An Integrated Asset Management System (IAMS) is a strategic asset management system that combines the assets of different categories into a system to prioritize their maintenance. This paper proposes a risk-based reliability-centric IAMS framework which works on the principle that the risk associated with the failure of an asset is a function of its direct and indirect costs. The direct costs are the costs associated with the replacement of the assets, whereas the indirect costs are the risks that the city faces following the failure. The framework is applied to the asset database of the City of Sugar Land, TX. The results of the model are analyzed in terms of a reduction in the number of assets in a very high-risk category in the risk matrix, the network level expected annual failure rate, and an increase in the network level average reliability.
BarberC.BlandD. (2008). Highway asset management plan. Communities and neighborhoods overview and scrutiny (The Chief Executive and City Treasurer), Manchester City Council.
2.
BehrensM. W. (2006). Allocation of state transportation resources. Testimony before the senate finance committee and senate finance committee, 79th session interim, The Texas Senate, Austin, TX.
3.
ButtA. A.ShahinM. Y.CarpenterS. H.CarnahanJ. V. (1994). Application of Markov process to pavement management systems at network level. 3rd International Conference on Managing Pavements, National Research Council, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 59–172.
DamnjanovicI. (2006). A risk-based approach to modeling life-cycle costs associated with warranty specifications for transportation infrastructure [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Texas.
6.
FallsL. C.HaasR.TigheS. (2006). Asset service index as integration mechanism for civil infrastructure. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1957(1), 1–7.
7.
FlintschG. W.BryantJ. W.Jr. (2006). Asset management data collection for supporting decision processes. Office of Asset Management. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Retrieved April 19, 2020, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/asset/dataintegration/if08018/index.cfm
8.
Fuchs-HanuschD.GanglG.KornbergerB.KölblJ.HofrichterJ.KainzH. (2008). PiRem – Pipe rehabilitation management developing a decision support system for rehabilitation planning of water mains. Water Practice & Technology, 3(1): wpt2008021. doi: https://doi.org/10.2166/wpt.2008.021.
9.
FwaT. F.FarhanJ. (2012). Optimal multiasset maintenance budget allocation in highway asset management. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 138(10), 1179–1187.
10.
GharaibehN. G.ChiuY. C.GurianP. L. (2006). Decision methodology for allocating funds across transportation infrastructure assets. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 12(1), 1–9.
11.
GharaibehN. G.DarterM. I. (2003). Probabilistic analysis of highway pavement life for Illinois. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1823, 111–120.
12.
GharaibehN. G.DarterM. I.UzarskiD. R. (1999). Development of prototype highway asset management system. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 5(2), 61–68.
13.
HadzilacosT.KallesD.PrestonN.MelbourneP.CamarinopoulosL.EimermacherM.KallidromitisV.Frondistou-YannasS.SaegrovS. (2000). UtilNets: A water mains rehabilitation decision-support system. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 24(3), 215–232.
14.
LiuL.GharaibehN. G. (2014). Bayesian model for predicting the performance of pavements treated with thin hot-mix asphalt overlays. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2431(1), 33–41.
15.
MarlowD.GouldS.LaneB. (2015). An expert system for assessing the technical and economic risk of pipe rehabilitation options. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(22), 8658–8668.
16.
MelchersR. E. (2009). Structural reliability: Analysis and prediction. Wiley.
17.
MishalaniR. G.MadanatS. M. (2002). Computation of infrastructure transition probabilities using stochastic duration models. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 8(4), 139–148.
18.
MrawiraD.AmadorL. (2009). Cross-assets trade-off analysis: Why are we still talking about it?Proceedings of 88th TRB Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
19.
National Cooperative Highway Research Program. (2009). An asset-management framework for the interstate highway system (p. 632). National Cooperative Highway Research Program Synthesis.
20.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2001). Asset management for the roads sector (p. 52). Author.
21.
OuyangM. (2014). Review on modeling and simulation of interdependent critical infrastructure systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 121, 43–60.
22.
PoudelA. (2021). Risk-based multi-objective cross-asset budget planning and allocation framework for the Integrated Asset Management System (IAMS) using a case study of the City of Sugar Land, TX [Master’s thesis]. Texas A&M University.
23.
ReliaSoft. (2015). Life data analysis reference. ReliaSoft Corporation.
24.
SeyedolshohadaieS. R. (2011). Modeling risks in infrastructure asset management [Doctoral dissertation]. Texas A&M University.
25.
SirirangsiP.AmekudziA.HerabatP. (2003). Capturing effects of maintenance practices in highway asset valuation: Replacement-cost approach versus book-value method. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1824, 57–65.
26.
ParvezJ. (2018). Life cycle assessment of pvc water and sewer pipe and comparative sustainability analysis of pipe materials. Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation, 7, 5493–5518.
27.
TanJ. Y.FwaT. F.ChanW. T. (2004). Advanced interactive budget planning for highway management. Proceeding of the Eighth International Conference. Applications of advanced technologies in transportation engineering (AATTE).
28.
ThompsonP. D.JohnsonM. B. (2005). Markovian bridge deterioration: Developing models from historical data. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 1, 85–91.
29.
WeiL.DuH.MahesarQ. A.Al AmmariK.MageeD. R.ClarkeB.DimitrovaV.GunnD.EntwisleD.ReevesH.CohnA. G. (2020). A decision support system for urban infrastructure inter-asset management employing domain ontologies and qualitative uncertainty-based reasoning. Expert Systems With Applications, 158, 113461, ISSN 0957-4174, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113461.
30.
ZhangZ.AkiF.HudsonW. R. (2002). Developing an integrated management system for the urban transportation infrastructure. Southwest Region University Transportation Center, Texas A&M University System.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
