International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management

Reliability-based preventive maintenance strategies of road junction systems

Kong Fah Tee, Ejiroghene Ekpiwhre,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Kong Fah Tee, Ejiroghene Ekpiwhre, (2019) "Reliability-based preventive maintenance strategies
of road junction systems", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, https://
doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-01-2018-0018
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-01-2018-0018
Downloaded on: 21 February 2019, At: 01:29 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 46 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 10 times since 2019*

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:327772 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0265-671X.htm

RELIABILITY PAPER Preventive

maintenance
Reliability-based preventive strategies
maintenance strategies of road
junction systems
Kong Fah Tee and Ejiroghene Ekpiwhre Received 16 February 2018
Faculty of Engineering and Science, University of Greenwich, Revised 23 September 2018
Accepted 8 October 2018
Kent, UK
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present a study of reliability-centred maintenance (RCM), which is
conducted on the key sub-assets of a newly constructed road junction infrastructure in Nigeria.
Design/methodology/approach – The classical RCM methodology, a type of RCM, which has a top down,
zero-based approach for maintenance analysis, is implemented in this study.
Findings – The implementation of the classical RCM is successful in its application of various PM policies
assigned to the assets and it shows that its application in the highway industry could reduce excessive maintenance
backlog and frequent reactive maintenance by effective optimisation of its preventive maintenance (PM) intervals.
Practical implications – Road junctions are originators of more than 70 per cent of road traffic congestion
and account for high accident rate. The traditional methods of reliability assurance used in the highway
industry such as reactive maintenance and routine maintenance are often inadequate to meet the round the
clock usage demands of these assets, thus the consideration for the application of a systematic RCM process
for maintaining the system function by selecting and applying effective PM tasks.
Originality/value – It uses an approach that critically develops and analyses thoroughly preventive and
continuous maintenance strategy in a new circumstance with environment of uncertainty and limited
operating data. The case-based reasoning cycle has been applied in the RCM approach with real-time data
obtained from a UK-based network maintenance management system for highway infrastructures.
Keywords Preventive maintenance, Failure mode effect analysis, Reliability-centred maintenance,
Road junction, Transport assets
Paper type Case study

1. Introduction
With advancement in computer technology and the ageing of many critical structures such as
buildings, bridges, highway infrastructures, underground pipelines, offshore structures,
hurricane protection barriers, mechanical structures, etc., renewed efforts can be seen in the
areas of structural simulation, design (Shi and Tee, 2014), assessment, reliability
(Mahmoodian et al., 2012; Tee et al., 2014; Fang et al., 2013) and maintenance (Liptrot and
Palarchio, 2000; Tee and Li, 2011). Road junction systems not only account for high accident
rates but also are considered originators of more than 70 per cent of traffic congestion. They
handle more traffic than the individual roads leading to the road junction, and this is often
increased by the lack of adequate road traffic management systems. This causes the situation
to rapidly deteriorate to traffic snare with latter effects on the public and environments such
as loss of productive man-hours, road traffic accidents and high environmental pollution.
Road junction network owners and administrators, like other infrastructure owners, are
continually considering all opportunities for trimming unnecessary expenses to reduce
maintenance and operating costs. This is coupled with the ever-increasing pressure from road
junction users for increased safety and reliability of journeys and the road authorities’ strong
desire to improve their safety record (Coupe and Greenwood, 2014). International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management
A survey carried out in furtherance of its urban renewal strategy, observes that © Emerald Publishing Limited
0265-671X
about 70 per cent of traffic congestion originates from road junctions, intersections and DOI 10.1108/IJQRM-01-2018-0018
 IJQRM roundabouts (Semiteje, 2013). Investment totalling £317m is currently required for
improvement works for 123 road junction schemes within England. This helps to remove a
bottleneck associated with road congestion, reduce road hazards, install new technologies
to improve driver information and reduce incident clear up time (Fitzpatrick, 2013).
The bottlenecks arising from road congestion, the increased rate of hazard and accident are
most often the results of the unavailability or failure of these highway assets.
The traditional methods of reliability assurance used in the highway industries such as
reactive maintenance or routine maintenance are often inadequate to meet the round the
clock usage demands of these highway assets. This study thus considers the application of a
systematic classical RCM process for maintaining the system function by selecting and
applying effective maintenance tasks.
A policy report depicts that increased congestion and journey disruption results from a
shortage of improvement of road network assets (DFT, 2012). It is also stated that the
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

availability of ancillary assets such as road signs, traffic signals and road markings is vital
for road safety and efficient use for road users by the prompt information provided by them.
However, major maintenance emphases have been placed on carriageways and bridges as
they are the most visible and valued elements of highways (Tee et al., 2018). Maintenance of
these ancillary assets which are assembled at most road junction networks helps to guide
vehicles, prevent collisions amongst vehicles and alert road users. Moreover, situations
requiring heightened attentiveness and increasing overall awareness during the day and
mostly at night depending on the availability of these ancillary assets (Markow, 2007;
Cheng et al., 2008). These assets are exposed to natural forces and deteriorate in a condition
often leading to functional asset failures. Unavailability of road transport assets results
from deterioration over their useful life due to variations, such as ageing, weathering and
maintenance induced failures. Hence, the requirement of maintenance which consists of
actions taken to ensure that these assets, systems, equipment and components are available
to provide their intended functions to road users when required and their availability during
their life cycle.
Ageing of systems and the need for computerised asset database are some of the key
importance of the asset management discipline. The context of asset management is very
important for optimisation of the highway infrastructure as it implements key decisions
for the design, operation, maintenance, inspection, renewal enhancement and disposal of
these physical assets to deliver safe and economic infrastructure (Ekpiwhre and Tee, 2018).
Asset management is essential for continuous availability of the road junction assets as its
discipline integrates maintenance and replacement analysis with economics and system
failure analysis (Remenyte-Prescott and Andrews, 2013; Battikha, 2003). This paper addresses
a maintenance methodology, namely, classical reliability-centred maintenance (RCM) which
has the capability of designing an appropriate maintenance programme suitable to sustain the
newly created asset with no previous maintenance history. The case-based reasoning (CBR)
problem solving approach that utilises solutions gained from experience or knowledge
encountered from the similar situation is employed. The CBR approach strengthens the
weakness of the classical RCM with limited operating data. The investigated assets are
drainage, carriageway, footway, road kerb, traffic island, street lighting, traffic signal, road
sign, guardrail, road markings and bus shelter. Their functional failure related category 1 and
2 defects are retrieved from a UK-based network maintenance management system (NMMS)
for highway infrastructures, revised with relation to the boundary of highway asset analysed
for the study and reused in designing the likely failure mode and effects of the associated
assets. Decision logic is applied to the failure mode effect analysis (FMEA) to assign a correct
maintenance strategy and periodicity for maintenance tasks.
The contents of this paper are structured as follows. In Section 2, the overview of the
maintenance strategy is presented. The framework of proposed RCM and CBR are
 discussed in Sections 3 and 4, respectively. In Section 5, a case study involving critical Preventive
sub-assets of a newly constructed road junction infrastructure in Nigeria is considered, and maintenance
the discussion and conclusion are presented in Sections 6 and 7, respectively. strategies
2. Maintenance
Maintenance is defined as a set of actions taken to ensure that systems or components
provide their intended functions when required with a key objective for restoring or
preserving reliability at minimum cost (S9081-AB-GIB-010, 2007). The key focus for
maintenance is maintaining the intended function of the asset to ensure the availability of
the function has been maintained at all time. The aim of carrying out a maintenance
programme is to address the unsatisfactory conditions in which intended functions are not
adequately been provided, often called functional failure. It is believed that the best short-,
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

medium- and long-term strategies relating to the entire useful lifetime of an asset can be
identified by a good maintenance management system which provides operators vital
information and decision-making support (Cheng et al., 2008). Maintenance activities can be
categorised into preventive maintenance (PM) and corrective maintenance as well as other
different types and strategies, as shown in Table I.
PM, which is the focus of this study, is an upkeep programme with actions initiated at
predetermined intermissions, or according to agreed standards, with the intention to
decrease the probability of failure or the dilapidation of the functioning of an asset. Some
PM tasks have been introduced to depict the approaches of PM. Based on these tasks,
methods to scheduling PM policies have been considerably studied. This paper attempts
to apply the existing PM strategies to road junction infrastructure system and investigate
their inter-relationships.

S. No. Maintenance types Strategies

1 Condition-based PM: maintenance based on performance and parameter monitoring and the
maintenance subsequent actions
2 Corrective maintenance CM: maintenance carried out after fault recognition and intended to put an
item into a state in which it can perform a required function
3 Deferred maintenance CM: maintenance which is not immediately carried out after fault detection
but is delayed by given maintenance rules
4 Immediate maintenance CM: maintenance which is carried out without delay after a fault has been
detected to avoid unacceptable consequences
5 Online maintenance PM/CM: maintenance carried out during the time that the item is in use
6 On-site maintenance PM/CM: maintenance carried out at the location where the item is used
7 Operator maintenance PM/CM: maintenance carried out by a user or operator
8 Remote maintenance PM/CM: maintenance of an item carried out without physical access of the
personnel to the item
9 Predetermined PM: maintenance carried out by established intervals of time or number of
maintenance units of use but without previous condition investigation
10 Predictive maintenance PM: maintenance carried out following a forecast derived from the analysis
and evaluation of the significant parameters of the degradation of the item
11 Preventive maintenance PM: maintenance carried out at predetermined intervals or according to
prescribed criteria and intended to reduce the probability of failure or the
degradation of the functioning of an item
12 Scheduled maintenance PM: maintenance carried out by an established schedule or established
number of units of use
13 Cyclic maintenance PM: maintenance carried out at regular intervals
14 Routine maintenance PM/CM: maintenance activity carried out in a cyclic maintenance Table I.
15 Reactive maintenance CM: maintenance refers to works that are carried out as a matter of urgency, Maintenance types
usually for reasons of safety and strategies
 IJQRM 2.1 Preventive maintenance (PM)
PM is carried out at predetermined intervals or according to prescribed criteria with intent
to reduce the probability of failure or the degradation of the functioning of an item. It helps
to minimise the opportunity for functions to fail through the use of tests, inspections,
replacements and routine actions (S9081-AB-GIB-010, 2007). The probability of failure can
be determined statistically for an individual system or asset and component which could be
replaced or repaired in time to avoid functional failure. For example, the lamp of the lighting
system is restored after a period as the failure rate increases with time in use. With the
advancement of computer technology, the different asset failure characteristics are
addressed by use of PM strategies such as time- or condition-based maintenance.
In designing periodic PM policy, an asset is preventively maintained at planned time
intervals nevertheless of the failure history of the asset and repaired at intervening failures.
Periodicity could be in block replacement in pre-arranged times for components or periodic
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

replacement at predetermined intervals to enable early detection of failure and elimination

by minimal repair (Sarkar et al., 2011; Shankar and Sahani, 2003).
RCM analysis helps to optimise the periodicity of the PM by investigating asset
reliability which enables the asset owners to set the PM periodicity based on its analysis.
The periodicity indicates how frequently the maintenance activity is to be conducted. The
knowledge of failure pattern of the asset is very important before planning maintenance
task periods that can ensure a predicted functional failure does not occur in between
maintenance period. Periodicity is often calendared or non-calendar based.
Time-based maintenance is a PM method carried out in established intervals of schedule
or number of units of use without previous condition investigation. Its maintenance task
restores an asset back to its actual condition before it reaches a stage where the probability
of failure becomes high and is the most suitable for addressing age-related failures. This
involves creating a maintenance regime where maintenance tasks are in time-based patterns
usually hourly, daily, weekly, monthly or yearly. It is assumed that time directed (TD)
maintenance periodicity approaches are costly because the useful life of the asset is often
giving up since the maintenance is not based on asset condition but on calendar period.
All assets have worn out stage within their whole life cycle when they reach a point
where there is a marked increase in the conditional probability of failure of the asset or
subsystems. Failure modes of the asset are essential in making decisions for the TD
approach. TD tasks are appropriate if the basis that the wear out characteristic is
well-known for the asset involved (Nicholas, 2004). The Weibull analysis and power-law
methods are amongst several ways the periodicity of TD maintenance could be considered.
The Weibull analysis focuses on the failure modes where the assets or subsystems are
replaced with a new component upon failure whereas parts that are repaired and returned to
use is better resolved with power-law analysis. Using the TD approach, the reliability of
asset is plotted against time for the failure mode. A scalar parameter lower than 1 indicates a
decrease in failure rate whereas above 1 indicates an increase in failure.
Condition-based maintenance is a PM method carried out based on monitoring the
performance or parameters of the asset. Condition-based maintenance is used to discover
a potential failure to enable a correction to be made thereby avoiding the occurrence of the
potential failure. Inspections or conditional monitoring systems are attributes of CD tasks
which are often used to maintain non-age-related failures (Besnard et al., 2010). Early
detection of failure and degradation of assets has increased the use of the condition-based
approach to maintenance. This has become possible due to the availability of predictive
technologies and methods to detect the need for corrective actions (Ekpiwhre et al., 2016;
Ekpiwhre and Tee, 2016; You, 2017).
Condition directed (CD) tasks such as vibration analysis, wear particle analysis,
ultrasonic flaw detection, visual inspection and other technologies are periodic tests or
 inspections used to equate the asset current conditions or performance of the asset with Preventive
established standards to determine the need for a follow-on repair, restoration or renewal maintenance
and to avert the functional failure of asset arising. The approach is viable if the failure mode strategies
characteristics are detectable with adequate and consistent period between potential failure
(P) and detection and the occurrence of the actual failure (F) known as the (P-F) interval. It is
practically challenging to determine a 100 per cent confidence from detecting a failure from
inspection. The number of inspection is important in determining the periodicity of
maintenance interval, but it can be assumed that the higher number of inspection gives
higher confidence of detecting a potential failure at an earlier stage.

3. Reliability-centred maintenance
RCM is a technique that determines the maintenance requirement of a system and the
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

intervals at which these are to be carried out in its operating context through a failure mode,
effects and criticality analysis (CA) (Moubray, 1997). The term RCM as expressed by
Nowlan and Heap (1978) is a programme designed to realise the inherent reliability
capabilities of assets. It focuses on the functions and failures of the assets as well as
identifies their consequences. It uses a standardised logical resolution procedure to
implement preventive measures from these identified consequences. RCM techniques decide
the required maintenance of a system while in its operating environment (Moubray, 1997).
The asset management institute classifies RCM as a control that supports optimised
management of physical assets (IAM, 2008). RCM combines different approaches to aid the
development of a systematic maintenance programme to manage risks as a basis for
maintenance decisions (Backlund, 2005). RCM framework focuses on preserving system
functions, rather than preserving physical asset since it offers asset availability, reliability
and maintainability. RCM has proven to be very beneficiary to several industries
(USACERL, 1999; Park et al., 2011; Huo et al., 2005; Siqueira, 2004) because of its
process analysis which is structured with definite tactic to determine optimal type of PM
through a thorough analysis of functional failures, failure modes and failure causes
(Rausand and Vatn, 2008).
Diverse forms, standards and guidelines of RCM do exits and have been utilised in
different scenarios in literature and tailored to different applications. The RCM procedure
consists of two methods, namely, the classical RCM and backfit RCM depending on the
scenario. Although both methods serve different maintenance situations, they have similar
attributes at some points. The classical RCM method is a PM system development approach
that critically develops and analyses thoroughly preventive and continuous maintenance
strategy in an environment of uncertainty with limited operating data or new assets for
which no operating history exists. On the other hand, the backfit RCM is considered as a PM
engineering that is applied where sufficient previous operating data exists. It is used to
confirm the assumptions that were made in the originally developed maintenance
programme, validate existing and recommend changes where appropriate. Thus it deals
with the uncertainty of changing existing maintenance requirements to make the
maintenance programme even more effective.
Asset functional failures result in the unavailability and downtime, which affects their
useful capability expectation. Every RCM process should ensure that seven key RCM
questions are answered reasonably and are answered in the order as follows:
(1) What are the functions and associated desired standards of performance of the asset
in its present in service context (functions)?
(2) In what ways can it fail to accomplish its functions (functional failures)?
(3) What causes each functional failure (failure modes)?
 IJQRM (4) What happens when each failure occurs (failure effects)?
(5) In what way does each failure matter (failure consequences)?
(6) What should be done to predict or prevent each functional failure (proactive tasks
and task intervals)?
(7) What should be done if a suitable proactive task cannot be found (default actions)?

3.1 Classical RCM process analysis

The classical RCM (c-RCM) optimises PM when a little to no operational experience exists
for a system, asset or equipment securing the right fusion of preventive and corrective
maintenance tasks (Chojnowski, 2007). The c-RCM develops maintenance task for new
systems by first partitioning the system into assets and sub-assets that requires analysis,
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

and after that, the functionally significant items are identified. The needed maintenance
tasks for each significant item based on analysis of its functions, its dominant failure modes
and risk associated with its functional failures are then determined. Literature review of
c-RCM methods reveals that only the c-RCM methodology can take a top-down, zero-based
approach to maintenance analysis (Moubray, 1997). This c-RCM process, as outlined
in Table II, consists of 12 phases divided into three segments with key emphasis on system
partitioning, FMEA with decision logic and maintenance strategy with task adoption.

Phase Description Purpose

Segment 1: detailed knowledge about the system and its functions are gathered to enable good decisions about
failures will be the most concern in the intended system application
1 Partitioning: Functional block diagram Determine system boundaries, interfaces and
and index functions
2 Functional failure analysis Describe system/subsystem, functions and interfaces.
Identify active and passive failures
3 Other functionally significant item selection Identify functions and functional failures at levels of
and functionality significant item index indenture below subsystem
Segment 2: all failure modes that could result in the system to loss of system function is considered, and the
failure modes with the greatest risk are determined. The best course of action to address these dominant failures
is then determined by a decision logic tree analysis
4 FMEA Determine dominant failures identify the effect
(consequences) of failure
5 RCM decision logic tree analysis Identify the need for a maintenance task, determine if
the proposed task is applicable and effective
6 Servicing and lubrication analysis Use instead of step 5 to evaluate routine servicing and
lubrication requirements
7 Audit and preparation of the maintenance List all proposed maintenance tasks for review and
requirement approval
Segment 3: maintenance task developed from the application of the decision logic tree are combined into the
detailed procedure for accomplishment with consideration to materials, workforce and training required to
obtain the best and appropriate maintenance procedure
8 Method study and evaluation of new task Develop the most practical method of accomplishing
each task
9 Maintenance requirement task Determine appropriate maintenance level
10 Inactive equipment maintenance Develop a procedure to a layup, preserve, reactivate
and test inactive equipment
Table II. 11 Unscheduled maintenance Develop a way for returning systems/equipment to
Classical RCM service following corrective maintenance
approach 12 Maintenance required cards preparation Prepare Maintenance Index Page and MRC
 It is believed that c-RCM can be time consuming. For systems and components Preventive
that are not as critical, one could consider an alternative evaluation process; however, a maintenance
critical system today may not be a critical system tomorrow. The failures that have strategies
happened in the past cannot necessarily be used to predict the failures that are going to
occur in the future. The level of effort for c-RCM is proportional to the criticality of the
asset. If the asset is less critical then others, there will be less functional failures associated
with it, less dominant failure modes, and less PM decisions. If it is not critical, those
assumptions and determinations will be documented and archived within the
organisation’s c-RCM library.
This type of RCM provides the most information and details about asset functions,
failure modes and maintenance actions that address the functional failures. The process
analysis is best utilised when the assets are new to the organisation, and there is a lack of
sufficient maintenance and operational knowledge of the function and functional failures
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

(Pride, 2010). The process analysis is explained as follows.

System partitioning. This identifies all the technical information of functionally
significant items. The asset descriptive and operational information are gathered from
traditional expert judgement and highway infrastructure maintenance literature. Asset
defect, defect categories, defect period, repair hours, repair cost, etc., as related to the
individual asset are retrieved from an NMMS.
Failure mode effect analysis (FMEA). The principal causes of functional failure are
identified in this step. This step is the most important phase in the RCM analysis as it
provides the basic information for decision logic analysis as well as the quality of the
proposed PM programme. It captures assets functions, functional failure, failure modes and
failure effects. The functional failure is an unsatisfactory condition which results from
an asset not adequately providing its intended function. The specific situation causing the
functional failure is known as a failure mode, while the arising consequences are called
failure effects.
RCM decision logic. It uses decision rationality of Yes and No questions to find an optimal
balance between the best maintenance tasks since making a decisive judgement from
old-style expert judgements in highway asset maintenance is difficult. Maintenance tasks
are chosen based on eight decision logic questions, as shown in Table III with consideration
of the criticality classes. Questions 1–3 determines the failure classification while other
questions are used for consideration of the most appropriate and effective task. Application
of decision logic identifies if a PM task is to be proposed for consideration as a TD or CD.
As shown in CA classification in Table IV, the classes (A, B, C and D), effectiveness (safety
and environment, mission, all others and hidden failure) and rules used to verify if the
proposed tasks are effective.
Maintenance task improvement. The maintenance task improvement comprises
developing PM tasks and combining effective PM policy. Exiting maintenance
classifications and intervals are very useful in developing PM programme for new assets.
Evaluation of the various maintenance task in Table I and the testing of the limits of the
recommended maintenance tasks would improve the maintenance system.

4. Case-based reasoning
CBR is a problem solving and learning approach which is used to solve the current problem
considering prior experience gained from similar problems solved in the past. In the CBR
terminology, a previous situation, which has been captured and learned in a way that it can
be reused in the solving of future problems, is referred to as a past case, previous case,
stored case or retained case. Similarly, a new case or unsolved case is the description of a
new problem to be solved (Aamodt and Plaza, 1994).
 IJQRM Question Logic Decision

1 Is the occurrence of Yes ¼ Go to Question 2

failure evident to the (Evident failure)
operating crew while No ¼ Go to Question 7
it is performing its (Hidden failure)
normal duties?
2 Does the failure cause Yes ¼ Go to Question 4
a loss of function or (Safety capability)
secondary damage No ¼ Go to Question 3
that has a direct and (Operational capability)
adverse effect on
operating safety?
3 Does the failure have a Yes ¼ Go to Question 5 (Operational
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

direct and adverse capability)

effect on operational No ¼ Go to Question 6 (All others)
capability?
4–7 Is there an effective/applicable PM task that will prevent functional failures?
Effectiveness Rules
Q4 Safety and Environment The probability of failure reduced
to very low
Q5 Mission Risk of failure reduced to an
acceptable level
Q6 All Others Cost of maintenance less than the
repair cost
Q7 Hidden Failure Consequences of hidden failure
Yes ¼ describe/classify; No ¼ Go
Table III. to Q8
RCM decision logic 8 Is a scheduled failure finding task available and justified? Yes ¼ Specify the task
questions No ¼ Consider the safe design

1 2 3 Criticality class

Y Y N/A A ¼ safety/environments
Table IV. Y N Y B ¼ mission
Criticality analysis Y N N C ¼ hidden failure
classification N N/A N/A D ¼ all other function

Mantaras expressed the importance of the use of CBR in solving current challenges
(Lopez De Mantaras et al., 2005). He stated that the current problem is best understood by
measuring its comparison with similar previous problems stored in a cased based, memory
and other suitable database and having their known solution. The cases are then retrieved
with the intent to reuse the solution arrived in the previous cases to address that of the new
case. The solution arrived is then evaluated by either direct application or domain expert,
and if favourable, it is retained as a new case, and the system learns how to solve such new
problems. In CBR, a previous situation, previously captured and learned, is reused in the
solving of future problems. A CBR cycle operates a 4R cycle system namely retrieve, revise,
reuse and retain. Failure types, causes and their effects are retrieved from related surveys,
literature and experts’ database and are reused in modelling the likely faults, failure modes
and maintenance task.
Maintenance data saved in an NMMS are retrieved and reused in solving the expected
functional failures which are likely to arise in the RCM analysis. It is stated that the current
 problems are best understood by measuring its comparison with similar previous problems Preventive
stored in a case-based NMMS. Introducing CBR into the RCM process analysis strengthens maintenance
the weakness of the classic RCM in which the approach is used for new situations strategies
where limited, or no operating data exists. This approach improves the efficiency of RCM
analysis by reducing or avoiding repeated analysis of assets by an expert (Garozzo and
Andrea, 2006). The solutions are tested on real-time newly created road junction
infrastructure system, as illustrated in Section 5.

5. Road junction transport asset analysis

Ageing of systems and the need for digital asset database are some of the key importance of
the AM discipline. The context of AM is imperative for optimisation of the highway
infrastructure as it implements key decisions for the design, operation, maintenance,
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

inspection, renewal enhancement and disposal of these physical assets to deliver safe and
economic infrastructure. AM is essential for continuous availability of the road junction
assets as its discipline integrates maintenance and replacement analysis with economics
and system failure analysis (Remenyte-Prescott and Andrews, 2013). A road junction
system in Niger Delta Region of Nigeria, called Enerhen road junction, is considered in the
case study. The road junction is newly constructed, thereby having no previous
maintenance records. Unlike the UK and other developed countries where the actual
operating history and techniques for dealing with maintenance uncertainties are
understood, Nigeria road transport industries, though carry out maintenance still
maintain highway assets on the run to failure and corrective maintenance style.
Introducing CBR into the RCM process analysis strengthens the weakness of the classic
RCM in which the approach is used for new situations where limited, or no operating data
exists. This approach improves the efficiency of RCM analysis by reducing or avoiding
repeated analysis of assets by an expert (Garozzo and Andrea, 2006). The solutions are
tested on real-time newly created road junction infrastructure system. Ensuring continuous
availability and reliability of these newly constructed road junction assets which comprises
of complex physical assets requires defining their function, units and quantity (Tee and
Ekpiwhre, 2018). A classical RCM method utilising a CBR approach is conducted for the
newly installed vital road transport assets at road junction by the research group consisting
of the design/project engineer involved in the whole construction and installation of the
assets and experts in highway infrastructure maintenance in the UK. The use of CBR in
modelling the RCM of the highway assets entails the following four steps.
First, the newly created highway assets in Nigeria was selected as a new case while all
other highway assets information in the UK codes of practice and UK NMMS data set
stands for case library in the knowledge base. The goal is to predict the condition of the
asset if no maintenance is carried out. Second, the process called retrieval is implemented by
the search in the UK codes of practice and UK NMMS data set to find the most similar stored
cases in the case library. The knowledge base has a similarity of failure types, causes and
the effects on road users. This information is retrieved from related surveys, literature and
experts’ database and is reused in modelling the faults, failure modes and maintenance task.
The cases are retrieved with the intent to reuse the solution arrived in the earlier cases to
address that of the new case. The attribute of a new case that represents the highway asset
information is then captured with the focus of the asset information. The definitions of the
asset functions, the various ways the assets do not perform their function, the modes of
failure of the assets and the effects of these failures and the consequences of these failures.
This section is used to propose the FMEA analysis.
Third, the asset information projected from the FMEA is utilised to conduct a CA of the
asset based on the four key criteria, namely, safety and environmental, mission, hidden failure
and others. Maintenance data saved in an NMMS are retrieved and reused in solving the
 IJQRM expected functional failures which are likely to arise in the RCM analysis. It is stated that the
current problems are best understood by measuring its comparison with similar previous
problems stored in a case-based NMMS. The process is called reuse which shows the assets
critical failure modes and how it affects road users. Finally, the last process is known as the
case retaining stage. The new information about the various assets (e.g. inspection and
maintenance data) are now used to support the newly created asset as a guide when failures
occur and best inspection regime with maintenance task available to support them. The
solution is then evaluated by either direct application or domain expert, and if favourable, it is
retained as a new case, and the system learns how to solve such new problems.

5.1 Segment 1 – problem related with new case

Delta State Government, Nigeria embarked on an ambitious strategy in the year 2013 to
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

significantly improve the reliability of its road junction systems. Its existing road junction
systems constructed over 50 years ago, as shown in Plate 1, had exceeded its useful life
and it lacked availability of crucial road junction assets. During severe conditions, such as
rain and flooding, it was consistently shut down for extended hours principally due to the
unavailability and inoperable road junction assets. The unavailability of the highway
asset as stated by the consultants leads to high traffic congestion and high-risk to
all road users (i.e. motorist, cyclist and pedestrians) and absolute menace at the road
junction. The additional issue at the junction included the following (i.e. no traffic
signals/of non-functional, no lane marking, deteriorated road pavement, poor drainage
system with silted drains, vehicle-passenger conflicts, no provision for walkways for
pedestrians). This led to increase congestion, road traffic accidents, high environmental
and noise pollution and the growth of the market and other economic activities around the
road junction.
In a comparative study of defects liability period in Nigeria, it is noticed that the
occurrence of defects after the defects liability period in Nigeria is higher than other
countries because of a shorter defects liability period of six months. As a result, it does not
give a reasonable time for defects to manifest (Oluwole et al., 2012). Defects liability period of
six months is equivalent to the warranty period owned by the owners. Within this period,
the contractors repair any defects associated with the assets. Little to no maintenance data
are usually recorded within this period as highway assets usually have a longer time to
failure than their defects liability periods. The short defect liability period provides asset

Plate 1.
Junction before
construction (failed
road junction system)
 owners with no maintenance records but to rely on experience, expert judgements, Preventive
corrective maintenance or run to failure strategies to ensure continuous availability and maintenance
reliability of their assets when a failure occurs. For this reason, the junction improvement strategies
work of the failed road junction network in Niger Delta, Nigeria presented in Plate 1 started
in early 2013 and completed in September 2013 with all crucial new road junction assets
installed as shown in Plate 2. The junction depicting its view in Plate 2 is proposed as the
new case for the analysis.

5.2 Segment 2- retrieve of similar problem from knowledge base

The second segment of the classical RCM analysis is the system selection of the assets
whose critical failure modes would diminish the operations of the junction system.
The selected assets for this investigation are drainage system, carriageway, footway and
cycleway, road kerb, road restraint system, traffic signs and bollards, road markings, traffic
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

signals and pedestrian crossing as well as road lighting. The asset functions are first
defined before making decisions about what dominant failure modes are the most crucial to
the system application. The assets are partitioned as shown in Table V to display the
disparity between various functions of the assets of the road junction system. They are
further broken down into sub-assets to enable the assembly team to determine system
boundaries, interfaces, functions, and functional failure.

5.3 Segment 3: adaptation and reuse of suggested solution for new case
After systematically bounding and describing the road junction system assets, the next
classical RCM step is to document the functions and performance parameters of the assets.
For instance, the primary function of the drainage system is to provide a means of collecting
and removal of water from rainfall or other sources such as from carriageway and surrounding
catchment areas as portrayed in Table VI, after that transfer the wastewater to a designated
discharge point. From this system function, three functional failures are listed as follows:
(1) the drainage system does not take away rainwater;
(2) the drainage system does not hold and transfer wastewater; and
(3) the drainage system does not protect from environmental pollution.

Plate 2.
Junction after
construction
 IJQRM No. Description Unit Qty Function

1. Drainage To allow for the removal of water from the carriageway

1.10 Linear drainage L.in.m 760 and surrounding catchment areas
1.20 Concrete drain cover L.in.m 760
1.30 Culvert L.in.m
2. Carriageway To facilitate reliable journey time for vehicular road
2.10 Compacted crush stone Cu.m 200 and cyclist
2.20 Bituminous Sq.m 1,080
2.30 Asphaltic wearing course Sq.m 8,900
3 Footway To create a safe way for pedestrians to move about on a
3.10 Precast concrete kerbs L.in.m 870 path that is separated from the carriageway
3.20 Precast footway paving Sq.m 5,904
stones
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

4. Traffic median/Island To help calm traffic and improve ease of pedestrian

4.10 Road median/traffic L.in.m 280 crossing or (in limited circumstances) carries traffic
Island control equipment
5. ROAD LIGHTING To provide visibility at night hours by illuminating the
5.10 Street lighting No 40 surface and adjacent features of the roadway and sidewalk
6. Road signs To guide and regulate traffic, communicating information
6.10 Road signs No 100 clearly and with sufficient time
7 Traffic signals To assign right of way to lanes to individual streams
7.10 Control Cabinet No 1 in turns
7.20 Poles and components No 4
7.30 Cameras No 4
8. ROAD RESTRAIN To segregate pedestrians from vehicles and helps channel
8.10 Guardrail m 740 pedestrians to where they are supposed to be walking
9. Lane markings To provide information and warning to road users and
Table V. 9.10 Road marking m 1,680 help guide traffic flow in an orderly, safe stream
Partitioned assets of 10. Bus terminal Helps provide shelter for passengers waiting to board or
investigated road 10.10 Bus shelter No 3 alight from the bus
junction system 21,326

All failure modes that could result in the loss of system functions are considered,
and the failure modes with the most significant consequences are determined by carrying
out an FMEA. Although functional failures and failure modes on highway assets are
numerous as addressed in UK Lighting Board (2004), UK Roads Board (2005), UK Bridges
Board (2005), the analysis projected twenty-six relevant critical functional failures
and failure modes for all the ten assets/seventeen sub-assets for this analysis as depicted
in Table VI.

5.4 Segment 4 – confirmed solution for retainment as learned case of new assets
The results from the application of decision logic tree analysis devised from the classic
RCM process analysis in Segment 2 Phase 5 (Table II) is used to develop an appropriate
maintenance programme for the associated road junction transport assets to ensure
continuous functionality and availability. The most appropriate method for
accomplishing each maintenance task is recommended. It is observed that the best way
to determine the ideal intervals should be based on information about the failure rate
function, the consequences and cost of the failure. The PM task is supposed to prevent as
well as reduce cost and mitigate the risk of the PM tasks (Rausand and Vatn, 2008).
The dominant failures as they affect user safety, mission and environment are determined
by a critical decision logic framework, as shown in Tables VII–XVI for the investigated
assets. The analysis utilises the fundamental eight decision logic questions as indicated in
 Functional failure
Preventive
Non-fulfilment of Failure mode Failure effect maintenance
Asset S/N Function function Cause of failure Consequences strategies
Drainage 01 To allow for the A Fails to take 1 Blocked Drains Public safety,
removal of water on away (edge drains affected destruction of
the carriageway and rainwater by sedimentation existing road
surrounding and debris infrastructure,
catchment areas accumulation) inefficient travel,
increase travel time,
B Fails to 1 Design (wrong disrupt intended
discharge or discharge design, flow and operating
contain rainfall damaged or speed, discomfort
inappropriate and inconveniences
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

rainfall to the road users

containment) and reduced
C Fails to protect 1 Dilapidated and appearance of road
from ineffective pollution aesthetics and
environment control devices appeal
pollution
Carriageway 02 To facilitate a A Fails to 1 Deterioration Affects vehicular
smooth and reliable facilitate Texture and and cyclist safety,
journey time smooth Drive reduced resistance comfort and
to skid convenience,
B Fails to provide Defected Increased vehicle
a reliable carriageway by maintenance cost
journey longitudinal and impact of the
transverse crack, economy., inefficient
pothole, poor travel time, and
texture, poor skid poor appearance of
resistance and lousy local aesthetics and
edge condition) appeal
Footway 03 To create a safe way A Fails to provide 1 Pavement distress, Affects pedestrian
for pedestrians to a safe walk spalling, cracking, and cyclist safety,
move about on a path surface irregularity comfort and
path that is convenience, poor
separated from the B Fails to ease 1 Weather, poor accessibility to
carriageway the convenient design, faded transits or bus
path markings shelters, inefficient
C Fails to provide 1 Debris accumulation travel, increased
friendly walk time
path
Traffic 04 To help calm traffic A Fails to calm, 1 Vehicles capable of Affects pedestrian
Island and improve ease of separate crossing over and cyclist safety,
pedestrian crossing opposite flow comfort and
or (in limited of traffic convenience, poor
circumstances) B Fails to ease 1 Inaccessible accessibility to
carries traffic pedestrian pedestrian route, transits or bus
control equipment crossing debris accumulation, shelters, inefficient
inappropriate tactile carriageway
surface crossing, and poor
C Fails to 1 Accident damage, appearance of local
accommodate age- use related aesthetics and
equipment factors appeal Table VI.
safety Failure mode effect
analysis (FMEA)
of road junction
(continued ) system assets
 IJQRM Functional failure
Non-fulfilment of Failure mode Failure effect
Asset S/N Function function Cause of failure Consequences

Road 05 To provide visibility A Fails to stand 1 Damage to post or Public safety

Lighting at night hours and hold lamp arm (accidents, majorly at night,
unit properly improper road users comfort
installation, age- and convenience
related) compromised, less
B Fails to 1 Flaws from efficient travel and
appropriate photocells, ballast or operating speed,
signals to the other components crime increase at
lamp night and poor
C Fails to light 1 Non-functional appearance of road
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

up or light up components (lamps, aesthetics and

designated ballast photocells) appeal
area
adequately
Road Sign 06 To guide and A Fails to hold 1 Sign panel support Increase rates of
regulate traffic, sign display damaged, near miss with
communicating uprightly or vandalism, safety implications,
information clearly display inappropriate frustration to road
and with sufficient carriageway maintenance users, less efficient
lead- time written signs travel and due to
clearly deteriorated signs,
B Sign panel fails 1 Deteriorated sign operating speed and
to send panel (poor discomfort and
appropriate reflectivity, faded inconveniences to
feedback to colouring, the road users and
road users weathering) poor appearance
C Signs panels 1 Faded
illegible
Traffic 07 To guide and A Fails to hold 1 Mast and arm Public safety,
Signal regulate traffic, signal display damage due to accident and
communicating unit uprightly damage, accident or accident risk
information clearly age and use increase, inefficient
and with sufficient travel, increase
time travel time, disrupt
the intended flow
B Fails to send an 1 Defects on controller and operating
appropriate and detectors cause speed, discomfort
signal to by corrosion, and inconveniences
display unit wreathing. to the road users
C Fails to assign 1 Non-function and poor
correct advice component (signal appearance of road
to road user display unit, aesthetics and
controller, detectors) appeal
Road 08 To segregate A Fails to 1 Inadequate offsets, The motorist, cyclist
Barrier pedestrians from segregate poor post spacing, and pedestrian’s
vehicles, help embattlement and safety compromised
channel pedestrians splicing, damaged or as head impact
to where they are age-related factors. criterion is
supposed to be increased, reduced
walking, mainly appearance of local
those with visual aesthetics and
impairment appeal

Table VI. (continued )

 Functional failure
Preventive
Non-fulfilment of Failure mode Failure effect maintenance
Asset S/N Function function Cause of failure Consequences strategies
B Fails to direct 1 Deteriorated Road
Safety Barrier, dull
declination devices,
missing parts
Road 09 To provide A Fails to guide 1 Paint for a lane, and Road user’s safety
Marking information and traffic edge striping compromised due to
warning to road abraded, wear and illegibility which
users and help guide loss of adhesion decreases the road
traffic flow in an (Ultra Violet rays, user’s decisions,
orderly, safe stream heat traffic and road discomfort and
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

surface grime) inconveniences to

B Fails to reflect 1 Loss of reflectivity road users, sparse
feedback on (reduced by dirt, appearance of local
road users abrasion and aesthetics and
weathering) appeal
C Fails to provide 1 Raised pavement
information marker unavailable
(degradation, dirt
accrual, heat wear)
Bus Shelter 10 To provide a safe A Fails to shelter 1 Damaged Passengers affected
place where passenger (vandalism, by harsh
passengers wait to safely age–user related, weathering
board and alight weathering) condition, accidents
from a bus B Fails to inform 1 Information or accident risk
passenger unavailable (lack from trips and fall
adequately of inspection) prior boarding or
alighting from the
bus Table VI.

Table IV to determine the criticality class by conducting a CA for the asset with emphasis
on the following:
• safety and environment criticality;
• mission criticality;
• other criticalities; and
• hidden failures criticality.
For illustration, the effectiveness priority assessment for drainage system, as illustrated in
Table VII, demonstrates that the criticality classes associated with three functional failures as
detected by logic analysis are B, B and A, where A is for safety and environment criticality
and B for mission criticality. A full breakdown of 1 A of Table VII is expressed in the below
list, presenting how the analysis for the various failure function of the assets is steered:
(1) Criticality analysis:
• Question 1. ¼ Is the occurrence of a blocked drainage failure evident to the
operating crew while it is performing its regular duties? Yes – Because the debris
reveals itself to the drainage inspection crew on their day to day activities.
• Question 2. ¼ Does the blocked drainage failure cause a loss of function or
secondary damage that has a direct and adverse effect on operating safety? Yes
 IJQRM • Question 3. ¼ Does the failure have a direct and adverse effect on operational
capability? No
• The CA results portray the answers as follows Q1. ¼ Yes (Y), Q2. ¼ Yes (Y) and
Q3. ¼ No (N). Y, Y, N is the CA equivalent of a 4 (safety and environmental
criticality) in the criticality class table for a PM task consideration as indicated in
Table IV.
(2) PM task:
• Question 4. ¼ Is the effectiveness safety and environment criticality related?
Yes (Y)
• Question 5. ¼ Is the effectiveness of mission criticality related? No (N)
Question 6. ¼ Is the effectiveness of other criticalities related? No (N)
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

• Question 7. ¼ Is the effectiveness hidden failures criticality related? No (N)

The resultant from a PM task of No. 4 (safety and environmental criticality)
requires that the probability of failure to be reduced to very low.
• Question 8. ¼ Is a scheduled failure finding task available and justified? Not
applicable
(3) Finding Task (FT): Yes
(4) Redesign (RD): No
(5) Preventive maintenance Strategy (PS): CD task requires a periodic diagnostic
inspection that compares the existing condition of the drainage system with the
design standard. This discovers and corrects potential failures before an actual
failure occurs.
(6) Description (D): maintenance activity to be recommended.
(7) Periodicity (P): mean time between inspections (MTBI).

6. Discussion
The dearth of deterrence of failure always leads to a rise in the cost and benefit ratio about
both the individual maintenance intervention and a group of interventions relating to the
network of infrastructure. After maintenance task selection, RCM logic decision proposes
various maintenance strategies that would be carried out in cyclic, routine and reactive
manner. As shown in Table II, FMEA of road junction asset precedes decision logic in which
FMEA spots underlying hazards, and the latter assigns a critical value which facilitates
criticality class selection. It is important to carry out a CA as it is the best way to evaluate
how asset failures impact system performance to analytically grade assets for the intention
of maintenance prioritisation and reliability improvement initiatives (Ray, 2010; Sinha,
2015). Before choosing criticality class for the assets, failure effects are classified as for how
they affect safety and environment (A), user mission (B), other failures (C) and hidden
failures (D). For example, if the failure affects the safety of road user which could lead to loss
of life, then it is classified as high priority. Tables VII–XVI for the investigated asset
presents the results of decision logic tree analysis.
The inter-relationships between road junction assets become more evident with a perusal of
the functional failures and maintenance strategies. For example, drainage systems functionally
fail when they are unable to take excess water from carriageway and surroundings which
often leads to failure of other assets such as carriageway by causing potholes which have
long-term and imminent effects such as skidding with severe consequences. The maintenance
 Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

FF-functional failure Criticality Criticality Finding PM

FM – failure mode analysis class PM task task Redesign Strategy Description Periodicity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FF
1A Fails to take away rainwater
1B Fails to contain rainfall runoff
1C Fails to protect from environment pollution
FM
1A1 Blocked drainage (edge drains affected by Y N Y B N Y N N YES NO CD Cleaning MTBI is every
Sedimentation/debris accumulation two years
1B1 Poor design (wrong discharge design levels, Y N Y B N Y N N YES NO CD More frequent Safety
damaged or inappropriate rainfall containment) Inspection/Redesign
1C1 Dilapidated and ineffective pollution control devices Y Y N A Y N N N YES NO CD Espouse time-based
(full/bypass interceptors, silt removal) maintenance
Preventive

strategies
maintenance

Table VII.
Drainage
 Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

IJQRM

Table VIII.
Carriageway
Decision logic analysis (carriageway)
FF-functional failure Criticality Criticality Finding PM
FM – failure mode analysis class PM task task Redesign Strategy Description Periodicity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FF
7A Fails to facilitate a smooth ride
7B Fails to facilitate the reliable journey
7A1 Deterioration Texture and skid resistance Y Y N A N Y N N YES NO CD Detailed MTBI is at
Inspection/ intervals monthly
Survey
7B1 Defected carriageway by longitudinal and transverse Y N Y B N Y N N YES NO CD Safety Inspection/
crack, rutting, poor texture, poor skid resistance and redesign
bad edge condition
 Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

Decision logic analysis (footway)

FF-functional failure Criticality Criticality Finding PM
FM – failure mode analysis class PM task task Redesign Strategy Description Periodicity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FF
2A Fails to provide a safe walk path
2B Fails to provide convenient walk path
2C Fails to provide unfriendly walk path Safety inspection that is hazardous
(trips, potholes, flags, missing
pavers, ruts &depressions)
FM
2A1 Pavement distress (spalling, cracking, Y N Y B N Y N N YES NO CD Detailed inspection (includes all MTBI is
surface irregularities, rutting, rocking, safety inspection, irregularities, every
depression, unzipping, potholes, bumps slipperiness, water seepage and three
and damaged) structural balance months
2B1 Surface type and size (unfriendly with the Y N N C N Y N N YES NO CD
weather condition, poor design, faded
painted markings)
2C1 Debris accumulation and vegetation Y Y N N Y N N YES NO TD MTBI is
encroachment on yearly
intervals
Preventive

strategies
maintenance

Table IX.
Footway
 Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

Table X.
IJQRM

Road light
Decision logic analysis (road light)
FF-functional failure Criticality Criticality Finding PM
FM – failure mode analysis class PM Task task Redesign Strategy Description Periodicity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FF
4A Fails to stand and hold
lamp unit uprightly
Fails to appropriate signal
to the lamp
4B Fails to light up lamp
adequately
4C Fails to display clearly Safety inspection (performance MTBI safety inspection is
of lighting) between 14–28 days interval
FM
4A1 Damaged (post and arms) Y Y . A Y N N N YES NO CD Detailed visual inspection & During bulk lamp change
maintenance (Luminaries, which is 12 months/4000
columns, network cabling, feeder hours interval for bulk lamp
4B1 Corrosion (flaw on Y Y . A Y N N N YES NO CD pillar, switch room and change
photocells and ballasts) distribution power points
4C1 Non-Functional Y Y . A Y N N N YES CD Electrical test and inspection
component (lamps,
ballast, photocells)
4D1 Use – time-related factor Y N Y B N Y N N YES NO CD Every six years
(Blurred casing, dirt
accumulation)
 Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

Decision logic analysis (road Signs and bollards)

FF-functional failure Criticality Criticality Finding PM
FM – failure mode analysis class PM task task Redesign Strategy Description Periodicity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FF
5A Fails to hold sign display
uprightly
5B Fails to send appropriate
feedback to road users
5C Fails legible Safety inspection (Night time MTBI between safety
patrol) inspection is 14–28 days
FM
5A1 Sign Panel or support Y N Y B N Y N N YES NO CD
damaged, vandalism,
inappropriate maintenance
5B1 Deteriorated sign panel (Poor Y Y . A Y N N N YES NO CD Detailed inspection (Visual 12–24 monthly interval
retro-reflectivity, faded colour, performance, cleaning, obscured
weathering) sign, signpost structural &
mechanical integrity)
5C1 Obscured sign (vegetation, Y N N B N Y N N YES NO CD Bulk lamp change 6/12/24 months interval
blistering, dirt accumulation based on lamp type or
and missing signs, insufficient by manufacturer’s
inspection) instructions
Preventive

strategies
maintenance

Road signs and

Table XI.

bollards
 Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

IJQRM

Table XII.
Traffic signal
Decision logic analysis (traffic signal)
FF-functional failure Criticality Criticality Finding PM
FM – failure mode analysis class PM task task Redesign Strategy Description Periodicity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FF
6A Fails to hold signal display
unit uprightly
6B Fails to send an appropriate
signal to display unit
6C Fails to assign correct advice
to road user adequately
FM
6A1 Damage (mast arm and poles) Y Y N A Y N N Y YES NO CD Safety inspection of & Yearly interval and replaced
replacement of based on manufacturer’s
6B1 Corrosion (defect on controller Y Y N A N N N Y YES NO CD electromechanical parts, back instructions
& detector) up batteries
6C1 Non-functional component Y Y – D N N N N NO YES CD Lamp changing and lens Checked six months interval
signal display) cleaning but changed yearly
 Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

Decision logic analysis (traffic Island)

FF-functional failure Criticality Criticality Finding PM
FM – failure mode analysis class PM task task Redesign Strategy Description Periodicity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FF
3A Fails to calm, separate opposite flow
of traffic
3B Fails to ease pedestrian crossing
FM
3A1 Vehicles capable of crossing over Y N Y B N Y YES NO CD Inspection to ensure that MTBI is every two
The inaccessible pedestrian route, debris all island surfaces are years
accumulation non-slippery by ensuring
it tactile are still intact,
and no accumulation of
debris or displacement of
3B1 Inappropriate tactile surface Y N Y B N Y YES NO CD asset laid of them
Preventive

strategies
maintenance

Traffic Island
Table XIII.
 Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

IJQRM

Table XIV.
Road restrain barrier
Decision logic analysis (road restrain barrier)
FF-functional failure Criticality Criticality Finding PM
FM – failure mode analysis class PM task task Redesign Strategy Description Periodicity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FF
8A Fails to segregate
8B Fails to direct Cleaning A yearly MTBI is attributed to
enabling cheques on structure
FM and paintings
8A1 Inadequate offset, poor post spacing, Y N Y B N Y YES NO CD More frequent Safety
embattlement and splicing, accidents, Inspection/redesign
age-related factors)
8B1 Dull delineation devices, missing Y N Y B N Y YES NO CD Espouse time-based
parts maintenance
 Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

Decision logic analysis (road markings)

FF–Functional Failure Criticality Criticality Finding PM
FM – Failure Mode analysis class PM task task Redesign Strategy Description Periodicity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FF
9A Fails to guide traffic
9B Fails to reflect feedback on road
users
9C Fails to provide Information
FM
9A1 Paint for a lane, and edge striping Y N Y B N Y YES NO CD High-speed monitor and visual MTBI is on an annual
abrade, wear and loss of adhesion inspection to assess retro- interval
(degraded by UV rays, heat, reflectivity, wear assessment, (Category 1 defects
traffic and road surface grime) assessment of luminance factor and corrected with 24
9B1 Loss of reflectivity (reduced by Y N Y B N Y YES NO CD measurement of skid resistance hours, while Category
dirt, abrasion and weathering) 2 defects within six
9C1 Raised pavement marker broken Y Y N A Y N YES NO CD months)
or missing, use related factors,
dirt accumulation, degradation
by UV rays and heat wear from
traffic
Preventive

strategies
maintenance

Table XV.
Road markings
 Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

IJQRM

Bus shelter
Table XVI.
Decision logic analysis (bus shelter)
FF-functional failure Criticality Criticality PM Finding PM
FM – failure mode analysis class Task task Redesign Strategy Description Periodicity

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FF
10A Fails to shelter passengers safely
10B Fails to inform user independently Cleaning
FM
101 Damage (vandalism) Y N Y B N Y N N YES NO CD More frequent Safety A monthly MTBI is
Inspection/redesign carried out for safety
inspection
10B1 Notifications unavailability N . . D N N N Y NO YES CD Espouse time-based Yearly Interval for
maintenance detailed inspection
 strategy to remediate failure modes is captured in FMEA. The FMEA is used to identify, Preventive
quantify, evaluate and prioritise the risk associated with the assets. It helps to reduce the risk maintenance
of failure by detecting the possible failure modes of the assets. Downtime to restore however is strategies
not consistent with the criticality of failure. For example, it is discovered that failure of
carriageway has a response time of five days, but the failure of drainage to take away the
excess of water concurs to the standard schedule of 28 days. This information depicts that road
transport network maintenance prioritisation is currently biased towards maintaining
carriageway functions, but FMEA results demonstrate that the functions of other assets are
distinct and significant. This is an important issue because functional failures have short and
long-term effects.
This RCM analysis has facilitated an in-depth analysis of road junction asset failures
particularly the procedural aspects of maintainability. In the implementation of RCM,
potential failure modes and causes associated with each road asset have been identified.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

Consequently, the criticality class of each failure mode is calculated. The results show that
road lights with criticality classes of A, A, A, B and traffic signal with A, A, D have the
highest criticality. This suggests that high priorities should be devoted to both assets
during maintenance prioritisation.
The RCM process has offered a rational basis to assign appropriate maintenance tasks to
manage road junction asset failures effectively. About 50 per cent of these proposed
maintenance tasks are operator maintenance. This means that current inspectors of
transport asset would be required to carry out much more tasks and this will require
skill-level upgrading. However, this will have to be managed tactically so as not to lead to
increasing disruption of road junction network operations.

7. Conclusions
The RCM has been presented by establishing a qualitative relationship between the
functional failure of asset and maintenance strategy. Results from the case study show that
how the FMEA and decision logic method can be used to propose different PM strategies
based on the eight critical questions, which include the impact of PM measure on system
reliability. Furthermore, the study shows that the RCM method can be performed and
supported by real input data. Periodic maintenance and reliability development are an
intricate problem, and substantial updates of real input data are required to enhance the
RCM method. The application of PM principles will help to decrease the number of failures
and inadvertent stops with directing resources for timely detection of a failure in
high-impact assets.
The paper presents a study of RCM which is conducted on the critical sub-assets of a
newly constructed road junction infrastructure in Nigeria. The need for road junction
system infrastructure to work at an optimum performance cannot be overemphasised. No
doubt this application of RCM to road junction networks has analysed failures, criticalities
and has proposed a different maintenance task. The results are however slightly not in line
with current road junction system network for defect-related failure regulations in
developing countries. However, it provides signposts to inform asset owners of functional
failure maintenance policy direction. Road junctions are originators of the road traffic
congestion and account for high accident rate. The traditional methods of reliability
assurance used in the highway industry such as reactive maintenance and routine
maintenance are often inadequate to meet the round the clock usage demands of these
assets. Thus, the consideration of the application of a systematic RCM process is for
maintaining the system function by selecting and applying practical PM tasks.
The results from the implementation of the classical RCM successfully shows that its
application in the highway industry could reduce excessive maintenance backlog and
frequent reactive maintenance by effective optimisation of its PM intervals as the FMEA is
 IJQRM used to identify, quantify, evaluate and prioritise the risk associated with the assets. The
classic RCM analysis results show that the highway network maintenance prioritisation is
currently biased towards carriageway functions failure maintenance. Carriageway has a
response time of five days, but the failure of drainage to take away the excess of water
concurs to the standard schedule of 28 days. However, FMECA results demonstrate that the
functions of other assets are distinct and significant.

References
Aamodt, A. and Plaza, E. (1994), “Case-based reasoning: foundational issues, methodological
variations, and system approaches”, AI Communications, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 39-59.
Backlund, F. (2005), “Managing the introduction of RCM experiences from a Swedish hydropower
company”, IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, San Francisco, CA, 12–16 June,
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

pp. 2646-2648.
Battikha, M.G. (2003), “Quality management practice in highway construction”, International Journal of
Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 532-550.
Besnard, F., Fischer, K. and Bertling, L. (2010), “Reliability-centred asset maintenance: a step towards
enhanced reliability, availability, and profitability of wind power plants”, IEEE PES Innovative
Smart Grid Technologies Conference Europe, pp. 1-8.
Cheng, Z., Jia, X., Gao, P., Wu, S. and Wang, J. (2008), “A framework for intelligent reliability centered
maintenance analysis”, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 93 No. 6, pp. 806-814.
Chojnowski, K. (2007), Best Practice: Reliability-Centered Maintenance: New Equipment Process
(Classic RCM), CACI International, Fairfax, VA.
Coupe, G. and Greenwood, C. (2014), “Visualising the New Oxford circus junction in London, UK”,
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Vol. 167, pp. 25-32.
DFT (2012), “Managing, improving and investing in the road network”, Deparment for Transport, London.
Ekpiwhre, E.O. and Tee, K.F. (2016), “Cost modelling of carriageway treatment transition for strategic
maintenance optimisation”, Proceedings of the Asset Management Conference, London,
23–24 November.
Ekpiwhre, E.O. and Tee, K.F. (2018), “Reliability based maintenance methodology for sustainable
transport asset management”, Pollack Periodica, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 99-112.
Ekpiwhre, E.O., Tee, K.F., Aghagba, S.A. and Bishop, K. (2016), “Risk-based inspection on highway
assets with category 2 defects”, International Journal of Safety and Security Engineering, Vol. 6
No. 2, pp. 372-382.
Fang, Y., Chen, J. and Tee, K.F. (2013), “Analysis of structural dynamic reliability based on the probability
density evolution method”, Structural Engineering & Mechanics, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 201-209.
Fitzpatrick, T. (2013), “Highways agency unveils £98m pinch point schemes – full list”, Construction News,
10 April.
Garozzo, M. and Andrea, A.D. (2006), “The role of maintenance for highway infrastructures”,
SECAP, Pula.
Huo, Z., Zhang, Z., Wang, Y. and Yan, G. (2005), “CMMS based reliability centered maintenance”, Proceedings
of the IEEE Power Engineering Society Transmission and Distribution Conference, pp. 1-6.
IAM (2008), Asset Management Part 2: Guidelines for the application of PAS 55-1, Institiute Asset
Management, British Standards Institution, London, p. 72.
Liptrot, D. and Palarchio, G. (2000), “Utilizing advanced maintenance practices and information
technology to achieve maximum equipment reliability”, International Journal of Quality and
Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 8, pp. 919-928.
Lopez De Mantaras, R., Mcsherry, D., Bridge, D., Leake, D., Smyth, B., Craw, S., Faltings, B.,
Lou Maher, M., Cox, M.T., Forbus, K., Keane, M., Aamodt, A. and Watson, I. (2005), “Retrieval,
reuse, revision and retention in case-based reasoning”, The Knowledge Engineering Review,
Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 215-240.
 Mahmoodian, M., Alani, A. and Tee, K.F. (2012), “Stochastic failure analysis of the gusset plates in the Preventive
Mississippi river bridge”, International Journal of Forensic Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 153-166. maintenance
Markow, M.J. (2007), NCHRP Synthesis 371: Managing Selected Transportation Assets: Signals, strategies
Lighting, Signs, Pavement Markings, Culverts, and Sidewalks, Transportation Research Board
Transportation Research Board National Academy, Washington, DC.
Moubray, J. (1997), Reliability-Centred Maintenance, Butterworth-Heinemann, Leicestershire.
Nicholas, J.R. (2004), “Mastering the maintenance process”, 19th International Maintenance Conference,
Florida, 5-8 December.
Nowlan, S. and Heap, H. (1978), “Reliabilty centered maintenence”, United Airlines–MDA 903-75-C-
0349, San Francisco, CA, p. 476.
Oluwole, A.A., Razak, A.R. and Oluwole, F.C. (2012), “Comparative study of defect liability period
practice in Malaysia and Nigeria Building Industry”, International Journal of Innovation,
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

Management and Technology, Vol. 3 No. 6, pp. 808-810.

Park, G.P., Heo, J.H., Lee, S.S. and Yoon, Y.T. (2011), “Generalized reliability centered maintenance
modeling through modified semi-Markov Chain in power system”, Journal of Electrical
Engineering and Technology, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 25-31.
Pride, A. (2010), “Reliability-centered maintenance (RCM)”, Whole Building Design Guide, National
Institute of Building Sciences, Washington, DC.
Rausand, M. and Vatn, J. (2008), “Reliability centred maintenance”, Complex System Maintenance
Handbook, Springer Series in Reliability Engineering, Springer, London, pp. 79-109.
Ray, D. (2010), Why is Criticality Analysis Important, Life Cycle Engineering, Charleston.
Remenyte-Prescott, R. and Andrews, J. (2013), “Review of infrastructure asset management methods
for networked systems”, 19th AR2TS Advances, pp. 189-213.
S9081-AB-GIB-010 (2007), Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) Handbook (Edited by Borkowski, M.
and Hans, P.), Direction of Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command, Port Hueneme, CA, April,
pp. 1-105.
Sarkar, A., Chandra Panja, S. and Sarkar, B. (2011), “Survey of maintenance policies for the last 50
years”, International Journal of Software Applications, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 130-148.
Semiteje, C.A. (2013), “Mid-term report by the honourable commissioner of special infrastructure”,
Delta State Government, Asaba.
Shankar, G. and Sahani, V. (2003), “Reliability analysis of a maintenance network with repair and
preventive maintenance”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 20
No. 2, pp. 268-280.
Shi, H. and Tee, K.F. (2014), “Review of design and construction of hurricane protection barriers”,
International Journal of Forensic Engineering, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 144-151.
Sinha, P. (2015), “Towards higher maintenance effectiveness: integrating maintenance management
with reliability engineering”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 32
No. 7, pp. 754-762.
Siqueira, I.P. (2004), “Optimum reliability-centered maintenance task frequencies for power system
equipments”, International Conference on Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems,
pp. 162-167.
Tee, K.F. and Ekpiwhre, E.O. (2018), “Reliability analysis and growth curves modelling of fielded road
systems”, World Review of Intermodal Transportation Research, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 168-194.
Tee, K.F. and Li, C.Q. (2011), “A numerical study of maintenance strategy for concrete structures in
marine environment”, Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Applications of
Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, pp. 618-625.
Tee, K.F., Ekpiwhre, E.O. and Zhang, Y. (2018), “Degradation modelling and life expectancy using
Markov Chain model for carriageway”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability
Management, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 1268-1288.
 IJQRM Tee, K.F., Khan, L.R. and Li, H. (2014), “Application of subset simulation in reliability estimation of
underground pipelines”, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 130, pp. 125-131.
UK Bridges Board (2005), Management of Highway Structures: A Code of Practice, UK Roads Liaison
Group, The Stationary Office, London.
UK Lighting Board (2004), Well-lit Highways: Code of Practice for Highway Lighting Management
(Edited by Bunting, E. and Coatham, D.), 2013th ed., UK Roads Liaison Group (UKRLG),
Stationery Office, London (November), pp. 105.
UK Roads Board (2005), Well- Maintained Highways: Code of Practice for Highway Maintenance
Management (Edited by Bunting, E., Taggart, A. and Capps, C.), UK Roads Liaison Group
(UKRLG), The Stationary Office (TSO), London.
USACERL (1999), Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) Guide (USACERL 99/41) US ARMY
CORPS Eng, Tacoma, Washington, DC.
You, M.-Y. (2017), “A predictive maintenance system for hybrid degradation processes”, International
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW At 01:29 21 February 2019 (PT)

Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 34 No. 7, pp. 1123-1135.

Further reading
A.I.L Infrastructure Limited (2014), Junction Improvement Works ( JIW) Project, Directorate of Special
Infrastructure, Governors Office, Asaba.

Corresponding author
Kong Fah Tee can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]