# Assessment Framework for the Maintainability of Sewer Pipeline Systems
## 5 Study Findings
### Reliability and Validation
 } & \multirow{2}{*}{**Defect**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Contributing Factor(s)**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Parameters**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Probability**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Impact**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**RII**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Ranking**} \\ \cline{5-16} \cline{8-16}  & & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Impact**} & & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Inject**} & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{5-16} \multirow{6}{*}{**Code**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Code**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Within the Defect**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Code**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Within the Defect**} & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Within the Defect**} & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{5-16}  & & & \multirow{2}{*}{**RII**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Weighted Mean \%**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Rank**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Code**} & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{5-16}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{5-16}  & &  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14} D7 & CS & 0.8 & — & — & — & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14} D8 & C9 & 0.811 & 54.678 1 & — & — & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14} Sewer system & Hydraulic & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14} overflow (ISO) & Hydraulic & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14}  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-14} D1 & C13 & 0.81  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Color and \(\sigma\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{Quality \(\sigma\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{Daily \(\sigma\)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{C24} & 0.789 & 26.792 & 1 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{P1} & 0.711 & 23.97 & 3 & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\sigma\)} & \multirow{2}{  
Tables 5-9 in this study provides a comprehensive framework for assessing the critical aspects of sewer pipeline systems in Saudi Arabia. These tables collectively illuminate the complexities of defect occurrence, the defects' multi-dimensional impacts, their rankings based on probability and impact, contributing factors, and the reliability of the assessment. In Table 5, the study presents an in-depth evaluation of the probability of defects occurring in the context of Saudi Arabian sewer systems. This examination is essential for understanding the specific vulnerabilities within the infrastructure. Table 6 delves into the impact of these defects across various parameters, highlighting the economic, environmental, social, and detection difficulty dimensions. It provides a nuanced view of the consequences that these defects may have, offering valuable insights into the overall significance of each defect category. Table 7 builds upon the probability and impact assessment, ranking the defects based on their risk index values. This ranking offers a clear indication of the most critical issues that require immediate attention in terms of management and maintenance. Moving on to Table 8, it provides a succinct summary of the findings, offering an overview of the contributing factors to these defects. This summary aids in understanding the root causes of these issues, ultimately guiding decision-makers towards more targeted intervention strategies. Finally, Table 9 validates the assessment's reliability, underlining the consistency and robustness of the study's methodology and findings. Together, these tables form a cohesive narrative.