Framework For Selection of Green Building Attributes To Achieve Cost Effectiveness Using Fuzzy Logic Model

Framework for selection of green building
attributes to achieve cost effectiveness using Fuzzy

logic model
M. Tech. Dissertation in Construction Engineering Management

Department of Civil Engineering
Submitted By : Manisha Mrutyunjay Kabbur
Reg. No. : 17ETCE040418
Supervisors : 1. Mr. Akshayakumar V.H, Assistant Professor

2. Dr. H M Rajashekara Swamy, Professor
August – 2019
Faculty of ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
M. S. Ramaiah University of applied sciences
Bengaluru -560 054
Framework for selection of green building attributes to achieve cost effectiveness using Fuzzy logic model
i
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
Certificate
This is to certify that the Dissertation titled “Framework for selection of
green building attributes to achieve cost effectiveness using Fuzzy logic
model” is a bonafide record of the work carried out by Ms. Manisha
Mrutyunjay Kabbur, Reg. No. 17ETCE040418 in partial fulfilment of
requirements for the award of M. Tech. Degree in Construction
Engineering and Management of M.S. Ramaiah University of Applied
Sciences in the Department of Civil Engineering.
August – 2019
Supervisors
Mr. Akshayakumar V H Dr. H M Rajashekar Swamy

Assistant Professor Head – Dept. of CE
Dr. H M Rajashekar Swamy Dr. M. Arulanantham

Head – Dept. of CE Dean-FET
ii
M.S.RamaiahUniversity of Applied Sciences – Faculty of Engineering and Technology (FET)
Declaration
Framework for selection of green building attributes to achieve

cost effectiveness using Fuzzy logic model
The dissertation is submitted in partial fulfilment of academic requirements

for the M.Tech Degree of M. S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences in
the Department of Civil Engineering. This dissertation is a result of my own
investigation. All sections of the text and results, which have been obtained
from other sources, are fully referenced. I understand that cheating and
plagiarism constitute a breach of University regulations, hence this
dissertation has been passed through plagiarism check and the report has
been submitted to the supervisor.
Signature :
Name of the Student : Ms. Manisha Mrutyunjay Kabbur
Reg. No. : 17ETCE040418
Date :
iii
M.S. Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences – Faculty of Engineering and Technology (FET)
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my gratitude and appreciation to all those who provided me with
the support and guidance to complete this project.
I take this as an opportunity to acknowledge my indebtedness and deep sense of
gratitude to my mentor Mr. Akshayakumar V.H, Assistant Professor, Department of Civil
Engineering, RUAS for guiding me with valuable suggestions. His dedication and keen
interest accompanied with his overwhelming attitude to help his students had been
solely and mainly responsible for completing my work
I express my sincere thanks to my mentor Dr. H M Rajashekhar Swamy, Professor and
Head of the Department, Department of Civil Engineering, RUAS for his kind suggestions
and motivations.
I owe my deepest gratitude to Mr. Kiriti Saho, Researcher & Area Convenor at TERI,
Bangalore for his encouraging guidance and stimulating suggestions at every stage of the
research. His timely scholarly advice has helped me to a very great extend to accomplish
this task
I would like to thank Dr.M. Arulanantham, Dean, Faculty of Engineering and Technology,
Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences, for facilitating the academic excellence in the
college that helped me in completing this project.
It is my privilege to thank my parents for being my inspiration and for their constant
encouragement throughout the period of this project.
Last but not the least, I am honoured to thank all my friends and teaching and non-
teaching staffs, who has motivated me with their support and contributed indirectly
towards the betterment of my project
iv
Abstract
Green certifications play a major role in today’s commercial construction world and as
per the environment and people well being as well. There are many rating systems
which consider different points for different attributes in green certification of a
building; there is a necessary to know the difference in rating systems. Also there will be
difference in the opinions of experts; here comes the picture of uncertainty, so there is a
necessary to find efficient way of rating system which can also be used prior to
application of any green certifications to know the approximate rating, improve the
greenness and then go for certification which can save the certification fees as well.
The present work focuses on development of fuzzy logic model to rate a greenness of a
building. Three green building rating systems which are widely used in India i.e. GRIHA,
IGBC and LEED are studied and required data is collected, based on the collected data
fuzzy logic model is developed to find the final score of a building using which the rating
can be awarded, all the criteria are considered as input variables and final score as a
output variable with different membership functions, different possibilities of points
allocation is done in an excel sheet using which the rules are formed for all the three
rating systems. To obtain this, fuzzy logic models are developed in MATLAB separately
for all three rating systems.
The developed fuzzy models are validated with two buildings (one is already rated and
another non rated building). The results obtained are favourable and seems more
effective in considering uncertainty of present manual rating systems. Fuzzy logic proved
to be very beneficial in rating process; it can be used not only for rating process but also
to solve many problems with uncertainty.
v
Table of Contents
Certificate……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….ii
Declaration………………………………………………………………………….…….................................iii
Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................. iv
Abstract ................................................................................................................................. v
Table of Contents.................................................................................................................. vi
List of Tables ....................................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures ........................................................................................................................ ix
Abbreviation and Acronyms ................................................................................................... x
Chapter-1: Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Green Building............................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Green Building Certification .......................................................................................... 2
1.3 Green Building Rating Systems ..................................................................................... 2
1.4 Fuzzy Logic .................................................................................................................... 3
Chapter-2: Literature Review and Problem Formulation ......................................................... 5
2.1 Reviewed Literature ...................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Summary of literature review ..................................................................................... 11
2.3 Identified Research gaps ............................................................................................. 20
Chapter-3: Problem Statement ............................................................................................. 21
3.1 Title ............................................................................................................................. 21
3.2 Aim .............................................................................................................................. 21
3.3 Objectives.................................................................................................................... 21
3.4 Scope of Present Investigation ................................................................................... 21
3.5 Methods and Methodology to attain each objective ................................................. 21
Chapter-4: Problem Solving .................................................................................................. 23
4.1 Collection of data ........................................................................................................ 23
vi
4.2 Preparation of fuzzy rule based model ....................................................................... 35

Chapter-5: Results and Discussions ...................................................................................... 49
5.1 Validation of the developed fuzzy model ................................................................... 49
5.2 Rating a non rated building......................................................................................... 55
Chapter-6: Conclusions and Future Directions ...................................................................... 61
References ........................................................................................................................... 62
vii
List of Tables
Table 1 Summary of literature review ............................................................................... 11

Table 2 Methods and Methodology to attain each objective ........................................... 21
Table 3 Certification fees for GRIHA .................................................................................. 24
Table 4 Criteria and point allocation for GRIHA ................................................................ 24
Table 5 Certification Level for GRIHA ................................................................................ 26
Table 6 Certification Fees for IGBC .................................................................................... 28
Table 7 Criteria and points allocation for IGBC.................................................................. 28
Table 8 Certification level for IGBC .................................................................................... 31
Table 9 Certification Fees for LEED .................................................................................... 31
Table 10 Criteria and points allocation for LEED ............................................................... 32
Table 11 Certification level for LEED .................................................................................. 34
Table 12 Inputs, outputs & membership functions to develop a fuzzy model for GRIHA 35
Table 13 Inputs, outputs & membership functions to develop a fuzzy model for IGBC ... 40
Table 14 Inputs, outputs & membership functions to develop a fuzzy model for LEED ... 44
Table 15 Data obtained from building authority for validation ........................................ 51
Table 16 Data Summary for validation .............................................................................. 53
Table 17 Point’s allocation for TERI building by GRIHA rating........................................... 57
viii
List of Figures
________________________________________________________________________
Figure 1: Fuzzy logic [ MATLAB Manual] .............................................................................. 4

Figure 2: Fuzzy logic unit [Abdel-Razek, et al., 1999] .......................................................... 4
Figure 3: Process involved in IGBC certification ................................................................ 27
Figure 4: Inputs and output in fuzzy model for GRIHA rating system ............................... 38
Figure 5: Membership functions for inputs in fuzzy model for GRIHA rating system ....... 38
Figure 6: Membership functions for output in fuzzy model for GRIHA rating system ...... 39
Figure 7: Rules formulation in fuzzy editor for GRIHA rating system ................................ 39
Figure 8: Inputs and output in fuzzy model for IGBC rating system .................................. 43
Figure 9: Membership functions for inputs in fuzzy model for IGBC rating system ......... 43
Figure 10: Membership functions for output in fuzzy model for IGBC rating system ...... 44
Figure 11: Rules formation in fuzzy editor for IGBC rating system ................................... 44
Figure 12: Inputs and output in fuzzy model for LEED rating system ............................... 47
Figure 13: Membership functions for inputs in fuzzy model for LEED rating system ....... 47
Figure 14: Membership functions for output in fuzzy model for LEED rating system ...... 48
Figure 15: Rules formation in fuzzy editor for LEED rating system ................................... 48
Figure 16: eFACiLiTY Enterprise Facility Management Software, Coimbatore ................. 50
Figure 17: Fuzzy output for IGBC Project 1 ........................................................................ 54
Figure 18: TERI Building ..................................................................................................... 55
Figure 19: Abundant natural light for work spaces ........................................................... 55
Figure 20: Indoor environmental quality is maintained .................................................... 56
Figure 21: Solar water heater installation ......................................................................... 56
Figure 22: Solar photovoltaic integrated with roof ........................................................... 56
Figure 23: Fuzzy output for GRIHA Project 2 ..................................................................... 60
ix
Abbreviation and Acronyms
BREEAM – Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method

CASBEE – Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency
CCR – Chares -Cooper-Rhodes
CII – Confederation of Indian Industry
CRSBS – Centre for Research on Sustainable Building Science
DEA – Data Envelopment Analysis
GRIHA – Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment
IGBC – Indian Green Building Council
LEED – Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design
MNRE – Ministry of New and Renewable Energy
NRDC – Natural Defence Council
NRS – National Rating System
TERI – The Energy and Resources Institute
USGBC – U.S Green Building Council
x
Chapter-1: Introduction
Construction is one among the largest industry which includes buildings entirely, which
in turn increases pollution in the environment. The largest sources of atmospheric and
terrestrial pollutions are buildings, which compute for about 44 percentages of material
use from the society and 40 percent of world’s energy requirements. In countries like UK
and US, the emission of carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide are about 36–45% and 48%
are from buildings. Where as in India it lies around 15–18% of carbon dioxide and 30-
50% of sulfur dioxide emission. Building’s negative impact on the environment has lead
to the generation of the green buildings which reduces energy consumption and
utilization of resources. The cost is high for the construction, but maintenance cost is
lower which reduces environmental harm. Hence green buildings play a very important
role in protecting the environment.
1.1 Green Building

This includes the entire life cycle of the of the building which starts from planning,
construction, operation, maintenance, renovation, and demolition, the application and
structure of the process that are environmentally efficient. The term green building
refers to build a building based on ecological principles. Buildings are evaluated on the
basis of the environmental impact, while the sustainable building should meet criteria in
terms of economic, environmental and social impact. Greenness is viewed as the subset
of the building. A building could be green but it might be not sustainable. If a building in
order to be sustainable it must be green. Certification for a green building is also
necessary.
1
1.2 Green Building Certification

Attributes related to the built environment are evaluated and verified.
Benefits
• Higher resale or rental value
• Higher tenant and occupant satisfaction
• Higher pride of place and worker productivity
• Operating costs is low
• National and local recognition opportunities
• Achieving certification adds a layer of integrity and accountability for the project
team.
Buildings are rated based on the rating tools available, which rates the impact of the
particular building on the environment.
1.3 Green Building Rating Systems

Few well known rating systems in India are
1. Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA)
2. Indian Green Building Council (IGBC)
3. The Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED)
1. Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA): It was developed in the
year 2005 by TERI after the comprehensive study of the building rating system.
Rating systems were developed by the CRSBS (Centre for Research on Sustainable
Building Science). On November 2007, government of India has adapted TERI GRIHA
as a national rating system (NSR) under MNRE (Ministry of New and Renewable
Energy). The main objective of the rating system involves designing green buildings
and thus evaluating greenness of the building, which in turn maintains the
2
environment. The committee of the rating system comprises experts with best
practices.
2. Indian Green Building Council (IGBC): it’s a not-for-profit council, formed as a part of
CII (Confederation of Indian Industry) in the year 2001 comprising more than 1918
members. This has enabled 3.84 Billion square feet of green building in our country
by creating awareness among the stakeholders. The rating system comprises of all
the methodologies which involves in rating a building, which has less impact on the
environment in terms of pollution, climatic zones etc.
3. The Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED): It was developed in by

USGBC (U.S. Green Building Council) in the year 1993 by Robert K. Watson, which
provides sustainable design for the building. Resources are efficiently used
compared to the conventional buildings which were built just to code. The certified
buildings under LEED provide healthier environment with improved health and
comfort of the employee. LEED has worked on more than 14000 projects covering
99km2 in the United States.
1.4 Fuzzy Logic

It’s a technique which manages the reasoning and handles the natural language like
human does. It was first coined by zadeh in the year 1965. It handles the concept of
partial truth. Fuzzy logic is gaining its importance in construction management industry.
Fuzzy logic is applied for decision making, forecasting and control of actions on
environment. It works based on the truth values, it might predict the complete true
value or false values. It works based on three parameters the input output domain of
the variables used in fuzzy and also the defining the type and set of the membership
function of the declared input variable. The relationship between the input and the
3
output variables has to be defined as fuzzy rules. Logic operators could be used in the
fuzzy logic.
Figure 1: Fuzzy logic [ MATLAB Manual]
Fuzzy controller consists of 3 phases Fuzzification, Decision making unit and

Defuzzification. Fuzzy representations are generated from the numerical inputs, which is
done in the first phase (fuzzification). Membership functions are recognized for
associated linguistic term involved in the fuzzy set. Second phase is the decision making
which is done based on the IF-THEN logic operation. The third phase includes the
calculation of the output value from the fuzzy set.
Figure 2: Fuzzy logic unit [Abdel-Razek, et al., 1999]
4
Chapter-2: Literature Review and Problem Formulation
2.1 Reviewed Literature
K.N. Jha and G.S. Vyas (Jha & Vyas, 2016) This research study focuses on developing
appropriate constructs to benchmark green building attributes in construction such that,
with limited funds, the sustainable performance of the building is improved. In this
research, Indian green building assessment tools, such as Green Rating for Integrated
Habitat Assessment (GRIHA), Indian Green Building Council (IGBC), eco-housing, and a
newly developed rating system, are reviewed. A Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) has
been employed to benchmark the green building attributes. Buildings in different
climatic conditions, such as hot and dry, warm and humid, and composite climates, were
chosen for benchmarking purposes. Efficiency was calculated using a constant return to
scale with an input-oriented Charnes-Cooper-Rhodes (CCR) formulation method. The
following attributes were observed: 1) utilization of the Bureau of Indian Standard (BIS)
recommended waste materials in the building, 2) increase in environmental awareness,
3) dedicated facilities for service staff, 4) design for universal accessibility, 5) low-impact
design 6) construction management practices and 7) use of low-volatile organic
compounds (VOC) paints that contribute to more green points at a lower cost.
Suryateja Gobidesi; Akshayakumar V H and Shrihari Naik (Gobidesi & V.H, 2018) this
research work presents the development of fuzzy logic based selection system for
formwork system and concreting placement works. Formwork systems and concreting
placement widely used in India are identified with most governing factors affecting their
selection process. The important factors are identified through questionnaire survey and
tabulated. Factors are considered as input variables and formwork systems as output
5
variables. Rule based fuzzy system is developed in accordance with factors and
formwork systems. To automate the selection process fuzzy logic model is developed in
MATLAB.
The developed model is validated by applying it on real-life case study (on going project
and completed project). The results obtained seem favourable and fuzzy logic plays
promising role in selection process. Not only in selection process but also Fuzzy Logic can
be used in various construction problems.
Mohamed Marzouk and Ahmed Amin (Mohamad Marzouk, et al., 2011) research
presents a system that utilizes fuzzy logic to identify construction materials that are
most sensitive to the change in prices. The research proposes a methodology for
identification of construction materials that are most sensitive to the change in prices to
be used in modifying the contract price with an attempt to predict the amount of future
change in materials prices using neural networks technique. To achieve this objective,
the research classifies construction cost items into four different components (building
materials, equipment, labour, and administrative expenses), which represent the basic
cost elements of any cost item. The system is based on the study of the changes in
materials prices that occurred in the Egyptian market from 2000 to 2010. It also provides
the impact on the prices of cost items in the priced bill of quantities (BOQ), which is
determined by the change in prices of cost items’ materials and their share percent on
forming the cost item. Getting to identify materials’ share in the bill of quantities’ items
has a great influence on the price of the cost item and the priority in ordering these
materials according to their impact on the item’s price. The developed system aids
construction contractors in studying bids during the tendering stage and procurement
planning during the project’s execution. It can also be used by owners’ representative to
6
estimate the expected total cost of upcoming projects. The system data are obtained
from the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics in Egypt through published
periodicals. A numerical example is presented to demonstrate the use of the proposed
system.
Sunita Bansal; Dr. Srijit Biswas and Dr. S. K. Singh (Sunita Bansal, 2015) In this research
paper a flexible rating system is developed to address wide range of projects data with
degree of certainty which is only the solution of the present day problem of GRIHA. Each
GRIHA criteria is well defined in terms of points and provision is kept to award the full
point only after full satisfaction of the expert on the quality of works under that criteria.
Naturally the membership value (µ(x)) is considered as either 1 or 0 when the experts is
either fully satisfied or not, there is no possibility for in-between values, so there is a
involvement of uncertainty. To assess the rating of green building, they considered all
criterias of GRIHA as attributes of proposed methodology except criteria no-32 & 34 as
both have no direct influence in the overall rating of the building, and also consider all
the points of GRIHA assigned against each criterion as weightage of that particular
attribute. The experts opinions are collected and degree of truthness and falseness are
measured and points are allotted accordingly and the final rating of the building is
calculated by adding all the points. The Green Rating thus obtained in the overall output
result has more degree of certainty than from the present guidelines of GRIHA. Here
only the methodology has been explained, no model is developed.
D. A. Pastagia & J.E.M. Macwan (Macwan, 2017)In this paper an attempt is made to
develop a user friendly computer based evaluation programme, fuzzy based criteria
evaluation models and AHP based weights were taken as reference. Further, Assessment
Model was developed considering 68 criteria combining from different rating tools like
7
GRIHA and LEED. The model is computer based and works on its own after entering the
criteria performance value. It gives the rating of residential green building in
preoccupancy & post occupancy phase. The rating is given from ‘one star’ to ‘four stars’
with a score range from 0 to 5. Comparison of evaluation results shows that the newly
developed model works well. It evaluated the building comprehensively by covering 68
criteria. The negative scoring effect is considered for 24 crucial criteria. The features of
‘FRAMREB 2016’ are compared with other tools like LEED and GRIHA. A building
evaluated through this model is likely to achieve higher rating compared to other
present systems due to ‘fuzzy approach’
Nina Frances and Parshall, B.S (Nina Frances Parshall, 2016) This research focuses on
the ancient green building evaluation of the Roman Pantheon, use the fuzzy set concept.
The green building evaluation first begins with the evaluation of specific green building
categories including Site Selection, Use of Water, Energy Conservation, Materials and
Resources, Air Quality, and Innovation of Design and Construction. Each category is
rated based on the subcategories, which are assigned linguistic rating values. The
linguistic values range from extremely non-green to extremely green. After all linguistic
ratings are assigned, a weight average is calculated to determine the category rating and
the total greenness rating of the Pantheon. While the weighted average can provide a
total green building rating for a structure, it does not take into account the unclearly
defined linguistic expressions. In order to provide a more realistic green building
evaluation, the fuzzy set concept was implemented to calculate the overall greenness
rating. The results of this research were that the weighted average and the fuzzy rating
did differ in their final rating values. Based on the assessment using the weighted
average the Pantheon has a total greenness rating of 1.29 or between fairly green and
8
green, and based upon the fuzzy set concept, the Pantheon has a total rating of [-0.61,
2.01] or between neutral and fairly green.
I M Chethana S; Illankoon; Vivian W Y Tam and Khoa N Le, Liyin Shen (I M Chethana S,
2017) This research aims to establish key credit criteria based on an extensive
literature study and evaluate these criteria based on widely used eight green building
rating tools. The comparison analysis is based on a quantitative measure, namely, a
normalised score, which is obtained through allocating credit points of selected green
building rating tools to the established key credit criteria. The comparison result is
presented with radar diagrams and bar charts. This research established seven key
credit criteria for these rating tools which are namely Site, Energy, Water, Indoor
Environment Quality, Material, Waste and pollution and Management. It is found that
Energy criterion is the most widely considered key credit criteria and then followed by
IEQ and Water criteria. Apart from that, credit criteria such as Triple bottom line
reporting, Education and Awareness, Economic aspects relating to various costs,
sustainable designing and planning and stakeholder relations are identified as possible
credit criteria which can be included in developing the rating tools in future. These key
credit criteria can be adopted as a baseline to develop new green building rating tools,
and it provides fruitful results to develop the existing tools further
Binh K Nguyen and Hasim Altan (Binh K Nguyen, 2011) This research presents a
complete and detail comparative review of five well-known sustainable rating systems.
Various aspects of these systems like popularity and influence, availability,
methodology, applicability, data collecting process, accuracy and verification, user-
friendliness and development were analyzed in order to find out the finest one. The
result of the study, i.e. final scores of five rating systems is BREEAM and LEED with their
9
strong bases, large investments and proven advantages both scored the highest with
75 points out of 100 points. CASBEE, GREEN STAR and HK-BEAM make up the lower
group with 69.5, 65 and 66 points. All of these 3 systems are the upcoming ones that
are trying to have more influence across the field. CASBEE scored a little higher than
GREEN STAR and HK-BEAM. However, it is not just the final score that matters, but the
whole review process itself. The information, analyses, valuations and comparisons
during the process would help architects, developers, managers, etc. to have better
insight into sustainable rating tools. They provide a systematic and valuable reference
source for various research which are related to sustainable development
Himanshu Agarwal; Hari Kumar Singh and Sanjay Vashishtha (Himanshu Agarwal,
2017) Reviewed in this paper about, three primary rating systems prevailing in India are
selected and analyzed with the aim of providing insights into the current situations,
highlighting the strengths, weaknesses, successes, and failures and making
recommendations for future improvements. The three most prevailing rating system in
India LEED, IGBC and GRIHA has been studied and compared with maximum points,
mandatory criteria and points obtained in case study and the points obtained from
LEED is 75.4, from IGBC = 87 and from GRIHA =85.5. Each rating system has its goal to
achieve sustainability and to create an environmental balance in the eco system but
they largely differ with each other in their approach.
Abhishek Rana and Dr. Rajiv Bhatt (Abhishek Rana, 2016)This study states the need for
the modified Green Building Rating Tool for the Gujarat, with clear, logical reasons that
different regions or different states need different criteria for the green building rating
tool as per their geographic and climatic conditions. Further, this research article
provides a systematic methodology for the generation of the criteria for the Gujarat
10
state and then the procedure for the development of the criteria weights based on the
responses of the experts. These weights can be utilized for the development of Green
Buildign Rating Tool for Gujarat. AHP technique is suggested for weight development
2.2 Summary of literature review
Table 1 Summary of literature review
Sl Authors Year Resear Methods Researc Conclusi Limitat Critical

No of ch and h ons ions of apprais
publi focus methodo findings drawn study al of
catio logy by the
n authors publish
ed
work
1 K.N. Jha 2016 Achievi Data Importa Compar Not all This
& G.S. ng Envelop nt ed to 27 the concep
Vyas maxim ment attribut of the attribu t can
um Analysis( es: green tes are be
green DEA) has utilizatio building consid used to
points been n of the attribut ered attain
in employe waste es, 7 for maxim
limited d to material attribut bench um
funds benchma s in the es are markin green
rk the building, the g points
green Increase most with
building in economi limited
attribute environ cal in funds
s. mental achievin
The awarene g
Efficiency ss, sustaina
Measure dedicate ble
ment d perform
System(E facilities ance
MS) is for from
used for service the
the staff building.
11
determin Design They

ation of for serve as
efficiency universa the
scores of l ‘‘bench
the accessibi mark”
greennes lity, for
s factors Low- green
impact construc
design tion
2 Suryatej 2018 Selectio Question Fuzzy Fuzzy Questi Still

a n of naire logic logic can onnair can be
Gobidesi Concret survey model is be used e used to
,Akshay e Fuzzy develop to survey select
akumar placem Logic ed to resolve from the
V H and ent Validatio select various experts formw
Shrihari method n with the construc is again ork
Naik s and real life concrete tions a way system
Formw cases placeme industry for s and
ork nt problem uncert concret
system method s that ainity e
s using s and occur in placem
Fuzzy formwor day to ent
logic k day life metho
systems and the ds
and model which
validate was save
d with develop money
the real ed to
life automat
cases e the
selectio
n
process
and also
can
forecast
the
project
status
12
3 Albert 2009 A brief Decision Decision The Only A brief

P.C. summa making, making, applicati study is fuzzy
Chan; ry of Fuzzy perform on of done techniq
Daniel fyzzy sets ance, fuzzy no ues
W.M techniq evaluati techniq experi used in
Chan, ues on/asses ues on ment constru
and used in sment these or ction
John constru and categori model manag
F.Y.Yeun ction modelin es is is ement
g manag g of very develo
ement fuzzy effective ped
sets and
practical
because
they can
help to
develop
models
to make
decision
s and to
evaluate
the
perform
ance in
a wide
range of
areas.
4 Sunita 2015 Green Fuzzy Weighte The Only Concep
Bansal, Buildin approach d rating propose the t can e
Dr. Srijit g 32 out of is d theoret used to
Biswas Rating 34 GRIHA calculat method ical develo
& Dr. S. with attribute ed and 2 based study is p fuzzy
K. Singh certaint s are star(gra on done model
y considere de D) GRIHA no
d rating is criteria model
Weightag given to has is
e for the tremend develo
each building ous ped
attribute by powers
s are consider to
13
assigned ing minimiz

truthnes e the
s and uncertai
falsenes nty that
s of the arises
attribut due to
es experts’
percepti
ons
The
Green
Rating
thus
obtaine
d in the
overall
output
result
has
more
degree
of
certaint
y than
from
the
present
guidelin
es of
GRIHA.
5 D. A. 2017 A 68 3 Star A Its very The

Pastagia Model( criteria rating is building difficult concep
& J.E.M. FRAMR combinin obtaine evaluate to t can
Macwan EB) is g from d for a d consid be
develo GRIHA residenti through er 68 used to
ped and LEED al this criteria develo
and are building model is for p a
compar considere using likely to rating new
ed with d FRAMRE achieve rating
LEED & A model B higher tool
14
GRIHA named FRAMRE rating

Fuzzy B compar
Rating consider ed to
Model ed more other
for number present
Residenti of systems
al criteria due to
Buildings( that is ‘fuzzy
FRAMRE 68 approac
B) is criteria h
develope compare
d d to
FRAMRE LEED
B is and
compare GRIHA
d with FRAMRE
LEED and B is
GRIHA more
efficient
than
LEED &
GRIHA
6 Nina 2016 Green Weighted Based A No Fuzzy

Frances Rating average on the standar validati set
& of a method assessm d rating on is approa
Parshall, ancient Fuzzy set ent system done ch can
B.S. buildin concept using has be
g 6 main the proven used to
Roman categorie weighte to develo
Panthe s and 28 d provide p a
on subcateg average sufficien fuzzy
ories the t rating model
were Pantheo totals,
considere n has a but
d for total fuzzy
both greenne provides
approach ss rating a more
of 1.29 realistic
or method
between to
15
fairly produce
green a final
and numeric
green al value
Based
upon
the
fuzzy set
concept,
the
Pantheo
n has a
total
rating
of [-
0.61,
2.01] or
between
neutral
and
fairly
green.
7 I M 2017 To find Comparis Key These Only Can be

Chethan key on result credit can be theoret used to
a S, credit is criteria: used as ical concen
Illankoo criteria presente Site, a study is trate
n, Vivian among d with Energy, baseline made more
W Y import bar Water, when no on
Tam, ant charts Indoor developi practic these
Khoa N green Environ ng new al criteria
Le, Liyin buildin mental green exampl while
Shen g rating Quality, building es are constru
tools Material rating consid ction
, Waste tool ered and
& certific
Pollutio ation
n,
Manage
ment.
Energy
16
is the
most
widely
consider
ed
criteria
and
then
followed
by IEQ
and
water
8 Binh K 2011 To Review BREEAM It is not Physica Can be

Nguyen, compar criteria of & LEED just the l useful
Hasim e five all five stood final criteria for
Altan differe rating first score, are constru
nt systems with 75 but the consid ction
rating Each points, whole ered manag
system category then review not ers the
and to contribut CASBEE, process. ecologi suitabil
find out ed a HK- The cal ity and
the number BEAM & informat criteria ease of
best of points GREENS ion, the
one due to TAR analyses conditi
their with , on for
importan 69.5, 66 valuatio certific
ce and 65 n and ation
For a points compari
total sons
score of during
100 the
process
would
help
architec
ts,
develop
ers,
manage
rs etc to
17
have
better
insight
to
sustaina
ble
rating
tools.
They
provide
a
systema
tic and
valuable
referenc
e source
for
various
research
which
are
related
to
sustaina
ble
develop
ment
9 Himansh 2017 Compar Mandato Points Each Not all Possibil

u ison of ry obtaine rating criteria ity of
Agarwal, three Criteria d from system are score
Hari rating Maximu LEED = has its consid obtaini
Kumar system m points 75.4 goal to ered ng
Singh s of Case Points achieve from
&Sanjay India Study of obtaine sustaina IGBC is
Vashisht a building d from bility more
ha IGBC = and to compar
87 create ed to
Points an other
obtaine environ two
d from mental system
18
GRIHA balance s
=85.5 in the
eco
system
but they
largely
differ
with
each
other in
their
approac
h
10 Abhishe 2016 Develo Study of 41 Differen Experts Still the

k Rana, ping Green criteria t regions opinion concep
Dr. Rajiv criteria Building are or s may t can
Bhatt for Rating selected differen be lead be
Green Tools to from t states to used to
Buildin three need uncert develo
g Question different differen ainty p a
Rating naire rating t criteria rating
Tool for Survey systems for the tools
Gujarat with to suit green for
State experts the building differe
Develop climatic rating nt
the conditio tool as climati
criteria ns of per their c
based on Gujarat geograp conditi
expert state hic and ons
opinion climatic
conditio
ns.
These
41
criteria
can be
utilized
for the
develop
ment of
19
Green
Building
Rating
Tool for
Gujarat
2.3 Identified Research gaps

• Fuzzy approach is done only for Ancient Structure considering only few attributes
of green building rating system
• There is no approach done with different rating systems
20
Chapter-3: Problem Statement

3.1 Title
Framework for selection of green building attributes to achieve cost effectiveness
using Fuzzy logic model
3.2 Aim
To study about the concepts of green building and fuzziness involved in green
building rating systems and develop a fuzzy rule based model for green building
rating
3.3 Objectives
1. To carry out Literature Survey
2. To collect the required data from different green building rating systems
3. To prepare fuzzy rule based system for green rating of a building
4. To validate fuzzy model for green rated building
5. To rate a non rated building
3.4 Scope of Present Investigation
To develop a fuzzy model to rate a greenness of a building
3.5 Methods and Methodology to attain each objective
Table 2 Methods and Methodology to attain each objective
Objective Statement of the Method/ Methodology Resources Utilised

No. Objective
1 To carry out Referring relevant journals, Journals from

Literature Survey thesis and reference books. Elsevier, websites,
Conference paper,
Research paper and
Thesis
21
2 To collect the Complete review on Manuals of

required data from different rating systems respective rating
different green (GRIHA, IGBC & LEED) systems
building rating from relevant websites and
systems green building certification
units and
authorities or agencies
3 To prepare fuzzy rule Numerical terms are MS Excel and

MATLAB
based system for converted into linguistic
green rating of a terms and rules are formed
building accordingly
4 To validate fuzzy A building is selected which MATLAB

model for green is already rated and
rated building validated with the developed
fuzzy model
5 To rate a non rated A non rated building is MS Excel and

MATLAB
building selected, it is manually rated
and also using developed
fuzzy model
22
Chapter-4: Problem Solving
The word fuzzy refers to things which are not clear or are vague. Fuzzy logic resembles
the human decision-making methodology. It is an approach to computing based on
“degrees of truth” rather than the usual “true or false” (1 or 0) Boolean logic on which
the modern computer is based. Fuzzy logic is used to solve all type of incomplete,
imprecise, vague or uncertain information. To solve uncertain problems, fuzzy logic use
some fuzzy rules that contains antecedents (If) and consequents (then). Antecedents
are the combination variables that are connected by fuzzy operators.
OBJECTIVE 2: To collect the required data from different green building rating systems
4.1 Collection of data
Data of three different rating system is collected i.e. GRIHA, IGBC and LEED and this
data includes
 Process involved
 Certification fees
 Criteria and points allocation
1. Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA):
Process involved
 Online Registration: This includes application and fees payment
 Post registration Workshop: It is by the GRIHA team to the project team
regarding rules and regulations of GRIHA
 Online submission of documents: Required documents for attempting criteria
should be submitted from the project team to the GRIHA team
 Site visits: Site visits to the project site from the GRIHA team for the attempting
criteria to verify whether they are fulfilling the attempting criteria or not
 Evaluation: Certification will e awarded based on the site visits
23
Certification fees
Table 3 Certification fees for GRIHA
Built up area (sqm) Certification Fees

2500-5000 Rs 314000
For every sqm above 5000 Rs 3.75/sqm
Criteria and point allocation

• Consists of 34 criteria under different categories
• These are broadly classified under different sections
Table 4 Criteria and point allocation for GRIHA
Sections Criteria Criteria Name Max points

No
Sustainable Site 1 Site Selection 1
Planning 2 Preserve and protect landscape during 5
construction
3 Soil conservation till post construction 2
4 Design to include existing site features 4
5 Reduce hard paving on-site and/or provide 2
shaded hard-paved surfaces
6 Enhance outdoor lighting system efficiency 3
and use renewable energy system for
meeting outdoor lighting requirement
7 Plan utilities efficiently and optimize on-site 3
circulation efficiency
Health and 8 Provide minimum level of sanitation/safety 2
24
wealth being of facilities for construction workers

Construction 9 Reduce air pollution during construction 2
workers
Building 10 Reduce landscape water requirement 3

Planning and
Construction 11 Reduce the water use by the building 2
12 Efficient water use during construction 1
13 Optimize building design to reduce 8
conventional energy demand
14 Optimize energy performance of building 16
within specified comfort limits
15 Utilization of flyash in building structure 6
16 Reduce volume and weight, and time of 4
construction by adopting efficient
technologies
17 Use low-energy material in interiors 4
18 Renewable energy utilization 5
19 Renewable-energy-based hot water system 3
Recycle, reuse 20 Waste-water treatment 2
and recharge of 21 Water recycle and reuse (including 5
water rainwater)
22 Reduction in waste during construction 1
23 Efficient waste segregation 1
24 Storage and disposal of wastes 1
25 Resource recovery from waste 2
Health and well 26 Use low-VOC paints/adhesives/sealants 3
25
being 27 Minimize ozone depleting substances 1

28 Ensure water quality 2
29 Acceptable outdoor and indoor noise levels 2
30 Tobacco smoke control 1
31 Provide at least the minimum level of 1
accessibility for persons with disabilities
Building 32 Energy audit and validation mandatory
Operation and 33 Operation and Maintenance 2
Maintenance
Innovation 34 Environmental Education 1
Green supply chain 1
Integrated pest management 1
Life cycle costing or others 1
TOTAL 100+4
Innovation points will be considered only if any of the criteria are not applicable to the
particular project site conditions
The project will be evaluated for 100 points and the certification will be awarded based
on the total points and the ranges of different levels are as follows
Table 5 Certification Level for GRIHA
Points Certification Level

50 Certified
51-60 1star
61-70 2star
71-80 3star
81-90 4star
91-100 5star
26
2. Indian Green Building Council (IGBC):

Process Involved:
Process involved in awarding the green certification from IGBC is similar to GRIHA
and is it is represented in flowchart as follows
Figure 3: Process involved in IGBC certification
Process involves initially registration then submission of required preliminary documents

and then review by IGBC third party assessors followed by final document submission,
site visits, final review and awarding the certification level.
27
Certification Fees:
Table 6 Certification Fees for IGBC
Criteria and points allocation

 IGBC has different point allocation for owner and tenant occupied buildings, here
we are considering only owner occupied building
 Consists of 7 main sections which are again sub categorised
Table 7 Criteria and points allocation for IGBC
Sections Credit No Credit Name Max Points

Sustainable SA Credit 1 Integrated Design Approach 1
SA Credit 2 Site Preservation 2
Architecture
SA Credit 3 Passive Architecture 2
and Design
Site Selection SSP Local Building Regulations Required
Mandatory
and Planning
Requireme1
SSP Mandatory Soil Erosion Control Required
Requirement 2
SSP Credit 1 Basic Amenities 1
SSP Credit 2 Proximity to Public Transport 1
SSP Credit 3 Low-emitting Vehicles 1
SSP Credit 4 Natural Topography or 2
Vegetation
SSP Credit 5 Preservation or Transplantation 1
28
of Trees
SSP Credit 6 Heat Island Reduction, Non-roof 2
SSP Credit 7 Heat Island Reduction, Roof 2
SSP Credit 8 Outdoor Light Pollution 1
Reduction
SSP Credit 9 Universal Design 1
SSP Credit 10 Basic Facilities for Construction 1
Workforce
SSP Credit 11 Green Building Guidelines 1
Water WC Mandatory Rainwater Harvesting, Roof & Required
Requirement 1 Non-roof
Conservation
WC Mandatory Water Efficient Plumbing Required
Requirement 2 Fixtures
WC Credit 1 Landscape Design 2
WC Credit 2 Management of Irrigation 1
Systems
WC Credit 3 Rainwater Harvesting, Roof & 4
Non-roof
WC Credit 4 Water Efficient Plumbing 5
Fixtures
WC Credit 5 Wastewater Treatment and 5
Reuse
WC Credit 6 Water Metering 1
Energy EE Mandatory Ozone Depleting Substances Required
Requirement 1
Efficiency
EE Mandatory Minimum Energy Efficiency Required
Requirement 2
EE Mandatory Commissioning Plan for Building Required
Requirement 3 Equipment & Systems
EE Credit 1 Eco-friendly Refrigerants 1
EE Credit 2 Enhanced Energy Efficiency 15
EE Credit 3 On-site Renewable Energy 6
EE Credit 4 Off-site Renewable Energy 2
EE Credit 5 Commissioning, Post-
installation of Equipment & 2
Systems
EE Credit 6 Energy Metering and 2
Management
Building BMR Segregation of Waste, Post- Required
Mandatory occupancy
Requirement 1
29
Materials and BMR Credit 1 Sustainable Building Materials 8

Resources BMR Credit 2 Organic Waste
Management, 2
Post-
occupancy
BMR Credit 3 Handling of Waste Materials,
During Construction 1
BMR Credit 4 Use of Certified Green Building
Materials, Products & Equipment 5
Indoor IEQ Mandatory Minimum Fresh Air Ventilation Required
Requirement 1
Environmental
IEQ Mandatory Tobacco Smoke Control Required
Quality Requirement 2
IEQ Credit 1 CO2 Monitoring 1
IEQ Credit 2 Daylighting 2
IEQ Credit 3 Outdoor Views 1
IEQ Credit 4 Minimise Indoor and Outdoor 1
Pollutants
IEQ Credit 5 Low-emitting Materials 3
IEQ Credit 6 Occupant Well-being Facilities 1
IEQ Credit 7 Indoor Air Quality Testing, 2
After Construction and Before
Occupancy
IEQ Credit 8 Indoor Air Quality 1
Management, During
Construction
Innovation and ID Credit 1 Innovation in Design Process 4
ID Credit 2 Optimisation in Structural Design 1
Development
ID Credit 3 Waste Water Reuse, During 1
Construction
ID Credit 4 IGBC Accredited Professional 1
TOTAL 100
30
Table 8 Certification level for IGBC
Certification Level Owner-occupied Recognition

Buildings
Certified 40 - 49 Best Practices
Silver 50 - 59 Outstanding Performance
Gold 60 - 74 National Excellence
Platinum 75 -100 Global Leadership
3. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED):

Process involved:
 Register: Register the project by completing key formalities
 Apply: Apply for LEED certification by submitting application, documents
and by paying the fees
 Review: Application is reviewed by respective team and documents are
verified
 Certify: Certification will be awarded based on the verifications and
evaluations of criteria
Certification Fees:
Table 9 Certification Fees for LEED
Building Design and Silver, Gold and Platinum Organizational or Non

Construction Fees per Level Members members
Building
Gross area Rate Minimum Rate Minimum
Project gross floor area $0.057/sf $2,850 $0.068/sf $3,420
(excluding parking): less Rs3.95/sf Rs197505 Rs4.712 Rs237006
than 250,000 sq ft
31

(excluding parking): Rs3.811/sf Rs987525 Rs4.5738 Rs1185030
250,000 - 499,999 sq ft
excluding parking): Rs3.465/sf Rs1905750 Rs4.158/sf Rs2286900
500,000 - 749,999 sq ft
It is observed that all the three rating systems are charging lakhs together for green
building certification. So by using the developed fuzzy model one can save the money by
approximately obtaining the rating of the building, improve the required attributes and
then apply for certification
Criteria and points allocation:

There are 9 main sections and those are subcategorized
Table 10 Criteria and points allocation for LEED
Sections Credit Credit Name Max points

Integrative Credit Integrative Process 1
Process
Location And LT Credit LEED For Neighborhood 16
Transportation(LT) Development Location
LT Credit Sensitive Land Protection 1
LT Credit High Priority Site 2
LT Credit Surrounding Density And Diverse 5
Uses
LT Credit Access To Quality Transit 5
LT Credit Bicycle Facilities 1
LT Credit Reduced Parking Footprint 1
LT Credit Green Vehicles 1
Sustainable SS Construction Activity Pollution
Prerequisite Prevention
Sites(SS)
SS Credit Site Assessment 1
SS Credit Site development – Protect or 2
restore habitat
SS Credit Open space 1
32
SS Credit Rainwater management 3

SS Credit Heat Island Reduction 2
SS Credit Light pollution reduction 1
Water Efficiency WE Outdoor water use reduction
Prerequisite
(WE)
WE Indoor water use reduction
Prerequisite
WE Building level water metering
Prerequisite
WE Credit Outdoor water use reduction 2
WE Credit Indoor water use reduction 6
WE Credit Cooling tower water use 2
WE Credit Water metering 1
Energy and EA Minimum Energy Performance
Prerequisite
Atmosphere(EA)
EA Building Level Energy Metering
Prerequisite
EA Fundamental Refrigerant
Prerequisite Management
EA Credit Enhanced Commissioning 6
EA Credit Optimize Energy Performance 18
EA Credit Advanced Energy Metering 1
EA Credit Demand Response 2
EA Credit Renewable Energy Production 3
EA Credit Enhanced Refrigerant 1
Management
EA Credit Green Power And Carbon Offsets 2
Materials and MR Storage and collection of
Prerequisite recyclables
Resources(MR)
MR Construction and demolition
Prerequisite waste management planning
MR Credit Building life-cycle impact 5
reduction
MR Credit Building product disclosure and 2
optimization – Environmental
product declaration
optimization-sourcing of raw
materials
33

optimization-Material
Ingredients
MR Credit Construction and demolition 2
waste management
Indoor EQ Minimum indoor air quality
Prerequisite performance
Environmental
EQ Credit Enhanced Indoor Air Quality 2
Quality(EQ) Strategies
EQ Credit Low-Emitting Materials 3
EQ Credit Construction indoor air quality 1
management plan
EQ Credit Indoor air quality assessment 2
EQ Credit Thermal comfort 1
EQ Credit Interior lighting 2
EQ Credit Day light 3
EQ Credit Quality views 1
EQ Credit Acoustic performance 1
Innovation(IN) IN Credit Innovation 5
IN Credit LEED Accredited professional 1
Regional Priority(RP) 4
TOTAL 110
Table 11 Certification level for LEED
Level of Evaluation LEED INDIA 2011

% of Score to Achieve Rating Level
FIRST 40-49 Certified
SECOND 50-59 Silver
THIRD 60-69 Gold
FOURTH >80 Platinum
34
OBJECTIVE 3: To prepare fuzzy rule based system for green rating of a building
4.2 Preparation of fuzzy rule based model
 The data of all the three systems are collected, based on the criteria and points
allocation fuzzy model will be developed separately for all the three systems
 The inputs are all the criteria of respective rating system
 Membership functions are the possible points for respective inputs (criteria)
 Linguistic terms are used in membership functions
ex: for the points 0 and 1 - non green and green
 Similarly for different points linguistic terms like less green, fairly green, very
green, extremely green etc are used
 The output will be the final score of the rating systems
 Membership functions for output will be the certification levels for respective
rating system
 The rating of a building can be awarded from the final score obtained from fuzzy
model by referring to the certification levels of respective rating systems
1. Development of fuzzy model for GRIHA
Table 12 Inputs, outputs & membership functions to develop a fuzzy model for GRIHA
Sl.No Inputs Points Membership functions Output

1 C1 0,1 non green, green
2 C2 1,2,3,4,5 less green, fairly green, green,
very green, extremely green Final
3 C3 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely Score
green
4 C4 0,1,2,3,4 non green, fairly green, green,
very green, extremely green
35
5 C5 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely

green
7 C7 0,1,2,3 non green, green, very green,
extremely green
8 C8 2 green
9 C9 2 green
extremely green
11 C11 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely
green
13 C13 6,7,8 green, very green, extremely
green Final
14 C14 8,10,12,14,16 less green, fairly green, green, Score

15 C15 0,1,2,3,4,6 non green, less green, fairly
green, green, very green,
extremely green
extremely green
18 C18 2,3,4,5,6,8 Very less green, less green, fairly
green, green, very green,
extremely green
36
extremely green
extremely green Final
27 C27 1 green Score
28 C28 2 green
29 C29 0,1,2 Non green, green, extremely
green
30 C30 0,1 Non green, green
31 C31 0,1 Non green, green
32 C32 0 Non green
33 C33 2 green
34 C34 0,1,2,3,4 Non green, fairly green, green,
The output membership functions for GRIHA are its certification levels i.e not certified,
certified, 1star, 2star, 3star, 4star & 5star
Based on the above data the fuzzy rule based model is developed and it is as shown
below
37
Figure 4: Inputs and output in fuzzy model for GRIHA rating system
Figure 5: Membership functions for inputs in fuzzy model for GRIHA rating system
38
Figure 6: Membership functions for output in fuzzy model for GRIHA rating system
There are number of possible points i.e by combination of all different criteria, this
points allocation is done in excel sheet for different possibilities and that is used to form
the rules for fuzzy model for all the three rating systems
Figure 7: Rules formulation in fuzzy editor for GRIHA rating system
39
2. Development of fuzzy model for IGBC
Table 13 Inputs, outputs & membership functions to develop a fuzzy model for IGBC

1 SA1 0,1 non green, green
2 SA2 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
3 SA3 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
4 SSP1 0,1 non green, green
7 SSP4 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
9 SSP6 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
10 SSP7 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green Final
11 SSP8 0,1 non green, green Score

15 WC1 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
16 WC2 0,1 non green, green
17 WC3 0,2,3,4 non green, green, very green, extremely green
18 WC4 0,1,2,3,4, non green, less green, fairly green, green, very
5 green, extremely green
19 WC5 0,2,3,4,5 non green, fairly green, green, very green,
extremely green
20 WC6 0,1 non green, green
40
21 EE1 0,1 non green, green

22 EE2 0,1,2,3,4, non green, green1, green2, green3, green4,
5,6,7,8,9, green5, very green1, very green2, very green3,
10,11,12, very green4, very green5, extremely green1,
13,14,15 extremely green2, extremely green3,
extremely green4, extremely green5
23 EE3 0,2,3,4,5, non green, less green, fairly green, green, very
24 EE4 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
25 EE5 0,2 non green, green
26 EE6 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green Final
27 BMR1 0,1,2,3,4, non green, green1, green2, green3, very Score
5,6,7,8 green1, very green2, very green3, extremely

green1, extremely green2
28 BMR2 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
29 BMR3 0,1 non green, green
30 BMR4 0,1,2,3,4, non green, less green, fairly green, green, very
31 IEQ1 0,1 non green, green
32 IEQ2 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
35 IEQ5 0,1,2,3 non green, green, very green, extremely green
41
39 ID1 0,1,2,3,4 non green, fairly green, green, very green,

extremely green Final
40 ID2 0,1 non green, green Score
41 ID3 0,1 non green, green
42 ID4 0,1 non green, green
The output membership functions for IGBC are its certification levels i.e not certified,
certified, silver, gold & platinum
below
Figure 8: Inputs and output in fuzzy model for IGBC rating system
42
Figure 9: Membership functions for inputs in fuzzy model for IGBC rating system
Figure 10: Membership functions for output in fuzzy model for IGBC rating system
43
Figure 11: Rules formation in fuzzy editor for IGBC rating system
3. Development of fuzzy model for LEED
Table 14 Inputs, outputs & membership functions to develop a fuzzy model for LEED
1 IP 0,1 non green, green
2 LT1 0,8,10,12,1 non green, fairly green, green, very green,

6 extremely green
3 LT2 0,1, non green, green
4 LT3 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green Final
5 LT4 0,1,2,3,4,5 non green, less green, fairly green, green, Score

6 LT5 0,1,2,3,4,5 non green, less green, fairly green, green,
44
7 LT6 0,1 non green, green

8 LT7 0,1 non green, green
9 LT8 0,1,2 non green, green
10 SS1 0,1,2 non green, green
11 SS2 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
12 SS3 0,1 non green, green
15 SS6 0,1 non green, green
16 WE1 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
17 WE2 0,1,3,4,5,6 non green, very less green, less green, fairly Final
green, green, very green, extremely green Score
18 WE3 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green

19 WE4 0,1 non green, green
20 EA1 0,2,3,4,5,6 non green, less green, fairly green, green,
21 EA2 0,1,2,3,4,5, non green, green1, green2, green3, green4,
6,7,8,9,10,1 green5, green6, very green1, very green2,
1,12,13,14, very green3, very green4, very green5, very
15,16,17,18 green6, extremely green1, extremely green1,
extremely green2, extremely green3,
extremely green4, extremely green5,
extremely green6
22 EA3 0,1 non green, green

23 EA4 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
24 EA5 0,1,2,3 non green, green, very green, extremely
45
green
25 EA6 0,1 non green, green
26 EA7 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
27 MR1 0,2,3,5 non green, green, very green, extremely
green
28 MR2 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
29 MR3 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green Final
30 MR4 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green Score
31 MR5 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green

32 EQ1 0,1,2 non green, green, extremely green
33 EQ2 0,1,2,3 non green, green, very green, extremely
green
34 EQ3 0,1 non green, green
38 EQ7 0,1,2,3 non green, green, very green, extremely
green
41 IN1 0,1,2,3,4,5 non green, less green, fairly green, green,
42 IN2 0,1 non green, green
43 RP 0,1,2,3,4 non green, fairly green, green, very green,
extremely green
46
The output membership functions for LEED are its certification levels i.e not certified,
certified, silver, gold & platinum
below
Figure 12: Inputs and output in fuzzy model for LEED rating system
Figure 13: Membership functions for inputs in fuzzy model for LEED rating system
47
Figure 14: Membership functions for output in fuzzy model for LEED rating system
Figure 15: Rules formation in fuzzy editor for LEED rating system
48
Chapter-5: Results and Discussions
Software used is Fuzzy Logic Tool box in MATLAB to implement the proposed model. A
user friendly model is designed for obtaining the final score of a green building from
which the rating of the building can be awarded for all the three rating systems i.e for
GRIHA, IGBC and LEED.
Two real life projects are selected for the validation of the developed model.
1. Project 1: Already rated building from IGBC version3
2. Project 2: Non rated building
The details of the project are given below
5.1 Validation of the developed fuzzy model

Project 1: Selected green building is eFACiLiTY Enterprise Facility Management Software,
Coimbatore
eFACiLiTY is an Enterprise-grade Facilities Management Software developed, owned and
supported by SIERRA ODC Private Limited, a two-decade year old Software company
operating in India with offices in USA, Malaysia and the Middle East. SIERRA, a Microsoft
Gold-Certified partner is committed to provide world-class Software services and
solutions to customers across the globe.
 It is a 2nd highest LEED rated building in the world
 It is a highest rated building in India
The building is also rated by IGBC, since only the final review document from IGBC of the
building was shared from the building authority, the final review data is used to validate
the developed fuzzy model for IGBC
49
Figure 16: eFACiLiTY Enterprise Facility Management Software, Coimbatore
50
Table 15 Data obtained from building authority for validation
51
52
Table 16 Data Summary for validation
53
This data is fed as inputs and used to validate the developed fuzzy model for IGBC rating
system and the output obtained is as shown
Figure 17: Fuzzy output for IGBC Project 1
 Final score of the building from IGBC V3 is 93

 Final score of the building from developed fuzzy rule based system is 87.7
 Both lie in the same category that is platinum rating
 The difference in the scores is due to points allocation by humans and fuzziness
involved in it
54
5.2 Rating a non rated building

Project 2: TERI building is selected which is non rated green commercial building in
Bangalore with total built up area of 26,663 sq.ft with G+2 floors
Figure 18: TERI Building
It has implemented many green concepts and techniques like use of abundant daylight
into office spaces, fresh environment is maintained inside by planting the saplings inside
the building, use of locally available materials for construction, roof gardening,
installation of solar photovoltaic cells and solar water heaters and many more, few of
them are as shown below
Figure 19: Abundant natural light for work spaces
55
Figure 20: Indoor environmental quality is maintained
Figure 21: Solar water heater installation
Figure 22: Solar photovoltaic integrated with roof
56
The data of the building is highly confidential it cannot be shared publicly by the building
authority, so personal visit to the building site has been made and manual rating is done
in excel sheet with the help of one of the member of the TERI Institute
Since GRIHA is developed by TERI and the member was from GRIHA team, the manual
rating is done for GRIHA rating system and also rating with developed fuzzy model for
GRIHA rating system
Point’s allocation for TERI building by GRIHA rating system is as shown below
Table 17 Point’s allocation for TERI building by GRIHA rating
Sections Criteria Criteria Name Max points Points

No Allotted
Sustainable 1 Site Selection 1 1
Site Planning 2 Preserve and protect landscape 5 2
during construction
3 Soil conservation till post 2 0
construction
4 Design to include existing site 4 4
features
5 Reduce hard paving on-site and/or 2 2
provide shaded hard-paved surfaces
6 Enhance outdoor lighting system 3 1
efficiency and use renewable energy
system for meeting outdoor lighting
requirement
7 Plan utilities efficiently and optimize 3 3
on-site circulation efficiency
57
Health and 8 Provide minimum level of 2 2

wealth being sanitation/safety facilities for
of construction workers
Construction 9 Reduce air pollution during 2 2
workers construction
Building 10 Reduce landscape water 3 3

Planning and requirement
Construction
11 Reduce the water use by the building 2 2
12 Efficient water use during 1 1
construction
13 Optimize building design to reduce 8 7
conventional energy demand
14 Optimize energy performance of 16 16
building within specified comfort
limits
15 Utilization of flyash in building 6 4
structure
16 Reduce volume and weight, and time 4 1
of construction by adopting efficient
technologies
17 Use low-energy material in interiors 4 4
18 Renewable energy utilization 5 3
19 Renewable-energy-based hot water 3 1
system
Recycle, 20 Waste-water treatment 2 0
58
reuse and 21 Water recycle and reuse (including 5 3

recharge of rainwater)
water 22 Reduction in waste during 1 1
construction
23 Efficient waste segregation 1 1
24 Storage and disposal of wastes 1 1
25 Resource recovery from waste 2 2
Health and 26 Use low-VOC 3 3
well being paints/adhesives/sealants
27 Minimize ozone depleting 1 1
substances
28 Ensure water quality 2 2
29 Acceptable outdoor and indoor noise 2 2
levels
30 Tobacco smoke control 1 1
31 Provide at least the minimum level of 1 1
accessibility for persons with
disabilities
Building 32 Energy audit and validation mandatory -
Operation 33 Operation and Maintenance 2 2
and
Maintenance
Innovation 34 Innovation 4 0
TOTAL 100 79
59
The same points are fed as inputs into developed fuzzy model for GRIHA rating system
and output obtained is as follows
Figure 23: Fuzzy output for GRIHA Project 2
 Final score of the building from excel sheet(manual rating) is 79

 Final score of the building from developed fuzzy rule based system is 75.7
 Both lie in the same category that is 3 star rating
60
Chapter-6: Conclusions and Future Directions
Conclusions:
 Fuzzy logic acts as a very good decision making tool and can be used to solve
many problems of construction industry
 There are different rating systems for different climatic conditions, three rating
systems GRIHA, IGBC and LEED which are widely used in India are studied and
applied into a Fuzzy logic
 Different Fuzzy models are developed for all three ratings systems to check for
the approximate rating of the building before going to any green building
certifications, improve the greenness and then go for certification which can save
the lakhs of certification fees
 The developed fuzzy models are validated with rated building and manual
ratings, this shows its usefulness and solves uncertainty of present manual
methods
Suggestions for future directions:
 In order to increase the accuracy of the fuzzy rating process the membership
functions for input and output variables can be improved and more number of
rules can be added using more possibilities of points
 Apart from these three rating systems there are other systems such as BREEAM,
CASBEE, Green Star etc for different countries for different climatic regions, the
same approach can be done for those rating systems
 If the huge data is available, other techniques like ANN can be used
61
References
 Agarwal, H., 2017. Comparison between Three Most Prevailing Green Building
Rating Systems of India. International Journal of Science, Engineering and
Technology, 5(3), pp. 85-93.
 Bansal, S., 2015. Approach of Fuzzy Logic For Evaluation of Green Rating System.
IJIRAE, 2(3), pp. 35-39
 B.S, N. F. P., 2016. Green Building Evaluation of the Pantheon Using Fuzzy Set
Approach, Rome: s.n.
 Chan , A. P., Chan, D. W. & Yeung, J. Y., 2009. Overview of the application of
"Fuzzy Techniques" in construction management research. Journal of
construction engineering and managment ASCE , II(6), pp. 212-219.
 Gobidesi, S., 2018. Fuzzy logic model for selection of concrete placement methods
for formwork systems, Bangalore
 Jha, G. V. &. K., 2016. Benchmarking Green Building Attributes to Achieve Cost
Effectiveness Using Data Envelopment Analysis. Sustainable cities and Society,
6(2), pp. 29-58.
 M. Chetana S. Illankoon, V. W., 2017. Key credit criteria among international
green building rating tools. Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 164, pp. 209-
220.
 Nguyen, B. K. & Altan, H., 2011. Comparative review of five sustainable rating
systems. Issue 21, pp. 376-386.
 Pastagia, D. A., 2017. Development of Fuzzy Rating Model for Residential
building. IJCIET, 8(10), pp. 1821-1828
62
 Rana, A., 2016. Methodology for developing criteria weights for green buiding
rating tool for gujrat state. International research journal of engineering and
technology , III(2), pp. 412-417.
 S, R. & Pai, V. G., 2009. Neutral networks, fuzzy logic and genetic algorithms.
Eastern economy edition ed. New Delhi: s.n.
 Zhikun Ding, Z. F. V. W., 2018. Green building evaluation system implementation.
Building and Environment, Volume 133, pp. 32-40.
63

Framework For Selection of Green Building Attributes To Achieve Cost Effectiveness Using Fuzzy Logic Model

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Framework For Selection of Green Building Attributes To Achieve Cost Effectiveness Using Fuzzy Logic Model

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Framework for selection of green building

attributes to achieve cost effectiveness using Fuzzy

M. Tech. Dissertation in Construction Engineering Management

Submitted By : Manisha Mrutyunjay Kabbur

Reg. No. : 17ETCE040418

Supervisors : 1. Mr. Akshayakumar V.H, Assistant Professor

Mr. Akshayakumar V H Dr. H M Rajashekar Swamy

Dr. H M Rajashekar Swamy Dr. M. Arulanantham

Framework for selection of green building attributes to achieve

The dissertation is submitted in partial fulfilment of academic requirements

4.2 Preparation of fuzzy rule based model ....................................................................... 35

Table 1 Summary of literature review ............................................................................... 11

Figure 1: Fuzzy logic [ MATLAB Manual] .............................................................................. 4

Abbreviation and Acronyms

BREEAM – Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method

1.1 Green Building

1.2 Green Building Certification

• Higher tenant and occupant satisfaction

• Higher pride of place and worker productivity

• Operating costs is low

• National and local recognition opportunities

1.3 Green Building Rating Systems

2. Indian Green Building Council (IGBC)

3. The Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED)

3. The Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED): It was developed in by

1.4 Fuzzy Logic

Figure 1: Fuzzy logic [ MATLAB Manual]

Fuzzy controller consists of 3 phases Fuzzification, Decision making unit and

Figure 2: Fuzzy logic unit [Abdel-Razek, et al., 1999]

Chapter-2: Literature Review and Problem Formulation

2.1 Reviewed Literature

2.2 Summary of literature review

Table 1 Summary of literature review

Sl Authors Year Resear Methods Researc Conclusi Limitat Critical

determin Design They

2 Suryatej 2018 Selectio Question Fuzzy Fuzzy Questi Still

3 Albert 2009 A brief Decision Decision The Only A brief

assigned ing minimiz

5 D. A. 2017 A 68 3 Star A Its very The

GRIHA named FRAMRE rating

6 Nina 2016 Green Weighted Based A No Fuzzy

7 I M 2017 To find Comparis Key These Only Can be

8 Binh K 2011 To Review BREEAM It is not Physica Can be

9 Himansh 2017 Compar Mandato Points Each Not all Possibil

10 Abhishe 2016 Develo Study of 41 Differen Experts Still the

2.3 Identified Research gaps

Chapter-3: Problem Statement

Table 2 Methods and Methodology to attain each objective

Objective Statement of the Method/ Methodology Resources Utilised

1 To carry out Referring relevant journals, Journals from

2 To collect the Complete review on Manuals of

3 To prepare fuzzy rule Numerical terms are MS Excel and

4 To validate fuzzy A building is selected which MATLAB

5 To rate a non rated A non rated building is MS Excel and

Chapter-4: Problem Solving

Table 3 Certification fees for GRIHA

Built up area (sqm) Certification Fees

Criteria and point allocation

Table 4 Criteria and point allocation for GRIHA

Sections Criteria Criteria Name Max points

wealth being of facilities for construction workers

Building 10 Reduce landscape water requirement 3

being 27 Minimize ozone depleting substances 1