Advertisement

Abstract

Infrastructure is vital to the prosperity and welfare of the citizens of a country. In order to take full advantage of its benefits to the society it is necessary to manage these valuable resources in a proper manner. A sophisticated computerized bridge management system (BMS) is a means for managing bridges throughout design, construction, operation and maintenance of bridges. Throughout Europe there are different management systems developed and adopted to the local requirements and needs, which may lead to different decisions on maintenance actions. In order to overcome this issue a COST Action TU 1406 has proposed a guideline for standardization and development of quality control plans for roadway bridges. In order to perform such analysis, first of all it is necessary to collect available data, conduct element identification and grouping, define vulnerable zones, damage processes and failure modes. This is followed by selection and evaluation of the performance indicators (PIs), calculation of key performance indicators (KPIs), establishing demands, and finally creating Quality Control Plan (QCP) scenarios and comparing them by spider diagrams. In this paper an example of the proposed procedure will be shown on a steel truss bridge in Israel.

References

  1. 1.
    Tao, Z., Zophy, F., Wiegmann, J.: Asset management model and systems integration approach. Transp. Res. Rec. 1719(00–1162), 191–199 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Van der Velde, J., Klatter, L., Bakker, J.: A holistic approach to asset management in the Netherlands. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 9(4), 340–348. Maintenance, management, life-cycle design and performance, Asset management in civil engineering (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    ISO (International Organization for Standardization): General principles on reliability of structures. ISO 2394 (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Capros, P., Mantzos, L., Papandreou, V., Tasios, N.: European energy and transport–trends to 2030–update 2007. European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport, Institute of Communication and Computer Systems of the National Technical University of Athens (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Flintsch, G.W., Bryant, J.W.: Asset Management Data Collection for Supporting Decision Processes. US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, May 2006Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stipanovic, I., Chatzi, E., Limonggelli, M., Gavin, K., Allah Bukhsh, Z., Skaric Palic, S., Xenidis, Y., Imam, B., Anzlin, A., Zanini, M., Klanker, G., Hoj, N., Ademovic, N.: COST TU 1406, WG2 technical report – performance goals for roadway bridges (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kedar, A., Sein, S., Panetsos, P., Ademović, N., Duke, A., Ryjacek, P.: COST TU 1406, WG4 technical report – preparation of a case study (2019)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rücker, W., Hille, F., Rohrmann, R.: Guideline for the assessment of existing structures. SAMCO Final Report (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hajdin, R., Kušar, M., Mašović, S., Linneberg, P., Amado, J., Tanasić, N. Close collaborators: Ademović, N., Costa, C., Marić, M., Almeida, J., Galvão, N., Sein, S., Zanini, M., Pendergast, L.: COST TU 1406, WG3 technical report – establishment of a quality control plan (2018)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hakim, S.J., Abdul Razak, H.: Modal parameters based structural damage detection using artificial neural networks -a review. Smart Struct. Syst. 14(2), 159–189 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2014.14.2.159
  11. 11.
    Frangopol, D.M., Soliman, M.: Life-cycle of structural systems: recent achievements and future directions. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 22(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2014.999794
  12. 12.
    Yi, J., Kumares, S.C.: Bridge service life prediction model using the Markov chain. Transp. Res. Rec. 1223, 24–30 (1989)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ansell, A., Racutanu, G., Sundquist, H.: A Markov approach in estimating the service life of bridge elements in Sweden. In: 9th International Conference: Durability of Building Materials and Components, Paper 142, pp. 1–10 (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Firouzi, A., Rahai, A.: Reliability assessment of concrete bridges subject to corrosion-induced cracks during life cycle using artificial neural networks. Comput. Concr. 12(1), 91–107 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.12989/cac.2013.12.1.091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    West, H.H., McClure, R.M., Gannon, E.J., Riad, H.L., Siverling, B.E.: Nonlinear deterioration model for the estimation of bridge design life. Research project no. 86-07, Final report, Pennsylvania Transportation Institute (1989)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Puz, G., Radic, J.: Life-cycle performance model based on homogeneous Markov processes. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 7(4), 285–294 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1080/15732470802532943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    fib Bulletin 34: Model Code for Service Life Design of Concrete Structures. International Federation for Structural Concrete (fib), Lausanne (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    fib Bulletin 59: Condition Control and Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Structures Exposed to Corrosive Environment (Carbonation/Chlorides). International Federation for Structural Concrete (fib), Lausanne (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    fib Bulletin 76: Benchmarking of deemed-to-satisfy provisions in standards: durability of reinforced concrete structures exposed to chlorides. DCC Document Competence Center Siegmar Kästl e. K, Germany (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dissanayake, P.B.R., Narasinghe, S.B.: Service life prediction of masonry arch bridges using artificial neural networks. Eng. XXXXI(01), 13–16 (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hakim, S.J.S., Abdul Razak, H.: Structural damage detection of steel bridge girder using artificial neural networks and finite element models. Steel Compos. Struct. 14(4):367–377 (2013)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fathallaa, E., Tanakab, Y., Maekawa, K.: Remaining fatigue life assessment of in-service road bridge decks based upon artificial neural networks. Eng. Struct. 171, 602–616 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    BS 5400-3:2000 Steel, concrete and composite bridges. Code of practice for design of steel bridges, 15 October 2000, The British Standards Institution (BSI) (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    The standard Institution of Israel, Loads on Bridges: Highway Bridges: IS 1227, Part 1 (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Civil EngineeringUniversity of SarajevoSarajevoBosnia and Herzegovina
  2. 2.Kedmor Engineers LtdGivataimIsrael

Personalised recommendations