Abstract
This study investigates the probable service life and Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of three types of bridge decks used by the Wyoming Department of Transportation (WYDOT). It uses a population of 53 WYDOT bridge decks to estimate probable service life and probable LCC for construction including maintenance. These findings are used to include variability and uncertainty in estimations of present values and Equivalent Uniform Annual Costs (EUACs) for three types of bridge deck rehabilitations. All variables including service life estimate, inflation rate, construction costs, nominal discount rate, etc. used to evaluate present value and EUACs of bridge decks are treated as random variables. To accomplish this, a Monte Carlo simulation method is employed to develop the probability cost analysis models of present values and EUACs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Afshin Hatami and George Morcous (2014). “Life-cycle cost assessment for bridge management: An application to Nebraska bridge.” Proceedings of the International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, ASCE, pp. 1779–1787, DOI: 10.1061/9780784413616.221.
Bhaskaran, R., Palaniswamy, N., and Rengaswamy, N. S. (2006). “Lifecycle cost analysis of a concrete road bridge across open sea.” Materials Performance, Vol. 45, No. 10, pp. 51–55, ISSN 0094-1492.
Bid Information (2014). Wyoming DOT, Collected at http://www.dot.state.wy.us/home/business_with_wydot/contractors/contractor_bids.html.
Fagen, M. E. and Phares, B. M. (2000). “Life cycle cost analysis of a low volume road bridge alternative.” Transportation Research Record 1696, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., pp. 8–13, DOI: 10.3141/1696-37.
Hearn, G.. and Xi, Y. (2007). Service life and cost comparisons for four types of CDOT bridge decks, Colorado Department of Transportation, Report No. CDOT-2007-2, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO.
Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs (2013). Circ A-94, US Office of management and budget, The White House.
Mohammadi, J., Guralnick, S. A., and Yan, L. (1995). “Incorporating life-cycle costs in highway-bridge planning and design.” J. Transp. Eng., Vol. 121, No. 5, pp. 417–424, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1995)121:5(417)).
Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of Nation’s Bridge (1995). Report No. FHWA-ED-89-044, US Dept. of Transportation, FHWA, Washington D.C.
Robert Bartoszy ski and Magdalena Niewiadomska-Bugaj (1997). Probability and statistical inference, Wiley-Interscience, New York, N.Y. ISBN: 0471310735, pp. 401–403.
Walther, R., Reed, R., McGormley, J., and Larosche, C. (2007). Bridge evaluation for rehabilitation design considerations, NHI and FHWA, Report No. FHWA-NHI-08-013, Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc., Northbrook, IL.
Weyers, R. and Goodwin, F. E. (1999). “Life-cycle cost analysis for zinc and other protective coatings for steel structures.” Transportation Research Record 1680, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., pp. 63–73, 2001, DOI: 10.3141/1680-10.
Ying-Hua Huang, Teresa M. Adams, and Jose A. Pincheira (2004). “Analysis of life-cycle maintenance strategies for concrete bridge decks.” Journal of Bridge Engineering, Vol. 9, No. 3, ASCE, pp. 250–258, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2004)9:3(250).
Zayed, T., Chang, L-M., and Fricker, J. D. (2002). “Life-cycle cost analysis using deterministic and stochastic methods: Conflicting results.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil., Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 63–74, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2002)16:2(63)).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shim, H.S., Lee, S.H. Developing a probable cost analysis model for comparing bridge deck rehabilitation methods. KSCE J Civ Eng 20, 68–76 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-015-2634-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-015-2634-8