Economics of New-Technology Materials: A Case Study of FRP Bridge Decking.
Economics of New-Technology Materials: A Case Study of
FRP Bridge Decking.
(3596 K)
Ehlen, M. A.; Marshall, H. E.
NISTIR 5864; 73 p. July 1996.
Available from:
National Technical Information Service
Order number: PB96-202353
Keywords:
breakeven analysis; building economics; construction
materials; cost classifications; cost effective; cost
estimation; economic methods; elemental classifications;
engineering economics; engineering design; FRP
composites; high performance materials; infrastructure
investment; life cycle cost analysis; R&D expense;
sensitivity analysis; spillover costs; user costs; value
engineering
Abstract:
Many new materials are being developed from polymers,
metals, and ceramics. Industry is beginning to
introduce some of these high-performance or
new-technology materials in construction and
manufacturing applications because the materials have
advantages over traditional materials like steel,
concrete, wood, and aluminum. However, many
high-performance materials have not been used in
large-scale construction projects. Economic and
Technical Barriers hinder industry's aggressive
introduction of these new technologies despite their
advantages over traditional materials. The primary
economic barrier preventing the use of new technology
material is their high initial cost. Regardless of how
cost effective a material might be over the life cycle
of the project, industry balks at high up-front costs,
particularly when the life-cycle costs of a new material
are relatively uncertain. This cost barrier inhibits
construction applications of - and eventually research
in - new materials. Yet the construction industry has
many potential applications; for example,
fiber-reinforced polymers (FRPs) and high-performance
concrete and steel are technically viable substitutes
for conventional bridge materials. FRPs are also likely
candidates for use in marine structures and offshore oil
rigs. Germany and Japan are leading the world in FRP
use in construction; if U.S. companies are to remain
globally competitive, they too will likely need to
introduce new technology materials in their construction
projects. To overcome this cost-based barrier to the
adoption of new materials, the construction industry
needs practical economic methods for evaluating
alternative building and construction materials in a
comprehensive and consistent manner. Providing a
guideline for determining life-cycle cost effectiveness
will give decision makers a tool to help them select,
both for research and construction applications, those
materials that will make firms competitive and help
government agencies deliver the nation's infrastructure
at minimum life-cycle cost. This report provides such a
method for evaluating the life-cycle cost effectiveness
of new-technology materials in relation to conventional
materials. The method provides users with a tool that
helps them choose that material among competing
alternative materials that perform the required function
at minimum life-cycle cost. This method can be used to
satisfy the Intermodel Surface Transport Efficiency
Act's requirement that life-cycle costs be considered in
the design of transportation-related structures, and
Executive Order 12893 which requires that the costs of
federal infrastructure investment be accounted for over
the life span of each project. The method is consistent
with ASTM Standards for computing life-cycle costs. A
three-level, hierarchical cost classification presents
the types of costs that characterize the use of
conventional and new-technology materials; this helps
analysts identify all of the costs - including spillover
costs to project users and others - that are appropriate
for an economic analysis. An economic case study of
bridge decks evaluates the use of three FRP materials as
alternatives to conventional concrete. A sensitivity
analysis shows how significant various cost items are
toward making FRP composite decks economically
competitive. Suggestions for further research in the
economics of new-technology materials completes the
report. The methods presented are equally applicable to
non-construction materials and projects, as well as the
evaluation of any capital budget expenditure as long as
the performance of each competing alternative meets
project requirements.
Building and Fire Research Laboratory
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, MD 20899