Infrastructure Assessment

Inputs

{
  "project_id": "uuid",
  "asset_type": "storm_sewer | sanitary_sewer | watermain | bridge | culvert | manhole | catchbasin",
  "asset_id": "municipal asset ID or null",
  "location": {
    "address": "123 Main St, Toronto ON",
    "coordinates": [43.6532, -79.3832],
    "road_name": "Main Street",
    "municipality": "Toronto"
  },
  "known_attributes": {
    "material": "concrete | PVC | HDPE | steel | cast_iron | ductile_iron | corrugated_steel_pipe",
    "diameter_mm": 600,
    "length_m": 120,
    "install_year": 1965,
    "depth_m": 3.0,
    "last_inspection_date": "2023-06-15",
    "inspection_type": "CCTV | visual | OSIM | load_test"
  },
  "inspection_data": {},
  "failure_history": []
}

Required fields:

• asset_type
• One of asset_id or location

Optional fields:

• known_attributes (improves assessment quality)
• inspection_data (raw inspection findings)
• failure_history (past breaks, collapses, or service disruptions)

Outputs

Produce exactly one artifact: condition_assessment.json.

{
  "project_id": "uuid",
  "asset_type": "storm_sewer",
  "asset_id": "municipal ID",
  "assessment_timestamp": "ISO datetime",
  "condition_rating": {
    "overall": 1,
    "structural": 2,
    "operational": 1,
    "scale": "1-5 (1=very good, 5=very poor)",
    "methodology": "PACP | OSIM | visual | estimated"
  },
  "remaining_useful_life_years": {
    "estimate": 15,
    "confidence": "high | medium | low",
    "basis": "age-based | condition-based | failure-rate"
  },
  "deficiencies": [
    {
      "deficiency_type": "structural_crack | joint_displacement | corrosion | scour | spalling | deformation | blockage | infiltration",
      "severity": "minor | moderate | severe | critical",
      "location_description": "At joint 3, 45m from upstream MH",
      "standard_reference": "OPSD 701.010",
      "requires_immediate_action": false
    }
  ],
  "rehabilitation_priority": "routine | planned | urgent | emergency",
  "material_condition": {
    "material": "concrete",
    "age_years": 61,
    "expected_service_life_years": 75,
    "corrosion_risk": "low | medium | high",
    "notes": ""
  },
  "hydraulic_adequacy": {
    "capacity_adequate": true,
    "basis": "design flow vs observed | Manning's calc | unknown"
  },
  "safety_flags": [],
  "facts": [],
  "inferences": [],
  "assumptions": [],
  "unknowns": [],
  "recommended_next_skill": "infrastructure-standards"
}

Reference Router

Load only the reference file relevant to the current assessment:

Workflow

1. Identify the asset and collect attributes

• Confirm asset type and location
• Gather material, age, diameter/span, depth, and installation year
• If asset_id is provided, look up municipal records
• If only location is provided, identify assets from spatial data

2. Review inspection data

For pipes (CCTV inspection):

• Apply PACP (Pipeline Assessment Certification Program) grading where available
• Grade structural defects: cracks, fractures, deformation, joint displacement, collapse
• Grade operational defects: roots, deposits, infiltration, exfiltration
• Note defect location by distance from upstream manhole

For bridges and culverts (OSIM inspection):

• Apply Ontario Structure Inspection Manual condition states (1-4)
• Evaluate: deck/top slab, soffit, walls/abutments, bearings, foundations, waterway adequacy
• Check for scour, spalling, reinforcement exposure, bearing failure

3. Evaluate material condition

Use age-based deterioration curves when inspection data is insufficient:

Adjust for:

• Soil conditions (corrosive soils reduce life by 20-40%)
• Traffic loading (heavy truck routes accelerate deterioration)
• Water chemistry (aggressive water reduces pipe life)
• Maintenance history (regular cleaning extends operational life)

4. Assess hydraulic adequacy

For pipes:

• Compare design capacity against current service demand
• Flag undersized infrastructure based on current IDF curves
• Note if upstream development has increased flows beyond design

For bridges:

• Check waterway adequacy for design flood
• Assess freeboard requirements

5. Rate overall condition

Apply a 1-5 condition rating:

6. Classify rehabilitation priority

7. Flag safety concerns

Always check for:

• Structural collapse risk (condition 5 structural)
• Sinkhole potential (pipe failure under roadway)
• Bridge load posting requirements (reduced load capacity)
• Environmental release risk (sanitary sewer failure near watercourse)
• Public safety hazards (exposed reinforcement, barrier failure)

Quality Bar

• Never assign condition rating 1-2 without supporting inspection data or known recent rehabilitation
• Age alone is insufficient for a rating worse than 3 — require deficiency evidence for ratings 4-5
• Always distinguish between facts (inspection results) and inferences (age-based estimates)
• Flag every assumption explicitly

Stop Conditions

Stop and return a partial artifact when:

• Asset type cannot be determined
• No inspection data and no installation date are available
• Location is ambiguous and multiple assets could match
• Inspection data format is unrecognizable

Reference Files

Read only the reference file relevant to the asset type being assessed.

External References