Presentation on theme: "CEE 404 Winter 2011 1 Life-Cycle Cost Analysis. CEE 404 Winter 2011 2 Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Required by National Highway System (NHS) Designation Act."— Presentation transcript:
CEE 404 Winter Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
CEE 404 Winter Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Required by National Highway System (NHS) Designation Act of 1995 Removed by Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century (TEA-21) of 1998 –FHWA still encourages LCCA
CEE 404 Winter Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Purpose –Determine total cost or value of an item over its entire life-cycle –Decision support tool Legislatively defined: “... a process for evaluating the total economic worth of a usable project segment by analyzing initial costs and discounted future cost, such as maintenance, user, reconstruction, rehabilitation, restoring, and resurfacing costs, over the life of the project segment.” A usable project segment is defined as a portion of a highway that, when completed, could be opened to traffic independent of some larger overall project.
CEE 404 Winter General Procedure Initial strategy & analysis decisions –Analysis period (at least 35 years) –Alternative pavement design strategies –Pavement performance over time –Maintenance/rehabilitation timing
CEE 404 Winter General Procedure Agency costs –Preliminary engineering –Contract administration –Initial construction –Construction supervision –Maintenance –Rehabilitation –Administrative –Salvage value
CEE 404 Winter General Procedure User costs –Normal operation –Work zone –Types of user costs Vehicle operating User delay crash
CEE 404 Winter VOC: The Cost or Roughness Papagiannakis and Delwar (2001) – 1 m/km = $200/yr for maint. & repair = 1.7 cents/mile Barnes and Langworthy (2003) IRI (inches/mile)% VOC Increase % 14015% 105 5% 80 0%
CEE 404 Winter VOC Assuming IRI = 80 inches/mile 56.1 cents/mile 25.2 cents/mile 18.3 cents/mile Data from Barnes and Langworthy (2003)
CEE 404 Winter VOC Assuming IRI = 140 inches/mile 64.5 cents/mile 31.3 cents/mile 24.0 cents/mile Data from Barnes and Langworthy (2003)
CEE 404 Winter VOC Assuming IRI = 170 inches/mile 70.1 cents/mile 34.0 cents/mile 26.1 cents/mile Data from Barnes and Langworthy (2003)
CEE 404 Winter VOC vs. Roughness
CEE 404 Winter General Procedure Alternative comparison –Net present value (NPV) –Equivalent uniform annual costs (EUAC) i=discount rate n=year of expenditure =Present value (PV) factor i=discount rate n=Analysis period (the number of years into the future over which you wish to compare projects)
CEE 404 Winter 2011 What is NOT Considered Environmental impacts –Energy use –Emissions –Waste Equity impacts –Connectivity –Congestion –Community 14 LCA of the CEE 404 Final Project Options (from Weiland 2008)
CEE 404 Winter 2011 What is NOT Considered Environmental impacts –Energy use –Emissions –Waste Equity impacts –Connectivity –Congestion –Community 15 LCA of the CEE 404 Final Project Options (from Weiland, 2008)
CEE 404 Winter General Assumptions Both pavements built at same time Same traffic on each pavement Same user costs between construction activities –VOC is the same –Implies road roughness is the same –Maintenance/rehabilitation activities are scheduled such that user costs are the same –Implies some unlikely activities must be scheduled Differences will be in… –Construction costs –User delay costs during construction –Salvage value
CEE 404 Winter Be Careful of Assumptions SR 704, Cross-Base Highway Project Estimated Cost $318 million Current Funding $43 million
CEE 404 Winter Be Careful of Assumptions SR 704: HMA Alternative
CEE 404 Winter Be Careful of Assumptions SR 704: PCC Alternative
CEE 404 Winter Other Life-Cycle Cost Study Pitfalls Not accounting for user costs –Traffic delay during construction –VOC due to differing roughness Differences in salvage value –Maintenance/rehabilitation timing
From Gibboney. (1995). Flexible and Rigid Pavement Costs on the Ohio Interstate Highway System I-71 in Ohio: Present Worth in 1960 of Total Contract Costs (using a 5% discount rate) 1.Commissioned by Flexible Pavements of Ohio 2.Did not account for user costs
I-70 in Kansas: Total Costs per 4-Lane Mile in 2001 Dollars From Cross and Parsons. (2002). Evaluation of Expenditures on Rural Interstate Pavements in Kansas 1.Did not account for user costs 2.Did not account for KDOT maintenance work (negligible)
I-80, Iowa County, Iowa: Total Cumulative (Life-Cycle) Costs From Asphalt Paving Association of Iowa. (1998). Iowa Interstates: A Look at Performance and Costs 1.Did not account for user costs 2.Did not account for routine maintenance costs 3.Did not account for salvage values
40-Year Life-Cycle Cost Analysis From Waalks. (n.d.). Life Cycle Cost Analysis: A Guide for Comparing Alternative Pavement Designs 1.Commissioned by the Portland Cement Association 2.Did not account for user costs ?
Michigan: Average Overall Cost per Lane-km per Year From Waalks. (n.d.). Life Cycle Cost Analysis: A Guide for Comparing Alternative Pavement Designs
WSDOT Interstate Pavements time to first rehabilitation
ODOT Interstate Pavements time to first rehabilitation
CEE 404 Winter Issues to Address 1.Pavement design Will foundation support PCC? 2.Life cycle Is LCCA difference less than 15%? 3.Engineering Is there a preferred alternative?
CEE 404 Winter WSDOT LCCA Sets standard procedure and assumptions –Only consider differential factors –Uses NPV –Gives values for user cost –Sets analysis periods 50 years for Interstate or Principal Arterial 20 years for Minor Arterial or Major Collector –Formal process for determining pavement type
CEE 404 Winter Primary References Walls, J. and Smith, M.R. (1998). Life-Cycle Cost Analysis in Pavement Design. Report No. FHWA-SA FHWA, Washington, D.C. team/DP115TechBulletin.pdf team/DP115TechBulletin.pdf WSDOT. (2005). Pavement Type Selection Protocol.