Risk-Based Protocol for Inspection of Transportation Construction Projects Undertaken by State Departments of Transportation
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 139, Issue 8
Abstract
In the last decade, the state departments of transportation in the US have experienced an increase in their construction projects, while the level of their in-house inspection staff and resources has either remained the same or declined. Previous studies have found that one strategy that may reduce the inspection workload is prioritizing construction activities for inspection. However, reducing the number of inspections also has its risks, such as functional failures and reduced design life. Thus, available inspection resources should be allocated to the activities with significant risk consequences if inspection is reduced. The objective of this paper is to develop a risk-based inspection protocol to facilitate efficient allocation of available inspection resources to minimize the risks associated with reduced inspection. First, the risk consequences associated with reduced inspection are identified for various construction activities linked to transportation projects. Based on data collected from 23 state departments of transportation, 58 engineers and inspectors from the Indiana Department of Transportation and 20 inspection consultants in the Midwest, the subjective perceived probabilities associated with the occurrence of each risk consequence are encoded by using fuzzy analysis, from which the risk impacts due to reduced inspection are obtained. The construction activities are prioritized based on the risk impacts associated with reduced inspection into five priority levels. The greater the risk impacts are as a result of reduced inspection, the higher the priority would be for inspection of that activity. Thus, the proposed protocol can be used for resource allocation based on risk impacts. The proposed list of prioritized construction activities can assist project and program managers in state departments of transportation in better allocating their limited inspection resources while reducing the risks due to reduced inspection.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
This research work was supported by the Joint Transportation Research Program administered by INDOT and Purdue University through Project No. SPR-3400. The authors would like to thank the engineers and inspectors of the state Departments of Transportation, the engineers and inspectors of INDOT, and project personnel from Parsons Brinckerhoff, HNTB, and Indianapolis Testing Lab for their support and insightful input for this study. The authors also acknowledge Professor Julio Martinez for his insightful feedback on this study. The contents of this paper reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Federal Highway Administration and INDOT, nor do the contents constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect necessarily the views of the organizations or the individuals listed here.
References
Anderson, J. L. (1998). “Embracing uncertainty: The interface of Bayesian statistics and cognitive psychology.” Conservat. Ecol., 2(1), 2.
Barnes, J. H. (1984). “Cognitive biases and their impact on strategic planning.” Strat. Manage. J., 5(2), 129–137.
Baruch, Y., and Holtom, B. C. (2008). “Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research.” Human Relat., 61(8), 1139–1160.
Beyth-Marom, R. (1982). “How probable is probable? A numerical translation of verbal probability expressions.” J. Forecast., 1(3), 257–269.
Bonissone, P. P., Gans, S. S., and Decker, K. S. (1987). “RUM: A layered architecture for reasoning with uncertainty.” Proc., 10th Int. Joint Conf. of Artificial Intelligence, Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, 891–896.
Clark, D. A. (1990). “Verbal uncertainty expressions: A critical review of two decades of research.” Curr. Psychol. Res. Rev., 9(3), 203–235.
Clemen, R. T., and Winkler, R. L. (1999). “Combining probability distributions from experts in risk analysis.” Risk Anal., 19(2), 187–203.
Daneshkhah, A. R. (2004). “Uncertainty in probabilistic risk assessment: A review.” Univ. of Sheffield, 〈http://www.shef.ac.uk/beep/publications.html〉 (Jun. 2011).
De Finetti, B. (1964). “Foresight: Its logical laws, its subjective sources.” Studies in subjective probability, H. Kyburg and H. Smokler, eds., Wiley, New York.
Dey, P. K., Ogunlana, S. O., and Naksuksakul, S. (2004). “Risk-based maintenance model for offshore oil and gas pipelines: A case study.” J. Qual. Maint. Eng., 10(3), 169–183.
Duda, R. O., Hart, P. E., and Nilsson, N. J. (1976). “Subjective Bayesian methods for rule-based inference systems.” Proc., AFIPS National Computer Conf., Vol. 45, New York, 1075–1082.
Hanss, M. (2005). Applied fuzzy arithmetic: An introduction with engineering applications, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Jagars-Cohen, C. A., Menches, C. L., Jangid, Y. K., and Caldas, C. H. (2009). “Priority-ranking workload reduction strategies to address challenges of transportation construction inspection.” Transportation Research Record 2098, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 13–17.
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., and Tversky, A. (1974). “Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases.” Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131.
Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A. (1996). “On the reality of cognitive illusions.” Psychol. Rev., 103(3), 582–592.
Law, A. M. (2006). “How to build valid and credible simulation models.” Proc., 2006 Winter Simulation Conf., S. J. Mason, R. Hill, L. Moench, and O. Rose, eds., IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 39–47.
Lindley, D. V., Tversky, A., and Brown, R. V. (1979). “On the reconciliation of probability assessments.” J. R. Stat. Soc., 142(2), 146–180.
Martin, C. (2001). “Help wanted: Meeting the needs for tomorrow’s transportation work force.” Public Roads, 65(1), 2–12.
Mostafavi, A., and Karamouz, M. (2010). “Selecting appropriate project delivery systems: A fuzzy approach with risk analysis.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 136(8), 923–930.
Nalli, K. (2007). “Risk-based inspection—An efficient maintenance tool.” J. Hydroc. Process., 86(12), 91–94.
Pawson, R., Wong, G., and Owen, L. (2011). “Known knowns, known unknowns, unknown unknowns: The predicament of evidence-based policy.” Am. J. Eval., 32(4), 518–546.
Reynolds, J. T. (1996). “Risk and material performance for petroleum, process and power.” Proc., of the 1996 ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conf., Vol. 336, Montreal, QB, Canada, 125–134.
Sandelowski, M. (1998). “The call to experts in qualitative research.” Res. Nursing Health, 21(5), 467–471.
Sargent, R. G. (2010). “Verification and validation of simulation models.” Proc., 2010 Winter Simulation Conf., B. Johansson, S. Jain, J. Montoya-Torres, J. Hugan, and E. Yücesan, eds., 166–183.
Spetzler, C. S., and Staël Von Holstein, C. S. (1975). “Probability encoding in decision analysis.” Manage. Sci., 22(3), 340–358.
Stone, M. (1961). “The opinion pool.” Ann. Math. Stat., 32(4), 1339–1342.
Straub, D., and Faber, M. H. (2006). “Computational aspects of risk-based inspection planning.” Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastruct. Eng., 21(3), 179–192.
Tien, S.-W., Hwang, W.-T., and Tsai, C.-H. (2007). “Study of a risk-based piping inspection guideline system.” ISA Trans., 46(1), 119–126.
Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D. (1974). “Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases.” Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131.
Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D. (1982). “Belief in the law of small numbers.” Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, and A. Tverskey, eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA, 23–31.
Tversky, A., and Koehler, D. J. (1994). “Support theory: A nonextensional representation of subjective probability.” Psychol. Rev., 101(4), 547–567.
Van der Gaag, L. C., Renooij, S., Witteman, C. L. M., Aleman, B. M. P., and Taal, B. G. (2002). “Probabilities for a probabilistic network: A case-study in esophageal cancer.” Artif. Intell. Med., 25(2), 123–148.
Von Winterfeldt, D., and Edwards, W. (1986). Decision analysis and behavioral research, Cambridge University Press, New York.
West, M. (1988). “Modelling expert opinion.” Bayesian statistics, J. M. Bernardo, J. O. Berger, A. P. Dawid, and A. F. M. Smith, eds., Oxford University Press, New York.
Winkler, R. L., Hora, S. C., and Baca, R. G. (1992). “The quality of expert judgment elicitations.” Nuclear Regulatory Commission Contract NRC-02-88-005, Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses, San Antonio, TX.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 139 • Issue 8 • August 2013
Pages: 977 - 986
Copyright
© 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: May 10, 2012
Accepted: Dec 5, 2012
Published online: Dec 7, 2012
Discussion open until: May 7, 2013
Published in print: Aug 1, 2013
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.