RIMS Update - Bridge Data Guidelines for Asset Management of Road Bridges


Published on

RIMS Forum 22 March 2012
by Simon Bush Opus

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

RIMS Update - Bridge Data Guidelines for Asset Management of Road Bridges

  1. 1. Bridge Data Guidelines for Asset Management of Road Bridges Simon Bush: Opus Consultants Piotr Omenzetter: University of Auckland Theuns F. P. Henning: University of Auckland Peter McCarten: Opus Consultants
  2. 2. Our role as asset managers• How do you prove you are contributing to national strategic outcomes?• How do you prove you are achieving value from money from bridge management funding?• Why? Our role is to ensure the assets we manage provide for the nations needs and therefore support the economy• How? Through the use of an advanced asset management approach
  3. 3. It is important to get it right• Close to 18000 bridges nationally (circa 4500 on state highways and 13500 on Local roads).• On average a bridge every 5km nationally and every 2.5km on state Highways. New Zealand therefore functions on its bridges.• Aging local bridge stock
  4. 4. New Zealand bridge asset management• NZGAO 2003: Limited evidence of an advanced asset management approach• USGAO 2008: The bridge program does not fully align with GAO’s principles… …in that the program lacks focus, performance measures. For example, the program’s statutory goals are not focused on a clearly identified federal or national interest.• NZGAO 2010: As asset information improves over time, there is a need to ensure the information is cost-effective to collect, and is as complete and up to date as possible, and remains useful.
  5. 5. New Zealand benchmark survey• Areas of innovation • Risk based inspections • Changes to the visual inspection programme• Areas of good practice • Compliance with standards/expectations • Good level of inventory data• Area for improvement • Understanding of bridge performance and strategic outcomes • Performance data collected, but not generally stored • Data management • Reliance on visual inspections • Knowledge and use of other forms of data collection
  6. 6. The underlying frameworkDataCollection Core Asset Management Advanced Asset ManagementLevel Basic functionality of asset management achieved including Core data may be insufficient forCore valuations and prioritisation of advanced asset management annual budget Core asset management may be Used for network level analysis,Intermediate insufficient for as long term forecasting condition/risk and planning cannot be undertaken investment level scenario analysis Core asset management may be Used for further analyses/ at a insufficient as long-term planning detailed level, such as diagnostics.Advanced and detailed analysis cannot be Used in the development of more undertaken accurate intervention measures/costs
  7. 7. Outcome: criticality and risk diagram 40.0 35.0 Risk Rating 30.0 25.0 Core Intermediate Advanced 20.0 AHB, 3.0, 20.6 GB, 2.0, 16.6 WRB, 3.0, 17.2 15.0 MH, 2.0, 15.6 10.0 SC, 2.0, 10.6 TSSR, 1.0, 8.8 NM, 3.0, 8.2 SBNS, 1.0, 7.4 LCNS, 1.0, 5.9 5.0 MSLN, 1.0, 4.8 Criticality Rating 0.0 0.0 0.5 Data collection tools available to bridge asset2.0 1.0 1.5 managers 2.5 3.0 Risk – and criticality-diagram
  8. 8. Bridge data detailed in guideline Governance/Policy Directives: Government Strategic Objectives Recommended data for collection
  9. 9. Collection methods detailed in guideline Data collection tools available to bridge asset managers
  10. 10. Strategy application: example a) Auckland Harbour Bridge b) Newmarket Viaduct c) Small culvert on SH1 d) Small rural timber bridge
  11. 11. Strategy application: example Culvert Timber Bridge AHB NewmarketPerformance criteria Risk Cons. Risk Cons. Risk Cons. Risk Cons.Structural safety 10.0 7.5 27.0 11.3 2 1 3 3Hydraulic/geotech. safety 10.0 5.0 22.5 3.8Serviceability 5.0 1 5.0 1 12.0 2 7.5 2Functionality 15.0 2 5.0 1 18.0 2 7.5 2Aggregate: risk (RMS) / 10.6 2 5.7 1 20.6 3 8.0 3criticality (max cons.)Data collection regime Intermediate Core Advanced AdvancedAsset management level Advanced Core Advanced Advanced a) Auckland Harbour Bridge b) Newmarket Viaduct c) Small culvert on SH1 d) Small rural timber bridge
  12. 12. Conclusion• Asset managers have new challenges going forwards• Have to adopt new technology• Have to start to understand their asset in greater detail• They have to do this if the bridges are to last 100 years and economically sustainable outcome is to be achieved
  13. 13. Questions?More Information?See NZTA website for the datacollection and monitoring strategySimon.bush@opus.co.nz