KR102570507B1 - Asset management system for water supply and drainage facilities) - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention relates to a water supply and sewage asset management system, comprising: a user terminal displaying a user interface for managing water and sewage assets;
a management server providing the user interface to the user terminal; and
Includes asset information and asset management information of water and sewage assets provided to the management server, and includes an asset database having an asset classification system in which each asset is classified according to a plurality of level steps based on function or location,
The asset database includes asset information data for basic items of assets and asset management information, which is information that is the basis for evaluating and analyzing assets, and the asset information data is a grouping criterion for determining whether assets have the same functional characteristics. It is characterized in that it includes asset-based information to be used.

Description

Water supply and sewage asset management system {ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES)}

The present invention relates to a water and sewage asset management system capable of performing water and sewage asset management in an integrated manner.

The asset classification system of the inventory of the existing water supply and sewage facility asset management system hardcoded the level names and codes for classification (coded to prevent data from being changed).

In this case, the user cannot arbitrarily change the asset classification system, and the developer must modify the code when newly registering a new asset that does not fit the existing classification or modifying or deleting the existing classification system.

In addition, most of the classification system is composed of high-lock key, so it is difficult to increase convenience in use by assigning the same level to assets that are identical or similar in function or characteristic.

In particular, in the case of large-scale local governments or metropolitan governments, when applying an asset management system in an area with tens to millions of assets and many asset paths, rather than hardcoding, which can be modified only by changing the program code, There was an urgent need to develop a water and sewage asset management system that allows users to freely configure the asset classification system.

Republic of Korea Patent No. 102008962 (2019.08.02)

The present invention has been made to solve the above problems,

An object of the present invention is to provide a water and sewage asset management system in which a user can directly create an asset classification system.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a water supply and sewerage asset management system capable of newly creating, modifying, and deleting an asset classification system for user convenience and system scalability improvement.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a water supply and sewerage asset management system capable of grouping assets having the same characteristics among assets and efficiently managing the assets using the grouped information.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a water supply and sewage asset management system for setting service levels provided by water and sewage assets and determining investment priority among various service level items.

A water supply and sewage asset management system according to an aspect of the present invention includes a user terminal displaying a user interface for managing water and sewage assets, a management server providing a user interface to the user terminal, and asset information and assets of water and sewage assets provided to the management server. Include management information.

The water supply and sewerage asset management system has a feature of including an asset database having an asset classification system classified according to a plurality of level steps based on asset function or location.

The asset database includes asset information data for basic items of assets and asset management information, which is information that is the basis for evaluation and analysis of assets, and the asset information data is a grouping standard for determining whether assets have the same functional characteristics. It is desirable to include asset-based information to be used.

In addition, the asset standard information may include level stages of functional standards of each asset in the asset classification system, and the grouping standard is the same when the level stages of standard standards of each asset in the asset classification system are the same. It is an information sharing group.

Preferably, the information sharing group is formed in at least two or more level stages, and it is also preferable that the information shared within the group to be shared by the information sharing group includes the result of evaluation and analysis of the asset.

The information shared within the group may be at least one selected from the group consisting of durability application information, failure type information, risk assessment information, and optimal investment plan establishment information, and the asset management information may be data for direct evaluation, indirect evaluation It is preferable to include one selected from the group consisting of use data, life prediction data, and service level analysis data, and the management server may include an asset evaluation unit that evaluates assets.

In addition, the asset evaluation unit includes a direct evaluation conducted with data obtained by evaluating the asset through direct observation and investigation of the state, and an indirect evaluation of identifying the state with data entered for the specification, buried environment, and operating environment of the asset. Preferably, the asset classification system allows a user to create or change an asset classification system having a plurality of level stages by registering or modifying level stages and level names through the user interface, and the asset information includes asset name, asset Basic item information including at least one selected from the group including code, facility/pipe network classification, installation date, disposal date, address, initial investment cost, water supply use, pipe diameter, width, height, type/type, and operation of the asset It may include whether the state is a normal state or an abnormal state, and in the case of the abnormal state, it is preferable to include state item information including the reason for the abnormal state.

The water supply and sewerage asset management system may further include an inspector's terminal that transmits data inspected from assets to the management server for the direct evaluation.

The water supply and sewerage asset management system according to another aspect of the present invention is characterized by including an asset database having an asset classification system classified according to a plurality of level steps based on the aforementioned asset function or location.

In the water supply and sewage asset management system according to the present invention, a user can easily add a new level or modify an existing level, thereby improving system scalability, compatibility, and convenience. In particular, in the case of large-scale local governments or metropolitan governments, when applying an asset management system in an area with many hundreds of thousands of assets and many asset paths, an asset classification system is required rather than hardcoding, which can be modified only by changing the program code. Since it can be configured freely, user convenience is increased.

In addition, the water supply and sewerage asset management system according to the present invention has an effect of managing information by classifying tens of thousands to millions of assets into hundreds of groups. In the case of a waterworks facility, about 75,000 assets are classified into groups with 88 similar characteristics to manage the standard information of assets, and assets belonging to the same group have the same attribute information (eg, durability life) collectively. Because of the input, the consistency of data (a state in which specific data values match each other) is improved, there is an advantage in that it is easy to modify reference information, and the effect of the invention that increases the efficiency of data management can be expected.

In addition, the water supply and sewage asset management system according to the present invention can determine the service level or service investment priority. Determining investment priorities for service level items is one of the very important processes because the performance of service level items varies greatly depending on investment priorities.

1A is a block diagram of a water supply and sewage management system according to the present invention.
Figure 1b is a user interface configuration diagram of the water supply and sewage management system according to the present invention.
Figure 1c is a diagram showing the configuration of the asset database of the water supply and sewage management system according to the present invention.
Figure 1d is a configuration diagram of the management server of the water supply and sewage management system according to the present invention.
Figure 2 shows the level code management of the user interface of the system according to the present invention.
3 is a maximum level setting menu screen for setting the maximum level in the inventory path management of the user interface according to the present invention.
4 is a path selection menu screen for selecting a level name for each level step of the user interface according to the present invention.
5 is a screen for selecting an inventory path of a user interface according to the present invention.
6 is a screen of the asset registration information menu for registering asset information of the user interface according to the present invention.
7 shows an edit screen for asset location registration of the user interface according to the present invention.
8 is an example of a water and sewage asset classification system recommended by the Ministry of Environment.
9A is a screen of the asset standard information menu according to the present invention.
9B is an asset classification system screen for each level step according to the present invention.
10 is a screen of the management data management menu of the user interface according to the present invention.
11 is a risk evaluation result view screen of the user interface according to the present invention.
12 shows a service level analysis screen of a user interface according to the present invention.
13a shows the condition values of the steel pipe, FIG. 13b shows the condition values of the cement mortar-lined ductile cast iron pipe (CML-DIP), FIG. 13c shows the condition values of CIP/DIP, and FIG. 13d Condition values of non-metal pipes are shown, and FIG. 13E shows weights for each pipe type.
Figure 14 shows the lifetime of an asset in relation to failure type.
Figure 15a is a graph showing the state grade of the asset by the number of years of use of the asset.
15B shows a graph for selecting an asset status grade regression model.
16 shows a service level analysis step according to the present invention.
17 shows a pairwise comparison table for determining service item priorities according to the present invention.
18 shows an example of a two-way comparison matrix.
19 shows an example of relative preference according to normalization matrix transformation.
20 shows an example of relative preference with consistency secured.
21 shows an example of a BRE rating distribution diagram.

Prior to describing the present invention in detail below, it is understood that the terms used herein are intended to describe specific embodiments and are not intended to limit the scope of the present invention, which is limited only by the appended claims. shall. All technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art unless otherwise specified.

Throughout this specification and claims, the terms "comprise", "comprise" and "comprising", unless stated otherwise, are meant to include a stated object, step or group of objects, and steps, and any other object However, it is not used in the sense of excluding a step or a group of objects or a group of steps.

On the other hand, various embodiments of the present invention can be combined with any other embodiments unless clearly indicated to the contrary. Any feature indicated as being particularly desirable or advantageous may be combined with any other features and characteristics indicated as being particularly desirable or advantageous. Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention and effects thereof will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings.

The water supply and sewage management system according to the present invention includes a user terminal, an asset database, and a management server. 1 is a block diagram of a water supply and sewage management system according to the present invention.

A user terminal is a terminal used by a user using a water supply and drainage management system and can access a management server through wired or wireless communication. When a user terminal accesses a management server, a website or application provided by the management server is executed, and the website or application provides a user interface.

The user interface provides inventory management, operation management, evaluation analysis, financial analysis, geographic information system, statistical analysis, and bulletin board menus.

Inventory management includes level code management, inventory path management, asset standard information management, and asset management. Level code management is a menu that allows you to build an asset classification system by registering and modifying level stages, level names, asset classification, and asset classification codes. 2 shows level code management. When registering a new level name code, select a level step and enter the level name, asset classification, and asset classification code of the level to be created. Optionally, you can enter the upper level and upper asset code of the corresponding level.

At this time, if a new level is created in a specific level step in the level code management, since the name of the level existing in the lower level of the newly created level may not exist, the lower level step of the newly created corresponding level step can also be newly created. Meanwhile, the new asset classification system created in the level code management is reflected in the inventory path management afterwards.

Inventory path management is a menu that creates an inventory path that includes a new level name in the asset classification system when a new level name is created or modified in level code management and the asset classification system is changed. Includes registration menu. 3 is a maximum level setting menu screen for setting the maximum level in inventory route management, and FIG. 4 is a route selection menu screen for selecting a level name for each level step.

The maximum level setting menu can set the total level level of the inventory path to set the inventory path management, and the path management is completed by specifying the path of all levels according to the level level in the inventory path and item registration menu. For example, if a new level name is created at the 4th level in level code management and a level of up to 8 levels is set in the maximum level setting menu, the newly set level name of the 4th level in the inventory path and item registration menu. Including, the inventory path for the new asset can be specified by selecting the level name from level 1 to level 8.

Asset management is a menu for registering and managing asset information, and includes an asset registration information menu for selecting an inventory path set in inventory path management and managing creation and modification of asset information. 5 is a screen for selecting an inventory path, and FIG. 6 is an asset registration information menu screen for registering asset information.

According to this, after clicking on an asset inventory path, searching for and selecting an asset belonging to the corresponding path, it is possible to input asset information in the asset registration menu.

Asset information includes basic item information and status item information. Basic item information is information on the basic items of the asset, including asset name, asset code, facility/pipe network classification, installation date, disposal date, address, initial investment cost, water supply use, pipe diameter, width, height, type/type, etc. do. Status item information is information about the operating state of an asset, including whether the asset is currently normal or abnormal, and the reason for the abnormality if it is abnormal. Abnormal causes include leaks, corrosion, material defects, paint damage, vibration, noise, peeling, inclination, defects, peeling, efflorescence, deformation, layer separation, scour, subsidence, pipe body damage, pipe joint damage, etc.

The asset management menu further provides a function for registering asset locations on a map. In this case, when asset location registration is executed, a map selection (GIS) pop-up window is displayed, and the location of the asset can be registered on the output map. Information, photo information, history information, etc. can be checked or entered. 7 shows an edit screen for asset location registration.

Meanwhile, unlike the asset management menu, an asset standard information management menu, which is asset information by group having similar characteristics, may be further included instead of one asset information. The asset-based information management menu is a menu for grouping and managing assets having similar characteristics in the asset classification system. Using the asset-based information management menu, information shared by information sharing groups with similar characteristics can be managed in an integrated manner.

In order to explain the asset-based information management menu in more detail, the specific problems of the prior art will be looked at. 8 is an example of a water and sewage asset classification system recommended by the Ministry of Environment. In the case of water supply facilities, it is determined by the name of the local government, management department, facility, business site name (system), process, type of work, asset group name, and detailed assets.

The conventional asset classification system as shown in FIG. 8 is stratified, and at this time, the stratification is stratified in such a way that the sum of asset items of a lower level becomes the asset information of a higher level. In addition, the hierarchy of assets is divided into levels. In the case of waterworks, it is divided into facility assets and pipe network assets and constitutes a separate level.

Basic item information corresponding to one asset, status item information, etc. (e.g., asset name, asset code, installation date, installation location, initial investment cost, model name, model specification, manufacturer, useful life, failure type Information required for asset management, such as information, risk assessment information, and optimal investment plan establishment information) are directly input by the user for each asset.

However, the above method has a problem that it takes a long time and errors may occur when inputting, and to improve this, new levels (level 7 of water supply facility assets, level 6 of waterworks network assets, level 5 of sewage treatment facilities and sewage pipelines) are created in advance so that users can group assets according to their needs.

However, in the case of arbitrarily grouping, it is not easy to group assets with similar characteristics because even the same asset group may have different characteristics depending on what the upper level is.

Therefore, in order to group assets with similar characteristics by breaking away from stratification in such a way that the sum of lower-level asset items becomes upper-level asset information, it is necessary to identify which level has unique characteristics that do not change in the asset classification system. In the present invention, as a result of a careful analysis of the level stages, it is found that each level stage in the asset classification system forms a different level stage based on location or function, and the upper level stages based on the function of assets in the asset classification system are the same. A level step was added to group assets with similar characteristics.

That is, each asset belonging to a group with similar characteristics, that is, an information sharing group having the same group-sharing information, has the same information in a certain type of asset information, which is called asset-based information, and asset-based information is used for grouping. It includes grouping criteria representing the same or similar characteristics of , and in an embodiment of the present invention, level steps having the above-described functional characteristics become asset reference information.

As a result, assets with the same asset-based information form an asset information sharing group, and the asset information sharing group shares the results of evaluation and analysis. Depending on the degree of asset-based information in the asset information sharing group, the durability application information and disability type At least one piece of information selected from the group consisting of information, risk assessment information, and optimal risk planning information may be shared. At this time, the shared information is referred to as intra-group shared information. 9A is a screen of the asset standard information menu according to the present invention.

9B is an asset classification system for each level according to the present invention. The entire hierarchy is divided into 9 levels, and information sharing groups in which assets having similar characteristics are grouped are added to the 7th and 8th levels. At this time, the information sharing group of the 7th level was named a large asset group, and the 8th level information sharing group was named a small asset group.

This shows that not only one information sharing group, but also subdivided information sharing groups can be managed according to the user's choice. That is, the user can arbitrarily add an information sharing group in the level stage of the classification system to efficiently manage asset information.

Table 1 exemplifies the information sharing group of the water purification plant facility mechanics and pumps according to the present invention. Here, level 3 and level 6 are level steps made on the basis of function, and a level 7 information sharing group that shares the same level 3 and level 6 as a higher level is formed as a large asset group, and also the same level 3, 6, and 7 A level 8 information sharing group shared at a higher level is formed as a subgroup of assets.

division level 3 level 6 level 7 level 8 Information sharing group facility species asset group asset subgroup example facility machine Pump Blow-in pump motor facility machine Pump Sludge supply pump motor facility machine Pump Submersible pump motor for drainage facility machine Pump sampling pump motor

Table 2 also exemplifies waterworks and drainage pipe information sharing groups. Here, level 3 and level 5 are level steps made on the basis of function, and a level 7 information sharing group that shares the same level 3 and level 5 as a higher level is formed as a large asset group, and also the same level 3, 5, and 6 A level 7 information sharing group that is shared at a higher level is formed as a small asset group.

division level 3 level 5 level 6 level 7 Information sharing group wait and see Pipeline/Auxiliary Facility asset group asset subgroup example wait and see pipeline drain PE pipe wait and see pipeline drain PVC pipe wait and see pipeline drain cast iron pipe

At this time, the shared information that the information sharing group can share is shown in Table 3 below. That is, shared information includes asset standard information, durability application information, failure type information, risk assessment information, and optimal investment plan establishment information.

information type Information items by type Asset-based information Facility/pipe network classification, work type (pipeline/subsidiary facility classification in the case of pipe networks), large asset group, small asset group Durable application information Legal life span, durability application method (average, minimum, maximum, range) Disability type information Application of regulatory life, capacity life, service life, physical life, and economic life Risk assessment information Destruction severity, spare rate Optimal investment planning information LoS relevance

The operation management menu provides asset cost management, operation data management, renovation project management, investigation and exploration management, NFC field inspection management, and civil complaint management functions. The user manages all costs related to assets in asset cost management, and can perform asset cost registration/modification/deletion/inquiry/output operations.

In operation data management, it is possible to perform inquiry/output work of flow rate/water pressure/water quality information and rate information system rate information in connection with the local waterworks database. 10 is a screen of the operation data management menu.

In the maintenance business management menu, you can perform registration/report work for waterworks related renovation business. At this time, the asset to be renovated can be selected from the asset list through asset inventory path selection or directly selected from the map.

In the survey and exploration management menu, you can perform registration/report work on survey and exploration related to water supply facilities. The method of selecting an asset is the method of selecting an asset list through asset inventory path selection and selecting an asset directly from a map.

As a menu used for on-site inspection of assets in the NFC field inspection management menu, when executed, it is possible to upload asset information, location information, and photos by accessing the dedicated mobile web with a terminal for inspectors to manage facilities with NFC tags.

The evaluation analysis menu provides functions such as technical diagnosis data management, indirect condition evaluation, direct condition evaluation, remaining life prediction evaluation, asset value revaluation, risk evaluation, service level analysis, and life cycle cost analysis.

In the technical diagnosis data management menu, you can manage general/professional technical diagnosis, safety inspection, and precise safety diagnosis data for water supply facilities. In the indirect condition evaluation menu, an indirect evaluation (scoring evaluation method) is performed within the technical diagnosis (structural and physical stability) of each facility according to the water supply pipe diagnosis technical diagnosis notification, and the indirectly evaluated score is entered. Assets to be evaluated can be selected from the asset list through asset inventory path selection or directly selected from the map.

The result of the indirect condition evaluation is displayed in the map selection pop-up window according to the pipeline condition grade: Grade I (small in aging - blue), Grade II (in progress of aging - green), Grade III (large in aging - red).

Direct evaluation (professional technical diagnosis) can be performed within the technical diagnosis (structural and physical stability) of each facility according to the waterworks pipe diagnosis technical diagnosis notification in the direct condition evaluation menu. Assets to be evaluated can be selected from the asset list through asset inventory path selection or directly selected from the map. The result of the direct condition evaluation can be expressed differently in the pipe color according to the condition grade of the pipe in the map selection pop-up window.

In the remaining life expectancy evaluation menu, you can analyze the remaining life of an asset and manage evaluation items and condition grades. Manage the condition grade and rate table according to the physical life condition evaluation method, and manage the condition grade for each year of the asset.

In the asset value re-evaluation menu, the present value of each asset according to the remaining life is evaluated, and in the risk evaluation menu, the risk evaluation based on the probability of damage, damage impact and reserve capacity of the asset can be performed. At this time, the risk evaluation result is visualized and displayed by color with the failure severity as the X axis and the failure probability as the Y axis. 11 is a risk evaluation result view screen.

In the service level analysis menu, you can establish and evaluate the target service level required for life cycle management of water supply facilities. The service level analysis results are divided into manpower, facilities, operation, service, environment, and finance, and are displayed, and the LoS results for each item and a graph compared with the latest evaluation year are shown at the bottom. 12 shows a service level analysis screen.

In the life cycle cost analysis menu, the user can perform an analysis of the total cost, which is the sum of costs incurred throughout the entire life cycle from production to disposal of each asset.

The financial analysis menu provides optimal investment plan establishment, financial plan establishment, and asset management plan establishment functions.

In the optimal investment plan establishment menu, risk priorities for each asset are derived, and optimal renewal decision-making supports decision-making on maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement of assets. In the case of waterworks assets, the results of analysis of optimal investment plans are divided into facilities, pipelines, optimal investments, RPN, and ORDM.

In the financial planning menu, you can generate past financial balance data and predicted financial balance analysis data for the next 30 years according to rate hikes and inflation rate changes. In the asset management plan establishment menu, you can receive a function of checking a series of procedures of the water supply life cycle (asset management) system from asset registration to financial balance analysis and outputting an asset management analysis report.

The geographic information system includes a facility management menu.

The facility management menu is a web GIS function that provides management functions for pipe network assets, block management functions, and evaluation analysis mapping functions.

In the management function for pipe network assets, users can search assets, select assets, check asset information, and analyze asset levels.

Through the block management function, the user can set and manage the block to which the asset belongs on the map. In general, in the water supply area, it is very difficult to control the flow rate and water pressure due to the tangled pipe network like a spider web as tap water supplied from the water purification plant is distributed to a wide water supply area through several reservoirs and supplied to the consumer.

Therefore, in order to rationally control and manage water supply facilities such as drainage volume management, water pressure management, and pipe network management as the water supply facilities are widened, divide the water supply area into several controllable blocks considering each water system and road network, and flow and water pressure for each block. It contributes to the smooth supply of residents by providing stable water supply by managing the water supply, and in particular, it performs optimization management to pursue business rationalization by increasing the water flow rate through flow monitoring.

The block management function of the present invention implements a function in which block information of all assets in a block is changed together when a block is changed on a GIS map. Since blocks can be changed for efficient block unit management, it is a very cumbersome task to change block information, which is one of the basic item information of an asset, for each individual asset whenever a block is changed. Therefore, when a block is changed on the map of the web GIS, the block information of all assets belonging to the corresponding block is changed collectively, enabling very efficient management.

Statistical analysis includes big data analysis. The big data analysis menu provides statistical data on assets within the water supply facility life cycle system. In the case of selecting an asset and section, it provides statistical data for facility renovation projects, statistical data for investigation and exploration, statistical data for condition (direct and indirect), and statistical data for risk assessment.

The bulletin board may include announcements, Q/A, and a reference room.

The asset database includes asset information data including asset information and asset management information data including asset management information.

Asset information includes basic item information, status item information, asset standard information, and shared information within a group.

Asset information includes basic item information and status item information. Basic item information is information on the basic items of an asset, such as asset name, asset code, facility/network classification, installation date, disposal date, address, initial investment cost, water supply Include use, diameter, width, height, form/type, etc.

Status item information is information about the operating state of an asset, including whether the asset is currently normal or abnormal, and the reason for the abnormality if it is abnormal. Abnormal causes include leaks, corrosion, material defects, paint damage, vibration, noise, peeling, inclination, defects, peeling, efflorescence, deformation, layer separation, scour, subsidence, pipe body damage, pipe joint damage, etc.

In addition, the asset information includes asset reference information. As described above, each asset belonging to a group with similar characteristics, that is, an information sharing group having the same group-sharing information, has the same information in a certain type of asset information, which is called asset-based information, and asset-based information is grouped. In order to do so, it is set as a criterion representing the same or similar characteristics of an asset, and in an embodiment of the present invention, level steps having the above-described functional characteristics become asset reference information.

Assets with the same asset-based information form an asset information sharing group, and the asset information sharing group shares the results of evaluation and analysis. Information about, that is, at least one group-shared information selected from the group consisting of durability application information, failure type information, risk assessment information, and optimal investment plan establishment information can be shared with each other.

By sharing information on evaluation analysis results, it is not necessary to conduct evaluation analysis separately for individual assets, and it is possible to manage assets by sharing the same asset information group by sharing evaluation analysis results, and even when data is changed, it is possible to proceed collectively. .

Asset management information is the basic information for asset evaluation and analysis, and includes data for direct evaluation, data for indirect evaluation, data for life prediction, and data for service level analysis.

Data for direct evaluation is data for direct evaluation of assets, for example, directly measured slime condition, interior and exterior painting condition, degree of neutralization, crystal generation condition, internal corrosion condition, crack condition, pipe joint, mechanical strength, chemical composition , data for the metal surface.

Data for indirect evaluation is data for indirect evaluation of assets, for example, data for controller, corrosive environment, external impact, external load, internal load, accident history, and joint/branch.

Data for life prediction is data necessary for predicting the life of an asset, for example, data on legal regulations, capacity, water supply design standards, legal water quality standards, residual values and repair costs.

Data for service level analysis is data for analyzing service level, and includes data by personnel, facilities, operation, service, environment, and finance.

The management server includes an asset evaluation unit, a remaining life prediction unit, a value revaluation unit, a service level analysis unit, a priority determination unit, a risk assessment unit, an optimal investment plan establishment unit, and a financial balance analysis unit.

The asset evaluation department evaluates the condition of assets, and condition assessment is a procedure performed to determine the current state of an asset, and is an important factor in predicting the process of deterioration of an asset in the future.

The Condition Assessment Protocol (CAP) is a protocol that classifies asset condition assessment methods into four stages (CAP 0 to CAP 3) to evaluate the physical condition of an asset. CAP selects and proceeds with an appropriate step for each asset by comprehensively considering the importance of the asset, the impact of failure, the existence of data, and the reliability of data. As for the status evaluation result, it can be seen that the reliability of the result increases as it goes from CAP 0 to CAP 3.

In the present invention, physical state evaluation is performed for all facility assets according to the condition evaluation rules.

On the other hand, the condition evaluation of pipe network assets consists of direct evaluation and indirect evaluation. Direct evaluation refers to the evaluation with data received through direct observation and investigation of the condition of the asset, while indirect evaluation refers to the specification of the asset and the buried environment. In other words, it means an indirect evaluation that identifies the state with data input into the operating environment.

For example, in the case of a water supply pipe, direct evaluation is made by measuring the control officer, slime condition, interior and exterior painting condition, neutralization degree, and nodule occurrence condition, and indirect evaluation is performed by the asset appraisal department from the asset database, It is made by receiving data for indirect evaluation of corrosiveness, soil corrosivity, electrical method, soil type, burial depth, road type, maximum water pressure, number of breakages, valve/junction density.

At this time, the relative evaluation calculates the indirect evaluation score by dividing the sum of the values obtained by multiplying the condition values of the evaluation items for each pipe type by the weight by the sum of the weights and multiplying by the aging correction coefficient according to the number of years of burial, as shown in Equation 1 below.

Here, f _pici = Conditional value of evaluation items for each pipe type

w _pici = weight of evaluation items by pipe type

DP _maxi = Pipe condition correction factor for each number of years of burial

At this time, the condition value of the steel pipe is shown in FIG. 13a, the condition value of the cement mortar lined ductile cast iron pipe (CML-DIP) is shown in FIG. 13b, the condition value of CIP/DIP is shown in FIG. 13c, and the condition value of the non-metal pipe is shown in FIG. 13e lists weights for each pipe type.

The remaining life prediction unit receives life prediction data from the asset database and predicts the remaining life of the asset.

In general, there are four methods of predicting the remaining life of an asset. Approach 1 uses a table of useful life determined by asset, Approach 2 applies a correction factor to the useful life of each asset, Approach 3 applies direct observation results, Approach 4 is to apply single/multiple asset condition evaluation and decay curve.

14 also shows the lifetime of an asset in relation to the failure type. According to this, the lifetime of an asset can be divided into regulatory life, capacity life, service life, physical life, and economic life. Among these, physical life is the lifespan that ends when an asset fails to fulfill its function due to failure, damage, or deterioration.

In the present invention, since the rest of the lifespan other than the physical lifespan is determined by legal regulations or operator's judgment, only the remaining lifespan prediction method using the physical lifespan that predicts the remaining lifespan using the condition evaluation result is presented.

In the present invention, as the first method for assets to which the asset condition evaluation method CAP 0 is applied, the remaining life is calculated according to Equation 2 by subtracting the actual useful life from the useful life. If the useful life of asset A is 10 years and the actual useful life is 7 years, the remaining life is 3 years after subtracting 7 years from 10 years.

In addition, for assets to which CAP 1, the asset condition evaluation method, is applied, the second method is applied, and the second method applies the condition grade adjustment rate corresponding to the condition evaluation result to the useful life, first calculates the adjusted useful life, and then actually uses it. It is a method of predicting the remaining life according to Equation 3 by subtracting the number of years.

The second method predicts the remaining life by applying the condition grades derived in the CAP 1 (simple) step and the CAP 1 (multiple) step to the adjustment rate for each condition grade, and the useful life adjustment rate for each condition grade used here is as follows: same.

status grade state judgment Early mid term terminal period Less than 35% useful life Useful life 35% ~ 65% More than 65% useful life 1st class very good 12% 10% 8% Grade 2 Good 8% 4% 0% Grade 3 commonly 4% 0% -4% 4th grade error 0% -5% -12% 5th grade very bad -5% -12% -20%

status grade Early mid term terminal period Less than 35% useful life Useful life 35% ~ 65% More than 65% useful life 1st class 12% 10% 8% Grade 3 8% 4% 0% 5th grade 4% 0% -4% 7th grade 0% -4% -8% 9th grade -4% -8% -12% level 10 -8% -10% -20%

Since the remaining life is calculated using the same calculation formula for both the CAP 1 (simple) stage and the CAP 1 (multiple) stage, the remaining life can be calculated by correctly applying the adjusted rate for each condition grade. If calculated, the remaining life is “0 years”, which is classified as an asset that requires immediate replacement. For assets with different condition grades and actual years of use, the remaining life is calculated after determining the condition grades in the CAP 1 (simple) step, the result is as follows.

asset classification status grade useful life years of use adjusted rate Adjustment durability Remaining life asset A One 32 years 10 years 12% 35.8 years 25.8 years asset B 2 32 years 10 years 8% 34.6 years 24.6 years asset C 2 32 years 20 years 4% 33.3 years 13.3 years asset D 5 32 years 32 years -20% 25.6 years -6.4 years

In addition, the third method is used for assets to which the asset condition evaluation method CAP 2 is applied, but it is not used in the asset management system of the present invention because it is difficult to collect and utilize direct observation results. In addition, the 4th method is used for assets to which CAP 3, the asset condition evaluation method, is applied, and the decay curve of the asset is created using the condition grade (vertical axis) and the period of use (horizontal axis), and the remaining life expectancy is predicted using this. When the prepared Decay Curve is classified by detailed item and used as data, more reliable remaining life prediction is possible.

For example, in the fourth method, the user evaluates the condition of the asset every year, and the condition of the asset is graded as 5 (very good), 4 (good), 3 (average), 2 (poor), and 1 grade. It is classified as (very bad), and the past condition rating history of the asset is displayed in a graph. For example, if the state grade of an asset for each year of use is shown as a graph, it is shown in FIG. 15A.

At this time, curve fitting is performed on the graph of FIG. 15a using various regression models (linear, exponential, logarithmic, etc.), and a model predicting the future status grade of the asset with the trend method having the highest coefficient of determination (R ² ) to decide In this case, a second-order polynomial is most appropriate, as shown in FIG. 15B.

Once the regression equation is determined, the useful life at which the life of the asset becomes 1, which is the status grade at which the life of the asset is completed, can be calculated. That is, x satisfying 1 = -0.0487x2 + 0.2037x + 4.8571 is obtained. As a result of the calculation, it is calculated as 11.23 years, which is the durability life of this asset.

Therefore, since this asset has a current service life of 9 years, the remaining life of this asset can be calculated as:

Remaining life = durability life - service life = 11.23 - 9 = 2.23 years

The value revaluation unit receives data necessary for value revaluation from the asset database and reevaluates the value of the asset.

Tangible assets, such as equipment, deteriorate over time, become damaged, and naturally depreciate in value. To prevent this, if preemptive maintenance or repair and replacement are carried out, the value of the asset will change again. Therefore, in order to understand the change in the value of a tangible asset, the present value of the asset must first be identified, and the present value analysis begins with the analysis of the residual value.

In the present invention, it is calculated by considering both the residual value of an asset without considering the inflation rate and the revaluation value of the asset considering the inflation multiple.

The residual value is calculated using the useful life, remaining life, and acquisition cost of the asset. The calculation is as in Equation 4.

Asset revaluation calculates the present value of an asset by additionally considering the inflation multiple in calculating the residual value. The value obtained by multiplying the acquisition cost used to calculate the residual value and the price multiple used to re-evaluate the asset value is expressed as the repurchase cost. The formula for calculating asset value revaluation is as follows:

In this case, the inflation multiple means the value obtained by dividing the price index of the current year by the price index of the year the asset was acquired to determine the change in prices. In this task, the price index provided by the database of the Korea Economic Statistics System is used.

The service level analysis unit receives data necessary for value revaluation from the asset database unit, analyzes the service level, and finally derives the service level result.

Level of Service (LoS) analysis means managing and evaluating the goals set in consideration of the roles, functions, and performance of assets. The level of service can be largely seen from the perspective of the customer and the manager. If you look at the service level from the customer's point of view, water supply and sewage facilities, which are public facilities, have an obligation to provide quality services to customers without interruption by performing their original purpose as water supply and sewage facilities. The role of assets in asset management without LoS As a result, it is not possible to provide a service suitable for the level of customer demand. Therefore, in order to provide service quality that meets the customer's requirements for water supply and sewage facilities, it is necessary to analyze the service level by identifying the customer's requirements in detail and linking performance indicators that can measure the performance according to the service level goal. There should be.

From the administrator's point of view, this service level should determine whether the asset performs its role smoothly in its current location and whether there are any functional or performance problems. In addition, it is necessary to review whether there are cases where legal requirements are not satisfied. Due to these things, managers should take preemptive measures to minimize the occurrence of problems before the asset reaches a critical state where it does not meet the requirements.

As an embodiment of the present invention, six items of manpower, facilities, operation, service, environment, and finance are classified according to Table 7 as service level management items for managing and evaluating service levels, and assets are appropriately targeted for those items. Analyze what your role is.

Management topics item content manpower Understanding the level of asset management personnel facility Understanding the level of facility efficiency, condition, etc. operate Identify operational service levels according to asset operation service Know the level of service to consumers environment Identify the impact of assets on the environment finance Knowing the financial condition related to the asset

Tables 8 to 13 summarize the data (indices) and analysis formulas required for evaluation of each personnel, facility, operation, service, environment, and finance.

order evaluation index analysis formula unit One Technical staff rate Total number of technical staff / Total number of employees × 100 % 2 Administrative staff rate Total number of administrative staff / total number of employees * 100 % 3 Technology + employee qualification acquisition rate Number of qualified employees/Total number of employees*100 % 4 Number of years worked in waterworks Number of years worked in waterworks/number of total employees year/person 5 Internal education and training hours Total number of hours each employee received internal training/total number of employees hour/person 6 Rate of securing adequate manpower for water purification plants Actual number of employees/Number of appropriate operation and management employees*100 % 7 Financial accounting staff rate Total number of accounting staff / Total number of staff × 100 % 8 service staff rate Number of service staff/total number of staff×100 % 9 External education and training period Total time each employee received external training/
total number of employees hour/person 10 fancy rate [(Many employees taking a day off due to work × number of days off) / (Total number of employees × number of working days per year)] × 100 % 11 International technology cooperation Number of cooperators including human skills × number of stays silk 12 Number of international exchanges Number of personal exchanges/total number of employees case/person

order evaluation index analysis formula unit One Facility operation rate Maximum production per day/facility capacity × 100 % 2 Clarifier surface loading rate Settling tank maximum inflow rate/settling tank surface area*1,000/(24*60) mm/min 3 Turbidity meter installation rate by filter paper Turbidimeter installation filtration index/total filtration index*100 % 4 Facility inspection rate Number of inspections of electricity, instrumentation, mechanical equipment, etc. of water purification facilities/12 times/month 5 Number of storage days for condensed chemicals Minimum storage amount of flocculating agent/average amount of flocculating agent used per day Day 6 pipeline inspection rate Pipeline extension checked/pipeline total extension × 100 % 7 Water pipe accident rate (number of water supply pipe accidents/extension of pipe lines)*100 cases/100km 8 pipeline improvement rate Improved Pipeline Extension/Total Pipeline Extension × 100 % 9 pipeline construction rate New pipeline extension/total pipeline extension × 100 % 10 Pipe network GIS management rate GIS Construction Pipeline Extension / Total Pipeline Extension × 100 % 11 Pipeline Corrosion Control Rate Pipeline extension for corrosion prevention construction/pipeline extension for corrosion prevention*100 % 12 Number of water leak detection repair cases (Number of prior water leak detection/restoration cases/total pipeline extension)*100 cases/100km 13 Pipeline valve installation density The number of valves installed on the piping/the total length of the piping dog/km 14 valve replacement rate The number of valves replaced/the total number of valves installed on pipelines*100 % 15 Water purification facility flow system correction rate Annually calibrated flow coefficients/total number of flow meters installed in water purification facilities % 16 Reservoir Effective Capacity Total reservoir capacity/maximum water supply per day*24 hour 17 Reservoir automatic water quality monitoring rate Number of reservoirs installed with automatic water quality measuring devices/total number of reservoirs*100 % 18 Reservoir cleaning rate Total capacity of reservoirs cleaned per year/total capacity of reservoirs*100 % 19 Reservoir Continuous Automatic Water Quality Monitoring Reservoir continuous automatic water quality monitoring system installation number/drainage index - 20 Water pipe accident rate Number of water supply pipe accidents/number of water supply failures × 1,000 cases/1,000 cases 21 Water meter freeze rate Number of frozen and broken water meters per year / Number of water supply transfers × 1,000 cases/1,000 cases 22 Tube freeze rate Number of freeze/rupture cases per year / Number of water supply transfers × 1,000 cases/1,000 cases 23 Accident rate of road, transport and drainage pipelines Number of accidents in road, conduit and drainage pipes/extension of conduit, conduit and drainage × 100 cases/100km 24 Accident rate of iron pipe line Number of steel pipe accidents/total steel pipe length × 100 cases/100km 25 Accident rate of non-ferrous pipelines Number of accidents of non-ferrous pipelines/total length of non-ferrous pipelines × 100 cases/100km 26 pipe replacement rate Replaced pipeline extension/total pipeline extension × 100 % 27 Effective leak control repair Number of leaks detected through leak control/total pipe length × 100 case/100 km/year 28 Seismic rate of water purification facilities Number of seismic design facilities/number of water purification facilities requiring earthquake resistance × 100 % 29 Water supply base density Reservoir, emergency water tank/water supply area × 100 Locations/100㎢ 30 Water meter confidentiality Water meter jockey/drain pipe repair dog/km 31 Gas leak alarm device installation drawing Number of gas leak detectors installed dog 32 drain extension density Drain pipe extension/water supply area area km/km2 33 Number of meters per employee Total number of meters / Total number of employees individual 34 Facility aging rate
(Pump Facility Equipment) Number of units exceeding the service life of pump facilities/
Number of major pump facilities × 100 % 35 Failure rate of sludge treatment facilities Number of failures in sludge treatment facilities/
Number of major facilities for sludge treatment × 100 %

order evaluation index analysis formula unit One Amount of water supplied per capita Daily average water supply/population supplied × 1,000 ℓ/day 2 Raw water quality monitoring chart Number of raw water quality inspection items/Number of legal inspection items × 100 % 3 Nonconformity rate of water quality standards Number of non-compliance with water quality standards/ Total number of inspections × 100 % 4 Water quality test (number of tests per day) Number of actual daily inspections / Number of legal daily inspections × 100 % 5 Intensity unit of chemical used for water purification sludge treatment Amount of chemicals used (sludge treatment)/amount of dehydrated sludge - 6 Adequacy of filtration rate Maximum filtration rate / Design rate × 100 % 7 Pump average operating rate Total annual pump operating hours/(total number of pumps ×
Number of days per year×24)]×100 % 8 Water purification plant automation rate (Number of facilities with automatic control devices installed in water purification plants / Number of facilities with control devices installed in water purification plants) × 100 % 9 Water facility automation rate Number of processes for automatic control of water facilities/number of processes subject to automatic control of water facilities × 100 % 10 Technical Diagnosis Improvement Completion Rate of Water Purification Plant Accumulated number of improvement cases / Total number of pointed out cases × 100 % 11 Efforts to Reduce Residual Chlorine [1 - (Annual maximum concentration of residual chlorine - residual chlorine water quality management target value) / residual chlorine water quality management target value] × 100 % 12 flow rate Annual flow rate / annual production × 100 % 13 Feed water load factor Average water supply per day/maximum water supply per day × 100 % 14 Water supply pressure inadequacy rate Incorrect water supply pressure measuring point/Total water supply pressure measuring point × 100 % 15 Suwon spare rate Secured water source quantity/maximum daily production × 100 % 16 Raw water utilization rate Annual effective water quantity / annual water intake × 100 % 17 Technical diagnosis of water purification plant Number of technical examinations conducted within the last 5 years number 18 Drug usage rate Amount of chemicals used for pruning water × 365 / annual production × 100 % 19 degree of automation Number of facilities equipped with automatic control devices/
Number of facilities with control devices × 100 % 20 pump power accident Number of shutdowns of pump facilities due to power supply failures/year
Total number of pumping facilities case/number*year 21 Water supply securing rate Dry season water intake / annual average supply × 100 % 22 Satisfaction with the discharge water tolerance standard Number of Items Satisfying Discharge Allowance Criteria/
Effluent Allowance Criteria Number of Items × 100 % 23 Number of water quality accidents in Suwon Number of annual water quality accidents case 24 Discharge facility operation rate Actual effluent treatment amount/planned effluent treatment amount × 100 % 25 Purification Reserve Capacity Securing Rate (Total water purification facility capacity-Maximum water supply per day)/Total water purification facility capacity×100 % 26 Private power plant capacity rate Private power generation facility capacity/total power capacity of the facility × 100 % 27 leak rate Annual leakage/annual production×100 % 28 Yearly Change Water Purification Facility Rate Water purification facility capacity exceeding the legal service life/
Total water purification facility capacity (facility capacity) × 100 % 29 Water purification facility utilization rate Daily average water supply / Daily supply available × 100 % 30 Leakage per water supply Annual leak rate/water supply ㎥/year/previous 31 Reservoir map rate Number of reservoir maps/total number of reservoirs×100 %

order evaluation index analysis formula unit One water supply rate Population served / total population × 100 % 2 Water supply per employee Population served / total number of employees number of people 3 Number of restricted days for water supply Number of restricted days of water supply per year Day 4 Water service complaint rate (total number of civil complaints/population served) × 1,000 case/thousand 5 Rate of complaints about water quality (Annual number of civil complaints on water quality/population served) × 1,000 case/thousand 6 Number of civil complaints about water charges (Number of civil complaints about water charges per year/population of water supply) × 1,000 case/thousand 7 Complaint processing time Total time required for handling complaints/number of complaints day/case 8 Complaint handling rate Number of civil complaints handled/total number of civil complaints % 9 Water Quality Test Location Density (water quality inspection sampling points/population of water supply) × 10,000 branch/10,000 10 information disclosure rate Number of Information Disclosures case 11 monitor participation rate Total number of questionnaire response monitors/Total number of monitors × 100 % 12 Commission's consumer participation rate The number of consumer members of the committee / the total number of members of the committee × 100 % 13 Percentage of visitors to water facilities (number of visitors to water facilities/population of water supply) × 1,000 person/thousand 14 Resident-friendly facility rate Resident-friendly facility area / water purification facility area × 100 % 15 Crisis management coping ability Budget for crisis management / total budget × 100 % 16 Existence of guidelines and training for coping with crisis management Crisis management response guideline + crisis management response training % 17 Service connection failure Number of service connection failures per year/total number of households × 1,000 No. of Cases/1,000 Households 18 Civil complaint rate for construction and work Number of complaints about construction and work/Total number of complaints × 100 % 19 Satisfaction with residents of waterworks protection areas Number of civil complaints related to water source protection / total number of civil complaints × 100 % 20 Publicity for waterworks Budget used for promotion/total budget × 100 % 21 For residents of waterworks
education Budget used for training/total budget × 100 % 22 monitor ratio Total number of monitors/population served × 1,000 person/thousand

order evaluation index analysis formula unit One Water purification sludge utilization rate Amount of recycled water purification sludge/
Annual amount of purified water sludge × 100 % 2 Energy consumed per 1㎥ of production Energy cost for water purification plant in the current year/annual production Won/㎥ 3 Recycling rate of water loss in water purification process Water loss in water purification process Recycled amount / Annual production × 100 % 4 CO2 emissions per cubic meter of production [Total power consumption (kWh) × 0.424 kgCO2/kWh] / Annual production × 1,000 gCO2/m3 5 Electricity consumption per 1㎥ of production Total power consumption/yearly production kwh/㎥ 6 Renewable energy utilization rate Power consumption of renewable energy facilities/
Total power consumption × 100 %

order evaluation index analysis formula unit One Equity Net Profit Rate Net Income / Equity Capital × 100 % 2 debt ratio Total Debt / Equity Capital × 100 % 3 Net Profit Percentage of Sales [net income / net sales (operating revenue - water supply revenue)] × 100 % 4 total balance ratio [Total revenue (operating + non-operating + special) /
Total cost (operating + non-operating + special loss + corporate tax, etc.)] × 100 % 5 cost compensation rate Water supply revenue (royalty revenue)/general cost × 100 % 6 supply unit price Revenue from water supply (revenue from usage fees)/total annual adjustment amount (charged amount) Won/㎥ 7 gross cost Gross cost/annual total adjustment amount (imposition amount) Won/㎥ 8 labor cost ratio Personnel cost/total cost (operating + non-operating + special loss + corporate tax, etc.) × 100 % 9 non-payment rate Total unpaid bills at the end of the year/Total revenue from bills × 100 % 10 current ratio Current assets/current liabilities × 100 % 11 checking ratio Quick Assets/Current Liabilities × 100 % 12 fixed-term fitness rate Fixed assets / (equity capital + fixed liabilities) × 100 % 13 Equity capital Ordinary profit rate Ordinary income/Equity capital × 100 % 14 Ordinary Profit Percentage of Total Equity Ordinary income/total capital × 100 % 15 total capital turnover Net sales (operating revenue - water supply revenue)/total capital episode 16 Equity turnover rate Net Sales (Operating Revenue - Water Supply Construction Revenue) / Equity Capital episode 17 Trade receivable turnover rate Net Sales (Operating Revenue - Water Supply Construction Revenue) / Accounts Receivable episode 18 Fixed asset turnover Net sales (operating revenue - water supply revenue)/fixed assets episode 19 depreciation rate Current period depreciation / (fixed assets - depreciated assets + depreciation) % 20 current account ratio [Ordinary Income (Operating Income + Non-Operating Income) / Ordinary Expenses (Operating Expenses + Non-Operating Expenses)]×100 % 21 Operating balance ratio (Operating Revenue - Water Supply Construction Revenue)/(Operating Expense - Water Supply Construction Cost) × 100 % 22 Debt repayment to fee income ratio [debt repayment/supply income (royalty income)] × 100 % 23 Ratio of labor cost to fee income [Labor cost/supply revenue (use fee revenue)] × 100 % 24 Operating revenue per employee Operating Revenue - Water Supply Construction Revenue/Total Number of Employees cause 25 population density Water supply population / water supply area area Phosphorus/㎦

As a method of evaluating the priority of the service level for the above six items, as shown in FIG. 16, the service level analysis unit in the present invention proceeds with the weight calculation step and the consistency review step to evaluate. The weight calculation step includes the pairwise comparison step for each item, the matrix creation and calculation step, and the eigenvector calculation step.

The pairwise comparison step is a step of performing a one-to-one relative importance check for each of the six management items described above. To this end, an evaluation for pairwise comparison from an expert is input from an evaluator terminal or an evaluation result is input by a user. See Table 14.

Pairwise Comparison Criteria relative importance Pairwise Comparison Items 3 2 One 2 3 manpower O facility manpower O operate manpower O service manpower O environment manpower O finance facility O operate facility O service facility O environment facility O finance operate O service operate O environment operate O finance service O environment service O finance environment O finance

The matrix creation and calculation step is a step of creating a matrix using the pairwise comparison result for each item. It is written using the result of the relative importance of pairwise comparison, and the relative importance is entered based on the pairwise comparison criteria, and the reciprocal of the result of the comparison criteria is entered. The pairwise comparison results of the same item, such as manpower and manpower, facility and facility, etc., have the same relative importance, so enter 1.

division manpower facility operate service environment finance manpower One 1/2 One 1/2 One One facility 2 One One 2 2 2 operate One One One 1/2 1/2 1/2 service 2 1/2 2 One 1/2 1/3 environment One 1/2 2 2 One One finance One 1/2 2 3 One One

The eigenvector calculation step is a step of calculating an eigenvector value to be used as a weight of importance. In the present invention, the value of the pairwise comparison result was multiplied by the same order of the result matrix creation values of the horizontal and vertical items that intersected, and then precalculated by summing them all (Table 16), and then dividing the row sum by item by the row sum of all items. . (Table 17)

division manpower facility operate service environment finance manpower One 2 3 4 5 6 facility 7 8 9 10 11 12 operate 13 14 15 16 17 18 service 19 20 21 22 23 24 environment 25 26 27 28 29 30 finance 31 32 33 34 35 36

division row sum eigenvector manpower 33.7 33.7 ÷ 272.1 = 0.124 facility 69.2 69.2 ÷ 272.1 = 0.254 operate 30.7 30.7 ÷ 272.1 = 0.113 service 36.9 36.9 ÷ 272.1 = 0.136 environment 47.7 47.7 ÷ 272.1 = 0.175 finance 54.0 54.0 ÷ 272.1 = 0.198 Grand total 272.1 272.1 ÷ 272.1 = 1.000

The step of calculating the maximum eigenvalue (λ _max ) is a step of obtaining the average maximum eigenvalue (λ _max ) after dividing the product of the matrix (horizontal) value for each item and the matrix of the eigenvector value (Table 18) by the eigenvector for each item.

division horizontal row vertical row result manpower (1 ½ 1 ½ 1 1) 0.805 facility (2 1 1 2 2 2) 1.633 operate (1 1 1 ½ ½ ½) 0.745 service (2 ½ 2 1 ½ ⅓) 0.889 environment (1 ½ 2 2 1 1) 1.121 finance (1 ½ 2 3 1 1) 1.257

division Multiplication of eigenvector value matrices Eigenvector values λ manpower 0.805 0.124 0.805 ÷ 0.124 = 6.492 facility 1.633 0.254 1.633 ÷ 0.254 = 6.429 operate 0.745 0.113 0.745 ÷ 0.113 = 6.593 service 0.889 0.136 0.889 ÷ 0.136 = 6.537 environment 1.121 0.175 1.121 ÷ 0.175 = 6.406 finance 1.257 0.198 1.257 ÷ 0.198 = 6.348 λ _max (average value of λ) 6.468

To determine reliability, the concordance index CI and concordance ratio CR are calculated. CI and CR are calculated using Equations 6 and 7. The random consistency index of Equation 7 is shown in Table 20. If the consistency ratio calculated by Equation 7 is less than 0.1, this questionnaire can be evaluated as being consistent.

At this time, the arbitrary index (RI) is shown in Table 17 as a value determined by the number of survey items.

In this example, the congruency index calculation step calculates the congruence index by dividing the value obtained by subtracting the number of six items (manpower, facilities, operation, service, environment, finance) from the maximum eigenvalue by the number of survey items - 1 am. For example, since the maximum eigenvalue obtained from Table 19 is 6.468 and the number is 6, the concordance index is (6.468-6) ÷ (6-1) = 0.0936.

Consistency is ultimately judged based on whether the consistency ratio (CR) is usually 10% or less.

The concordance ratio calculation step is a step of calculating the concordance ratio by dividing the concordance index by a random index and expressing it as a percentage. At this time, the arbitrary index (RI) is shown in Table 20 as a value determined by the number of survey items.

number of items 1~2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 RI 0 0.52 0.89 1.11 1.25 1.35 1.40 1.45 1.49 1.52 1.54 1.56 1.58 1.59

For example, since the number of survey items is 6, the random index is 1.25, and if the concordance index is divided by the random index to obtain the concordance ratio, 0.0936 ÷ 1.25 = 0.0749, and expressed as a percentage, it is 7.49%, so 10% or less, that is, a good response can be judged to be When the service level analysis unit completes the weight calculation and consistency review in the above-described method, the service level analysis result can be finally derived.

The goal and result of the evaluation index selected for each management item are expressed in numerical values according to the unit and evaluated in consideration of the accuracy of the data and the reliability of the data. Reliability can be defined as shown in Table 21, for example. For reliability, high is 3, medium is 2, and low is 1.

reliability level Justice input value height Data recorded in documents, such as operation log, status of civil complaints received, statistical data, etc.
(75% accuracy or better) 3 middle Newly created data through combination and extraction from existing similar data
(more than 50% accuracy) 2 lowness Data that are not documented data but have lower reliability than the intermediate level of reliability and are based on the person in charge's guess
(accuracy greater than 25%) One

Here, the service level result is calculated by reflecting the weight calculated for each management item. Service level results can be calculated as (outcome ÷ target) × reliability × weight. An example of calculating the service level result for each evaluation index of personnel management items is as follows.

manpower evaluation index unit target result Reliability weight LoS result Technical staff rate % 100 90 2 0.124 0.223 Water service service training year/person 5 5 3 0.124 0.372 Internal education and training hours hour/person 100 98 3 0.124 0.365 International technology cooperation silk 5 4 One 0.124 0.099 Number of international exchanges case/person 10 7 One 0.124 0.087

The priority determining unit determines service level items to be improved with priority among the above-mentioned service management items. Service level prioritization is determined by proceeding with a weight calculation step and a consistency review step, similar to the service level analysis unit. The weight calculation step includes the pairwise comparison step for each item, the matrix creation step, and the relative preference derivation step. The consistency review includes the maximum eigenvalue calculation step, concordance index calculation step, and concordance ratio calculation step.

The pairwise comparison step is a step of performing a one-to-one preference check for each of the six management items described above. To this end, an evaluation for pairwise comparison from an expert is input from an evaluator terminal or an evaluation result is input by a user. 17 shows an example of pairwise comparison.

The matrix creation step is a step of creating a matrix using the pairwise comparison result for each item. Create using the result of pairwise comparison, enter relative preference based on pairwise comparison standard items, and enter the reciprocal number for the comparison item standard result. Since the pairwise comparison results of the same item, such as manpower and manpower and facilities and facilities, are the same, enter 1. See Figure 18.

In the relative preference derivation step, the binary comparison matrix of FIG. 19 is converted into a normalization matrix to derive the relative preference. The normalization matrix refers to a new matrix created by dividing the elements of each column of the binary comparison matrix by the sum of the corresponding columns, as shown in FIG. 19 . The sum of each column of the normalization matrix is '1'.

In order to calculate the relative preference, the average of each row (the sum of the elements in each row divided by the number of elements in each row) is calculated in the normalization matrix created above. The average value of each row is the relative preference. In other words, in this case, as a result of synthesizing the questionnaires of various groups, it means that the improvement of the facility service level item is the most desired, so that this part should be invested first. Alternatively, it is also possible to distribute a given budget in proportion to relative preferences.

The step of calculating the maximum eigenvalue (λmax) is a step of calculating λmax by multiplying the two-way comparison matrix and the relative preference matrix to create a new 6×1 matrix, then dividing by the relative preference and performing arithmetic average.

After calculating the relative preference, the concordance index CI and concordance ratio CR are calculated as described above to determine the reliability of this questionnaire.

<Table 23. Random index of n × n binary comparison matrix> n 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 RI 0.00 0.58 0.90 1.12 1.24 1.32 1.41 1.45 1.49 1.51

The CR of the two-way comparison matrix used above is calculated to be 0.08, so it can be said to be consistent. As shown in FIG. 20, the arithmetic average value of the relative preference values calculated by repeating the above process as many times as the number of consistent surveys is used as the final relative preference. The risk evaluation unit evaluates the risk level of the asset and calculates the BRE as an indicator of the risk level and importance of the asset. BRE is calculated by multiplying the product of the failure probability of an asset and the failure severity by the margin rate, which is a risk reduction factor.

Probability of Failure (PoF) aims to predict the probability of failure. In general, the longer the period of use of an asset, the higher the probability of occurrence of failure. Therefore, the usage period and remaining life of the asset are used to calculate the usage rate, and the usage ratio between 0% and 100% is classified and expressed on a scale of 1 to 10. The formula for calculating the usage rate is shown in Equation 8.

The purpose of the Consequence of Failure (CoF) is to predict the degree of damage that may occur due to the occurrence of a failure of an asset and the resulting impact. Depending on the degree of damage and expected necessary countermeasures, it is classified from 1 to 10 grades, and the contents of the destruction severity grade classification are shown in Table 24.

Rating detail degree of damage countermeasures singular population cut off time Water supply interruption rate One No errors or 1 hour
If recovery is possible within - - - no action 2 No errors or 1 hour
If recovery is possible within less than 10,000 less than 1 hour - no action 3 In case of temporary water supply interruption in some areas less than 2.5 million less than 3 hours - Recovery within 6 months 4 In case of temporary water supply interruption in some areas less than 50,000 less than 6 hours - Recovery within 6 months 5 When water supply disruptions are expected to continue in some areas less than 100,000 less than 12 hours less than 15% Recovery within 1 week 6 When water supply disruptions are expected to continue in some areas less than 250,000 less than 24 hours less than 30% Recovery within 1 week 7 When it is expected that water supply disruption will continue for a wide area or a large number of watered populations less than 500,000 less than 36 hours less than 45% Recovery within 24 hours 8 When it is expected that water supply disruption will continue for a wide area or a large number of watered populations less than 1 million less than 48 hours less than 60% Recovery within 24 hours 9 When it is expected that water supply disruption will continue for a wide area or a large number of watered populations over 1 million more than 48 hours more than 60% Recovery within 2 hours 10 When it is expected that water supply disruption will continue for a wide area or a large number of watered populations over 2 million more than 48 hours more than 60% Recovery within 2 hours

In general, BRE (Business Risk Exposure) is a criterion for determining risk and is calculated by multiplying probability of failure (PoF), severity of destruction (CoF), and margin rate. However, margin ratio is not considered in the present invention.

BRE = PoF × CoF × Redundancy

Classify the calculated BRE value by grade and create a grade distribution map to easily understand the number and distribution of assets by risk grade. 21 is an example of a rating distribution. The horizontal axis of the BRE grade distribution chart represents the probability of failure (PoF) from 1 to 10, and the vertical axis represents the severity of failure (CoF) from 1 to 10. According to the BRE calculation method, the point of intersection of PoF and CoF (the redundancy rate is not considered in the present invention) is set as the BRE of the asset and the number of assets is entered.

The color classification of the BRE grade distribution map is low-risk group-light blue, medium-risk group-green color, and high-risk group-red color, and the criteria for classifying by BRE value are as follows. By referring to the BRE value, the management priority of the asset can be identified.

Classification of BRE grades detail 1 to 20 or less low-risk group Assets with margin in terms of risk management 21 to 50 or less medium-risk group Assets requiring risk management 51 to 100 high-risk group Assets for which risk management is essential

The optimal investment department sets the priority of individual replacement among all assets and determines the optimal replacement plan. The RPN score is used to determine the priority of the replacement. To calculate this, LoS correlation, BRE, and asset utilization rate are used. In the case of LoS relevance, the relevance of manpower/facility/operation/service/environment/finance is considered, and the final RPN score is calculated according to the calculation formula, and the RPN score is prioritized in the order of high.

Optimized Renewal Decision Making (ORDM) is derived by comprehensively comparing the investment cost, operating cost, maintenance cost, and operating period of the renewal methods for assets requiring renewal, and identifying the expected expenditure cost to determine future needs. Can be used for budget projections.

As for the plan, three renewal plans are proposed: repair, improvement, and replacement. The average annual expenditure for each plan is compared with the value converted into present value (Table 26, A), and the plan with the lowest amount is selected as the optimal replacement plan ( ORDM). (Table 26)

division Total (KRW) Annual average (KRW) Operating period (years) 1 year ··· n years -repair
-improvement
-substitute investment cost ··· operating cost ··· maintenance cost ··· total cost ··· present value A ···

The investment cost in ORDM is the concept of the initial investment cost that is initially incurred when the renewal method is introduced. The discount rate in the present value conversion uses the real discount rate and the average value of the past 10 years as of the date of preparation. The present value conversion formula is shown in Equation 9.

The real discount rate is calculated using the nominal interest rate and the inflation rate, and the calculation formula is shown in Equation 10.

The Fiscal Balance Analysis Department conducts a fiscal balance analysis to predict the future fiscal balance using the past fiscal balance. The data for the fiscal balance analysis is obtained from Clean Eye Sight, a public disclosure database for local public enterprises.

The features, structures, effects, etc. illustrated in each of the above-described embodiments can be combined or modified with respect to other embodiments by those skilled in the art in the field to which the embodiments belong. Therefore, contents related to these combinations and variations should be construed as being included in the scope of the present invention.

10: user terminal
20: management server
30: asset database
40: Local water supply and sewerage database
50: Economic statistics database

Claims (12)

a user terminal displaying a user interface for managing water and sewage assets;
a management server providing the user interface to the user terminal; and
Based on the asset classification system that classifies each asset according to a plurality of level stages based on function or location, asset information data including asset information, which is a basic item of water and sewage assets provided to the management server, and asset evaluation analysis It includes asset management information, which is information that is the basis for the water supply and sewerage system including asset standard information used as a grouping standard for determining the functional similarity characteristics of assets in the functional standard level step. Includes asset management information data,
The user interface includes an inventory management menu, in which the asset classification system is created, modified, and deleted according to an asset to be registered, and the asset is stored according to the created, modified, and deleted asset classification system. It has the function of entering into the asset classification system,
The user interface further includes an asset standard information management menu for integrally managing asset information shared by assets of an information sharing group having similar characteristics according to the asset standard information. According to claim 1,
The asset standard information includes level steps of functional standards of each asset in the asset classification system. According to claim 1,
The grouping criterion is the same information sharing group when the level steps of the criteria of each asset in the asset classification system are the same. According to claim 3,
The information sharing group is a water supply and sewage asset management system formed in at least two or more levels. According to claim 4,
The water and sewage asset management system of According to claim 5,
The shared information within the group,
At least one water supply and sewage asset management system selected from the group consisting of durability application information, failure type information, risk assessment information, and optimal investment plan establishment information. According to claim 1,
The asset management information includes one selected from the group consisting of data for direct evaluation, data for indirect evaluation, data for life prediction, and data for service level analysis. According to claim 1,
The management server is a water supply and sewage asset management system including an asset evaluation unit for evaluating assets. According to claim 8,
The asset evaluation unit includes direct evaluation with data obtained from evaluation through direct observation and investigation of the asset's condition, and indirect evaluation for identifying the state with data entered for the specification, buried environment, and operating environment of the asset. management system. delete According to claim 1,
The asset information includes basic information including at least one selected from the group including asset name, asset code, facility/pipe network classification, installation date, disposal date, address, initial investment cost, water supply use, pipe diameter, width, height, and type/type. item information,
The water supply and sewerage asset management system including status item information including whether the operating state of the asset is normal or abnormal, and in the case of the abnormal state, the reason for the abnormality. According to claim 9,
The water supply and sewerage asset management system further comprises an inspector terminal for transmitting the data inspected in the asset to the management server for the direct evaluation.