Development of a post-flood road maintenance strategy: case study Queensland, Australia

Abstract

Currently, no road authority takes into account flooding in road deterioration (RD) models; as a result, post-flood rehabilitation treatments may be sub-optimal. This paper proposes a new approach to the development of a post-flood maintenance strategy. The recently developed roughness and rutting-based RD models with flooding, by the current authors, are used as input to predict pavement deterioration after a flood (i.e. assuming a flood in year 1). The HDM-4 model has been used to get the post-flood maintenance strategy with constrained and unconstrained budget, where post-flood rehabilitation starts from year 2. The road groups in state road network of Queensland, Australia, are used as the case study. The unconstrained budget solution aims to keep the network in an excellent condition at a cost of $49.7bn with the possible strongest treatments. The constrained budget strategy uses agency cost and pavement performance as constraints in optimisation and provides a reasonable solution. This strategy requires about $26.1bn in life cycle, which is close to the main road authority of Queensland’s post-flood rehabilitation programme. The paper discusses two other strategies on maximise economic benefits and budget optimisation. It is expected that a road authority would properly investigate its flood-damaged roads before implementation. The paper shows pavement performances with the post-flood strategy. The need for a RD model to predict deterioration after a flood and for post-flood treatment selection is also highlighted.

Keywords:

• Pavement management system
• RD models with flooding
• HDM-4
• post-flood maintenance strategy
• budget

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Department of Transport and Main Roads of Queensland for supporting the current research through their 34,000 km road database. This study is partially supported by a DECRA from the Australian Research Council.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.