Policy implications of standalone timing versus holistic timing of infrastructure interventions: Findings based on pavement surface roughness. (June 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Qiao, Julie Yu; Du, Runjia; Labi, Samuel; Fricker, Jon D.; Sinha, Kumares C.
• Is Part Of: Transportation research. Volume 148(2021)
• Page Start: 79
• Page End: 99
• Publication Date: 2021-06
• Subjects: Repair scheduling -- Maintenance policy -- Optimal timing -- Treatment thresholds -- Pavement maintenance -- Maintenance optimization; Transportation -- Research -- Periodicals; 388.011
• DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2021.02.021
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0965-8564

Abstract

Abstract: Transportation agencies routinely make repair decisions in numerous contexts which include the timing of different repair treatments over an extended period. The timing policy may be characterized either by a standalone manner that maximizes the outcome or utility of individual treatments at a given time, or by a holistic manner that maximizes the utility of all treatments together within a given horizon period. This study begins with a hypothesis that the effect of the sum of treatment prescriptions may be different from the sum of the effect of individual treatment prescriptions. The paper discusses separate practical applications where each of these two situations is pertinent. The study is based on the use of surface roughness as the indicator of pavement performance, and therefore, the framework includes the development of treatment-specific treatment performance jump and performance loss models in terms of roughness. The framework also includes identification of the optimal roughness thresholds for each pavement treatment as a standalone activity, followed by a determination of the thresholds for each treatment from a holistic standpoint. The latter involves the establishment of an optimal repair schedule over the pavement life cycle and recording the resulting roughness thresholds at which each treatment is recommended for application within the optimal schedule. Then the paper presents a case study to demonstrate application of the framework, and to compare the optimal-schedule thresholds versus the stand-alone thresholds. The case study involved fourteen treatment types, two surface material types (rigid and flexible) and three road functional classes. The results suggest that in this context of highway management, the optimal triggers associated with individual standalone repair treatments are not necessarily the same (and yield inferior outcomes) compared to the application thresholds of those treatments when they are considered within an optimized life-cycle schedule. The results can provide guidance to agencies as they examine or update their current roughness thresholds for each standard treatment and their long-term condition-based or time-based repair schedules. The paper's framework and results can also help agencies assess the consequences of deviations from a repair timing policy (delayed or hastened applications) due to lack of funds and other causes.