BIPS-01: Aging Infrastructure: Issues, Research, and Technology

[gulilero]

BIPS-01: Aging Infrastructure: Issues, Research, and Technology

Author: Homeland Security, Science and Technology | Size: 47 MB | Format: PDF | Quality: Original preprint | Publisher: Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate, Infrastructure | Year: December 2010 | pages: 492

BIPS 01 / December 2010

The papers in this chapter provide an overview of the state of our infrastructure,
including the range of problems that exist, and future
needs that must be met. Several papers discuss the relationship between
age and failure, and there appears to be general agreement that,
while aging is not in itself a failure mechanism, it is generally a contributor.
“Whether age is used to prioritize infrastructure for rehabilitation
or reconstruction will depend on how it has contributed to
past condition and performance problems. There
are various indications of infrastructure weaknesses
and outages that are indicative of age, some of
which are described below, but more research is
needed to definitively associate these weaknesses.
The ASCE (2009) report card for infrastructure
cites the poor quality of infrastructure in the U.S.,
but it is difficult to separate out age as a factor.”
(Zimmermann et al., Paper 2.2)
“Age might not necessarily be directly indicative of vulnerability,
but may suggest design practices that contribute to vulnerability.
As discussed in more detail in the section on bridges below, during
the 1950s and 1960s, a shift toward non-redundancy in bridge
design led to inflexibilities that restricted alternatives when materials
were weakened due to maintenance problems. Age has not
affected flexibility in some infrastructures. For example, the NYC
transit system which is decades old, showed considerable flexibility
in being able to recover from the subway damages and shutdowns
following the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade
Center.” (Zimmermann et al., Paper 2.2)
Issues of resiliency are introduced because the importance of a fully
functioning infrastructure for the Nation’s economic health is critical.
“Infrastructure robustness and resiliency represent interdependent
qualities of system. Robust systems are inherently more
resilient. Probabilistic approach to robustness and resiliency encompass
all threats. As such, robust and resilient design represents
a true independence from threat.
“Remarkably, there is little common ground regarding the definition
of robustness. A quick look at the dictionary reveals five variations
of the adjective with three of those five including the word ‘strong’
or ‘strength.’ So, it is natural that engineers, when asked about the
meaning of robustness, would reply with words like ‘strong,’ ‘resilient,’
and ‘redundant.’” Marjanishvili and Hinman, Paper 4.2)
“Resiliency is the foundation of preparedness. A resilient society can
withstand and/or recover from natural disasters, terrorist attacks,
and infrastructure failures. A resilient society can face the challenges
of the upcoming decades. Resiliency goes hand-in-hand with capacity.
As we improve our resiliency, we simultaneously improve reserve
capacity and can design for future demand. Resiliency is a core
component of quality of life, prosperity, competitiveness, and security.”
(Erickson, Paper 2.4; also see Paper 4.2 by Marjanishvili and
Hinman for discussion and definitions of resiliency and robustness)
“The opportunities for America to improve its resiliency depend
on, among other things, implementing new technological solutions.
The scientific and engineering communities can infuse
scientific approaches as well as new technologies into other ongoing
programs. DHS S&T can contribute through modeling
interdependencies, logistics modeling, modeling the intermodal
operations, and demonstrating dual use.” (Erickson, Paper 2.4)
The last decade has seen new issues and threats arise that the infrastructure
of the future must come to terms with and incorporate in its
technology and management to overcome and incorporate.
“Infrastructure will be increasingly faced with threats that potentially
compromise its integrity. This is supported by the increasing number
of major federally declared disasters, increasing by about 2.7% per year
between 1990 and 2005 and the fact that most of the major hurricanes
have occurred since 2000… Terrorist attacks, likewise, have targeted infrastructure,
particularly transportation… New initiatives in the way that
infrastructure is designed can address both new public concerns such
as sustainability and security and the problems of condition and performance
to which age contributes.” (Zimmermann et al.)

Code:

***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:

http://forum.civilea.com/thread-27464.html
***************************************

This post has been made by CivilEA Post-Generator ver 2.1.6