OJCE  Vol.4 No.4 , December 2014
Sensitivity Analysis of Key Parameters in Decision Making of Two-Stage Evolutionary Optimization Maintenance Strategies
Preventative maintenance (PM) measures for bridges are proactive maintenance actions which aim to prevent or delay a deterioration process that may lead to failure. This type of maintenance can be justified on economic grounds since it can extend the life of the bridge and avoid the need for unplanned essential/corrective maintenance. Due to the high importance of the effective integration of PM measures in the maintenance strategies of bridges, the authors have developed a two-stage evolutionary optimization methodology based on genetic algorithm (GA) principles which links the probabilistic effectiveness of various PM measures with their costs in order to develop optimum PM strategies. In this paper, the sensitivity of the methodology to various key input parameters of the optimization methodology is examined in order to quantify their effects and identify possible trends in the optimum PM intervention profiles. The results of the sensitivity studies highlight the combined use of both proactive and reactive PM measures in deriving optimum strategy solutions. The precise mix and sequence of PM measures is clearly a function of the relative effectiveness and cost of the different available PM options as well as the various key parameters such as discount rate, target probability of failure, initial probability of failure and service life period examined. While the results highlight the need for more reliable data they also demonstrate the robustness and usefulness of the methodology; in the case where data is limited it can be used as a comparative tool to improve understanding of the effects of various strategies and enhance the decision making process.

Cite this paper
Tantele, E. , Votsis, R. and Onoufriou, T. (2014) Sensitivity Analysis of Key Parameters in Decision Making of Two-Stage Evolutionary Optimization Maintenance Strategies. Open Journal of Civil Engineering, 4, 338-352. doi: 10.4236/ojce.2014.44029.
[1]   FHWA (2011) Bridge Preservation Guide, Maintaining a State of Good Repair Using Cost Effective Investment Strategies. Federal Highway Administration, US Department of Transportation, FHWA Publication Number, FHWA-HIF-11042.

[2]   Tantele, E.A. and Onoufriou, T. (2010) Optimization of Life-Cycle Preventative Maintenance Strategies Using Genetic Algorithm and Bayesian Updating. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Bridge Maintenance, Safety and Management, IABMAS’10, Smart EN ITN Mini-Symposium, Philadelphia, 11-15 July, 2010.

[3]   Tantele, E.A. and Onoufriou, T. (2009) Optimum Preventative Maintenance Strategies Using Genetic Algorithm and Bayesian Updating. Ships and Offshore Journal, 4, 299-306.

[4]   Holland, J.H. (1975) Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

[5]   Goldberg, D.E. (1983) Computer-Aided Gas Pipeline Operation Using Genetic Algorithms and Rule Learning. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

[6]   Miyamoto, A., Kawamura, K. and Nakamura, H. (2000) Bridge Management System and Maintenance Optimization for Existing Bridges. Computer Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 15, 45-55.

[7]   Liu, M. and Frangopol, D.M. (2004) Optimal Bridge Maintenance Planning Based on Probabilistic Performance Prediction. Engineering Structures, 26, 991-1002.

[8]   Furuta, H., Nakatsu, K., Ishibashi, K. and Miyoshi, N. (2014) Optimal Bridge Maintenance of Large Number of Bridges Using Robust Genetic Algorithm. Structures Congress, Boston, 3-5 April 2014, 2282-2291.

[9]   Morcous, G. and Lounis, Z. (2005) Maintenance Optimization of Infrastructure Networks Using Genetic Algorithms. Automation in Construction, 14, 129-142.

[10]   Haupt, R. and Haupt, S. (2004) Practical Genetic Algorithms. 2nd Edition, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.

[11]   Weyers, R.E., Prowell, B.D., Sprinkel, M.M. and Vorster, M. (1993) Concrete Bridge Protection, Repair, and Rehabilitation Relative to Reinforcement Corrosion: A Methods Application Manual. SHRP-S-360, Strategic Highway Research Program, Washington DC.

[12]   Highways Agency (1999) Serviceable Life of Highway Structures and Their Components. Final Report, Project Number 970530.

[13]   Pearson, S. and Cuninghame, J.R. (1997) Water Management for Durable Bridges. Project Report PR/CE/91/97, Transport Research Laboratory, Berkshire.

[14]   Kepler, J.L., Darwin, D. and Locke, C.E. (2000) Evaluation of Corrosion Protection Methods for Reinforced Concrete Highway Structure. Structural Engineering and Engineering Materials SM Report No. 58, University of Kansas Center for Research, Inc., Lawrence.

[15]   Krauss, P.D., Lawler, J.S. and Steiner, K.A. (2009) Guidelines for Selection of Bridge Deck Overlays, Sealers and Treatments. Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc., Northbrook.

[16]   Tilly, G.P. (1996) Principles of Whole Life Costing. Proceedings of Conference on Safety of Bridges, ICE, Thomas Telford, London, 138-144.

[17]   Tantele, E.A., Onoufriou, T. and Mulheron, M. (2005) Effectiveness of Preventative Maintenance for Reinforced Concrete Bridges—A Stochastic Approach. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Bridge Management, Surrey, 11-13 April 2005, 443-451.

[18]   Treasury, H.M. (2003) The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government: Treasury Guidance. TSO, London.

[19]   Li, C.Q. (2003) Life-Cycle Modelling of Corrosion—Affected Concrete Structures: Propagation. Journal of Structural Engineering, 129, 753-761.

[20]   BS EN 1990 (2002) Eurocode: Basis of Structural Design. British Standards Institution, London.

[21]   JCSS (2000) Probabilistic Model Code, Part 1—Basis of Design. Joint Committee on Structural Safety, JCSS-OSTL/ DIA/VROU-10-11-2000.

[22]   Val, D.V. and Stewart, M.G. (2003) Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures in Marine Environments. Structural Safety, 25, 343-362.

[23]   OECD (1992) Bridge Management, Road Transport Research. Paris.

[24]   BS 5400 (1998) Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges—Part 1: General Statement. British Standards Institution, London.