YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Bridge Engineering
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Bridge Engineering
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Lifecycle Decision Framework for Steel Bridge Painting

    Source: Journal of Bridge Engineering:;2017:;Volume ( 022 ):;issue: 011
    Author:
    Bismark R. D. K. Agbelie
    ,
    Samuel Labi
    ,
    Jon Fricker
    ,
    Yu Qiao
    ,
    Zhibo Zhang
    ,
    Kumares C. Sinha
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001140
    Publisher: 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.
    • Download: (425.2Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Lifecycle Decision Framework for Steel Bridge Painting

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4241720
    Collections
    • Journal of Bridge Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorBismark R. D. K. Agbelie
    contributor authorSamuel Labi
    contributor authorJon Fricker
    contributor authorYu Qiao
    contributor authorZhibo Zhang
    contributor authorKumares C. Sinha
    date accessioned2017-12-16T09:21:22Z
    date available2017-12-16T09:21:22Z
    date issued2017
    identifier other%28ASCE%29BE.1943-5592.0001140.pdf
    identifier urihttp://138.201.223.254:8080/yetl1/handle/yetl/4241720
    description abstractBridge 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.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleLifecycle Decision Framework for Steel Bridge Painting
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume22
    journal issue11
    journal titleJournal of Bridge Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001140
    treeJournal of Bridge Engineering:;2017:;Volume ( 022 ):;issue: 011
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian