Page - 1273 - in Book of Full Papers - Symposium Hydro Engineering

Fig. 5 Criteria used for prioritising actions in the MCDA model Critères utilisés pour hiérarchiser les actions dans le modèle MCDA The second criteria type included those affecting prioritising the actions according to their financial conditions. Different criteria were used to produce different plans till year 2050. Any plan to year 2050 was divided into five year plans. The criteria were:  Absolute cost of actions  Different/ equal 5-year-plan budgets  Benefit/cost-ratio of actions  Action type  Structure grouping MPHS FINAL PRIORITY FACTORS TOTAL 100% # Description Data source Scoring system Weight 1 Hydraulic structure entity Site Visits 1 2 3 4 5 Intermediate and Spillway (small) Intermediate Regulator Head Regulator (small) Head Regulator (large) Main Barrage (Nile River) 2 Purposes of the structure Site Visits 1 2 3 4 5 Irrigation Irrigation + Traffic Irrigation + Traffic + Navigation Irrig + Traffic + Navig + Water Supply Irrig + Traffic + Navig + Supply + Power Gen. 3 Site Visits 1 2 3 4 5 Low Below Average Average Above Average High 4 Aging and material state 1 2 3 4 5 Years from commisioning or from fully renovation <25 or fully renovated<10 25 to 50 or fully renovated 10 to 25 50 to 75 75 to 100 >100 5 Presence of cracks 1 2 3 4 5 Detection of visible cracks Not visible or negligible Discrete on any part Continuous on abutment/bridge Continuous on raft and piers Critical and continuous on the structure 6 Presence of holes/abrasion 1 2 3 4 5 Detection of holes and abrasions Not visible or negligible Discrete on <50% vents Discrete on >50% vents Critical on <50% vents Critical on >50% vents 7 Scouring downstream the structure 1 2 3 4 5 Depth (m) x 1000 / distance from floor edge DS (m) <5 6 to 33 34 to 66 67 to 99 >100 8 Sedimentation upstream the structure 1 2 3 4 5 Height (m) x 1000 / distance from the floor edge US (m) <5 6 to 33 34 to 66 67 to 99 >100 9 Vents mechanical equipment operation 1 2 3 4 5 Fully operative Fair operative- basic maintenance required <50% gates out of order 50-90% gates out of order All gates out of order 10 Site Visits 1 2 3 4 5 Not implemented/op erative Fair operative- basic maintenance Bridge inoperative and Lock operative Bridge operative and lock inoperative Both Fully Inoperative 11 Minimum Uplift Factor of Safety 1 2 3 4 5 >3 2 to 3 2 to 1.5 1.5 to 1 <1 12 Minimum Sliding Factor of Safety 1 2 3 4 5 >3 2 to 3 2 to 1.5 1.5 to 1 <1 13 Minimum Bearing Factor of Safety 1 2 3 4 5 >3 2 to 3 2 to 1.5 1.5 to 1 <1 14 Exit Gradient (Piping) Factor of Safety 1 2 3 4 5 >3 2 to 3 2 to 1.5 1.5 to 1 <1 15 Overall Safety Condition 1 2 3 4 5 Stability analysis conclusion 10 8 to 9 7 to 8 5 to 6 <5 16 Hazard Potential Site Visits 1 2 3 4 5 Distance from inhabited areas DS water way (m) >2000 m 2000 to 1000 m 1000 to 500 m 500 to 100 m < 100 m 17 Seismic Hazard Site Visits 1 2 3 4 5 Very low (0 - 0.2 m/s2) Low (0.2 - 0.8 m/s2) Medium (0.8 - 2.4 m/s2) High (2.4 - 4 m/s2) Very high ( > 4 m/s2) 18 Irrigated land served by the water way Site Visits 1 2 3 4 5 Number of feddan < 100.000 100.000 to 500.000 500.000 to 1.000.000 > 1.000.000 Control Structure to feed other intakes 19 Hydraulic Head (meters) Site Visits 1 2 3 4 5 <1 m 1 to 2 m 2 to 4 m 4 to 5 m >5 m 20 1 2 3 4 5 >5000 m 5000 to 1000 m 1000 to 500 m 500 to 100 m < 100 m Stability Analysis Stability Analysis Stability Analysis Stability Analysis Nature Park or Historical Archeological site nearby (distance) Site Visits/SEA 2% 5% 3% 6% 3% Stability Analysis 4% 5% 4% 4% 4% Site Visits and Detailed Investigations 15% Navigation lock and swinging bridge operation 5% Topo and Bathy Reports 4% Topo and Bathy Reports 2% Site Visits and Detailed Investigations 10% Site Visits and Detailed Investigations 10% Superstructure general condition (Priority Index according to deterioration) 3% Site Visits 3% 5% 3% 1273