Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Integrated Pavement Management System With A Markovian Prediction Model
Integrated Pavement Management System With A Markovian Prediction Model
Prediction Model
Khaled A. Abaza1; Suleiman A. Ashur, M.ASCE2; and Issam A. Al-Khatib3
Abstract: An integrated pavement management system has been designed to provide the pavement engineers with an effective decision-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Western Ontario on 10/27/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
making tool for planning and scheduling of pavement maintenance and rehabilitation 共M&R兲 work. The developed system applies a
discrete-time Markovian model to predict pavement deterioration with the inclusion of pavement improvement resulting from M&R
actions. An effective decision policy with two major options has been used. The first option optimizes a generalized nonlinear objective
function that is defined in terms of proportions of pavement sections in the five deployed condition states, and is subjected to budget
constraints. The second option minimizes M&R cost which is subjected to preset pavement condition requirements in terms of state
proportions at the end of a selected study period. The system applies two approaches for the selection of pavement project candidates. The
first approach is based on random selection of pavement sections within the same condition state, while the second one relies on
worst-first selection within the same condition state. The optimization process is performed using two different optimization methods
which are the penalty function method and uniform search method.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0733-947X共2004兲130:1共24兲
CE Database subject headings: Pavement management; Markov process; Models; Rehabilitation; Maintenance; Decision making.
combined with localized reconstruction applied to state 4, and and present M&R variables (q i j and f i j ) applied to pavement
complete reconstruction applied to state 5. sections in state i, with each (q i ) includes one maintenance vari-
able and a rehabilitation one, state 2 can only receive one main-
tenance variable as the deployed matrix shows only one entry
Methodology available for improvement. The present M&R variables ( f i j ) can
be estimated by referring to an agency’s files. The subscript j
The first part of this section provides an overview of the method- designates the improved state, and equals to (i⫺1) for mainte-
ology used in the development of optimum M&R models associ- nance variables and one for rehabilitation variables. The present
ated with the case of random selection of pavement project can- transition probabilities ( P i,i and P i,i⫹1 ) need to be estimated
didates 共Abaza and Ashur 1999兲. The second part presents the from historical records of pavement distress as will be later pre-
development of optimum M&R models for worst-first selection. sented. Generally, the transition probabilities ( P i,i⫹1 ) represent
the deterioration rates of pavement sections from state i to state
i⫹1 in one transition, and the M&R variables (q i j and f i j ) rep-
Overview of Random Selection Methodology resent the improvement rates from state i to state j in one transi-
A Markovian model with 5⫻5 discrete-time transition matrix has tion.
been used to incorporate the five condition states. The model Unique forms of the transition matrix have been constructed to
utilizes a present transition matrix 共P兲, and a future transition include several combinations of the seven outlined M&R vari-
matrix ( P ⬘ ). The elements of the present transition matrix are the ables below the matrix main diagonal. The result is 27 different
present transition probabilities ( P i,i and P i,i⫹1 ), and the present combinations representing 27 distinct M&R models 共matrices兲
M&R variables ( f i j ). The elements of the future transition matrix that are incorporated into the IPMS system. The combinations are
⬘ and P i,i⫹1
are the future transition probabilities ( P i,i ⬘ ), and the formed by requiring: 共1兲 a minimum of four M&R variables in a
future M&R variables (q i j ). The two matrices along with the particular model 共matrix兲; 共2兲 a minimum of one variable for each
冉 冊
deployed seven M&R variables are provided in state with the exception of state 1 which receives none; 共3兲 a
maximum of two variables for each state 共one maintenance and
P 11 P 12 0 0 0 one rehabilitation兲 with the exception of state 2 共one maintenance
f 21 P 22 P 23 0 0 variable兲; and 共4兲 a maximum of seven variables that can only be
f 31 f 32 P 33 p 34 0 present in one model.
P⫽
There are a total of seven future M&R variables represented
f 41 0 f 43 P 44 P 45 by the variable (q i j ), namely: four maintenance (q i,i⫺1 , i
冉 冊
f 51 0 0 f 54 P 55 ⫽2,3,4,5), and three rehabilitation (q i,1 , i⫽3,4,5) as presented
(1) earlier. The optimum values of the seven variables are obtained
P ⬘11 P ⬘12 0 0 0 through the application of an effective decision policy that de-
q 21 P ⬘22 P ⬘23 0 0 ploys two major options. The first option optimizes a generalized
nonlinear objective function, which is defined as a weighted sum
P ⬘⫽ q 31 q 32 P ⬘33 p ⬘34 0 of state probabilities 共proportions兲 for a selected study period of n
q 41 0 q 43 P ⬘44 P ⬘45 transitions, and is subjected to budget constraints. The generalized
form of the resulting nonlinear objective function is provided in
q 51 0 0 q 54 ⬘
P 55
5
It has been typically assumed that only two transition prob-
abilities are present in a particular matrix row 共Way et al. 1982;
optimize : F⫽ 兺 w i ⫻Q 共i n 兲
i⫽1
(3)
Butt et al. 1987; Abaza and Ashur 1999兲. The future transition
matrix largely depends on the present one, a property of the Mar- The objective in optimizing Eq. 共3兲 is to yield the ‘‘best’’ pave-
kovian model. Therefore, the two transition matrices have been ment conditions, which can be achieved by either maximizing
related to each other by assuming that the ratio of the two present pavements in ‘‘good’’ states such as 1 and 2, or minimizing pave-
transition probabilities ( P i,i and P i,i⫹1 ) and the ratio of the two ments in ‘‘bad’’ states such as 4 and 5. Therefore, the selection of
future transition probabilities ( P ⬘i,i and P i,i⫹1
⬘ ) are equal, and the appropriate weights (w i ) as required by Eq. 共3兲 would have to be
sum of any row in either matrix is unity 共Abaza and Ashur 1999兲. consistent with the approach being undertaken. Maximization of
The resulting relations are Eq. 共3兲 requires assigning higher weights for the ‘‘good’’ states
冉 冊
and lower weights for the ‘‘bad’’ ones, while minimization re-
P i,i⫹1 quires the opposite. Generally, there is a large number of weight
⬘ ⫽
P i,i⫹1 共 P i,i ⫹ P i,i⫹1 ⫺q i 兲 (2)
P i,i ⫹ P i,i⫹1 choices for each approach, and it definitely depends on the engi-
F⫽ 兺 w i ⫻Q 共i n 兲⫽ f 共 Q 共i 0 兲 , P i,i⫹1
i⫽1
⬘ ,q i j , f i j ,w i 兲 (7a) This module deals with the data pertaining to the effectiveness of
the specified M&R plans. The system provides for four mainte-
nance plans, one for each of the states 2, 3, 4, 5; and three reha-
Subject to:
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Western Ontario on 10/27/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
bilitation plans, one for each of the states 3, 4, and 5. The system
5
provides general guidelines for defining the seven M&R plans,
1. 兺 uc i j Q 共i k⫺1 兲q i L⭐AB k
i⫽2
共 k⫽1,2,...,n 兲 but the user has the freedom to select the type and extent of M&R
work involved in each plan. The user has to provide the system
with a reliability index value for each M&R plan. The reliability
⬘
2. 0⭐q i ⭐ P i,i⫹1 where q i⫽ 兺j q i j ⫺ 兺j f ij index reflects the level of confidence an agency has in its design
and construction practices so that the selected M&R plans will
Phase II perform as expected 共Abaza et al. 2001兲, and it is related to the
Optimize: seven M&R variables as indicated by
5
⬘ ⫽␣ i,i⫺1 q i,i⫺1 ;
q i,i⫺1 ⬘ ⫹q i2
q i1 ⫽q i1 ⬘
F⫽ 兺 w i ⫻Q 共i n 兲⫽ f 共 Q 共i 0 兲 , P i,i⬘ ,q i j , f i j ,w i 兲 (7b)
i⫽1
⬘ ⫽␣ i1 q i1 ;
q i1 ⬘ ⫽ 共 1⫺␣ i1 兲 q i1
q i2 (8)
Subject to: ⬘ ⫽proportion of pavement sections that has actually
where q i,i⫺1
5 improved from state i 共2, 3, 4, 5兲 to state (i⫺1) by an application
1. 兺 uc i j Q 共i k⫺1 兲q i L⭐AB k 共 k⫽1,2,...,n 兲 of maintenance plan; q i,i⫺1 ⫽proportion of pavement sections that
i⫽2
has been maintained in state i 共2, 3, 4, 5兲 with the intention of
improvement to state (i⫺1) by an application of maintenance
⬘ ⭐q i ⭐1.0
2. P i,i⫹1 where q i⫽ 兺j q i j ⫺ 兺j f ij plan; ␣ i,i⫺1 ⫽reliability index reflecting the confidence level that
the applied maintenance plan will result in improving a pavement
The two-phase optimization model uses similar objective func- section from state i to state (i⫺1). Its value is generally lower for
tions and budget constraints; but the two phases require different maintenance than rehabilitation. For rehabilitation, it could reach
physical constraints. Phase II will be executed for the kth transi- up to 99% whereas for maintenance it may not exceed 80%
tion 共time interval兲 if the associated optimum cost is smaller than 共Abaza et al. 2001兲; and q i1 ⫽proportion of pavement sections
the budget available for that particular transition. Minimization of that has been rehabilitated in state i 共3, 4, 5兲 with the intention of
total M&R cost can be extended to the ‘‘worst-first’’ selection improvement to state 1. The outcome is either placement in state
using a two-phase procedure, but it is not presented in this paper. 1 (q ⬘i1 ) with (␣ i1 ) reliability or placement in state 2 (q ⬘i2 ) with
(1⫺␣ i1 ) reliability.
The introduction of the reliability index is consistent with the
System’s Structure probabilistic performance of pavements. A higher reliability index
implies a better quality M&R plan, which means a higher cost.
The IPMS system has been designed using Fortran as the pro-
Therefore, the reliability index value can also be related to the
gramming language. The system can be operated from a personal
type of highway facility being considered in which a major one
computer using either online input data for a small pavement
would be justified for a higher M&R expenditure. The introduced
system or electronically fed data from a computerized database
reliability index is similar to the reliability concept used by the
for a larger one. The IPMS system operates using several modules
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Offi-
designed to perform specific tasks as described below.
cials 共AASHTO兲 in the design of pavements in which a higher
reliability level 共R兲 results in a higher strength pavement
Pavement Inventory Module 共AASHTO 1993兲. Initially, the reliability index values can be es-
The inventory database is programmed to store, update and re- timated based on experience and engineering judgment. However,
trieve information related to the pavement system such as pave- it is recommended that a highway agency establishes a mecha-
ment type, pavement structural section properties, traffic condi- nism for evaluating and monitoring the maintained and rehabili-
tion such as the average daily traffic, pavement section coding tated pavements to ensure that actual performance outcomes do
number, pavement section length and width, M&R history, and confirm to the expected ones. Otherwise, the reliability index val-
pavement condition rating as obtained from pavement distress ues used would have to be revised accordingly.
assessment.
Pavement Condition Prediction Module
Pavement Condition Assessment Module
This module performs the prediction process using the presented
Periodic assessment of the pavement condition is essential to the Markovian model. It applies the estimated transition probabilities
successful implementation of any pavement management system. and the initial state probabilities along with other relevant input
Optimization Module
This module applies two different optimization methods. The first
method is the penalty function using the method of Hooke and
Jeeves between successive iterations which has been effectively
applied to the case of random selection 共Abaza and Ashur 1999兲.
The penalty function method has been applied to the worst-first
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Western Ontario on 10/27/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
where 共T兲 is either the service life estimated from actual pave-
Estimation of Transition Probabilities Module
ment performance records or the analysis period used in the de-
There are several methods that can be used to estimate the present sign of pavement. Researchers have used performance curves
transition probabilities ( P i,i and P i,i⫹1 ). These methods are based generated using the AASHTO design method of flexible pave-
either on the experience and judgment of pavement experts or on ment to estimate the service periods (D i ) 共Abaza et al. 2001兲. The
sound engineering principles. Application of engineering prin- present serviceability index 共PSI兲 has been used to define the five
ciples requires feedback on pavement performance as obtained condition states. State 1 corresponds to a PSI range of 4.5– 4.0,
from field assessment of pavement distress. Three methods are while state 5 represents a PSI range of 2.5–2.0. For example, the
presented in this section with different requirements. five state service periods (D i ) are estimated from the constructed
The first method is to apply the very basic definition of tran- performance curve to be 6, 5, 4, 3, and 2 years for states 1, 2, 3,
sition probabilities; that is, if (N 0 ) pavement sections are initially 4, and 5, respectively. These estimates are obtained for a 20 year
found in state i, and (N f ) sections existed in state i after one design analysis period and a particular set of design input param-
transition, the transition probabilities can be estimated using eters as required by the AASHTO design method of flexible pave-
ments. A better alternative to design analysis period is service life,
N 0 ⫺N f which requires extensive pavement performance historic records,
P i, j⫹1 ⫽
N0 and it is highly dependent on pavement type and current states.
i⫽1 j⫽1
subsystems in proportion to the existing traffic volumes as
where n⫽total number of transitions for which PCI versus age represented by the average daily traffic (V j ) and length of a
data are available; m(i)⫽total number of data points recorded at pavement subsystem in lane kilometers (L j ). The allocated
the ith transition; Y (i, j)⫽observed PCI value for each sample budget (AB j ) for subsystem j can be calculated in relation to
taken at the ith transition; and E 关 X(i,p) 兴 ⫽predicted PCI value at total available budget (AB i ) during the ith transition using
the ith transition which is a function of the unknown transition V j⫻L j
probabilities P i,i⫹1 that are represented by the vector p. AB j⫽ AB (14)
Eq. 共11兲 minimizes the sum of all residual absolute values. 兺V j⫻L j i
Minimizing the sum of squared values of all residuals can also be Eq. 共14兲 provides fair mechanism for allocating M&R funds
used. In predicting the PCI values, the state probabilities associ- in the absence of political and other influential factors. A
ated with the five condition states have been defined in terms of vital alternative to Eq. 共14兲 is optimal allocation of M&R
PCI as a uniform probability density function that takes on the funds based on pavement distress condition in each pave-
following general form: ment subsystem. The only foreseeable drawback of this al-
ternative is the increased number of M&R variables which
Q 共1i 兲 ,
冦
k 2 ⭐PCI⭐k 1 would make the nonlinear optimization extremely difficult.
Q 共2i 兲 , k 3 ⭐PCI⭐k 2 The new number of M&R variables would be the current
number multiplied by subsystems number. For only three
F⫽ Q 共3i 兲 , k 4 ⭐PCI⭐k 3 (12) subsystems, the new number of M&R variables becomes 21
Q 共4i 兲 , k 5 ⭐PCI⭐k 4 as the current number is seven variables. However, the writ-
ers plan to consider this alternative for future research as it
Q 共5i 兲 , k 6 ⭐PCI⭐k 5
presents a very interesting and challenging problem.
The uniform probability density function F has been applied 3. Estimating the present M&R proportions ( f i j ) as obtained
since the state probabilities are not explicit functions of the PCI. from an agency’s files. In the absence of an active M&R
The state probabilities are functions of the initial state probability program, then a set of zeros can be assigned.
vector, and unknown transition probabilities P 12 , P 23 , P 34 , and 4. Estimating the reliability indices (␣ i j ). These indices are
P 45 which need to be estimated from the minimization process. products of the experience and judgment of the pavement
The expected PCI value at the ith transition is obtained by engineers, which reflect their expectations of the outcomes
E 关 PCI共 i 兲 兴 ⫽c 1 Q 共1i 兲 ⫹c 2 Q 共2i 兲 ⫹c 3 Q 共3i 兲 ⫹c 4 Q 共4i 兲 ⫹c 5 Q 共5i 兲 (13) of their M&R actions. In general, there is a higher level of
reliability in rehabilitation when compared to maintenance.
where (c k )⫽expected PCI value for a particular state probability. The reliability index may reach 99% for rehabilitation work,
Each (c k ) is the mean of a uniform probability density function. but it may not exceed 80% for maintenance.
For example, c 1 ⫽(k 1 ⫹k 2 )/2, c 2 ⫽(k 2 ⫹k 3 )/2,..., etc. The con- 5. Estimating the unit costs of various M&R plans in dollars
stants (k i ) are defined using appropriate PCI values. The pre- per lane kilometer. The system requires seven unit costs cor-
sented CERL model requires extensive historic records of pave- responding to the seven deployed M&R plans.
ment distress to yield reliable estimates of the transition 6. Specifying the desired study period in terms of the equiva-
probabilities. Therefore, highway agencies that have recently ini- lent number of transitions. It is recommended that the study
tiated a pavement distress survey program cannot use the CERL period does not exceed 6 years to satisfy the ‘‘stationary’’
method. property of the Markovian model 共Butt et al. 1987兲. This
recommendation assures that the transition probabilities will
System’s Requirements remain practically unchanged by normal changes in traffic
loadings. However, 6 years is adequate to plan ahead since
The pavement engineer needs to prepare in advance the input data estimation of anticipated M&R funds can only be foresee-
required to utilize the IPMS system. The pavement system under able for a limited number of years. Therefore, the maximum
the jurisdiction of an agency needs to be broken down into sub- number of transitions can vary from 3 to 6 depending on the
systems with similar pavement structures and traffic conditions. length of time interval used between successive surveys of
As a minimum, there are two types of pavement structures con- pavement distress. The length of this time interval is typi-
sisting of rigid and flexible, and four levels of traffic conditions cally 1 or 2 years.
corresponding to the four major road classes of highways, arteri- 7. Estimating the initial state probabilities. This step requires
als, collectors, and locals. Therefore, a minimum of eight input field inspection of the pavement system prior to the applica-
data files are required for a given road network. The following tion of the IPMS system. It requires a complete cycle of
10 X1 X2 — — X3 X4 X5
12 X1 X2 — X3 X4 X5 — 4 0.0004 0.100 0.700 1.000 0.600 $261.60
13 X1 X2 X3 — X4 — X5 0.0001 0.001 0.613 1.000 0.756 $287.00
14 X1 — X2 — X3 X4 X5 5 0.0000 0.500 1.000 1.000 1.000 $185.50
15 X1 X2 X3 — — X4 X5 0.0000 0.849 0.846 1.000 1.000 $213.70
16 X1 X2 X3 X4 — X5 —
17 X1 — X2 X3 X4 X5 — 6 0.0766 0.700 0.300 0.300 0.200 $318.00
18 X1 X2 X3 X4 — — X5 0.0670 0.944 0.272 0.142 0.472 $333.10
19 X1 X2 — X3 — X4 X5 7 0.0322 0.900 0.300 0.300 1.000 $284.30
20 X1 — X2 X3 X4 — X5 0.0254 0.998 0.279 0.379 0.993 $302.80
21 X1 — — X2 X3 X4 X5
22 X1 X2 X3 — X4 X5 X6 8 0.0001 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 $159.50
23 X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 — 0.0001 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 $159.50
24 X1 X2 — X3 X4 X5 X6 9 0.0026 1.000 0.300 1.000 1.000 $210.30
25 X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 — X6 0.0033 0.001 0.441 1.000 0.919 $284.50
26 X1 — X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 a
Optimization by uniform search method.
27 X1 X2 X3 X4 — X5 X6 b
Optimization by penalty function method.
28 X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7
Note:— not applicable. 1. The total length of surveyed pavement sections, all with
similar traffic and pavement structures, was about 20 lane-
kilometers with each section about 50 m long.
pavement distress survey to obtain an estimate of the PCR 2. The initial state probabilities (Q (0)
i ) for states 1, 2, 3, 4, and
for each pavement section. The five condition states can be 5 were estimated using Eq. 共15兲 based on pavement distress
survey. The estimates were Q (0) 1 ⫽0.23, Q 2 ⫽0.29, Q 3
(0) (0)
defined in terms of PCR limits. Then, the initial state prob-
ability (Q (0)
i ) for state i can be estimated from the initial ⫽0.43, Q 4 ⫽0.043, and Q 5 ⫽0.015.
(0) (0)
number of pavement sections (N (0)i ) found in each of the five 3. The present transition probabilities ( P i,i ) were estimated
states using using Eq. 共9兲 based on two cycles of distress survey of the
共0兲
N共i 0兲 same pavement system. The two cycles were separated by a
Qi ⫽ 5 共 0 兲 (15) 2 year time period. The estimates were P 11⫽0.44, P 22
兺i⫽1Ni ⫽0.52, P 33⫽0.62, and P 44⫽0.67.
8. Estimating the present transition probabilities ( P i,i and 4. It was determined that the local agency having jurisdiction
P i,i⫹1 ) associated with the five condition states. This step over the surveyed pavement system did not have an active
can be performed using the methods presented in a preceding M&R program. Hence, the present M&R variables ( f i j ) van-
section. A minimum of two cycles of pavement distress sur- ished.
veys is required. Otherwise, rough estimates can be provided 5. The reliability indices (␣ i j ) for maintenance and rehabilita-
based on personal judgment and experience. Once sufficient tion are specified at 80 and 95%, respectively.
historical records of pavement distress become available, 6. The study period is considered for 6 years consisting of three
then the IPMS system can be applied to obtain refined esti- transitions (n⫽3) with each transition representing a 2 year
mates of the transition probabilities using the CERL method. interval. The length of transition period has to be consistent
9. Required optimization parameters for the search process with the time period used in the estimation of transition
such as starting point, step size, termination constant, and probabilities. Two cycles of distress surveys separated by 2
penalty parameter have been extensively tested and pro- years were conducted to estimate the transition probabilities.
grammed in the IPMS system. 7. Maintenance unit costs as applied to states 2, 3, 4, and 5 are
estimated in dollars per lane-kilometer to be $4,350, $5,800,
$7,250, and $9,250, respectively.
Analysis of Sample Results 8. Rehabilitation unit costs as applied to states 3, 4, and 5 are
also estimated in dollars per lane-kilometer and found to be
Sample results are presented for the purpose of making certain $33,200, $78,200, and $156,400, respectively.
comparisons among the different options available to the IPMS 9. Allocated funding for the study period of three transitions
users. The input data for the sample presentation is summarized has been specified for the first, second, and third transition to
below. be $80,000, $85,000, and $90,000, respectively.
The analysis of results is confined to optimizing state propor- Investigation of the effect of selecting a particular starting
tions, and for models containing four M&R variables 共Models point to initiate the search process, as required by the penalty
2–9兲 and seven M&R variables 共Model 28兲. Guidelines for function method, is illustrated in Table 4. Two different starting
matching the variables (X i ) with the corresponding M&R plans points have been used to maximize the total proportions of states
for the 28 models are provided in Table 1. In Model 8 for ex- 1 and 2. Table 4 shows that identical solutions have been reached
ample, the variables (X 1 , X 2 , and X 3 ) represent the three main- in six models, while minor variations resulted in two models.
tenance variables (q 21 , q 32 , and q 43), while (X 4 ) represents the Therefore, it is concluded that the effect of selecting a starting
rehabilitation variable (q 51). Model Number 1 is the do-nothing point is seen to be negligible; therefore, a value of zero has been
M&R program. The value of an optimum variable represents the programmed in the IPMS system for all variables.
fraction of pavement sections in a condition state to receive the Table 5 provides results obtained by maximizing state 1 pro-
corresponding M&R plan. For example, a 1.0 value implies that portion using uniform search method with the two defined levels
all pavement sections present in the corresponding state during of accuracy. Accuracy level 2 has resulted in minor improvements
every two-year transition within the study period of 6 years shall in some of the optimal solutions. The minor improvements ob-
receive the designated M&R plan. tained by applying accuracy level 2 are gained at a cost of sub-
Table 2 contains the optimum M&R programs obtained by stantial increase in required computer time. Therefore, accuracy
minimizing the proportion of pavement sections in state 5 using level 2 is not deemed practical from an economic point of view.
both uniform search and penalty function methods. Inspection of Table 6 provides optimum M&R programs for model Number
the optimum state 5 proportion (Q 5 ) reveals that both methods 28, which contains all seven M&R variables. The solutions are
have converged with similar results. Uniform search has reached provided for optimizing the six suggested state proportion func-
improved solutions in two models, the penalty method has tions using worst-first selection and penalty function method. All
yielded improved solutions in three models, and identical solu- seven M&R variables have contributed to the optimum solutions
tions are obtained in three models. Improvements in either case in three of the presented M&R programs, five variables contrib-
are not substantial. uted to one program, and four variables contributed to the remain-
A comparison between random and worst-first selections can ing two programs 共a contribution of 0.001 is considered zero兲.
be made by inspecting the optimal solutions presented in Table 3 Therefore, using a larger number of M&R variables does not
for the case of maximizing ASC. Worst-first selection has yielded necessarily imply that they would all contribute to the optimal
improved optimal solutions, in terms of the objective function solution. In addition, there are no substantial improvements
value 共ASC兲, in almost all models. Associated M&R costs are gained in the objective function values from the inclusion of more
generally lower for the case of worst-first selection with even M&R variables. However, increasing the number of M&R vari-
improved solutions. This conclusion evidently supports the worst- ables provides additional M&R program choices, which may
first selection of M&R candidates all in the same condition state. come at an increased cost as the additional variables could prob-
Table 6. Optimum Maintenance and Rehabilitation Programs for Model 28 Using Worst-First Selection and Penalty Function Method
Optimum maintenance and rehabilitation programs
Objective function Objective function value q 21 q 32 q 43 q 54 q 31 q 41 q 51 Cost 共$1000兲
Maximum Q 1 0.6334 1.000 0.001 0.001 0.999 0.001 0.833 0.944 $203.1
Maximum Q 3 0.5180 0.000 0.599 0.500 0.500 0.000 0.001 0.241 $104.5
Minimum Q 5 a 0.0004 0.824 0.575 0.215 0.785 0.170 0.417 0.425 $235.0
Maximum (Q 1 ⫹Q 2 ) 0.9817 0.876 0.775 0.273 0.001 0.264 0.381 0.001 $253.1
Minimum (Q 4 ⫹Q 5 ) a 0.0009 1.000 0.794 0.120 0.880 0.138 0.862 0.206 $157.5
Maximum ASCa 3.6390 1.000 0.832 0.094 0.906 0.144 0.856 0.168 $216.7
a
All seven M&R variables contributed to the optimum solution.