Presentation Outline

PITFALLS of HDM-
HDM-4 STRATEGY
„ Background
ANALYSIS
„ Objectives
Presenter:

Co-Author:
„ Analysis Guidelines for Strategy Analysis
Saitama University, Japan
„ Results & Discussion

84th TRB Annual Meeting „ Conclusions

Matrix Approach versus Dynamic Sectioning Approach

Background „ If good inventory data are
„ For Strategy Level Analysis, the
„ The Highway Development and Management Tool (HDM-4) HDM-4 document series available, Strategy Analysis may
is a comprehensive road investment model and can be recommends taking a “Matrix be done with the “Dynamic
used Approach” Sectioning Approach” in which
„ to combine technical and economic appraisals of road „ In Matrix Approach, a road network section specific information are
projects is represented by a small size retained
„ to prepare road investment programs, and matrix where each matrix element
„ With Dynamic Sectioning
„ to analyze road network strategies represents “average” values of the
Approach, homogenous road
sections.
„ HDM-4 Application Levels sections are defined when a
„ The matrix is defined by
predefined jump is detected in
„ Project Level for individual projects considering ranges of variables
one or more parameters such as
„ Program Level for prioritization of a set of defined projects including traffic volume, road
road width, roughness, etc. as
„ Strategy Level for the analysis of whole road network condition parameters and geometric
you drive along the network
data

Matrix Approach versus Dynamic Sectioning Approach Objectives

„ The Matrix Approach is attractive
for its simplicity but as it involves
data aggregation precision is not so
high so as to identify, for example,
maintenance works for individual
sections
„ Dynamic Sectioning Approach
„ To suggest guidelines on the selection of good maintenance
has a potential to increase the
and improvement policies for all sections while doing
precision of the analysis; however,
Strategy Analysis with the Dynamic Sectioning Approach
generation of good maintenance
„ In addition to above, the objectives are
and improvements alternatives for
„ How to obtain a uniform outlay of investments over the
all links can be challenging
Planning Period?
because of huge number of
„ Relationship between the “Planning Period” of the
sections and because HDM-4 is
Strategic Plan and “Analysis Period” of the HDM-4 runs
fundamentally a What-If model
for analyzing it

1
 Guidelines for Analysis with Dynamic Sectioning
Illustration of Guidelines through a Case Study
„ First, insights should be obtained by testing a wide range of
„ Case Study’s Road Network Details
alternatives with the “Representative Sections (RS)”
„ 128 Homogenous Sections - Total Length: 915 KM
„ RS must be carefully defined using right set of section parameters
„ Network Characteristics
such as pavement type, traffic, etc.
„ Good: 50% (IRI ≤ 4)

„ RS must reflect the distribution of all sections with respect to the „ Fair: 32% (4 < IRI ≤ 6)

variable chosen along with the identification of the „ Poor: 8% (6 < IRI ≤ 8)

„ Very Poor (IRI > 8)

correspondence between the two

„ A Two Step approach in which first interventions from a wide „ Cost, Vehicle Characteristics and Traffic data based on Vietnamese

range are tested followed by a narrow range of options around the conditions

best one identified in the first step „ 12 Representative Sections were defined considering Traffic and

„ Insights obtained through the analysis with RS should be used to Roughness

define appropriate alternatives for all sections

Illustration of Guidelines through a Case Study Illustration of Guidelines through a Case Study
„ Alternatives tested with the Representative Sections „ Insights derived from the Analysis with the Representative

„ Base Case: Do Minimum i.e. Basic Routine Maintenance only Sections:

„ Reseals: 25mm DBST Responsive to 20% and 30% Surface Damage „ Reconstruction with AC was not found to be the Optimum regardless
„ Overlays: 30mm, 50mm and 70mm overlays responsive to 3-8 IRI of Traffic and Pavement Condition and was omitted from further

„ Reconstruction: With 25mm DBST, and 50mm and 70mm AC consideration

„ Optimum Alternatives for Representative Sections „ Reconstruction with DBST was the Optimum alternative for Poor

„ For Poor Roads: Reconstruction with DBST Roads. Thus, Reconstruction with DBST activated in different years

„ For Fair Roads: Frequent and Thicker Overlays for High Traffic and were used as Appropriate Alternatives for Poor Roads

Less Frequent and Thinner for Low Traffic „ Appropriate Alternatives for other Roads were defined considering

„ For Good Roads: Thinner Overlays (Frequent for High Traffic and less Optimum Alternatives, Alternatives cheaper than the Optimum and

for Low) Change in Optimum Alternative because of deferment

Spreading Lumping Investments over Planning Period Spreading Lumping Investments over Planning Period
20.00
Capital Expenditure (million USD)

„ When Budgets are unconstrained, HDM-4 may suggest Investment

17.50
Patterns with several Maintenance Works schedule in the first few
Unconstrained optimum
15.00
years Optimum with uniform expenditure
12.50
„ The Strategic Plan must have more or less Uniform expenditure 10.00
over the Planning Period and it may be done as follows 7.50

„ Find the unconstrained optimum expenditure for the entire Planning 5.00

Period 2.50

„ Impose a Budget Constraint that equals the Total Expenditure found 0.00
2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

above divided by the Number of Years in the Planning Period for each

year of the Planning Period with a large budget for the rest of the Time (year)
Analysis Period

2
 Analysis Period versus 10-Year
Planning Period and Analysis Period
Expenditure in the Planning Period
„ HDM-4 does not take into account network condition at the end of 50

10-Year Expenditure (million USD)

the Analysis Period and as a result it suggests investment patterns 40

with no or fewer investments at the end of the Analysis Period 30

20
„ Use of an Analysis Period same as the Planning Period will

10
underestimate the Expenditure Requirements as shown in the next

0
figure 10 15 20 25

Analysis Period (Years)

Planning Period and Analysis Period Expenditure in Later Years of Planning Period
The 10-Year Expenditure in the Planning period gets stable with 1.00
Capital Expenditure (million USD)

the increase in the Analysis Period as evident from the flattening of

0.75
the curve

„ HDM-4 Analysis Period should be longer than the Planning Period 0.50

– Analysis Period twice as long as the Planning Period may be Analysis Period: 10 Years
0.25 Analysis Period: 20 Years
appropriate

„ Even when budgets are very tight, HDM-4 will choose fewer or no 0.00
2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013
projects in the Later Years of the Planning Period if the Analysis

Period is the same as Planning Period as illustrated in the next Time (year)

figure

Conclusions
„ Strategy Analysis with Dynamic Sectioning

Approach requires careful definition of appropriate

Maintenance and Improvement Alternatives for the

Whole Network

„ HDM-4 Analysis Period must be longer than the

Planning Period

„ Analysis Period twice as Long as the Planning

Period may be appropriate