Presentation on theme: "Application of Asset Management Technique for Road Tunnel Maintenance Management Nagasaki University Shizuka UEDA Yujing JIANG Yoshihiko TANABASHI."— Presentation transcript:
Application of Asset Management Technique for Road Tunnel Maintenance Management Nagasaki University Shizuka UEDA Yujing JIANG Yoshihiko TANABASHI
Background of research Occurrence of the concrete exfoliation accident in tunnels Importance of maintenance and management rather than the new construction itself Many points about tunnel maintenance and management are indefinite Cost reduction by reviewing the public works
Purpose of research Construction of road tunnel database Evaluation tunnel condition and future prediction Repair time selection Budget smoothing Calculation of final cost and Life cycle cost
Construction of database by using GIS Fundamental information （ tunnel name ， length ） Retrieval of data Data display Analytical function Detailed information （ crack length ， safety degree ） Total material （ sectional view ， development of deformation ） Detailed information （ Deformation photograph ） Evaluation of a deformation easiness degree The degree of safety judgment for every construction span
Development of inquiry tool Example ： 「事務所別＝対馬支庁 And 資料状況＝有 り」 It is necessary to constitute inquiry formula.
Performance evaluation Judgment division DeformationDangerMeasures 3ALarge deformation DangerousUrgent measures are necessary 2AMedium deformation Dangerous without measure Immediate measures are necessary AMedium deformation Risk existsSchemed measures are necessary BNegligible deformation No dangerObservation is necessary SNo problem in function Performance value
Setting of degradation curves from tunnel deformation simulation Decision of degradation curve 経過年， T 性能 Performance evaluation Performance value The progressing year, T (year) 経過年， T 性能 Survey result Degradation curve (case 5) Performance value The progressing year, T (year) Verifying the degradation curve Case 5 agrees well with the survey result ＝ (100 － Safety degree of a tunnel) (Performance value )×100
Evaluation of the importance of tunnel Traffic volume, Traffic capacity Calculated by the weighted mean method Evaluation of the importance of tunnel route Importance index WeightConcrete itemEvaluation point Traffic volume Traffic capacity (Road width) m25 4m-6m50 6m-12m75 12m-100
Decision of priority order ： (100 － Safety degree of a tunnel) ： Importance degree of tunnel ： Weight coefficient ，
Analysis of direct repair cost 経過年，Ｔ 直接補修費（万円 /m ） Ｃ ＝相対直接補修費（万円 /m ） Direct repair cost Relative direct repair cost Direct repair cost (Hundred million yen) Passed years (year) Direct repair cost divided by the extension of the object tunnel Repair costs of every performance result were calculated based on the regression analysis result 経過年，Ｔ 直接補修費（万円 /m ） 相対直接補修費（万円 /m ）， Ｃ Direct repair cost (Hundred million yen) Passed years (year) Direct repair cost Relative direct repair cost
Setting of direct repair cost Passed years 性能 直接補修費（万円 /m ） 性能 Repair after year Performance value Direct repair cost (Ten thousand yen/m) Performance value Direct repair cost 7.92 （ Ten thousand yen/m ）
Setting of direct repair cost Passed years 性能 直接補修費（万円 /m ） 性能 Repair after years Performance value Direct repair cost 性能 Performance value 直接補修費（万円 /m ） Direct repair cost (Ten thousand yen/m) z （ Ten thousands yen/m ）
Setting of trial condition of the asset management 31 tunnels in Nagasaki prefecture carried out detailed investigation are used as objects. The cost that used to improve the performance is calculated based on the regression analysis result of the direct repair cost. The repair work is not related to the degradation level, namely the tunnel is certainly improved to performance degree 1.0. The last repair cost was estimated for 3 cases
Reference rank and priority order The secular change of the direct repair cost by repairing 3 tunnels every year since 2005 累計補修費（億 円） 西暦 補修費（億円） Reference rank ＝ (100 － Safety degree of a tunnel) Priority order Repair cost (Hundred million yen) Total repair cost (Hundred million yen/m) A.D. Reference rank Priority rank Reference rank(total) Priority rank(total)
累計補修費（億 円） 西暦 補修費（億円） Reference rank and priority order Final cost is lower based on primarily order Priority order The extension, which occupies the main part of repair cost could be maintained in early stage Repair cost (Hundred million yen) Total repair cost (Hundred million yen/m) A.D. Reference rank Priority rank Reference rank(total) Priority rank(total)
Trial of the repair time selection (1) ～ The secular change of repair cost ～ Repaired by improving their performances from 0.4,0.5, 0.6, 0.7,0.8 to 1.0, respectively Carrying out the repair in late stage 0.4 → 1.0 Carrying out the repair in early stage 0.8 → → 1.0 Carrying out the repair in early stage, the final repair cost could be reduced. 累計補修費（億 円） 西暦 Total repair cost (Hundred million yen/m) A.D. Performance value
Trial of the repair time selection (2) ～ The secular change of average performance ～ Carrying out the repair in early stage, high performance could be maintained 0.7 → → 1.0 累計補修費（億 円） 西暦 Performance value Total repair cost (Hundred million yen/m) A.D.
Trial of the budget smoothing ～ The secular change of repair cost ～ ５年毎の合計補修費（億円） 西暦 Increasing the performance of 0.7 to 1.0 for 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 tunnels every year A.D. 1tunnel/year 2tunnels/year 3tunnels/year 4tunnels/year 5tunnels/year Total repair cost in the every five years (Hundred million yen/m) 1tunnel/ year Repairing 1 tunnel every year → most smooth cost is obtained
Secular change of total repair cost in every year Trial of the budget smoothing ～ The secular change of average performance ～ 西暦 1tunnel/year Repairing 1 tunnel every year → Final repair cost finally increases Total repair cost (Hundred million yen/m) 3 ～ 5 tunnels are repaired every year → The final repair costs become almost equivalently 3tunnels/year Repairing 1 tunnel every year → most smooth cost is obtained Repairing 3 tunnel every year → Most effective from both side of reducing the final repair cost and the budget smoothing A.D.
Setting of LCC(Life cycle cost) Road administrat or cost Planning costInvestigation cost Construction costSite cost, Site management cost Management costEquipment cost, Traffic safety cost Maintenance costInspection cost, Measuring cost, Preventive maintenance cost Repair costRepair/Reinforce cost, Restoration cost, Compensation cost Disposal costDisposal facility cost, Renewal cost Road user cost Car traveling costFuel cost, Consumption cost Time loss costVenice regulation cost, Detour cost Other costAccident cost, Psychological cost Life cycle cost =(Direct repair cost) + (Indirect repair cost) + (User loss cost)
Analyzed on 11 tunnels Average relative indirect repair cost was assumed for each tunnel Life cycle cost was estimated Setting of indirect repair cost Tunnel name Length （ m ） Indirect repair cost (Ten thousand yen) Relative indirect repair cost (Ten thousand yen/m) K 2603, N 4105, B 3804, ：：：： Average 11.79
Setting of user loss cost (1) ： Type of car ： Days of the passage stop ： Time value primary unit of car type ： Day traffic volume of car type ： Lost time per car (minute) / Total traffic regulation days Time loss cost by regulation of traffic
Setting of user loss cost (2) ： Total traffic regulation days 10 ： Time value primary unit ： Lost-time per car(minute) / total traffic regulation days 2 Tunnel nameLocationLength (m) Traffic volumeUser cost (ten thousand yen) TN108.03,6831,389 BN ,9347,518 CN ,7134,041 ：：：：： Average33,670 was calculated on 31 tunnels
Total repair cost (Hundred million yen/m) A.D. Trial of LCC (Life cycle cost ) Performance value Total repair cost will increase in case of frequent repairing 0.8 → 1.0 Repairing when performance decrease to 0.4 → Final cost can be mostly reduced 0.4 → 1.0 Secular change of the average performance 性能 西暦 Performance value A.D. Performance value Repairing when performance decrease to 0.4 → Performance evaluation decrease to under → 1.0 Performance evaluation under 0.6 → Risk(expectation damage) is so high
Case that repair is carried out when its performance decrease to 0.7 has the highest cost-effectiveness. Defining of cost-effectiveness :Average performance in 50 years :Life cycle cost in case i :Maximum value of life cycle cost Performance evaluation 0.4→1.00.5→1.00.6→1.00.7→1.00.8→ LCC (hundred million yen) Considering the final performance and cost, carrying out repair work when performance decrease to 0.7 is most effective.
Applicability and the optimization of tunnel maintenance by using the asset management Conclusions → Decision of priority order Evaluation of degradation and importance of tunnel → Current conditions of road tunnels could be obtained Construction of database ， Developing retrieval tool → Decision of degradation curve Comparing survey result with the result of tunnel deformation simulation
Propose the calculation methods of life cycle cost for various cases Future prospects Risk of tunnel damage and the effect of each kinds of repairing methods need to be introduced Improving Detailed frame of the system