deck preservation strategies with a bridge management system

Deck Preservation Strategies with a Bridge Management

System

Deck Preservation Strategies with a Bridge Management

System

Paul Jensen

Montana Department of Transportation

Email : [email protected]

Paul Jensen



State Bridge InventoryState Bridge InventoryFive Administrative DistrictsFive Administrative Districts

Interstate 994

Other NHS 468

Primary 548

Secondary 529

Urban 61

Interstate 994

Other NHS 468

Primary 548

Secondary 529

Urban 61

12441244 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 5 Prestressed Concrete5 Prestressed Concrete10951095 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 7 Wood or Timber7 Wood or Timber569569 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 3 Steel3 Steel

12441244 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 5 Prestressed Concrete5 Prestressed Concrete10951095 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 7 Wood or Timber7 Wood or Timber569569 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 3 Steel3 Steel

Inventory By Bridge TypesInventory By Bridge Types

Montana Department Of TransportationMontana Department Of Transportation Bridge Management SectionBridge Management Section

Urban 61

Other On Sys 199

Off System 1806

Urban 61

Other On Sys 199

Off System 1806

569569 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 3 Steel3 Steel373373 04 Tee Beam04 Tee Beam 5 Prestressed Concrete5 Prestressed Concrete314314 19 Culvert19 Culvert 3 Steel3 Steel234234 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 4 Steel Continuous4 Steel Continuous168168 01 Slab01 Slab 2 Concrete Continuous2 Concrete Continuous162162 10 Truss10 Truss--ThruThru 3 Steel3 Steel130130 04 Tee Beam04 Tee Beam 1 Concrete1 Concrete112112 01 Slab01 Slab 1 Concrete1 Concrete6666 04 Tee Beam04 Tee Beam 2 Concrete Continuous2 Concrete Continuous6262 03 Girder03 Girder--FloorbeamFloorbeam 4 Steel Continuous4 Steel Continuous5858 19 Culvert19 Culvert 1 Concrete1 Concrete3030 22 Channel Beam22 Channel Beam 5 Prestressed Concrete5 Prestressed Concrete1919 03 Girder03 Girder--FloorbeamFloorbeam 3 Steel3 Steel1616 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 1 Concrete1 Concrete

569569 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 3 Steel3 Steel373373 04 Tee Beam04 Tee Beam 5 Prestressed Concrete5 Prestressed Concrete314314 19 Culvert19 Culvert 3 Steel3 Steel234234 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 4 Steel Continuous4 Steel Continuous168168 01 Slab01 Slab 2 Concrete Continuous2 Concrete Continuous162162 10 Truss10 Truss--ThruThru 3 Steel3 Steel130130 04 Tee Beam04 Tee Beam 1 Concrete1 Concrete112112 01 Slab01 Slab 1 Concrete1 Concrete6666 04 Tee Beam04 Tee Beam 2 Concrete Continuous2 Concrete Continuous6262 03 Girder03 Girder--FloorbeamFloorbeam 4 Steel Continuous4 Steel Continuous5858 19 Culvert19 Culvert 1 Concrete1 Concrete3030 22 Channel Beam22 Channel Beam 5 Prestressed Concrete5 Prestressed Concrete1919 03 Girder03 Girder--FloorbeamFloorbeam 3 Steel3 Steel1616 02 Stringer/Girder02 Stringer/Girder 1 Concrete1 Concrete

Typical Agency Alignment of SystemsTypical Agency Alignment of Systems


TISTIS

Development Of A RoadmapDevelopment Of A Roadmap

Definitions

CultureOutcomes


Performance

Measures

Data

Collection

Models

Everyone On The Same PageEveryone On The Same Page� New Construction� Preservation Includes (Deck, Super,

Sub)� Preventive (Not Always Condition

Responsive), � Rehabilitation

Reconstruction

� New Construction� Preservation Includes (Deck, Super,

Sub)� Preventive (Not Always Condition

Responsive), � Rehabilitation

Reconstruction

Definitions


� Reconstruction

� Reactive Maintenance (Unplanned Activities)

� Key Words: � Life Extension� Cost Effectiveness� Proactive

� Reconstruction

� Reactive Maintenance (Unplanned Activities)

� Key Words: � Life Extension� Cost Effectiveness� Proactive

Three Track NominationsThree Track Nominations

� Reactionary Maintenance (by Bridge)

� Emergency Repairs

� Limited Contract Repairs

� DOT In-house Repairs

� Preventive Maintenance (by Corridor)

Contract Deck Sealing

� Reactionary Maintenance (by Bridge)

� Emergency Repairs

� Limited Contract Repairs

� DOT In-house Repairs

� Preventive Maintenance (by Corridor)

Contract Deck Sealing

Definitions


� Contract Deck Sealing

� Contract Surface Rehab (Mill-And-Fill)

� Rehab, Replacement (by Bridge - Capital)

� Contract Work

� Tied to State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP)

� Contract Deck Sealing

� Contract Surface Rehab (Mill-And-Fill)

� Rehab, Replacement (by Bridge - Capital)

� Contract Work

� Tied to State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP)

Culture Of Change Culture Of Change � Upper Management (Across All

Areas)� High Level� Performance Goals� Resource Allocation� Political Considerations

Mid Management (Infrastructure)

� Upper Management (Across All Areas)� High Level� Performance Goals� Resource Allocation� Political Considerations

Mid Management (Infrastructure)

Culture


� Mid Management (Infrastructure)� Detail Roll-up Of Expectations� Priority Over Costs� Area Of Performance

� Technical Experts� Models� Development Of Program Levels� Area Of Performance

� Mid Management (Infrastructure)� Detail Roll-up Of Expectations� Priority Over Costs� Area Of Performance

� Technical Experts� Models� Development Of Program Levels� Area Of Performance

Basis For Measurement Development

Basis For Measurement Development

� Current Vs. Needed

� Monitor Trends

� Develop Both Short And Long Term Goals

� Current Vs. Needed

� Monitor Trends

� Develop Both Short And Long Term Goals

Performance

Measures


Goals

� Return On Investment

� Funding Constraints

� Higher Expectations From The Public

� Affordable Level-of-Service

Goals

� Return On Investment

� Funding Constraints

� Higher Expectations From The Public

� Affordable Level-of-Service

FHWA’s Guidance for Approval Systematic Process

FHWA’s Guidance for Approval Systematic Process

1. Define How The Needs Are Identified.

2. Outline How The Needs Are Prioritized And Programmed.

3. Define The Outcome Or Goal, Including Resources Necessary & Timeframes To Reach The Outcome/Goal.

1. Define How The Needs Are Identified.

2. Outline How The Needs Are Prioritized And Programmed.

3. Define The Outcome Or Goal, Including Resources Necessary & Timeframes To Reach The Outcome/Goal.

Performance

Measures


The Outcome/Goal.

4. Demonstrate That The Proposed Activity Is A Cost-effective Means Of Extending The Service Life Of A Bridge.

5. Dedicate Resources Necessary To Reach Defined Outcome/Goal.

6. Annually Track, Evaluate, And Report On Progress In Reaching Outcome/Goal And Adjust Resources Accordingly.

The Outcome/Goal.

4. Demonstrate That The Proposed Activity Is A Cost-effective Means Of Extending The Service Life Of A Bridge.

5. Dedicate Resources Necessary To Reach Defined Outcome/Goal.

6. Annually Track, Evaluate, And Report On Progress In Reaching Outcome/Goal And Adjust Resources Accordingly.

Deck Performance Measure

Deck Performance Measure

� Best Practice Is the Health Index

� Dose Not Account for Smart Flags

� Range of Values Small for Large Change in Condition

� Best Practice Is the Health Index

� Dose Not Account for Smart Flags

� Range of Values Small for Large Change in Condition

Performance

Measures


� Calculated by Equation 4.2.1 of Pontis Technical Manual (Page 4-9)

� Calculated by Equation 4.2.1 of Pontis Technical Manual (Page 4-9)

100100**nn

Total Element Quantity Total Element Quantity **Element CostElement Cost

nnPercent Condition StatePercent Condition State**QuantityQuantityElement Element **CostCostElement Element

IndexIndexHealthHealth∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑

∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑========

Deck Performance MeasureMontana Modified

Deck Performance MeasureMontana Modified

� Used Core Computation

� Included Smart Flags in Calculation

� Used Grouping From NBI Translator

� Smart Flag Cost From Total Cost of

� Used Core Computation

� Included Smart Flags in Calculation

� Used Grouping From NBI Translator

� Smart Flag Cost From Total Cost of

Performance

Measures


� Smart Flag Cost From Total Cost of Element Group (Deck, Bearings, Joints, Approach Slabs)

� Limited One Smart Flag by Span Group

� Smart Flag Cost From Total Cost of Element Group (Deck, Bearings, Joints, Approach Slabs)

� Limited One Smart Flag by Span Group

100100**ee Cost * Qty * Pct in State)Cost * Qty * Pct in State)

HImtHImt

∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑========

((

ee Qty) Qty) **CostCost∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑((

ss * Qty * Pct in State))* Qty * Pct in State))∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑+ (+ (ee Qty) Qty) **CostCost∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑((

ss* Qty))* Qty))∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑+ (+ (

ee Qty) Qty) **CostCost∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑((

Montana HIMontana HI

� Larger Spread of HI Values

� Gave Better Feel for Need

� Inventory Averages

� HIavg (No SF in Computation) = 90

� Larger Spread of HI Values

� Gave Better Feel for Need

� Inventory Averages


Performance

Measures



� HIavg (SF in Computation) = 88

� Bridges With Smart Flags





� Bridges With Smart Flags



Data CollectionData Collection

� Deterioration - From Field Observation

� NBI Inspections

� Element Inspections

� Cost Data

Contract Data

� Deterioration - From Field Observation

� NBI Inspections

� Element Inspections

� Cost Data

Contract Data

Data

Collection


� Contract Data

� Scheduled Contract Work

� State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP)

� Maintenance Work Records

� Contract Data

� Scheduled Contract Work

� State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP)

� Maintenance Work Records

MDT Data CollectionMDT Data CollectionData

Collection� Collecting NBI Data Since 1980

� Collecting AASHTO CoRe Data Since 1995

� CoRe : Commonly Recognized Elements

� All Data Warehoused in Oracle

� Collecting NBI Data Since 1980

� Collecting AASHTO CoRe Data Since 1995

� CoRe : Commonly Recognized Elements

� All Data Warehoused in Oracle


� All Data Warehoused in Oracle Database

� Data Structure Uses AASHTOWare Pontis Schema

� Data Analysis Uses Pontis and “Home Grown” Applications

� All Data Warehoused in Oracle Database

� Data Structure Uses AASHTOWare Pontis Schema

� Data Analysis Uses Pontis and “Home Grown” Applications

Historical Review (NBI)Historical Review (NBI)� Breakdown of NBI Data

� Deck, Superstructure and Substructure

� Snapshot Past 25, 10, 5, 1 Years

� Review for Trends and Limit the Program Scope

� Breakdown of NBI Data� Deck, Superstructure and Substructure

� Snapshot Past 25, 10, 5, 1 Years

� Review for Trends and Limit the Program Scope

19801980 19951995 20002000 20042004

Worse than 5Worse than 5 1.8%1.8% 0.9%0.9% 0.8%0.8% 1.3%1.3%

DeckDeck

Data

Collection


Worse than 5Worse than 5 1.8%1.8% 0.9%0.9% 0.8%0.8% 1.3%1.3%Equal to 5Equal to 5 2.9%2.9% 3.6%3.6% 4.3%4.3% 4.8%4.8%Better than 5Better than 5 95.2%95.2% 95.2%95.2% 84.1%84.1% 91.4%91.4%


SuperstructureSuperstructure


SubstructureSubstructure

Conclusion From NBI DataConclusion From NBI Data� Superstructure and Substructure

� Work Condition (Worse Than 5) Down Trend

� Watch Condition (5) Went up

� Do Nothing (Better Than 5) No Trend

� Factors� Removal of Short Span Timber Bridges

� Seismic Retro Fitting

� Superstructure and Substructure� Work Condition (Worse Than 5) Down Trend

� Watch Condition (5) Went up

� Do Nothing (Better Than 5) No Trend

� Factors� Removal of Short Span Timber Bridges

� Seismic Retro Fitting

Data

Collection


� Replacement of Older Inventory

� Deck� Work Condition Upward Trend

� Watch Condition Went up

� Do Nothing - No Trend

� Factor� Increase in Traffic

� Increase Use in Liquid Deicers

� Replacement of Older Inventory

� Deck� Work Condition Upward Trend

� Watch Condition Went up

� Do Nothing - No Trend

� Factor� Increase in Traffic

� Increase Use in Liquid Deicers

Historical Review(AASHTO CoRe)Historical Review(AASHTO CoRe)

� Breakdown of Deck Elements

� Snapshot Past 10, 5, 1 Years

� Breakdown of Deck Elements

� Snapshot Past 10, 5, 1 Years

19951995 20002000 20042004

States 4 & 5States 4 & 5 0.3%0.3% 0.7%0.7% 1.2%1.2%

Deck CoRe ElementsDeck CoRe Elements

Data

Collection


States 4 & 5States 4 & 5 0.3%0.3% 0.7%0.7% 1.2%1.2%

State 3State 3 1.0%1.0% 3.7%3.7% 4.3%4.3%

States 1 & 2States 1 & 2 98.7%98.7% 95.7%95.7% 94.6%94.6%

States 2 thru 5States 2 thru 5 0.6%0.6% 8.3%8.3% 7.3%7.3%

Deck Smart Flags UseDeck Smart Flags Use

Conclusion From Element Data

Conclusion From Element Data

� Data Collection Started in Year 10

� Cracking and Soffit Defects on the Rise

� Deck Ride Quality on Downward

� Data Collection Started in Year 10

� Cracking and Soffit Defects on the Rise

� Deck Ride Quality on Downward

Data

Collection


� Deck Ride Quality on Downward Trend

� Deck Ride Quality on Downward Trend

Overall ConclusionOverall Conclusion

� Need to Develop a Long Term Preventive Maintenance Strategy

� Decks and Associated Elements As a Focus

� Need to Develop a Long Term Preventive Maintenance Strategy

� Decks and Associated Elements As a Focus

Data

Collection


As a Focus

� Use Deterioration Models From Pontis

� Develop a Performance Measure for the Constrained Data

As a Focus

� Use Deterioration Models From Pontis

� Develop a Performance Measure for the Constrained Data

Issues Effecting Preservation Activities

Issues Effecting Preservation Activities

� Data

� Process Misalignment

� Safety Compliance

� Asset Management

� Data

� Process Misalignment

� Safety Compliance

� Asset Management

Models

� Predicting Deterioration

� Dependent On Expert Option

Replacement-in-

� Predicting Deterioration

� Dependent On Expert Option

Replacement-in-


Asset Management

� Data Misalignment

� Structural Defects

� Protection Defects

Asset Management

� Data Misalignment

� Structural Defects

� Protection Defects

� Replacement-in-kind

� Strategic Approach

� Remaining Live

� Life Cycle

� Replacement-in-kind

� Strategic Approach

� Remaining Live

� Life Cycle

BMS (Pontis) ParametersBMS (Pontis) Parameters� Limit the Data Set

� Decks and Slabs

� Bearing

� Joints

� Deck Smart Flags

� Develop Probabilistic Model for Elements

Develop Deterministic Rules for Smart Flags

� Limit the Data Set� Decks and Slabs

� Bearing

� Joints

� Deck Smart Flags

� Develop Probabilistic Model for Elements

Develop Deterministic Rules for Smart Flags

Models


� Develop Deterministic Rules for Smart Flags

� Limit the Work to Scheduled Work

� Allow a Zero Budget

� Store Element Deterioration by Year

� Simulate for 10 Years

� Develop Deterministic Rules for Smart Flags

� Limit the Work to Scheduled Work

� Allow a Zero Budget

� Store Element Deterioration by Year

� Simulate for 10 Years

ReportingReporting

� Development of “Indifference Curve”

� Report� By Bridge (by Year)

� Recommended Action

� Benefit / Cost Ratio

Hi

� Development of “Indifference Curve”

� Report� By Bridge (by Year)

� Recommended Action

� Benefit / Cost Ratio

Hi

Outcomes


� Himt

� Categorize by Good, Watch, Bad

� By Route (Break on County and Year)� Average Himt

� Network Indifference Curve

� Network Benefit / Cost Ratio

� Network Cost to Improve

� Count by Good, Watch, Bad Groupings

� Himt

� Categorize by Good, Watch, Bad

� By Route (Break on County and Year)� Average Himt

� Network Indifference Curve

� Network Benefit / Cost Ratio

� Network Cost to Improve

� Count by Good, Watch, Bad Groupings

GroupingsGroupings

� Good Condition � Himt Greater Than 70

� No Defects

� Watch

� Good Condition � Himt Greater Than 70

� No Defects

� Watch

Outcomes


� Himt Between 50 and 69

� Bridges Have Defects That Need Monitoring

� Bad � Himt Less Than 50

� Defects Needing Corrective Action

� Himt Between 50 and 69

� Bridges Have Defects That Need Monitoring

� Bad � Himt Less Than 50

� Defects Needing Corrective Action

0

20

40

60

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Good Watch Bad

Indifference CurveIndifference Curve

� Need Cost or Bridge Count by Year

� Need Cost or Bridge Count by Year

Needing Work Before Input Into a Capital Program

Maximum PM Cost < Capital Cost

Needing Work Before Input Into a Capital Program

Maximum PM Cost < Capital Cost

Outcomes


� Plot Cost (Bridge) and Year

� Take Action Before Going Near Vertical

� Plot Cost (Bridge) and Year

� Take Action Before Going Near Vertical

-$5.0

$0.0

$5.0

$10.0

$15.0

$20.0

$25.0

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

First Time to Consider Work

(Lest Cost)

First Time to Consider Work

(Lest Cost)

Program DevelopmentProgram Development

� Develop Different Budgets

� Run Scenarios

� Plot Long Term Effects

Settle on Program Parameters

� Develop Different Budgets

� Run Scenarios

� Plot Long Term Effects

Settle on Program Parameters

Outcomes


� Settle on Program Parameters and Budget

� Settle on Program Parameters and Budget

Check for Corridor Improvement

Check for Corridor Improvement

� Input Projects, Scopes and Cost Into Pontis

� Run the Scenario With Proposed Budgets

� Input Projects, Scopes and Cost Into Pontis

� Run the Scenario With Proposed Budgets

Outcomes


Budgets

� Compare Network Level Results

� Fulfill Performance Goals?

� Budgets Adequate for Scope?

� Peaks and Valleys of Needs Smooth Out?

Budgets

� Compare Network Level Results

� Fulfill Performance Goals?

� Budgets Adequate for Scope?

� Peaks and Valleys of Needs Smooth Out?

Development ResultsDevelopment Results

DeckHealthIndex

DeckHealthIndex

AccumulativeExpendituresAccumulativeExpenditures

DeckHealthIndex

DeckHealthIndex


DeckHealthIndex

DeckHealthIndex


DeckHealthIndex

DeckHealthIndex

Need toCorrectNeed toCorrect

Maximum $500 Thousand Annual

Budget

Maximum $500 Thousand Annual

BudgetMaximum $1.0 Million

Annual BudgetMaximum $1.0 Million

Annual BudgetUnconstrained BudgetUnconstrained BudgetDo NothingDo Nothing

YearYear

Outcomes


34.134.1$1,693,066$1,693,06664.364.3$13,603,630$13,603,63082.882.8$22,354,797$22,354,7970.40.4$35,696,378$35,696,37820582058

41.341.3$2,439,881$2,439,88170.170.1$11,744,147$11,744,14788.388.3$17,972,034$17,972,0340.70.7$35,136,686$35,136,68620482048

43.943.9$1,260,291$1,260,29156.656.6$6,279,637$6,279,63771.471.4$10,910,317$10,910,3179.29.2$24,551,826$24,551,82620382038

59.459.4$1,202,671$1,202,67170.570.5$4,453,960$4,453,96073.573.5$7,093,280$7,093,28034.534.5$12,276,500$12,276,50020282028

70.570.5$1,233,546$1,233,54674.374.3$1,798,384$1,798,38481.181.1$3,590,750$3,590,75055.955.9$6,936,027$6,936,02720182018

85.785.7$114,927$114,92788.988.9$437,341$437,34193.793.7$1,485,733$1,485,73384.984.9$1,485,733$1,485,73320082008

Goal DHI for Performance Level of Service

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Deck H

ealt

h I

nd

ex

Deck Heath Index Over Time

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Outcomes


20

30

40

2008 2018 2028 2038 2048 2058

Year

Deck H

ealt

h I

nd

ex

Do Nothing

Unconstrained Budget

$1.0 Million Budget

$500 Thousand Budget

20

30

40

10

0

Field Review and Set Scope

Field Review and Set Scope

� Rank Corridors From Worst to Best

� Review Recommended Action From Pontis With Field

� Rank Corridors From Worst to Best

� Review Recommended Action From Pontis With Field

Outcomes


From Pontis With Field Observations

Kick Some Rocks

� Develop Scopes for Each Bridge

� Detailed Estimate for Each Bridge in the Corridor

From Pontis With Field Observations

Kick Some Rocks

� Develop Scopes for Each Bridge

� Detailed Estimate for Each Bridge in the Corridor

Development Of A RoadmapDevelopment Of A Roadmap

Definitions

CultureOutcomes


Performance

Measures

Data

Collection

Models

ConclusionConclusion

� Defining The Difference Between Reactive Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, Preservation And Rehabilitation.

� Development And Definition Of Bridge Preservation Strategies.

� Defining The Difference Between Reactive Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, Preservation And Rehabilitation.

� Development And Definition Of Bridge Preservation Strategies.


� Developing Deterioration Models For The Bridge As A Whole And For The Preservation Work.

� Development Of Bridge Management Policies That Address The Interaction Of Network Benefits And Needs With Individual Bridge Benefits And Needs.

� Developing Deterioration Models For The Bridge As A Whole And For The Preservation Work.

� Development Of Bridge Management Policies That Address The Interaction Of Network Benefits And Needs With Individual Bridge Benefits And Needs.

Thank For Your TimeThank For Your Time

Paul JensenPaul Jensen






deck preservation strategies with a bridge management system

Documents