Wirahadikusumah, R; Abraham, D M and Castello, J (1999) Markov decision process for sewer rehabilitation. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 6(4), pp. 358-370. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Finding the optimal solution to address problems in sewer management systems has always challenged asset managers. An understanding of deterioration mechanisms in sewers can help asset managers in developing prediction models for estimating whether or not sewer collapse is likely. The effective use of deterioration prediction models along with the development and use of life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) can contribute to the goals of reducing construction, operation and maintenance costs in sewer systems. When sewer system maintenance/rehabilitation options are viewed as investment alternatives, it is important, and in some cases, imperative, to make decisions based on life cycle costs instead of relying totally on initial construction costs. The objective of this paper is to discuss the application of deterioration modelling and life cycle cost principles in sewer system management, and to explore the role of the Markov chain model in decision making regarding sewer rehabilitation. A test case is used to demonstrate the application of the Markov chain decision model for sewer system management. The analysis includes evaluation of this concept using dynamic programming and the policy improvement algorithm.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | infrastructure; life cycle cost analysis; Markov chain model; optimization; rehabilitation; sewer deterioration models; sewer management systems; transition probabilities |
| Index terms: | management system, operation and maintenance, sewer, deterioration, manager, prediction model, life cycle cost, decision-making, estimating, Markov chain, decision process, construction cost, life cycle cost analysis, test case, dynamic programming, option, modelling |
| Subjects: | research methods, maintenance engineering, algorithms, economics, management, decision analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, mathematical modelling, practitioner, analytical methods, financial and cost management, material degradation and durability, prediction and forecasting, professional practice |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Construction Materials, Risk Management, Roles and Professions |
| 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