Gransberg, D D (2004) Life cycle evaluation criteria for design-build highway pavement projects. PhD thesis, University of Colorado at Boulder, USA.
Abstract
Six current pavement life cycle cost analysis algorithms are evaluated and the Federal Highway Administration algorithm is selected, as it is both pavement material-type neutral, robust enough for use with a variety of pavement designs, and flexible enough to handle constraints imposed by state or local-level pavement management policies. Next, a sensitivity analysis on the life cycle cost analysis algorithm with respect to discount rate and period of analysis finds that life cycle cost is sensitive to both. A further evaluation is conducted on three alternatives for modeling the inflation component of the discount rate and recommends that a locally-derived discount rate and analysis period is most appropriate for use in the subsequent evaluation of five design-build case study projects. The formalized framework allows the owner to constrain its procurement process for local legislative and policy restrictions while adopting a life cycle cost sensitive best-value award system through the promulgation of design-build life cycle cost pavement performance evaluation criteria. It does so by changing the pavement procurement model from a linear one, where life cycle cost analysis is done after contract award, to a cyclical one where the life cycle cost analysis is completed before contract award on a competitive basis. This allows an evaluation of project performance to feedback into the next project, thereby fine-tuning its best-value award algorithm. The research reports the results of simulations run on the seven existing best-value award algorithms and describes their limitations and necessary modifications for use in this innovative methodology. It also proposes three new best-value procurement algorithms that have been tested and found to be suitable for use in life cycle-based procurement. (1) Award on a basis of lowest life cycle cost. (2) Award with life cycle cost as a separate weighted criteria category along with price and technical score. (3) Award using a life cycle cost adjusted price. To support the use of the new algorithms, a logical, repeatable structure for the development and writing of life cycle cost analysis-based evaluation criteria based on abductive reasoning is presented. Finally, the study proposes a new project performance metric called “life cycle budget growth” that can be used to measure the degree of post-award success of projects procured using life cycle considerations.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Molenaar, K R |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | best value; reasoning; highway; pavement; feedback; inflation; life cycle; performance evaluation; policy; owner; cost analysis; life cycle cost; project performance; case study; pavement design; simulation |
| Index terms: | modelling, project performance, best value, life cycle cost analysis, owner, life cycle, case study, performance evaluation, abductive reasoning, inflation, methodology, life cycle cost, procurement process, sensitivity analysis, pavement design, cost analysis, reasoning |
| Subjects: | sociology, cognitive psychology, transportation engineering, environmental hazards, performance measurement, economics, research methods, project management theory and practice, contractual arrangements, bidding, economic analysis, financial and cost management, analytical methods, data collection methods, research design and methodology, value management |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Stakeholder Management, Quality Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Sustainability, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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