Journal of Korean Society of Water and Wastewater (상하수도학회지)

The Korean Society of Water and Wastewater (대한상하수도학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Development of sewer condition assessment and rehabilitation decision-making program(SCARD)

하수관거 평가 및 정비 우선순위 의사결정도구 개발

  • Han, Sangjong (Environmental and Plant Engineering Institute, Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology) ;
  • Hwang, Hwankook (Environmental and Plant Engineering Institute, Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology)
  • 한상종 (한국건설기술연구원 환경.플랜트연구소) ;
  • 황환국 (한국건설기술연구원 환경.플랜트연구소)
  • Received : 2014.12.05
  • Accepted : 2015.02.15
  • Published : 2015.02.15
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

A CCTV inspection method has been widely used to assess sewer condition and performance, but Korea lacks a proper decision support system for prioritizing sewer repair and rehabilitation (R&R). The objective of this paper is to introduce the results that we have developed in the Sewer Condition Assessment and Rehabilitation Decision-making (SCARD) Program using MS-EXCEL. The SCARD-Program is based on a standardized defect score for sewer structural and hydraulic assessment. Priorities are ranked based on risk scores, which are calculated by multiplying the sewer severity scores by the environmental impacts. This program is composed of three parts, which are decision-making for sewer condition and performance assessment, decision-making for sewer R&R priority assessment, and decision-making for optimal budget allocation. The SCARD-Program is useful for decision-makers, as it enables them to assess the sewer condition and to prioritize sewer R&R within the limited annual budget. In the future, this program logic will applied to the GIS-based sewer asset management system in local governments.

Keywords

References

  1. AMSA (2001) Managing public infrastructure assets to minimize cost and maximize performance, Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA), Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA), the American Water Works Association (AWWA), and Water Environment Federation (WEF), Denver, CO. USA
  2. Han, S. J., Shin, H. J. and Hwang, H. K. (2013)a Failure Risk Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Sewer Pipes on Crack-Related Defects", Journal of Korean Society of Water and Wastewater, 27(6), pp 731-741 https://doi.org/10.11001/jksww.2013.27.6.731
  3. Han, S. J., Shin, H. J. and Hwang, H. K. (2013)b Failure Risk Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Sewer Pipes on Joint-Related Defects, Journal of Korean Society of Water and Wastewater, 27(6), pp 787-796 https://doi.org/10.11001/jksww.2013.27.6.787
  4. Hulance, J., Kowalski, M., Taylor, K. and Hurley, R. (2004) WP7, Deliverable D21, User Interface for the CARE-S Wastewater Rehabilitation Manager Software(EVK1-CT- 2002-00106 Report No7.2), WRc plc, United Kingdom
  5. Hwang, H. K., Han, S.J. and Chong, Y.k. (2010), Development of Asset Management system in water and wastewater pipeline, Journal of Korean Society of Environmental Engineers, 32(12), pp. 1069-1075
  6. Jansen, K., (1998) AQUA-Selekt 4.0 beta Program manual: Procedure for the Selective Inspection of Sewers Draining Systems and House Connections of Germany, Germany
  7. NZWWA (2006) Pipe Inspection Manual Third edition, New Zealand Water & Wastewater Association, New Zealand
  8. The Ministry of Environment (2011) The study on the standardization of sewer evaluation and the establishment of selection criteria for sewer repair and rehabilitation, The Ministry of Environment
  9. The Ministry of Environment (2014) Standardization of sewer condition assessment database and development of laser profiling inspection system(The third report) (414-111-002), The Ministry of Environment
  10. The Ministry of Environment (2015) Standardization of sewer condition assessment database and development of laser profiling inspection system(The forth report) (414-111-002), The Ministry of Environment
  11. Rowe, R. and Kathula, V. (2004) Application of new sewer condition assessment methodology measures the relative conveyance performance and risk impacts of FOG and other pipe defects. Proc., Specialty Conf. Series, Collection System Specialty Conf., WEF, Alexandria, Va., 1.11. USA
  12. Vose, D (2000) Risk Analysis: A quantitative guide 2nd Edition, John wiley & Sons LTD, England
  13. WRc (1983) Sewerage Rehabilitation Manual, Water Research Center, UK
  14. WSAA (2008) Conduit Inspection Reporting Code of Australia 2nd Edition, Water Service association of Australia, Australia

Cited by

  1. An analysis of the categories regarding the probability of an operational failure of sewers vol.45, pp.2267-1242, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20184500040