Mohseni, H; Setunge, S; Zhang, G and Wakefield, R (2017) Markov process for deterioration modeling and asset management of community buildings. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 143(6): 04017003, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The current management process for community buildings in Australia is mainly reactive. Data collected using regular inspections are used for maintenance decision making in the period between consecutive inspections, disregarding the future degradation of the assets and the resultant levels of service. Forecasting future conditions using historic data is difficult because of the uncertainty and stochastic nature of deterioration. A major gap in knowledge is the lack of methods for predicting this highly uncertain degradation process for components of community buildings to support a strategic decision-making process. This paper presents a Markov process-based method for deterioration prediction of building components using condition data collected by the City of Kingston in Australia. Markov transition matrices for building components have been derived using a modified method combining the genetic algorithm with Monte Carlo sampling called direct absolute value difference, which offers superior accuracy. The derived matrices are validated using a new data set collected in 2011. Fourteen transition matrices for building components are proposed. The paper presents a typical decision-making method based on the Markov process.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | buildings; cost projection; genetic algorithm; Markov chain; Monte Carlo; probabilistic deterioration prediction; risk profile |
| Index terms: | sampling, modelling, forecasting, Markov chain, degradation, decision-making process, inspection, Australia, decision-making, building component, deterioration, genetic algorithm, asset management, accuracy |
| Subjects: | mathematical modelling, data collection methods, material degradation and durability, prediction and forecasting, analytical methods, algorithms, architectural elements, professional development, Geography, asset management, decision analysis, quality assurance |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Design Practice, Quality Management, Business Strategy, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Construction Materials, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here