Infrastructure Asset Management of Urban Water Systems

Alegre, Helena; Coelho, S. T.

doi:10.5772/52377

Cited by 55 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the street level, two extra criteria are considered (see Table 1). These three main categories derive from the available data and the classical key figures for infrastructure asset management of urban water systems: risk, performance and costs [56]. Risk bases on the probability and the consequence of failure.…”

Section: Sewer Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Multi-criteria decision-making techniques in water infrastructure rehabilitation planning and asset management can be applied in all planning decision levels, ranging from the strategic down to the operational level [56]. They can be used for deciding on overall strategies and fund distribution over decades [37], for rehabilitation projects in near future [9,38] as well as for the decision about the immediate rehabilitation technique for an occurred failure [51].…”

Section: Application Of Mcdm Techniques In Rehabilitation Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods for Integrated Rehabilitation Prioritization

Tscheikner-Gratl

Egger

Rauch

et al. 2017

Water

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The decisions taken in rehabilitation planning for the urban water networks will have a long lasting impact on the functionality and quality of future services provided by urban infrastructure. These decisions can be assisted by different approaches ranging from linear depreciation for estimating the economic value of the network over using a deterioration model to assess the probability of failure or the technical service life to sophisticated multi-criteria decision support systems. Subsequently, the aim of this paper is to compare five available multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods (ELECTRE, AHP, WSM, TOPSIS, and PROMETHEE) for the application in an integrated rehabilitation management scheme for a real world case study and analyze them with respect to their suitability to be used in integrated asset management of water systems. The results of the different methods are not equal. This occurs because the chosen score scales, weights and the resulting distributions of the scores within the criteria do not have the same impact on all the methods. Independently of the method used, the decision maker must be familiar with its strengths but also weaknesses. Therefore, in some cases, it would be rational to use one of the simplest methods. However, to check for consistency and increase the reliability of the results, the application of several methods is encouraged.

show abstract

Section: Sewer Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Application Of Mcdm Techniques In Rehabilitation Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods for Integrated Rehabilitation Prioritization

Tscheikner-Gratl

Egger

Rauch

et al. 2017

Water

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reliable data are the foundation of successful asset management (Alegre & Coelho, 2012). Integrated models have the drawback of incorporating many variables and assumptions, all of which are uncertain to a certain extent and propagate through the used models.…”

Section: Sewer Network Modulementioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated rehabilitation planning of urban infrastructure systems using a street section priority model

Tscheikner-Gratl

Rauch

Kleidorfer

2015

Urban Water Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to the changes in water management, from the construction of new systems to the rehabilitation of existing networks, integrated strategic rehabilitation management has become more and more important. Consequently, this paper shows a method that considers sewer and water distribution networks against environmental factors (e.g. street network and connected buildings) in a priority model. This approach aids in not only identifying areas where rehabilitation is technically necessary but also economically recommendable (e.g. completely depreciated). This is achieved by implementing factors of structural resiliency, vulnerability of the network, capital value and other network components (e.g. manholes, house connections). This model is applied to a medium sized case study in which the rehabilitation areas identified by the developed model are compared to the actual rehabilitation plans of the water and sewage companies. Results also show the application of the estimated ranking for rehabilitation planning with a fixed budget. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…This methodology approaches IAM as a management process, based on continuous improvement principles (Alegre & Coelho, 2012). It requires a full alignment between the strategic objectives and targets, and the actual priorities and actions implemented, thus embedding the key requirements of the forthcoming ISO 55000/55001/55002 standards on asset management (ISO, 2012a(ISO, , 2012b(ISO, , 2012c.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It requires a full alignment between the strategic objectives and targets, and the actual priorities and actions implemented, thus embedding the key requirements of the forthcoming ISO 55000/55001/55002 standards on asset management (ISO, 2012a(ISO, , 2012b(ISO, , 2012c. The manuals were produced as part of a landmark project, AWARE-P, which aimed at providing water and wastewater utilities with the know-how and tools needed for efficient decision-making in the scope of infrastructure asset management of urban water services (aware-p.org, Alegre, Coelho, Covas, Almeida, & Cardoso, 2013;Alegre & Coelho, 2012 from the outset to reach the industry and society with useable, effective products that can make a difference in capacity building and support to the planning process. These included training courses and an open-source software family ( Figure 2) (Coelho, Vitorino, & Alegre, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving urban water infrastructure asset management from science into practice

Leitão

Coelho

Alegre

et al. 2014

Urban Water Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

iGPI, the National Initiative for Infrastructure Asset Management is a Portuguese collaborative project led by LNEC (National Civil Engineering Laboratory, Portugal) through which 19 water utilities develop their own infrastructure asset management (IAM) systems and plans in a joint training and capacitation programme. Technical assistance to the participating utilities is ensured by LNEC, IST (Technical University of Lisbon) and Addition, a software development company. The water utilities get collective as well as one-on-one support and specific training. They benefit from networking with the other utilities in a common and simultaneous process, with similar difficulties and challenges, leading to an effective sharing of solutions. The developed products, including training materials, templates and guidelines for developing strategic and tactical IAM plans, are available to the general public. This project has greatly contributed to the establishment of reference methodologies and standards for IAM planning, in a range of utilities of widely diverse size and context, effectively defining an accepted best practice. This paper discusses the project's format and its advantages, and goes on to describe the main outcomes, including selected cases and final products.Keywords: urban water services; infrastructure asset management; collaborative project; strategic planning; tactical planning CASE 1 LargeFeatures: utility is the result of the recent merger of 10 municipal water and wastewater services; very diverse contexts, challenges, and data availability and quality among the municipalities; certified BSC management system; GIS available, but reflecting the disparity in information availability, depth and quality among the municipalities. † iGPI was seen by the utility as a golden opportunity to help establish sound organizational processes. † One of the challenges for this utility was to prioritize the municipalities with higher rehabilitation needs, in a sound, transparent and accountable way, in a context of local political sensitiveness where consensus-driven negotiation is crucial. The results from iGPI helped respond to this challenge, particularly through a sound IAM metrics system. † The existing BSC implementation did not address the long-term effect of the managerial decisions. Although changes are more difficult to implement given the size and complexity of the organization, several new metrics have been included and a transition process has been devised towards a fully satisfactory BSC implementation. † iGPI also gave rise to multiple new data collection procedures, particularly related to GIS, work orders, and harmonization among information systems. CASE 2 MidsizeFeatures: technologically developed utility; well-trained human resources available; good inventory; full coverage, reliable GIS; good monitoring systems; hydraulic models available for the entire water supply system. † The availability of a large amount of information, mostly reliable, including all-mains calibrated hydraulic models for the e...

show abstract

Infrastructure Asset Management of Urban Water Systems

Cited by 55 publications

References 11 publications

Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods for Integrated Rehabilitation Prioritization

Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods for Integrated Rehabilitation Prioritization

Integrated rehabilitation planning of urban infrastructure systems using a street section priority model

Moving urban water infrastructure asset management from science into practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About