Ikpong, Anthony Akpan (2016) Managing Highway Bridges against Climate-Triggered Extreme Events in Cold Regions. PhD thesis, Concordia University.
Preview |
Text (application/pdf)
10MBIkpong_PhD_F2016.pdf - Accepted Version Available under License Spectrum Terms of Access. |
Abstract
Highway bridges represent a significant investment by Governments at both Provincial and Federal levels and their importance is underscored by the fact that every citizen derives a benefit, directly or indirectly, from public transportation infrastructure. As with any engineering product, highway bridges must be well designed and robust to avoid any malfunction that could jeopardise the lives of people. Further, highway bridges deteriorate over time and need preservation intervention applied at suitable intervals over the bridge’s service life. Determining the timing and order of implementation of preservation work among deficient bridges in a highway bridge inventory is an important function of bridge management.
The doctoral research reported in this thesis aimed to devise a method for the resilience/vulnerability rating of highway bridges against climate-triggered extreme events/ loads. The research also sought to devise a ranking technique for bridge projects’ programming by pursuing a one-directional, non-iterative, method that could maximize the value function and significantly cut down the computer run time for the ranking analysis.
The research outcomes include a weighted-criteria method for the multi-criteria ranking, a practical tool for the resilience/vulnerability rating of highway bridges against extreme events such as deck flooding and abutment washout, and a method for determining the magnitude of climate-triggered extreme load (e.g. ice accretion, pier scour) that could potentially cause bridge failure.
The projects’ ranking method developed in this research, including the development of a weighted criteria formulation, could potentially be adopted by bridge management systems in North America and elsewhere. Further, it is expected that the method will influence future development of multi-criteria ranking in bridge management and other fields. Similarly, the proposed new method for climate change resilience rating of highway bridges is a significant effort at translating the general scientific and engineering impacts’ discussion of climate change into an engineering tool for the continuous management of bridges. Finally, it will be important for transportation agencies to determine beforehand what magnitude of climate-triggered extreme load would produce bridge distress and potential failure, and this thesis provides a solution to that problem.
| Divisions: | Concordia University > Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science > Building, Civil and Environmental Engineering |
|---|---|
| Item Type: | Thesis (PhD) |
| Authors: | Ikpong, Anthony Akpan |
| Institution: | Concordia University |
| Degree Name: | Ph. D. |
| Program: | Civil Engineering |
| Date: | 14 September 2016 |
| Thesis Supervisor(s): | Bagchi, Ashutosh |
| Keywords: | highway bridges, cold regions, climate change resilience rating, climate-triggered extreme events, climate-triggered extreme loads, bridge resilience rating, bridge vulnerability rating, multi-criteria optimization of bridge projects` selection, multi-criteria ranking of competing bridge projects, deck flooding, abutment washout, pier scour, abutment permafrost instability, ice accretion, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) |
| ID Code: | 981849 |
| Deposited By: | ANTHONY AKPAN IKPONG |
| Deposited On: | 09 Nov 2016 14:16 |
| Last Modified: | 18 Jan 2018 17:53 |
References:
1. Abu Dabous, S. and Alkass, S. (2011). Managing Bridge Infrastructure under Budget Constraints: A Decision Support Methodology, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 38 (11): pp. 1227-1237.2. ACIA. 2004. Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, Cambridge University Press.
3. Adey, B. T., Lethanh, N. and Lepert, P. 2012. An Impact Hierarchy for the Evaluation of Intervention Strategies for Public Roads, 4th European Pavement and Asset Management Conference, Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe, Lyon, France.
4. American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2014. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 7th Edition, AASHTO, Washington DC.
5. Alfares, H. K. and Duffuaa, S. O. 2009. “Assigning Cardinal Weights in Multi-Criteria Decision Making Based on Ordinal Ranking,” J. Multi-Criteria Decis. Anal., 15 (5/6): pp. 125–133, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mcda.420.
6. Ayyub, B. M. 2014. Probabilistic Methodology for Quantifying Regional Risk Profiles from Sea Level Rise, 2014 ASCE International Conference on Sustainable Development of Critical Infrastructure, ASCE, Reston, USA.
7. Ayyub, B. M., and Kearney, M. S. (editors). 2012. Sea Level Rise and Coastal Infrastructure: Prediction, Risks, and Solutions.” ASCE Council on Disaster Risk Management, Monograph No. 6, ASCE, Reston, VA.
8. Bloetscher, F., Berry, L., Rodriguez-Seda, J., Hammer, N. H., Roma, T., Jolovic, D., Heimlich, B., and Cahill, M. A. 2014. Identifying FDOT’s Physical Transportation Infrastructure Vulnerable to Sea Level Rise, J. Infrastruct. Syst., 20 (2): pp. 115-123.
9. Canadian Standards Association. 2014. Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code S6-14, CSA Group, Mississauga, Canada.
10. Canadian Standards Association. 2010. Infrastructure in Permafrost: A Guideline for Climate Change Adaptation, CSA Group, Mississauga, Canada.
11. Committee on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Research. 2008. Wise Adaptation to Climate Change, Committee on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Research, Japan.
12. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO). 2007. Infrastructure and Climate Change Risk Assessment for Victoria, Government of Victoria, Australia.
13. Computers & Structures Inc. 2014. CSiBridge, Computers & Structures Inc., Walnut Creek, California.
14. Department of Highways & Public Works of Yukon. 2010. Yukon Bridge and Culvert Management System – 2010 Condition Report, Yukon Government.
15. Dinh. K. 2014. Condition Assessment of Concrete Bridge Decks using Ground Penetrating Radar, Concordia University PhD Dissertation, Concordia University Montreal.
16. El Chanati, H., El-Abbasy, M. S., Mosleh, F., Senouci, A., Abouhamad, M., Gkountis, I., Zayed, T., and Al-Derham, H. 2015. Multi-Criteria Decision Making Models for Water Pipelines, ASCE J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 04015090-1/12 (Online 18 Nov. 2015).
17. Ellis, R. M., Thompson, P. D., Gagnon, R. and Richard, G. 2008. Design and Implementation of a New Bridge Management System for the Québec Ministry of Transport, 10th Int. Bridge and Structure Management Conference, Transportation Research Circular E-C128, http://www.nap.edu/catalog/15296/transportation-research-circular-e-c128-10th-international-conference-on-bridge, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
18. Erath, A., Birdsall, J., Axhausen, K., and Hajdin, R. 2009. Vulnerability Assessment Methodology for Swiss Road Network, Transportation Research Record 2137 (13): pp. 118–126, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC.
19. Espinet, X., Schweikert, A., and Chinowsky, P. 2015. Robust Prioritization Framework for Transport Infrastructure Adaptation Investments under Uncertainty of Climate Change, ASCE-ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Eng. Syst., Part A: Civ. Eng. E4015001-1/9. (Online 19 November 2015)
20. Essahli, Z. and Madanat, S. 2012. Optimal Allocation of Resources to Maintain, Rehabilitate, and Reconstruct Heterogeneous Bridge Networks, Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2292 (19): pp. 134-140.
21. European Commission. 2013a. European Union (EU) Strategy on Climate Change, European Commission, Brussels.
22. European Commission. 2013b. European Climate Adaptation Platform, European Commission, Brussels
23. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2015. International Practices on Climate Adaptation in Transportation, United States Department of Transportation, Washington DC.
24. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2012a. Climate Change and Extreme Weather Vulnerability Assessment Framework, U. S. Department of Transportation, Washington DC.
25. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2012b. Evaluating Scour at Bridges 5th Edition, US Department of Transportation, Washington DC.
26. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2008a. Integrating Climate Change into the Transportation Planning Process, US Department of Transportation, Washington DC.
27. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2008b. Highways in the Coastal Environment 2nd Edition, US Department of Transportation, Washington DC.
28. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2011a. Assessing Vulnerability and Risk of Climate Change Effects on Transportation Infrastructure: Pilot of the Conceptual Model, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/HEP/climate/conceptual_model62410.htm, US Department of Transportation, Washington DC.
29. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2011b. Report FHWA-HEP-12-010 The Use of Climate Information in Vulnerability Assessments, United States Department of Transportation, Washington DC.
30. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2009. Report FHWA-HEP-13-001 Climate Change Adaptation Peer Exchanges: Comprehensive Report, United States Department of Transportation, Washington DC.
31. Field, C. B., Barros, V. R., Dokken, D. J., Mach, K. J., Mastrandrea, M. D., Bilir, T. E., Chatterjee, M., Ebi, K. L., Estrada, Y. O., Genova, R. C., Girma, B., Kissel, E. S., Levy, A. N., MacCracken, S., Mastrandrea, P. R., and White, L. L. (eds.). 2014. IPCC, 2014: Summary for policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1-32.
32. Ghodoosipoor, F. 2013. Development of Deterioration Models for Bridge Decks Using System Reliability Analysis, PhD Dissertation, Concordia University Montreal.
33. Government of Canada. 1985. Navigable Waters Protection Act, RSC, (c. N-22).
34. Government of Japan. 2009. Climate Change and its Impacts in Japan, Government of Japan.
35. Hajdin, R. (2008). KUBA 4.0 – the Swiss Road Structure Management System, 10th Int. Bridge and Structure Management Conference, Transportation Research Circular E-C128, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, http://www.nap.edu/catalog/15296/transportation-research-circular-e-c128-10th-international-conference-on-bridge.
36. Hamilton, M., Lambert, J., and Valverde, L., Jr. (2015). "Climate and Related Uncertainties Influencing Research and Development Priorities." ASCE-ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Eng. Syst., Part A: Civ. Eng., 10.1061/AJRUA6.0000814, 04015005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/AJRUA6.0000814
37. Hamilton, M. C., Thekdi, S. A., Jenicek, E. M., Harmon, R. S., Goodsite, M. E., Case, M. P., Karvetski, C. W., and Lambert, J. H. 2013. Case Studies of Scenario Analysis for Adaptive Management of Natural Resource and Infrastructure Systems, Environ. Syst. Decis., 33: 89-103.
38. Hirsch, A. H. and Kunstman, B. E. 2014. Climate Change Vulnerabilities and Risk Based Management Approaches used on Transportation Assets, International Conference on Sustainable Infrastructure, pp. 175-185, ACSE, Reston, USA.
39. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 2009. Risk Management Vocabulary Guide 73, ISO.
40. Joshi, N. and Lambert, J. H. 2007. Equity Metrics for the Prioritization and Selection of Transportation Projects, Trans. Eng. Manage., 54 (3): pp. 539–547.
41. Karl, T. R., Melillo, J. M., and Peterson, T. C. (eds.). 2009. Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States, Cambridge University Press.
42. Karvetski, C.W., Lambert, J.H., Keisler, J.M., Sexauer, B. and Linkov, I. 2011a. Climate Change Scenarios: Risk and Impact Analysis for Alaska Coastal Infrastructure, Int. J. Risk Assessment and Management, 15 (2/3): pp. 258–274.
43. Karvetski, C. W., Lambert, J. H., Keisler, J. M., and Linkov, I. 2011b. Integration of Decision Analysis and Scenario Planning for Coastal Engineering and Climate Change, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A, 41 (1): pp. 63–73.
44. Kasprzyk, J. R., Reed, P. M., Kirsch, B. R., and Characklis, G. W. 2009. Managing Population and Drought Risks using Many-Objective Water Portfolio Planning under Uncertainty, Water Resour. Res., 45 (12): 1–18.
45. Kasprzyk, J., Nataraj, S., Reed, P. M., and Lempert, R. J. 2013. Many-Objective Robust Decision Making for Complex Environmental Systems Undergoing Change, Environ. Model. Software 42: 55–71, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.12.007.
46. Keisler, J. M. 2009. The Value of Assessing Weights in Multi-Criteria Portfolio Decision Analysis, J. Multi-Criteria Decis. Anal., 15 (5/6): pp. 111–123.
47. Khelifa, A., Garrow, L. A., Higgins, M. J., and Meyer, M. D. 2013. Impacts of Climate Change on Scour-Vulnerable Bridges: Assessment Based on HYRISK, J. Infrastruct. Syst. 19 (2): 138-146.
48. Kim, S., Frangopol, D. M., and Soliman, D. 2013. Generalized Probabilistic Framework for Optimum Inspection and Maintenance Planning, Journal of Structural Engineering, 139 (3): pp. 435-447.
49. Lambert, J. H., Tsang, J. L., and Thekdi, S. A. 2013a. Risk-Informed Investment for Tropical Cyclone Preparedness of Highway Signs, Signals, and Lights, J. Infrastruct. Syst., 19 (4): pp. 384-394.
50. Lambert, J. H., Wre, D., Wu, Y., You, H., Clarens, A., and Smith, B. 2013b. Climate Change Influence on Priority Setting for Transportation Infrastructure Assets, J. Infrastruct. Syst., 19 (1): pp. 36-46.
51. Linkov, I., Bridges, T., Creutzig, F., Decker, J., Fox-Lent, C., Kröger, W., Lambert, J.H., Levermann, A., Montreuil, B., Nathwani, J., Nyer, R., Renn, O., Scharte, B., Scheffler, A., Schreurs, M., and Thiel-Clemen, T. 2014. Changing the Resilience Paradigm, Nature Climate Change, 4: pp. 407-409, www.nature.com/natureclimatechange, Macmillan Publishers Limited.
52. Liu C., Hammad, A., and Itoh, Y. 1997. Maintenance Strategy Optimization of Bridge Decks using Genetic Algorithm. ASCE Journal of Transportation Engineering, 123 (2): pp. 91-100.
53. Mach, D. and Hartman, B. 2008. Progress Report on Oregon’s Efforts to Integrate its State Transportation Improvement Program Project-Selection Process with Pontis, 10th Int. Bridge and Structure Management Conference, Transportation Research Circular E-C128, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, http://www.nap.edu/catalog/15296/transportation-research-circular-e-c128-10th-international-conference-on-bridge.
54. Markow, M. J. 2008. Use of Bridge Management for Agency Decisions in Planning, Programming, and Performance Tracking, 10th Int. Bridge and Structure Management Conference, Transportation Research Circular E-C128, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, http://www.nap.edu/catalog/15296/transportation-research-circular-e-c128-10th-international-conference-on-bridge.
55. McLaughlin, B. J., Murrell, S. D. and DesRoches, S. 2011. Case Study: Assessment of the Vulnerability of Port Authority of NY & NJ Facilities to the Impacts of Climate Change, First Congress of Transportation and Development Institute (TDI), pp. 966-976, ACSE, Reston, USA.
56. Metz, B., Davidson, O. R., Bosch, P. R., Dave, R., Meyer, L. A. (editors.). 2007. IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USA, pp. 1-863.
57. Ministry of Environment Japan. 2015. Climate Change Adaptation: Approaches for National and Local Governments, Government of Japan.
58. Montibeller, G., Gummer, H., and Tumidei, D. 2006. Combining Scenario Planning and Multi-criteria Decision Analysis in Practice. J. Multi-Crit. Decis. Anal. 14 (1-3): 5–20.
59. Moreno, A. and Becken, S. 2009. “A Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Methodology for Coastal Tourism,” J. Sustainable Tourism, 17 (4): pp. 473–488, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669580802651681
60. Næss, L. O., Norland, I. T., Lafferty, W. M., and Aall, C. 2006. Data and Processes Linking Vulnerability Assessment to Adaptation Decision-Making on Climate Change in Norway. Global Environ. Change 16 (2): 221–233.
61. North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority. 2011. Climate Change Vulnerability and Risk Assessment of New Jersey’s Transportation Infrastructure, Newark, NJ, Rep., http://www.njtpa.org/Plan/Element/Climate/documents/CCVR−REPORT−FINAL−4−2−12−ENTIRE.pdf
62. Oswald, M. R. and McNeil, S. 2013a. Climate Change Adaptation Tool for Transportation: Mid-Atlantic Region Case Study, J. Transp. Eng. 139 (4): 407-415.
63. Oswald, M. R. and McNeil, S. 2013b. Evaluating the Progress of Climate Change Adaptation Practices across Transportation Planning Agencies: a Case Study on the Mid-Atlantic, Second Conference on Green Streets, Highways, and Development, pp. 322-336, ASCE, Reston, USA.
64. Patidar, V., Labi, S., Sinha, K.C., and Thompson, P. 2007. Multi-Objective Optimization for Bridge Management Systems, NCHRP Report 590, pp. 1-139, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_590.pdf, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC, .
65. Leviäkangas, P. (ed.), Tuominen, A. (ed.), Molarius, R. (ed.), Kojo, H. (ed.), Schabel, J., Toivonen, S., Keränen, J., Ludvigsen, J., Vajda, A., Tuomenvirta, H., Juga, I., Nurmi, P., Rauhala, J., Rehm, F., Gerz, T., Muehlhausen, T., Schweighofer, J., Michaelides, S., Papadakis, M., Dotzek, N., Groenemeijer, P. 2011. Extreme Weather Impacts on Transport Systems, pp. 1-136, http://www.vtt.fi/publications/index.jsp, VTT Working Papers 168, pp. 1-136, EWENT Project Deliverable D1, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland.
66. Pinto, C.A. and Lambert, J. H. 2002. Risk of extreme events in the configuration of priority systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 76 (3): pp. 265–71.
67. Public Infrastructure Engineering Vulnerability Committee – PIEVC. 2008. Report of the First National Engineering Assessment of the Vulnerability of Public Infrastructure to Climate Change, pp. 1-76, Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, Ottawa, Canada.
68. Ram, C., Montibeller, G., and Morton, A. 2011. Extending the Use of Scenario Planning and MCDA for the Evaluation of Strategic Options, J. Oper. Res. Soc., 62 (5): 817–829.
69. Ram, C., and Montibeller, G. 2013. Exploring the Impact of Evaluating Strategic Options in a Scenario-based Multi-Criteria Framework, Technol. Forecasting Social Change, 80 (4): 657–672.
70. Saaty, T. L., Vargas, L. G. 2001. Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Kluwer’s Academic Publishers, Boston.
71. Samford, M. P. 2013. Framework for Integration of Emergency Support Function, Infrastructure Protection, and Supply Chain Management Efforts, Homeland Security Today Magazine.
72. Schroeder, M. J. and Lambert, J. H. 2011. Scenario‐based Multiple Criteria Analysis for Infrastructure Policy Impacts and Planning, Journal of Risk Research, 14 (2), pp. 191-214.
73. Shepard R.W. and Johnson, M.B. 2001. California Bridge Health Index – A Diagnostic Tool to Maximize Bridge Longevity, Investment, TR News, 215 (July/August).
74. Seto, J. T. C., Arenson, L. U., and Cousineau, G. 2012. Vulnerability to Climate Change Assessment for a Highway Constructed on Permafrost, Cold Regions Engineering 2012: Sustainable Infrastructure Development in a Changing Cold Environment, ASCE, Reston, USA, pp. 515-524.
75. Sinha, K. C., Patidar, V., Li, Z., Labi, S., and Thompson, P. D. 2009. Establishing the Weights of Performance Criteria: Case Studies in Transportation Facility Management, ASCE Journal of Transportation Engineering, 135 (9): pp. 619-631.
76. Stewart, T. J., French, S., and Rios, J. 2013. Integrating Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis and Scenario Planning: Review and Extension, Omega Int. J. Manage. Sci., 41 (4): 679–688.
77. Thompson, P., Sinha, K., Labi, S. and Patidar, V. 2008. Multi-Objective Optimization for Bridge Management Systems, 10th Int. Bridge and Structure Management Conference, Transportation Research Circular E-C128, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, http://www.nap.edu/catalog/15296/transportation-research-circular-e-c128-10th-international-conference-on-bridge.
78. Thompson, P. D., Ellis, R. M., Hong, K. and Merlo, T. 2003. Implementation of Ontario Bridge Management System [OBMS], Transportation Research Circular E-C049: 9th International Bridge Management Conference, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/153044.aspx.
79. Thompson, P., Hearn, G., and Hyman, B. 2008. National Database System for Maintenance Actions on Highway Bridges, Transportation Research Circular E-C128, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, http://www.nap.edu/catalog/15296/transportation-research-circular-e-c128-10th-international-conference-on-bridge.
80. Transportation Research Board (TRB). 2003. NCHRP Report 489: Design of Highway Bridges for Extreme Events, pp: 1-183, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_489.pdf.
81. Union of Concerned Scientists. 2009. Climate Change in the United States: The Prohibitive Costs of Inaction, pp. 1-14, Union of Concerned Scientists, http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/legacy/assets/documents/global_warming/climate-costs-of-inaction.pdf.
82. United Nations. 2007. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 4th Assessment Report – Summary, United Nations, https://ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_synthesis_report.htm.
83. Vashist, J. K. and Dey, A. K. 2016. Selection Criteria for a Mode of Surface Transport: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach, Amity Global Business Review, 11 (1): pp. 86-95.
84. Wall, T. A., Walker, W. E., Marchau, V. A. W. J., and Bertolini, L. 2015. Dynamic Adaptive Approach to Transportation Infrastructure Planning for Climate Change: San-Francisco-Bay-Area Case Study, J. Infrastruct. Syst. 21 (4): pp. 1-15, Permalink: http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000257.
85. Wilks, J. H. 2010. Forecasting Transportation Infrastructure Slope Failures in a Changing Climate, 11th Young Geotechnical Engineers Symposium, University of Bristol, Australia, pp: 1-2.
86. Wormuth, M., Demou, E., Scheringer, M., Hungerbühler, K. 2007. Assessments of Direct Human Exposure – The Approach of EU Risk Assessments Compared to Scenario-based Risk Assessment, Risk Analysis 27 (4): pp. 979–990.
87. Wu, Y. J., Hayat, T., Clarens, A., and Smith, B. L. 2013. Scenario-based Climate Change Risk Analysis for Transportation Infrastructure using GIS, Transportation Research Board 92nd Annual Meeting, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
88. Yaghi, S. 2014. Integrated Remote Sensing Technologies for Condition Assessment of Concrete Bridges, PhD Dissertation, Concordia University Montreal
89. You, H., Connelly, E. B., Lambert, J. H., and Clarens, A. F. 2014a. Climate and other Scenarios Disrupt Priorities in Several Management Perspectives, Environ Syst. Decis., 34:540–554, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273062441_Climate_and_other_scenarios_disrupt_priorities_in_several_management_perspectives.
90. You, H., Lambert, J. H., Clarens, A. F., and McFarlane, B. J. 2014b. Quantifying the Influence of Climate Change to Priorities for Infrastructure Projects, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 44 (2): pp. 133-145.
91. Zeleny, M. 2010. Optimization, Optimal Design and De Novo Programming, in Handbook of Multi-Criteria Analysis, Zopounidas, C., Pardalos, P. M. (eds), Springer-Verlag: Berlin-Heidelberg, pp: 243-262.
92. Zeleny, M. 2011. Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM): From Paradigm Lost to Paradigm Regained? J. Multi. Criteria Decis. Anal., 18 (1–2): 77–89.
93. Zhu, B. and Frangopol, D. M. 2013. Risk-Based Approach for Optimum Maintenance of Bridges under Traffic and Earthquake Loads, Journal of Structural Engineering, 139 (3): pp. 422-434.
All items in Spectrum are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved. The use of items is governed by Spectrum's terms of access.
Repository Staff Only: item control page
Download Statistics
Download Statistics