Analytical Framework for Optimizing Pavement Maintenance
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 114, Issue 3
Abstract
The problem of scheduling maintenance for pavements in an optimum fashion has been approached in a variety of ways by researchers and practitioners. However, the Markov decision process has found very limited use despite the fact that cumulative damage is readily modeled by a Markov chain and that a wealth of immediately applicable theoretical results exist in the literature. The solutions are known for a variety of problems involving inspection, repair, and replacement, making it possible to solve directly for an optimal policy in the form of a control law. This paper reviews some of the relevant theoretical results in order to call them to the attention of civil engineers involved with pavement management systems.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Artman, D., and Liebman, J. (1983). “Optimization of long‐range major rehabilitation of airfield pavements.” Transp. Res. Record, 938, Jan., 1–11.
2.
Bogdanoff, J., and Kozin, F. (1985). Probabilistic models of cumulative damage. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y.
3.
Carnahan, J., Davis, W., Shahin, M., Keane, P., and Wu, M. (1987). “Optimal maintenance decisions for pavement management.” J. Transp. Engrg., ASCE, 113(5), 554–572.
4.
Cox, D., and Miller, H. (1965). The theory of stochastic processes. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y.
5.
Darter, M., and Shahin, M. (1980). “Pavement rehabilitation, identifying the need.” J. Transp. Engrg., 106(1), 1–10.
6.
Darter, M., Smith, R., and Shahin, M. (1985). “Use of life cycle cost analysis as the basis for determining cost‐effectiveness of maintenance and rehabilitation treatments for developing a network level assignment procedure.” Proc. North American Pavement Mgmt. Conf., Ontario Ministry of Transportation and Communications/U.S. Federal Highway Administration, vol. 2, Mar., 7.6–7.18.
7.
Derman, C. (1962). “On sequential decisions and Markov chains.” Mgmt. Sci., 9(1), 16–24.
8.
Derman, C. (1963). “Optimal replacement under Markovian determination with probability bounds on failure.” Mgmt. Sci., 9(3), 478–481.
9.
Derman, C. (1965). “Markovian sequential control prbcesses‐denumerable state space.” J. Math. Anal. and Appl., 10(2), 295–302.
10.
Derman, C. (1970). Finite state Markovian decision processes. Academic Press, New York, N.Y.
11.
Golabi, K., Kulkarni, R., and Way, G. (1982), “A statewide pavement management system.” Interfaces, 12(6), 5–21.
12.
Haas, R., and Hudson, W. R. (1978). Pavement management systems. McGraw‐Hill, New York, N.Y.
13.
Kher, R., and Cook, W. (1985). “PARS‐the MTC model for program and financial planning in pavement rehabilitation.” Proc. North American Pavement Mgmt. Conf., Ontario Ministry of Transportation and Communication/U.S. Federal Highway Administration, vol. 2, Mar., 6.24–6.40.
14.
Klein, M. (1962). “Inspection‐maintenance‐replacement schedules under Markovian deterioration.” Mgmt. Sci., 9(1), 25–32.
15.
Kolesar, P. (1966). “Minimum cost replacement under Markovian deterioration.” Mgmt. Sci., 12(9), 694–766.
16.
Liebman, J. (1985). “Optimization tools for pavement management.” Proc. North American Pavement Mgmt. Conf., Ontario Ministry of Transportation and Communication/U.S. Federal Highway Administration, vol. 2, Mar., 6.6–6.15.
17.
Phillips, D. K. (1985). “3R Standards Implementation.” J. Transp. Engrg., 111(2), 131–137.
18.
Phillips, D. T., Lytton, R., and Shanmugham, C. (1981). “Rehabilitation and maintenance system: the optimization models.” Texas Transportation Institute Research Report No. 239‐4, Texas A&M Univ., College Station, Tex.
19.
Ritchie, S., Yeh, C., Mahoney, J., and Jackson, N. (1987). “Surface condition expert system for pavement rehabilitation planning.” J. Transp. Engrg., ASCE, 113(2), 155–167.
20.
Ross, S. (1970). Applied probability models with optimization applications. Holden‐Day, San Francisco, Calif.
21.
Scullion, T., and Stein, A. (1985). “Predicting maintenance and rehabilitation needs for the state of Texas.” Proc. North American Pavement Mgmt. Conf., Ontario Ministry of Transportation and Communication/U.S. Federal Highway Administration, Mar., 5.54–5.64.
22.
Shahin, S., Kohn, S., Lytton, R., and McFarland, W. (1985). “Pavement M&R budget optimization using the incremental benefit‐cost technique.” Proc. North American Pavement Mgmt. Conf., Ontario Ministry of Transportation and Communication/U.S. Federal Highway Administration, Mar., 6.97–6.107.
23.
Shahin, M., Nunez, M., Broten, M., Carpenter, S., and Sameh, A. (1987). “New techniques for modeling pavement deterioration,” presented at 66th Annual Meeting Transp. Res. Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 12–15.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 114 • Issue 3 • May 1988
Pages: 307 - 322
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 ASCE.
History
Published online: May 1, 1988
Published in print: May 1988
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.