Abstract
The rapid growth of freight traffic is now taxing a significant number of the U.S. national freight corridors. Additional demand accompanied by trucks over legal weight limits has been accelerating pavement and bridge deterioration at a faster rate than anticipated. States do not collect sufficient revenues to offset pavement and bridge damage caused by overweight trucks. As increase in overweight permit fee may affect different stakeholders positively and/or negatively, decision makers must develop policy options considering multiple conflicting objectives simultaneously. A multiobjective analysis approach [i.e., the (epsilon)-constraint method] was applied to address conflicting objectives associated with overweight freight truck mobility and to identify rational overweight truck damage cost recovery fee options by generating detailed tradeoffs between these options. Bridge damage costs were estimated as fatigue damage using finite-element simulation models of bridge archetypes and pavement damage costs were estimated using a method based on equivalent single-axle load as per AASHTO standard. These costs were used to develop the mathematical relationship between the objectives and constraints in the multiobjective model. This paper presents a case study with two objectives, as follows: (1) minimization of unpaid pavement and bridge damage by overweight freight trucks, and (2) minimization of overweight damage cost recovery fees. A set of 10 overweight fee options and the associated tradeoffs are developed for four damage cost recovery fee types [i.e., (1) flat, (2) axle-based, (3) weight-based, and (4) weight-distance-based fee types]. The tradeoff analysis reveals that increasing the flat overweight damage cost recovery fee by $1 from $43 will reduce unpaid damages by $4.2 million annually in South Carolina with a high elasticity of demand. In the axle-based damage cost recovery fee type, increasing the average axle-based overweight damage cost recovery fee by $1 from $43 will reduce unpaid damages of $3.8 million annually in South Carolina. These types of tradeoff analyses provide valuable information to decision makers in selecting types and levels of fee for overweight trucks. Tradeoff analysis framework and results of the tradeoff analysis depicted in the paper contributes to assessing infrastructure damage due to overweight trucks, and developing damage recovery fee policies considering multiple conflicting objectives.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The writers acknowledge the SCDOT, which provided funding for the research reported in this paper. The writers also thank Drs. Bradley Putman and Weichiang Pang, and Linbo Chen for their valuable input to the research reported in this paper. The comments from anonymous reviewers helped to enhance the quality of this paper. All opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations presented in this paper are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the SCDOT.
References
AASHTO. (1993). Guide for design of pavement structures, Washington, DC.
ASCE. (2013). ASCE report card for America’s infrastructure, Reston, VA.
Atkinson, R. D., and Shultz, M. (2009). “Paying our way, a new framework for transportation finance.”.
Bai, Q., Labi, S., and Sinha, K. C. (2012). “Trade-off analysis for multiobjective optimization in transportation asset management by generating Pareto frontiers using extreme points nondominated sorting genetic algorithm II.” J. Transp. Eng., 798–808.
Banerjee, A., Prozzi, J. P., and Prozzi, J. A. (2012). “Evaluating the effect of natural gas developments on highways: Texas case study.”, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 49–56.
Brauers, W. K. M., Zavadskas, E. K., Peldschus, F., and Turskis, Z. (2008). “Multi-objective decision making for road design.” Transportation, 23(3), 183–193.
Cambridge Systematics. (2005). “An initial assessment of freight bottlenecks on highways.”, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC.
Chankong, V., and Haimes, Y. Y. (1983). Multiobjective decision making: Theory and methodology, North-Holland, New York.
Chowdhury, M., Garber, N., and Li, D. (2000). “An interactive multiobjective resource allocation methodology for highway safety improvements.” J. Infrastruct. Syst., 138–144.
Chowdhury, M., Putman, B., Pang, W., Dunning, A., Dey, K., and Chen, L. (2013). “Bridge and pavement damage as affected by trucks.”, Columbia, SC.
Chowdhury, M., and Tan, P. (2005). “A case study on investment analysis using a constraint multiobjective methodology.”, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 231–237.
Chowdhury, M., Tan, P., and William, S. L. (2002). “An interactive multiobjective decision support framework for transportation investment.”.
Deb, K. (2001). Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms, Wiley, Chichester, U.K.
Dey, K. C., Chowdhury, M., Pang, W., Putman, B. J., and Chen, L. (2014). “Estimation of pavement and bridge damage costs caused by overweight trucks.” Transport. Res. Rec., 2411(1), 62–71.
Ehrgott, M. (2005). Multicriteria optimization, 2nd Ed., Springer, Berlin.
Ehrgott, M., and Wiecek, M. M. (2005). “Multiobjective programming.” Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys, J. Figueira, S. Greco, and M. Ehrgott, eds., Springer, New York, 667–722.
FEMA. (2003). “Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology earthquake model HAZUS-MH MR3 technical manual.”, Washington, DC.
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). (1997). “Federal highway cost allocation study.”, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC.
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). (2010). “Freight facts and figures 2010.”, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC.
Fwa, T. F., Chan, W. T., and Hoque, K. Z. (2000). “Multiobjective optimization for pavement maintenance programming.” J. Transp. Eng., 367–374.
Garber, N. J., and Hoel, L. A. (2008). Traffic and highway engineering, 4th Ed., Cengage Learning.
Graham, D. J., and Glaister, S. (2004). “Road traffic demand elasticity estimates: A review.” Transp. Rev. Trans. Transdiscip. J., 24(3), 261–274.
Hwang, H.-C. (2009). “Inventory replenishment and inbound shipment scheduling under a minimum replenishment policy.” Transp. Sci., 43(2), 244–264.
LS-DYNA. (2010) LS-DYNA keyword user’s manual volume I version 971/Rev 5, Livermore Software Technology, Livermore, CA.
Luskin, D. M., and Walton, C. M. (2001). “Effects of truck size and weights on highway infrastructures and operations: A synthesis report.”, U.S. DOT, Washington, DC.
Mavrotas, G. (2009). “Effective implementation of the e-constraint method in multi-objective mathematical programming problems.” Appl. Math. Comput., 213(2), 455–465.
Middleton, D., and Li, Y. (2013). “Impacts of route restrictions on the movement of oversize/overweight loads in Texas.” Proc., Transportation Research Board 92nd Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.
Miettinen, K. (1999). Nonlinear multiobjective optimization, Kluwer, Dordrecht, Netherlands.
NBI (National Bridge Inventory). (2012).〈http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/nbi/ascii.cfm?year=2012〉 (Feb. 20, 2013).
ODOT (Ohio DOT). (2009). “Impacts of permitted trucking on Ohio’s transportation system and economy.”, Columbus, OH.
Prozzi, J., et al. (2012). “Oversize/overweight vehicle permit fee study.”, Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX.
Sabria, E. H., and Beamon, B. M. (2000). “A multi-objective approach to simultaneous strategic and operational planning in supply chain design.” Omega, 28(5), 581–598.
Sadeghi, J. M., and Fathali, M. (2007). “Deterioration analysis of flexible pavements under overweight vehicles.” J. Transp. Eng., 625–633.
Salama, H. K., Chatti, K., and Lyles, R. W. (2006). “Effect of heavy multiple axle trucks on flexible pavement damage using in-service pavement performance data.” J. Transp. Eng., 763–770.
Salem, H. M. A. (2008). “Effect of excess axle weights on pavement life.” Emirates J. Eng. Res., 13(1), 21–28.
Siekmann, A., Capps, G., and Hudson, M. B. L. (2011). “Preliminary assessment of overweight mainline vehicles.”, Oak Ridge, TN.
Straus, S. H., and Semmens, J. (2006). “Estimating the cost of overweight vehicle travel on Arizona highways.”, Phoenix.
U.S. Census. (2004). “South Carolina: 2002 economic census, vehicle inventory and use survey.”, Washington, DC.
VTRC (Virginia Transportation Research Council). (2008). “A review of the current overweight permit fee structure in Virginia (HB 1551).” 〈http://www.fairfaxfederation.org/committees/Transportation/081125OverweightPermitFeeStructureReportEdited.pdf〉 (Jan. 21. 2015).
WSDOT (Washington State DOT). (2001). “Legal load limits, overweight loads and pavements and bridges.”, Olympia.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 141 • Issue 7 • July 2015
Copyright
© 2015 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Apr 24, 2014
Accepted: Dec 18, 2014
Published online: Mar 12, 2015
Published in print: Jul 1, 2015
Discussion open until: Aug 12, 2015
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.