Comparative analysis of traditional and modular building systems in terms of cost, construction duration, energy efficiency, and life cycle

This thesis presents a comparative evaluation of various building systems that can be utilized in post-disaster reconstruction processes from engineering, economic, and environmental perspectives. The analyses, conducted for the province of Kahramanmaraş, examine eleven different systems, including reinforced concrete, steel, timber (masonry, braced and unbraced frame, Bağdadi), masonry (stone, brick, reinforced), and modular systems (CLT, prefabricated light steel, autoclaved aerated concrete panel). For each system, cost, project duration, energy efficiency, and life cycle assessment (LCA) parameters were considered. The analyses were performed using Autodesk Revit–Insight and Tally software. The parameter weights were determined through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), and a multi-criteria decision-making framework was applied for the final evaluation. The results revealed that modular and prefabricated systems significantly reduce construction time, lower carbon emissions, and exhibit superior performance in energy efficiency. In contrast, reinforced concrete structures, while advantageous in terms of structural strength, were found to be the least favorable in terms of environmental impact and construction duration. Ultimately, the study concludes that modular and light steel systems represent the most suitable alternatives for rapid, sustainable, and energy-efficient construction in post-disaster contexts. These findings provide a scientific basis for developing environmentally sensitive and economically feasible reconstruction strategies for future disaster scenarios.