Skip to main content
Green Ports Toolkit
Southeast Asia · Case study

Kuantan Port Authority (Malaysia), Condition-Based Wharf Inspection and Repair Prioritization

Kuantan, Malaysia2004 to 2011 (damage identified 2004; repairs 2008; documented in regional guidelines 2011)

The ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership prepared the Guidelines on Strategic Maintenance for Port Structures between 2009 and 2011 to help developing countries, particularly ASEAN members, maintain their port structures (MLIT, 2011). The guidelines include worked examples from ASEAN ports. One is the wharf at Kuantan Port in Malaysia, managed by the Kuantan Port Authority (ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership, 2011).

The wharf is a frame structure, about 300 meters long, with a concrete slab supported by steel beams, girders and piles. It was completed in 2000, and by 2004 there were already signs of corrosion and damage in wharf components. Inspections found corrosion of steel beams, substantial corrosion of steel piles, and severe spalling of concrete with exposed reinforcement (ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership, 2011).

Approach

Treat maintenance as part of asset management. The port's procedure places maintenance within a wider cycle of inspection, inventory, maintenance and repair, rehabilitation and replacement (ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership, 2011).

Rate condition with a standard checklist. A visual condition inspection rates each wharf component on a scale of 0 to 5 using a checklist (ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership, 2011).

Confirm damage before acting. Senior engineers carry out a more thorough confirmatory inspection that focuses on the damage found (ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership, 2011).

Diagnose the cause. Inspectors then run diagnostic tests to establish the source of the problem. These include chloride and carbonation tests, half-cell potential surveys, rebound hammer tests and cover meter tests (ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership, 2011)

Match the response to the condition. A wharf management procedure links inspection findings to one of four responses: routine maintenance, minor damage repair, severe damage rehabilitation or replacement (ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership, 2011).

Apply the regional framework. The guidelines' framework is based on life-cycle management. It grades deterioration, evaluates the remaining performance of each facility over its remaining service period, and chooses countermeasures that keep total life-cycle cost down. Life-cycle cost covers initial, operation and maintenance, and demolition costs (ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership, 2011).

Results

Repair works in 2008 covered:

  • supply and installation of a new fender pile system;
  • structural steel repair and painting;
  • sealing of deck slab cracks by epoxy injection;
  • cathodic protection of the fender piles;
  • revetment works.

(ASEAN-Japan Transport Partnership, 2011)

The guidelines do not report repair costs or the wharf's later condition, so the long-term outcome of the repairs is not documented.

Transferability

DMC port authorities can adopt this stepwise approach with modest resources. They can start with a simple checklist that rates each structural component, then send only damaged components for confirmatory inspection and targeted diagnostic testing.

Linking condition ratings to a fixed set of responses makes repair decisions consistent and easier to justify in budget requests. Recording each inspection and repair builds the history needed for life-cycle planning.

Ports with steel structures in marine environments should inspect early, because Kuantan's wharf showed corrosion within four years of completion.

Sources

All information used for this case study was based on publicly available resources.