Estimation of financial needs and condition of infrastructure assets
2024-03-11
Required
Provided
Gradual/Manifest
Sudden/Latent
Process | Subprocess | Comments |
---|---|---|
Concrete surface wear | Abrasion | moving objects in contact with concrete which can wear away and often desired roughness |
Aggregate deterioration | Alkali-silica reaction | a reaction between the hydroxide ions in the alkaline cement pore solution in the concrete and reactive forms of silica in the aggregate form a gel is produced, which increases in volume by taking up water and so exerts an expansive pressure |
Freezing and thawing | under humid conditions pores may be water-filled and under freezing conditions, water in these pores may freeze and thaw, which causes immense hydraulic pressure, which cracks concrete | |
Cement paste deterioration process | Deterioration due to sulfate | exposure to industrial and agricultural chemicals can result in the breakdown of the cement paste, the glue that holds concrete together |
Reinforcement corrosion process | Chloride-induced corrosion of steel | Corrosion of steel can cause the production of a rusted product that is significantly larger than the normal steel cracking the surrounding concrete and destroying the bond between concrete and steel. There may also be section loss of the steel reinforcement. |
Carbonation-induced corrosion of steel | Carbonation, or neutralization, is a chemical reaction between carbon dioxide in the air with calcium hydroxide and hydrated calcium silicate in the concrete. |
Deterioration process phases | Visual condition indications | Time | Provided service | |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Penetration of water and de-icing salts into surface concrete | None | 1 | 1 |
2 | Breakdown of depassivation layer of top reinforcement | None | 2 | 1 |
3 | Rusting of top reinforcement | None | 3 | 1 |
4 | Cracking and spalling of surface concrete | Small pockmarks on the surface, often accompanied by a rust stain, and usually at a point corresponding to the location of a top reinforcing bar | 5 | 1 |
5 | Shifting of the compressive zone in the concrete deck | Spalling in multiple locations and some of these locations had significant amounts of exposed reinforcement Uniformly spaced cracks on the underside of the slab, beneath spalled areas |
5 | 1 |
6 | Overstressing of the bottom reinforcement | No additional visual indications | 6 | 1 |
7 | Cracking of the bottom concrete | Spalling in numerous widely dispersed locations over relatively large areas, more intense under the truck lanes. | 7 | 1 |
8 | Punching failures | Spalling in numerous widely dispersed locations over relatively large areas, extensive cracking was observed, two punching failures of the deck slab occurred | 8 | 2 |
9 | Collapse | - | ? | 3 |
Item | State | Condition | Description of condition on entry |
---|---|---|---|
Deck | 1 | Good | no signs rust |
2 | Acceptable | minor spots of rust and/or spalling and thin cracks less than 2.5 mm wide | |
3 | Damaged | major spots of rust and/or spalling and thin cracks | |
4 | Poor | major spots of rust and/or spalling and section loss of reinforcement less than 10% | |
5 | Alarming | section loss of reinforcement more than 10% |
We can use a Markov model
Consider a sequence of random variables \({X_k, k = 0,1,2,….}\) , where each \(X_k\) can be one of a finite number of possible values, i.e. states.
These states are a set of non-negative integers from the set \(S = {1,2,…,n}\).
If \(X_k = i\), then the process (or Markov chain) is said to be in state \(i\) at time \(k\).
We can use a Markov model
\[P(X_{n+1}=j \mid X_n=i, X_{n-1}=i_{n-1},\] \[\ldots, X_1=i_1, X_0=i_0) \] \[= P(X_{n+1}=j \mid X_n=i) \] \[= P_{ij}\]
\[ P = \begin{pmatrix} p_{11} & p_{12} & \ldots & p_{1K} \\ p_{21} & p_{22} & \ldots & p_{2K} \\ \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\ p_{R1} & p_{R2} & \ldots & p_{RK} \end{pmatrix} \]
- The addition of row transition probabilities must be equal to 1
\[ \sum_{j=1}^{k} P_{ij} = 1\quad\forall i \]
\[ P_{ij}=0 \quad\forall i>j \]
We can use a Markov model
State at \(t\), i.e., \(S(t)=\)
Deterioration Matrix,i.e., \(P=\)
\[ S_1 \quad S_2 \quad S_3 \quad S_4 \quad S_5 \\ \{q_1 \quad q_2 \quad q_3 \quad q_4 \quad q_5\} \]
\[ \begin{pmatrix} P_{11} & P_{12} & P_{13} & P_{14} & P_{15} \\ 0 & P_{22} & P_{23} & P_{24} & P_{25} \\ 0 & 0 & P_{33} & P_{34} & P_{35} \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & P_{44} & P_{45} \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & P_{55} \end{pmatrix} \]
\[
\qquad S_1 \quad S_2 \quad S_3 \quad S_4 \quad S_5 \\
Q=\{0.8 \quad 0.1 \quad 0.1 \quad 0 \quad 0\}
\]
\[ \begin{pmatrix} 0.8 & 0.2 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0.76 & 0.24 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0.72 & 0.28 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0.65 & 0.35 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \]
We can use a Markov model
CS evolution between \(t = 0\) and \(t = 50\)
With data With
expert
opinion With
deterministic
deterioration
model
Minimise the long-term difference between:
\[ Z = \sum_t (y(t)-\bar y(t))^2 \]
\[ C(t)=0.16\cdot t+1 \] - Objective function
\[ Z=\sum_{t=1}^{T}(0.16\cdot t-\bar C(t))^2 \]
\[ P = \begin{bmatrix} p_{11} & 1-p_{11} & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & p_{22} & 1-p_{22} & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & p_{33} & 1-p_{33} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & p_{44} & 1-p_{44} \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix} \]
\[ C(t)=C(0)\cdot P^{t} \] Therefore, the average condition state at \(t\):
\[ \bar C(t)=C(0) \cdot P^{t} \cdot S \\ S^T=\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 \end{pmatrix} \]
Download this template!
CS at \(t=0\)/\(t=t+1\) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0.86 | 0.13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1 | 0 | 0.81 | 0.18 | 0 | 0 |
2 | 0 | 0 | 0.74 | 0.25 | 0 |
3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.65 | 0.37 |
4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Name | Explanation |
---|---|
settled area per km | relative exposure of the community road network to urbanity |
residents per settled area | captures the effect of high population density and the consequential complexity of the infrastructure |
HGV per km | proxies the effect of increased deterioration due to high axle load |
tax per resident | captures the (standard economic theory) effect that wealthier a political units are likely to spend more on high quality goods |
average slope | average slope of the community |
geologic difficulty | sediments are assigned to one of three difficulty classes: difficult = +1, average = 0, or easy = -1 |
Richmond, C., Kielhauser, C., Adey, B.T., (2015), Developing key performance indicators for cantonal road management in Switzerland, The Asset Management Conference, London, United Kingdom, November 25-26.
Snow
Daily temperature fluctuations
Amount of rain
Amount of traffic
Sensible categories
\[ P_{ij}=1−0.5^{\frac{t}{T}} \\ P_{12} = 1−0.5^{\frac{t}{T}} \\ P_{12} = 1−0.5^{\frac{1}{12}} \\ P_{12} = 1−0.94 \\ P_{12} = 0.056 \]
\[ P_{ii}= 0.5^{ \frac{t}{T}} \\ P_{11}= 0.5^{ \frac{t}{T}} \\ P_{11}= 0.5^{ \frac{1}{12}} \\ P_{11}= 0.944 \]
\[ T= \frac{1 \cdot log(0.5)}{log(0.944)} \\ T= \frac{−0.301}{-0.0269} \\ T=12 \]
Important
When an asset can change only one CS per each \(t\).
Questions?
Hamed Mehranfar
Doctoral student
hmehranfar@ethz.ch
ETH Zürich
Institute of Construction and Infrastructure Management (IBI)
Chair of Infrastructure Management
HIL G 32.2, Stefano-Franscini-Platz 5
8093 Zürich