A New Model for Infrastructure Service Life With Applications to Bridge Assessment and Management

Abstract

Service life is a critical, yet somewhat nebulous consideration in the management of infrastructure assets. Although often defined in terms of deterioration and time to physical failure, infrastructure service life is also defined by nonphysical factors such as increasing loads and alternate levels of evaluation. A new conceptual model is presented defining infrastructure service life as a function of physical and nonphysical factors. The model reflects, for example, the idea that an asset can be evaluated at different performance levels, with accompanying trade-offs in moving from a lower level to a higher one. In addition, the model recognizes that alternative performance evaluation techniques can influence a decision maker's perception of serviceability and remaining service life. Several applications illustrate how the model offers a fresh perspective on bridge service life, a key consideration given the trend toward ever-increasing truck loads. Results described have various implications for policy making and infrastructure asset management.

Keywords

service life National Bridge Inventory truck weight bridge evaluation bridge deficiency

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials. (2003). Manual for condition evaluation and load and resistance factor rating (LRFR) of highway bridges. Washington, DC: Author.

American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials. (1994). Manual for condition evaluation of bridges. Washington, DC: Author .

American Society of Civil Engineers. (2005 ). Report Card for America's Infrastructure. Reston, VA: Author.

Chang, J. (2007). A new model for bridge service life: Management and policy implications. Doctoral thesis. Columbia University , New York, NY. Available at http://digitalcommons.libraries.columbia.edu/dissertations/

Chang, J. , & Garvin, M.J. (2006). A conceptual model of bridge service life. Bridge Structures, 2(2), 107-116.

Chang, J. , & Garvin, M.J. (2007). Sensitivity analysis to assess the impact of truck weight reform on bridge network costs. In Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 86th Annual Meeting [CD-ROM]. Washington DC: National Academies.

Chase, S. , Small, E.P. , & Nutakor, C. (2000). An in-depth analysis of the National Bridge Inventory database utilizing data mining, GIS and advanced statistical methods. In Transportation Research Circular No. 498: Proceedings of the 8th International Bridge Management Conference (No. IBMC99-047, pp. C-6/1-C-6/17). Retrieved November 21, 2006, from http://gulliver.trb.org/publications/circulars/circ498/v1_C06.pdf .

Cho, A. (2006, June 19). Road projects and officials must be sensitive and sensible. Engineering News Record. 257.

Ellingwood, B. (2005). Risk-informed condition assessment of civil infrastructure: State of the practice and research issues. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 1(1), 7-18.

10.

Federal Highway Administration. (1995). Recording and coding guide for the structure inventory and appraisal of the nation's bridges. Washington, DC: Author.

11.

Ghosn, M. , & Moses, F. (2000). Effect of changing truck weight regulations on U.S. bridge network. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 5(4), 304-310.

12.

Lemer, A.C. (1996). Infrastructure obsolescence and design service life. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 2(4), 153-160.

13.

Lichtenstein Consulting Engineers. (2006). Weigh-in-motion truck measurements on the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge. In Final Report to MTA Bridges and Tunnels. New York: Author.

14.

New Hampshire: Rebuilding covered bridges. (2006). Retrieved July 18, 2006. from http://www.transportation.org/aashto/success.nsf/allpages/07-NHCoveredBridges..

15.

Perrin, J. & Jhaveri, C. (2004). The economic costs of culvert failures. In Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 83 rd Annual Meeting [CD-ROM]. Washington DC: National Research Council,Transportation Research Board.

16.

Sivakumar, B. , & Ibrahim, F. (2007). Enhancement of bridge live loads using weigh-in-motion data. Bridge Structures, 3(3-4), 193-204.

17.

Sorensen, P.A. , & Taylor, B.D. (2006). Innovations in road finance: Examining the growth in electronic tolling. Public Works Management & Policy , 11(2), 110-125.

18.

Sullivan, R. (2006, June 25). The way we live now: 6-25-06: idea lab; a slow-road movement? New York Times Magazine.

19.

U.S. Department of Transportation. (2002). Comprehensive truck size and weight study. Washington, DC: Author.

20.

U.S. Department of Transportation (2005). 2004 status of the nation's highways, bridges, and transit conditions and performance. Washington, DC: Author .

21.

U.S. General Accounting Office. (1994). Longer combination trucks. Washington, DC: Author.

22.

Weissmann, J. , & Harrison, R. (1998a). Increasing U.S. truck size and weight regulation under NAFTA. In Journal of the Transportation Research Forum . Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.

23.

Weissmann J. , & Harrison, R. (1998b). Impact of 44,000 kg six-axle semitrailer trucks on bridges on rural and urban U.S. Interstate system. In Transportation Research Record 1624. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board,.