Optimizing Maintenance Interventions for Deteriorating Structures Using Cost-Benefit Criteria
Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 133, Issue 7
Abstract
Life extension of existing deteriorating structures requires maintenance interventions, which allow partial or complete rehabilitation. However, such maintenance interventions have to be economically reasonable, i.e., maintenance expenditures have to be outweighed by expected future gains. If this cannot be achieved, the optimal lifetime of a structure has been exceeded. This paper discusses optimum maintenance planning (optimal sequences of maintenance times and rehabilitation levels) by maximizing the expected net present benefit rate throughout lifetime. The underlying formulation is as follows: (1) between maintenance interventions the deterioration due to Poisson shocks is modeled by a continuous-time Markov chain; (2) maintenance interventions can take place anytime throughout the lifetime and comprise the rehabilitation of all deterioration states above a certain minimum level; and (3) maintenance interventions are optimized by taking into account all life-cycle costs (construction, failure, inspection, and state-dependent rehabilitation costs as well as state- or time-dependent benefit rates). Numerical examples demonstrate that the proposed approach not only allows to optimize maintenance interventions, but also allows to determine optimal lifetimes and acceptable failure rates.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Adler, M. D., and Posner, E. A. (2006). New foundations of cost-benefit analysis, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Ang, A. H.-S., and Lee, J.-C. (2001). “Cost optimal design of R/C buildings.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 73, 233–238.
Baker, J. E. (1987). “Reducing bias and inefficiency in the selection algorithm.” Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications: Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, J. J. Grefenstette, ed., Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., 14–21.
Bogdanoff, J. L., and Krieger, W. (1978). “A new cumulative damage model—Part 2.” J. Appl. Mech., 45, 251–257.
Cesare, M. A., Santamarina, C., Turkstra, C., and Vanmarcke, E. H. (1992). “Modeling bridge deterioration with Markov chains.” J. Transp. Eng., 118(6), 820–833.
Cox, D. R., and Miller, H. D. (1965). The theory of stochastic processes, Chapman and Hall, London.
Deb, K., and Agrawal, R. B. (1995). “Simulated binary crossover for continuous search space.” Complex Syst., 9, 115–148.
DiPasquale, E., Ju, J.-W., Askar, A., and Çakmak, A. S. (1990). “Relation between global damage indices and local stiffness degradation.” J. Struct. Eng., 116(5), 1440–1456.
Eiben, A. E., and Smith, J. E. (2003). Introduction to evolutionary computing, Springer, Berlin.
Ellingwood, B. R. (2001). “Acceptable risk bases for design of structures.” Prog. Struct. Eng. Mater., 3, 170–179.
Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S. L., and Keeney, R. L. (1981). Acceptable risk, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Frangopol, D. M., Lin, K-Y., and Estes, A. C. (1997). “Life-cycle cost design of deteriorating structures.” J. Struct. Eng., 123(10), 1390–1401.
Gansted, L., Brincker, R., and Hansen, L. P. (1991). “Fracture mechanical Markov chain crack growth model.” Eng. Fract. Mech., 38, 475–489.
Grefenstette, J. (2000). “Rank-based selection.” Evolutionary computation 1: Basic algorithms and operators, Institute of Physics, Bristol, 187–194.
Gusella, V. (2000). “Eigen-analysis of cumulative damage.” Struct. Safety, 22, 189–202.
Horn, R. A., and Johnson, C. R. (1990). Matrix analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Lassen, T. (1991). “Markov modelling of the fatigue damage in welded structures under in-service inspection.” Int. J. Fatigue, 13, 417–422.
Madanat, S., Mishalani, R., and Wan Ibrahim, W. H. (1995). “Estimation of infrastructure transition probabilities from condition rating data.” J. Infrastruct. Syst., 1(2), 120–125.
Mori, Y., and Ellingwood, B. R. (1994). “Maintaining reliability of concrete structures. II: Optimum inspection/repair.” J. Struct. Eng., 120(3), 846–862.
Park Y.-J., Ang, A. H-S., and Wen, Y. K. (1985). “Seismic damage analysis of reinforced concrete buildings.” J. Struct. Eng., 111(4), 740–757.
Rackwitz, R. (2000). “Optimization—The basis of code-making and reliability verification.” Struct. Safety, 22, 27–60.
Rosenblueth, E., and Mendoza, E. (1971). “Reliability optimization in isostatic structures.” J. Engrg. Mech. Div., 97(6), 1625–1642.
Ross, S. M. (2003). Introduction to probability models, Academic, Amsterdam.
Sobczyk, K., and Spencer, B. F., Jr. (1992). Random fatigue: From data to theory, Academic, Boston.
Streicher, H., and Rackwitz, R. (2004). “Time-variant reliability-oriented structural optimization and a renewal model for life-cycle costing.” Probab. Eng. Mech., 19, 171–183.
Wen, Y. K., and Kang, Y. J. (2001). “Minimum building life-cycle cost design criteria. I: Methodology.” J. Struct. Eng., 127(3), 330–337.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 133 • Issue 7 • July 2007
Pages: 925 - 934
Copyright
© 2007 ASCE.
History
Received: May 24, 2006
Accepted: Dec 14, 2006
Published online: Jul 1, 2007
Published in print: Jul 2007
Notes
Note. Associate Editor: Shahram Sarkani
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.