Optimizing Bridge Network Retrofit Planning Based on Cost-Benefit Evaluation and Multi-Attribute Utility Associated with Sustainability

During their service life, bridge networks may be exposed to extreme events, including strong earthquakes, which pose an imminent threat to society, economy, and surrounding environment. This threat reinforces the need to implement updated sustainability assessment and optimal risk mitigation procedures. The sustainability-based seismic optimization of bridge networks considering the utility associated with cost and benefit of retrofit interventions is investigated. The ultimate aim of this framework is to reduce the extent of earthquake damage to society, economy, and environment, while simultaneously minimizing the total retrofit costs of bridge networks. The total benefit of a retrofit plan is quantified in terms of the reduction in the seismic loss during a given time interval using multi-attribute utility theory. Retrofit actions associated with varying improvement levels are considered herein. A genetic algorithm based optimization procedure is adopted to determine the optimal retrofit action for each bridge within an existing bridge network.

[1]  R. Keeney,et al.  An illustrative example of the use of multiattribute utility theory for water resource planning , 1977 .

[2]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Lifetime-oriented multi-objective optimization of structural maintenance considering system reliability, redundancy and life-cycle cost using GA , 2009 .

[3]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Life-Cycle Cost Analysis for Bridges , 1999 .

[4]  Young Suk Kim.  Seismic loss assessment and mitigation of critical urban infrastructure systems , 2007 .

[5]  Phaedon C. Kyriakidis.  Sequential Spatial Simulation using Latin Hypercube Sampling , 2005 .

[6]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Sustainability-informed maintenance optimization of highway bridges considering multi-attribute utility and risk attitude , 2015 .

[7]  M. D. McKay,et al.  A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code , 2000 .

[8]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  A stochastic computational framework for the joint transportation network fragility analysis and traffic flow distribution under extreme events , 2011 .

[9]  Hokey Min,et al.  International Supplier Selection : : A Multi-attribute Utility Approach , 2022 .

[10]  T. Stewart.  Robustness of Additive Value Function Methods in MCDM , 1996 .

[11]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Sustainability of Highway Bridge Networks Under Seismic Hazard , 2014 .

[12]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Life cycle utility-informed maintenance planning based on lifetime functions: optimum balancing of cost, failure consequences and performance benefit , 2016 .

[13]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Repair Optimization of Highway Bridges Using System Reliability Approach , 1999 .

[14]  Antonio Jiménez-Martín,et al.  A decision support system for multiattribute utility evaluation based on imprecise assignments , 2003, Decis. Support Syst..

[15]  Wilson H. Tang,et al.  Probability concepts in engineering planning and design , 1984 .

[16]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Time‐variant sustainability assessment of seismically vulnerable bridges subjected to multiple hazards , 2013 .

[17]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Integration of the effects of airborne chlorides into reliability-based durability design of reinforced concrete structures in a marine environment , 2012, Structures and Infrastructure Systems.

[18]  Masanobu Shinozuka,et al.  Socio-economic effect of seismic retrofit of bridges for highway transportation networks: a pilot study , 2010 .

[19]  Liang Chang,et al.  Bridge Seismic Retrofit Program Planning to Maximize Postearthquake Transportation Network Capacity , 2012 .

[20]  Thomas Charles Edouard Dequidt.  Life Cycle Assessment of a Norwegian Bridge , 2012 .

[21]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Risk-Based Approach for Optimum Maintenance of Bridges under Traffic and Earthquake Loads , 2013 .

[22]  Changzheng Liu,et al.  A two-stage stochastic programming model for transportation network protection , 2009, Comput. Oper. Res..

[23]  Sang-Hoon Kim,et al.  Socio-Economic Effect of Seismic Retrofit Implemented on Bridges in the Los Angeles Highway Network , 2008 .

[24]  Ian G. Buckle,et al.  Seismic Retrofitting Manual for Highway Structures: Part 1 - Bridges , 2006 .

[25]  Stephanie E. Chang,et al.  Probabilistic Earthquake Scenarios: Extending Risk Analysis Methodologies to Spatially Distributed Systems , 2000 .

[26]  Jamie E. Padgett,et al.  Aging Considerations in the Development of Time-Dependent Seismic Fragility Curves , 2010 .

[27]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Life-cycle performance, management, and optimisation of structural systems under uncertainty: accomplishments and challenges 1 , 2011, Structures and Infrastructure Systems.

[28]  Gregory G. Deierlein,et al.  Cost-Benefit Evaluation of Seismic Risk Mitigation Alternatives for Older Concrete Frame Buildings , 2013 .

[29]  Jamie E. Padgett,et al.  Risk-based seismic life-cycle cost–benefit (LCC-B) analysis for bridge retrofit assessment , 2010 .

[30]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Pre-Earthquake Multi-Objective Probabilistic Retrofit Optimization of Bridge Networks Based on Sustainability , 2014 .

[31]  Jamie E. Padgett,et al.  Sustainable Infrastructure Subjected to Multiple Threats , 2009 .

[32]  Stuart M. Stein,et al.  Prioritizing Scour Vulnerable Bridges Using Risk , 1999 .

[33]  Dan M. Frangopol,et al.  Life-Cycle Risk Assessment of Spatially Distributed Aging Bridges under Seismic and Traffic Hazards , 2013 .

[34]  Richard J. Beckman,et al.  A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output From a Computer Code , 2000, Technometrics.

[35]  Hokey Min.  International Supplier Selection , 1994 .

[36]  J. Last.  Our common future. , 1987, Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique.

[37]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  Readings on the Principles and Applications of Decision Analysis , 1989 .