A Framework for the Evaluation of Infrastructures’ Serviceability

Aging infrastructures became a serious social problem. This brought out the increased need for the legislation of a new strict guideline for infrastructure management. Although existing guidelines provided basics of how to evaluate and manage the condition of infrastructures, they needed improvements for their evaluation procedures. Most guidelines mainly focused on the structural condition of infrastructures and did not properly reflect service aspects of infrastructures such as performance, public demand, capacity, etc., which were significantly valuable to public. Regardless of the importance, these factors were often neglected in infrastructure evaluations, because they were quite subjective and difficult to quantify in rational manner. Thus, this study proposed a framework to properly identify and evaluate the service indicators. This study showed that service indicators could be grouped into two categories and properly evaluated using AHP and Fuzzy. Overall, proposed framework is expected to assist governmental agency in establishing effective investment strategies for infrastructure improvements.

Authors:

• Kyonghoon Kim
• Wonyoung Park
• Taeil Park

Keywords:

• Infrastructure
• evaluation
• serviceability
• fuzzy.

References:

[1] B. S. Kwon, “Development of Performance Indicators for Asset
Management of Public Facilities,” Master’s thesis, University of Seoul,
2009.
[2] Ministry of land, infrastructure and transport, “Guidelines for the safety
inspection and test of infrastructure,” 2012.
[3] UK water industry, “UKWIR,” Webree.com Ltd, 2012.
[4] S. Rahman, and D. J. Vanier, “An Evaluation of Condition Assessment
Protocols for Sewer Management,” NRC.CNRC, 2004.
[5] FHWA, “2010 Status of the Nation’s Highways, Bridges, and Transit:
Conditions & Performance,” U.S Department of Transportation: Federal
Highway Administration, 2010.
[6] L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy Sets,” Information and control, vol. 8, 1965,
pp.338–353.
[7] H. J. Zimmerman “Fuzzy set theory” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews:
Computational Statistics 2, 2010, pp. 317–332.
[8] T. G. Han, K. W. Kim, and Y. S. Kim “The New Estimation Method of
Activity Duration using Fuzzy Set Theory,” J. Research Inst. Ind.
Technol., vol. 57, 1999, pp. 69–77.
[9] J. H. Lee, and K. H. Lee, “A Fuzzy Set based Method for Determining the
Ranks of Fuzzy Numbers,” Journal of the Korean Institute of Information
Scientists and Engineers, vol.27 no.7, 2000, pp. 723–730.
[10] T. L. Satty, the analytic hierarchy process, McGraw Hill, New York,
1980.
[11] T. J. Kim, and G. S. Lee, “The Site Analysis for Crop Cultivation Using
GIS-Based AHP Method,” Journal of Korean Society of Civil Engineers,
vol. 26 no. 4D, 2006, pp. 698–702.
[12] K. H. Kim, E. J. Kim, and J. J. Kim, “A Study to Judge the Importance of
Indices to Estimate Architectural Competition on the Apartment for
Using BIM,” Journal of The Architectural Institute of Korea, vol. 25 no. 2,
2009, pp. 59–66.