A process for the management of physical infrastructure

Physical infrastructure assets are important components of our society and our economy. They are usually designed to last for many years, are expected to be heavily used during their lifetime, carry considerable load, and are exposed to the natural environment. They are also normally major structures, and therefore present a heavy investment, requiring constant management over their life cycle to ensure that they perform as required by their owners and users. Given a complex and varied infrastructure life cycle, constraints on available resources, and continuing requirements for effectiveness and efficiency, good management of infrastructure is important. While there is often no one best management approach, the choice of options is improved by better identification and analysis of the issues, by the ability to prioritise objectives, and by a scientific approach to the analysis process. The abilities to better understand the effect of inputs in the infrastructure life cycle on results, to minimise uncertainty, and to better evaluate the effect of decisions in a complex environment, are important in allocating scarce resources and making sound decisions. Through the development of an infrastructure management modelling and analysis methodology, this thesis provides a process that assists the infrastructure manager in the analysis, prioritisation and decision making process. This is achieved through the use of practical, relatively simple tools, integrated in a modular flexible framework that aims to provide an understanding of the interactions and issues in the infrastructure management process. The methodology uses a combination of flowcharting and analysis techniques. It first charts the infrastructure management process and its underlying infrastructure life cycle through the time interaction diagram, a graphical flowcharting methodology that is an extension of methodologies for modelling data flows in information systems. This process divides the infrastructure management process over time into self contained modules that are based on a particular set of activities, the information flows between which are defined by the interfaces and relationships between them. The modular approach also permits more detailed analysis, or aggregation, as the case may be. It also forms the basis of ext~nding the infrastructure modelling and analysis process to infrastructure networks, through using individual infrastructure assets and their related projects as the basis of the network analysis process. It is recognised that the infrastructure manager is required to meet, and balance, a number of different objectives, and therefore a number of high level outcome goals for the infrastructure management process have been developed, based on common purpose or measurement scales. These goals form the basis of classifYing the larger set of multiple objectives for analysis purposes. A two stage approach that rationalises then weights objectives, using a paired comparison process, ensures that the objectives required to be met are both kept to the minimum number required and are fairly weighted. Qualitative variables are incorporated into the weighting and scoring process, utility functions being proposed where there is risk, or a trade-off situation applies. Variability is considered important in the infrastructure life cycle, the approach used being based on analytical principles but incorporating randomness in variables where required. The modular design of the process permits alternative processes to be used within particular modules, if this is considered a more appropriate way of analysis, provided boundary conditions and requirements for linkages to other modules, are met. Development and use of the methodology has highlighted a number of infrastructure life cycle issues, including data and information aspects, and consequences of change over the life cycle, as well as variability and the other matters discussed above. It has also highlighted the requirement to use judgment where required, and for organisations that own and manage infrastructure to retain intellectual knowledge regarding that infrastructure. It is considered that the methodology discussed in this thesis, which to the author's knowledge has not been developed elsewhere, may be used for the analysis of alternatives, planning, prioritisation of a number of projects, and identification of the principal issues in the infrastructure life cycle.

Preliminary results concerning the VSS X- chart with unknow in-control parameters

The VSS X- chart is known to perform better than the traditional X- control chart in detecting small to moderate mean shifts in the process. Many researchers have used this chart in order to detect a process mean shift under the assumption of known parameters. However, in practice, the process parameters are rarely known and are usually estimated from an in-control Phase I data set. In this paper, we evaluate the (run length) performances of the VSS X- control chart when the process parameters are estimated and we compare them in the case where the process parameters are assumed known. We draw the conclusion that these performances are quite different when the shift and the number of samples used during the phase I are small. ©2010 IEEE.

How do practitioners use conceptual modeling in practice?

Much research has been devoted over the years to investigating and advancing the techniques and tools used by analysts when they model. As opposed to what academics, software providers and their resellers promote as should be happening, the aim of this research was to determine whether practitioners still embraced conceptual modeling seriously. In addition, what are the most popular techniques and tools used for conceptual modeling? What are the major purposes for which conceptual modeling is used? The study found that the top six most frequently used modeling techniques and methods were ER diagramming, data flow diagramming, systems flowcharting, workflow modeling, UML, and structured charts. Modeling technique use was found to decrease significantly from smaller to medium-sized organizations, but then to increase significantly in larger organizations (proxying for large, complex projects). Technique use was also found to significantly follow an inverted U-shaped curve, contrary to some prior explanations. Additionally, an important contribution of this study was the identification of the factors that uniquely influence the decision of analysts to continue to use modeling, viz., communication (using diagrams) to/from stakeholders, internal knowledge (lack of) of techniques, user expectations management, understanding models' integration into the business, and tool/software deficiencies. The highest ranked purposes for which modeling was undertaken were database design and management, business process documentation, business process improvement, and software development. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.