Determining Relative Weights of Sewer Pipelines’ Components and Defects
Publication: Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice
Volume 9, Issue 1
Abstract
Condition assessment models for sewer network components can be considered a tool for key personnel to make informed decisions regarding the required interventions on the basis of the current conditions of these components. Defect-based models determine the condition of sewer pipelines on the basis of the different defect types and the severity of each defect. In this paper, the different relative weights of defects and components in sewer pipeline segments were determined using the analytical network process (ANP) as an aggregation method. To determine the relative importance of defects and pipeline components, a questionnaire was distributed to experts working in the field of sewage systems and infrastructures. The pipeline segment was divided into three principal components, namely, pipe length, corresponding joints, and manholes, whereas the defects in each component were classified into three defect categories: structural defects, operational defects, and installation/rehabilitation defects. It was found that the pipeline and joint components both had equal relative importance weights of 0.38 each, leaving the manhole component with 0.24. The structural and installation defects’ relative weights for pipelines were higher than the operational defects with a value of 0.4 and 0.36, respectively. The structural defects in joints had the highest share, with 0.61 as a relative weight. The relative defects’ weights in manholes were found to vary between 0.3 and 0.4.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
This publication was made possible by National Priorities Research Program (NPRP) Grant No. (NPRP6-357-2-150) from the Qatar National Research Fund (a member of The Qatar Foundation). The statements made in this paper are solely those of the authors. Also, the authors would like to thank the public works authority of Qatar (Ashghal) for their support in the data collection.
References
Büyükyazıcı, M., and Sucu, M. (2003). “The analytic hierarchy and analytic network processes.” Hacettepe J. Math. Stat., 32, 65–73.
CERIU (Centre for Expertise and Research on Infrastructures in Urban Areas). (2004). “Manuel de standardization des observations.” Montreal.
Chang, N., Chen, H. W., and Chang, Y. H. (2009). “Fair fund distribution for a municipal incinerator using GIS-based fuzzy analytic hierarchy process.” J. Environ. Manage., 90(1), 441–454.
Cheng, E. W. L., and Li, H. (2007). “Application of ANP13-15 in process models: An example of strategic partnering.” Build. Environ., 42(1), 278–287.
Demirtas, E. A., and Ustun, O. (2009). “Analytic network process and multi-period goal programming integration in purchasing decisions.” Comput. Ind. Eng., 56(2), 677–690.
El-Abbasy, M. S., Senouci, A., Zayed, T., and Mosleh, F. (2015). “A condition assessment model for oil and gas pipelines using integrated simulation and analytic network process.” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., 11(3), 263–281.
El Chanati, H., et al. (2015). “Multi-criteria decision making models for water pipelines.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 1–12.
Grondin, B. (2012). “Guide pour comprendre et interpréter le protocole d’inspection télévisée PACP.” CERIU, Montreal.
Hawari, A., Alkadour, F., Elmasry, M., and Zayed, T. (2016). “Simulation-based condition assessment model for sewer pipelines.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 04016066.
Lee, J. W., and Kim, S. H. (2000). “Using analytic network process and goal programming for interdependent information system project selection.” Comput. Oper. Res., 27(4), 367–382.
Liao, S., and Chang, K. (2009). “Select televised sportscasters for Olympic Games by analytic network process.” Manage. Decis., 47(1), 14–23.
Lin, C., and Juan, P. (2009). “Developing a hierarchy relation with an expert decision analysis process for selecting the optimal resort type for a Taiwanese international resort park: Part 1.” Expert Syst. Appl., 36(2), 1706–1719.
Meade, L. M., and Presley, A. (2002). “R&D project selection using the analytic network process.” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., 49(1), 59–66.
Molinos-Senante, M., Gómez, T., Caballero, R., Hernández-Sancho, F., and Sala-Garrido, R. (2015). “Assessment of wastewater treatment alternatives for small communities: An analytic network process approach.” Sci. Total Environ., 532, 676–687.
NASSCO. (2001). Pipeline assessment and certification program manual, Pipeline Assessment and Certification Program, Shirley, NY.
New Zealand Water and Wastes Association. (2006). New Zealand pipe inspection manual, Auckland, New Zealand.
Piantanakulchai, M. (2005). “Analytic network process model for highway corridor planning.” Proc., ISAHP, ISAHP, Hong Kong.
Saaty, R. (2003). Super decisions software guide, Creative Decisions Foundation, Pittsburgh.
Saaty, T. L. (1977). “A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures.” J. Math. Psychol., 15(3), 234–281.
Saaty, T. L., and Vargas, L. G. (2012). Models, methods, concepts and applications of the analytic hierarchy process, Springer, New York.
Super Decisions [Computer software]. Creative Decisions Foundation, Pittsburgh.
Wong, J., Li, H., and Lai, J. (2008). “Evaluating the system intelligence of the intelligent building systems. 1: Development of key intelligent indicators and conceptual analytical framework.” Autom. Constr., 17(3), 284–300.
WRC (Water Research Centre). (2001). Sewerage rehabilitation manual, 4th Ed., Wiltshire, U.K.
WRC (Water Research Centre). (2013). Manual of sewer condition classification, 5th Ed., Blagrove, U.K.
Yan, W., Chen, C., Huang, Y., and Mi, W. (2008). “An integration of bidding-oriented product conceptualization and supply chain formation.” Comput. Ind., 59(2–3), 128–144.
Yang, C., Chuang, S., Huang, R., and Tai, C. (2008). “Location selection based on AHP/ANP approach.” IEEE Int. Conf. on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, IEEE, Redhook, NY, 1148–1153.
Yuksel, I., and Dagdeviren, M. (2007). “Using the analytic network process (ANP) in a SWOT analysis: A case study for a textile firm.” Inf. Sci., 177(16), 3364–3382.
Zhao, J. Q., McDonald, S. E., and Kleiner, Y. (2001). “Guidelines for condition assessment and rehabilitation of large sewers.”, Institute for Research in Construction, National Research Council Canada, Ottawa.
Zoffer, J., Bahurmoz, A., Hamid, M., Minutolo, M., and Saaty, T. (2008). “Synthesis of complex criteria decision making: A case towards a consensus agreement for a Middle East conflict resolution.” Group Decis. Negotiation, 17(5), 363–385.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice
Volume 9 • Issue 1 • February 2018
Copyright
©2017 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Nov 6, 2016
Accepted: May 19, 2017
Published online: Sep 25, 2017
Published in print: Feb 1, 2018
Discussion open until: Feb 25, 2018
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.