Lifecycle Decision Framework for Steel Bridge PaintingSource: Journal of Bridge Engineering:;2017:;Volume ( 022 ):;issue: 011Author:Bismark R. D. K. Agbelie
,
Samuel Labi
,
Jon Fricker
,
Yu Qiao
,
Zhibo Zhang
,
Kumares C. Sinha
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001140Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
Abstract: Bridge agencies seek to apply appropriate rehabilitation or maintenance treatments at the right time. For a specific treatment, improper timing can have significant adverse consequences: Premature application could mean wasteful spending by the agency even if road users and the community enjoy the benefits of a superior bridge condition, and deferred or delayed application can result in higher user or community disbenefits caused by poor condition and consequent reduced asset longevity in the long-term. For short-term decisions regarding the identification of the most cost-effective paint action at a specific time (do nothing, spot paint, overcoat, or recoat), the paper presents a methodology for developing a painting decision tree. For long-term decisions regarding the identification of the most cost-effective schedule over the superstructure lifetime, the paper demonstrates a methodology for developing a long-term schedule of painting activities. An analysis of the state of paint scheduling at a specific highway agency revealed that the current practice of complete recoating every 25 years may not be optimal. Instead, a painting schedule that includes the application of lower-level treatments (spot repairing and overcoating) can yield as much as a 19% reduction in the lifecycle cost and a 31.97% higher cost-effectiveness compared to the current practice.
|
Collections
Show full item record
contributor author | Bismark R. D. K. Agbelie | |
contributor author | Samuel Labi | |
contributor author | Jon Fricker | |
contributor author | Yu Qiao | |
contributor author | Zhibo Zhang | |
contributor author | Kumares C. Sinha | |
date accessioned | 2017-12-16T09:21:22Z | |
date available | 2017-12-16T09:21:22Z | |
date issued | 2017 | |
identifier other | %28ASCE%29BE.1943-5592.0001140.pdf | |
identifier uri | http://138.201.223.254:8080/yetl1/handle/yetl/4241720 | |
description abstract | Bridge agencies seek to apply appropriate rehabilitation or maintenance treatments at the right time. For a specific treatment, improper timing can have significant adverse consequences: Premature application could mean wasteful spending by the agency even if road users and the community enjoy the benefits of a superior bridge condition, and deferred or delayed application can result in higher user or community disbenefits caused by poor condition and consequent reduced asset longevity in the long-term. For short-term decisions regarding the identification of the most cost-effective paint action at a specific time (do nothing, spot paint, overcoat, or recoat), the paper presents a methodology for developing a painting decision tree. For long-term decisions regarding the identification of the most cost-effective schedule over the superstructure lifetime, the paper demonstrates a methodology for developing a long-term schedule of painting activities. An analysis of the state of paint scheduling at a specific highway agency revealed that the current practice of complete recoating every 25 years may not be optimal. Instead, a painting schedule that includes the application of lower-level treatments (spot repairing and overcoating) can yield as much as a 19% reduction in the lifecycle cost and a 31.97% higher cost-effectiveness compared to the current practice. | |
publisher | American Society of Civil Engineers | |
title | Lifecycle Decision Framework for Steel Bridge Painting | |
type | Journal Paper | |
journal volume | 22 | |
journal issue | 11 | |
journal title | Journal of Bridge Engineering | |
identifier doi | 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001140 | |
tree | Journal of Bridge Engineering:;2017:;Volume ( 022 ):;issue: 011 | |
contenttype | Fulltext |