Associated Engineering Asset Management group delivers non-proprietary database and GIS-based, decision-making system

What is asset management?

Asset management involves managing assets to maintain a fixed service level while balancing available resources. Other stressors such as legislative requirements, public-perceived service level versus delivered service level, financing, and liability issues all factor into a strategic asset management plan. To produce a balanced and feasible asset management plan, consideration has to be given to all of these factors to ensure asset sustainability, and to meet or exceed service levels and/or public expectations.

Customer service levels and public expectations can be forgotten in process or structurally derived asset management plans. The reality of asset management in a public agency is that the customer base often drives the capital budget planning processes of tangible assets, such as road networks, while neglecting intangible assets, such as underground infrastructure. Similarly, a purely conditionbased rating and prioritization system is defensible from an engineering perspective, but does little in terms of helping to ensure that funds are directed to the assets with the largest customer impact.

Managing any asset network as a singular entity (for example, bridges) or entities invariably leads to the silo-type of capital plan development with no regard for adjoining networks or their respective condition ratings. This leads to ineffective staging of improvements and the often heard remark from the customer base, “They just rebuilt that road and now they are tearing it up.”

Databases and GIS for Asset Management

Relational databases and visualization tools, more specifically Geographic Information Systems (GIS), have facilitated and enhanced the process of balancing needs between networks while assessing the criticality of any individual asset in the context of a network or networks. Actually, these “balanced decisions” could not easily be made before the introduction of these software tools given the volume of information involved, the complexity of juxtaposing condition information between disparate networks, and the assembly of all information sources into one cohesive set.

AE approach

Associated Engineering’s Asset Management/GIS group employs a holistic or global method to assess individual assets and networks in a given system using advanced spatial, location-based, and relational database techniques to identify comparative ratings inside and outside each system being examined. Individual ratings are derived using balanced condition arrays. Figure 1 shows a representative condition array for a bridge structure.

This example indicates the various metrics that we consider when developing a bridge capital replacement or rehabilitation program. Each of the weighted metrics constitutes a significant stressor in terms of the decision-making and, more importantly, the improvement staging process.

The metrics shown are data-driven by existing client information sources and are weighted in discussions with the client. Individual weightings can vary substantially depending on geography, class of bridge structure, and other factors. The example shown above is for a typical urban municipal bridge structure. Table 1 shows an example of the various numeric weightings for a sample bridge.

As with all decision-making matrices, the individual metrics and weightings are subject to discussion. The advantages of this approach are as follows:

• Decisions are data-driven. As data is refined and/or augmented over time, decision-making is further refined.
• Performance of the system can be monitored over time.
• Scenario management can be performed by varying metrics or individual weightings.
• Capital investment planning is based on objective measurable metrics.

The resulting rating is then applied to the bridge network being examined, yielding a comparative rating across all structures.

Case Studies

Associated Engineering is currently developing a similar but abbreviated decision-based matrix as part of the strategic plan for the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities and Saskatchewan Highways and Transportation. The strategic plan will identify the maintenance and operational needs, frequency of reinspection, and rehabilitation needs for managing over 3500 bridges and culverts for Saskatchewan Highways and Transportation and the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities.

In this project, two databases supplied by the client are being mined for information to support an objective decision-making system. Due to the volume of information involved, this project highlights the need for using advanced spatial analysis.

The 3500 rural structures owned and operated by the rural municipalities are distributed geographically throughout the province. Using information supplied by the Saskatchewan Highways and Transportation geomatics division, the following site and clientspecific stressors are being applied to each structure to form a strategic management plan: Grain-haul corridor support, AADT, Road class, Design standard, Load rating, and Type and sensitivity of crossing.

This analysis is being performed to promote unified service levels and performance objectives across the entire network of structures. In addition, a formal process is being formulated to identify funding needs for operations, maintenance, and repair of structures to maintain assets at a prescribed standard, including estimates of the backlog of investment requirements.

On a smaller scale, this approach, in conjunction with the Associated Engineering Bridge Database application, is also being applied to the City of Medicine Hat’s Bridge Program, where we are examining conventional bridge structures in an urban municipal context. In the next few issues of AE Today, we will publish additional results from these projects and more information on our asset management applied GIS team.

Non-proprietary database and GIS-based, decision-making system

The most significant aspect of each project is the deliverable: a purpose-built, non-proprietary database and GIS-based, decisionmaking system, which each client will integrate into their respective asset management systems. A secure, web-based, GIS is being employed in the Saskatchewan bridge management project for managing client information between both the client and Associated Engineering offices in St. Catharines, Regina, and Saskatoon.

This delivery method ensures that the results of each project live well beyond the delivery of the project. In addition, the transition from the strategic plan which we deliver, to the capital plan which each client develops, will be expedited considerably, as many of the factors impacting the plan will have been considered in a defensible and transparent manner.

Associated Engineering staff involved in these projects include John Fussell, Jason Horner, Russell Martin, David Watt, Tanya Stephens, and James Burn