Matching Items (4)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Civil Engineering
- Genre: Doctoral Dissertation
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
Description
This dissertation presents a portable methodology for holistic planning and optimization of right of way infrastructure rehabilitation that was designed to generate monetary savings when compared to planning that only considers single infrastructure components. Holistic right of way infrastructure planning requires simultaneous consideration of the three right of way infrastructure components that are typically owned and operated under the same municipal umbrella: roads, sewer, and water. The traditional paradigm for the planning of right way asset management involves operating in silos where there is little collaboration amongst different utility departments in the planning of maintenance, rehabilitation, and renewal projects. By collaborating across utilities during the planning phase, savings can be achieved when collocated rehabilitation projects from different right of way infrastructure components are synchronized to occur at the same time. These savings are in the form of shared overhead and mobilization costs, and roadway projects providing open space for subsurface utilities. Individual component models and a holistic model that utilize evolutionary algorithms to optimize five year maintenance, rehabilitation, and renewal plans for the road, sewer, and water components were created and compared. The models were designed to be portable so that they could be used with any infrastructure condition rating, deterioration modeling, and criticality assessment systems that might already be in place with a municipality. The models attempt to minimize the overall component score, which is a function of the criticality and condition of the segments within each network, by prescribing asset management activities to different segments within a component network while subject to a constraining budget. The individual models were designed to represent the traditional decision making paradigm and were compared to the holistic model. In testing at three different budget levels, the holistic model outperformed the individual models in the ability to generate five year plans that optimized prescribed maintenance, rehabilitation and renewal for various segments in order to achieve the goal of improving the component score. The methodology also achieved the goal of being portable, in that it is compatible with any condition rating, deterioration, and criticality system.
ContributorsCarey, Brad David (Author) / Lueke, Jason S (Thesis advisor) / Ariaratnam, Samuel (Committee member) / Bashford, Howard (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
Civil infrastructures are susceptible to damage under the events of natural or manmade disasters. Over the last two decades, the use of emerging engineering materials, such as the fiber-reinforced plastics (FRPs), in structural retrofitting have gained significant popularity. However, due to their inherent brittleness and lack of energy dissipation, undesirable failure modes of the FRP-retrofitted systems, such as sudden laminate fracture and debonding, have been frequently observed. In this light, a Carbon-fiber reinforced Hybrid-polymeric Matrix Composite (or CHMC) was developed to provide a superior, yet affordable, solution for infrastructure damage mitigation and protection. The microstructural and micromechanical characteristics of the CHMC was investigated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and nanoindentation technique. The mechanical performance, such as damping, was identified using free and forced vibration tests. A simplified analytical model based on micromechanics was developed to predict the laminate stiffness using the modulus profile tested by the nanoindentation. The prediction results were verified by the flexural modulus calculated from the vibration tests. The feasibility of using CHMC to retrofit damaged structural systems was investigated via a series of structural component level tests. The effectiveness of using CHMC versus conventional carbon-fiber reinforced epoxy (CF/ epoxy) to retrofit notch damaged steel beams were tested. The comparison of the test results indicated the superior deformation capacity of the CHMC retrofitted beams. The full field strain distributions near the critical notch tip region were experimentally determined by the digital imaging correlation (DIC), and the results matched well with the finite element analysis (FEA) results. In the second series of tests, the application of CHMC was expanded to retrofit the full-scale fatigue-damaged concrete-encased steel (or SRC) girders. Similar to the notched steel beam tests, the CHMC retrofitted SRC girders exhibited substantially better post-peak load ductility than that of CF/ epoxy retrofitted girder. Lastly, a quasi-static push over test on the CHMC retrofitted reinforced concrete shear wall further highlighted the CHMC's capability of enhancing the deformation and energy dissipating potential of the damaged civil infrastructure systems. Analytical and numerical models were developed to assist the retrofitting design using the newly developed CHMC material.
ContributorsZhou, Hongyu (Author) / Attard, Thomas L (Thesis advisor) / Fafitis, Apostolos (Thesis advisor) / Mignolet, Marc P (Committee member) / Ariaratnam, Samuel (Committee member) / Thomas, Benjamin (Committee member) / Blumsom, Jim (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Much of the water and wastewater lines in the United States are nearing the end of their useful life. A significant reinvestment is needed in the upcoming decades to replace or rehabilitate the water and wastewater infrastructure. Currently, the traditional method for delivering water and wastewater pipeline engineering and construction projects is design-bid-build (DBB). The traditional DBB delivery system is a sequential low-integration process and can lead to inefficiencies and adverse relationships between stakeholders. Alternative project delivery methods (APDM) such as Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) have been introduced to increase stakeholder integration and ultimately enhance project performance. CMAR project performance impacts have been studied in the horizontal and vertical construction industries. However, the performance of CMAR projects in the pipeline engineering and construction industry has not been quantitatively studied.
The dissertation fills this gap in knowledge by performing the first quantitative analysis of CMAR performance on pipeline engineering and construction projects. This study’s two research objectives are:
(1) Develop a CMAR baseline of commonly measured project performance metrics
(2) Statistically compare the cost and schedule performance of CMAR to that of the traditional DBB delivery method
A thorough literature review led to the development of a data collection survey used in conjunction with structured interviews to gather qualitative and quantitative performance data from 66 completed water and wastewater pipeline projects. Performance data analysis was conducted to provide performance benchmarks for CMAR projects and to compare the performance of CMAR and DBB.
This study provides the first CMAR performance benchmark for pipeline engineering and construction projects. The results span across seven metrics in four performance areas (cost, schedule, project change, and communication). Pipeline projects delivered using CMAR have a median cost and schedule growth of -5% and 5.10%, respectively. These results are significantly improved from DBB baseline performance shown in other industries. To verify this, a statistical analysis was done to compare the cost and schedule performance of CMAR to similar DBB pipeline projects. The results show that CMAR pipeline projects are being delivered with 6.5% less cost growth and with 12.5% less schedule growth than similar DBB projects, providing owners with increased certainty when delivering their pipeline projects.
The dissertation fills this gap in knowledge by performing the first quantitative analysis of CMAR performance on pipeline engineering and construction projects. This study’s two research objectives are:
(1) Develop a CMAR baseline of commonly measured project performance metrics
(2) Statistically compare the cost and schedule performance of CMAR to that of the traditional DBB delivery method
A thorough literature review led to the development of a data collection survey used in conjunction with structured interviews to gather qualitative and quantitative performance data from 66 completed water and wastewater pipeline projects. Performance data analysis was conducted to provide performance benchmarks for CMAR projects and to compare the performance of CMAR and DBB.
This study provides the first CMAR performance benchmark for pipeline engineering and construction projects. The results span across seven metrics in four performance areas (cost, schedule, project change, and communication). Pipeline projects delivered using CMAR have a median cost and schedule growth of -5% and 5.10%, respectively. These results are significantly improved from DBB baseline performance shown in other industries. To verify this, a statistical analysis was done to compare the cost and schedule performance of CMAR to similar DBB pipeline projects. The results show that CMAR pipeline projects are being delivered with 6.5% less cost growth and with 12.5% less schedule growth than similar DBB projects, providing owners with increased certainty when delivering their pipeline projects.
ContributorsFrancom, Tober C (Author) / Ariaratnam, Samuel (Thesis advisor) / El Asmar, Mounir (Thesis advisor) / Bearup, Wylie (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
Water utilities across the United States are facing numerous challenges, such as limited funding and increasing project complexity, in constructing and upgrading their aging infrastructure. One innovative method to overcome these challenges is through the use of alternative project delivery methods (APDM), such as construction management at-risk (CMAR) and design-build (DB). Previous research has shown that APDM have the potential to deliver higher performing water infrastructure projects when compared to the traditional design-bid-build (DBB) method. However, there is a need to further examine APDM practices and develop tools that may support utilities in the delivery of their APDM water infrastructure projects. This study fills the knowledge gap by conducting several studies that may support public and private utilities in improving the delivery of their APDM water infrastructure projects. First, APDM implementation practices for water infrastructure projects are identified by assessing the state of practice, particularly during project procurement and execution. Second, DB project administration best practices are determined to support utilities seeking to add DB to their organization’s project delivery toolbox. Third, a pioneering web-based project delivery method decision-support tool was developed to aid utilities in selecting the appropriate delivery method for their water project. Finally, project-specific factors and attributes that impact project delivery performance are investigated through exploratory modeling and analysis. The study collected data on 75 completed treatment plant projects, conducted interviews with ten utilities that successfully deliver their water projects using DB, and worked closely with several industry experts through industry workshops and panels. Key findings related to water infrastructure project delivery revealed in this study included: (1) guaranteed maximum price (GMP) is the preferred compensation type for APDM projects; (2) utilities statistically having the lowest comfort level with delivering CMAR projects; (3) qualifications-based procurement is an effective DB project delivery practice; (4) the identification of 13 key project delivery method selection factors; and (5) the three highest predictors that impact unit cost performance are project complexity, project team chemistry and communication, and project size.
ContributorsFeghaly, Jeffrey (Author) / El Asmar, Mounir (Thesis advisor) / Ariaratnam, Samuel (Thesis advisor) / Bearup, Wylie (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020