Presentation on theme: "Scott A. Anderson FHWA - Resource Center"— Presentation transcript:
1Scott A. Anderson FHWA - Resource Center Risk-Based Asset and Performance Management: A Geotechnical PerspectiveScott A. AndersonFHWA - Resource Center
2Risk-Based Asset and Performance Management Can’t do all we would likeNeed to OptimizeCan’t do it all at onceNeed to PrioritizeThis is the motivation for “management”There is also a catalyst
3Catalysts for management Bridge – safetyPavement – costGeotechnical – performance
4MAP-21 National Performance Goals SafetyInfrastructure Conditions: State of Good RepairCongestion ReductionSystem Reliability- improve efficiencyFreight Movement and Economic VitalityEnvironmental SustainabilityReduced Project Delivery DelaysTo address this problem, FHWA started on “System Performance”, not only bridge or pavement performance with the goal to ….. See word “system”The HQ office started to reorganize and move from “Asset Management” to “Performance Mamanegment, which is the future….
5FAQ on MAP-21Question 2: What requirements does MAP-21 have pertaining to asset management?Answer 2: Each State is required to develop a risk-based asset management plan for the National Highway System (NHS) to improve or preserve the condition of the assets and the performance of the system. (23 U.S.C. 119(e)(1), MAP-21 § 1106)The Secretary is required to issue a regulation not later than 18 months after date of enactment, after consultation with the States, which will establish the process to develop the State asset management plan for the NHS. (23 U.S.C. § 119(e)(8), MAP-21 § 1106)Source: FHWA website
6Question 3: What are the scope and content of a risk-based asset management plan? Answer 3: In general, a State risk-based asset management plan includes strategies that lead to a program of projects that would make progress toward achievement of the State targets for asset condition and performance of the NHS in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 150(d) and supporting progress toward the achievement of the national goals identified in 23 U.S.C. 150(b). (23 U.S.C. 119(e)(2), MAP-21 § 1106) States must address pavements and bridges but are encouraged to include all infrastructure assets within the highway right-of-way in their risk-based asset management plan.23 U.S.C. 119(e)(4) (MAP-21 § 1106) requires that a State asset management plan be in a form that the Secretary determines to be appropriate. It also requires that the plan include:a summary listing of the pavement and bridge assets on the NHS in the State, including a description of the condition of those assets;asset management objectives and measures;performance gap identification;lifecycle cost and risk management analysis;a financial plan; andinvestment strategies.
7Question 4: What other infrastructure assets within the highway right-of-way can be included in a risk-based asset management plan?Answer 4: While the MAP-21 risk-based asset management plan specifies pavements and bridges on the NHS in 23 U.S.C. § 119(e)(4), 23 U.S.C. 119(e)(3) (MAP-21 § 1106) requires the Secretary to encourage States to include all infrastructure assets within the highway right-of-way. Examples of such infrastructure assets include: pavement markings, culverts, guardrail, signs, traffic signals, lighting, Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) infrastructure, rest areas, etc., in the asset management plan.SafetyInfrastructure Conditions: State of Good RepairCongestion ReductionSystem Reliability- improve efficiencyFreight Movement and Economic VitalityEnvironmental SustainabilityReduced Project Delivery DelaysReally?
8Geotechnical Impacts on System Performance Though the pavement and bridges are in excellent condition, the performance here is poor.
9The Geotechnical Role We can address many performance goals The intent of the law may fail if we don’t manage our assets to support performance goalsThe language we speak will become less relevant if we aren’t ‘managing our assets’We are responsible for certain links in a transportation corridor(The System)
14Comprised of earth or performance achieved through earth interaction with structure or inclusion
15Proposed Geotechnical Asset Taxonomy – 1/8/14 Physical AssetCorridor and/or GAM SectionROW FeatureIndependent FeatureSlopeRockSoilModifiedEmbankmentSubgradeEarth Retaining StructureStabilized EarthSteel or Reinforced ConcreteElement of other StructureBridge ElementTunnel ElementPavement ElementOutside-ROW FeatureSlopesWater bodiesStructures (walls, etc.)Non-CorridorMaterial SitesStockpiles or otherNon-Physical AssetDataKnowledgeEquipmentThe adjective “Geotechnical” means the asset is comprised of earth, pertains to earth, or its performance is achieved through earth interaction with a structure or inclusion.Inclusions are any and all non-earth modifications: pipes, anchors, grids, fabrics, grouts, etc.Predominant distinction in how feature is managed. Features with inclusions are “modified”.Activities here:Add examples and paragraph or so to each box.Link to the activities that are currently going on like slope inventories, wall inventories, the flexible rockfall barrier NCHRP study, etc.Format into paper.Established management systems for other structures that have (or should have) geotechnical elements. Others, could be added; for example – culverts.High slopes, shorelines, and structures typically owned by others outside the ROW that are sources of risk because they can impact performanceInvestigation and test results, lab and field equipment, key personnel
16Current Practice Implementation in States today They are all taking steps: some big, some smallAlabamaGeorgiaFloridaKentuckyUtahNorth CarolinaSouth CarolinaWashington D.C.New HampshireSouth DakotaTennesseeConnecticutMaineMarylandOregonNew JerseyNew YorkPennsylvaniaOhioNorth DakotaIndianaMichiganIllinoisMissouriNebraskaIowaWisconsinMinnesotaArizonaMontanaCaliforniaColoradoKansasWashingtonIdahoAlaska Vermont
17Remember the fine print? 23 U.S.C. 119(e)(4) (MAP-21 § 1106) requires that a State asset management plan be in a form that the Secretary determines to be appropriate. It also requires that the plan include:a summary listing of the pavement and bridge assets on the NHS in the State, including a description of the condition of those assets;asset management objectives and measures;performance gap identification;lifecycle cost and risk management analysis;a financial plan; andinvestment strategies.That’s what these states are doing, all in their own ways.Let’s look at linking Condition, Performance and Risk Management- and define “Condition” and “Risk Management” as we do so
18Two diversions to show breadth of the revolution Performance Based Practical Design (PBPD)SHRP2 - R19B: BRIDGE FOR SERVICE LIFE BEYOND 100 YEARS: SERVICE LIMIT STATE DESIGN…Then on to some new ideas
19PBPD – Definition The PBPD approach: grounded in performance managementexercise engineering judgment to build up the improvements from existing conditions to address purpose and needuses appropriate performance-analysis toolsconsiders both short- and long-term project and system goalsA Performance-Based Practical Design (PBPD) approach is grounded in a performance management framework. PBPD can be articulated as modifying a traditional design approach to a “design up” approach where transportation decision makers exercise engineering judgment to build up the improvements from existing conditions to meet both project and system objectives. PBPD uses appropriate performance-analysis tools to inform our engineering judgment, considers both short and long term project and system goals while addressing project purpose and need.
20Context Sensitive Solutions PBPD – OverlappingAsset Mgmt.PBPDValueEngineeringRoad DietsContext Sensitive SolutionsIt is true that there are overlaps from other initiatives: Context-sensitive solutions, Livability, Road Diets, VE, Asset ManagementContext-sensitive solutions (CSS) and livability seek a transportation solution that addresses the needs of all road users and the functions of the facility within the context of its setting, considering land use, users, the environment, and other factors. CSS is a collaborative, interdisciplinary approach that includes the viewpoints of all stakeholders in the development of a shared vision of project goals, and uses a defined decision-making process. CSS, livability, and PBPD rely on flexibility to achieve results that meet the project purpose and need. PBPD compliments CSS and livability by providing performance information that supports decision-making.Livability
21SHRP2 R19B – Bridges for Service Life beyond 100 Years: Executive SummaryThe objectives of SHRP 2 Project R19B were to develop design and detailing guidance and calibrated Service Limit States (SLSs) to provide 100 year life, and to develop a framework for further development of calibrated SLSs. Generally, it has been assumed that maintenance activities will be sufficient to prevent significant loss of the strength and stiffness that would result in unsatisfactory service level performance.Consideration of SLSs requires different input data than the previously calibrated Strength Limit State I (ULSs). In ULSs, the limit state function is defined with two variables, resistance, which was considered constant in time, and loads. For SLSs, a different approach is needed:• As exceeding service limit states does not lead to a clear, immediate, loss of functionality, defining the resistance is very subjective.• Acceptable performance can be subjective (full life-cycle analysis is required).• Resistance and load effects can be and often are correlated.• Load must be considered to be a function of time, described by magnitude and frequency of occurrence.• Resistance may be strongly affected by quality of workmanship, operation procedures and maintenance.• Resistance is subject to changes in time, mostly but not only deterioration, with difficulty predicting initiation time and time-varying rate of deterioration (e.g. corrosion, accumulation of debris, cracking).• Resistance can depend on geographical location (climate, exposure to industrial pollution, exposure to deicing agents or proximity to the ocean).
22Pavement Deterioration Curve PCI = Condition Deterioration is relatively well understood for pavementGalehouse et al., 2006
23Deterioration modelsHow are these levels related to Performance Goals?
24Linking Condition and Performance Example: With four Performance Goals and four Asset Classes, these are the components of Level of Service (LOS). A description of condition with respect to different goalsAsset ClassPerformance GoalsPerformance GoalsSafetyInfrastructureCongestionEnvironmentalAsset ClassesRetaining WallsLOSRW,SLOSRW,ILOSRW,CLOSRW,ESlopesLOSSL,SLOSSL,ILOSSL,CLOSSL,EEmbankmentsLOSEM,SLOSEM,ILOSEM,CLOSEM,ESubgradeLOSSB,SLOSSB,ILOSSB,CLOSSB,EActivity here:Explain this using examples of technical and non-technical measures, the units of measure, and how an LOS Threshold can be set between each LOS (Good, Fair, Poor) in such a way that they can be aggregated, summed or averaged.Tie back to Verhoeven presentation.Explain that LOS is today and Risk is the future using a deterioration curve and using random events. (Scott to lead)Level of Service (LOS) describes condition with respect to Goals
25Risk Management Risk(E) = Probability(E) x Consequence(E) (Vulnerability included here with Consequence)“Risk management is an important part of asset management …” (AASHTO TAM Guide and ES)MAP 21 reads as follows:“IN GENERAL—A State shall develop a risk-based assetmanagement plan for the National Highway System toimprove or preserve the condition of the assets and theperformance of the system.”
26ChallengeRisk is treated as though it is an additional Performance Measure or Goal (TAMG 5.1.3)as though it were additional to Safety, Congestion, Reliability, etc.This leaves open a question (See TAMG 5.4): “Risk of what; what event is failure?”This contributes to an imprecise use of the word, and confusion…
27Proposed SolutionExplicitly do not consider risk as an additional Performance Measure or GoalTreat risk as related to each and every Performance Goal, and whether or not it will be met (= “failure”)Safety, Congestion, Reliability, etc.Define “Level of Service” (LOS) as also related to the same Performance Goals
28Key PointLOS is static at a point in time, whereas Risk is related to the potential rate of change of LOSLOS is “today”, what condition and service is the asset providing through today; it is not uncertainRisk is “tomorrow”; all else is the same, but of course it is uncertainRisk is related to a prediction, a forecast of LOS change through action or inaction
29Risk Sources – sources of the event (E) Natural Hazardse.g. extreme/rare eventsExternal Agency Impactse.g. poor materials or constructionPhysical Failuree.g. deteriorationOperational Riske.g. poor design, operation, or business decisionAll risks can be identified in a 3-D matrix:Risk Sources x Assets x Performance GoalsTAM Guide (Section 5.4.1)Activities here:Expand on what these mean from the AASHTO Guide.Compare and contrast with other means of identifying risk sources. Hopefully end up here (I like the way things fall out with this).Add in discussion of vulnerability and resilience, and how risk can be expressed in dollars.Propose simplifications (like vulnerability be considered as part of consequence, or other similar things) Need to avoid getting too complicated.
30Definition of the Event (E) = “failure” Slipping below a condition state – a target LOS for a Performance Goal
32GEOTECHNICAL RISK Asset Class Risk Source Performance Goals InfrastructureEnvironmentalCongestionSafetyRRW,E,OROperational RiskPhysical FailureRRW,C,PFExternal Agency ImpactsRRW,I,EAINatural HazardsRRW,S,NHΣ of ALL Risk Sources on GEOTECHNICAL Assets with respect to ALL Performance GoalsCan be done for GAM Section, Corridor or entire inventoryRetaining WallsRRW,S,NHAsset ClassSlopesRSL,I,NHActivities here:Give specific examples of how risk can be calculated for a variety of cell types of the Physical Failure and Natural Hazard types. Use expert based event trees and methods based on statistics of data at hand.Show how these can be classified as High, Medium and Low, and compare this with what was done for LOS.EmbankmentsREM,C,NHRisk SourceSubgradeRSB,E,NHPerformance Goals
33Simplification 64 cells (this example) is too many. MAP-21 has 7 Goals … 112 cellsEliminate or categorize secondary contributorsAddress Operational Risk and External Agency Impacts differently throughEstablished business practicesImplementation of QC/QAPlansThe national performance goals for the Federal highway programs as established in MAP-21 are as follows:Federal-Aid Program[23USC §150(b)]Safety - To achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads.Infrastructure Condition - To maintain the highway infrastructure asset system in a state of good repairCongestion Reduction - To achieve a significant reduction in congestion on the National Highway SystemSystem Reliability - To improve the efficiency of the surface transportation systemFreight Movement and Economic Vitality - To improve the national freight network, strengthen the ability of rural communities to access national and international trade markets, and support regional economic development.Environmental Sustainability - To enhance the performance of the transportation system while protecting and enhancing the natural environment.Reduced Project Delivery Delays - To reduce project costs, promote jobs and the economy, and expedite the movement of people and goods by accelerating project completion through eliminating delays in the project development and delivery process, including reducing regulatory burdens and improving agencies' work practices
342 Sources are managed separate from GAM InfrastructureEnvironmentalCongestionSafetyOperational RiskPhysical FailureRRW,C,PFExternal Agency ImpactsNatural HazardsRRW,S,NHRetaining WallsRRW,S,NHAsset ClassSlopesRSL,I,NHPut this in writing with some examples of how these risks are managed separatelyEmbankmentsREM,C,NHRisk SourceSubgradeRSB,E,NHPerformance Goals
36Physical Failure Risk Source InfrastructureEnvironmentalCongestionSafetyPhysical FailureRRW,C,PFRetaining WallsSlopesEmbankmentsDevelop a deterioration curve with an error band so that it can be shown that the ‘likelihood’ of falling below a certain LOS Threshold is greater at greater “time” and less early on or after some preservation intervention. Write this up (Scott to lead).SubgradePerformance Goals
37Natural Hazard Risk Source InfrastructureEnvironmentalCongestionSafetyRRW,S,NHNatural HazardsRetaining WallsRRW,S,NHSlopesRSL,I,NHEmbankmentsREM,C,NHTypically, the extreme events here will be earthquake or precipitation/melt, though it could also include fire and extreme (climate) temperature.A Delphi approach is probably adequate.SubgradeRSB,E,NHPerformance Goals
38GAM Section, Corridor or Inventory Retaining WallsRiskLOSSlopesEmbankmentsSubgradePerformance GoalsPerformance GoalsDescribe how, if each of these cells is filled with G, F, P and H, M, L (for risk), or some kind of an index number, that various ways of summing and interpreting can lead to management decisions. Among other things, need to bring in cost-benefit analysis...TAM Guide MaturityAchieve minimum LOS before looking at Risk of falling below it(might already be there)
39US 2, Crookston, MN4 months of monitoringCould more have been done?
40Risk-Based Asset and Performance Management Can’t do all we would likeNeed to OptimizeCan’t do it all at onceNeed to PrioritizeWhat do you think?
41Conclusions There is an evolution in practice It is multidisciplinary Decisions are based on performance and riskThese are not new ideas for geotechs but there is lots of opportunity