A Summary Review for Decision Making for Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Municipal Pavements

Abstract

The planning process has a significant impact on the life-cycle cost of maintaining the pavement network and its current state. The requirement for pavement preservation should be established appropriately before any planning. Municipalities spend billions every year updating their ageing infrastructure. To guarantee the continued viability of our infrastructure assets, asset management systems, of which pavement management systems are a part, have long recognized the significance of regular maintenance and rehabilitation planning. Additionally, these frameworks understand the value of cost-effectiveness, optimal performance, and economic concepts when making decisions. Municipalities have a greater challenge in proving that a pavement preservation treatment is essential than in deciding which treatment to apply on a given stretch of road. Focusing on service levels, pavement inventory, need identification, and need prioritization, this article will describe a methodical strategy for doing so at the network level of the annual management cycle. The study will analyze and critique existing methods, such as those used in deciding how to plan and carry out urban pavement repair, using novel optimization models and techniques.

Chapter 1  Systematic Review

1.1 Introduction

This subsection will focus on decision-making through a peer-reviewed systematic literature review. Several primary areas of study have developed in multi-objective decision-making for pavement M&R. These include optimizing decision models that include high-dimensional targets, nonlinear strategies, and high-dimensional factors [1].

Regarding road maintenance decision-making issues, several scholars [2, 3] have examined the usefulness and effectiveness of optimization strategies. Using multi-objective optimization (MOO) techniques is one way to combine all of a strategy’s components. The paper highlights approaches such as The Weighted Sum Model (WSM), analytic hierarchy process (AHP), and Artificial intelligence techniques, like genetic-algorithm-based procedures. Because of its ease of use, the WSM has been adopted by many scholars [4, 5]. The subjective nature of assigning weights and formalizing the decision builder’s preferences are two of its fundamental shortcomings, along with the requirement for normalization when tackling multi-dimensional issues. AHP, The essential benefit of this strategy is in the simplicity with which decision-makers may evaluate options and weigh coefficients thanks to the use of pairwise comparisons [6]

The articles provide an overview of the design-making and the strategies municipalities employ to streamline budget allocations in pavement maintenance and rehabilitation efforts. These related articles entail (a)Pavement Maintenance Decision Making Based on Optimization Models and (b) Planning Urban Pavement Maintenance by a New Interactive Multi-objective Optimization approach.

1.2 Systematic Review

1.1 Planning Urban Pavement Maintenance by a New Interactive Multi-objective Optimization Approach.

The authors of this research suggested interactive MOO techniques to manage road repair better. The MOO approach integrates two different techniques, “Interactive Multi-objective Optimization” (IMO) and “Dominance-based Rough Set Approach” (DRSA) [7, 8, 9] and the approach is founded on the concept of restricting the range of viable solutions within the Pareto front, employing a designated objective function target value that reflects the selection of the decision maker. The “Pareto optimal” method is used to find a feasible solution to the multi-objective optimization issue [10]. This literature paper evaluates the potential of implementing a novel approach (IMO-DRSA) in the domain of pavement management, given the unique challenges associated with the pavement management process and the constraints of conventional methods [11].

1.1.1 Method

The practice used is to describe an approach s (from a collection of feasible methods S, with s S) as a sequence of treatments to be implemented annually at t intervals throughout the time T of the analytic scope (with t T). To describe a sequence of treatments to be performed over time T on a given segment, the strategy may be thought of as the implementation of upkeep decision criterion (such as a decision tree) expressed mathematically as follows:

Using a multi-objective PMS deeply embedded in an asset management system, the study aimed to demonstrate how the IMO-DRSA technique was used effectively as a decision support tool for developing pavement conservation plans at the network system. The IMO-DRSA uses the following procedure to review the possible answers to a multi-objective optimization challenge (where X is the evaluated array of alternatives and Fi: X R, i = 1… k are the target variables to optimize). Figure 1 depicts the overall layout of the IMO-DRSA procedure.

1.1.2 The Benefits of the Suggested Method

The guidelines provide comprehensible justifications backed by preference data (choice instances) and avoid ad hoc recommendations. In addition, the person making the call may always return to an earlier stage if necessary. The decision-maker learns more about the connections between the values of goals within reach and the preferences that emerge from this process. The decision maker exits this interactive multi-objective optimization process after they are persuaded that a particular solution is acceptable and should be chosen.

Figure 1. The framework of the IMO-DRSA method

1.1.3 Case Study Example Evaluation

An example was given to show how IMO-DRSA may be useful in real-life situations. The road network used spanned a distance of 23 kilometres and consisted of 46 individual road segments. The PCI was 43.3, PSI was 2.6, the international roughness index was 2.51 meters per kilometre, and the average annualized crash rate for the three years prior to the base year was 29.5.

Figure 2. Decision Trees

Maximizing calculated one of the performance indices from individual performance indicators (P.I.s) was expressed by the following mathematical formulation of the goals. Pavement asset value, user comfort, and safety are three related indicators important to drivers and transportation companies. PCI (P.I.s specified in ASTM D5340) is a rating system used to assess the structural pavement state according to distress noticed on the pavement’s surface (for example. potholes and cracking).

As shown in Fig. 2 (PSI) is derived from roughness and distress measures (single P.I.s) and is used to evaluate the road pavement’s contribution to the user’s comfort (ASTM E867). The mathematical formulation of the highway network’s % in excellent structural condition within the planned horizon can be expressed as

1.1.4 Results and Discussion

The DRSA was utilized to infer the D.M.’s decision-making preferences and narrow the search for the most suitable options. To do this, the D.M. was asked to choose a group of (relatively) “good” solutions from among those listed in Table 1’s “proposed” column, as stated in the table’s “evaluation” column. The D.M. deemed the following answers “good”: S5, S6, S7, S21, and S22.

Table 1. Twenty-two Pareto-optimal Solutions

Twenty-two Pareto-optimal solutions were discovered, all maximized Fk while meeting some other objective functions’ aims within the specified budget limitations shown in Table 1.

Detailed information on PCI and PSI metrics was pooled from 3 classes and displayed with the average values of roughness and the several accidents linked to pavement quality in Fig. 3, providing an overview of the beginning and subsequent performance of the pavement system. Even after extensive optimization, the figure showed that the sample network’s structural and serviceability state had typically declined, but its safety has improved. The example’s limited resources, in particular the decision maker’s emphasis on security concerns, drove these outcomes. The relatively little amount of money that is often allocated to the upkeep of municipal roads’ paved surfaces was seen as a great chance to do a thorough quality check on the procedure.

Figure 3. The S2 solution’s overview of pavement performance for the analyzed time T, broken down by percentage of PCI and PSI-classed networks (a and b), mean roughness (c) and annual occurrence of crashes correlated to the pavement state (d) number of accidents

The collected findings demonstrated the effectiveness of IMO-DRSA in narrowing down the Pareto optimum set in multi-objective optimization situations, empowering the D.M. to choose the most optimal option from among several viable ones.

1.1.5 Conclusion

The study employed an interactive optimization approach that utilized a choice-rule model, specifically the IMO-DRSA, to facilitate engagement with the decision-maker. Several of the primary challenges in a prioritization issue is the significant volume of viability alternatives, which presents a challenge for decision-makers in selecting the optimal solution. Hence, the salient feature of the suggested approach is to furnish a mechanism that assists the decision-maker in this particular phase of the decision-making process.

1.1.6 Research Gap

The proposed method avoided subjective operations like averaging, weighted sum, and distance by not aggregating goals. The IMO-DRSA uses only ordinal comparisons unaffected by rising monotonic scale transformations, ensuring measurement theory-valid findings. Although a five-year time frame was considered, the proposed model was generic and scalable, incorporating a wide range of repair methods, planning horizons, policy alternatives, and budgetary considerations. Applying the IMO-DRSA methodology to a case study demonstrated its utility for determining the optimal upkeep procedures within a fixed budget.

1.2 Pavement Maintenance Decision-Making Based on Optimization Models

1.2.1 Summary Review

The article majorly focused on decision-making on the costs of pavement maintenance. Using data collected by municipal patrols, this article determined the real PCI of municipal roads. In order to optimize repair quality while limiting repair expenditures, a linear optimization model was constructed using the pavement condition index and a MOO model. These models were used to guide real-world pavement maintenance choices using sequential quadratic programming and a genetic algorithm. The findings confirmed that the suggested decision-making models were enough to deal with real-world challenges encountered during pavement repair. Validation of the optimization findings and analysis of the models’ underlying assumptions were used to determine the models’ credibility. Additionally, their usefulness in making decisions and performing routine upkeep on pavement operations for roads of varying quality was validated.

1.2.2 Problem Formulation

Most decisions about which roads will be prioritized for repair and which will be subject to objective limits are made at the macro level regarding pavement maintenance. The respective regional governments typically handle pavement repair in China. For instance, each district and county has its own agency regarding macro-level decisions like pavement upkeep. Formulating a yearly pavement routine upkeep plan, applying a budget, and maintaining quality control are all examples of typical decision-making processes associated with pavement care.

In real-world situations, daily patrol data is used to assess the level of road network degradation in a given area before any choices are made about pavement repair. The pavement condition index (PCI) provides a quantitative evaluation of pavement condition based on the kind and intensity of distress detected on the outer layer of pavement, allowing for the quantification of pavement degradation.

In a particular region, the task of prioritizing repair for an entire network of N roads involves taking into account the area of each road requiring repair (A), the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of each road, the total budget available for pavement maintenance (C), and selecting m roads (m ≤ N) for repair.

Three objectives guide the prioritization process:

(1) Ensuring that the total cost of repair does not exceed C,

(2) Reducing the overall cost of repair, and

(3) Increasing the quality of routine maintenance

Choosing suitable roads based on human experience yields 2^N combination schemes. The choice factor is a Boolean that denotes the inclusion or exclusion of a highway in the maintenance plan. This research used NSGA-II to solve a decision-making optimizing model for pavement repair. The whole process of optimizing pavement repair decisions is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Schematic representation of the optimal decision-making process for pavement repair

1.2.3 Model Construction

Maximum Maintenance Quality–Limited Budget Model

Maximum maintenance quality-limited budget (MMQLB) models are developed to maximize maintenance quality while restricting costs. As can be seen below, the MMQLB model is an expression of a linear optimization model with a single goal.

Equation 1a

Where the ith road needs repair is represented by the decision variable xi in these equations. Each route may be in one of two maintenance-necessity statuses. The road needs repair at the moment if xi is set to 1, else it is not. The goal function of the model is represented by Equation (1), wherein ‘n’ denotes the overall number of roads and ‘PCI′i−PCIi’ signifies the degree of enhancement in PCI, which pertains to the routine upkeep quality of a particular highway. The value of PCI′i in this model represents the post-maintenance Pavement Condition Index of the road, which is assumed to be 100, indicating that the road is in an optimal state following maintenance.

The second equation of the model denotes the constraint condition, wherein Areai signifies the area (in square meters) of the ith road that necessitates maintenance. The variable P represents the fixed expenditure attributed to the care of each square meter of the roadway, with a specified value of 200 CNY/m2. The budget denotes the aggregate amount of funds allocated for the upkeep of pavement, while D is a fixed value that signifies the maintenance threshold of the roadway.

If the (PCI) of a particular road falls below a specific threshold value, it is deemed substandard quality and necessitates upkeep. The default value of D has been established as 70. The parameter of PCI has been chosen for the objective function due to its significance as an index for assessing the satisfactory condition of roads per the Chinese “technical code of maintenance for the urban road” [12].

Equation 3

1.2.4 Model Application

This section discussed suggested models for making pavement maintenance decisions. Model findings were global optimum using actual data.

1.2.5. Dataset

The study subjected 149 Shushan District roadways in Hefei, Anhui, China. Equation (3) estimated the maintenance area and pre-maintenance PCI using 2019 road degradation data. Nine expressways, 39 major highways, and 101 branch roads were classified according to the National Standard of Road Classification. Table 2 only includes a small subset of the total number of roads across all three grades and their respective pre-maintenance PCI values. The median PCI was 88.43, the lowest was 67.89, and the highest was 100 overall, 149 roads. Only five roads had a PCI below 70, while 26 had a PCI of 100 or higher.

Table 2. Various characteristics of Shushan District’s roads, including their PCI.

The optimization models were utilized sequentially by quadratic programming and the NSGA-II method to determine the values of the choice factors and the goal functions. The research’s second model was addressed using the NSGA-II technique since it was a multi-objective problem that a G.A. could tackle.

1.2.6 Results

In Table 3, it was shown that the optimum solutions provided by the MMQLB model for a variety of cost considerations. Using the improved PCI for all roads, the model predicted a total maintenance cost of 10.199 billion CNY and the best possible asphalt repair quality of 1724.29. Unfortunately, certain roads were taken off the entire repair plan due to financial constraints. If just the poorest roadways below 70 PCI were to be rehabilitated, the cost would be = 1,567,200 CNY (maintenance quality: 154.51).

Figure 4 shows a thematic map of the Shushan District’s 149 highways. According to the limitation of the MMQLB model, all roads with a (PCI) lower than 70 needed repair. The optimization model determined that the red roads required maintenance since the related decision-making variables were equal to 1 for those routes. The optimization model concluded that the blue roads did not need repair since the value of the choice-making factors was determined to be zero.

Figure 4. Plan for pavement upkeep based on the MMQLB framework.

See the link Applied Sciences | Free Full-Text | Pavement Maintenance Decision Making Based on Optimization Models (mdpi.com)

The MBMMQ model’s final Pareto front is shown in Figure 5 after the model’s results had been calculated. At the 3000th generation, the NSGA-II algorithm solved the objective function and reached a stable set of values. The two primary goals were maintenance quality maximization on the x-axis and maintenance cost minimization on the y-axis. The Pareto front comprised several optimum solutions, denoted by star points covered in solutions alternatives.

The integrated management system for municipal infrastructures in Shushan Dist., Hefei, Anhui (China), was implemented using the two optimum models. The Municipal Engineering Management Office in Shushan District has used technology since 2018 to make pavement-related decisions. Even though funding for routine road maintenance was raised by 2% in 2019, the total PCI of improved roadways grew by 15%.

Figure 5. The pareto optimal solution for the MBMMQ model found via genetic programming.

1.2.6 Validation of Calculations

An exact solution may be obtained by using the suggested MMQLB model. The end result is a maintenance plan that optimizes maintenance quality while spending as little as possible on maintenance (see Table 4). The MBMMQ model, being a bi-objective optimization approach, was resolved through the utilization of NSGA-II heuristic algorithms.

Table 3. The MMQLB model’s optimal answers are under varying financial constraints.

The collection of MBMMQ solutions contains several solutions from MMQLB. This shows that the MMQLB model’s findings validated the MBMMQ model’s partial outcomes in this instance. In general, the form of the Pareto front showed a correlation between total quality improvement and minimum total maintenance cost.

1.2.7 Extension of the Multi-objective Model

When comparing road types, expressways need more frequent maintenance than primary arterial roads. When it comes to upkeep, major roadways often take precedence over side streets.

These additions were made to the MBMMQ model:

Equation 3

Equation 4

Here, wi represents the grade of Road i, which is 1.5 for an expressway, 1 for a major road, and 0.5 for a side road. Figure 6 displays the additional analysis results using the updated model to compare the impacts of the various road classifications and maintenance plans. As can be seen in Figure 4, the effects of the multiple road grades and upkeep plans were further established using this updated model. Since expressways and branch roads have different PCI values and upkeep areas, the result is a slight variation in upkeep costs and quality relative to the initial approach.

Figure 6. In this case, the MBMMQ model was used to compare the (PCI) values of the routes prior to and following repair.

1.2.8 Conclusion

This led to creation of two models, the MMQLB and the MBMMQ. The MBMMQ model’s optimum upkeep schemes had certain upkeep quality and cost values that fit the MMQLB model’s cost limitations. The MMQLB model might make decisions like the MBMMQ model by changing maintenance requirements. One nonlinear constraint of MMQLB should be enhanced to replace the nonlinear formulation and lessen issue complexity in future studies. In real life, the amount of time and attention attached to each road grade also affects the price tag associated with its upkeep. As a result, future research will further expand the parameters employed in the suggested models to represent real-world circumstances better and increase their application.

Chapter 2 Topic: A Summary Review in Decision Making for Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Municipal Pavements in Canada

2.1 Introduction

The two most fundamental concerns facing municipalities and other pavement network owners are how much money is required for network maintenance and how to guarantee that money gets where it is most needed. The study outlined how municipalities may preserve their pavement infrastructures by applying engineering processes to plan and budget. Each city with a pavement preservation budget also has a procedure for determining how much money should be set aside each year for the purpose. The process is streamlined if the financial plan is based mainly on the previous year’s figures, or it could be found on the pavement serviceability standards deemed acceptable by customers.

This study explored how a more open and transparent procedure for translating pavement preservation demands into prioritizing projects might help enhance the planning and budgeting process. The first step is determining what constitutes an acceptable level of pavement maintenance services. Prioritizing tasks based on minimal condition levels, the best return on spending, and service level targets determines the order in which improvements are made. The priority planning and budgeting approach outlined in this article is based on the concepts, goals, and asset management methodology. It gives basic guidelines on how to answer these challenges.

2.2 Objectives

The aims of the research study are as follows:

• To introduce the nationwide Guidelines for Sustainable Municipal roadway facilities and their context;
• To define the teamwork method employed in developing the guide, specifically focusing on the optimal approach for organizing and budgeting for roadway preservation.
• To delineate the optimal approach for prioritizing and spending in the context of pavement upkeep plans and rehabilitation efforts and ;
• To delineate the primary stages of execution and any possible challenges.

2.3 Problem Justification

Determining which roads require repair, what approaches should be used for pavement care, how much the maintenance will cost, and when it must be completed are all typical factors to consider. On the other hand, more than human experience-based decision-making is required for managing pavement maintenance expenses or determining whether maintenance quality is up to standards. This cause further road structural degradation. Management leaders of roadways must balance the competing demands of keeping roads open and safe for travel while also managing scarce monetary and human capital. To improve the long-term efficiency and effectiveness of transportation infrastructure, asset management has been extensively adopted by national and municipal governments and administrations.

Chapter 3

Literature Review

Road pavements are firm surfaces constructed from long-lasting materials that can resist the wear and tear of vehicles and the elements. Regular pavement care is essential to repair damage and offset deterioration brought on by rising traffic volumes carrying heavier loads and the effects of harsh conditions. A suitable budget must be allotted to keep the pavement in good shape, but a shortage of funds is the biggest challenge to pavement maintenance [13]. Cost-effectiveness must be balanced with adherence to quality standards when planning and executing large-scale pavement repair projects.

Choosing an effective pavement maintenance strategy is a multi-goal optimization problem. As a result, deciding on the best pavement maintenance strategy depends on knowing what that strategy is [14, 15]. Pavement maintenance decision-making is a challenging NP-hard task due to its complexity and non-determinism [16]. When faced with pavement repair duty, maintenance workers usually rely on their own experiences to make decisions. Each municipality in Canada sets aside funds in its annual budget to maintain its roads, and all of these municipalities engage in pre-budgetary planning [17].

The study analyzes the priority planning and budgeting process as a subject of a best practice under development by the Canadian National Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure Innovations and Best Practices and its network of excellence. Without including local streets, over 4,000 Canadian municipalities administer around 750,000 two-lane-equivalent km of public roadways throughout Canada, which vary from multi-lane highways to two-lane gravel roads [18].

With the InfraGuide, Canadians can access a national network of experts and a library of documents covering best practices for municipal infrastructure like roads and public transportation. It also serves as the nerve centre for Canadian professionals, academics, local governments, and others involved in infrastructure upkeep and management. Few of like eight best practices in the field of municipal roads were accomplished by the end of 2003, with another four being implemented. Some of these practices include

• Sealing and repairing fractures in asphalt concrete surfaces;
• Timely preventative maintenance for municipal roads: a primer ;
• Intersection rut mitigation methods; and,
• Prioritized financing and preparation for pavement maintenance and rehabilitation.

Chapter 4

4.1 Methods and Results

Conduct research was done on city officials and some of the pointed questions in order to learn more about the criteria used by their departments when deciding which pavement restoration initiatives to fund. To properly choose pavement preservation solutions, for instance, a pavement management system (PMS) should have already been in place and fully operational. Approximately half of the 56 municipalities surveyed had a PMS (Figure 7). It was also pointed out that a PMS is not something that only exists in really big cities.

Figure 7. Municipalities in Canada have access to PMS

When it comes to matters of public infrastructure, smaller communities often rely solely on the expertise of municipal officers /engineers. It is common practice to do maintenance on pavements either in a worst-first order or only when there is an immediate risk (Figure 7). Both the Pavement Design and Management Guide [19] and the Pavement Management Guide [20] provide helpful guidance on various aspects of pavement oversight, such as the need for data, methods for gathering data, pavement functionality prediction, choosing repair and maintenance treatments, importance analysis, and an inventory of pavement management tools.

Figure 8. Goals of Canadian Municipal Maintenance Plans

Figure 8 illustrates setting priorities requires balancing strategic vision with operational detail for decision-makers and technical staff. It is around the same length as other best practices and lacks rigorously comprehensive procedural material of about 30 pages. The most crucial idea is determining a reasonable level of service, determining resources, ranking requirements, and allocating funds. Pavement preservation investments are improved by ensuring appropriate segments are treated at the right times.

Outline of Best Practice

Decision Framework

The yearly oversight cycle, which encompasses planning, budgeting, engineering, and implementation activities, ought to incorporate the decision-making process regarding decision of road repair and upkeep. The annual management cycle consists of eight fundamental steps: review or development of service levels; pavement inventory; identification of requirements; prioritizing; budgeting; project design; project execution; and performance monitoring (Figure 9).

Figure 9. Decision-making Structure for the Maintenance of Pavements

Levels of Service (Step 1)

To better serve their clients, the people who utilize the roads and government organizations must conduct research like Winnipeg [21). Cities like Winnipeg’s work hard to keep their roads in good repair and operating order for as long as possible. Figure 10 shows how decisions on indicators, benchmarks, service standards, and, finally, trigger values and design requirements, are affected by and influenced by overarching strategic goals and objectives.

Figure 10. Strategic goals shape service quality, thresholds, and other design considerations.

It is recommended that municipal council undertake a thorough review and provide approval for the policies pertaining to levels of service implemented by a highway department. The approved service levels serve as the basis for all future pavement preservation requirements and are obligatory. Levels of service and trigger values are shown in Figure 11 as examples of how they can be employed in pavement leadership. Minimum safety-related service levels are often categorized by the specific types of damage they cause to the road surface, such as holes, cracks, and ruts caused by vehicles.

A specification may stipulate that potholes on a major highway should not exceed 600 cm2 in area and 8 cm in depth. These should be repaired as soon as possible after their appearance [22]. In order to maintain acceptable levels of service and safety, it is necessary to plan the repair of a tough stretch of road. Service standards are the minimum expected levels of service that an organization must provide.

Figure 11. Classes of Service Levels and their Associated Breakpoints

Trigger values are commonly linked to particular pavement maintenance techniques, such as the sealing of cracks in asphalt concrete pavement. There are also generic threshold values. PCI (on a rating scale where 100 denotes a new pavement) recommendations from the City of Regina include 50–70 for overlays, 30–50 for partial rebuilding, and 30 for whole reconstruction. Edmonton has set thresholds for determining which structures need maintenance and which may be rehabilitated without breaking the bank.

The term “target levels of service” is used to describe the degree of service that a road system should provide. An example target would be to have no more than 10% of arterial roads in “poor” condition (e.g., below 40) on a scale from 0 to 100. This would entail setting the intermediate state of arterial roadways to at least 70 on the scale.

Pavement Inventory (Step 2)

Modern methods of inventory data management include computerized mapping, GIS, and video data. For Cornwall, Ontario, Lee and Deighton (1995) created a mapping system that displays many types of data pertaining to infrastructure (such as pavement on a single map). U.S. DOT’s Data Integration Primer (2001) details best practices and considerations for creating unified data stores. Creating an inventory requires first segmenting the network into a consistent number of connections. For instance, the amount of traffic, pavement quality, and other factors should all be constant over a given stretch.

Current state

In addition to monitoring checks on the overall quality of the pavement system, assessing its current state is essential for determining when repairs or replacements are necessary. The only way to get reliable trends from pavement monitoring is if the measurements are consistent and objective. Roughness and pavement distress evaluation is a common part of this process.

Depending on the organization, pavements may be ranked on a scale from excellent to bad using either a 3- or 5-point scale. Edmonton, Alberta, uses a pavement quality index that takes into account roughness, distress, and structural soundness to provide just one example.

Pavement Performance Prediction

Forecasting into future pavement maintenance requirements is greatly aided by the ability to forecast performance. Figure 12 shows pavements have identical condition ratings. However, pavement B degrades faster than A. Therefore, it can be inferred that Pavement B will reach the minimum acceptable service level at an earlier stage and consequently require pavement preservation measures sooner. Prioritizing and selecting appropriate parts for treatment using the projected pavement degradation rate.

Figure 12. Pavement Performance Forecast Fundamentals

Long-term projections, spanning over five or more years, pertain to the durability of the current pavements and their subsequent need for treatment, as illustrated in Figure 12. Additionally, these projections encompass the rehabilitation of individual sections over the intervening years and the efficacy of these rehabilitation procedures.

The process of identifying needs and prioritizing them is a crucial aspect of effective decision-making (Steps 3 and 4)

Numerous pavement management software applications are available for procurement and customization by municipalities. Commonly, the treatments chosen are general, such as a single-layer or multi-layer asphalt overlay. This is especially true when the selection process is automated through software. Each segment and its proposed treatment are described according to factors such as its precise location (which includes road class), rehabilitation category, indicated year of development, estimated cost, and most importantly, the degree of priority. These factors

• Pavement quality (relative to the level of service);
• Highway class;
• Amount of traffic and proportion of industrial vehicles; and
• Cost-efficiency (benefit-cost ratio).

Long-term Identification of Requirements and Ranking of Importance.

According to FHWA’s report [23] in 1997, the process of multi-year prioritization analysis involves the evaluation of different approaches for each analysis year. To provide a clear illustration, it is assumed that only two alternatives are available despite the numerous options that can be generated for various years. The initial plan entails a solitary lift resurfacing that will take place in the upcoming three years, while the subsequent plan involves a dual lift resurfacing that is scheduled to occur in nine years. By conducting a multi-year prioritization analysis, it is possible to assess the two options of paying now or paying later in an equitable manner while also taking into account other projects.

The implementation of multi-year planning has the potential to enhance engineering and economic decision-making processes. Additionally, it facilitates the evaluation of the trade-offs between less expensive treatments that require immediate payment and more expensive treatments that will necessitate future payment, as well as the effects of reallocating funds to preventive maintenance. The significant attribute of multi-year prioritization analysis lies in its ability to prioritize or optimize competing treatments based on their cost-effectiveness. Each intervention is characterized by its corresponding expenses and advantages. To achieve this objective, each intervention is characterized by its corresponding expenses and advantages.

[24] Suggesting that its life cycle cost should ideally determine the financial considerations associated with the treatment.

Since the specifics of the treatments are unknown during the preparation phase, most organizations only account for the upfront costs associated with the treatment and, if applicable, routine maintenance.

Figure 9. Different Methods of Treatment and When to Give It.

A treatment’s efficacy may be measured by the savings it generates for its users and the time the pavement lasts after it has been treated. If two separate improvements result in the same amount of extra pavement life, the project on the highway with the greater volume of traffic may be prioritized.

Multi-year prioritizing yields insights into the connection between pavement investment and service quality for the public. Figure 10 depicts an example of this sort of analysis by demonstrating the results of a variation in the budgeted amount. The ideal level of service was intended to be achieved in 2007 with a 10 per cent increase in funding that could be maintained over many years. Prioritization software that spans many years should be able to accommodate varying degrees of specificity. A municipality may get started with a basic system and then optimize it as more experience and data are accumulated. They may achieve this simplification by:

• reducing the time spent on planning;
• streamlining the methods used to anticipate pavement conditions;
• limiting the number of potential treatments in each subsection; and
• Instead of utilizing a cost-benefit analysis, prioritize based on more straightforward metrics like pavement quality and traffic volumes.

Figure 10. The Impacts of Varying Budgets

Budgetary considerations, both yearly and long-term, benefit greatly from a prioritized list of pavement maintenance requirements. Budgets, however, also need to take into account a wide variety of additional financing requirements and programming factors.

Budgeting (Step 5)

Initiatives included in the budget should be chosen to maximize the return on investment in the various infrastructure investments and programs, such as pavements, and in protecting the ecosystem while enhancing public safety. The budgeting process draws on the outcomes of planning and prioritizing to create a financial strategy for allocating resources to physical infrastructure. As shown in Figure 11, a budget involves making technical and economic decisions.

Figure 11. Budgeting is a process that involves making both technical and financial decisions.

There are several line items in a municipal budget. In certain municipalities, capital improvements are allocated from a different fund than maintenance costs. There might be some administrative benefits to this. However, both line items in the budget should reflect priorities in which the repair and upkeep work together.

Programming and Budgeting

The following requirements and factors must be taken into account throughout the programming and packaging of projects:

• Identified critical maintenance requirements for pavements;
• Additional highway requirements, such as walkways; operational enhancements, such as widening at a junction and expanding the system; safety enhancements;

Figure 12 Key Budgeting Activities

The following tools may be used to measure and report the impact of the allocated money.

• Specify which planned actions will be suspended due to a lack of resources.
• Using Figure 10 demonstrates the effects of alternative spending plans on the pavement’s state of repair.
• Monitor the growth or decrease in unmet requirements from one year to the next.
• Keep an eye on the patterns of network activity. The City of Calgary, for instance, keeps an eye on metrics like network growth and quality over time, as well as yearly expenditure per square meter of pavement.

Project Design and Implementation (Steps 6 and 7)

The process of priority planning and budgeting is utilized to ascertain the allocation of pavement preservation treatments to specific sections, along with the corresponding year of implementation, the type of treatment (such as an A.C. overlay), and the estimated cost associated with the treatment. The design of a project plays a crucial role in determining the specific treatment approach and furnishing supplementary particulars that are essential for the project’s construction, including the thickness of layers, material type, and construction techniques. Life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) provides a methodical framework for designing pavement upkeep and repair procedures. It is not only the original building expenses that are included in LCCA calculations but also the ongoing costs of upkeep and repair, as well as any expenditures associated with the end users.

A lot of cities also employ building warranties on top of quality control and assurance measures. Warranties serve as a safety net to guarantee standard building quality. For pavement restoration techniques (such as sealing cracks in asphalt pavements and micro-surfacing), warranties are especially useful since construction techniques and the choice of materials might be challenging to define and implement. The average warranty length in Canada is between 1-3 years for rehabilitation and reconstruction projects and one to three years for “thin” paving contracts.

Performance Monitoring (Step 8)

For instance, cities like Edmonton and Toronto regularly assess the effectiveness of pavement preservation measures, especially novel ones. This provides the data necessary to decide on the treatment’s scope, modifications, or elimination depending on its cost-effectiveness.

Implementation

These are some of the most critical aspects of the implementation process and difficulties that may arise, such as

• systemic advantages,
• approval from the council,
• management’s dedication,
• developing the technological foundation’s factors (such as weather conditions, logistics chains, and the construction sector)-continual software maintenance is required since a computer decision-support system often automates the procedure
• Constant effort throughout time- Time and practice provide more significant rewards. For instance, obtaining pavement indicators and calibrating pavement performance models requires accumulating data over many years. Good inventory data must be readily available for the procedure to succeed.
• Constant backing- It takes money and skilled workers to conduct needs assessments and set priorities.

Chapter 6

Conclusions

The National Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure (InfraGuide) was created via a collaborative effort that drew on the knowledge of Canadian municipal agencies. This has increased the likelihood that the document being widely adopted. Managers and technicians tasked with determining the most effective plan of action for pavement maintenance and creating a financial plan may find the best practice on prioritization programming and cost beneficial. There are a variety of advantages to using this method;

1. It outlines the steps to take to identify, record, and defend the budgetary requirements for pavement upkeep;
2. It explains methods to set up and budget for pavement maintenance in a systematic and organized way that takes into account priorities and existing resources;
3. Small and big communities alike may use this as a standard against which to measure the success of their pavement preservation efforts.
4. Top managers and the public may benefit from the unbiased data it provides on the importance of pavement maintenance and the long-term implications of budgetary choices. By illustrating the connection between maintenance costs and customer satisfaction, it may be used to convince policymakers to provide more money for pavement maintenance; and
5. It encourages making the most of paved areas with the least amount of money outlay possible.

In particular, the municipality may gain the following by adopting best practices:

1. latest inventory data on the state of the road system;
2. an overview of the past, present, and foreseeable needs for pavement repair and preservation over the whole network;
3. With the help of reliable technical evaluation, a list of all the things that need to be done to keep the roads in good shape (this can be broken down into categories like “minimum acceptable condition level,” “preventive maintenance/cost-effectiveness,” and so on.
4. a detailed, sectionalized list of priorities for spending money (a budget plan);
5. tendencies in the state of the road system as a whole; and
6. details of the infrastructure gap (unmet requirements) as they relate to existing projects

References

• Chen, W., & Zheng, M. (2021). Multi-objective optimization for pavement maintenance and rehabilitation decision-making: A critical review and future directions. Automation in construction, 130, 103840.
• Dekker, R., & Scarf, P. A. (1998). On the impact of optimization models in maintenance decision making: The state of the art. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 60(2), 111–119.
• Marler, R. T., & Arora, J. S. (2004). Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Struct Multidiscip Optim, 26(6), 369–395.
• Dissanayake, S., Lu, J. J., Chu, X., & Turner, P. (1999). Use of multicriteria decision-making to identify the critical highway safety needs of special population groups. Transportation Research Record, 1693, 13–17.
• Lambert, J. H., Wu, Y. J., You, H., Clarens, A., & Smith, B. (2012). Future climate change and priority setting for transportation infrastructure assets. ASCE J Infrastruct Syst. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000094.
• Chou, S. Y., Chang, Y. H., & Shen, C. Y. (2008). A fuzzy simple additive weighting system under group decision-making for facility location selection with objective/subjective attributes. Eur J Oper Res, 189(1), 132–145.
• Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., & Slowinski, R. (2001). Rough sets theory for multicriteria decision analysis. Eur J Oper Res, 129, 1–47.
• Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., & Slowinski, R. (2005). Decision rule approach. In J. Figueira, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.) Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys(pp. 507–555). New York: Springer-Verlag.
• Branke, J., Branke, J., Deb, K., Miettinen, K., & Slowiński, R. (Eds.). (2008). Multi-objective optimization: Interactive and evolutionary approaches (Vol. 5252). Springer Science & Business Media.
• Pareto V (1906). Manuale di Economica Politica, Società Editrice Libraria. Milan; translated into English by A.S. Schwier as Manual of Political Economy, edited by A.S. Schwier and A.N. Page (1971). New York: A.M. Kelley.
• Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., & Slowinski, R. (2008). Dominance-based rough set approach to interactive multi-objective optimization. In J. Branke, K. Deb, K. Miettinen, & R. Slowiski (Eds.), Multi-objective optimization: Interactive and evolutionary approaches(pp. 121–155). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
• Shah, Y. U., Jain, S. S., Tiwari, D., & Jain, M. K. (2013). Development of overall pavement condition index for urban road network. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 104, 332-341.
• Alqaili, A., Qais, M., & Al-Mansour, A. (2021). Integer Search Algorithm: A New Discrete Multi-Objective Algorithm for Pavement Maintenance Management Optimization. Applied Sciences, 11(15), 7170.
• Wang, F., Zhang, Z., & Machemehl, R. B. (2003). Decision-making problem for managing pavement maintenance and rehabilitation projects. Transportation Research Record, 1853(1), 21-28.
• Santos, J., Ferreira, A., & Flintsch, G. (2019). An adaptive hybrid genetic algorithm for pavement management. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 20(3), 266-286.
• Syan, C. S., & Ramsoobag, G. (2019). Maintenance applications of multi-criteria optimization: A review. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 190, 106520.
• Muntz, H. (1994). Priority Planning, Budgeting Helps Municipalities. BETTER ROADS-CHICAGO THEN ILLINOIS-, 64, 16-16.
• Hajek, J., Hein, D., & Olidis, C. (2004, September). Decision-making for maintenance and rehabilitation of municipal pavements. In Conf. Transp. Assoc. Canada, Québec City, Québec, Canada.
• TAC (Transportation Association of Canada), (1997). Pavement Design and Management Guide, 2323 St. Laurent Boulevard, Ottawa, K1G 4J8.
• AASHTO, 2001. Pavement Management Guide, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, AASHTO Joint Task Force on Pavements, ISBN-1-56051-155-9.
• Hamilton, B. A. (2003). NCHRP Web Document 58: Research for Customer-Driven Benchmarking of Maintenance Activities.
• Anderson, B. (2002). Roadway Service Standards for Municipal Roads in Ontario, Ontario Good Roads Association, 530 Otto Rd., Mississauga, ON, L5T 2L5.
• FHWA (Federal Highway Administration), 1997. Pavement Management Analysis – Multi-year Prioritization, Publication No. FHWA-SA-97-072.
• Zimmerman, K.A., K.D. Smith, and M.G. Grogg, (2000). Applying Economic Concepts from an LCCA to a Pavement Management Analysis, Paper No. 00-1351, Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.