Mostafa, K and Hegazy, T (2025) Smart rehabilitation-planning framework for sustainable infrastructure: Roofing application. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 151(2): 04024203, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Aging infrastructure assets, including buildings, require efficient rehabilitation to sustain services. However, current rehabilitation planning is a complex process that is challenged by strict budgets and the difficulty of identifying and delivering the assets that are most worthy of rehabilitation. Existing methods struggle not only with collecting inspection data but also with how to use these data to allocate the limited rehabilitation funds efficiently across the asset portfolio. This paper introduces a smart infrastructure rehabilitation framework that integrates inspection, fund allocation, and scheduling phases. Focusing on roofing elements, the proposed framework uses four novel components: (1) asset image analysis to quantify the size of sustained damage; (2) data-mining to further analyze the asset condition; (3) clustering and optimization to shortlist the assets that are most worthy of rehabilitation under a strict budget; and (4) repetitive scheduling to generate timely delivery plans for the budgeted rehabilitation works. The model was applied to the Toronto District School Board asset portfolio (300+ schools), and the model identified the buildings in most need of rehabilitation given a strict budget ($2.3 million) and offer a schedule for the efficient delivery of the required rehabilitation work within a 45-day period of the school's summer break. Although this paper focuses on built-up building roofs, the framework is scalable to other types of assets.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | condition assessment; data mining; delivery; fund allocation; image analysis; optimization; roofing; smart rehabilitation |
| Index terms: | repetitive scheduling, scheduling, roofing, data mining, fund allocation, Toronto, smart infrastructure, inspection, mining, summer, roof, clustering |
| Subjects: | quality assurance, Geography, economic analysis, operations research, climate science, systems engineering, geotechnical engineering, design practice, data science |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Business Strategy, Time Control, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Sustainability, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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