M. 2007. The Economic Crisis and Efficiency Change: Evidence from the Korean Construction Industry, Applied Economics 39(14): 1833–1842. doi:10.1080/00036840600690199

Zavadskas, E. K. 1987. Multiple Criteria Evaluation of Technological Decisions of Construction. Dissertation of Dr. Sc. Moscow Civil Engineering Institute, Moscow (in Russian) [Завадскас, Э. К. 1986. Многоцелевая селектоновация технологических решений строительного производства. Дис. … д-ра техн. наук. Московский инженерно-строительный институт].

Zavadskas, E. K.; Turskis, Z. 2010. A New Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method in Multicriteria Decision-Making, Technological and Economic Development of Economy 16(2): 159–172. doi:10.3846/tede.2010.10

Zavadskas, E. K.; Kaklauskas, A.; Turskis, Z.; Tamošaitienė, J. 2009a. Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Model by Applying Grey Numbers, Informatica 20(2): 305–320.

Zavadskas, E. K.; Kaklauskas, A.; Vilutienė, T. 2009b. Multicriteria Evaluation of Apartment Blocks Maintenance Contractors: Lithuanian Case Study, International Journal of Strategic Property Management 13(4): 319–338. doi:10.3846/1648-715X.2009.13.319-338

Zavadskas, E. K.; Turskis, Z.; Vilutiene, T. 2010. Multiple Criteria Analysis of Foundation Instalment Alternatives by Applying Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method, Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering 10(3): 123–141.

Zhang, R.; Zheng, J.; Pu, H.; Zhang, L. 2011. Analysis of Excavation-Induced Responses of Loaded Pile Foundations Considering Unloading Effect, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 26: 320–335. doi:10.1016/j.tust.2010.11.003

Zhao, M.; Jiang, C.; Cao, W.; Liu, J. 2007. Catastrophic Model for Stability Analysis of High Pile-Column Bridge Pier, Journal of Central South University of Technology 14(5): 725–729. doi:10.1007/s11771-007-0138-5

Zhao, M.; Liu, E.; Yang, J. 2009. Analysis of Stability of Pile Foundation with Higher Pile-Column Bridge Piers, Journal of Highway and Transportation Research and Development 4(1): 40–44.




How to Cite

Sušinskas, S., Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2011). Multiple Criteria Assessment of Pile-Columns Alternatives. The Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering, 6(3), 145-152.