Incorporating Priority Preferences into Pavement Maintenance Programming
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 138, Issue 6
Abstract
Traditionally, it has been a common practice to apply priority weights to selected parameters in the process of optimal programming of pavement maintenance. However, there are several issues associated with this approach of incorporating priority preferences into pavement maintenance programming. For instance, applying priority weights to selected problem parameters will lead to a suboptimal solution with respect to the original objective function (such as minimal total maintenance cost or maximum pavement condition). The decision makers may not be aware of this consequence and the magnitude of loss in optimality caused by their choice of priority scheme. This paper proposes an improved methodology of incorporating priority preferences into pavement maintenance programming to overcome these problems. Instead of applying priority weights directly into the mathematical formulation of maintenance programming, priority preferences are handled in two stages of postprocessing of the optimal programming process, namely, a tie-breaking analysis and a trade-off analysis. The optimal programming problem is first solved without applying priority weights to any parameters of the problem. This ensures that the optimality of the solution is not disturbed. In the tie-breaking postprocessing, prioritized maintenance activities are identified to replace lower-priority activities in the solution without affecting the optimality of the solution. Finally, a trade-off analysis is performed to introduce more prioritized activities into the solution on the basis of the willingness of the highway agency to accept some loss in optimality.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Abaza, K. A., and Ashur, S. (1999). “An optimum decision policy for management of pavement maintenance and rehabilitation. In transportation research record.” Transportation Research Record 1655, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 8–15.
Abaza, K. A., Ashur, S. A., and Al-Khatib, I. (2004). “An integrated pavement management system with a Markovian prediction model.” J. Transp. Eng.JTPEDI, 130(1), 24–33.
Al-Abdul Wahhab, H., Ramadhan, R., Asi, I. M., and Yazdani, J. (2002). “Development of pavement management system for municipality roads, Saudi Arabia.” 89th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers (DVD-ROM), Paper No. TRB 02-2978, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
ASTM. (2007). “Standard practice for roads and parking lots pavement condition index surveys.” D6433-07, Philadelphia.
Bellman, R. E. (1957). Dynamic programming, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Chan, W. T., Fwa, T. F., and Tan, C. Y. (1994). “Road-maintenance planning using genetic algorithms. I: Formulation.” J. Transp. Eng.JTPEDI, 120(5), 693–709.
Chan, W. T., Fwa, T. F., and Tan, J. Y. (2003). “Optimal fund-allocation analysis for multidistrict highway agencies.” J. Infrastruct. Syst.JITSE4, 9(4), 167–175.
Chang, J. R., Hung, C. T., Tzeng, G. H., and Lin, J. D. (2004). “Fuzzy multiple objective programming approach for optimizing pavement maintenance management systems.” The 6th Int. Multi-Objective Programming and Goal Programming Conf., Institute of Management, Univ. of Tunis, Hammamet, Tunisia.
Evdorides, H. T., Kerali, H. G. R., Rivière, N., and Ørnskov, J. K. (2002). “Condition-based method for programming road infrastructure maintenance.” Transportation Research Record 1816, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 10–15.
Ferreira, A., Antunes, A., and Picado-Santos, L. (2002). “Probabilistic segment-linked pavement management optimization model.” J. Transp. Eng.JTPEDI, 128(6), 568–577.
Fwa, T. F., Chan, W. T., and Hoque, K. Z. (2000). “Multiobjective optimization for pavement maintenance programming.” J. Transp. Eng.JTPEDI, 126(5), 367–374.
Fwa, T. F., and Sinha, K. C. (1988). “Highway routine maintenance programming at network level.” J. Transp. Eng.JTPEDI, 114(5), 539–554.
Fwa, T. F., Tan, C. Y., and Chan, W. T. (1994). “Road-maintenance planning using genetic algorithms. II: Analysis.” J. Transp. Eng.JTPEDI, 120(5), 710–722.
Goldberg, D. (1989). Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning, Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.
Kulkarni, R. B., and Miller, R. W. (2003). “Pavement management systems: Past, present, and future.” Transportation Research Record 1853, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 65–71.
Li, Z., and Sinha, K. C. (2009). “Application of Shackle’s model and system optimization for highway investment decision making under uncertainty.” J. Transp. Eng.JTPEDI, 135(3), 129–139.
Scheinberg, T., and Anastasopoulos, P. C. (2010). “Pavement preservation programming.” A Multi-Year Multiconstraint Optimization Methodology, Transportation Research Board 89th Annual Meeting (DVD-ROM), Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Tack, J. N., and Chou, E. Y. J. (2002). “Multiyear pavement repair scheduling optimization by preconstrained genetic algorithm.” Transportation Research Record 1816, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 3–9.
Wang, F., Zhang, Z., and Machemehl, R. B. (2003). “Decision-making problem for managing pavement maintenance and rehabilitation projects.” Transportation Research Record 1853, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 21–28.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Dec 5, 2009
Accepted: Oct 27, 2011
Published online: Nov 9, 2011
Published in print: Jun 1, 2012
Published ahead of production: Jun 15, 2012
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.