Sciulli, G; Rizzo, P; Kurlander, J and Brozik, B (2025) A comparative analysis of three methodological frameworks for bridge asset management. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 151(5): 04025029, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Bridge asset management refers to the process of planning, organizing, and directing all activities related to the life cycle of bridges. The process includes strategies to prioritize maintenance and provide cost-effective decisions about rehabilitation or replacement. In the US, the transportation agency of each state has its own guideline to prioritize intervention. In some cases, this is done by applying systematic methodologies based on different characteristics of the assets in order to schedule timely interventions and minimize adverse effects. In the study presented in this paper, three data-driven strategies based on the aggregation of information from the National Bridge Inventory (NBI) were applied to the bridges of Pennsylvania. Using data related to the year 2021, a ranking of the worst to the best bridge was obtained from each strategy. Then, three representative bridges of the city of Pittsburgh were selected and the NBI data related to the timeframe 1992–2023 were imported to identify trends attributable to degradation. The results show that the methods lead to three different rankings, whereas their the long-term trends agree.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bridge asset management; national bridge inventory; sufficiency rating |
| Index terms: | degradation, life cycle, transportation agency, inventory, comparative analysis, strategy, asset management, replacement, methodology |
| Subjects: | materials science, asset management, transportation engineering, research methods, inventory management, data analysis and analytics, material degradation and durability, value management, management |
| Topics: | Supply Chain Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Construction Materials, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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