Advertisement

Mechatronics in the Process of Cultural Heritage and Civil Infrastructure Management

  • Vincenzo Gattulli
  • Erika Ottaviano
  • Assunta Pelliccio
Chapter
Part of the Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering book series (ISCA, volume 92)

Abstract

Automatized survey, construction, inspection, maintenance, restoration and reconstruction have become challenging activities conducted during the process of cultural heritage and civil infrastructure management, due to the revolutionary impact of mechatronics and information technology in routine operations. The complete process is summarized, considering different aspects related to the interconnection between classical engineering and architectural problems with the emerging technologies related to automation, robotics and information communication technologies (ICT). The impact of new technologies on data acquisition for survey, inspection and monitoring is, firstly, considered, drawing upon evidence of how the use of robotized systems and sensor networks determines new sets of available data to be processed by digital tools to build advanced models. The integration among different information and numerical models permits one to test the novelties related to the use of ICT technologies for creating an exhaustive description of the examined facility. Data and models can be then used to identify and to describe defects and degradation, especially in view of determining possible performance reduction in existing structures. All the acquired knowledge opportunely managed constitutes the input for automated or partially automated decision-making process useful in facilities and infrastructure management.

References

  1. 1.
    Akyldiz IF, Su W, Sankarasubramaniam Y, Cayirci E (2002) Wireless sensor networks: a suvey. Comput Netw 38:393–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ansari F (2007) Practical implementation of optical fiber sensors in civil structural health monitoring. J Intel Math Syst Struct 18(8):879–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Antucheviciene J, Kala Z, Marzouk M, Rytas Vaidogas E (2105) Decision making, methods and applications in civil engineering. Math Probl Eng 2015. Article ID 160569Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Antucheviciene J, Kala Z, Marzouk M, Vaidogas ER (2015) Solving civil engineering problems by means of fuzzy and stochastic MCDM methods: current state and future research. Math Probl Eng 2015. Article ID 362579Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aspinall R, Pearson D (2000) Integrated geographical assessment of environmental condition in water catchments: linking landscape ecology, environmental modelling and GIS. J Environ Manag Elsevier 59(4):299–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Avdelidis NP, Moropoulou A (2004) Applications of infrared thermography for the investigation of historic structures. J Cult Heritage Elsevier 5(1):119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Azhar S (2011) Building information modeling (BIM): trends, benefits, risks, and challenges for the AEC Industry. Leadersh Manag Eng 11(3) American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bai L (2013) RFID sensor-driven structural condition monitoring in integrated building information modeling environment. PhD Dissertation, University of Maryland, College ParkGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Balaguer C, Montero R, Victores JG, Martínez S, Jardón A (2014) Towards fully automated tunnel inspection: a survey and future trends. In: The 31st international symposium on automation and robotics in construction and mining (ISARC 2014), Sydney, pp 19–33Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bay H, Ess A, Tuytelaars T, Van Gool T (2008) Speeded-up robust features (SURF). Comput Vis Image Underst 110(3):346–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Betz DC, Staudigel L, Trutzel MN, Kehlenbach M (2003) Structural monitoring using fiber-optic bragg grating sensors. Struct Health Mon 2(2):145–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burrough PA, McDonnell RA, Lloyd CD (1998, 2015) Principles of geographical information systems. Oxford University Press. ISSN 978-0-19-874284-5Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Caprari C et al (2010) Highly compact robots for inspection of power plants. In: 2010 1st international conference on applied robotics for the power industry, Montreal, pp 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/CARPI.2010.5624412
  14. 14.
    Castellazzi G, D’Altri AM, Bitelli G, Selvaggi I, Lambertini A (2015) From laser scanning to finite element analysis of complex buildings by using a semi-automatic procedure. Sensors 15:18360–18380. https://doi.org/10.3390/s150818360 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Castelli G, Ottaviano E, Rea P (2014) A cartesian cable-suspended robot for improving end-users’ mobility in an urban environment. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 30(3):335–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chen XN, Xiab Q, Zhang SH, Zhou Y (2005) 3D laser scanner system for surveying and engineering. ISPRS.ecn.purdue.eduGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cruz-Ramırez SR, Mae Y, Arai T, Takubo T, Ohara K (2011) Vision-based hierarchical recognition for dismantling robot applied to interior renewal of buildings. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng 26(5):36–355Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Davila Delgado J, Butler LJ, Gibbons N, Brilakis I, Elshafie MZEB, Middleton C (2016) Management of structural monitoring data of bridges using BIM. In: Proceedings of the institute of civil engineers, Bridge EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Davis FW, Quattrochi DA, Ridd MK, Lam NSN, Walsh SJ, Michaelsen JC, Johnston CA (1991) Environmental analysis using integrated GIS and remotely sensed data. Some research needs and priorities. Photogram Eng Remote Sens 57(6):689–697Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Eleftheriadis S, Mumovic D, Greening P, Chronis A (2015) BIM enabled optimisation framework for environmentally responsible and structurally efficient design systems. In: 32nd international symposium on automation and robotics in construction and mining (ISARC 2015) 15–18 June 2015, Oulu, FinlandGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Eramo N, Modoni G, Arroyo M (2012) Design control and monitoring of a jet grouted excavation bottom plug. In: Proceedings of the 7th international symposium on geotechnical aspects of underground construction in soft ground, TC28 IS Rome, Viggiani ed., Taylor & Francis Group London, 16–18 May 2011, pp 611–618. ISBN 978-0-415-66367-8Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Federici F, Graziosi F, Faccio M, Colarieti A, Gattulli V, Lepidi M, Potenza F (2012) An integrated approach to the design of wireless sensor networks for structural health monitoring. Int J Distrib Sens Netw. Article ID 594842Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fedorik F, Makkonen T, Heikkilä R (2106) Integration of BIM and FEA in automation of building and bridge engineering design. In: 33rd international symposium on automation and robotics in construction (ISARC 2016), Auburn, USA, 18–21 July 2016Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gattulli V, Chiaramonte L (2005) Condition assessment by visual inspection for a bridge management system. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng 20:95–107Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gattulli V, Lepidi M, Potenza F (2016) Dynamic testing and health monitoring of historic and modern civil structures in Italy. Struct Monit and Maint 3(1):71–90Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gattulli V, Potenza F, Graziosi F, Federici F, Colarieti A, Faccio M (2014) Design of wireless sensor nodes for structural health monitoring applications. Proc Eng 87:1298–1301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gattulli V, Potenza F, Toti J, Valvona F, Marcari G (2016) Ecosmart reinforcement for a masonry polycentric pavilion vault. Open Constr Build Technol J 10(Suppl 2: M7):259–273. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874836801610010259
  28. 28.
    Granosik G, Borenstein J, Hansen MG (2007) Serpentine robots for industrial inspection and surveillance. In: Low KH (ed) Industrial robotics: programming, simulation and applications. Published by pro-Literatur Verlag, Germany, pp 633–662Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Guarnieri A, Pirotti F, Vettore A (2013) Cultural heritage interactive 3D models on the web: an approach using open source and free software. J Cult Heritage, Elsevier 11(3):350–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Guisan A, Zimmermann NE (2000) Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. J Ecol Model Elsevier 147–186Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hallermann N, Morgenthal G (2013) Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) for the assessment of existing structures. In: IABSE symposium, KolkataGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
  33. 33.
    Jacobs S, Matthys G, De Roeck G, Taerve L, de Waele W, Degrieck J (2007) Testing of a prestressed concrete girder to study the enhanced performance of monitoring by integrating optical fiber sensors. J Struct Eng 133(4):541–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jakobsson A, Giversen J (2013) Guidelines for implementing the ISO 19100 geographic information quality standards in national mapping and cadastral agencies. EurographicsGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Joerin F, Musy A (2000) Land management with GIS and multicriteria analysis. Int Trans Oper Res Elsevier 7(1):67–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kamińska IA, Ołdak A, Turski WA (2004) Geographical information system (GIS) as a tool for monitoring and analysing pesticide pollution and its impact on public health. Ann Agric Environ Med 11(2):181–184. ISSN: 1232-1966 e-ISSN: 1898-2263Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kenny J (2016) Live BIM offers building stress monitoring in real-time, Dec 2016. http://www.bimplus.co.uk/technology/live-bim-monit6ors-bu5ilding-str9ess-real-time/
  38. 38.
    Khan FS (2012) Color attributes for object detection. IEEE Conf Comput Vision Pattern Recogn 3306–3313Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kim J-W, Kim S-B, Park J-C, Nam J-W (2015) Development of crack detection system with unmanned aerial vehicles and digital image processing, In: International congress on advances in structural engineering and mechanics, IncheonGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lee S, Kalos N (2015) Bridge inspection practices using non-destructive testing methods. J Civil Eng Manag 21(5):654–665Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Li QB, Ansari F (2001) Circumferential strain measurement of high strength concrete in triaxial compression by fiber optic sensor. Int J Sol Struct 38(42–43):7607–7625CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lingua A, Piumatti P, Rinaudo F (2012) Digital photogrammetry: a standard approach to cultural heritage survey. In: The international archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences, vol. XXXIV, Part 5/W12Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lynch JP, Loh K (2006) A summary review of wireless sensors and sensor networks for structural health monitoring. Shock Vib 38(2):91–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Maurelli P (2006). I Sistemi Informativi Territoriali (SIT) come contesti di rappresentazione e interazione. In: Martone M (ed) Atti del Seminario La rappresentazione per la conoscenza dell’ambiente urbano e del territorio Rome Kappa EdizioniGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Meschini A, Pelliccio A (2013) Il colore nel rilievo strumentale: laser scanner, termografia e postprocessing dei dati in un sistema GIS. In: Rossi M, Siniscalco A (eds), Colore e Colorimetria. Contributi multidisciplinari, Maggioli Editore S.P.A.: 70–81. ISBN 9788838762413Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Meyer E, Grussenmeyer P, Perrin JP, Durand A, Drap P (2007) A web information system for the management and the dissemination of cultural heritage data. J Cult Heritage Elsevier 8(4):396–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Moscati A (2012) Integrated information systems for the enhancement of the urban/architectural heritage, including 3D GIS, AIS (architectural information systems) and web. PhD Dissertation, Rome URN: urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-28937OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hj-28937DiVA: diva2:892496Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Nagatani K, Kiribayashi S, Okada Y, Otake K, Yoshida K, Tadokoro S, Nishimura T, Yoshida T, Koyanagi E, Fukushima M, Kawatsuma S (2013) Emergency response to the nuclear accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plants using mobile rescue robots. J Field Robot 30:44–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ottaviano E, Ceccarelli M (2006) Application of a 3-DOF parallel manipulator for earthquake simulations. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 11(2):240–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ottaviano E, Rea P (2013) Design and operation of a 2-DOF leg-wheel hybrid robot. Robotica 31(8):1319–1325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ottaviano E, Rea P, Castelli G (2014) THROO: a tracked hybrid rover to overpass obstacles. Adv Robot 28(10):683–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/01691864.2014.891949 Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Patraucean V, Armeni I, Nahangi M, Yeung J, Brilakis I, Haas C (2015) State of research in automatic as-built modelling. Adv Eng Infor 29:162–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Pelliccio A (2013) Informative representation for the vulnerability analysis of anthropic landscape. Two different areas in comparison: the historical center of St. Elia Fiumerapido (Fr) and the mining site of Coreno Ausonio. Disegnarecon, April 2013. ISSN 1828-5961Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pelliccio A, Cigola M (2015) Geographic information systems (G.I.S.) for the analysis of historical small towns. In: Khosrow-Pour M (ed) Encyclopedia of information science and technology, 3rd edn. IGI Global, pp 3128–3135. ISBN 978-1-4666-5888-2 (hardcover); ISBN 978-1-4666-5889-9 (ebook); ISBN 978-1-4666-5891-2 (print &perpetual access)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Potenza F, Castelli G, Gattulli V, Ottaviano E (2017) Integrated process of images and acceleration measurements for damage detection. In: X international conference on structural dynamics, EURODYN 2017, Procedia Engineering, in pressGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rea P, Pelliccio A, Ottaviano E, Saccucci M (2017) The heritage management and preservation using the mechatronic survey. Int J Architect Heritage. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2017.1338790 Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Saranli U, Buehler M, Koditschek DE (2001) RHex: a simple and highly mobile hexapod robot. Int J Robot Res 20(7):616–631. https://doi.org/10.1177/02783640122067570 [14]
  58. 58.
    Shin Y, Cho K (2015) BIM application to select appropriate design alternative with consideration of LCA and LCCA. Math Probl Eng 2015. Article ID 281640Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Siegwart R, INourbakhsh R (2004) Introduction to autonomous mobile robots. MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Spencer BF, Chung-Bang Y (eds) (2010) Wireless sensor advances and applications for civil infrastructure monitoring, Newmark Structural Engineering Lab. Report Series, No.24. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Illinois. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/16434
  61. 61.
    Spencer BF, Ruiz-Sandoval Manuel E, Kurata N (2004) Smart sensing technology: opportunities and challenges. Struct Control Health Monit 11:349–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Stapelberg RF (2009) Handbook of reliability, availability, maintainability and safety in engineering design. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Tian Y, Wen C, Hong S (2008) Global scientific production on GIS research by bibliometric analysis from 1997 to 2006. J Inf Elsevier 2(1):65–74Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Valvona F, Toti J, Gattulli V, Potenza F (2017) Effective seismic strengthening and monitoring of a masonry vault by using glass fiber reinforced cementitious matrix with embedded fiber bragg grating sensors. Comp Part B Eng 113:355–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Viola P, Jones M (2001) Rapid object detection using a boosted cascade of simple features. In: Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE computer society conference on computer vision society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, vol 1Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Wang C, Cho YK (2105) Application of as-built data in building retrofit decision making process, Procedia Eng 118:902–908Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Webb GT, Vardanega PJ, Middleton CR (2015) Categories of SHM deployments: technologies and capabilities. J Bridge Eng (ASCE) 20(11):04014118Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Xiongjue W (2016) Analysis on complex structure stability under different bar angle with BIM technology. Perspect Sci 7:317–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Yamauchi B (2004) PackBot: a versatile platform for military robotics. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol 5422. Unmanned Ground Vehicle Technology VI, Orlando, FLGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Yeum CM, Dyke SJ (2015) Vision-based automated crack detection for bridge inspection. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng. https://doi.org/10.1111/mice.12141 Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Zonta D, Pozzi M, Zanon P (2008) Managing the historical heritage using distributed technologies. Int J Archit Heritage 2(3):200–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vincenzo Gattulli
    • 1
  • Erika Ottaviano
    • 2
  • Assunta Pelliccio
    • 2
  1. 1.DISG—Department of Structural and Geotechnical EngineeringSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  2. 2.DICeM—Department of Civil and Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of Cassino and Southern LazioCassino (FR)Italy

Personalised recommendations