Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.12652/Ksce.2017.37.3.0585

Sewer CCTV Inspection Prioritization Based on Risk Assessment  

Son, Jooyoung (Chung-Ang University)
Lee, Jaehyun (Chung-Ang University)
Oh, Jeill (Chung-Ang University)
Publication Information
KSCE Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering Research / v.37, no.3, 2017 , pp. 585-592 More about this Journal
Abstract
Most sewer lines buried in the city are likely to be collapsed due to serious aging. Also, due to the high concentration of development and high population density and traffic, the collapse of the sewer will cause enormous social and economic damage. Therefore, proactive maintenance is required to prevent accidents caused by deteriorated sewer pipe. In order to utilize limited budget effectively, risk-based prioritization methods should be proposed that simultaneously consider the consequence of failure and the probability of failure. In this study, the method of risk-based prioritization of sewer was examined by reviewing various cases of overseas studies and applied to the urban sub-catchment. First, the impact factors that can be secured through the sewer GIS DB in Seoul were derived, and the weight, sub-criteria, and impact score of each impact factor were determined and the consequence of failure was calculated by weight sum method. In addition, the probability of failure was calculated by dividing the service life by the estimated useful life, and the consequence of failure and the probability of failure were classified into five grades by the Jenks natural breaks classification method. The prioritization method was applied to sub-catchment in the Seoul to derive a risk matrix and a risk grade. As a result, 26% of all subjects were selected as the inspection priority subjects with 4-5 risk grade. Therefore, using the risk-based CCTV prioritization methodology, it will be possible to systematically determine the objects that need investigation first.
Keywords
CCTV inspection; Critical sewer; Prioritization; Risk-based inspection; Sewer condition assessment;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Kley, G. and Caradot, N. (2013). D1. 2. Review of sewer deterioration models; project acronym : SEMA, Kompetenzzentrum Wasser Berlin.
2 Korea Institute of Public Finance (KIPF) (2012). Depreciation and useful life analysis of major countries, pp. 40-45 (in Korean).
3 Lukas, A. and Merrill, M. S. (2006). Scraps: "An expert system for prioritizting sewer inspections." North American Society for Trenchless Technology (NASTT).
4 Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) (2009). Capital Improvement Program (CIP), http://www.mwra.state.ma.us/finance/cip.htm
5 McDonald, S. E. and Zhao, J. Q. (2001). "Condition assessment and rehabilitation of large sewers." In Proceedings of the International Conference on Underground Infrastructure Research, pp. 361-369. University of Waterloo.
6 Ministry of Environment (MOE) (2005). Public sewer maintenance practical guide (in Korean).
7 Ministry of Environment (MOE) (2011). Sewerage facility standard (in Korean).
8 Ministry of Environment (MOE) (2013). Guidance of sewer system maintenance in major management (in Korean).
9 Ministry of Environment (MOE) (2015a). Conducting precise surveys on aged sewage pipes to cope with subsidence; Press Releases (in Korean).
10 Ministry of Environment (MOE) (2015b). Guidelines for public sewerage facility management (in Korean).
11 Ministry of Environment (MOE) (2015c). National sewerage master plan (2016-2025).
12 National Association of Sewer Service Companies (NASSCO) (2013). Infrastructure condition assessment and certification programs (PACP/MACP/LACP), National Association of Sewer Service Companies, USA, 2012 and 2013 Trainer of the Year.
13 National Research Facility & Equipment Center (NFEC) (2014). Accounting Life and Management Life of Research Equipment (in Korean)
14 Salman, B. and Salem, O. (2012). "Risk assessment of wastewater collection lines using failure models and criticality ratings." Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 68-76.   DOI
15 Toy, L. P. (2014). Risk-based asset inspection prioritisation programme.
16 Seoul Metropolitan Government. (2015). Korea geologic information consortium : sewer management computer system maintenance . improvement of function and DB accuracy improvement business (in Korea).
17 Syachrani, S., Jeong, H. D. and Chung, C. S. (2013). "Advanced criticality assessment method for sewer pipeline assets." Water Science and Technology, Vol. 67, No. 6, pp. 1302-1309.   DOI
18 Syachrani, S., Jeong, H. S. and Chung, C. S. (2011). "Dynamic deterioration models for sewer pipe network." Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 123-131.   DOI
19 Baah, K., Dubey, B., Harvey, R. and McBean, E. (2015). "A riskbased approach to sanitary sewer pipe asset management." Science of The Total Environment, Vol. 505, pp. 1011-1017.   DOI
20 Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) (2009). Statement of federal financial assounting concepts and standards.
21 Hahn, M. A., Palmer, R. N., Merrill, M. S. and Lukas, A. B. (2002). "Expert system for prioritizing the inspection of sewers : Knowledge base formulation and evaluation." Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, Vol. 128, No. 2, pp. 121-129.   DOI
22 Halfawy, M. R., Dridi, L. and Baker, S. (2008). "Integrated decision support system for optimal renewal planning of sewer networks." Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp. 360-372.   DOI
23 Harvey, R. R. and McBean, E. A. (2014). "Predicting the structural condition of individual sanitary sewer pipes with random forests." Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 294-303.   DOI
24 Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (2015). Publication 946, pp.105-113.
25 United States Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) (2002). SSO fact sheet-asset management for sewer collection systems.
26 Invercargill City Council (ICC) (2011). Sewerage Asset Management Plan.
27 Jenks, G. F. (1977). Optimal data classification for choropleth maps, Occasional paper No. 2. Lawrence, Kansas: Univ. of Kansas, Dept. of Geography.
28 Kleiner, Y., Sadiq, R. and Rajani, B. (2004). "Modeling failure risk in buried pipes using fuzzy Markov deterioration process." In ASCE International Conference on Pipeline Engineering and Construction, pp.1-12.
29 United States Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) (2005). Advanced asset management training.
30 United States Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) (2009). Condition assessment of wastewater collection systems, EPA/600/R-09/049.
31 United States Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) (2015). Condition assessment of underground pipes with excerpts from : condition assessment of wastewater collection systems, EPA/600/R-09/049.
32 Ward, B. and Savic, D. A. (2012). "A multi-objective optimisation model for sewer rehabilitation considering critical risk of failure." Water Science and Technology, Vol. 66, No. 11, pp. 2410-2417.   DOI
33 Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) (2007). Condition assessment strategies and protocols for water and wastewater utility assets.
34 Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) (2009). Remaining asset life : A state of the art review.
35 Water Research centre (WRc) (2001). Sewerage rehabilitation manual (4th ed.).