Optimización de emisiones de CO2 y costes de muros de contrafuertes con el algoritmo del agujero negro

Acaban de publicarnos un artículo en la revista Sustainability,  revista indexada en JCR. En este artículo minimizamos las emisiones de CO2 en la construcción de un muro de contrafuertes de hormigón armado usando la metaheurística del agujero negro (Black Hole Algorithm). El trabajo se enmarca dentro del proyecto de investigación DIMALIFE que dirijo como investigador principal en la Universitat Politècnica de València.

La optimización del costo y de las emisiones de CO2 en los muros de contención de tierras es relevante, pues estas estructuras se utilizan muy frecuentemente en la ingeniería civil. La optimización de los costos es esencial para la competitividad de la empresa constructora, y la optimización de las emisiones es relevante en el impacto ambiental de la construcción. Para abordar la optimización se utilizó la metaheurística de los agujeros negros, junto con un mecanismo de discretización basado en la normalización mínimo-máxima. Se evaluó la estabilidad del algoritmo con respecto a las soluciones obtenidas; se analizaron los valores de acero y hormigón obtenidos en ambas optimizaciones. Además, se compararon las variables geométricas de la estructura. Los resultados muestran un buen rendimiento en la optimización con el algoritmo de agujero negro.

Abstract

The optimization of the cost and CO 2 emissions in earth-retaining walls is of relevance, since these structures are often used in civil engineering. The optimization of costs is essential for the competitiveness of the construction company, and the optimization of emissions is relevant in the environmental impact of construction. To address the optimization, black hole metaheuristics were used, along with a discretization mechanism based on min–max normalization. The stability of the algorithm was evaluated with respect to the solutions obtained; the steel and concrete values obtained in both optimizations were analyzed. Additionally, the geometric variables of the structure were compared. Finally, the results obtained were compared with another algorithm that solved the problem. The results show that there is a trade-off between the use of steel and concrete. The solutions that minimize CO 2 emissions prefer the use of concrete instead of those that optimize the cost. On the other hand, when comparing the geometric variables, it is seen that most remain similar in both optimizations except for the distance between buttresses. When comparing with another algorithm, the results show a good performance in optimization using the black hole algorithm.

Keywords

CO2 emission; earth-retaining walls; optimization; black hole; min–max discretization

Reference:

YEPES, V.; MARTÍ, J.V.; GARCÍA, J. (2020). Black hole algorithm for sustainable design of counterfort retaining walls. Sustainability, 12, 2767. DOI:10.3390/su12072767

Descargar (PDF, 770KB)

Comparativa medioambiental de muros atendiendo a su ciclo completo de vida

Acaban de publicarnos un artículo en la revista Journal of Cleaner Production (primer decil del JCR), de la editorial ELSEVIER, en la que analizamos una de las construcciones más habituales en la ingeniería civil, como son las estructuras de contención de tierras.

Se ha realizado para ello un análisis de ciclo de vida completo de cuatro tipos de muros: muros de hormigón armado, de hormigón en masa, de gaviones y de escollera. Además se ha realizado un estudio paramétrico para averiguar hasta qué altura de tierras es mejor una u otra tipología. Las conclusiones obtenidas no son evidentes a priori. Podéis verlas en el resumen que os paso a continuación.

Además, la editorial ELSEVIER nos permite la distribución gratuita del artículo hasta el 29 de junio de 2018. Por tanto, os paso el enlace para que os podáis descargar este artículo: https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1X15O3QCo9R1sI

Referencia:

PONS, J.J.; PENADÉS-PLÀ, V.; YEPES, V.; MARTÍ, J.V. (2018). Life cycle assessment of earth-retaining walls: An environmental comparison. Journal of Cleaner Production, 192:411-420.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.268

Abstract:

Earth-retaining walls are one of the most common structures in civil engineering, a discipline of the construction sector, which is known to produce one of the highest environmental impacts. Therefore, developing cleaner design and construction practices could contribute to a more sustainable future for our planet. To make a step towards this goal, this study comprises the life cycle assessment (LCA) of the four most common earth-retaining walls built between 1 to 6 m of height: cantilever walls, gravity walls, masonry walls and gabion walls to obtain the best solutions for the environment. To assess the environmental impacts caused throughout their whole life-cycle including the production, construction, use and end of life phases, we used the OpenLCA software, the ecoinvent 3.3 database and the ReCiPe (H) method. The associated uncertainties have been considered and the results are provided in both midpoint and endpoint approaches. Our findings show that gabion and masonry walls produce the lowest global impact. On the one hand, gabion walls cause less damage to human health but on the other hand, masonry walls cause less damage to the ecosystems. Furthermore, gravity walls produce similar impacts to gabion and masonry walls between 1 and 3 m of height as well as fewer impacts than cantilever walls for a height of 4 m. In conclusion, gabion and masonry walls are preferable to concrete walls for heights between 1 and 6 m and cantilever walls should be used over gravity walls for greater heights than 4.5 m.

Keywords:

Life cycle assessment; Sustainability; Earth-retaining wall; ReCiPe

Highlights:

  • Four earth-retaining walls are compared to obtain the best environmental solution.
  • The OpenLCA software, the Ecoinvent 3.3 database and the ReCiPe (H) method are used.
  • Gabion walls cause less damage to human health than masonry walls.
  • Masonry walls cause less damage to the ecosystems than gabion walls.
  • Mass concrete walls are cleaner than reinforced ones until 4.5 m of height.