Development of a Cross-Asset Model for the Maintenance of Road and Water Pipe Assets using AHP Method

J. A. N. N. Jayakody; M. C. M. Nasvi; D. J. Robert; S. K. Navaratnarajah; L. C. Kurukulasuriya; F. Giustozzi; C. Gunasekara; S. Setunge

doi:10.28991/CEJ-2024-010-02-01

Authors

J. A. N. N. Jayakody 1) Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka. 2) School of Engineering, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University, Melbourne, VIC 3001,, Australia
M. C. M. Nasvi Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Peradeniya,, Sri Lanka
D. J. Robert
dilan.robert@rmit.edu.au
School of Engineering, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University, Melbourne, VIC 3001,, Australia
S. K. Navaratnarajah Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Peradeniya,, Sri Lanka
L. C. Kurukulasuriya Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Peradeniya,, Sri Lanka
F. Giustozzi School of Engineering, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University, Melbourne, VIC 3001,, Australia
C. Gunasekara School of Engineering, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University, Melbourne, VIC 3001,, Australia
S. Setunge School of Engineering, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University, Melbourne, VIC 3001,, Australia

Vol. 10 No. 2 (2024): February

Research Articles

Downloads

PDF

Abstract
How to Cite
Metrics
References
License

Roads and water pipe assets undergo various deterioration processes due to the high demand for their services. Maintenance of these assets is often planned as individual assets, and the interdependency among different assets is neglected. An integrated framework for cross-asset maintenance is required for optimum utilization of the available funds for asset maintenance. To date, there are very few studies focusing on the use of the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for cross-asset maintenance of roads and water pipe assets. Therefore, this research aims to develop an integrated fund allocation model for the maintenance of road and water pipe assets. A model was developed using AHP analysis based on expert opinions captured through a questionnaire in order to obtain optimum maintenance fund allocation for the cross-assets, roads, and water pipes. Then, a case study corridor segment with the considered cross-assets was selected, and a trade-off analysis was conducted for the intervention alternatives considering different levels of service (LOS) of the asset elements. The results of the trade-off analysis can be used to identify the optimum intervention alternative that satisfies the budget requirement and results in the maximum benefit. Overall, asset managers can use the approach presented in the present study to develop a cross-asset fund allocation model when multiple assets are involved in maintenance.

Doi: 10.28991/CEJ-2024-010-02-01

Full Text: PDF

Jayakody, J. A. N. N., Nasvi, M. C. M., Robert, D. J., Navaratnarajah, S. K., Kurukulasuriya, L. C., Giustozzi, F., … Setunge, S. (2024). Development of a Cross-Asset Model for the Maintenance of Road and Water Pipe Assets using AHP Method. Civil Engineering Journal, 10(2), 336–361. https://doi.org/10.28991/CEJ-2024-010-02-01

Download Citation

[1] Haas, R., Hudson, W. R., & Falls, L. C. (2015). Pavement Asset Management. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, United States. doi:10.1002/9781119038849.
[2] Wu, Z. (2008). Hybrid multi-objective optimization models for managing pavement assets. Ph.D. Thesis, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, United States.
[3] Dehghani, M., Giustozzi, F., Flintsch, G., & Crispino, M. (2013). Cross-asset resource allocation framework for achieving performance sustainability. Transportation Research Record, 2361(2361), 16–24. doi:10.3141/2361-03.
[4] Deix, S., Alten, K., & Weninger-Vycudil, A. (2012). Procedures for Cross Asset Management Optimisation. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 48, 2022–2028. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.1175.
[5] Weninger-Vycudil, A., Hanley, C., Deix, S., O'Connor, A., & Pakrashi, V. (2015). Cross-asset management for road infrastructure networks. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Transport, 168(5), 442–456. doi:10.1680/jtran.13.00087.
[6] Sjögren, L., Ihs, A., Edvardsson, K., Wennström, J., Haider, M., Casse, C., Van Geem, C., Benbow, E., Wright, A. & Š½nidariÄ, A. (2013). Overall road asset performance. HeRoad, Holistic Evaluation of Road Assessment, 1-125.
[7] Laumet, P., & Bruun, M. (2016). Trade-off Analysis for Infrastructure Management: New Approaches to Cross-asset Challenges. Transportation Research Procedia, 14, 422–429. doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2016.05.094.
[8] Marler, R. T., & Arora, J. S. (2004). Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 26(6), 369–395. doi:10.1007/s00158-003-0368-6.
[9] Wu, Z., Flintsch, G., Ferreira, A., & de Picado-Santos, L. (2012). Framework for multiobjective optimization of physical highway assets investments. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 138(12), 1411–1421. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000458.
[10] Porras-Alvarado, J. D. (2016). A methodological framework for cross-asset resource allocations to support infrastructure management. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, United States.
[11] Deb, K., Sindhya, K., & Hakanen, J. (2016). Multi-objective optimization. Decision sciences. CRC Press, Boca Raton, United States. doi:10.1201/9781315183176-4.
[12] Patidar, V. (2007). Multi-objective optimization for bridge management systems. National Cooperative Highway Research Program, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, United States.
[13] Mulliner, E., Malys, N., & Maliene, V. (2016). Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability. Omega (United Kingdom), 59, 146–156. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2015.05.013.
[14] Velasquez, M., & Hester, P. (2013). An analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods. International Journal of Operations Research, 10(2), 56–66.
[15] Lungu, K. A., Kaliba, C., & Mwanaumo, E. M. (2022). Systematic review: Prioritization models for asphalt road maintenance. Building Smart, Resilient and Sustainable Infrastructure in Developing Countries, 225–234, CRC Press, Boca Raton, United States. doi:10.1201/9781003325321-24.
[16] ílvarez, M., Moreno, A., & Mataix, C. (2013). The analytic hierarchy process to support decision-making processes in infrastructure projects with social impact. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 24(5–6), 596–606. doi:10.1080/14783363.2012.669561.
[17] Saaty, T. L. (1995). Transport planning with multiple criteria: The analytic hierarchy process applications and progress review. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 29(1), 81–126. doi:10.1002/atr.5670290109.
[18] Su, M., & Hassan, R. (2007). Application of the analytic hierarchy process in road asset management: user manual. No. AP-T84/07, AUSTROADS, Sydney, Australia.
[19] Wang, S., & Chou, E. Y. (2015). Integrated Optimization Model for Network-Level Transportation Cross Asset Preservation. No. 15-0036, Transportation Research Board, Wahington, United States.
[20] Porras-Alvarado, J. D., Han, Z., & Zhang, Z. (2015). A fair division approach to performance-based cross-asset resource allocation. 9th International Conference on Managing Pavement Assets, 18-21 May, 2015, Washington, United States.
[21] Li, H., Ni, F., Dong, Q., & Zhu, Y. (2018). Application of analytic hierarchy process in network level pavement maintenance decision-making. International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology, 11(4), 345–354. doi:10.1016/j.ijprt.2017.09.015.
[22] Rifat Hossain Bhuiyan, M., Asif Raihan, M., & Hossain, M. (2024). A MCDM Based Approach to Prioritizing National Highways for Road Safety Improvements. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering. ICACE 2022, Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, 368, Springer, Singapore. doi:10.1007/978-981-99-3826-1_13.
[23] Van Hiep, D., & Sodikov, J. (2017). The Role of Highway Functional Classification in Road Asset Management. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 12, 1477-1488. doi:10.11175/easts.12.1477.
[24] Fawzy, M. M., Elsharkawy, A. S., Hassan, A. A., & Khalifa, Y. A. (2023). Prioritization of Egyptian Road Maintenance Using Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology, 1-14. doi:10.1007/s42947-023-00351-6.
[25] Sharma, V., Al-Hussein, M., Safouhi, H., & Bouferguène, A. (2008). Municipal Infrastructure Asset Levels of Service Assessment for Investment Decisions Using Analytic Hierarchy Process. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 14(3), 193–200. doi:10.1061/(asce)1076-0342(2008)14:3(193).
[26] Orugbo, E. E., Alkali, B. M., Desilva, A., & Harrison, D. K. (2015). RCM and AHP hybrid model for road network maintenance prioritization. Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering, 10(2), 182–190. doi:10.3846/bjrbe.2015.23.
[27] Chaipetch, P., Amprayn, C., Pawan, P., & Ratanavaraha, V. (2022). Analytical of Multi-Criteria Approach for Identifying the Weight and Factor of Rural Road Maintenance Prioritization. International Journal of GEOMATE, 22(91), 70–79. doi:10.21660/2022.91.gxi334.
[28] Nautiyal, A., & Sharma, S. (2022). Scientific approach using AHP to prioritize low volume rural roads for pavement maintenance. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 28(2), 411–429. doi:10.1108/JQME-12-2019-0111.
[29] Dalal, J., Mohapatra, P. K. J., & Mitra, G. C. (2010). Prioritization of rural roads: AHP in group decision. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 17(2), 135–158. doi:10.1108/09699981011024669.
[30] Hassoun Nedjar, N., Djebbar, Y., & Djemili, L. (2023). Application of the analytical hierarchy process for planning the rehabilitation of water distribution networks. Arab Gulf Journal of Scientific Research, 41(4), 518–538. doi:10.1108/AGJSR-07-2022-0110.
[31] Orasanin, G., Simic, S., Kosarac, A., Vaskovic, S., & Milic, A. D. (2024). Water Supply Network Renewal Strategic Planning Utilizing the VIKOR Method. doi:10.20944/preprints202401.1033.v1.
[32] Mezhoud, C., Berreksi, A., Bedjou, A., & Bosseler, B. (2022). Prioritization of maintenance work in wastewater networks using decision support methods. Journal of Water Sanitation and Hygiene for Development, 12(2), 186–199. doi:10.2166/washdev.2022.165.
[33] Aşchilean, I., Badea, G., Giurca, I., Naghiu, G. S., & Iloaie, F. G. (2017). Choosing the Optimal Technology to Rehabilitate the Pipes in Water Distribution Systems Using the AHP Method. Energy Procedia, 112, 19–26. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1109.
[34] Kilinç, Y., Özdemir, Ö., Orhan, C., & Firat, M. (2018). Evaluation of technical performance of pipes in water distribution systems by analytic hierarchy process. Sustainable Cities and Society, 42, 13–21. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2018.06.035.
[35] Mazumder, R. K., Salman, A. M., Li, Y., & Yu, X. (2021). Asset Management Decision Support Model for Water Distribution Systems: Impact of Water Pipe Failure on Road and Water Networks. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 147(5), 4021022. doi:10.1061/(asce)wr.1943-5452.0001365.
[36] Abu Samra, S., Ahmed, M., Hammad, A., & Zayed, T. (2018). Multiobjective Framework for Managing Municipal Integrated Infrastructure. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 144(1), 4017091. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001402.
[37] Shahata, K., & Zayed, T. (2016). Integrated Risk-Assessment Framework for Municipal Infrastructure. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(1), 4015052. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001028.
[38] Amador-Jimenez, L., & Mohammadi, A. (2021). Decision making methods to prioritise asset-management plans for municipal infrastructure. Infrastructure Asset Management, 8(1), 11–24. doi:10.1680/jinam.19.00064.
[39] Vladeanu, G. J., & Matthews, J. C. (2019). Consequence-of-Failure Model for Risk-Based Asset Management of Wastewater Pipes Using AHP. Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice, 10(2), 4019005. doi:10.1061/(asce)ps.1949-1204.0000370.
[40] Aidinidou, M. T., Kaparis, K., & Georgiou, A. C. (2023). Analysis, prioritization and strategic planning of flood mitigation projects based on sustainability dimensions and a spatial/value AHP-GIS system. Expert Systems with Applications, 211, 118566. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2022.118566.
[41] Bagla, V., Gupta, A., & Mehra, A. (2013). Improving consistency of Comparison matrices in analytical hierarchy process. International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, 3(2), 316-321.
[42] Saaty, T. L. (2001). Fundamentals of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. The Analytic Hierarchy Process in Natural Resource and Environmental Decision Making. Managing Forest Ecosystems, 3, Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. doi:10.1007/978-94-015-9799-9_2.
[43] Igroufa, M., Benzerra, A., & Seghir, A. (2020). Development of an assessment tool for infrastructure asset management of urban drainage systems. Water Science and Technology, 82(3), 537–548. doi:10.2166/wst.2020.356.
[44] Duleba, S. (2022). Introduction and comparative analysis of the multi-level parsimonious AHP methodology in a public transport development decision problem. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 73(2), 230–243. doi:10.1080/01605682.2020.1824553.
[45] Ministry of Finance. (2022). Budget Estimates - 2022. Ministry of Finance, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
[46] Department of Treasury and Finance Victoria. (2022). Victorian Budget 2022/23. Department of Treasury and Finance Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
[47] Schraven, D., Hartmann, A., & Dewulf, G. (2011). Effectiveness of infrastructure asset management: Challenges for public agencies. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 1(1), 61–74. doi:10.1108/20441241111143786.
[48] Rashidi, M., Samali, B., & Sharafi, P. (2016). A new model for bridge management: Part B: decision support system for remediation planning. Australian Journal of Civil Engineering, 14(1), 46–53. doi:10.1080/14488353.2015.1092642.
[49] Coulter, E. D., Coakley, J., & Sessions, J. (2006). The Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Tutorial for Use in Prioritizing Forest Road Investments to Minimize Environmental Effects. International Journal of Forest Engineering, 17(2), 51–69. doi:10.1080/14942119.2006.10702535.
[50] Kresnanto, N. C. (2022). Prioritizing District Road Maintenance Using AHP Method. Proceedings of the Second International Conference of Construction, Infrastructure, and Materials. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, 216, Springer, Singapore. doi:10.1007/978-981-16-7949-0_32.
[51] Vicroads. (2021). Pavement Management Strategic Plan. Transport Assets – Asset Management. VicRoads, Kew, United Kingdom.
[52] Aghapoor Khameneh, P., Miri Lavasani, S. M., Nabizadeh Nodehi, R., & Arjmandi, R. (2020). Water distribution network failure analysis under uncertainty. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 17(1), 421–432. doi:10.1007/s13762-019-02362-y.
[53] Torres-Machí, C., Chamorro, A., Pellicer, E., Yepes, V., & Videla, C. (2015). Sustainable pavement management: Integrating economic, technical, and environmental aspects in decision making. Transportation Research Record, 2523, 56–63. doi:10.3141/2523-07.
[54] Pietrzycki, J. (2014). Analytical hierarchy process in pavement management systems. Master Thesis, The University of Toledo, Toledo, Spain.
[55] Mouratidis, A., & Papageorgiou, G. (2010). A rational approach for optimization of road upgrading. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 37(11), 1462–1470. doi:10.1139/L10-079.
[56] Song, Y., Wu, P., Li, Q., Liu, Y., & Karunaratne, L. (2022). Hybrid Nonlinear and Machine Learning Methods for Analyzing Factors Influencing the Performance of Large-Scale Transport Infrastructure. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 23(8), 12287–12300. doi:10.1109/TITS.2021.3112458.
[57] Delnaz, A., Nasiri, F., & Li, S. S. (2023). Asset management analytics for urban water mains: a literature review. Environmental Systems Research, 12(1). doi:10.1186/s40068-023-00287-7.
[58] RDA. (2018). National Road Master Plan (2018-2027). Road Development Authority, Battaramulla, Sri Lanka. Available online: https://www.rda.gov.lk/supported/noticeboard/publications/NRMP_2018-2027/NRMP2018-2027_Draft-final.pdf (accessed on February 2024).
[59] National Water Supply and Drainage Board. (2020). NWSDB Corporate Plan 2020-2025. National Water Supply and Drainage Board, Ratmalana, Sri Lanka.

Publication Start Year:	2015
JCR 2023 Impact Factor (IF):	4.3
JIF QUARTILE:	Q1
SJR 2023 Quartile:	Q1
Acceptance Rate:	27%
Review Speed (Average):	76 days
Issue Per Year:	12
Number of Volumes:	10
Number of Issues:	107
Number of Articles:	1552
Number of Reviewers:	3417
Number of Contributors:	3604
Contributing Countries:	86
No. of WoS Citations:	7986
WoS h-index:	34
Scopus CiteScore:	7.0
No. of Google Citations:	17324
Google h-index:	47
Google i10-index:	393
Abstract Views:	5,819,908
PDF Download:	3,790,637

Development of a Cross-Asset Model for the Maintenance of Road and Water Pipe Assets using AHP Method

Authors

Downloads

Login

Publisher and Affiliated Societies

Publisher & Affiliated Societies

Indexing & Abstracting

SidebarMenu

Journal Imprint

Journal Imprint

Journal Metrics

IndexedBy

Indexed In

Follow us

Follow Us

Most Cited Articles

Heavy Metal Removal Investigation in Conventional Activated Sludge Systems

Modeling of the Solar Thermal Energy Use in Urban Areas

Adsorption Behavior of Heavy Metal Ions by Hybrid Inulin-TEOS for Water Treatment

Modeling Finned Thermal Collector Construction Nanofluid-based Al2O3 to Enhance Photovoltaic Performance

visitors

Analytics

Information

Address

Contact Info: