Infrastructure sustainability : differential axial shortening of concrete structures

High density development has been seen as a contribution to sustainable development. However, a number of engineering issues play a crucial role in the sustainable construction of high rise buildings. Non linear deformation of concrete has an adverse impact on high-rise buildings with complex geometries, due to differential axial shortening. These adverse effects are caused by time dependent behaviour resulting in volume change known as ‘shrinkage’, ‘creep’ and ‘elastic’ deformation. These three phenomena govern the behaviour and performance of all concrete elements, during and after construction. Reinforcement content, variable concrete modulus, volume to surface area ratio of the elements, environmental conditions, and construction quality and sequence influence on the performance of concrete elements and differential axial shortening will occur in all structural systems. Its detrimental effects escalate with increasing height and non vertical load paths resulting from geometric complexity. The magnitude of these effects has a significant impact on building envelopes, building services, secondary systems, and lifetime serviceability and performance. Analytical and test procedures available to quantify the magnitude of these effects are limited to a very few parameters and are not adequately rigorous to capture the complexity of true time dependent material response. With this in mind, a research project has been undertaken to develop an accurate numerical procedure to quantify the differential axial shortening of structural elements. The procedure has been successfully applied to quantify the differential axial shortening of a high rise building, and the important capabilities available in the procedure have been discussed. A new practical concept, based on the variation of vibration characteristic of structure during and after construction and used to quantify the axial shortening and assess the performance of structure, is presented.

Framework and processes for enhancing sustainability deliverables in Australian road infrastructure projects

Road and highway infrastructure provides the backbone for a nation’s economic growth. The versatile dispersion of population in Australia and its resource boom, coupled with improved living standards and growing societal expectations, calls for continuing development and improvement of road infrastructure under the current local, state and federal governments’ policies and strategic plans. As road infrastructure projects involve huge resources and mechanisms, achieving sustainability not only on economic scales but also through environmental and social responsibility becomes a crucial issue. While sustainability is a logical link to infrastructure development, literature study and consultation with the industry found that there is a lack of common understanding on what constitutes sustainability in the infrastructure context. Its priorities are often interpreted differently among multiple stakeholders. For road infrastructure projects which typically span over long periods of time, achieving tangible sustainability outcomes during the lifecycle of development remains a formidable task. Sustainable development initiatives often remain ideological as in macro-level policies and broad-based concepts. There were little elaboration and exemplar cases on how these policies and concepts can be translated into practical decision-making during project implementation. In contrast, there seemed to be over commitment on research and development of sustainability assessment methods and tools. Between the two positions, there is a perception-reality gap and mismatch, specifically on how to enhance sustainability deliverables during infrastructure project delivery. Review on past research in this industry sector also found that little has been done to promote sustainable road infrastructure development; this has wide and varied potential impacts. This research identified the common perceptions and expectations by different stakeholders towards achieving sustainability in road and highway infrastructure projects. Face to face interviews on selected representatives of these stakeholders were carried out in order to select and categorize, confirm and prioritize a list of sustainability performance targets identified through literature and past research. A Delphi study was conducted with the assistance of a panel of senior industry professionals and academic experts, which further considered the interrelationship and influence of the sustainability indicators, and identified critical sustainability indicators under ten critical sustainability criteria (e.g. Environmental, Health & Safety, Resource Utilization & Management, Social & Cultural, Economic, Public Governance & Community Engagement, Relations Management, Engineering, Institutional and Project Management). This presented critical sustainability issues that needed to be addressed at the project level. Accordingly, exemplar highway development projects were used as case studies to elicit solutions for the critical issues. Through the identification and integration of different perceptions and priority needs of the stakeholders, as well as key sustainability indicators and solutions for critical issues, a set of decision-making guidelines was developed to promote and drive consistent sustainability deliverables in road infrastructure projects.

Developing a life-cycle costing analysis model for sustainability enhancement in road infrastructure project

With increasing pressure to provide environmentally responsible infrastructure products and services, stakeholders are putting significant foci on the early identification of financial viability and outcome of infrastructure projects. Traditionally, there has been an imbalance between sustainable measures and project budget. On one hand, the industry tends to employ the first-cost mentality and approach to developing infrastructure projects. On the other, environmental experts and technology innovators often push for the ultimately green products and systems without much of a concern for cost. This situation is being quickly changed as the industry is under pressure to continue to return profit, while better adapting to current and emerging global issues of sustainability. For the infrastructure sector to contribute to sustainable development, it will need to increase value and efficiency. Thus, there is a great need for tools that will enable decision makers evaluate competing initiatives and identify the most sustainable approaches to procuring infrastructure projects. In order to ensure that these objectives are achieved, the concept of life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA) will play significant roles in the economics of an infrastructure project. Recently, a few research initiatives have applied the LCCA models for road infrastructure that focused on the traditional economics of a project. There is little coverage of life-cycle costing as a method to evaluate the criteria and assess the economic implications of pursuing sustainability in road infrastructure projects. To rectify this problem, this paper reviews the theoretical basis of previous LCCA models before discussing their inability to determinate the sustainability indicators in road infrastructure project. It then introduces an on-going research aimed at developing a new model to integrate the various new cost elements based on the sustainability indicators with the traditional and proven LCCA approach. It is expected that the research will generate a working model for sustainability based life-cycle cost analysis.

Sustainable infrastructure assets : capability for infrastructure capacity management

Building for a sustainable environment requires sustainable infrastructure assets. Infrastructure capacity management is the process of ensuring optimal provision of such infrastructure assets. Effectiveness in this process will enable the infrastructure asset owners and its stakeholders to receive full value on their investment. Business research has shown that an organisation can only achieve business value when it has the right capabilities. This paradigm can also be applied to infrastructure capacity management. With limited access to resources, the challenge for infrastructure organisations is to identify and develop core capabilities to enable infrastructure capacity management. This chapter explores the concept of capability and identifies the core capability needed in infrastructure capacity management. Through a case study of the Port of Brisbane, this chapter shows that infrastructure organisations must develop their intelligence gathering capability to effectively manage the capacity of their infrastructure assets.

Metadata aggregation : a critical component of research infrastructure for the future

The development of research data management infrastructure and services and making research data more discoverable and accessible to the research community is a key priority at the national, state and individual university level. This paper will discuss and reflect upon a collaborative project between Griffith University and the Queensland University of Technology to commission a Metadata Hub or Metadata Aggregation service based upon open source software components. It will describe the role that metadata aggregation services play in modern research infrastructure and argue that this role is a critical one.

A framework for strategic infrastructure asset management

The concept of asset management is not a new but an evolving idea that has been attracting attention of many organisations operating and/or owning some kind of infrastructure assets. The term asset management have been used widely with fundamental differences in interpretation and usage. Regardless of the context of the usage of the term, asset management implies the process of optimising return by scrutinising performance and making key strategic decisions throughout all phases of an assets lifecycle (Sarfi and Tao, 2004). Hence, asset management is a philosophy and discipline through which organisations are enabled to more effectively deploy their resources to provide higher levels of customer service and reliability while balancing financial objectives. In Australia, asset management made its way into the public works in 1993 when the Australian Accounting Standard Board issued the Australian Accounting Standard 27 – AAS27. Standard AAS27 required government agencies to capitalise and depreciate assets rather than expense them against earnings. This development has indirectly forced organisations managing infrastructure assets to consider the useful life and cost effectiveness of asset investments. The Australian State Treasuries and the Australian National Audit Office was the first organisation to formalise the concepts and principles of asset management in Australia in which they defined asset management as “ a systematic, structured process covering the whole life of an asset”(Australian National Audit Office, 1996). This initiative led other Government bodies and industry sectors to develop, refine and apply the concept of asset management in the management of their respective infrastructure assets. Hence, it can be argued that the concept of asset management has emerged as a separate and recognised field of management during the late 1990s. In comparison to other disciplines such as construction, facilities, maintenance, project management, economics, finance, to name a few, asset management is a relatively new discipline and is clearly a contemporary topic. The primary contributors to the literature in asset management are largely government organisations and industry practitioners. These contributions take the form of guidelines and reports on the best practice of asset management. More recently, some of these best practices have been made to become a standard such as the PAS 55 (IAM, 2004, IAM, 2008b) in UK. As such, current literature in this field tends to lack well-grounded theories. To-date, while receiving relatively more interest and attention from empirical researchers, the advancement of this field, particularly in terms of the volume of academic and theoretical development is at best moderate. A plausible reason for the lack of advancement is that many researchers and practitioners are still unaware of, or unimpressed by, the contribution that asset management can make to the performance of infrastructure asset. This paper seeks to explore the practices of organisations that manage infrastructure assets to develop a framework of strategic infrastructure asset management processes. It will begin by examining the development of asset management. This is followed by the discussion on the method to be adopted for this paper. Next, is the discussion of the result form case studies. It first describes the goals of infrastructure asset management and how they can support the broader business goals. Following this, a set of core processes that can support the achievement of business goals are provided. These core processes are synthesised based on the practices of asset managers in the case study organisations.

Sustainable infrastructure project planning : progress in contemporary decision support tools

Most infrastructure project developments are complex in nature, particularly in the planning phase. During this stage, many vague alternatives are tabled - from the strategic to operational level. Human judgement and decision making are characterised by biases, errors and the use of heuristics. These factors are intangible and hard to measure because they are subjective and qualitative in nature. The problem with human judgement becomes more complex when a group of people are involved. The variety of different stakeholders may cause conflict due to differences in personal judgements. Hence, the available alternatives increase the complexities of the decision making process. Therefore, it is desirable to find ways of enhancing the efficiency of decision making to avoid misunderstandings and conflict within organisations. As a result, numerous attempts have been made to solve problems in this area by leveraging technologies such as decision support systems. However, most construction project management decision support systems only concentrate on model development and neglect fundamentals of computing such as requirement engineering, data communication, data management and human centred computing. Thus, decision support systems are complicated and are less efficient in supporting the decision making of project team members. It is desirable for decision support systems to be simpler, to provide a better collaborative platform, to allow for efficient data manipulation, and to adequately reflect user needs. In this chapter, a framework for a more desirable decision support system environment is presented. Some key issues related to decision support system implementation are also described.

Infrastructure asset management: The challenges and approaches

Infrastructure organisations such as airport, seaport, rail and road are operating in an increasingly challenging business environment as a result of globalisation, privatisation and deregulation. These organisations must ensure that their main resource i.e. their infrastructure assets are well managed in order to support their business operations. Brisbane Airport is used as a case study to understand the challenges faced in the management of infrastructure assets as well as the approaches used to overcome them. The findings can be useful in helping asset managers to identify the resources they should seek to manipulate in order to make improvement to their activities and contribute to the overall performance of their organisation.

Project-based organisations : overcoming lack of trust and social networks within small and medium project teams

In sustainable development projects, as well as other types of projects, knowledge transfer is important for the organisations managing the project. Nevertheless, knowledge transfer among employees does not happen automatically and it has been found that the lack of social networks and the lack of trust among employees are the major barriers to effective knowledge transfer. Social network analysis has been recognised as a very important tool for improving knowledge transfer in the project environment. Transfer of knowledge is more effective where it depends heavily on social networks and informal dialogue. Based on the theory of social capital, social capital consists of two parts: conduits network and resource exchange network. This research studies the relationships among performance, the resource exchange network (such as the knowledge network) and the relationship network (such as strong ties network, energy network, and trust network) at the individual and project levels. The aim of this chapter is to present an approach to overcoming the lack of social networks and lack of trust to improve knowledge transfer within project-based organisations. This is to be done by identifying the optimum structure of relationship networks and knowledge networks within small and medium projects. The optimal structure of the relationship networks and knowledge networks is measured using two dimensions: intra-project and inter-project. This chapter also outlines an extensive literature review in the areas of social capital, knowledge management and project management, and presents the conceptual model of the research approach.

Delivering value for money in the procurement of public sector major infrastructure : a new first-order decision making model

The significant challenge faced by government in demonstrating value for money in the delivery of major infrastructure resolves around estimating costs and benefits of alternative modes of procurement. Faced with this challenge, one approach is to focus on a dominant performance outcome visible on the opening day of the asset, as the means to select the procurement approach. In this case, value for money becomes a largely nominal concept and determined by selected procurement mode delivering, or not delivering, the selected performance outcome, and notwithstanding possible under delivery on other desirable performance outcomes, as well as possibly incurring excessive transaction costs. This paper proposes a mind-set change in this particular practice, to an approach in which the analysis commences with the conditions pertaining to the project and proceeds to deploy transaction cost and production cost theory to indicate a procurement approach that can claim superior value for money relative to other competing procurement modes. This approach to delivering value for money in relative terms is developed in a first-order procurement decision making model outlined in this paper. The model developed could be complementary to the Public Sector Comparator (PSC) in terms of cross validation and the model more readily lends itself to public dissemination. As a possible alternative to the PSC, the model could save time and money in preparation of project details to lesser extent than that required in the reference project and may send a stronger signal to the market that may encourage more innovation and competition.