Abstract
This paper describes a low regret-based adaptive decision-making methodology for evaluating alternative design and corrosion management strategies for steel roadway bridges despite limited site-specific knowledge of the actual corrosiveness of the environment. To illustrate the method, an example is provided, in which design options include whether using metallizing or not as a corrosion protection measure and its time of application. While in a mild environment, unpainted weathering steel might show little degradation, in case of realization of a severe environment, for example, due to extensive use of de-icing salt during winter, using this material without protection can be problematic as doing so might result in higher management costs or even catastrophic failures. On the contrary, the realization of a mild or moderate environment after utilization of the expensive galvanized/metallized steel or early adaptation of preventive measures can also be viewed as suboptimal. Another strategy is resorting to adaptive solutions, beginning with a less expensive option until the actual environment is more evident. Willing to minimize the “maximum sense of loss”, in the methodology applied here, regret is combined with the real option methodology and implemented in the decision-making framework. In this way, the methodology quantifies the desire of decision-makers to minimize the sense of loss associated with having made the wrong decision.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Commentary on CAN/CSA-S6-00 (2000) Canadian highway bridge design code. Canadian Standards Association
Damgaard NR (2009) Prediction and prolongation of the service life of weathering steel highway structures. University of Waterloo
Damgaard N, Walbridge S (2009) Service life prediction for weathering steel highway structures. In: Proceedings of the 2009 structures congress—don’t mess with structural engineers: expanding our role, pp 2189–2198. https://doi.org/10.1061/41031(341)240
Dittrich R, Wreford A, Moran D (2016) A survey of decision-making approaches for climate change adaptation: are robust methods the way forward? Ecol Econ 122:79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.12.006
Vallejo L, Mullan M (2017) Climate-resilient infrastructure—getting policy right, no 121
Marchau V, Walker W, Bloemen P, Popper S (2019) Decision making under deep uncertainty. From theory to practice
Savage LJ (1951) The theory of statistical decision. J Am Stat Assoc 46(253):55–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1951.10500768
Mondoro A, Frangopol DM, Liu L (2018) Bridge adaptation and management under climate change uncertainties: a review. Nat Hazards Rev 19(1):04017023. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)nh.1527-6996.0000270
Espinet X, Schweikert A, Chinowsky P (2017) Robust prioritization framework for transport infrastructure adaptation investments under uncertainty of climate change. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertainty Eng Syst Part A Civ Eng 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1061/ajrua6.0000852
Myers SC (1984) Finance theory and financial strategy. Interfaces (Providence) 14(1):126–137. https://doi.org/10.1287/INTE.14.1.126
Dixit RK, Pindyck RS (1994) Investment under uncertainty. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400830176
Voeks R (1997) Real options: managerial flexibility and strategy in resource allocation. J Bank Finance 21(2):285–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-4266(97)85585-9
Amram M, Kulatilaka N (1999) Real options: managing strategic investment in an uncertain world. Choice Rev Online 36(10):36-5767. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.36-5767
Copeland TE, Antikarov V (2001) Real options: a practitioner’s guide. Texere. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.ca/books?id=fnhPAAAAMAAJ
Neufville R (2003) Real options: dealing with uncertainty in systems planning and design. Integr Assess 4(1):26–34. https://doi.org/10.1076/IAIJ.4.1.26.16461
Gersonius B, Ashley R, Pathirana A, Zevenbergen C (2013) Climate change uncertainty: building flexibility into water and flood risk infrastructure. Clim Change 116(2):411–423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0494-5
CAN/CSA-S6-06 (2006) Canadian highway bridge design code. Canadian Standards Association
Albrecht P, Naeemi A (1984) National cooperative highway research program report 272: performance of weathering steel in bridges. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC
Kayser J (1988) The effects of corrosion on the reliability of steel girder bridges
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 Canadian Society for Civil Engineering
About this paper
Cite this paper
Barkhori, M., Walbridge, S., Pandey, M. (2023). Low Regret-Based Design and Corrosion Management for Steel Roadway Bridges. In: Gupta, R., et al. Proceedings of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineering Annual Conference 2022. CSCE 2022. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 363. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34593-7_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34593-7_27
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-34592-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-34593-7
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)