Скачать презентацию PROGRESS ASSESSMENT OF PMS 1967 -1987 THE EARLY Скачать презентацию PROGRESS ASSESSMENT OF PMS 1967 -1987 THE EARLY

6ad0ea3925da7e7cf7aa536f0268cc51.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 57

PROGRESS ASSESSMENT OF PMS 1967 -1987 THE EARLY BIRTH YEARS 1987 -2007 PREDICTION VS PROGRESS ASSESSMENT OF PMS 1967 -1987 THE EARLY BIRTH YEARS 1987 -2007 PREDICTION VS REALITY 2007 -2027 THE VISION SUCCESS IS UP TO YOU Ronald Hudson and Ralph Haas I-1

PRESENTATION q Motivation behind the birth of PMS and key components q Project and PRESENTATION q Motivation behind the birth of PMS and key components q Project and network levels of PMS q Key things learned from first 20 years of PMS q Looking ahead in 1987 q PMS development, progress, and issues 1987 -2010 q PMS now basis for growing AMS q Closing thoughts I-2

Pavement Thickness Subgrade Strength 2 IPS K S 10 P KI PS KI 8 Pavement Thickness Subgrade Strength 2 IPS K S 10 P KI PS KI 8 1 Load CBR DESIGN CHART I-3

BIRTH OF AND MOTIVATION FOR PMS q First concepts 1960’s q Too many early BIRTH OF AND MOTIVATION FOR PMS q First concepts 1960’s q Too many early failures, US Interstate q Inadequate recognition of maintenance on performance and life cycle analysis q US space program and use of systems methods q Innovative engineers who saw need to integrate planning, design, construction, maintenance and rehabilitation I-4

Pavement Management Is a coordinated systematic process for carrying out all activities related to Pavement Management Is a coordinated systematic process for carrying out all activities related to providing pavements I-5

Components of PMS Broader Asset Management Concerns PMS NETWORK LEVEL Programming PROJECT LEVEL DATA Components of PMS Broader Asset Management Concerns PMS NETWORK LEVEL Programming PROJECT LEVEL DATA Design Construction Planning BASE Budget Maintenance Rehabilitation Engineering Analysis Research - Special Studies I-6

Data Collection PMS Software Data Analysis Performance Prediction Data Process Storage Budget Prediction Engineering Data Collection PMS Software Data Analysis Performance Prediction Data Process Storage Budget Prediction Engineering Plan Action Plan I-7

Major Components of a PMS Inputs Models Behavior Distress Performance Traffic Friction Costs Decision Major Components of a PMS Inputs Models Behavior Distress Performance Traffic Friction Costs Decision Criteria Ordered Set of Choices Implementation I-8

INPUTS • Traffic • Materials • Thickness Costs Models Behavior Safety Deflection • Test INPUTS • Traffic • Materials • Thickness Costs Models Behavior Safety Deflection • Test Pits • Lab Tests • Count • Weigh • Classification • Rainfall • Temperature Traffic Counts & Weights Distress Condition Surveys Performance Roughness PSI Update Models LONG-TERM DATABASE & ANALYSIS RECORD • Construction • Maintenance I-9

Types of Evaluation Information Structural Inputs Models Behavior Distress Performance Costs Safety Cores, Construction Types of Evaluation Information Structural Inputs Models Behavior Distress Performance Costs Safety Cores, Construction Records etc. Friction Measures Condition Surveys Deflection Measurements Maintenance Cost Records Roughness Serviceability History Various monitoring methods 10

INPUTS Prediction Models Load MEASURE BEHAVIOR Stress Strain DEFLECTION OUTPUTS Estimate Structural Strength Time/History INPUTS Prediction Models Load MEASURE BEHAVIOR Stress Strain DEFLECTION OUTPUTS Estimate Structural Strength Time/History Σ of Distress (Predicted and/or Measured) Σ Loads DISTRESS Cracking Deformation Disintegration Σ Load History PERFORMANCE (Predicted/Measured Annual Roughness Analysis/Prediction Historical Trends (Service Level) Calculated Condition Index Predicted Roughness Predicted Maintenance Optimization and Decisions I - 11

SUMMARY: EARLY WORKSHOPS, CONFERENCES, BOOKS q Workshops in Austin, Phoenix and Charlotte (1970’s) q SUMMARY: EARLY WORKSHOPS, CONFERENCES, BOOKS q Workshops in Austin, Phoenix and Charlotte (1970’s) q “A Management System for Highway Pavements” (ARRB 1970) q First text books (1977 and 1978) q First ICMPA Conferences (1985 and 1987) Proceedings ARRB Canberra 1970 1985 1987 I - 12

Major Concern – 1987 -2007 High-Quality Data Collection Processes Data Collection Phase Prior to Major Concern – 1987 -2007 High-Quality Data Collection Processes Data Collection Phase Prior to start of data collection Data Collection Element • Guidelines, standards, & protocols • Operator training & accreditation • Equipment calibration & checks During data collection • Ambient conditions • Data collection & field review activities After completion of data collection • QC/QA checks • Time series & data studies • Formal feedback mechanisms I - 13

DRIVING FORCES FOR EARLY NETWORK LEVEL PMS (circa 1970’s) q Early failure of 1, DRIVING FORCES FOR EARLY NETWORK LEVEL PMS (circa 1970’s) q Early failure of 1, 000’s km of pavements q Primary interest of Chief Engineers q AASHTO, FHWA, Can. Austin & other initiatives q Workshops and Conferences Where? The Network I - 14

Components of PMS Broader Asset Management Concerns PMS NETWORK LEVEL Programming Planning PROJECT LEVEL Components of PMS Broader Asset Management Concerns PMS NETWORK LEVEL Programming Planning PROJECT LEVEL DATA Design Construction BASE Budget Maintenance Rehabilitation Engineering Analysis Research - Special Studies I - 15

PMS NETWORK LEVEL Programming Planning Budgeting DATA BASE Project Level Engineering Analysis Size of PMS NETWORK LEVEL Programming Planning Budgeting DATA BASE Project Level Engineering Analysis Size of boxes shows relative use as of 2011. I - 16

SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS As seen 1970 -1987 1. Skills needed Pavement, Software Development, Optimization, Database SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS As seen 1970 -1987 1. Skills needed Pavement, Software Development, Optimization, Database Handler ? 2. In-house development ? 3. Use of Outside Professionals ? 4. Specialized Software Providers ? I - 17

Key Things Learned from 20 Years (1967 -1987) of P. M. From P. M. Key Things Learned from 20 Years (1967 -1987) of P. M. From P. M. Process Itself • The component activities for P. M. can be described on a generic basis. • Existing and new technology can be organized within PMS framework. • PMS framework allows complete flexibility for different models, methods and procedures. • P. M. operates at two basic levels: network and project. • Sound technology is critical to PMS process and its effective use. II - 18

Key Things Learned from 20 Years (1967 -1987) of P. M. (continued) From Using Key Things Learned from 20 Years (1967 -1987) of P. M. (continued) From Using the P. M. Process • Development and implementation of a PMS must be staged. • Staging promotes understanding and acceptance by various users. • Options always exist; they should be evaluated on a life-cycle basis. • We need models for predicting deterioration effect of rehabilitation and maintenance. • P. M. can make efficient use of available funds but it will not “save” a network if funding is inadequate. • Good, effective PMS data. II - 19

BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR AN EFFECTIVE AND COMPREHENSIVE PMS (Circa ICMPA 1987 “Future Prospects for BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR AN EFFECTIVE AND COMPREHENSIVE PMS (Circa ICMPA 1987 “Future Prospects for Pavement Management”) q Coordinated direction of resources and labour q Serving different levels of users in the organization q Effective decision making for network level programs and individual projects based on good data q Making good use of existing and new technologies q Having a structure / framework for activities and decisions II - 20

PMS Structure for ACTIVITIES AND DECISIONS (Circa ICMPA 1987 “Future Prospects for Pavement Management” PMS Structure for ACTIVITIES AND DECISIONS (Circa ICMPA 1987 “Future Prospects for Pavement Management” Block Data Network Level v Sectioning, data acquisition (roughness, distress, etc. ) v Data processing Project Level v Structural, materials, traffic, climate, costs, etc. v Data analysis Analyses v Max. as-built roughness, max. project costs, traffic disruption, etc. v Selection criteria Criteria v Min. serviceability, friction, etc. ; max. user and maint. costs; max. program costs v Selection criteria v Now and future needs, alternatives, econ. eval. , priority analysis, etc. v Within-project alternatives, performance and distress predictions, etc. v Evaluation of alternative budget scenarios v Life-cycle economic analysis II - 21

PMS Structure for ACTIVITIES AND DECISIONS (Circa ICMPA 1987 “Future Prospects for Pavement Management” PMS Structure for ACTIVITIES AND DECISIONS (Circa ICMPA 1987 “Future Prospects for Pavement Management” Cont/d. Block Selection Network Level v Final priority program of capital projects (including rehab. ) v Final maintenance program v Schedule, contracts, program monitoring Implementation v Budget and financial planning updates Project Level v Best within-project alternative v Maintenance treatments v Construction activities and control, as-built records v Maintenance activities and management Questions: How relevant is this structure to the 2010 + era? What were the major issues in 1987; still relevant? II - 22

LOOKING AHEAD IN 1987: MAJOR ISSUES q Effects of different organizational structures; recognizing various LOOKING AHEAD IN 1987: MAJOR ISSUES q Effects of different organizational structures; recognizing various levels of users q Local area PMS needs vs. State and Federal systems q Establishing PMS benefits in quantitative terms q Integrating PMS with transport system management q Relationships between PMS and other infrastructure management systems II - 23

II - 24 II - 24

LOOKING AHEAD IN 1987: OPPORTUNITIES q Generic framework for (network and project) PMS q LOOKING AHEAD IN 1987: OPPORTUNITIES q Generic framework for (network and project) PMS q Improved public and senior administrative awareness of PMS value q Better incentive programs: contractors, researchers, etc. q Identification of high payoff areas for technology advancements q Programs for improved technical capabilities: contractors, practitioners, etc. q Better consistency between sophisticated analysis and basic materials, traffic, environmental and other inputs q Substantial funded program (similar to AASHTO Design Guide) to develop next major level of PMS II - 25

II - 26 II - 26

SUMMARY OF OPPORTUNITIES OPPORTUNITY AREA CHALLENGES PROSPECTS A. Pavement Data 1. Needs and Cost. SUMMARY OF OPPORTUNITIES OPPORTUNITY AREA CHALLENGES PROSPECTS A. Pavement Data 1. Needs and Cost. Effectiveness 2. Collection Technologies 3. Quality Assurance Numerous Challenges and Prospects for Major Advances Range From Short to Long Term 4. Storage and Integration II - 27

SUMMARY OF OPPORTUNITIES OPPORTUNITY AREA CHALLENGES PROSPECTS B. Pavement Management 1. Structural Design and SUMMARY OF OPPORTUNITIES OPPORTUNITY AREA CHALLENGES PROSPECTS B. Pavement Management 1. Structural Design and LCCA 2. Performance Modelling 3. Treatment Selection 4. Quantifying Benefits 5. Decision Support Numerous Challenges and Prospects for Major Advances Range From Short to Long Term II - 28

SUMMARY OF OPPORTUNITIES OPPORTUNITY AREA CHALLENGES PROSPECTS C. Institutional Improvements 1. Organizational Structure 2. SUMMARY OF OPPORTUNITIES OPPORTUNITY AREA CHALLENGES PROSPECTS C. Institutional Improvements 1. Organizational Structure 2. Location (PMS and AMS) 3. Technology Updates 4. Skills and Training Numerous Challenges and Prospects for Major Advances Range From Short to Long Term 5. P 3’s II - 29

1975 -1995 States with Good PMS Software • ARIZONA • KANSAS • MINNESOTA • 1975 -1995 States with Good PMS Software • ARIZONA • KANSAS • MINNESOTA • ONTARIO, CANADA • WASHINGTON • PARANA, BRAZIL • TOCANTINS, BRAZIL Weak in-house systems in 10 -15 states. Little or nothing in other states. I - 30

Where We in 2000? North America has invested US $2. 3 trillion in highways Where We in 2000? North America has invested US $2. 3 trillion in highways South American has invested US $1. 6 trillion +/- in Highways The World has invested US $10 trillion + I - 31

32 32

What Are The Issues, 2000 -Now? • Pavement Preservation – “Throughout the world, there What Are The Issues, 2000 -Now? • Pavement Preservation – “Throughout the world, there has been a shift from constructing new highways to preserving, maintaining, and maximizing the operation of what we have” [Madeleine Bloom, FHWA] – “The right treatment on the right pavement at the right time” [Foundation for Pavement Preservation] • More reasons that good “design” is not enough I - 33

This Software Concept is Inadequate in 2010 Inputs Models Behavior Distress Performance Traffic Friction This Software Concept is Inadequate in 2010 Inputs Models Behavior Distress Performance Traffic Friction Costs Decision Criteria Ordered Set of Choices Implementation I - 34

To Reports Roadway Inventory Data To Reports Management Sections To Reports Actual Software Requirements To Reports Roadway Inventory Data To Reports Management Sections To Reports Actual Software Requirements - 2010 Structure Traffic Data Current PM Sections Define Sections for Data Aggregation Work Records* Road Structure Stats. Raw Condition Conversion Distress Indexes Pavement Layers* AADT ESAL % Trucks Aggregation to Distress Sections Condition Measures Aggregation of Data onto Management Sections Aggregated Performance Information Performance * Historical Reports * Including information for pavement preservation treatments & maintenance work Aggregated Network Information Performance * Models Projected * Condition Network Analysis Scenario * Work Pgm. Current Reporting # er th s O m To ste Sy Master Work Program # Including PP plans and MMS 35

Optimization Analysis 2010 Condition Data Condition Indexes Other Pavement Data Integer Solver Predicted Condition Optimization Analysis 2010 Condition Data Condition Indexes Other Pavement Data Integer Solver Predicted Condition Decision Trees Multi. Constraint Analysis Multi-Year Analysis Models Strategy Generation Engine Output Projected Conditions & Budgets Work Plan Section Strategies 36

Which Do You Use? • Computer Operating System – Develop in-house or use Microsoft Which Do You Use? • Computer Operating System – Develop in-house or use Microsoft • Database – In-house? or ORACLE/People. Soft • Computer Map – In-house? or Google Earth • Internet – In-house? or Commercial 37

Good Commercial PMS Software is Available – 2000 to date 1. About 20 US Good Commercial PMS Software is Available – 2000 to date 1. About 20 US States now use commercial 2. 50 -60% of Agencies still use in-house PMS. 3. In-house delays development – inadequate, incomplete, slow Wastes $2 -10 million per year of delay 38

DOT Asset Management 90% of Assets and Budgets PMS BMS MMS Pavements Bridges Maintenance DOT Asset Management 90% of Assets and Budgets PMS BMS MMS Pavements Bridges Maintenance 10% Other Buildings, Safety, etc. 39

Data Collection PMS Software Data Analysis Performance Prediction Data Process Storage Budget Prediction Engineering Data Collection PMS Software Data Analysis Performance Prediction Data Process Storage Budget Prediction Engineering Plan Action Plan I - 40

Asset Management Modular Framework Pavement Manager Executive Decisions Bridge Manager Core AA Functions Maintenance Asset Management Modular Framework Pavement Manager Executive Decisions Bridge Manager Core AA Functions Maintenance Manager (Fleet, Equipment, Materials, Labor) Asset Inventory Base Linear Reference Security User Organization Terminology Mobile Apps External Data and Models Common Data Model Data Management Reporting Graphing Communications System Utilities Network Manager Safety Manager v Zero-Footprint, Web-based System v All Transportation Assets v Agency-specific models External Systems (e. g. , SAP. Advantage, People. Soft, etc) GIS v Integrated GIS Mapping Capabilities v Secure and scalable to thousands of users v Integrated Asset & Maintenance Management v Easy-to-use with Sophisticated Analysis v Input to Administrators v User Friendly v Powerful reporting tools I - 41

Functional Areas – Processes are identified by Functional Area • Resource Management (RM) LR Functional Areas – Processes are identified by Functional Area • Resource Management (RM) LR AI Asset Inventory Processes PL Planning Processes Linear Referencing Processes Agile. Assets Core OS Org. Structure System OP Security Operations Management Reporting RM Resource Management – Labor Management – Equipment Management – Materials Management • Linear Referencing Processes (LR) – LRS Management • Asset Inventory Processes (AI) – – Asset Acquisition Asset Condition Assessment Linear Construction History Linear Attribute Data Management • Planning Processes (PL) – Model Management – Analysis and Optimization – Planning • Operations Management (OP) – Projects / Contracts / Repair Orders – Work Order Creation and Scheduling – Resource Usage and Accomplishment Recording • Organizational Structure (OS) – System – Security – Reporting I - 42

res su Tradeoff Objectives - 2010 of ce Mea ons man ati or bin res su Tradeoff Objectives - 2010 of ce Mea ons man ati or bin erf = Com al P off tility vidu ade U ndi Tr i Road Sub-Network Utility Safety Bridge Structural Soundness Sign Damage Driver Information Sign Visibility Roll Over Prevention Low Shoulder Guardrail Condition Congestion Skidding and Hydroplaning Comfort No of lanes Pvt Skid Resistance Pvt Macro -texture Aesthetics Pvt Microtexture Pvt Rutting Pvt Roughness Grass Height Litter Pvt Cracking I - 43

The Start of Asset Management in 5 -7 States – 2008+ III - 44 The Start of Asset Management in 5 -7 States – 2008+ III - 44

Where Are We in 2011? 1. 20± agencies use complete detailed PMS 2. Many Where Are We in 2011? 1. 20± agencies use complete detailed PMS 2. Many others worldwide still need to upgrade their PMS 3. Data collection is adequate will continue to improve II - 45

Where Are We in 2011? (cont. ) 4. Maintenance and preservation still need models Where Are We in 2011? (cont. ) 4. Maintenance and preservation still need models and add to PMS 5. PMS is acting as an anchor to develop full asset management 5+ state 6. Large Funding like SHRP and MEPDG is needed for large rapid improvement. II - 46

Initially, Management Systems Resisted by Engineers • 1967 – Engineering Review Team vetoed PMS Initially, Management Systems Resisted by Engineers • 1967 – Engineering Review Team vetoed PMS Concept • 1980’s – Bridge designers would not use BMS concepts. “Design covers all we need” Use safety factor of 2. 0+ • 2000 -2010 – (Still resist) – US has spent $15 million developing a mechanistic “design system” that requires 300 variables. 47

Initially, Management Systems Resisted by Engineers (cont. ) • All 3 groups ignore future Initially, Management Systems Resisted by Engineers (cont. ) • All 3 groups ignore future variability in predicted traffic, environment, material properties. • There has been little or no research on benefits of maintenance and preservation. • More administrators, budget makers, planners, maintenance staff now support and demand PMS/BMS/MMS. IV - 48

Historical and Current Limitations 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Lack of Standard Nomenclature Prioritize Historical and Current Limitations 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Lack of Standard Nomenclature Prioritize not True Optimization Many use worst first funding User Costs – Not used Life-Cycle Cost – Partial use IV - 49

Frontier – Leading Edge • • True optimization 10 -15 -20 year planning Horizon Frontier – Leading Edge • • True optimization 10 -15 -20 year planning Horizon Tools Corridor Analysis PMS, BMS, SMS, etc. Active Asset Management – demonstrate to Admin. and Top Staff – true interaction • Benefits, not loss of Authority for them – Examples: North Carolina, Idaho, Virginia IV - 50

Agency Needs • • • • Good linear reference system Proven software Totally flexible Agency Needs • • • • Good linear reference system Proven software Totally flexible segmentation Full live-cycle analysis with user costs Consistent accurate data Web-based Server-based – not central Interface with maintenance management Corridor analysis Handles lane additions Determine monitory benefits Automatic annual asset valuation Add other management systems, bridges, safety, etc. IV - 51

What does the Future Hold? • Convince more administrators to use what is already What does the Future Hold? • Convince more administrators to use what is already available. • Corridor analysis – optimum funding for – Pavement – Bridges – Added Lane Capacity – Level of Service – Funds allotted among needs • Long-term (20 years) optimization – Life-cycle analysis – Multi objectives – Use annual predictions – extend 20 years. • Cities – Integrate PMS with utility plans, maintenance, etc. IV - 52

Potential Topics for “Focused Conferences” 1. Practical interface of PMS with Asset Management. 2. Potential Topics for “Focused Conferences” 1. Practical interface of PMS with Asset Management. 2. How do we reach and educate administrators and show benefits of PMS (still a vital topic). 3. Calculate and demonstrate benefits of PMS in monetary terms. 4. Difference between network & project level PMS data. IV - 53

Potential Topics for “Focused Conferences” (Cont. ) 5. Examine the guts of the “black Potential Topics for “Focused Conferences” (Cont. ) 5. Examine the guts of the “black boxes” provided by PMS software vendors – case studies. 6. Educate a new generation of PMS managers. 7. Factors now ignored in PMS, 1 or 2 at a time, such as noise, societal effects, environmental effects, “green” pavements, asset valuation, and risk analysis 8. You (THE ATTENDEES) can add others with some creative thought. IV - 54

CLOSING THOUGHTS q Pavement management includes but is not controlled by design q Mechanistic CLOSING THOUGHTS q Pavement management includes but is not controlled by design q Mechanistic methods alone will not solve the “pavement problem” q LTPP core concept not yet realized q PMS needs a team approach of engineers, statisticians, programmers, etc. IV - 55

CLOSING THOUGHTS (Cont. ) q There are no perfect solutions for pavement; they have CLOSING THOUGHTS (Cont. ) q There are no perfect solutions for pavement; they have to be managed q PMS do not replace good design; rather, actual variability must be balanced among design, construction, maintenance, preservation and rehabilitation q Good commercial PMS software is now available – use it. IV - 56

THANKS TO ICMPA 8 AND THE INTERNATIONAL PAVEMENT COMMUNITY IV - 57 THANKS TO ICMPA 8 AND THE INTERNATIONAL PAVEMENT COMMUNITY IV - 57