Condition Assessment of Bridges: Past, Present and Future. A Complementary Approach

Condition Assessment of Bridges:
Past, Present and Future

A Complementary Approach
ELI FIGUEIREDO
IONUT MOLDOVAN
MANUEL BARATA MARQUES
Universidade Catlica Editora
Qual o tempo e movimento de uma elipse?
Estudos sobre Aby M. Warburg
organizao Anabela Mendes
Isabel Matos Dias
Jos M. Justo
Peter Hanenberg
Isabel Matos Dias
Jos M. Justo
Peter Hanenberg
Edio: Universidade Catlica Editora, Unipessoal, Lda.
Composio: Magda Macieira Coelho
Data: dezembro de 2013
ISBN: 978-972-54-0402-7
Univcrsidadc CaIo!ica EdiIora
Palma de Cima 1649-023 Lisboa
tel. (351) 217 214 020 fax (351) 217 214 029
uce@uceditora.ucp.pt www.uceditora.ucp.pt
ELI FIGUEIREDO
IONUT MOLDOVAN
ELI FIGUEIREDO
IONUT MOLDOVAN
Isabel Matos Dias
Jos M. Justo
Peter Hanenberg
Isabel Matos Dias
Jos M. Justo
Peter Hanenberg
SEMINAR SUMMARY
LnI1oRs
Eli Figueiredo
Assistant Professor Faculty of Engineering, Catholic University of Portugal
Ionut Moldovan
Assistant Professor Faculty of Engineering, Catholic University of Portugal
Manuel Barata Marques
Full Professor and Director Faculty of Engineering, Catholic University of Portugal
IvI1Ln SLAxLRs
Antnio Perry da Cmara, Armando Rito, Carlos Santinho Horta, Charles R. Farrar,
Joaquim A. Figueiras, Jos Carlos Clemente, Keith Worden, Lus Oliveira Santos,
Paulo Lima Barros, Robert Veit-Egerer, and Tiago Mendona

v
Contents
Prclacc vii
NoIaIion x
Acknow!cdgmcnIs xi
I. Ovcrvicw ol Bridgc ManagcmcnI I
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Bridge management and structural condition assessment of bridges 5
1.3 The motivation for structural condition assessment of bridges 6
1.4 The history of the Portuguese road and rail networks
and bridge management 7
1.5 Status of the Portuguese bridges 22
1.5.1 The perspective of the three main bridge owners 23
1.5.2 Other bridge owners 24
2. Bridgc ManagcmcnI SysIcm (BMS} 27
2.1 Introduction 27
2.1.1 Definition 27
2.1.2 BMS evolution around the world 28
2.1.3 Current BMS organization 32
2.2 The role of bridge inspections 33
2.2.1 Overview 33
2.2.2 Shortcomings and needs 35
2.3 The role of the Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) 36
2.3.1 Overview 36
2.3.2 Visual inspections 37
2.3.3 Other current NDE techniques 37
2.3.4 Shortcomings and needs 38
2.4 The role of the Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) 39
2.4.1 Overview 39
2.4.2 Historical perspective of SHM: from rotating machinery to bridges 42
2.4.3 Economic and safety reasons of the SHM for bridge management 44
2.4.4 The applicability of SHM for structural condition assessment 45
Condition Assessment of Bridges
vi
2.4.5 Model updating 46
2.4.6 Statistical pattern recognition (SPR) paradigm 48
2.4.7 Main challenges of the SHM-SPR process 52
2.4.8 SHM of bridges in Portugal and in China 56
2.4.9 Main lessons from the past of SHM 61
2.4.10 Shortcomings and needs of SHM 63
2.5 Main lessons from the past of BMS 63
2.6 Shortcomings and needs of BMS 65
8. Cuidc!incs lor Ihc IuIurc ol CondiIion AsscssmcnI ol Bridgcs 67
3.1 Bridge designers recommendations 67
3.2 Bridge owners recommendations 68
3.3 Future trends and recommendations for NDE 69
3.4 Future trends and recommendations for SHM and BMS 71
3.5 How to improve the bridge inspections:
the US and the Portuguese experiences 74
3.6 Bridges capable to be upgraded with SHM technology 76
3.7 How to integrate SHM into BMS 78
3.8 Conclusions 80
4. Summary ol Ihc Ora! PrcscnIaIions 8S
4.1 Bridge inspections as a tool for rehabilitation, design and maintenance 87
4.2 From structural assessment for retrofitting to integration of SHM
on new design of bridges 104
4.3 Visual inspections as a tool to detect damage:
current practices and new trends 110
4.4 Bridge management and current state condition
of Brisas highway network bridges 121
4.5 An overview on SHM and outstanding research issues 135
4.6 A decade of bridge monitoring in Portugal: the LABEST experience 144
4.7 Machine learning and the Structural Health Monitoring of bridges 153
4.8 Integrated performance assessment addressing long term asset
management of engineering structures 156
Sponsor InsIiIuIions I78
Rclcrcnccs I8I

vii
Preface
Improved and more continuous condition assessment of bridges has been de-
manded by our society to better face the challenges presented by aging civil
infrastructure. Indeed, the recent collapses of the Hintze Ribeiro Bridge that
killed 59 people, in Portugal, and the I-35W Bridge in the United States (US),
that killed 13 people, pointed out the need for new and more reliable tools to
prevent such catastrophic events. Besides those events, the financial implica-
tions and potential impact through optimal bridge management are vast. For
instance, facing an ageing infrastructure, the United Kingdom Governments
2010 Infrastructure Plan signaled the need for enormous investments in in-
frastructures, equivalent to 200 billion over the next five years. On the other
hand, the American Society of Civil Engineers reports the cost of eliminating all
existing US bridge deficiencies at $850 billion. These values clearly show that
planned bridge maintenance can lead to considerable savings.
In the last two decades, bridge condition assessment techniques have been de-
veloped independently based on two complementary approaches: Structural
Health Monitoring (SHM) and Bridge Management Systems (BMSs). The SHM
refers to the process of implementing monitoring systems to measure in real
time the structural responses, in order to detect anomalies and/or damage at
early stages. On the other hand, BMS is a visual inspection-based decision-sup-
port tool developed to analyze engineering and economic factors and to assist
the authorities in determining how and when to make decisions regarding
maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of structures.
While the BMS has already been accepted by the bridge owners around the
world, even though with inherent limitations posed by the visual inspections,
the SHM is becoming increasingly appealing due to its potential ability to detect
damage at early stages, with the consequent life-safety and economical benefits.
Recent research suggests that, in an effort to create more robust bridge man-
agement, the SHM should be integrated into the BMS in a systematic way.
viii
Nowadays, there is a generalized consensus about this integration, but few real
applications have been accomplished, mainly because of the lack of interaction
between all the participants involved in the bridge management field.
Therefore, in an attempt to lay the foundations of a more robust bridge manage-
ment, especially in Portugal, an international seminar was organized in Lisbon,
in December 2012, with the objective of bringing together bridge designers,
bridge owners, researchers, and students to discuss the actual condition of the
Portuguese bridges, the current practice in terms of condition assessment and
maintenance needs of the bridges, and to set up new targets and new (or alter-
native) strategies for the next decades.
In terms of the Portuguese bridge condition and current practice, this seminar
intended to answer the following questions:
What is the current structural condition of the Portuguese bridges?
How much does it cost to return our aged infrastructure to world-class
levels of performance?
Which are the most common damage scenarios encountered in our bridg-
es?
Are the current bridge inspections and maintenance strategies enough to
maintain our bridges?
Is the bridge SHM technology ready for real applications?
Which are the cutting edge technologies currently under development?
In terms of new strategies for the next decades, our vision was to link practice
and research, and also to find new research pathways for condition assessment.
Basically, we expected to go through the following points:
Find mechanisms to reduce the bridge maintenance costs by integrating
SHM into BMS;
Identify technologies that are ready to transit from research to practice;
Prioritizing research topics that endorse real-world applications;
Preface
ix
Identify the direct benefits for the bridge owners derived from the SHM
systems;
Raise the awareness of the authorities to support new research projects;
and
Attract more and better students into the field of condition assessment of
bridges.
Therefore, in order to summarize the conclusions of this seminar, this book is
published as an extended seminar summary. It is divided in four chapters. In
Chapter 1, we briefly review the evolution of the bridge management in Portugal
and the current structural condition of the Portuguese bridges. In Chapter 2,
we give an overview of the bridge management field, and the BMSs in particu-
lar, by focusing the roles of bridge inspections, Non-destructive Evaluation, and
Structural Health Monitoring for the structural condition assessment of bridges.
In Chapter 3, we present some guidelines for the future of condition assessment
of bridges, which were adjusted according to the input given by the invited
speakers during the seminar. In particular, we focus on the potential of the SHM
for improving and complementing the information gathered by the visual in-
spections of bridges. Finally, each oral presentation is summarized in Chapter 4.
Note that only the Editors are responsible for the opinions and points of views
expressed in Chapters 1, 2, and 3. On the other hand, in Chapter 4, the invited
speakers are responsible for the entire content of their presentations.
Eli Figueiredo
Ionut Moldovan
Manuel Barata Marques
Lisbon, 2013
Notation
All symbols used in this book are defined when they first appear in the text. For
the readers convenience, this section contains only the principal meanings of
the commonly used acronyms and symbols. Some symbols have more than one
meaning, but their meaning should be clear when read in context.
AhhrcviaIions
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
BMS Bridge Management System
Brisa Brisa Auto-estradas de Portugal, S.A.
CP Comboios de Portugal
DAQ Data Acquisition System
EP Estradas de Portugal, S.A.
EU European Union
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
GOA Gesto de Obras de Arte (Software)
JAE Junta Autnoma das Estradas
NDE Non-destructive Evaluation
PNR National Roadway Plan (Plano Nacional Rodovirio)
REFER Rede Ferroviria Nacional, EPE
SHM Structural Health Monitoring
SPR Statistical Pattern Recognition
UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
UK United Kingdom
US United States (of America)
UUV Unmanned Underwater Vehicle

xi
Acknowledgments
First of all, we would like to acknowledge all the sponsors of the international
seminar Structural Condition Assessment of Bridges: Past, Present, and Fu-
ture. Without their support, this effort to push forward the knowledge about
bridge management could not have taken place.
We would like to thank all the invited speakers, for their will and availability to
come over and give a talk on their specific topics of expertise: Antnio Perry da
Cmara, Armando Rito, Carlos Flix, Carlos Santinho Horta, Charles R. Farrar,
Jos Carlos Clemente, Keith Worden, Lus Oliveira Santos, Paulo Lima Barros,
Robert Veit-Egerer, and Tiago Mendona. We would also like to thank Helmut
Wenzel and Joaquim Figueiras for their initial availability to give a talk at the
seminar. Due to unforeseen events, they could not participate, but nominated
Robert Veit-Egerer and Carlos Flix to replace them, respectively.
We would also like to thank the Bastonrio of the Ordem dos Engenheiros (the
Portuguese Order of Engineers) Carlos Alberto Matias Ramos, for giving the
institutional support to the seminar as well as for having chaired one of the ses-
sions.
We also would like to thank Assuno Alves and Ivo Boaventura for the testimo-
nies given about the current bridge management procedures carried out at the
Municipal Chambers of Lisbon and Barcelos, respectively.
Lastly but most importantly, we would like to thank all the students involved
in the organization of the seminar, especially Joo Tiago Pereira and Joo Pires
Mesquita.
Interpret the past,
understand the present, and
design the future of condition assessment of bridges.
1
1. Overview of Bridge Management
1.1 Introduction
Around the world, the investment in road and rail networks is huge and bridges,
along with tunnels, are by far the most vulnerable and expensive parts per ki-
lometer. Bridges play a key role in the backbone of the economies, even though
their importance in our society is often overlooked. The bridge structures are
generally used to cross rivers, estuaries, valleys, and to improve traffic flow at
intersections. Certain bridges can also be high-profile structures rising up as
landmarks in the landscape.
The value of bridges in the national networks has been estimated at 12 billion
Euros in France, 23 billion Euros in the United Kingdom (UK), 4.1 billion Euros
in Spain, and 30 billion Euros in Germany [1].
In the United States (US), it is speculated that the first bridge construction boom
started along with the road construction program mandated by the Federal
Highway Act of 1956 [2]. In 2009, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
declared to have in its inventory 603,259 bridges [3]. In the European Union
(EU), most bridges in the national road networks have been built after the World
War II. Typically they comprise about 2% of the length and about 30% of the val-
ue [1], which shows the relatively high cost of bridges in the road network. Nev-
ertheless, in Portugal most road bridges have been built during the last 30 years,
mainly pushed by the EU funding and the highway construction boom. On the
other hand, the rail network had its construction boom in the late 19
th
century.
In the recent Global Competitiveness Report, the World Economic Forum classi-
fied Portugal in 4
th
in terms of quality of roads, which indicates an extensive and
efficient road network, and in 26
th
in quality of railroad infrastructure, which
indicates the underinvestment observed in this sector [4]. Currently, the main
2
road and rail networks comprise about 6,200 bridges. The railway bridge length
comprises about 1.65% of the total rail network length.
Over the last 60 years, both in the US and in the EU, the emphasis was cen-
tered on the construction of new bridges rather than on routine inspections or
preventive maintenance of the existing ones. However, modern societies have
reached the point of development where the maintenance of the existing infra-
structure is mandatory. For instance, according to the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), more than 26% of the
nations bridges are either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. The
cost of eliminating all existing bridge deficiencies, as they arise over the next
50 years, was estimated at $850 billion in 2006, equating to an average annual
investment of $17 billion [5]. As a response, in 2010, the US Federal Government
has announced plans for a $50 billion, six-year infrastructure investment plan,
which includes rebuilding 150,000 miles of roads and bridges, and construction
and maintenance of 4,000 miles of railways [6]. Facing an aging infrastructure,
the UK Governments 2010 Infrastructure Plan signaled the need for enormous
investments of 200 billion over the next five years [7]. Therefore, learning the
lessons from the current infrastructure scenario, in some of the most developed
countries in the world, and assuming the Portuguese delay in the economy de-
velopment, one can conclude that we do need to act today in order to avoid such
huge investments, at once, in 20 to 30 years from now, i.e. we need to maintain
the present to preserve the future.
Maintaining bridge structures in a serviceable condition has been challenged
by the wide variety of structural systems. Even though the majority of modern
bridges are of reinforced or prestressed concrete construction, there are also
a large number of composite bridges, steel bridges, cable-stayed bridges, sus-
pended bridges, and masonry-arch bridges. Each type of structure behaves dif-
ferently, suffers from different types of deterioration, and has different main-
tenance needs. Additionally, the increasing volume of traffic, and maximum
weights of individual vehicles, means that, for many structures, the loads to
which bridges are being subjected are far higher than those predicted during the
designing process, which also increase their deterioration. The deterioration is
further amplified as many modern structures, especially concrete bridges, are
subject to a more aggressive environment than the ancient ones. The effects of
Overview of Bridge Management
3
chlorides, either in a marine environment or from de-icing salts, alkali-silica
reaction, carbonation, and inadequate corrosion protection are causing pro-
gressive deterioration of the bridges, which leads to a higher frequency of bridge
repairs and possibly reduced bridge load carrying capacity. Bridge maintenance
is also costly, so ensuring that bridges are properly maintained is challenged by
reduced governmental or private owners budgets for maintenance activities.
Meanwhile, the collapses of certain bridges around the world have put pres-
sure on the authorities to develop solutions to periodically inspect their bridges
and to support maintenance activities. Thus, in the last two decades, numer-
ous Bridge Management Systems (BMSs) have been developed, in the US and
inside the EU, to assist engineers on the condition assessment and prioritiza-
tion of maintenance activities. A BMS is defined as a visual inspection-based
decision-support tool developed to analyze engineering and economic factors
and to assist the authorities in determining how and when to make decisions
regarding maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of bridge structures. Even
though the BMS technology has already been accepted by the bridge owners
around the world, its efficiency has been challenged by the limitation of the vi-
sual inspections to unveil all the structural anomalies. This limitation may lead
to inappropriate or costly maintenance activities in order to cover the uncer-
tainty derived from the visual inspections.
As stated by the FHWA [8], the public is demanding to act faster, cheaper, and
greener than ever before. One solution to accomplish that is through the inclu-
sion of innovation, research, and new technologies for bridge condition assess-
ment. Therefore, in the last decade, the Structural Health Monitoring (SHM)
technology has evolved and become increasingly appealing due to its potential
to detect damage at early stages, with the consequent life-safety and economical
benefits. The SHM refers to the process of implementing monitoring systems to
measure in real time the structural responses, in order to detect anomalies and/
or damage at early stages. Recent developments [9] have suggested that, in an
effort to create a more robust bridge management, the SHM should be integrat-
ed into the BMS in a systematic way. Although there is a generalized consensus
about the need of this integration, few real applications have been accomplished
due to technological challenges and also due to the lack of interaction between
all the participants involved in this field.
4
In 2008, the AASHTO pointed top five problems for bridges in general: age and
deterioration, congestion, soaring construction costs, maintaining bridge safe-
ty, and new bridge needs; and five solutions for bridges: investment, research
and innovation, systematic maintenance, public awareness, and financial op-
tions [5]. Therefore, in order to maintain bridge safety at the minimum overall
cost, the bridge owners need to act now, by investing in research and innova-
tion, in order to be able to perform appropriate systematic maintenance.
In order to interpret the past, understand the present, and design new perspec-
tives for the future of bridge management, with focus on the condition assess-
ment of bridges, the Catholic University of Portugal organized the international
seminar Structural Condition Assessment of Bridges: Past, Present, and Fu-
ture, held in Lisbon, in December 2012. Well-known specialists, with different
backgrounds, were invited to participate, such as bridge owners, bridge de-
signers, researchers, and students. As the main outcome of the seminar, this
book is intended to summarize some of the discussions held on this occasion. In
particular, Chapter 1 presents a brief history of the Portuguese road and rail net-
works and of the development of bridge management in Portugal. Additionally,
it summarizes the current state condition of the Portuguese bridges from the
perspective of the main bridge owners. Chapter 2 gives an overview of bridge
management and its several parts, summarizes some of the main lessons from
the past, and provides some limitations and needs in terms of bridge condition
assessment. It also highlights the capabilities of the SHM systems for bridge con-
dition assessment, including the Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) technolo-
gy, which can potentially be integrated into the existing BMSs in a systematic
way. Chapter 3 provides some guidelines for the future of bridge management in
order to support the bridge owners, especially the Portuguese ones, to maintain
their bridges at minimum overall cost, taking all factors into account such as the
condition of the structure, load carrying capacity, rate of deterioration, effect
on traffic, duration of the repairs, and the residual life of the structure. Finally,
Chapter 4 summarizes the presentations given by the invited speakers.
The reader should note that, the bridge management is a vast multidisciplinary
field, which makes it difficult for the authors to go through all its main topics
in just one document. Thus, this book is mostly focused on the structural en-
gineering point of view, especially on the structural condition assessment of
5
bridges. Nevertheless, the authors acknowledge the existence of other topics
of outmost importance to the success of the BMSs, as for instance, information
technology and economics.
1.2 Bridge management and structural condition assessment
of bridges
The bridge management (Figure 1.1) has been defined as a multidisciplinary field
incorporating knowledge from structural engineering, information technology,
and economics [10]. The BMSs are computerized tools, which incorporate that
knowledge aiming to optimize maintenance budgets within a stock of existing
bridges. The structural condition assessment of bridges is a subset of the struc-
tural engineering, concerning exclusively with the assessment of the structure
integrity, defined as the capacity of the structure to fulfill the technical require-
ments for use in serviceability limit states and to fulfill the structural capacity
to resist to the ultimate limit states. In general, the outcome of the structural
condition assessment is a score that quantifies the operational performance of
bridges, which can be subsequently used to support the maintenance programs
and to prevent bridge collapses.
Figure 1.1 Bridge management as a multidisciplinary field.
6
1.3 The motivation for structural condition assessment of
bridges
The ultimate goal of structural condition assessment will always be the preven-
tion of bridge collapses. Actually, the motivation for permanent or temporary
structural condition assessment of bridges has been driven, politically, by cat-
astrophic bridge collapses around the world. Indeed, in the US, the safety and/
or deterioration of the existing bridges came up, in the late 1960s, when the US
Highway 35 Silver Bridge suddenly collapsed on December 17, 1967, and killed
46 people. However, despite the tremendous developments observed in the US
since then, the I-35W Bridge over the Mississippi River collapsed in 2007, killing
13 people and pointing out the need for new and more reliable tools to prevent
such catastrophic events. In Portugal, the collapse of the Hintze Ribeiro Bridge,
in 2001, over the Douro river in Entre-os-Rios, that killed 59 people (Figure 1.2),
has been seen as the awakening moment in terms of bridge management, as
mentioned by the brigde owners.
Figure 1.2 Front page of a Portuguese newspaper focusing the Hintze Ribeiro Bridge collapse.
7
On the other hand, the bridge owners are also interested in the condition as-
sessment as a tool to guide and support the bridge maintenance throughout its
life cycle. As mentioned in Section 1.1, the financial implications and poten-
tial impact through optimal bridge management are vast, which suggests that
planned bridge maintenance can lead to considerable savings.
1.4 The history of the Portuguese road and rail networks and
bridge management
Based on the political, social, and economic environment as well as the strat-
egies implemented throughout the centuries, the evolution of the Portuguese
road and rail networks can be split into five periods (adapted from [11]):
Before 1852;
1852-1910;
1910-1933;
1933-1985;
1985-present.
Until the second part of the 19
th
century, the Portuguese people used to move
by animal-powered transportation and boat. There was not yet any type of rail
network. The first road classification is dated from the 18
th
century, more pre-
cisely in 1790 [12]. The road network diagram of 1808 (Figure 1.3) indicates the
existence of a massive road network (even though without quality) that covered
most of the Portuguese territory and connected the main cities. At that time,
a trip between Lisbon and Porto used to last three days, approximately. Even
though most of the roads were unpaved, some roads were paved using the mac-
adam. The first macadam road built in Portugal was in 1824, in Lisbon
1
[13].
1. The asphalt made of bitumen was used only in the early 20
th
century.
8
The year of 1844 stands as a historical year as a group of capitalists formed a
company under the name of Portuguese Public Works Company
2
, which set out
to accomplish all the great public works legally authorized for the improve-
ment of the countrys communications, and was approved, along with its
statutes, by a decree of the same year. On the 1
st
of March 1845, the company
entered into a contract with the Government, whereby it was entrusted with
carrying out the necessary works to improve the countrys communications,
namely the opening and the improvement of several roads and the construction
of the first railway line. The approval of the plans and the supervision of the
works were reserved to the Government. The company was granted with a con-
cession agreement for 40 years on the roads and 99 years on the railways. De-
spite such privileges, the company was unable to follow its ambitious plan. At
the end of 1855, when it was shut down with a negative balance, it had only
undertaken the construction and improvement of some roads and performed
studies for the Lisbon ring road and east railway lines [14].
The period from 1852 to 1910 is remembered due to the outstanding work car-
ried out by Antnio Maria de Fontes Pereira de Melo and the construction of
most of the national rail network.
In 1852, the Ministry of Public Works
3
is created, headed by Fontes Pereira de
Melo, whose one of the main goals was to elaborate studies in order to build the
first railway lines. In 1853, the Portuguese government signed up a concession
agreement with the Central Peninsular Railway Company of Portugal
4
[15], repre-
sented by Hardy Hislop, to build up a rail connection between Lisbon and Spain,
through the city of Santarm. Later on, the Portuguese state resigned the conces-
sion agreement and assumed itself the construction of the railway. In October of
1856, the first railway was opened between Lisbon and Carregado with a length
of 36km [16]. The Royal Portuguese Railroad
5
, nowadays called Comboios de Por-
tugal (CP), the main railway operator, was founded on the 11
th
of May, 1860, by
the Spanish entrepreneur Jos de Salamanca e Mayol. In 1877, in the middle of the
railway construction boom, the Maria Pia Bridge is inaugurated (Figure 1.4).
2. In Portuguese: Companhia das Obras Pblicas Portuguesa
3. In Portuguese: Ministrio das Obras Pblicas
4. In Portuguese: Companhia Central Peninsular dos Caminhos de Ferro de Portugal
5. In Portuguese: Companhia Real dos Caminhos de Ferro Portugueses
9
Figure 1.3 Military map of the Portuguese national roads in 1808 [13]
(picture with low resolution).
Figure 1.4 Construction of the Maria Pia Bridge over the Douro River, in Porto [17].
10
On the other hand, at that time, in spite of huge developments of the rail net-
work, the national road network does not observe significant investments by
the Government. Nevertheless, in 1889, the classified road network (estradas
reais and estradas distritais) was estimated at 18,427km. Note that, during this
time, the first level of conservation works used to be done by road menders
6

(Figure 1.5), who were road conservation workers responsible to overview their
canton and to report to the head of conservation [18]. The road menders were
spread around the country and were responsible to maintain the roads (e.g.
clean the gutters) as well as to patrol the roads [19].
In 1892 a law was passed to create the Board of Directors of the State Railways,
but most railways remained in private ownership albeit with greater regulation.
Actually, and due to the rapid increase of railway lines and bridges, the bridge
management was first handled by the CP. The CPs Regional Bridge Brigade and
Bridge Review Brigade
7
were responsible to
manage the railway bridges. The Region-
al Bridge Brigade was divided into different
regions throughout the country and was
responsible for routine inspection and cur-
rent maintenance such as small repairs and
cleaning. The Bridge Review Brigade was
only responsible for the principal inspec-
tions [20]. By 1895, Portugal had a rail net-
work of 2,344km [17] as shown in Figure 1.6.
Figure 1.5 Road menders dressing from
Junta Autnoma das Estradas.
Figure 1.6 Map of the Portuguese rail network in 1895,
including the former Portuguese colonies.
6. In Portuguese: Cantoneiros; In French: Cantonniers
7. In Portuguese: Brigada de Reviso
11
12
The period between 1910 and 1933 is remembered as an era of political instabil-
ity and by the rise of the automobile industry.
After the 1910 revolution, which deposed the monarchy, the democratic but un-
stable Portuguese first republic was established. Recognizing the importance of
the bridge safety, in 1912 the state declares that some university specialists must
be part of a commission to verify the safety of bridges [11]. In 1913, the road net-
work is officially classified into national and municipal roads (estradas naciona-
is, estradas municipais, and caminhos vicinais). In 1926, after the 28
th
of May
Revolution, Portugal implemented an authoritarian regime of social-catholic
views, which, in 1933, was recast and renamed as the New State
8
. In 1927, the
Junta Autnoma das Estradas
9
(JAE) was founded after the extinction of the
General Administration of Roads and Tourism
10
, in order to organize and devel-
op the Portuguese road network. Signs of the growing power of motorists were
given by the creation of the Portuguese Automobile Association
11
, which became
one of the strongest players in the national road action.
The period between 1933 and 1985 is marked by the vision of Duarte Pacheco,
engineer and politician, in the middle of the 20
th
century, and by the develop-
ment of the road network.
In 1933, the whole classified road network (national and municipal) was esti-
mated at 16,900km. In the same year, Duarte Pacheco, Minister of Public Works,
created a commission to analyze the proposal to build a road and railway bridge
in Lisbon. However, the proposal was subsequently put aside in favor of the
Marechal Carmona Bridge, in Vila Franca de Xira (1951) the closest bridge to
Lisbon to cross the Tagus River.
In recognition of the importance of the road network, in 1945 the Portuguese
state elaborated the first real National Roadway Plan PNR 45
12
. According with
the PNR 45, the classified national road network was estimated in 20,597km
8. In Portuguese: Estado Novo
9. Which is today EP Estradas de Portugal S.A.
10. In Portuguese: Administrao Geral das Estradas e Turismo
11. In Portuguese: ACP Automvel Club de Portugal
12. In Portuguese: Plano Rodovirio Nacional 1945
13
[12]. In 1948, in later reorganization, marked by the end of the World War II and
the construction of new roads and bridges, it was created the Bridge Directorate
Services
13
, from the Construction Services Directorate
14
, with greater autono-
my, being also responsible for the current conservation works. Its primary re-
sponsibility was to build and maintain the road network in Portugal.
In 1953, the Minister of the Public Works created a new commission to analyze
the construction of a bridge over the Tagus River, in Lisbon. In 1959, a public
tender was launched to build up a road and railway bridge. Due to economic
reasons, later on, the Portuguese authorities decided to give up the idea of a rail
line, even though it was decided to leave the structure prepared for a later up-
grade. In 1962, the United States Steel International Inc. was put in charge of its
construction. On the 6
th
of August 1966, the four-lane Salazar Bridge (nowadays
the 25 de Abril Bridge) was inaugurated after 45 months of construction works
(Figure 1.7).
Around this time, the JAE had four Bridge Brigade teams, for bridge mainte-
nance activities, with specialized people, located in Almada, Vila Franca de Xira,
and Porto. The fourth one was a team with a mobile vehicle
15
(Figure 1.8), es-
pecially designed to perform small bridge repairs throughout the country [20].
Due to the increasing importance of the road network, and to the need of short-
ening the journeys between the main cities, in 1972, Brisa Auto-estradas de
Portugal, S.A. (Brisa) was created for construction, operation, and maintenance
of tolled highways.
In 1975, and following the Carnation Revolution
16
, the CP was nationalized.
In the early and mid 1980s, the JAE undertook several internal changes, such as
the ending of the Bridge Brigades and the road menders. In consequence, most
of the maintenance activities were outsourced from the private sector and were
13. In Portuguese: Direco dos Servios de Pontes
14. In Portuguese: Direco dos Servios de Construo
15. In Portuguese: Carro oficina
16. In Portuguese: Revoluo dos Cravos, aps o golpe de estado ocorrido a 25 de Abril de 1974
14
essentially reactive rather than planned. Note that the road menders were pres-
ent as conservation workers since the 19
th
century.
The period between 1985 and present day is marked by the integration of Portu-
gal into the EU and the arrival of European funding for the construction of new
roads. This period stands as a Portuguese golden age for highway construction.
In 1985, one year before the integration of Portugal into the EU, the PNR 45 was
replaced by the PNR 85
17
. In 1991, three years before the established deadline,
Brisa completed the highway A1 between Lisbon and Porto, which marked the
beginning of a new era in the national road paradigm the construction of a
massive highway network. As a way to show the excitement around this in-
auguration, Figure 1.9 shows the 27m-high sculpture, by Charters de Almeida,
raised in Condeixa for the inauguration of the highway A1. With the completion
of the A1, the length of national highways was set in 409km.
At this time, the bridge inventories and inspections were summarized in hand-
filled forms. For instance, Figure 1.10 shows several registration records
18
from
CP related with a bridge inventory, describing structural details about the
bridge. Additionally, Figure 1.11 shows a bi-
annual inspection datasheet from JAE sum-
marizing one inspection performed, in 1992,
to the Pinho Bridge over the Douro River.
Note that the bridge inspector pointed out
the need for cleaning of the draining system
and the sidewalks, rail maintenance, and
also a special bridge inspection for reassess-
ment of bearings and cracking observed in
steel components. However, these hand-
filled forms were vulnerable, i.e. they were
easily lost, stolen, damaged or destroyed.
Figure 1.7 Inauguration of the Salazar Bridge
(currently 25 de Abril Bridge) in 1966.
17. In Portuguese: Plano Rodovirio Nacional 1985
18. In Portuguese: Ficha de Cadastro
15
Figure 1.8 Mobile vehicle from JAE for small repairs and maintenance activities [20].
Figure 1.9 Charters de Almeida sculpture to commemorate
the accomplishment of the highway A1 in 1991.
16
Figure 1.10 CPs registration records dated from 1989 [20].
Figure 1.11 JAE inspection records dated from 1992 [20].
17
In the 1990s, the CP also underwent a change in the bridge management strate-
gy, namely the reorganization of the internal maintenance teams, the reduction
of the number of people involved in maintenance activities, and the extinction
of the workshop
19
in the city of Ovar, which was responsible to support, lo-
gistically, the maintenance activities performed on the bridges throughout the
country (Figure 1.12). Part of the capabilities, for small repairs, were moved to
the city of Entroncamento. The reorganization of the maintenance teams led
to the extinction of the Regional Bridge Brigades and the creation of four bri-
gades for bridge maintenance located in Porto, Guarda, Lisbon, and Faro. Those
teams were responsible for annual routine inspections and were in charge of
basic maintenance activities, without special technology and means. Significant
repairs needed to be outsourced. One also observed the extinction of the Bridge
Review Brigade and the creation of a bridge inspection team, with more trained
people and special equipment, responsible for main inspections uncovered by
the four regional brigades [20]. Finally, at this time, a plan for periodic observa-
tion and instrumentation of bridges was put into place.
Figure 1.12 Workshop of Ovar.
19. In Portuguese: Oficina
18
In 1997, REFER Rede Ferroviria Nacional, EPE (REFER) was created as a public
company responsible for providing the public service of managing the nation-
al rail network infrastructure in Portugal. REFER is subject to the supervision
of the finance and transport ministers. At this point, CP became exclusively a
train service operator.
Even though in the first years Brisas activity was mainly focused on the con-
struction (project, works coordination, and supervision) and operation of new
highways, the maintenance of those later became a priority. Therefore, since
1991, after the conclusion of the highways A1 and A5, as well as the initial
stretches of A3 and A4, an infrastructures management system for the global
network was internally required. Thus, in 1994, Brisa developed the first Portu-
guese BMS STONE
20
.
In 1995, one assisted at the beginning of periodic inspections for important
structures. In 1997 was initiated the development of a BMS called GOA
21
, which
would later become the prominent Portuguese BMS. In 1998, the Municipal
Chamber of Lisbon
22
acquired and implemented the GOA system. In 1999, RE-
FER also implemented the GOA system.
In 1998, a new National Roadway Plan PNR 2000 was approved, which was
essentially an optimization of the PNR 85. In the same year, in order to alleviate
the congestion of the 25 de Abril Bridge, the cable-stayed Vasco da Gama Bridge
was opened to traffic. Additionally, the sidewalls of the 25 de Abril Bridge were
extended and retrofitted to accommodate six road lanes. In 1999, the lower plat-
form of the bridge was prepared to carry two rail tracks. In the same year, JAE
was split into three agencies: Instituto das Estradas de Portugal (IEP), responsi-
ble for the regulation and supervision of the national road sector, Instituto para
a Construo Rodoviria (ICOR), responsible for the road construction works,
and Instituto para a Conservao e Explorao da Rede Rodoviria (ICERR),
which was responsible for the maintenance and operation works.
20. In Portuguese Manual para a Manuteno Programada das Obras de Arte Rodovirias
21. Acronym for Gesto de Obras de Arte
22. In Portuguese Cmara Municipal de Lisboa
19
As a means of showing the excitement around the highway construction boom,
in 2001, ten years after the accomplishment of the highway A1, Portugal almost
quadrupled the length of its highways (1,659km)!
However, on the 4
th
of March 2001, the Entre-os-Rios tragedy showed the defi-
ciencies of the bridge management carried out in Portugal and marked the shift
to a new era of bridge management. The tragedy occurred after many days of
intense rain and consequent increase of the river stream, when one of the piers
of the Hintze Ribeiro Bridge, owned by IEP, over the Douro River, collapsed re-
sulting in the partial fall of the deck. The collapse dragged together a bus and
three cars, killing 59 people (Figure 1.13). In an emergency response, from April
to June of the same year, the ICERR launched a program for emergency inspec-
tions. After 349 bridge inspections, three bridges were closed down and load/
speed restrictions were enforced on 56 more. Retrofit projects were developed
for 60 bridges. Meanwhile, the ICERR and REFER promoted campaigns for un-
derwater inspections. On the 4
th
of May, 2002, the new Hintze Ribeiro Bridge
was inaugurated.
Figure 1.13 Hintze Ribeiro Bridge collapse in 2001.
20
In 2002, ICOR and ICERR were merged into a single agency, namely the IEP. In
early 2004, and after several years of hesitations, the renamed Estradas de Por-
tugal, S.A. (EP) finally acquired the GOA system. In 2005, the EP promotes an
annual program for underwater inspections. In 2006, roughly 1,700 bridges are
reported as being subjected to principal inspections.
In 2007, the government decided to create a new institute Instituto de In-
fra-estruturas Rodovirias (InIR), which was mandated to regulate and super-
vise the national road sector. In the same year, the Lezria Bridge, the longest
one in Portugal (10km, roughly), included in the Brisas highway network, was
officially opened to traffic with a monitoring system composed of a dense sensor
network over 400 sensors.
In 2008, about 1,200 bridges were subjected to principal inspections. In 2012, in
another governmental reorganization, the InIR is integrated into a new institute
Instituto da Mobilidade e dos Transportes, IP.
As described in Chapter 4, currently, the three main Portuguese owners (Brisa,
EP, and REFER) use the GOA system, as a database with relevant information
of their special structures, and have their own teams and internal resources to
Figure 1.13 Hintze Ribeiro Bridge collapse in 2001.
21
perform routine and principal bridge inspections, with the exception of the
underwater and special inspections. However, the structural condition assess-
ment still relies heavily on visual inspections. For this reason, and in order to
improve the structural condition assessment, the three owners have already in-
stalled monitoring systems in some of their bridge structures, namely the 25 de
Abril Bridge in Lisbon, the Lezria Bridge in Carregado, and the So Joo Bridge
in Porto.
Finally, in order to summarize the current Portuguese road and rail networks,
Figure 1.14 shows the evolution of the national railway length since 1853 and
Figure 1.15 shows the evolution of the highway network along with the total na-
tional road network since 1960 and 1990, respectively. Table 1.I summarizes the
total length of the highway network as well as the total length of the national
road and rail networks.
Figure 1.14 Current railway length in kilometers (adapted from [17] and [21]) until 2010.
22
Figure 1.15 Evolutions of the highway (1960-2011) and national road network (1990-2011)
(adapted from [21]).
Table 1.I Total length of the Portuguese highway network as well
as national road and rail networks in 2011.
Highway Network National Road Network National Rail Network
Length (km) 2,737 13,511 2,843
1.5 Status of the Portuguese bridges
In Portugal, currently there are three main bridge owners, namely Brisa, EP,
and REFER, plus the Municipal Chambers. Brisa was created in 1972 and, in four
decades, it has become one of the largest tolled highway operators in the world
and the largest private transport infrastructure company in Portugal. EP is a
company owned entirely by the Portuguese State. REFER is also a state-owned
company and was created to manage the Portuguese rail infrastructure, previ-
ously under control of CP, which is currently exclusively a train service opera-
tor. In Portugal, the 308 Municipal Chambers are responsible for bridges incor-
porated in the network of secondary roads.
23
1.5.1 The perspective of the three main bridge owners
The main owners have the inventory database organized according to the typol-
ogy of the special structures, which may include bridges, viaducts, footbridg-
es, culverts, cattle creeps, and tunnels. Herein, and for simplification reasons,
the term bridge is defined as a structure used to span physical obstacles such as
bodies of water, valleys, or roads. Thus, it includes bridges (span bodies of wa-
ter), viaducts (span valleys), footbridges, overpasses (cross over another road
or railway), and underpasses (constructed for the benefit of secondary roads
and railways). For completeness, culverts, cattle creeps, and tunnels are still
covered here, as those structures also carry out lessons that can help solving the
challenges posed by aging bridge structures.
In Chapter 4, the inventory of special structures is summarized for each owner.
Additionally, it contains information about the current condition of those
structures, the bridge management and maintenance strategies implement-
ed (which includes the identification of the type of bridge inspections and the
maintenance activities), the currently observed damage scenarios, and the fu-
ture developments and recommendations.
Concerning the past and the present, and based on the description of each own-
er, the following conclusions can be drawn regarding the structural condition
of the bridges:
Even though REFER has a longer tradition in bridge inspection, interven-
tion, and maintenance activities, the Hintze Ribeiro Bridge disaster, in
2001, has been seen as a changing moment, or turning point, in terms of
bridge management for all owners;
Nowadays, the three bridge owners use the Portuguese BMS GOA, as
an organized and systematic methodology to provide information about
their patrimony and to assist them on the prioritization of the interven-
tions according with the budgetary constraints;
According with the bridge definition given above, the three main owners
account for 6,200 bridges, approximately; additionally, they also possess,
in their inventory, approximately 2,600 culvert and cattle creeps;
24
Taking into account the last two levels of structural condition rating ad-
opted by each owner, one may conclude that only 3.2% of the special
structures are considered structurally deficient; on the other hand,
taking into account the first three levels, one may conclude that 84.8%
of the special structures are considered in a good to excellent condition;
The most common damage scenarios identified are: generalized concrete
degradation (cracking, delamination, and corrosion of the reinforcing
bars), corrosion of metal components, degradation of the expansion joints
and bearings, and degradation of corrugated metal culverts; note that the
alkali-silica reaction is identified as one of the main degradation mecha-
nism of the concrete; the rapid degradation of corrugated metal culverts
has pushed the owners to perform considerable investments in order to
maintain them; and
The three main owners have already installed monitoring systems in some
of their special structures; the reduced number of monitoring systems has
been justified by their relatively low benefit-cost ratio; some examples of
bridges incorporated with those systems are: the 25 de Abril Bridge in Lis-
bon, the Lezria Bridge in Carregado, and the So Joo Bridge in Porto.
1.5.2 Other bridge owners
The number of bridges owned by each Municipal Chamber varies with the size
of the Chamber, in terms of population and area. There is not too much infor-
mation available about neither the state condition of those bridges nor the num-
ber of bridges under control of the Chambers.
The authors can claim though, through personal interviews performed after the
Seminar, that currently the Municipal Chamber of Lisbon owns, roughly, 160
bridges (most are overpasses and underpasses) and tunnels. This value does not
include pedestrian bridges. On the other hand, the smaller Municipal Cham-
ber of Barcelos owns 10 bridges over rivers, approximately. The status of those
bridges is not reported herein due to the lack of coherent information. Never-
theless, through those interviews, it was possible to unveil four main challenges
that Chambers face in the bridge maintenance process, namely:
25
Continuously shrinking public budgets for active maintenance activities;
Reduced number of people involved in the maintenance process;
Through the last decade, especially due to the shrinking budgets caused
by the economic crisis, the division for maintenance activities has been
marginalized, which gives them less power to take action; and
In the last years, and due to the declassification of some national roads to
municipal roads, the EP has transferred the responsibility of inspection
and maintenance activities for the bridges incorporated in those roads, to
the Municipal Chambers; however, the shrinking budgets of the Cham-
bers, along with lack of internal organization to conduct regular bridge
inspections, might delay some preventive maintenance activities.
27
2. Bridge Management System (BMS)
2.1 Introduction
2.1.1 Definition
Initially, the BMSs were simply inventories of basic information about the bridg-
es such as construction date, location, owner details, etc. Then, and as shown
in Figure 1.10 and Figure 1.11, they evolved to incorporate information derived
from scheduled inspections and from maintenance activities. Currently, BMSs
intend to cover all activities performed during the service life of bridges, from
design to demolition, by taking into account public safety, authorities budget-
ary constraints, and transport network functionality. They possess mechanisms
to ensure that the bridges are regularly inspected, evaluated, and maintained in
a systematic way. Broadly speaking, the main goal of a BMS is to ensure safety
while minimizing costs. Therefore, even though there is not a unique definition,
a BMS can be defined as a visual inspection-based decision-support tool devel-
oped to analyze engineering and economic factors and to assist the authorities
in determining how and when to make decisions regarding maintenance, re-
pair, and rehabilitation of structures.
However, the BMSs still rely heavily on bridge inspections, especially on the
qualitative and not necessarily consistent visual inspections, which may com-
promise the structural evaluation and, consequently, the maintenance deci-
sions as well as the avoidance of bridge collapses. Note that the inspectors may
naturally overlook certain structural problems, especially in parts of the struc-
ture where the access is difficult. Therefore, the reducing maintenance budgets
have pushed to the advent of more complex BMSs capable to optimize main-
tenance at minimum long-term cost for the transportation network. The idea
is to transform the current BMSs from visual inspection-based to continuous
28
assessment-based decision-support tools, which takes information from long-
term monitoring and bridge inspections.
In that sense, in the last years, the NDE and the SHM fields have emerged to aid
the bridge management with more quantitative information. As explained in
Cross et al. [22], the NDE concerns the health assessment of a structure, or its
components, through offline non-damaging procedures. Although most of the
techniques used for NDE might be used for SHM purposes, one should keep in
mind that NDE normally occurs as a local event in time, often applied to a small
area of a structure where damage is thought to be present. On the other hand,
SHM assumes an online approach, continuous in time and global in nature, with
the aim of autonomous monitoring. One should also note that SHM is more than
monitoring, as simply collecting data does not constitute SHM. Rather, SHM as-
sumes a continuous strategy of damage identification based on monitoring and
interpreting the collected data. Nevertheless, it is fair to observe that NDE may
be incorporated into the SHM systems, but not vice-versa.
At the current stage, it is important to note that SHM and NDE technologies do
not intend to replace the visual inspections, rather they intend to provide accu-
rate assessment and, at most, reduce the bridge inspection frequency.
2.1.2 BMS evolution around the world
The BMS evolution has been triggered by the challenges posed by aging bridges
around the world. The reports of several catastrophic bridge failures and the
increase of maintenance costs have pushed the authorities to upgrade, progres-
sively, the existing BMSs.
The US has been the leading force of the BMS development, mainly due to the
fast deterioration of their bridges and the number of observed catastrophic fail-
ures. In the US, during the first bridge construction boom, which started along
with the road construction program mandated by the Federal Highway Act of
1956 [2], the whole emphasis was centered on the construction of new bridges
rather than on routine inspections or preventive maintenance of the existing
Bridge Management System (BMS)
29
ones. Actually, the concern regarding the safety and/or deterioration of existing
bridges emerged in the late 1960s, when the pin-connected link suspension US
Highway 35 Silver Bridge suddenly collapsed on December 17, 1967, and killed
46 people (Figure 2.1). This catastrophic event prompted the FHWA to estab-
lish the National Bridge Inspection Program in 1970. This program required the
bridges to be inspected every two years and the creation of the National Bridge
Inventory database. Despite the efforts to inspect the bridges, in June 1983 the
Mianus River Bridge on the I-95 collapsed, killing three people. This disaster
caused concerns regarding fatigue and fracture-critical bridges. The National
Transportation Safety Board determined the disaster was the result of undetect-
ed anomalies in the pin and hanger assembly by the inspection and maintenance
program. In 1987 and 1989, the scour-induced failures at the Schoharie Creek
Bridge in New York and at the Hatchie River Bridge in Tennessee, respectively,
pushed the need to design bridge piers to resist scour and also the initiation
of the underwater bridge inspection program [2]. Realizing the need to inspect
the bridges for scour, the FHWA issued a technical advisory in 1988 revising
the National Bridge Inspection Standards to require evaluation of all bridges for
susceptibility to damage resulting from scour.
Figure 2.1 Collapse of the Silver Bridge on December 17, 1967, that killed 46 people in the US.
30
In the early 1990s several software packages were developed to assist in manag-
ing bridges, such as PONTIS and BRIDGIT in the US, and DANBRO in Denmark
[23].
In Portugal, until 1990s and as reviewed in Section 1.4, the bridge management
was carried out in a simplified manner, but with skilled technicians. Few acci-
dents were reported due to lack of maintenance, which can also be explained
by the reduced number of bridges. However, the early management systems
had significant information flaws, derived by the manual filing systems. More-
over, they were not prepared to interact with financial programming as well as
the needs of the whole transport network. In mid 90s, Brisa gave the first step
towards the creation of a BMS, namely with the development of STONE. Nev-
ertheless, the Hintze Ribeiro Bridge collapse (Figure 1.13) of 2001 stands as the
tipping point in terms of bridge maintenance. The bridge disaster boosted the
Portuguese authorities for regular bridge inspections. The collapse of the cente-
nary bridge, owned by EP, was later related to streambed scouring
23
caused by
illegal sand extraction, which compromised the integrity of the foundations of
the pillars. This disaster also pushed the authorities to realize the need of peri-
odic underwater bridge inspections. Therefore, in the early 2000 the GOA sys-
tem was released [24] and adopted by the main owners.
In spite of huge developments of the automated BMSs, in 2007, the Minneapolis
I-35W Bridge over the Mississippi River, Minnesota, collapsed during the rush
hour killing 13 people. Later, the National Transportation Safety Board deter-
mined that the probable cause of the collapse was the inadequate load capaci-
ty of the gusset plates at one node along with additional weight on the bridge
[25]. However, in 2005, the bridge was rated as structural deficient accord-
ing to the National Bridge Inventory database and, in 2006, subsequent report
found cracking and fatigue problems [26]. In the same year, in a less advertized
event, a heavy truck collapsed the 40-year-old Harp Road Bridge in a rural area
of southwest Washington State. The reasons of the non-fatality accident were
related to live load caused by the truck that was much higher than the design
capacity of the bridge. These incidents clearly showed the insufficiency of the
23. Scour is the result of erosive action of flowing water, excavating and carrying away material from the
bed and banks of streams or rivers. Bridge scour is the removal of sediment, such as sand and rocks, from
around bridge piers and abutments.
31
BMSs to avoid bridge collapses and have put pressure on the authorities to im-
prove the current BMSs.
Figure 2.2 Collapsed north section of the Minneapolis I-35W Bridge, Minnesota, in the US [25].
Around the world, the increasing number of bridges and the continuous need
to maintain the existing ones, along with the information technology revolu-
tion, brought about the generalization of the BMSs. Nevertheless, to date, the
structural condition assessment of these systems essentially relies on weighted
indices based on visual inspections and/or preliminary NDE technologies. For
instance, at the 50
th
anniversary of the Interstate Highway System, Walther and
Chase [27] stated that despite the advances in BMS, the condition assessment ac-
tivities still rely heavily on visual inspections, which inherently produces wide-
ly variable results as described in Section 2.2.2. The same authors argued that
the challenge would be to develop better assessment methodologies, that can
generate better prediction models, to support the owners decisions regarding
bridge safety assessment and maintenance.
Therefore, the current limitations of the visual inspections, which have been
identified as a shortcoming in BMS, have driven the research to developments
on long-term monitoring, namely to the advent of SHM and various forms of
NDE, whose results may be integrated into the BMS in a systematic way.
32
2.1.3 Current BMS organization
Even though there is not a unique standard organization, a typical BMS can be
split into six main modules as follows [1]:
Inventory;
Condition assessment;
Structural assessment;
Comparison of maintenance options;
Optimal maintenance program; and
Prioritized maintenance program.
The results from the bridge inspections are used to provide a measure of the
bridge condition through condition ratings. Two approaches have been used
worldwide. The first one is based on a cumulative condition rating obtained from
a weighted sum of all the condition assessments of the elements/components.
This approach has been adopted by the Portuguese GOA system, as highlighted
in Section 4.4 by the bridge owner. The ratings generally range from zero to five.
The second approach gives the assessed condition of the bridge as the highest
condition rating of the bridge elements/components. In both approaches, the
higher the condition rating, the worst the structural condition.
The FHWA has developed a software package called PONTIS, which allows a
choice of optimization policies at the network level while being based on mini-
mizing life-cycle costs. It recommends maintenance for each structure by car-
rying out a cost-benefit analysis where the benefit is calculated from the saving
made from maintaining the bridge immediately compared to postponing the
maintenance for one or more years. Currently, PONTIS is probably the most
advanced BMS. A particular feature of PONTIS is its statistical approach to the
condition of bridge elements, where each element of a bridge is considered as
part of a family of elements isolated from the individual bridges. The software
uses a simple form of Markov chain to model the progress of deterioration, and
transition probabilities are applied to model the change of the condition rating
of each element [1].
33
2.2 The role of bridge inspections
2.2.1 Overview
The general concept of bridge inspection has always existed, with its effective
practice varying between simple local visual inspections to more complex forms
of online monitoring using sensor networks. Until the middle of 20
th
century,
the reduced number of inspection programs was tied with the reduced number
of bridges and the lack of a regular maintenance strategy. After the World War
II, this scenario changed in several countries, especially in the US and Europe,
with all the emphasis centered on the construction of new bridges at a mini-
mal cost but with little effort on bridge inspections and maintenance activities.
As mentioned in Section 2.1.2, the inspections started to be the focus of bridge
owners with the collapse of the Silver Bridge, in the US in 1967. Afterwards, na-
tional standards and programs, which establish how bridge inspections should
be accomplished and at what frequency, were created around the world, bring-
ing the concept of planned and organized bridge inspections. Thus, the main
objectives of bridge inspections are:
To ensure the safety of the bridge;
To identify any maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation works that need
to be done; and
To provide a basis for planning and funding of the required works.
Currently, around the world, the bridge inspections are generally divided into
five categories:
Inventory inspection;
Routine inspection;
Principal or in-dept inspection;
Special inspection; and
Underwater inspection.
34
As mentioned in Section 4.3, the inventory inspection is the first inspection of
a new or existing structure, as it becomes part of the bridge inventory. It serves
to verify the information gathered previously and to look for missing informa-
tion. The routine and principal inspections are the two most common inspec-
tions. The routine inspection aims to look for maintenance needs. Normally, it
is performed every two years and it does not need access equipment. The prin-
cipal inspection is used to look for structural defects and is normally performed
every five years (or when required). The special inspection should be used to
perform a close inspection of a particular area or defect that is causing con-
cern. It is undertaken when required and normally needs access equipment. It
may also require supplementary tests, such as load test, structural monitoring,
and physical or chemical tests in the laboratory. The underwater inspection is
used to detect defects in submerged structural elements (masonry, concrete,
or steel) and to identify bridge scour. In Portugal, the underwater inspections
are performed routinely only after the Hintze Ribeiro Bridge collapse in 2001.
The bottom line of underwater inspections, as described by the bridge owners,
is to accurately record the present condition of the bridge foundations and the
stream, and to identify conditions that are indicative of potential problems with
scour and stream stability for further review and evaluation. Actually, scour is
statistically considered the most common cause of highway bridge failures in
the US [28]. From 1961 to 1976, 46 out of 86 major bridge failures were result of
scour near piers. Note that during that period, more bridge failures were caused
by scour than by earthquakes, wind, structural, corrosive, accidental, and con-
struction-related failures [29]. A glimpse on bridge scour research and evalua-
tions can be found in references [30, 31].
Furthermore, as described in Section 4.3, the general procedure of bridge in-
spection can be split into three main stages: planning, performing, and report-
ing. In Section 4.1, the reader can find some examples of bridge inspections
and further maintenance interventions. The examples shown are based on the
bridge inspections carried out on the Kwanza Bridge in Angola as well as the
Aguieira Bridges, the Figueira da Foz Bridge, and the Barra Bridge in Portugal.
35
2.2.2 Shortcomings and needs
In Portugal, since early 2000, the main bridge owners have made a success-
ful effort in order to implement an effective bridge inspection program in the
framework of a BMS. Bridge inspections can reveal substantial information re-
garding the structure condition and can be supplemented with a wide range of
NDE tests. However, in general, the current bridge inspections, as a mean of
including condition information into the BMSs, have several limitations as dis-
cussed in Chapter 4:
The condition rating system used, especially based on the visual inspec-
tions, depends highly on human-based evaluation and the ratings do not
exhibit a high degree of consistency when performed by different inspec-
tors;
The rating accuracy is unknown, as the assessment is generally restricted
to the visible spectrum, which cannot identify hidden flaws or anomalies;
The bridge inspections and the supplementary NDE tests are time con-
suming and expensive; and
The accuracy and reliability of routine and principal inspections could be
increased through more training of the inspectors in the types of damage
scenarios to be found and the methods to identify them; as highlighted
by the bridge designers in Sections 4.1 and 4.2, the experience gathered
from the rehabilitation projects and bridge inspections have brought to
the conclusion that in order to have proper rehabilitation projects and
proper budget estimations, it is important to have inspectors that are well
trained, capable to take risks, see beyond what they see in order to get a
good diagnosis, and have a thorough mapping of the damages.
In 2001, the FHWA performed a comprehensive study on the reliability of rou-
tine and principal inspections [32] as applied to highway bridges. For the rou-
tine inspection, bridge inspectors were provided with similar information,
instructions, and tools. The condition rating system required that inspectors
assigned a rating from 0 to 9 that reflected the structural capacity of a bridge
and described any structural deficiencies and the degree to which they are dis-
tributed. The routine inspections were completed with significant variability,
and the condition ratings assigned varied over a range of up to five different rat-
36
ings. It is predicted that only 68 percent of the condition ratings will fall within
one rating point of the average, and 95 percent will fall within two points. Ad-
ditionally, the study found that, in general, most inspectors visually examined
each of the primary bridge components, but inspection tools usage was minimal
and few detailed examinations were completed. Even though typically used by
less than 50 percent of the inspectors, the most common inspection NDE tools
used during the routine inspection tasks included a masonry hammer, flash-
light, tape measure, and binoculars. In terms of principal inspections, it was
highlighted that they may fail to detect or identify the specific types of defects
for which the inspection is prescribed, and may not reveal deficiencies beyond
those that could be noted during a routine inspection.
Recently, in order to verify the accuracy of the visual inspections, the EP con-
ducted parallel inspections (inspections performed by two different teams) on
about 2.5% of the internal inspections conducted annually by EP technicians
during the biennium 2010/2011, in order to obtain a Quality Certification of the
performed works and methodologies proposed by these inspections. The classi-
fication showed contradictions regarding the condition of the slopes.
Clearly, there is a need to support the bridge inspections with more NDE tech-
niques capable to enhance the condition of the bridges and to integrate more
quantitative information into condition ratings and, consequently, the BMSs.
The idea is not to substitute the current condition rating, rather to adjust and
improve it with more quantitative information as proposed in [9].
2.3 The role of the Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE)
2.3.1 Overview
The NDE is a multi-disciplinary field concerned with the development of mea-
surement techniques to characterize the materials, components, and structures
without damaging their integrity. NDE is included into bridge inspections as a
means of structural condition assessment. Note that Non-Destructive Testing
(also known as NDT) is a term that is often used, interchangeably, with NDE
37
[38]. Normally, the measurement techniques are based on visual, ultrasonic, ra-
diographic, thermographic, electromagnetic, and optic methods.
2.3.2 Visual inspections
Visual inspection is the most common and basic NDE technique used in bridge
inspections and it serves as the baseline with which many other NDE techniques
may be compared. The visual inspections have been the main source of condi-
tion information in the BMSs, but their reliability, in terms of bridge condition
assessment, is very often questionable as they are qualitative and not necessar-
ily consistent, as confirmed by the study carried out by the FHWA (see Section
2.2.2).
2.3.3 Other current NDE techniques
The number of inspection technologies has increased rapidly in the last decades.
As summarized in Section 4.3, some of the most used NDE techniques for con-
crete structures are given below:
Schmidt/rebound hammer test used to evaluate the surface hardness
of concrete;
Covermeter testing used to measure the distance of steel reinforcing
bars beneath the surface of the concrete and also to measure the diameter
of the reinforcing bars;
Carbonation depth measurement test used to determine whether mois-
ture has reached the depth of the reinforcing bars, essential for corrosion;
Ultrasonic pulse velocity testing mainly used to measure the sound ve-
locity in the concrete and hence the compressive strength of the concrete;
38
Penetration resistance or Windsor probe test used to measure the sur-
face hardness and hence the strength of the surface and near surface lay-
ers of the concrete;
Permeability test used to measure the flow of water through the con-
crete;
Radiographic testing used to detect voids in the concrete and the posi-
tion of pre-stressing ducts;
Sonic methods using an instrumented hammer providing both sonic
echo and transmission methods;
Infrared thermography used to detect voids, delamination, and other
anomalies in concrete as well as to detect water entry points in buildings;
Half-cell electrical potential method used to detect the corrosion po-
tential of reinforcing bars in concrete;
Impact echo testing used to detect voids, delamination, and other
anomalies in concrete;
Ground penetrating radar or impulse radar testing is a method that uses
radar pulses to image the subsurface, and therefore, to detect the position
of reinforcing bars or pre-stressing ducts; and
Tomographic modeling uses the data from ultrasonic transmission tests
in two or more directions to detect voids in concrete.
For more details on specific NDE methods, the reader is advised to consult the
documentation provided by the American Society for Nondestructive Testing
[34].
2.3.4 Shortcomings and needs
Based on the point of view of bridge designers, bridge inspectors, and bridge
owners, the current practices of bridge inspections, using some sort of NDE
techniques, have permitted to conclude that some of the existing NDE tech-
niques have the following limitations and needs:
39
Early signs of deterioration are often not seen based on the human visual
perception;
The accessibility to some components of the bridge is difficult and costly;
Most of the NDE methods have limited range and wide area coverage needs
multiple access points;
High level of personal skills is required to distinguish relevant signals
from noise; and
Specific training is needed for the inspectors to handle NDE techniques.
2.4 The role of the Structural Health Monitoring (SHM)
2.4.1 Overview
The process of implementing an autonomous damage detection strategy for
aerospace, civil, and mechanical engineering infrastructure is referred to as
SHM. The SHM process involves the observation of a system over time using
periodically sampled response measurements from an array of sensors, the ex-
traction of damage-sensitive features from these measurements, and the statis-
tical analysis of these features to determine the current state of system health.
For long-term SHM, the output of this process is periodically updated, provid-
ing information regarding the ability of the structure to perform its intended
function in light of the inevitable aging and degradation resulting from opera-
tional environments. After extreme events, such as earthquakes or blast load-
ings, SHM is used for rapid condition screening and aims to provide, in nearly
real time, reliable information regarding the integrity of the structure [35, 36].
The basic idea of SHM is to build up a system similar to the human nervous sys-
tem [37], where the brain (computer) processes the information and determines
actions (maintenance activities), and the nerves (sensors) feel the pain (dam-
age), as shown in Figure 2.3.
40
Heuristic forms of sensing-based damage detection have probably been around
as long as man has used tools. Developments in sensing-based damage detection
are closely coupled with the evolution, miniaturization, and cost reductions in
data acquisition (DAQ) systems and digital computing hardware. The develop-
ment of sensing-based damage detection has been driven by the rotating ma-
chinery, aerospace, offshore oil platform, and civil infrastructure applications.
To date, the most successful applications of sensing-based damage detection
have been accomplished from condition monitoring of rotating machinery.
In terms of conceptual approach, SHM is a multi-disciplinary field that involves
smart sensors, wire or wireless networks, data acquisition, damage identifica-
tion, model updating, safety evaluation, and prognosis. Nevertheless, current-
ly, a typical SHM system for bridges is given by the general layout depicted in
Figure 2.4, where the data is collected by sensing systems (sensors and DAQ sys-
tems) and sent via the Internet to a data storage unit. After the processing phase,
periodically, these data are compared with historical information (ideally using
artificial intelligence algorithms). At this stage, some kind of performance eval-
uation is normally carried out, in order to detect deviations from the baseline
condition. Finally, the results are sent to the owner for decision approval.
As stated in Section 4.5, the inherent multidisciplinary nature of the research
required to realize SHM solutions, coupled with the life-safety and economic
advantages that this technology can provide, and its broad applications, quali-
fies it as a Grand Challenge problem for engineering in the 21
st
centry.
41
Figure 2.3 SHM analogy with the human nervous system [38].
Figure 2.4 General layout of permanent SHM systems [39].
Information Processing - Brain
(e.g. central station, computers)
Sensory System - Nerves
(e.g. sensors and DAQ systems)
42
2.4.2 Historical perspective of SHM: from rotating machinery
to bridges
The damage identification in the past was mainly performed based on visual in-
spection methods, with occasional application of conventional NDE techniques
such ultrasonic and acoustic emission (e.g. tap tests on train wheels). However,
vibration-based damage detection methods have received considerable atten-
tion during the last 40 years. A brief review of the SHM historical evolution us-
ing vibration-based structural damage identification is given herein. However,
the reader is referred to Doebling et al. [40] and Sohn et al. [41] for a review of
literature on this subject.
The most successful application of damage identification using vibration-based
methods has been reported for rotating machinery. The shorter lifetime, con-
trolled operational and environmental variability along with well-defined dam-
age types, permitted one to build up large data sets, from both undamaged and
damaged conditions, and to pave the way for application of pattern recognition
algorithms. In the broad sense, a pattern recognition algorithm simply assigns
estimated vibration spectra to types of damage. A relatively recent state of the
art review on monitoring rotating machinery was made by Randall [42, 43].
The aerospace industry has pioneered the transition of SHM from research to
practice in a variety of civilian and defense applications. In early 1980s, the de-
velopment of the space shuttle motivated the aeronautics community to im-
plement vibration-based methods. The Shuttle Modal Inspection System was
developed to detect fatigue damage in the fuselage panels, typically covered
with a thermal protection system making the visual inspection difficult. This
system has been used, successfully, to detect and locate damage in hidden com-
ponents using analytical and measured modal correlation procedures [35]. An-
other successful SHM application, in the aerospace industry, is the Rotorcraft
Health and Usage Monitoring System that was developed in early 1990s. This
system was initially installed in the rotor drive train and gearbox components
for early failure detection. Well-defined operational conditions (e.g. the varia-
tion in rotor speed) provide the basis to correlate vibration spectrum changes
with component degradation. Even though it was initially implemented to in-
crease flight safety, it has been commercially developed for economic benefits,
43
such as increasing mission reliability, downtime reduction, and customization
of maintenance actions [44].
During the 1970s and 1980s, the oil industry also made attempts to identify dam-
age, in particular to detect damage in offshore platforms, using vibration-based
methods. These methods were mainly based on inverse modeling approaches,
where analytical models are adjusted with measured natural frequencies. The
main issues challenging the damage detection procedure were: the operation-
al and environmental variability present in those structures (e.g. platform ma-
chine noise), difficult access for measurement, changing mass caused by rise
and fall of sea levels as well as liquid storage, and boundary condition changes
[35].
The civil engineering community has also studied vibration-based damage-de-
tection methods for bridges since the early 1980s. Those methods were funda-
mentally based on inverse modeling approaches, using modal parameters as
well as derived quantities such as mode-shape curvatures and dynamic flexibil-
ity matrix [35]. However, the operational and environmental variability pres-
ents significant difficulties to detect damage in such large-scale structures.
In a general sense, all the examples given above make use of two complemen-
tary approaches, namely inverse problem (also known as model updating) or
pattern recognition techniques, as mentioned in Section 4.6. The former tries
to identify damage by relating the measured data from the structure to the pre-
dictions of physics-based numerical models (e.g. finite element models) tai-
lored for the same structure. A summary of these inverse modeling approaches
for damage identification can be found in Doebling et al. [40]. The latter ap-
proach is a data-based (or data-driven) modeling approach, where measured
data from a damaged state condition is assigned to a known type of damage.
Basically, the identification of damage requires data comparison between two
state conditions, the baseline and damaged conditions. This approach, also
known as the statistical pattern recognition (SPR) paradigm, will be the focus
in this section.
Even though there is still a long walk for a successful real-world SHM bridge
application, regulatory requirements are driving the development of vibra-
44
tion-based bridge monitoring systems. In the US, the Long-Term Bridge Per-
formance Program was included in the latest highway legislation. This program
attempts to provide quantitative data for network and bridge level management
and, ultimately, to improve the safety assessment of the nations bridges [27].
Furthermore, in east-Asian countries, the construction companies need to cer-
tify, periodically, the structural condition of the bridges.
2.4.3 Economic and safety reasons of the SHM for bridge
management
The ability to transition SHM from research to practice depends highly on the
economical and/or life safety benefits it can provide. Besides the ultimate goal
to prevent catastrophic failures and the usefulness of evaluating the system per-
formance, as with any investment, the SHM system must prove to be a way of
reducing the overall life-cycle maintenance costs related to a structure.
Currently, for new bridges, the initial investment cost of a SHM system is around
0.5% of the total bridge construction cost. In the light of this cost estimation,
and as highlighted by the bridge owners, a SHM system must be designed to be
useful during the construction stage as well as over the entire bridge lifetime.
Note that, for the construction stage, the SHM system can potentially be used to
supervise the construction and thus put pressure on the contractors to deliver a
high-quality product as well as to support the construction of new lightweight
structures. Note that many failures can occur during construction and the SHM
system can be used to minimize those risks.
An overview of the motivation to deploy SHM systems on bridges is well stated
by Ko and Ni [45]. Besides the main goal of the SHM systems of endorsing the
early damage identification, and thus preventing catastrophic failures, from a
more general perspective, SHM systems for bridge management might be de-
signed to [36]:
Provide structural monitoring during the construction stage with the po-
tential benefit of reducing manufacturing costs, endorsing lightweight
45
structures by fully exploiting the material strength, and supervising the
contractors to deliver a high-quality product;
Validate design assumptions by measuring the actual structural response;
Improve design specifications for future structures;
Reduce the frequency and/or support bridge inspections;
Provide the owners with a real-time tool to support the decision-making
process:
Reduce unnecessary ad hoc maintenance,
Extend the structures lifetime by preventive maintenance,
Reduce downtime costs,
Traffic management and control;
After extreme events (e.g. earthquakes and blast loading) the SHM sys-
tems can be used for condition assessment regarding the integrity of the
structure.
2.4.4 The applicability of SHM for structural condition
assessment
As mentioned in Section 2.1.1, SHM is different from bridge inspections and
NDE, as it intends to identify continuously, through long-term monitoring,
slow deteriorations on the major bridges, in which prompt identification might
trigger timely repairs and, consequently, avoid long-term costs. Herein, struc-
tural deterioration is defined as:
Concrete shrinkage and creep;
Pier settlements;
Abnormal and/or misaligned bearing devices as well as expansion joints;
Substructure movements;
46
Concrete cracking;
Rupture of tendons and cables; etc.
SHM typically involves the installation of sensors, at key locations along the
structure, connected to a central station. The sensors normally measure loads,
strains, displacements, accelerations, temperatures, and chemical composition
of concrete and steel. In particular, for the structural condition assessment, the
SHM can potentially support the structural condition assessment as follows:
Reducing the frequency and costs of the bridge inspections;
Increasing the accuracy of the deterioration laws; and
Prioritizing maintenance schedules at project (one particular bridge) and
network levels (stock of bridges).
2.4.5 Model updating
Model updating techniques aim at identifying structural damage by comparing
the measured response of a structure with a baseline computational model, tai-
lored for that specific structure, and validated against its undamaged behavior
immediately after its completion. The finite element method is typically used for
creating computational models of bridges. It divides the structure under analy-
sis into small parts (the finite elements), where some unknown field (typically
the displacement field) is approximated using some simple functions (e.g. linear
polynomials). The equations governing the problem are then enforced at each
elements level, leading to an algebraic system having the displacements of the
vortices of the finite elements as unknowns. Frequently, these displacements
can be compared directly with measured data, an approach known as direct
model updating [46]. However, due to the necessity of actually measuring dis-
placement data in the points that correspond to finite element vortices, direct
model updating procedures are limited to very simple structures, so iterative
updating methods are typically used for complex structural systems instead.
47
Iterative methods exploit the discretized nature of the finite element method.
The basic idea is to use the recorded structural response to update some select-
ed parameters (e.g. stiffness properties, boundary conditions), defined at the
finite element level, such to minimize an objective function, defined as the dif-
ference between the computed and measured structural responses. One of the
fundamental issues in applying iterative techniques is the choice of the objective
function to be minimized. Two mainstream approaches exist, namely the min-
imization of modal residuals and the minimization of response residuals. Modal
residuals are functions of the difference between the modal parameters (eigen-
frequencies and eigenvectors) obtained from the structural response data and
those computed using the finite element model [47]. Their use is hindered by
the uncertainties associated with the extraction of modal parameters from the
recorded structural response, but the method can be applied using operation-
al data (i.e. environmental structural response). Conversely, response residuals
objective functions are defined based on data measured directly, thus eliminat-
ing the need of modal extraction [48]. However, as the structural response de-
pends on the applied excitation, response residuals are only applicable when the
input is known a priori, which is generally not an option in continuous SHM.
Clearly, an important source of concern common to all techniques is the error
associated with the finite element model itself. The main challenge in the con-
struction of the model is to ensure a level of precision high enough to avoid in-
ducing significant errors in the updating process at the lowest possible compu-
tational cost. It should be noted that the preliminary phase of the iterative mod-
el updating procedure (the calculation of the sensitivity matrix) may require
as many runs as updating parameters (i.e. number of finite elements), thus the
optimization of the model is fundamental.
The model updating process includes two phases. In the first phase, the initial
finite element model is updated to the undamaged state. When structural dam-
age is suspected (for instance, after a catastrophic event or when the data-based
SHM process detects an abnormal response), the second model updating takes
place, with the purpose of identifying eventual damage based on the analysis
of the updating parameters. The updated structural properties are then used to
extract information regarding the localization and extent of the damage, as well
as changes in the boundary conditions.
48
2.4.6 Statistical pattern recognition (SPR) paradigm
It is believed that all approaches to SHM, as well as all traditional NDE tech-
niques, can be cast in the context of a pattern recognition problem. Thus, the
SPR paradigm for the development of SHM solutions can be described as a four-
step process as illustrated in Figure 2.5 [35, 36].
A necessary first step to developing SHM capability is to perform an operational
evaluation. This part of the SHM solution process attempts to answer four ques-
tions regarding the implementation of a SHM system:
What are the life safety and/or economic justifications for monitoring the
structure?
How is damage defined for the system being monitored?
What are the operational and environmental conditions under which the
system of interest functions?
What are the limitations on acquiring data in the operational environ-
ment?
Figure 2.5 SPR paradigm for SHM [36].
49
Operational evaluation defines, and to the greatest extent possible quantifies,
the damage that is to be identified. It also defines the benefits to be gained from
the deployment of the SHM system. This process also begins to set limitations on
what will be monitored and how to perform the monitoring as well as tailoring
the monitoring to the unique aspects of the system and unique features of the
damage that is to be identified.
The data acquisition part of the paradigm involves selecting the excitation
methods; the sensor types, numbers, and locations; and the data acquisition/
storage/processing/transmittal hardware. The actual implementation of the
data acquisition system is application-specific. A fundamental premise regard-
ing sensing and data acquisition is that these systems do not measure damage.
Rather, they measure the response of a structure to its operational and envi-
ronmental loading or the response to inputs from actuators embedded with the
sensing system. Depending on the sensing technology and the type of damage
to be identified, the sensor readings may be more or less directly correlated to
the presence and location of damage. Data interrogation procedures (feature
extraction and statistical modeling for feature classification) are necessary
components of a SHM system. They convert the sensor data into information
about the structural condition. Furthermore, to achieve successful SHM, the
data acquisition systems have to be developed in conjunction with these data
interrogation procedures.
A damage-sensitive feature is some quantity extracted from the structural re-
sponse data that is correlated with the presence of damage in a structure (e.g.
modal parameters, maximum displacements, regression model parameters and
residual errors). Ideally, a damage-sensitive feature will change in some con-
sistent manner as the level of damage increases. Identifying features that can
accurately distinguish a damaged structure from an undamaged one is the focus
of most SHM technical literature [40, 41, 49]. Fundamentally, the feature ex-
traction process is based on fitting some model, either physics- or data-based,
to the measured response data. The parameters of these models, or the pre-
dictive errors associated with them, become the damage-sensitive features.
An alternative approach is to identify features that directly compare the sen-
sor waveforms (e.g. influence lines and acceleration time series) or spectra of
these waveforms (e.g. power spectra density) measured before and after dam-
50
age. Many of the features identified for impedance-based and wave propaga-
tion-based SHM studies fall into this category [50, 51, 52, 53].
The portion of the SHM process that has received the least attention in the tech-
nical literature is the development of statistical models to enhance the damage
detection process. Statistical modeling for feature classification is concerned
with the implementation of algorithms that analyze the distributions of the ex-
tracted features in an effort to determine the structural condition. The algo-
rithms used in statistical model development usually fall into three general cat-
egories: (i) group classification, (ii) regression analysis, and (iii) outlier detec-
tion. The appropriate algorithm to use will depend on the ability to perform su-
pervised or unsupervised learning. Here, supervised learning refers to the case
where examples of data from damaged and undamaged conditions are available.
Unsupervised learning refers to the case where data are only available from the
undamaged condition. Note that for high capital expenditure structures, such
as most civil infrastructure, the unsupervised learning algorithms are often re-
quired because only data from the undamaged condition are available.
Inherent in the data acquisition, feature extraction, and statistical modeling
portions of the SHM process are data normalization, cleansing, fusion, and
compression [54]. As it applies to SHM, data normalization is the process of
separating changes in sensor readings caused by damage from those caused by
varying operational and environmental conditions [55]. Data cleansing is the
process of selectively choosing data to pass on to, or reject from, the feature se-
lection process. Data fusion is the process of combining information from mul-
tiple sensors in an effort to enhance the fidelity of the damage detection process.
Data compression is the process of reducing the dimensionality of the data, or
the features extracted from the data, in an effort to facilitate efficient storage of
information and to enhance the statistical quantification of these parameters.
These four activities can be implemented in either hardware or software and
usually a combination of the two approaches is used.
The damage identification should be as detailed as possible in order to describe
the damage impact on the system. In a broad sense, developments on damage
identification can be broken down into three areas, namely damage detection,
damage diagnosis, and damage prognosis. Nonetheless, damage diagnosis can
51
be subdivided in order to better characterize the damage in terms of location,
type, and severity. Thus, even though the original guidelines of Rytter [56] as-
sumed four levels, the hierarchical structure of damage identification can be
decomposed in five levels (Figure 2.6) that answer the following questions [57]:
1. Is the damage present in the system (detection)?
2. Where is the damage (localization)?
3. What kind of damage is present (type)?
4. What is the extent of damage (severity)?
5. How much useful lifetime remains (prognosis)?
Figure 2.6 Hierarchical structure of damage identification [36].
The answers to the questions above can only be made in a sequential way, e.g.,
the answer to the severity of damage can only be made with a priori knowl-
edge of the type of damage. When applied in an unsupervised mode, statistical
algorithms are typically used to answer questions regarding the detection and
localization of damage. When applied in a supervised learning mode and cou-
pled with physics-based models, the statistical algorithms can be used to better
52
determine the type of damage, the severity of damage, and the remaining useful
lifetime. Note that damage prognosis at step five cannot be accomplished with-
out an understanding of the damage accumulation process. See [58] for further
discussion on the concept of damage prognosis.
2.4.7 Main challenges of the SHM-SPR process
As described in Section 4.5, the main challenges of the SHM process based on
the SPR paradigm are listed below. They are organized according to the four-
stage process illustrated in Figure 2.5, namely operational evaluation, data ac-
quisition, feature extraction, and statistical modeling for feature classification.
Operational evaluation
Most high-capitalexpenditure civil engineering structures, such as
bridges, are one-of-a-kind systems, dictated by the physical environ-
ment where they are built. It is therefore more difficult to incorporate
lessons learned from other nominally similar systems to define antici-
pated damage.
Structural designs are often driven by low-probability, but extreme-im-
pact events such as earthquakes, hurricanes, terrorist actions, floods, etc.
Generally, structural systems degrade slowly under normal use: corrosion
and fatigue cracking, freeze-thaw/thermal damage, loss of pre-stress-
ing forces, vibration-induced connectivity degradation, and hydrogen
enbrittlement.
There is no widely accepted procedure yet to demonstrate the rate of re-
turn of the investment in a SHM system.
Data acquisition
There is no sensor that measures damage (and there never will be!); how-
ever, it is not possible to implement SHM without sensing.
53
Define the data to be acquired and the data to be used in the feature ex-
traction process:
Types of data to be acquired,
Sensor types and locations,
Bandwidth and sensitivity (e.g. dynamic range),
Data acquisition/transmittal/storage system,
Power requirements (e.g. energy harvesting),
Sampling intervals,
Processor/memory requirements,
Excitation source (e.g. active sensing),
Sensor diagnostics.
Number of sensors:
Instrumenting large structures with lots of sensors still represents
a sparsely instrumented system,
Large sensor systems pose many challenges for reliability and data
management.
Ruggedness of sensors:
Sensing systems must last for many years with minimal mainte-
nance,
The existence of harsh environments (e.g. thermal, mechanical,
moisture, radiation, corrosion) compromises the sensor durabil-
ity,
Need of sensor diagnostic capability.
The sensing system must be developed integrally with the feature selec-
tion and extraction as well as classification.
54
Feature extraction
A feature is some characteristic of the measured response that is correlated with
damage. The primary properties of features are:
Sensitivity a feature should be sensitive to damage and completely in-
sensitive to everything else, which rarely occurs in practice;
Dimensionality a feature vector should have the lowest dimension pos-
sible; high dimensionality induces undesirable complexity into the statis-
tical models;
Computational requirements minimal assumptions and minimal CPU
cycles, which facilitates the embedded systems; and
Consistency features magnitude should change monotonically with
damage level.
One wants to use the simplest feature possible that can distinguish between the
damaged and undamaged system. However, there are a couple of challenges for
feature selection and extraction, namely:
Developing an analytical approach to feature selection feature selection
is still based almost exclusively on engineering judgment;
Quantifying the features sensitivity to damage [49];
Quantifying how the feature changes with the level of damage [49];
Understanding how the feature varies with changing environmental and
operational conditions one of the biggest barriers to in situ deployment
of civil infrastructure SHM systems.
Actually, the later challenge has been tackled in several publications from
Figueiredo et al. [36, 59, 60]. For instance, in a study carried out in 2008, in
one simply supported span at the end of the Canyon Bridge, Alamosa, in the
US, an asymmetrical variation in the first mode shape was found that changed
throughout the day, as shown in Figure 2.7 (the colors are used to highlight the
differences in the modal coordinates). This asymmetry along the longitudinal
axis was correlated with the time of the day and associated solar heating. Note
that these thermal effects were more pronounced because of the north-south
55
orientation of the bridge. If not properly accounted for, such changes in the
dynamics response characteristics can potentially result in false indications of
damage. If the mode in Figure 2.7a was considered to be the baseline condition,
a classification algorithm would identify the mode in Figure 2.7b as some form
of an outlier. This outlier could inappropriately be labeled as damage if the en-
vironmental variability associated with this feature was not taken into account
in the outlier detection process [61].
(a)
First mode at 10:00am
(b)
First mode at 5:30pm
Figure 2.7 First mode shape of one simply supported span of the Alamosa Canyon Bridge during two
distinct times of the day: (a) in the morning (7.75 Hz); and (b) in the afternoon (7.42 Hz) [61].
56
Statistical modeling for feature classification
Some of the challenges for probabilistic decision making are:
The damage detection classification is currently posed in the context of
false-positive indication of damage and false-negative indication of
damage; this technique recognizes that a false-positive classification may
have different consequences than false-negative ones; therefore, analyti-
cal approaches to defining threshold levels must:
Balance tradeoffs between false-positive and false-negative indi-
cations of damage,
Minimize false-positives when economic concerns drive the SHM
application,
Minimize false-negatives when life-safety issues drive the SHM;
Updating statistical models as new data become available;
Managing the large volumes of data that will be produced by an on-line
monitoring system; in that regard, we should learn how others are doing
it (e.g. credit card fraud detection).
2.4.8 SHM of bridges in Portugal and in China
In Portugal, there are already several bridges with long-term monitoring sys-
tems. For completeness, Table 2.I summarizes 16 long-term monitoring sys-
tems. One should note though that bridge monitoring does not imply SHM nec-
essarily. The strategies implemented by the bridge owners regarding the usage
of the data are not reported in this document.
As highlighted in Section 4.2, the Lezria Bridge is probably the most recent ex-
ample of an extensive long-term monitoring in Portugal. It was built between
2005 and 2007, forming part of the highway A10 from Bucelas to Carregado. It
is 11,670m long and is split into three segments, namely north viaduct, main
bridge, and south viaduct. The main segment crosses the Tagus River, with a
57
total length of 970m. It is formed by eight spans and seven piers supported on
pilecaps over the river bed. The spans are 130m long, approximately, except the
end spans, which are 95m long. The bridge deck is composed of a box girder of
variable inertia. Figure 2.8 summarizes the measuring system installed on the
bridge. In particular, one should note the installation of an optical acquisition
system, a liquid leveling system to measure vertical displacements along the
deck, pile strain gauges, soil accelerometers, and sonar devices in pile heads
[62]. The initial investment of the SHM system was about 0.5% of the total
bridge construction cost.
Figure 2.8 Measuring system adopted in the Lezria Bridge [62].
In Asia, governments are mandating companies which construct civil engineer-
ing infrastructure, to periodically certify the structural health of that infra-
structure. Currently, China leads in:
58
Quantity since 2005, almost all major new bridges as well as some old
bridges have SHM systems; currently, it is estimated in more than 40 sys-
tems;
Scale from simple to complex, largest systems contain more than 1000
sensors for a given bridge;
Quality some systems have been deployed for more than ten years, but
most are relatively new;
Technology used distributed network, remote access, substation, fiber
optical, electro magnetic sensors, and other new sensor technologies;
Table 2.II summarizes the SHM systems installed in certain Chinese bridg-
es until 2005. Note that the cost of the SHM system deployed on the Tsing
Ma Bridge in Hong Kong was $20 million, approximately, for more than
1000 channels of data acquisition. The SHM system investment was of the
order of 0.6% of construction cost.
For simplification reasons, the examples of SHM/monitoring systems given here
focused on Portugal, the nationality of the bridge owners present at the semi-
nar, and China, which we believe that is leading the installation of monitoring
systems of bridges, in terms of quantity and scale. Nevertheless, the Editors ac-
knowledge the existence of significant contributions from other countries, such
as South Korea [63] and Canada.
59
Year
Name
of the Bridge
Type
of Structure
Location
Typical
Span (m)
Type of
Sensors Installed
Number
of Sensors
1966 25 de Abril Bridge Suspension Lisbon 1000 1-5, 14, 19 160
1975 Barra Bridge Continuous span Aveiro 80 2, 8
1982
Edgar Cardoso
Bridge
Cable-stayed Figueira da Foz 225 2, 8
1991
International Bridge
over Guadiana River
Cable-stayed Castro Marim 324 2, 3, 5, 11, 12, 19 80
1991 Arade Bridge Cable-stayed Portimo 256 2, 3, 11, 19 100
1991 So Joo Bridge
Rigid frame
bridge
Porto 250
2(73), 3(118), 5(18),
11(4), 19(4)
217
1992
Valena Internacional
Bridge
Continuous span
box girder
Valena 170 2, 3, 11, 19 105
1992
Alccer do Sal
Bridge
Continuous span
box girder
Alccer do Sal 85 2, 3, 11, 19 80
1994 Angueira Bridge
Continuous span
box girder
Algoso 115 2, 3, 11, 19 70
1995 Freixo Bridge
Continuous span
box girder
Porto 150 2, 3, 11, 19 175
1997 Miguel Torga
Rigid Frame
Bridge
Peso da Rgua 180
2(35), 3(69), 11(2),
17(1), 19(4)
111
1998 Ermida Bridge
Continuous span
box girder
Resende 140 2, 3, 11, 19 50
2000
Salgueiro Maia
Bridge
Cable-stayed Santarm 246 2, 3, 5, 11, 19 170
2003
Infante Dom
Henrique Bridge
Arch concrete
bridge
Porto 280
2(8), 3(16), 4(12),
11(8)
44
2004
Rainha Santa
Isabel Bridge
Cable-stayed Coimbra 186 2, 3, 11, 19 85
2007 Lezria Bridge
Continuous span
box girder
Carregado 130
2(108), 3(212), 4(20),
5(2), 8(15), 10(47),
11(9), 16(8), 19(20),
21(2)
443
Table 2.I Several long-term monitoring systems in Portugal.
74
24
105
25
1 anemometers; 2 temperature sensors; 3 strain gauges; 4 accelerometers;
5 displacement transducers; 6 global positioning systems; 7 weigh-in-motion systems;
8 corrosion sensors; 9 elasto-magnetic sensors; 10 optic fiber sensors; 11 tiltmeters;
12 level sensors; 13 total stations; 14 seismometers; 15 barometers; 16 hygrometers;
17 pluviometers; 18 video cameras, 19 joint expansion displacement; 20 fatigue gage; 21 sonar.
24. The SHM system was only installed in 2008 during the rehabilitation works.
25. The SHM system was only installed in 2005 during the rehabilitation works.
60
Table 2.II Bridge SHM systems in China until 2005.
Year
Name
of the Bridge
Type
of Structure
Location
Typical
Span (m)
Type of
Sensors Installed
Total Number
of Sensors
1995
Tongling Yangtze
River Bridge
Cable Stayed Anhui 432 1, 2, 4, 11, 13 -
1997 Tsing Ma Bridge Suspension Hong Kong 1377 1-7, 12, 18 278
1997
Kap Shui Mun
Bridge
Cable Stayed Hong Kong 430 1-7, 12, 18 288
1998
Ting Kau
Bridge
Cable Stayed Hong Kong 475 1-7, 12, 18 285
1999 Xupu Bridge Cable Stayed Shanghai 590 2-4, 7, 12 76
2005
Jiangyin Bridge
(after upgrade)
Suspension Jiangsu 1385 1-6, 9, 10, 13 185
2005
3
rd
Nanjing Yangtze
River Bridge
Cable Stayed Jiangsu 648 1-5, 10, 11 1303
2005
Runyang South
Bridge
Suspension Jiangsu 1490 1-4, 6 241
2005
Runyang North
Bridge
Cable Stayed Jiangsu 400 1-4 188
2005 Wuhu Bridge Cable Stayed Anhui 312 2-5, 10, 12 152
2005
Donghai Bridge,
Main Route
Cable Stayed Shanghai 420
1-3, 6, 8, 9, 12,
19, 20
266
2005
Donghai Bridge,
Kezhushan Route
Cable Stayed Shanghai 332 2-4, 6, 9, 19, 20 115
2005
Donghai Bridge,
Other Approaching
Routes
Concrete Girder Shanghai
70,120,
140,160
2, 12 180
2005
Dongying Yellow
River Bridge
Cable Stayed Shandong 300 2, 10 1868
1 anemometers; 2 temperature sensors; 3 strain gauges; 4 accelerometers;
5 displacement transducers; 6 global positioning systems; 7 weigh-in-motion systems;
8 corrosion sensors; 9 elasto-magnetic sensors; 10 optic fiber sensors; 11 tiltmeters;
12 level sensors; 13 total stations; 14 seismometers; 15 barometers; 16 hygrometers;
17 pluviometers; 18 video cameras, 19 joint expansion displacement;
20 fatigue gage; 21 sonar.
61
2.4.9 Main lessons from the past of SHM
Over the last 25 years, there has been an explosion in SHM research worldwide.
Fundamental research has been followed by large scale industrial applications,
as sampled in the previous section. Based on this experience, some of the main
lessons from the past are summarized next:
Technology has evolved from almost exclusively focusing on inverse mod-
eling using physics-based models to using more general pattern recogni-
tion approaches;
A general SPR paradigm that can encompass both physical modeling and
machine learning approaches has been proposed and adopted by many
researchers worldwide [64];
Fundamental axioms of SHM have been proposed [64];
Certain SHM application areas have made the transition from research to
practice, such as rotating machinery, and Health and Usage Monitoring
Systems for rotorcraft;
New applications for SHM are continually being reported in the literature
(e.g. amusement park rides, ship structures, electronic components, tele-
scopes, dams);
Over the last 15 years there has been an increasing number of conferences,
workshops, and journals dedicated to SHM technology;
Commercial SHM systems are starting to become available;
Time scales on which damage evolves presents challenges for the bridge
SHM systems;
Long-term SHM, periodically updates information regarding the ability of
the structure to perform its intended function, in light of its inevitable ag-
ing and degradation resulting from operational environments; therefore,
in a long term, the SHM systems need to deal with:
Maintenance staff continuity,
Data archiving and retrieval,
62
Changing maintenance budgets,
Sensor technology endurance and evolution;
After extreme events, such as earthquakes or blast loading, SHM is used
for rapid condition screening and must provide, in nearly real time, reli-
able information regarding the integrity of the structure:
The process puts tremendous burden on sensing and processing
hardware,
Should provide information to first-responders,
Consequences of misdiagnosis are severe,
Must be integrated with control systems;
Bridge owners expect from the SHM community:
Information instead of data,
Custom-made solutions,
Understandable results;
SHM for bridges based on performance assessment was noticed to be use-
ful and easier to implement; it is generally based on ambient vibration
monitoring; this approach is based on the following reasons:
The visual deficiencies are not necessarily an issue,
The mechanical relevance of visible damage is instead evaluated,
The structural integrity is analyzed by extracting the effective
bending/torsional resistance from measured natural frequencies,
Material properties or impact of corrosion are implied;
In South Korea, major long-span bridges have been instrumented with
operational monitoring systems; however, despite sophisticated hard-
ware, data interpretation for assessment and evaluation still remains
quite limited;
A study performed in the US, based on some notorious bridge problems
(Silver, I-35W, and Oakland Bay Bridges), concluded that serious damage
in most bridges is caused by extreme events (flood, collision, earthquakes,
63
explosions, etc.); conversely, damage caused by problems of design, cor-
rosion, and deterioration occurs less frequently and is typically less se-
vere, but is not negligible [65]; the same study also strongly suggests that
inspections may need to be improved, and that inspection alone is not suf-
ficient to guarantee bridge reliability because it does not take into account
all time-dependent failure modes and causes; furthermore, it is shown
that the SHM technology may be used not only for continuous long-term
monitoring, but also for rapid assessment of bridge components after ex-
treme events; clearly, the quoted study suggests that the SHM technology
is required to (i) optimize maintenance costs and (ii) improve safety.
2.4.10 Shortcomings and needs of SHM
SHM systems are potentially efficient tools to optimize the management of
important civil engineering structures. As detailed in Section 4.5, some of the
shortcomings and needs of the SHM technology are:
The SHM Catch-22:
Owners will not invest in SHM technology until it is demonstrated
on real world systems,
Real-world structures are generally not available to damage in an
effort to develop and demonstrate SHM technology;
Cost multi-disciplinary research needs long term proof of concept
demonstrations.
2.5 Main lessons from the past of BMS
In the past, the BMS had the advantage to be simple to handle by skilled tech-
nicians. However, the BMS had several information flaws (they were based on
hand-filled forms vulnerable to be lost, stolen, damaged or destroyed) and were
not prepared to interact with financial programming.
64
Even though relatively few accidents were observed due to lack of maintenance,
one may draw the following lessons from the past:
The public authorities and bridge owners must implement some sort of
bridge management software to guarantee a cost-effective performance
of bridges;
Major bridge failures have occurred even when the bridge was being eval-
uated regularly with current inspection practices;
The current BMS organization is not sufficient to prevent bridge collapses,
even when they raise a flag, as demonstrated with the I-35 Bridge in the
US;
As demonstrated by the Hintze Ribeiro Bridge collapse in Portugal, in the
long run, the lack of maintenance can cause life losses and increase public
spending;
The lack of knowledge about the real condition of the structures has re-
sulted in inadequate conservation strategies;
In practice, the BMS have been useful and worldwide accepted as an in-
ventory system, but not yet as an effective cost planning methodology;
It has been observed that SHM can often deliver useful information to re-
duce the uncertainties;
Monitoring and life-cycle methodologies have reached a mature state for
certain applications;
Traditional approaches (visual inspections) may be jointly integrated with
monitoring and other NDE technologies into life-cycle engineering appli-
cations;
Generally, bridge owners expect engineering expertise addressing the
structural condition of the structure; herein, engineering expertise means:
Extent of load bearing capacity, safety, and operability,
Risk level regarding sudden failure,
Structural measures for maintenance and/or rehabilitation,
Recommendations for remaining service life.
65
2.6 Shortcomings and needs of BMS
Visual inspections are qualitative and not necessarily consistent as point-
ed out by the bridge owners, demonstrated in a study performed by the
FHWA [66] and summarized in Section 2.2.2. The current practice of visual
inspections has been already identified as a shortcoming in bridge condi-
tion assessment, which gives indications that the BMSs should be upgrad-
ed with more quantitative information regarding the structural condition
of bridges. Furthermore, a review of bridge events performed by McLinn
[67] also strongly suggests that inspections may need to be improved, and
that inspection alone is not sufficient to guarantee bridge reliability, be-
cause it does not include all time-dependent failure modes and causes.
Therefore, improvements in damage detection and quantitative measures
are needed to optimize BMS.
It should be mandatory to allocate capital and human resources to imple-
ment BMS.
One of the challenges of the bridge management is posed by the diversity
of bridge types.
A successful BMS needs institutional organization and well-trained in-
spectors.
In practice, the BMS has proved to be a useful inventory system; however,
it needs to be more effective in terms of optimal maintenance program at
project level and prioritization of maintenance at network level.
There is a strong need to support strategic maintenance decisions regard-
ing long-term planning.
Solutions tailored for specific needs are required, and tailored solutions
demand different approaches for different goals.
There is a need to overcome the subjectivity/uncertainty in engineering
expertise.
The current tools lack an integrated approach for life-cycle engineering.
There is a need for combination of performance assessment with finite
element analysis (or model-based), regarding the capacity/redundancy
issues.
66
The condition ratings for life-cycle analysis need to be upgraded based on
a multi-level approach by means of visual inspection indicator, loading
indicator, and SHM indicator.
67
3. Guidelines for the Future of Condition
Assessment of Bridges
3.1 Bridge designers recommendations
Very often, bridge designers play an important role as visual inspectors, espe-
cially during special bridge inspections. As mentioned in [72], an efficient bridge
design should address issues like:
Constructability;
Life cycle costs;
Inspectability;
Maintainability.
Therefore, bridge designers are key elements to guarantee efficient bridge
life-cycle maintenance. Based on the bridge designers testimonies in Sections
4.1 and 4.2, some future developments and/or recommendations are:
One of the current challenges of bridge maintenance is the lack of pre-
diction models capable to characterize the bridge behavior; therefore, in
the future, one should support the development of deterioration laws, for
particular bridge types, in order to set up the rate of deterioration and to
estimate the bridge remaining life-time;
New bridge designs should provide details to facilitate adequate inspec-
tion and maintenance activities, by providing, for instance, easy access to
all the components of the bridge structure;
At the bridge design stage, it is important to establish, in advance, the
weak points (or failure sections) of a bridge and the reasons for bridge
failure, which helps to focus the inspection on the key components;
68
Design and development of remote operated vehicles to access areas or
components of the bridges where the human access is difficult; those ve-
hicles can be aerial or underwater;
Development of image processing software that allows an automatic
cracking mapping as well as crack width measuring;
Development of corrosion sensors for prestress cables and stays;
Development of sensors to detect poorly injected prestress ducts;
It should be mandatory to perform bridge field tests before and after re-
habilitation works; the structural response data should be stored into the
BMSs for comparison purposes over the years.
Additionally, from the designers point of view, the SHM systems have some
potential advantages, namely:
Confirmation (or not) and improvement of the design hypotheses;
Allow early detection of structural abnormal behavior;
Permit the investigation of damage prognosis theories based on data ac-
quired by the monitoring systems;
The data collected continuously can exempt the need to use NDE tech-
niques during the bridge inspections.
3.2 Bridge owners recommendations
The future developments and/or recommendations of the bridge owners, in
Chapter 4, permit one to summarize the following recommendations for the fu-
ture:
New tools and technologies are needed to automate the introduction of
information derived from the bridge inspections into the BMSs, which is
still time consuming; they will allow more efficiency in the bridge inspec-
tions activities;
Guidelines for the Future of Condition Assessment of Bridges
69
Currently, for new bridges, the initial investment of a SHM system rang-
es around 0.5% of the total bridge construction cost; therefore, the SHM
systems should be part of the overall construction budget in order to mar-
ginalize their costs;
The SHM systems must be designed as integrated systems that can be im-
plemented during the construction stage as well as over the bridge life-
time;
Vandalism of the SHM systems is a recurring problem, especially in the
first years of operation; therefore, measures to avoid vandalism are rec-
ommended, such as integrated systems and/or difficult access to them;
Bridge owners expect from the SHM community meaningful information
instead of recorded data, and custom-made solutions;
The current BMS condition ratings can be defined, in some contexts, as
insufficient to classify the safety of the bridges, as they are subjective
in nature and do not reflect any deterioration laws; therefore, the BMS
should evolve in order to introduce more quantitative information into
the condition ratings;
Development of efficient remote bridge monitoring to increase the reli-
ability of the current BMSs, namely:
To predict possible structural damages and structural behavior on
specific conditions,
To add value information for better planning of maintenance and
rehabilitation activities,
To better manage the available budgets/resources for the global
concession period.
3.3 Future trends and recommendations for NDE
Based on the experience gathered from the bridge inspections and maintenance
activities, performed by the bridge inspectors and bridge designers, some NDE
hot-topics for development and implementation are:
70
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV);
Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (UUV);
Specially equipped vehicles circulating as ordinary traffic;
Bathymetric survey technology; and
Portable structural condition kit.
In this case, the UAVs are helicopters carrying equipment onboard like Global
Positioning System (GPS), communication equipment, movie camera, infrared
camera, and photo camera, which enable detection, characterization, and anal-
ysis of cracks in concrete surfaces. The development of UUVs was suggested for
underwater inspections, in order to replace divers with cameras.
More details about the UAVs and UUVs can be found in Sections 4.1 and 4.3.
The Rolling Wheel Deflectometer (RWD, Section 4.3) is an example of an NDE
vehicle circulating as ordinary traffic. Still largely experimental, the RWD uses
lasers to measure deflections of road pavements and has the potential to detect
damage in bridge decks. Moreover, a vehicle-mounted Ground Penetrating Ra-
dar system is under development with the purpose of directly detecting damage
in bridges beneath a layer of flexible pavement.
The bathymetric survey technology in special bridges might also be an appro-
priate NDE technology to use. Actually, this technology has been tested by RE-
FER to measure the depths of rivers from the water surface.
Finally, in order to provide an efficient method for assessing bridge performance
under operational loading, bridge inspectors should also be equipped with pro-
grammable systems capable to measure and record the bridge movements and
vibrations. These systems can automatically generate reports to enable inspec-
tors to review and compare performances over time. Basically, the data gener-
ated from sensors (e.g. accelerometers and displacement transducers) are used
to:
Support the inspections;
71
Create a baseline for future comparisons, and therefore confirm structural
performances over time;
Identify bridge components that require attention;
Measure the effectiveness of rehabilitation works.
Measuring periodically how bridge components respond under operational
loading gives inspectors a new tool for detecting undesirable conditions before
they get worse. The sensors and DAQ systems need to be small and portable to
make them easy to be operated in situ.
3.4 Future trends and recommendations for SHM and BMS
Based on the presentations of the invited speakers, and after compilation of
those, it was concluded that future research must focus on integrating new SHM
technology into the BMSs in order to:
Improve consistency and reliability of bridge inspections;
Reduce costs of inspection, maintenance, and overall life-cycle costs of
the bridges;
Provide more continuous surveillance and improved safety;
Validate design assumptions.
In particular, further developments of monitoring systems and/or SHM systems
should take the following into account:
The SHM community must move away from developing technology inde-
pendently from the bridge design society, the government agencies, and
the bridge owners responsible for the bridge management; therefore, it
is recommended the creation of a Research Agenda, with all players in-
volved such as academia, industry, government and consortia, to focus
on issues and ideas and to orient the research community toward both
short- and long-term goals;
72
The SHM systems for bridges have evolved using ready-to-use off-the-
shelf technology; however, the SHM research should pursue tailor-made
SHM systems as a function of bridge or component types, in order to better
fit the needs of the bridge owners and the needs of bridge management;
Increase the reliability and robustness of sensors and equipment installed
in situ;
Improvement of software solutions for data visualization, data interpre-
tation, and damage identification;
In a long-term monitoring, the life cycle of the monitoring systems must
be weighted with the expected life of the bridges; normally the bridge life
is over 100 years; therefore, sensing systems must cover, at least, two hu-
man generations, last with minimal maintenance, and should also be pre-
pared for simple replacement;
The SHM technology needs more proof-of-concept demonstrations; field
destructive tests on bridges, already scheduled for demolition, such as
those performed on the Z-24 Bridge in Switzerland [68], are recommend-
ed; in these structures, one can simulate and detect real-world damage
scenarios and test the robustness of the SHM technology for early damage
detection; additionally, a direct comparison with routine bridge inspec-
tions may be performed to demonstrate the reliability of those inspec-
tions to detect damage at early stages and to improve the visual inspection
methodologies;
As shown in Section 1.4, from the earliest days, infrastructure has been
funded by a combination of private and public funding, in ventures in-
volving businesses at both national and local levels; private funding was
given the incentive to invest in often cutting-edge technologies by the
prospect of earning proper returns; therefore, any proposal for SHM
technology should present the expected benefit-to-cost ratio, in order to
convince the bridge owners to invest in the technology; moreover, the
governments should support the installation of new SHM technologies on
key bridges through fiscal incentives, for instance.
73
For the integration of SHM into BMS, some future trends and recommendations
are:
As mentioned before, improvements in damage detection and quantita-
tive measures are needed to improve the condition ratings and therefore
to optimize the BMSs; it is believed that any proposal for bridge safety
and maintenance should be based on results from long-term monitoring
(i.e. SHM) as well as visual inspections along with NDE; this approach will
contribute to a much more reliable condition assessment and, therefore,
engineers and/or owners will be provided with more quantitative infor-
mation to support their decisions;
The SHM technology should have enough time to evolve and mature;
therefore, for the next decades, the SHM technology does not intend to
replace the visual inspections, rather it intends to provide accurate as-
sessment and, at most, reduce the bridge inspection frequency; therefore,
engineering judgment should continue supporting the decision making
process in terms of priority and maintenance options; the computer-aid-
ed management of bridges, i.e. the BMSs, stand as a useful data storage
and retrieval to assist engineers to make decisions;
A general SPR paradigm that can encompass both physical modeling and
machine learning approaches [36] has been proposed and adopted by
many researchers worldwide, as a way to integrate quantitative informa-
tion from the SHM systems into the BMSs;
In order to integrate SHM into BMS, in a systematic way, strong cooper-
ation is recommended between the bridge owners and the companies re-
sponsible for the installation of the SHM systems; a maintenance contract
is suggested, before hand, in order to guarantee the operation of the SHM
system as well as the release of duly interpreted periodic reports, clearly
explaining to the owners the current structural condition of the bridges
as well as eventual maintenance interventions required to preserve their
functionality;
Overcome the subjectivity and uncertainty in engineering judgment of
a particular bridge, by incorporating into the BMSs monitoring refer-
ence data from other similar bridges; a final decision has to be based on a
comparison with similar reference cases; thus, the judgment on a certain
structure is done in the context of other specifically conducted bridge in-
74
vestigations; queries of identical database attributes are incorporated re-
garding material, cross section type, type of static system, and infrastruc-
tures function;
Development of an integrated asset management tool for highway infra-
structure for estimating the remaining lifetime by analyzing the struc-
tural design, processing the data from visual inspections, and reviewing
structural monitoring campaigns; this methodology may be based on the
statistical analysis of a large database of structures and, consequently, the
approach is realistic and empirically well-founded; in particular, this tool
should address the following:
Mid- and long-term maintenance as well as cost planning for free-
ly chosen time frames;
Minimization of costs under full compliance of load bearing capac-
ity, serviceability, and traffic safety;
Efficiency on the comparison of different maintenance strategies;
Comparison of the expected life-cycle cost based on different con-
struction types;
Calculation of different future scenarios in terms of budget, traffic
development, and construction price development; and
Consideration of external costs or factors (emission, availability
costs, macroeconomics, CO2, etc.).
3.5 How to improve the bridge inspections: the US and the
Portuguese experiences
As highlighted in Section 2.2, the bridge inspection is an activity that always
existed since the outset of bridges around the world. Its practice has varied from
simple visual inspections to more complex forms of online monitoring. Cur-
rently, and based on the testimonies of bridge owners as well as bridge design-
ers and inspectors, any proposal to improve bridge inspections should secure
some of the following objectives:
75
Automation of tasks and enhancement of systematization;
Increase objectivity;
Improve access to the bridge components;
Decrease the traffic disturbance; and
Better training of the visual inspectors.
In the US, the requirements for periodic inspection of all bridges on public roads
are well established and codified in regulations within the National Bridge In-
spection Standards (NBIS). According to the NBIS, all publicly owned highway
bridges (including culverts) located on public roads, that are longer than 20 feet
(6 meters), must be inspected at least once every two years. The standards also
describe the necessary qualifications of the persons who serve as program man-
agers and team leaders performing the in situ inspections. For both positions,
the NBIS requires some appropriate form of professional accreditation or a min-
imum number of years of experience inspecting bridges. The inspectors also
need to complete the Safety Inspection of In-Service Bridges program a com-
prehensive two-week training on bridge inspection offered through FHWAs
National Highway Institute. In addition to that training program, the FHWA
continues to develop other training forms to ensure that bridge inspectors have
the required knowledge to perform both routine and special inspections on
critical components. In 2008, the FHWA Office of Infrastructure Research and
Development, in cooperation with FHWA field offices and State Department of
Transportations (DOTs), identified a need for training on NDE testing to im-
prove the quality and accuracy of bridge inspections at the State level. In order
to meet the expressed need for NDE training, the FHWA developed the Bridge
Inspectors NDE Showcase (BINS) program. The BINS is an informal, one-day,
demonstration-based seminar designed to expose State DOTs bridge inspection
staff to basic NDE tools. The purpose of the showcase is to familiarize bridge
inspectors with:
Various NDE methodologies;
Knowledge of how, when, and where to apply NDE tests during bridge
inspections; and
The capabilities and limitations of each methodology [69].
76
In Portugal, there is not a unique public legislation to rule the bridge inspection
activity. Basically, each bridge owner has adopted its strategy for bridge inspec-
tion. Nowadays, Brisa and EP perform routine inspections in every structures
once every two years and REFER performs routine inspections annually in every
structure.
Since 2008, as part of the concession contract between the Brisa and the Por-
tuguese state (see Section 4.4), there is a quality control plan (PCQ), for the
entire concession period
26
. The PCQ defines a series of obligations, namely the
minimum state of conservation for the highway network, the frequency of the
bridge inspections, and the global bridge indicators. The PCQ allows the private
bridge owner to maintain a standard for the condition rating of each bridge as
well as for the entire network.
To conclude, in order to improve the bridge inspections, it is fair to establish
that the bridge management field needs to develop more sophisticated NDE
technologies, more training and legislation to support the bridge inspectors,
and more efficiency at the designing process to permit easy access to all bridge
components. In particular, and for the Portuguese case, it is recommended the
development of bridge inspection legislation to standardize the activity and to
set up equal requirements for bridge safety among the bridge owners.
3.6 Bridges capable to be upgraded with SHM technology
The excitement around SHM systems does not necessarily imply the maturity of
the systems. As suggested in Section 2.4.3, the SHM technology holds the prom-
ise of optimizing maintenance costs and, ultimately, to improve bridge safety.
But, should all bridges incorporate SHM technology? Currently, in theory one
might say yes, but in practice the answer is not trivial, at least for permanent
SHM technology. (Note that NDE may be considered some sort of SHM if per-
formed periodically over time.) The main reason is tied with current low bene-
fit-to-cost ratio, as actually mentioned by the bridge owners in Chapter 4. Even
26. Decreto-Lei n. 247-C/2008 and Decreto-Lei n. 294/97
77
though the SHM community is constantly adding value to the technology, there
are not yet generalized SHM tools that can fulfill all the life-cycle maintenance
requirements. This happens mainly because bridges are large and complex
physical systems with relatively slow deterioration and exposed to harsh op-
erational and environmental conditions. Additionally, at the current stage, the
monitoring of all bridge components is economically not feasible, meaning that
there can be no guarantees that the damage will actually affect the monitored
structural components. Therefore, based on the current state of the technology,
the bridge owners should only invest in permanent SHM technology for special
bridge structures, for special components vulnerable to well-known damage
scenarios, or for fundamental structural components, whose failure would lead
to a catastrophic collapse. This can be achieved by identifying simple key struc-
tural condition indicators, the components to be monitored, and the location of
the sensors. For instance, in South Korea most of the long-span bridges are now
equipped with (operational) monitoring systems, which permits one to per-
form operational assessment on a global basis. Basically, the long-span bridges
have been instrumented with monitoring systems in order to secure the per-
formance and serviceability without closure, to prevent unexpected failures by
giving alarms, and to assist the planning of inspection and maintenance. A good
example is that the monitoring system of Guangan Bridge was successfully used
to give an alarm, block, and reopen the bridge during the crossing of typhoon
Maemi in September 2013 [70].
Masonry bridges are naturally overdesigned and can often tolerate significant
deterioration. For this type of bridges, and in the light of limited capital recours-
es to install permanent SHM systems in all bridges, a periodic bridge inspection,
with NDE technology, of the superstructure may be used as a basis for its bridge
management. Nevertheless, monitoring technologies at the foundation level
might be useful to detect scouring problems. Actually, a FHWA research project
investigated the possibility that, by measuring the dynamic response charac-
teristics of a bridge substructure, the condition and safety of the substructure
and its foundation type (shallow or deep) may be determined. Determining the
condition of the bridge foundation using dynamic response characteristics may
be applied to quantify losses in foundation stiffness (or changes in the bound-
ary conditions) caused by earthquakes, scour, and impact events. This informa-
tion may subsequently be used to estimate the bridge stability and vulnerability
78
under dead and live loading [71, 72]. On the other hand, certain modern bridges,
such as the suspension bridges, may require a more formal and global approach
to their safety and maintenance, thus justifying the investment in permanent
SHM technology for all structural components.
As with the road bridges, the railway bridges are required to be visually in-
spected on a regular basis. However, the inspection requirements for railway
bridges are typically tighter than those of roads, mainly because the live loading
is substantially higher than the dead load, which might carry out fatigue-type
damage in the long-term. This fact suggests the observation of bridge behavior
under live loading. In this case, a long-term monitoring system can be useful
to identify how well the bridge components are performing by evaluating the
superstructure vibrations and the pier motion under known input loading
the trains. Unlike road bridges, where the efficiency of the SHM system is chal-
lenged by the random traffic, in the railway bridges monitoring is simplified
because of the quasi periodic and known traffic.
Finally, the authors believe that the combination of global performance assess-
ment and local damage detection are essential for the success of SHM of bridges.
3.7 How to integrate SHM into BMS
Recent developments on the role of SHM/NDE in BMSs suggest the desirability
of combining long-term dynamic testing results, periodically or continuously
sampled, with visual rating data [9]. For instance, in the US, states annually
submit to the FHWA all the required information for each bridge based on the
bridge inspection results. Then, the FHWA uses those results to calculate the
Sufficiency Rating (SR) and determine which bridge may need repair or replace-
ment [73]. Basically, the SR takes into account four separate factors, indicative
of the bridge sufficiency to remain in service, which ranges between 0% (en-
tirely insufficient) and 100% (entirely sufficient bridge),
SR = S
1
+ S
2
+ S
3
- S
4
(1)
79
where S
1
is the Structural Adequacy and Safety (0-55%), S
2
is the Serviceability
and Functional Obsolescence (0-30%), S
3
is the Essentiality for Public Use (0-
15%), and S
4
corresponds to Special Reductions (0-13%, only when S1+S2+S3
50%).
In order to incorporate the quantitative information from SHM systems, a cor-
rection factor h
i
may be introduced into Equation (1) in order to increase the
reliability of S
1
when the bridge safety is the main concern for deploying a SHM
system, and S
2
when the goal of the SHM system is to preserve the serviceability
of the bridge. Thus, a new health sufficiency rating (HSR) can be derived in the
form of
HSR = S
1
x h
1
+ S
2
x h
2
+ S
3
- S4 (2)
Note that the correction factor, h
1
, may be tailored to better gather damage-re-
lated information or to address specific reasons for deploying SHM systems.
A methodology to obtain the correction factor can be given as a weighted score
of the global daily Damage Indicators (DIs) in the form of
h = (DI
1
, DI
2
,..., DI
k
) (3)
where k is the number of days within the observed period of reference. The DIs
can be obtained based on operational condition response data, such as modal
properties. An outlier detection approach needs to be used to estimate those
DIs, as mentioned in [9]. The weight of this correction, or the maximum re-
duction rate, depends on the reliability of the SHM system and on the type of
structure.
Alternatively, an approach is suggested in Section 4.8, where a condition rating
can be derived using a multi-level approach by means of visual inspection indi-
cator, loading indicator, and SHM indicator.
80
3.8 Conclusions
Finally, the outcome of the international seminar Structural Condition As-
sessment of Bridges: Past, Present, and Future summarized above suggests
some possible answers to the initially raised questions. Note that the answers
embody the current context of limitations and challenges and cannot be read
isolated from them.
What is the current structural condition of the Portuguese bridges?
The three main bridge owners take into account, approximately, 8,800
special structures in their inventory. According to the bridge definition
given herein (excluding culverts and cattle creeps) 6,200 are bridges and
2,600 are culverts and cattle creeps.
Taking into account the last two levels of the condition rating system
adopted by each owner, one may conclude that only 3.2% of the special
structures are considered structurally deficient. On the other hand,
taking into account the first three levels, one may conclude that 84.8%
of the special structures are considered in a good to excellent condition.
How much does it cost to return our aged infrastructure to world-class
levels of performance?
Currently, due to the relatively new patrimony, Portugal does not have an
aged infrastructure (with some exceptions), as compared to the US, for in-
stance. Actually, this fact was recently highlighted in the Global Compet-
itiveness Report, released by the World Economic Forum, which classified
Portugal and the US in 4th and 20th, respectively, in terms of quality of
roads, which indicates that Portugal possesses an extensive and efficient
road network. However, there is a fundamental and historical reason for
that. Basically, most of the developed countries in the world had the in-
frastructure construction boom after the World War II. Conversely, Portu-
gal had an infrastructure boom, mainly due to the construction of a dense
highway network, between the 1990s and early 2000. Therefore, and as-
suming the Portuguese delay in the economy development, one can con-
clude that we do need to act today, in terms of bridge preventive mainte-
nance, in order to avoid those huge investments, at once, in 20 to 30 years
from now, i.e. we need to maintain the present to preserve the future.
81
Which are the most common damage scenarios encountered in our bridg-
es?
The most common damage scenarios observed in the Portuguese bridges
are generalized concrete degradation (cracking, delamination, and corro-
sion of the reinforcement bars), corrosion in metal components, degrada-
tion of corrugated metal culverts, and degradation of the expansion joints.
Note that the alkali-silica reaction is identified as one of the main degra-
dation mechanism of concrete, which is normally highlighted by general-
ized concrete cracking. Additionally, the rapid degradation of corrugated
metal culverts has pushed one of the bridge owners to perform significant
investments in order to maintain them, as indicated in Section 4.4.
Are the current bridge inspections and maintenance strategies enough to
maintain our bridges?
It is unanimous that the current bridge inspections and maintenance
strategies need to be improved. Visual inspections are qualitative and not
necessarily consistent. In practice, the BMS has proved to be a useful in-
ventory system; however, it needs to be more effective in terms of optimal
maintenance program at project level and prioritization of maintenance
at network level. It was highlighted the need to develop new tools and
technologies to automate the introduction of information derived from
the bridge inspections into the BMSs, which is still time consuming, and
also to adjust the condition ratings with more quantitative information.
In order to improve the life-cycle maintenance strategies, an integrated
approach for life-cycle engineering was suggested, where the condition
ratings are estimated based on a multi-level approach by means of visu-
al inspection indicator, loading indicator, and SHM indicator. Addition-
ally, there is a need for combination of performance assessment (using
data-driven methods) with finite element analysis (using physics-based
methods), regarding the capacity/redundancy issues.
Is the bridge SHM technology ready for real applications?
The application of generalized SHM systems is still challenged by sever-
al factors. In practice, for general approaches, the SHM has been already
used for the so-called Operational Monitoring (or performance assess-
ment), which means that the SHM is used to detect long-term anomalies
by addressing the first level of damage identification. The performance
assessment is carried out through dynamic-based key performance
82
indicators: integrity, operability, fatigue assessment, damage localiza-
tion, life-cycle curve, and stiffness mapping. This global approach can
also support the development of systematic procedures for estimating
load factors and load carrying capacity. Nevertheless, as highlighted by
the bridge owners, the current low benefit-to-cost ratio is a reality that
needs to be addressed. So, as the SHM evolves, the SHM technology should
be tailored for each specific application. Bridge structures are relatively
large and complex physical systems composed of many components. At
the current stage, the monitoring of all components with sensors may be
economically and technologically not feasible. Therefore, at this state of
development, the bridge owners should invest in SHM technology for spe-
cial bridge structures and for special components. This can be achieved by
identifying simple condition indicators to be compared, components to
be monitored, and right location to place sensors.
Concluding, at this stage of development, the SHM technology is not in-
tended to replace the visual inspections. Rather, it is intended to provide
accurate assessment and, at most, reduce the bridge inspection frequen-
cy.
Which are the cutting edge technologies currently under development?
In terms of NDE technologies, this seminar highlighted the existence of
ongoing projects to develop UAVs, UUVs, and specially equipped vehicles
circulating as ordinary traffic. The bathymetric survey technology in spe-
cial bridges might also be an appropriate NDE technology to use.
In terms of long-term monitoring, the global navigation satellite sys-
tem is an interesting alternative, to the more conventional techniques to
measure structural displacements. It provides all weather observations,
various levels of accuracy to meet different application requirements, 3D
positioning in an external reference system, continuous monitoring at up
to 100Hz, automated operation with almost no need of human interven-
tion, kinematic methods suitable to monitor the dynamic parameters of
the structures, and no long-term sensor drifts. Some field applications
using this technique have been tested and the results have demonstrated
its potential [74]. Additionally, the fiber optic sensing systems for SHM
of bridges have experienced a tremendous amount of innovation in the
last decade. As highlighted in Section 4.6, a considerable number of fiber
optic sensors has been proposed to meet specific applications of civil en-
83
gineering infrastructures, such as strain gauges to be embedded into the
concrete as well as displacement transducers.
In terms of software, as highlighted in Section 4.8, some authors are al-
ready developing an integrated asset management tool for highway infra-
structure in order to estimate the remaining lifetime of bridges by analyz-
ing the structural design, processing the data from visual inspections, and
reviewing structural monitoring campaigns. This methodology may be
based on the statistical analysis of a large database of other structures and,
consequently, the approach is realistic and empirically well-founded.

85
4. Summary of the Oral Presentations
Table 4.I shows the program of the seminar that took place in Lisbon, on the 11
th

of December, 2012, at the campus of the Catholic University of Portugal. Most
of the presentations had durations between 20 and 30 minutes. Note that this
chapter only intends to highlight the main contributions of each invited speaker
as well as to endorse the statements of Chapters 1 to 3. For further details, the
reader is advised to go through the references provided throughout the summa-
ry of the presentations.
Table 4.I Program of the international seminar.
09:00-09:15
Welcome speech given by the Rector of the Catholic University of Portugal
Maria da Glria Ferreira Pinto Dias Garcia
Session 1: Status of our nations bridges
Chairman: Manuel Barata Marques, Rapporteur: Eli J. F. Figueiredo
BRIDGES DESIGNERS AND VISUAL INSPECTORS
09:20-09:40
Bridge inspections as a tool for rehabilitation design and maintenance,
Armando Rito
09:40-10:00
From structural assessment for retrofitting to integration of SHM on new design of bridges,
Antnio Perry da Cmara
10:00-10:20
Visual inspections as a tool to detect damage: current practices and new trends,
Lus Oliveira Santos
BRIDGES OWNERS
10:45-11:15
Bridge management and current state condition of Brisas highway network bridges,
Paulo Lima Barros
11:15-11:45
Implementation, shortcomings, and needs of a bridge maintenance system:
the experience of Estradas de Portugal,
Carlos Santinho Horta
11:45-12:15
Present practice and future trends on REFERs Bridge Management System,
Jos Carlos Clemente
86
Session 2: Management of bridges
Chairman: Carlos Alberto Matias Ramos, Rapporteur: Eli J. F. Figueiredo
STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING
13:45-14:15
An overview on SHM and outstanding research issues,
Charles R. Farrar
14:15-14:45
A decade of bridge monitoring in Portugal: the LABEST experience,
Joaquim A. Figueiras
14:45-15:15
Data-based SHM for civil infrastructure,
Keith Worden
BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
15:45-16:15
Bridge management in Portugal: the past, the present, and the future,
Tiago Mendona
16:15-16:45
Integrated performance assessment addressing long term asset management
of engineering structures,
Robert Veit-Egerer
Panel Discussion
Moderator: Charles R. Farrar
17:00-18:00
Round table with all invited speakers: Research needs for the next decades
87
4.1 Bridge inspections as a tool for rehabilitation, design and
maintenance
I. Examples of bridge inspections and further interventions
I.1 Kwanza Bridge
The Kwanza Bridge, at the mouth of the Kwanza River in Angola, is a cable-stayed
bridge built in 1975 with a total length of 400m and a main span of 260m (Figure
4.1).
Figure 4.1 Overview of the Kwanza Bridge in 1997.
The first visual inspection performed in 1997 permitted to unveil severe struc-
tural degradation, as depicted in Figure 4.2. The generalized degradation was
due to inflicted damage and lack of maintenance due to the prolonged Angolan
civil war and also to the marine environment. Therefore, in 1998 it was decided
to perform a thorough visual inspection with locally available means, as shown
ARMANDO RITO
Armando Rito Engenharia, S.A.
Portugal
88
in Figure 4.3. Figure 4.5 shows the state condition of the decks anchorages and
Figure 4.4 shows the state condition of the cables uncovered during the reha-
bilitation works.
Finally, Figure 4.6 shows the condition of the bridge after the rehabilitation
works performed between 2000 and 2002.
Figure 4.2 Generalized structure degradation
witnessed in 1997.
Armando Rito
89
Figure 4.3 Visual inspection performed in 1998.
Figure 4.4 Condition of decks anchorages.
Figure 4.5 Condition of the stays uncovered during the rehabilitation works.
90
I.2 The Aguieira Bridges
The Aguieira Bridges (Figure 4.7), owned by EP and incorporated into the IP3
road in the area of the Aguieira dam, have been under thorough visual inspec-
tions. The visual inspections have identified ongoing severe structure degrada-
tion in several piers, in the form of cracking, caused by the alkali-silica reaction.
Furthermore, the underwater inspections permitted also to unveil the presence
of severe and very dangerous cracking on the shafts and at the foundation level
(Figure 4.8). A sketch of the cracking pattern is represented in Figure 4.9. Note
that a new bridge to replace the existing one is now being built.
Figure 4.6 Pictures of the Bridge, in 2002, after the rehabilitation works.
Armando Rito
91
Figure 4.8 Cracking observed
at sight and underwater inspections.
Figure 4.7 The Aguieira Bridges.
92
Figure 4.9 Sketch of the cracking pattern on one pier.
Armando Rito
93
I.3 Figueira da Foz Bridge
The Figueira da Foz Bridge [75, 76], shown in Figure 4.10, was built in 1982, at
the mouth of the Mondego River, and it has a total length of 1350m. It includes a
405m long cable stayed bridge with composite steel-concrete deck and two ap-
proach viaducts of 945m long with prestressed concrete deck. The bridge main
span over the river is 225m long.
Roughly 20 years after its construction, the visual inspections permitted to
identify a generalized deterioration of the bridge, mainly due to a severe marine
environment, deficient construction, and lack of maintenance. In particular,
the visual inspections have identified deteriorated saddles and anchorages of
the stays, as shown in Figure 4.11. It was also verified that the abutments, tran-
sition piers, pylons, pylon foundations, and access viaducts beams were in a
state of evident deterioration, and with a total absence of maintenance, with
concrete delamination and reinforcing steel corrosion (Figure 4.12). The visual
inspections also unveiled cavities under the pre-stressing cables due to rein-
forcement congestion (Figure 4.13 and Figure 4.14), which indicates that the
ducts were not cast into the concrete.
In 2005, the bridge was subjected to a general rehabilitation and strengthening,
which costed approximately 10M. Figure 4.15 shows the Figueira da Foz Bridge
after the rehabilitation and retrofitting works.
Figure 4.10 Figueira da Foz Bridge.
94
Figure 4.11 Saddles and anchorages deterioration.
Armando Rito
95
Figure 4.12
Deterioration of the abutments,
pillars, and pylons.
96
Figure 4.13 Cavities under the pre-stressing cables due to reinforcement congestion.
Figure 4.14 Prestress ducts absence of casting in the concrete due to voids.
Figure 4.15 Figueira da Foz Bridge
after the rehabilitation
and retrofitting works in 2005.
Armando Rito
97
I.4 The Barra Bridge
The Barra Bridge [77, 78, 79] crosses the Mira Canal, in Aveiro, and was opened
to traffic in 1975. The total length, between abutments, is 578m (Figure 4.16).
The bridge is composed by three double-box-girder central spans and two ac-
cess viaducts with typical spans of 32 meters composed by four longitudinal
beams connected by the top slab. The central span is 80m long and it is split into
two 34m-long cantilevers connected by an isostatic span. The piers are portal
frames bearing on two cylindrical caissons. The bridge is located in one of the
most aggressive marine environments in Portugal (e.g. the relative humidity of
the air over 80%).
Figure 4.16 General view of the Barra Bridge.
The first indication of inadequate performance was given, soon after the bridge
opening, by the development of an excessive deflection of the central span can-
tilevers, due to the structural system choice and excessive creep. The visual
inspections carried out since then permitted to observe that the structure was
at a stage of high degradation, concerning mainly poor workmanship, the ag-
gressiveness of the marine environment and a total lack of maintenance of the
bridge. In particular they permitted to detect several anomalies:
Highly porous and permeable concrete;
Absence of a protective coating;
98
Corrosion in the steel reinforcement due to inadequate concrete cover;
the rebars electrical potential and concrete electrical conductivity re-
vealed active corrosion in the splash zones (Figure 4.17);
Chloride concentration between 0.4% and 0.9% (weight of cement);
Alkali-silica reaction in the piers (Figure 4.18); and
Destroyed lead bearings (Figure 4.19).
Figure 4.17 Corrosion and cracks observed at the foundation.
Armando Rito
99
Figure 4.18 Alkali-silica reaction.
Figure 4.19 Destroyed lead bearings.
Figure 4.20 Observed corrosion in the simple supported beam bearings in the main span.
100
As in the Figueira da Foz Bridge, it was verified during the rehabilitation works
that in general the ducts were not corroded, as shown in Figure 4.22.
In 2005, the Barra Bridge underwent rehabilitation and retrofitting works to
adapt it to the new code rules, namely to new traffic loads, seismic actions, and
improve durability aspects, which permitted to secure the improvement of the
bridge performance levels. Figure 4.23 shows the bridge after the rehabilitation
and retrofitting works in 2005. This rehabilitation cost approximately 10M.
Figure 4.21 Longitudinal cracking in the beams.
Figure 4.22 Ducts not corroded.
Armando Rito
101
II. Future trends for bridge inspections
Some hop-topics for development and implementation are:
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV); and
Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (UUV).
Use of unmanned aerial vehicles to automatically perform photographic sur-
veys of the whole structure or its critical zones is now being actively developed.
However, the applicability of this technique is, for the time being, challenged by
the poor steadiness, too much vibration, low payload, and poor photo and video
definition. Additionally, it might not be suitable for the inspection of certain
bridges such as inside of box girders and truss bridges (Figure 4.25). Neverthe-
less, present and future developments will overcome these drawbacks.
Figure 4.23 Barra Bridge
after the rehabilitation works
102
Figure 4.24 Unmanned aerial vehicles.
Figure 4.25 Two examples of unsuitability of the UAV: inside of box girders and truss bridges.
Figure 4.26
Unmanned underwater vehicles.
Armando Rito
103
The use of unmanned underwater vehicles, for the inspection of submerged
bridge piers and foundations, is also being developed. Compared to the UAV, it
has the advantage to ensure a steady platform, low level of vibration, good pay-
load, and better photo definition due to reduced vibration.
III. Recommendations for the future
The experience gathered from the rehabilitation works have brought us to the
conclusion that in order to accomplish proper rehabilitation projects and prop-
er budget estimates, it is important to have well trained inspectors that are ca-
pable to take risks, see beyond what is visible and obvious, in order to get a good
diagnosis and a thorough mapping of the damages.
104
4.2 From structural assessment for retrofitting to integration
of SHM on new design of bridges
I. Bridge Management System (BMS)
I.1 Past of the BMS
Advantages:
Simple to use;
Skilled technicians were involved;
There were few accidents due to lack of maintenance.
Disadvantages:
They had information flaws;
They were not prepared to interact with financial programming.
I.2 Main lessons from the past
Public authorities and bridge owners must implement BMS to guarantee a
cost-effective performance of bridges.
It should be mandatory to allocate capital and human resources to imple-
ment BMS.
In the long run lack of maintenance can cause life losses and increase pub-
lic spending.
ANTNIO PERRY DA CMARA
Invited Associate Professor, Faculty of Engineering of the Catholic
University of Portugal, and PC&A, Consultores de Engenharia Lda
Portugal
105
I.3 Present practice
BMS are now implemented.
Bridges are inspected regularly.
Underwater inspections are realized when necessary.
The majority of the rehabilitation projects are awarded by the cheapest
price criterion, therefore they are not always done by skilled engineers
and, nowadays, are always underpaid.
The main inspections includes several in situ tests like core sampling,
concrete cover measurement, carbonation front penetration, crack map-
ping and width measurement, reinforcement detection, etc. and also lab-
oratory tests like petrographic analysis and core strength tests.
Local visual inspections are very important to integrate all the pathologies
and establish a behavior model of the bridge these should be done by a
skilled engineer.
These inspections serve also to identify all the elements that have pathol-
ogies similar to those identified on tests zones.
II. The SHM system of the Lezria Bridge
II.1 The Lezria Bridge
The Lezria Bridge is 11,600m long and it is split into 3 segments as shown in
Figure 4.27, namely, the north viaduct (1,470m), the bridge over the Tagus River
(970m), and the south viaduct (9160m). Figure 4.28 shows some pictures of the
bridge.
106
Figure 4.27 Top view of the Lezria Bridge.
Figure 4.28 Lezria Bridge.
107
The author of this presentation was responsible for the bridge designing team,
which has allowed him to gain some experience on the interaction with the
SHM output information.
The monitoring system has operated for five years, roughly, and it is composed
of a wide range of sensors (approximately 500 sensors) to measure vertical dis-
placements, bearing displacements, rotations, concrete deformations, tem-
perature, and humidity. It also has two sonars to measure/detect bridge scour-
ing at two piers (P1 and P2), as shown in Figure 4.29.
The system allows remote access to the data through the Internet browser. For
instance, Figure 4.30 shows the bearing horizontal displacements measured
from Jan 2009 to Dec 2012.
Figure 4.30 Online access to the bearing horizontal displacements (from Jan 2009 to Dec 2012)
27
.
27. Brisa, Auto-estradas de Portugal, December 2012.
Figure 4.29 Location of the sonars to detect bridge scouring.
108
II.2 Advantages of the SHM systems
From the designers point of view, the SHM systems present several advantages:
Confirmation (or not) of the design hypothesis;
Allow early detection of abnormal structural behavior;
With more investigation they may permit, in the future, to make a damage
prognosis of the structure;
The data collected can exempt the need for destructive tests in future in-
spections.
II.3 Shortcomings and needs of the SHM systems
From the designers point of view, the shortcomings and needs of the SHM sys-
tems are:
Strong cooperation needed between the bridge owner and the responsible
for the SHM system;
Requirement for a contract between them to keep the system fully oper-
ational;
Need for full integration of SHM on BMS;
Assurance of no vandalism;
What is the lifetime of the monitoring system and components?
III. Future trends
Remotely operated vehicles that can access parts of the structure where
the human access is difficult. Those parts can be aerial or underwater.
Development of image processing software that allows an automatic map-
ping of cracking with crack opening measuring.
Corrosion sensors for pre-stressing cables and stays.
109
Detection systems for poorly injected prestress cable sheaths.
Investigation of damage prognosis theories based on data acquired by the
present systems.
Development of theories to allow for estimating the bridge remaining life-
time.
110
4.3 Visual inspections as a tool to detect damage:
current practices and new trends
I. The bridge inspections
I.1 Goal
The main objectives of the bridge inspections are:
To ensure the bridge safety condition;
To identify any maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation works that need
to be done;
To provide a basis for the planning and funding of the required works.
I.2 Overview
The bridge inspections are generally divided into five categories:
Inventory Inspection;
Routine Inspection;
Principal or In-depth Inspection;
Special Inspection; and
Underwater Inspection.
The Inventory inspection is the first inspection of a new or existing structure,
as it becomes part of the bridge inventory. It serves to verify the information
LUS OLIVEIRA SANTOS
Senior Research Officer,
LNEC Laboratrio Nacional de Engenharia Civil
Portugal
Lus Oliveira Santos
111
gathered previously and to look for missing information. The two most com-
mon inspections are: Routine and Principal Inspections. The Routine Inspection
aims to look for maintenance needs (Figure 4.31). Normally, it is performed ev-
ery two years and it does not need access equipment. The Principal Inspection
(PI) is used to look for structural defects (Figure 4.32) and is normally performed
every five years (or when required).
Figure 4.31 Routine Inspection.
Figure 4.32 Images taken during a principal inspection.
112
Normally a PI needs access equipment. It should be of sufficient scope and qual-
ity to determine:
The condition of all parts of the structure;
The extent of any significant change or deterioration since the last PI;
Any information relevant to the bridge performance.
It should establish:
The scope and urgency of any required actions before the next PI;
The need for a Special Inspection and/or additional investigations;
The accuracy of the main information on the structure held in the inven-
tory.
The Special Inspection should be used to perform a close inspection of a par-
ticular area or defect that is causing concern. It is undertaken when required
and normally needs access equipment. It may also require supplementary tests,
such as load test, structural monitoring, and physical or chemical tests in the
laboratory (Figure 4.33).
Figure 4.33 Special Inspection.
Lus Oliveira Santos
113
The underwater inspection is used to detect defects in structural elements (ma-
sonry, concrete, or steel). It is mainly used for inspection for bridge scour
28
. The
bottom line is to accurately record the present condition of the bridge foun-
dations and the stream, and identify conditions that are indicative of potential
problems with scour and stream stability for further review and evaluation by
others.
I.3 Stages of bridge inspections
The general procedure of visual inspection can be split into three main stages:
planning, performing, and reporting.
Planning stage
Documentation:
Relevant structural drawings, plans, and elevations;
Construction records;
Details of materials used;
Methods and dates of construction;
History of bridge use (accidents, repairs, etc.);
Past reports of tests or inspection made.
Equipment needed:
Cleaning tools (wire brushes, scrapers, etc.);
Inspection tools (hammer, markers, etc.);
Visual aid tools (binoculars, mirror, flashlight, etc.);
Basic measurement equipment (measuring tapes or rulers, etc.);
28. Scour is the result of erosive action of flowing water, excavating and carrying away material from the
bed and banks of streams or rivers. Bridge scour is the removal of sediment, such as sand and rocks, from
around bridge piers and abutments.
114
Recording materials (cameras, etc.);
Safety equipment.
Access methods:
Under-bridge inspection vehicle (Figure 4.34);
Scaffoldings;
Permanent gantries;
Boats;
Climbing (Figure 4.35);
Need for traffic management arrangements?
Figure 4.34 Under-bridge inspection vehicle.
Lus Oliveira Santos
115
Performing stage
Systematization, rigorousness, and qualification must be the backbone of the
visual inspections. The visual inspection is normally performed in all parts of
the structure by an element-based strategy (abutments, piers, deck, bearings,
expansion joints, wearing surface, parapets, sidewalks, etc.). In the end, all ele-
ments of the bridge must be rated based on a condition rating scale.
The inspector responsibilities are:
Identify minor problems that can be corrected before they develop;
Identify bridge components/elements that require repairs;
Identify unsafe condition.
For each defect found, an inspector should:
Clearly characterize the damage;
Try to identify its causes;
Forecast its evolution.
Figure 4.35 Climbing [80].
116
Special attention needs to be paid to various factors, namely:
Verification of information gathered during the inspection planning;
Deformations of the structure;
Presence of humidity or water, leakages, etc.;
Fouling (algae, moss, tresses);
Appearance of the concrete surface;
Presence of cracks, their appearance and patterns;
Deterioration of the concrete itself; and
Exposed rebars.
Reporting stage
The inspection bridge report:
Is required to update the bridge history file;
Should identify and assess the repair requirements and maintenance
needs;
Descriptions should be specific, detailed, quantitative, and complete
(photos and sketches);
Should contain recommendations to correct or prevent defects;
Should refer the type of repairs, the scope of the work, and estimate the
quantity of material.
II. NDE of concrete structures
The breadth of inspection technologies has increased rapidly in the last decades.
Some of the most used NDT/NDE methods for concrete structures are given be-
low:
Lus Oliveira Santos
117
Schmidt/rebound hammer test: used to evaluate the surface hardness of
concrete;
Covermeter testing: used to measure the distance of steel reinforcing bars
beneath the surface of the concrete and also the diameter of the reinforc-
ing bars;
Carbonation depth measurement test: used to determine whether mois-
ture has reached the depth of the reinforcing bars and hence corrosion
may be occurring;
Ultrasonic pulse velocity testing: mainly used to measure the sound ve-
locity in the concrete and hence the compressive strength of the concrete;
Penetration resistance or Windsor probe test: used to measure the surface
hardness and hence the strength of the surface and near surface layers of
the concrete;
Permeability test: used to measure the flow of water through the concrete;
Radiographic testing: used to detect voids in the concrete and the position
of stressing ducts;
Sonic methods: using an instrumented hammer providing both sonic
echo and transmission methods;
Infrared thermography: used to detect voids, delamination and other
anomalies in concrete and also detect water entry points in buildings;
Half-cell electrical potential method: used to detect the corrosion poten-
tial of reinforcing bars in concrete;
Impact echo testing: used to detect voids, delamination, and other anom-
alies in concrete;
Ground penetrating radar or impulse radar testing: used to detect the po-
sition of reinforcing bars or stressing ducts;
Tomographic modeling: uses the data from ultrasonic transmission tests
in two or more directions to detect voids in concrete.
118
III. Future trends for bridge inspections
The new trends in bridge inspections are aimed at:
Automation of tasks;
Increasing systematization;
Increasing objectivity;
Improving access;
Decreasing the traffic disturbance.
Some hop-topics for development and implementation are:
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV);
Specially equipped vehicles circulating as ordinary traffic.
The Airtici Research Project Advanced Interactive Robotic Tools for the In-
spection of Critical Infrastructures has been developed by Department of Elec-
trical and Computer Engineering of the Instituto Superior Tcnico of Lisbon to
support the visual inspections (Figure 4.36). This UAV carries equipment on-
board, such as: GPS, communication equipment, movie camera, infrared cam-
era, and photo camera (Figure 4.37). The Image Processing of Concrete Surfaces
enables the detection, characterization and analysis of cracks in concrete sur-
faces (Figure 4.38).
Figure 4.36
Lus Oliveira Santos
119

Figure 4.36 Airtici Research Project
(Advanced Interactive Robotic Tools for the Inspection of Critical Infrastructures).
Figure 4.37 Photo taken by the helicopter.
Figure 4.38 Image processing of concrete surfaces.
120
Specially equipped vehicles circulating as ordinary traffic can also be used as
NDE testing devices. A Rolling Wheel Deflectometer (RWD) is an expensive and
specialized vehicle, which uses lasers to measure deflections of road pavements.
A new application for the RWD is under development its output will be pro-
cessed to detect damage in bridges.
A vehicle-mounted Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) system will be developed
with the purpose of directly detecting damage in bridges beneath a layer of flex-
ible pavement (Figure 4.39).
IV. Final remarks
A successful effort has been made in Portugal in order to implement an
effective program of inspection of bridges in the framework of a Bridge
Management System.
Visual inspections can reveal substantial information regarding the struc-
ture condition.
Visual inspections can be supplemented with a wide range of tests.
However:
The visual inspections have a subjective component;
Visual inspections have some limitations, because human eyes are re-
stricted to the visible spectrum;
The inspections and the supplementary tests are extremely time consum-
ing and therefore expensive.
Figure 4.39 Ground penetrating radar (GPR).
121
4.4 Bridge management and current state condition
of Brisas highway network bridges
I. Introduction
The Brisa holding has six concessions (Brisa, Litoral Oeste, Brisal, Douro Li-
toral, Baixo Tejo, and Auto-estradas do Atlntico) responsible for the opera-
tion of most of the motorways in Portugal, distributed in a network length of
1,618km, as shown in Figure 4.40, which corresponds to roughly 60% of the
total motorway network (2,737km). Brisa Engenharia e Gesto (BEG) is re-
sponsible for the bridge management of all concessions. In a simplified manner,
Figure 4.41 shows the internal organization of Brisa.
PAULO LIMA BARROS
Director, Brisa Engenharia e Gesto
Portugal
122
Figure 4.40 Current motorway network of all the Brisas concessions.
Paulo Lima Barros
123
Figure 4.41 Brisa holding internal organization.
As summarized in Table 4.II, currently, Brisa owns 1,915 structures (special and
small). Following the Brisas definition, special structures are Bridges, Viaducts,
and Tunnels. On the other hand, Small Structures are Overpasses, Underpass-
es, Culverts, Cattle Creep, and Pedestrian. According to the bridge definition
above, 1,489 structures are bridges, 422 are culverts and cattle creeps, and four
are tunnels. Figure 4.42 shows the distribution of the structures by type. Clear-
ly, the relatively high percentage of overpasses and underpasses is related to
the insertion of the motorway network in the natural landscape. Even though
most of the bridges are made of reinforced and/or prestressed concrete, more
recently steel-concrete composite bridges (concrete deck with steel girders) are
also part of the network, as indicated in Figure 4.43. The lack of masonry struc-
tures, and the predominance of concrete ones, reflects the relatively new Brisas
patrimony.
Table 4.II Brisas inventory of (special and small) structures.
Type Overpass Underpass Culvert Cattle Creep Pedestrian
Bridge and
Viaduct
Tunnel Total
Concrete 582 598 316 106 18 229 4 1853
Steel-concrete 60 0 0 0 1 1 0 62
Total 642 598 316 106 19 230 4 1915
124
Figure 4.42 Current Brisas inventory by type of structures.
Figure 4.43 Current Brisas inventory by deck material.
Paulo Lima Barros
125
II. Bridge management
In order to maintain the quality and structural safety of the bridges, a BMS and
a quality control plan
29
(PCQ) are considered essential. The first BMS (STONE) of
Brisa was acquired in 1994 to an Italian company. In 2002, Brisa changed to GOA
(Figure 4.44) software developed by Betar a Portuguese engineering consul-
tant. Due to the network evolution, since 2000 a dedicated department (incor-
porated in BEG) is responsible to manage the bridge maintenance. Since 2008,
as part of the concession contract between the Brisa and the Portuguese state,
there is a PCQ, for the entire concession period
30
. The PCQ defines a series of
obligations, namely the minimum state of conservation for the motorway net-
work, the frequency of the bridge inspections, and the global bridge indicators.
The PCQ allows Brisa to maintain a standard for the condition rating of each
bridge as well as for the entire network.
Figure 4.44 The BMS adopted by Brisa: GOA.
The continuous observation of the bridges condition is assured by a bridge in-
spection strategy based on four types of inspections: Routine Inspection, Pe-
riodic Inspection, Special or Extra Inspection, and Underwater Inspection.
29. In Portuguese: Plano de Controlo de Qualidade (PCQ)
30. Decreto-Lei n. 247-C/2008 and Decreto-Lei n. 294/97
126
Internal dedicated teams perform the former two types and the later ones are
outsourced from specific consultants. The Routine Inspections are responsible
to trigger basic maintenance activities. The Periodic and Underwater Inspec-
tions are responsible to trigger repair and rehabilitation actions. The Special In-
spections are prompted by major events like vehicle collisions and natural haz-
ards. The bridge inspection frequencies are currently set as four years for small
structures and six years for special structures.
An Inspection Manual (Figure 4.45), especially developed by Brisa and which
sets a common procedure to be carried out by the visual inspectors, supports
and rules the bridge inspections. Each bridge inspection ends with a report,
which is used to identify local damages and classify their impact on the bridge
components through bridge condition evaluation.
Figure 4.45 Current Brisas inspector manual.
The bridge condition evaluation is made using a component-based system (Fig-
ure 4.46), i.e. the components/elements indicated in Table 4.III are inspected
and rated from zero to five according with Table 4.IV. In the end, the bridge is
rated also from zero to five, as summarized in Table 4.V. The Brisas internal pro-
cedure determines that: (i) condition rating lesser or equal to two no action is
needed; (ii) condition rating higher and equal to three action is needed.
Paulo Lima Barros
127
Figure 4.47 shows the current condition rating (CR) distribution of the Brisas
structures, where CR0 is Excellent and CR5 is Bad. Basically, only 7.0% of
the bridges need some intervention as they are classified with CR3. It is not-
ed that, currently, Brisa does not have any bridge classified with CR4 and CR5,
which might to be linked to the fact that its oldest patrimony dates from the
1970s, in addition to the fact that in these situations the damage are to be re-
paired in a short period of time.
Due to limited resources, the engineering judgment always needs to take de-
cisions in terms of priority and maintenance options. The interventions are
always balanced at network level by taking into account the actual condition
ratings, annual available budget, priority definition, and improvement of con-
dition indicators of the PCQ.
The interventions have been characterized by local rehabilitations/repairs,
global rehabilitations/reinforcement, and widening of existing bridges. For in-
stance, Figure 4.48 shows the reinforcement works carried out in the Tranco
Viaduct, incorporated in the highway A1, over the Tranco River, in Sacavm.
For completeness, Figure 4.49 highlights the evolution of the bridge cost inter-
ventions from 2002 to 2010. The significant weight of the general rehabilitation
costs is related to the rehabilitation of older viaducts.
Figure 4.46 Component-based condition evaluation.
128
Table 4.III List of bridge components to be evaluated.
Reference Bridge component
1 Bridge
2 Wing walls
3 Slope
4 Abutments
5 Bearings
6 Pier/column
7 Bridge deck
8 Cornice
9 Railings
10 Safety barrier
11 Sidewalks
12 Pavement
13 Drainage System
14 Expansion Joints
15 Other Components
Table 4.IV Condition rating and description of each component.
Condition Rating Description
0 No damages
1 Damages with no evolution
2 Damages which may evolve
3 Damages with evolution
4 Damages which may affect the bridge durability
5 Damages which may affect the bridge structural safety
Table 4.V Bridge condition rating and description according with the main component evaluation.
Evaluation Description
0 No damages on the main components no action is needed
1 Damages which do not evolve no action is needed
2 Damages which can progress observation
3 Damages in progress evaluation plan or action in one-year time
4 Damages which can influence bridge durability evaluation plan or action in six months
5
Damages which can influence bridge structural safety intervention plan in one-month
time and possible circulation restriction
Paulo Lima Barros
129
Figure 4.47 Current Brisas bridge distribution based on the condition rating (CR).
Figure 4.48 Bridge intervention in the Tranco Viaduct, in Sacavm.
Figure 4.49 Bridge cost interventions made by Brisa from 2002 until 2010.
130
Brisa is also concerned with the passage permission of special vehicles (e.g.
trucks) with exceptionally heavy loads, which might cause structural problems
during the service life of the bridges (e.g. cracking in concrete bridges might
affect their durability). Therefore, Brisa developed software (Figure 4.50) linked
to the BMS database for evaluation of damages caused by special vehicles. Basi-
cally, it performs a simplified and quick analysis of all bridges affected by vehi-
cle passage (by selection of a typical cross-section deck). In the end, it outputs a
safety factor of the bridges affected by each passage.
Figure 4.50 Software for evaluation of damages caused by special vehicles.
Paulo Lima Barros
131
III. Most common damage scenarios
Some of the damage scenarios identified by Brisa are corrosion in metal compo-
nents (Figure 4.51), concrete deterioration (Figure 4.52) and construction de-
fects (Figure 4.53), and degradation of corrugated metal culvert (Figure 4.54).
The corrosion in metal elements is normally present in beams, bearings, and
railings, derived from defects of painting or protective coating. The concrete
deterioration is mainly caused by debris (traps moisture), deficient drainage
or leakage. An adequate design and detailing of specific parts of the structures
might solve these types of damages. Finally, the deterioration of the corrugated
metal culverts is currently one of the Brisas main concerns, which derives from
the poor galvanization, strong corrosion, and section loss. In order to fix it, Bri-
sa is preparing, for the next years, a 10M package to maintain all the corrugat-
ed metal culverts incorporated in the motorway network.
Figure 4.51 Corrosion in metal elements (beam, bearing, and rails)
132
Figure 4.52 Concrete deterioration of structural components.
Figure 4.53 Construction
defects in concrete components.
Paulo Lima Barros
133
IV. Future developments and/or recommendations
In terms of future developments in order to overcome some of the current lim-
itations, Brisa identifies the need of:
More efficiency in visual inspection activities by developing new tools and
technologies in data acquisition in order to automate the introduction of
information derived from the bridge inspections into the BMSs, which is
still time consuming;
Development of remote bridge monitoring to increase the reliability of
the current BMSs, namely:
To predict possible structural damages,
To add value information for better planning of maintenance and
rehabilitation activities,
Figure 4.54 Deteriorated corrugated metal culverts.
134
To better manage the available budgets/resources for the global
concession period;
New methodologies to predict bridge degradations processes and struc-
tural behavior on specific conditions.
135
4.5 An overview on SHM and outstanding research issues
I. Structural Health Monitoring
Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) is the process of developing a damage as-
sessment capability for aerospace, civil, and mechanical infrastructure.
I.1 Brief history of SHM
Heuristic forms of vibration-based damage detection (acoustic) have
probably been around as long as man has used tools.
Figure 4.55 The SHM main goal.
CHARLES R. FARRAR
The Engineering Institute Leader, Los Alamos National Laboratory
United States of America
136
Developments in vibration-based damage detection are closely coupled
with the evolution, miniaturization and cost reductions in dynamic data
acquisition systems and digital computing hardware.
The development of vibration-based damage detection has been driven by
the rotating machinery, aerospace, offshore oil platform, and civil infra-
structure applications.
To date, the most successful applications of vibration-based damage de-
tection has been for condition monitoring of rotating machinery.
I.2 Highway bridge monitoring
Study SHM techniques to augment federally mandated visual inspections
(in the USA).
Driven by several catastrophic bridge failures over last 30-40 years (Fig-
ure 4.56).
Figure 4.56 Motivation for highway bridge SHM
31
.
31. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1649646_1421688,00.html and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_collapse
Charles R. Farrar
137
Commercial systems for bridge health monitoring are currently available.
Asian governments are mandating the companies that construct civil en-
gineering infrastructure to periodically certify the structural health of
that infrastructure.
U.S. Federal Highway Administration has developed a center to validate
bridge NDE methods (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/research/tfhrc/labs/
nde/).
Tsing Ma Bridge in Hong Kong (approx. $20 million for 1000+ channels of
data acquisition).
I.3 Status of bridge monitoring in the U.S.
26% of the 600,000+ bridges in the U.S. are structurally deficient or
functionally obsolete.
Structurally deficient bridges require weight/speed restrictions.
Functionally obsolete bridges cant accommodate current traffic volumes
or vehicles sizes.
Doubling of truck traffic in last 20 years has driven bridge deterioration.
The state-of-the-art for bridge inspection remains biennial visual inspec-
tion.
Bridge inspections in the U.S. are federally mandated, but each state is
responsible for implementation.
Inspections are qualitative and not necessarily consistent:
See Reliability of Visual Inspection for Highway Bridges, FHWA-
RD-01-020, June 2001.
Federal Highway Administration is working with states to improve BMS.
Survey of inspection practices shows:
Thirty-one Division Offices indicated that their states are not us-
ing life cycle costs in bridge management decision making;
138
States indicate that they need: a) Bridge management awareness,
effectiveness, and bridge management requirements; b) Life cy-
cle cost analysis; c) exchanges, what other states are doing; and d)
case studies;
See http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/elibrary.htm.
I.4 The SHM Process
The author believes that all approaches to SHM as well as all traditional NDT
techniques can be cast in the context of a pattern recognition problem. Thus,
the statistical pattern recognition (SPR) paradigm for the development of SHM
solutions can be described as a four-step process:
Operational evaluation: defines the damage to be detected and begins to
answer questions regarding implementation issues for a structural health
monitoring system;
Data acquisition and networking: defines the sensing hardware and the
data to be used in the feature extraction process;
Feature selection and extraction: the process of identifying damage-relat-
ed information from measured data;
Probabilistic decision making: classifies feature distributions into dam-
aged or undamaged category.
Challenges for operational evaluation
Most high-capitalexpenditure civil engineering structures are one-of-
a-kind systems:
Dictated by physical environment where they are built,
More difficult to incorporate lessons learned from other nominally
similar systems to define anticipated damage.
Structural designs are often driven by low-probability, but extreme-im-
pact events:
Charles R. Farrar
139
Earthquake,
Hurricanes,
Terrorist actions,
Loss-of-coolant accidents.
However, structural systems also degrade slowly under normal use:
Corrosion and fatigue cracking, freeze-thaw/thermal damage,
Loss of pre-stressing forces, Vibration-induced connectivity deg-
radation, Hydrogen enbrittlement and nuclear irradiation (NPP).
There is no widely accepted procedure to demonstrate rate of return on
investment in an SHM/DP system.
Challenges for SHM sensing systems
Number of sensors:
Instrumenting large structures with lots of sensors still represents
a sparsely instrumented system!
Large sensor systems pose many challenges for reliability and data
management.
Ruggedness of sensors:
Sensing systems must last for many years with minimal mainte-
nance;
Harsh environments (thermal, mechanical, moisture, radiation,
corrosion);
Need sensor diagnostic capability.
The sensing system must be developed integrally with the feature selec-
tion/extraction and classification.
There is no accepted sensor design methodology:
Optimal (or robust?) sensor system design (need models);
Optimal waveform design for active sensing (need models).
140
Challenges for feature selection and extraction
Developing an analytical approach to feature selection:
Feature selection is still based almost exclusively on engineering
judgment.
Quantifying the features sensitivity to damage.
Quantifying how the features change with damage level.
Understanding how the feature will change with changing environmental
and operational conditions:
Is one of the biggest barriers to in situ deployment of civil infra-
structure SHM systems.
Challenges for probabilistic decision making
Analytical approaches to defining threshold levels:
Must balance tradeoffs between false-positive and false-negative
indications of damage;
Minimize false-positives when economic concerns drive the SHM
application (e.g. wind turbines);
Minimize false-negatives when life-safety issues drive the SHM
application (e.g. nuclear power plant).
Updating statistical models as new data become available.
Managing the large volumes of data that will be produced by an on-line
monitoring system:
Learn how others are doing it (credit card fraud detection).
Charles R. Farrar
141
II. Main Lessons from the past
Over the last 25 years there has been an explosion in SHM research world-
wide.
Technology has evolved from almost exclusively focusing on inverse mod-
eling using physics-based models to using more general pattern recogni-
tion approaches.
A general statistical pattern recognition paradigm that can encompass
both physical modeling and machine learning approaches has been pro-
posed and adopted by many researchers.
Fundamental axioms of SHM have been proposed (Figure 4.57).
Figure 4.57 The new SHM book
32
.
Certain SHM application areas have made the transition from research to
practice: rotating machinery, health and usage monitoring systems for
rotorcraft.
32. C. R. Farrar and K. Worden, Structural Health Monitoring: A Machine Learning Approach, John Wiley
& Sons LTD, Chichester, UK, 2013.
142
New applications for SHM are continually being reported in the literature
(e.g. amusement park rides, ship structures, electronic components, tele-
scopes, dams).
Over the last 15 years there have been an increasing number of confer-
ences, workshops and journals dedicated to SHM technology.
Commercial SHM systems are starting to become available.
Time scales on which damage evolves presents challenges for the SHM
system.
Long term SHM, periodically updates information regarding the ability
of the structure to perform its intended function in light of the inevitable
aging and degradation resulting from operational environments:
Maintenance staff continuity,
Data archiving and retrieval,
Changing maintenance budgets,
Sensor technology endurance and evolution.
After extreme events, such as earthquakes or blast loading, SHM is used
for rapid condition screening and must provide, in near real time, reliable
information regarding the integrity of the structure:
Puts tremendous burden on sensing and processing hardware,
Should provide information to first-responders,
Consequences of misdiagnosis are severe,
Must be integrated with control systems.
III. Shortcomings and needs
Visual inspections are inconsistent.
Major bridge failures have occurred even when being inspected with cur-
rent practices.
Charles R. Farrar
143
The SHM Catch-22:
Owners will not invest in SHM technology until it is demonstrated
on a real world system,
Real-world structures are generally not available to damage in an
effort to develop and demonstrate SHM technology.
Cost (multi-disciplinary research, need long term proof of concept
demonstrations).
IV. Future trends
Research must focus on integrating new SHM technology developments
with current bridge management systems to:
Improve consistency and fidelity of inspections;
Reduce costs of inspection, maintenance and overall lifecycle costs
of the bridge system;
Provide more continuous monitoring and improved safety;
Validate design assumptions.
The SHM community must move away from developing technology inde-
pendently from the bridge design community and the government agen-
cies responsible for bridge management.
Need to make monitoring systems part of the construction budget as op-
posed to the maintenance budget.
144
4.6 A decade of bridge monitoring in Portugal:
the LABEST experience
I. Introduction
The transport infrastructure represents a huge asset:
In terms of investment;
In supporting the development and well-being of societies.
The structural health monitoring (SHM) contributes decisively to extend the
lifetime of structures (bridges) in terms of safety, economy, and quality, by:
Controlling the construction phase;
Assessing the structural integrity;
Permitting the proactive conservation for the lifecycle management.
II. Structural Health Monitoring
Is based on integrated and automatic systems for:
Measuring relevant parameters of structural and durability behavior, and
Analyzing data,
to fulfill the proactive conservation of structures (Model Code 2010 fib).
JOAQUIM A. FIGUEIRAS AND CARLOS FLIX
1
Collaborator of LABEST, Full Professor at FEUP,
and Director of NewMensus, Lda
2
LABEST, Professor at ISEP, and Director of NewMensus, Lda
Portugal
1 2
Joaquim A. Figueiras and Carlos Flix
145
III. Development of measuring systems
The importance:
Development of reliable and robust sensors to measure the intended pa-
rameters;
Implementation of signal interrogation units to integrate new technolo-
gies.
The motivation:
To implement the actual measuring techniques;
To integrate additional parameters in monitoring systems;
To explore and assess new transducers based on fiber optic technology;
To integrate in structural monitoring systems different techniques em-
ployed in other fields.
Some of the most relevant contributions led by LABEST are shown below.
Displacement monitoring with Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)
GNSS positioning is an interesting alternative to the more conventional tech-
niques of structural displacement monitoring. It provides all weather obser-
vations, various levels of accuracy to meet different application requirements,
3D positioning in an external reference system, continuous monitoring at up to
100Hz, automated operation with almost no need of human intervention, ki-
nematic methods suitable to monitor the dynamic parameters of the structures
and no long-term sensor drifts. Some field applications using this technique
have been made and the results have demonstrated its potential.
Reference: PESTANA, Antnio; LAGE, Armindo; FIGUEIREDO, Eli; FLIX,
Carlos; FIGUEIRAS, Joaquim Monitorizao GNSS de um pilar do Viaduto do
Corgo. Encontro Nacional Beto Estrutural BE2012. FEUP, 24 a 26 de outubro,
2012.
146
Fiber optic strain gage to embed into concrete
Strain gage able to integrate deformations in 1m length and accommodate crack
widths with linear behavior (Figure 4.58). Adequate robustness for field instal-
lation.
Figure 4.58 Fiber optic strain gage.
Reference: RODRIGUES, Carlos; FLIX, Carlos, LAGE, Armindo; FIGUEIRAS,
Joaquim Development of a long-term monitoring system based on FBG sen-
sors applied to concrete bridges. Engineering Structures Vol. 32 (8): pp. 1993-
2002. April, 2010.
Fiber optic deflections transducer
Suited to measure the vertical displacement of bridges with reference to a hydro-
static leveling system (Figure 4.59). (Portuguese Patent PCT/PT2009/000058,
2009. International Patent, WO/2010/053392, 2010.)
Figure 4.59 Fiber optic deflections transducer.
147
Reference: RODRIGUES, Carlos; FLIX, Carlos; FIGUEIRAS, Joaquim Fi-
ber-optic-based displacement transducer to measure bridge deflections. Struc-
tural Health Monitoring Vol. 10: pp. 147-156. March, 2011.
Fiber optic displacement transducer
High sensitivity and self-compensated for thermal variations displacement
transducer suited to measure displacement in expansion joints in bridges (Por-
tuguese Patent PCT/PT2012/000155, 2012), as shown in Figure 4.60.
Figure 4.60 Fiber optic displacement transducer.
Reference: FARIA, Remy; COSTA, Bruno; FIGUEIRAS, Joaquim Transdutor de
deslocamento baseado na tecnologia das fibras ticas. Encontro Nacional Beto
Estrutural BE2012. FEUP, 24 a 26 de outubro, 2012.
IV. Conception and specification of systems
Aspects such as architecture, installation and functionality of the monitoring
system must be taken into account to obtain a robust and useful system (Figure
4.61). The main aspects to consider in developing an SHM system are:
Establish the main objectives;
Select and locate the sensors;
Select the data acquisition and communication units;
148
Implement the data visualization and analysis tools;
Describe the monitoring plan: written document and drawings.
Figure 4.61 Specification of monitoring systems.
V. Monitoring phases
The monitoring process may occur in different phases, namely:
During the construction;
At the end of the construction;
During the service period;
At the rehabilitation and strengthening phases.
Some examples of application of monitoring systems are given next, identifying
the main objective and the intervention phase.
149
Pedro and Ins Footbridge, Coimbra, Portugal monitoring for execution
control
Reference: DIMANDE, Amrico; PIMENTEL, Mrio; FLIX, Carlos; FIGUEIRAS,
Joaquim Monitoring system for execution control applied to a steel arch foot-
bridge. Journal of Structure and Infrastructure Engineering. Maintenance, Man-
agement, Life-Cycle Design and Performance. Vol. 8, N. 3: pp.277-294. March,
2012.
Luis I Bridge, Porto, Portugal monitoring during the load test
Reference: FIGUEIRAS, Joaquim; FLIX, Carlos; COSTA, Bruno Testing and
Monitoring of a Centenary Arch Bridge. Structure and Infrastructure Engineer-
ing Maintenance, Management, Life-Cycle Design and Performance. Inter-
national Association for Bridge Maintenance and Safety. Vol. 1, n 1, p.67-73.
March, 2005. ISSN 1573-2479.
150
Lezria Bridge, Carregado, Portugal monitoring during the service period
Reference: SOUSA, Helder; FLIX, Carlos; BENTO, Joo; FIGUEIRAS, Joaquim
Design and implementation of a monitoring system applied to a long-span pre-
stressed concrete bridge. Structural Concrete Vol. 12: pp 82-93. DOI: 10.1002/
suco.201000014. June, 2011.
Eiffel Bridge, Viana do Castelo, Portugal monitoring at the rehabilitation
and strengthening phases
Reference: CAVADAS, Filipe; RODRIGUES, Carlos; FLIX, Carlos; FIGUEIRAS,
Joaquim Post-rehabilitation assessment of a centenary steel bridge through
numerical and experimental analysis. Journal of Constructional Steel Research.
Vol. 80: pp. 264277, 2013.
151
VI. Data treatment
In SHM, there are two alternative methods for identifying non-conformities:
Methods of statistical data analysis with reference to the signature of
the structure (data driven methods);
Methods based on detailed and calibrated numerical models (model-based
methods).
VII. Final considerations
The civil engineering structures are high value heritage whose continued
operation, in conditions of safety and economy, is of major importance.
Monitoring systems have recently experienced considerable advances
with the availability of novel sensors, new signal acquisition equipment
more robust and suitable for bridges applications, and the development of
appropriate software for analysis and visualization of results.
The application of such systems to a variety of structures and situations,
has contributed to the development of more efficient SHM systems.
The results achieved have contributed to a better control of the bridges
constructions phases and the rehabilitation processes, and to acquiring
insight knowledge of the life cycle management of structures.
VIII. Main lessons from the past
The lack of knowledge about the real condition of the structures has resulted in
inadequate conservation strategies. Bridges that need urgent rehabilitation are
collapsing. Many bridges that are strengthened and rehabilitated need not be.
152
IX. Shortcomings and needs
SHM systems are an essential tool for the optimized management of important
civil engineering structures.
X. Future trends
Further development of monitoring systems will be focused on:
Increasing the reliability and robustness of the sensors and equipment in-
stalled on site;
Improvement of software routines for data visualization and data inter-
pretation, and for bridge damage identification.
153
4.7 Machine learning and the Structural Health Monitoring
of bridges
I. Approaches to SHM
There are arguably two main approaches to SHM: model-based and da-
ta-based.
Data-based approach is founded in machine learning and pattern recog-
nition and can use supervised learning or unsupervised learning.
Both modes depend on existence of appropriate features carrying infor-
mation about damage.
II. The data-based approach
II.1 SHM hierarchy
Is there damage in the system (existence)?
Where is the damage in the system (location)?
What kind of damage is present (type)?
How severe is the damage (extent)?
How much useful (safe) life remains (prognosis)?
KEITH WORDEN
Full Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University
of Sheffield
United Kingdom
154
II.2 Learning
For supervised learning, one needs feature data corresponding to both
the undamaged and damaged condition. This is most desirable as one can
potentially accomplish higher levels of damage identification: detection,
location, severity.
For unsupervised learning, one only needs normal condition data, but
then can only really do detection.
Both modes present problems for SHM.
Pattern recognition problems are difficult.
II.3 The two problems
If supervised learning is necessary, how does one acquire data corresponding to
damage states of the structure? Modeling and the use of experiment are options,
but may be prohibitively expensive. Proxies for damage can be investigated (Pa-
patheou (E.) et al. 2010 Journal of Sound and Vibration 329 pp.2349-2366. The
use of pseudo-faults for novelty detection in SHM).
If novelty detection is used, how does one remove the effect of benign environ-
mental and operation variations from the data in order to avoid false indications
of damage? New projection methods look most promising e.g. cointegration
(Cross (E.J.) et al. 2011 Proceedings of the Royal Society Series A 467 pp.2712-
2732. Cointegration; a novel approach for the removal of environmental trends
in structural health monitoring data).
III. Main lessons from the past
A lot of academic research is in existence no working SHM systems are
installed.
People very often confuse monitoring for SHM thousands of sensors
are not an SHM system.
Keith Worden
155
Business case for large-scale adoption is not there.
There are still major technical issues, but there are encouraging results
available.
IV. Shortcomings and needs
Data-based SHM faces a number of challenges.
The most important is convincing stakeholders that there is a business
case for SHM.
Two major technical challenges:
Where does the damage data come from?
Confounding influences.
V. Future trends
More emphasis on proxies for the data-based approach (including phys-
ics-based models).
Better (nonlinear) projection methods for the removal of confounding in-
fluences.
A holistic viewpoint including the wants and needs of stakeholders.
At a very technical level, more Bayesian analysis accommodating uncer-
tainty.
156
4.8 Integrated performance assessment addressing long term
asset management of engineering structures
I. Introduction
I.1 Critical questions regarding structural assessment
Does a certain structure (bridge) have any strength/capacity issues? If so,
what are they?
Which technology should be used to identify, quantify, and understand
these issues?
Can SHM contribute to life time extension efforts?
What, if any, retrofits or interventions would you recommend?
Maintenance and repair options for an xx-year lifecycle?
I.2 Demand on life cycle assessment
To receive expertise with regard to:
Structural Integrity/Safety;
Load Bearing Capacity:
Proper support for decision making (tailored major/minor inter-
ventions),
ROBERT VEIT-EGERER
Head of Department Asset Management, VCE Vienna Consulting
Engineers
Austria
Robert Veit-Egerer
157
Extending service life;
Preventing risk:
Prognosis on expected remaining lifetime;
Long Term Maintenance Planning;
Optimization of structural treatments and their impact on residual life:
Performance of a financial cost optimization exercise.
I.3 Big picture life cycle engineering Asset Management
The experience gained over 50 years in bridge structural design, visual inspec-
tions, maintenance and retrofit planning, development and application of BRI-
MOS
Structural Health Monitoring, and life cycle calculations, has permitted

Vienna Consulting Engineers (VCE) to adopt an integrated asset management
approach based on life cycle engineering (Figure 4.62).
Figure 4.62 Asset Management: from lifetime analysis to maintenance planning.
158
I.4 Incorporation of SHM
BRIMOS
Structural Health Monitoring is an assessment and judgment meth-

odology, which enables accurate observation and evaluation of structural con-
dition and damage detection in relevant infrastructure. The provided technolo-
gy was developed and is constantly modified and optimized in order to support
the decision process of infrastructure owners in the course of maintenance and
cost planning.
It was recognized very early, that methods based on conventional visual inspec-
tion get broadened and more objective by incorporating the evaluation of the
dynamic behavior of an analyzed structure. Based on the principles of structural
mechanics tailored dynamic measurements are merged with numerical simu-
lations. In the first instance structural analysis reflects experimental full scale
monitoring (measured physics). Complementary finite element calculations
enable a deepened understanding of structural integrity leading to decisive in-
terpretation of results.
Dynamic monitoring campaigns with BRIMOS
are undertaken in order to

analyse structural behaviour, performance and integrity, and to determine the
load bearing capacity.
The following key performance indicators are used and explained with regard to
their relevance in the civil engineering context (Figure 4.63):
The bridge structures relevant eigenfrequencies and corresponding
mode-shapes:
Load bearing capacity and operability,
Evaluation of the bearings;
Sensitivity analysis and trend of dynamic stiffness (investigating the
progression, the character, the stability, and probable changes in the en-
ergy content of the relevant eigenfrequencies):
Load bearing capacity and operability,
Robert Veit-Egerer
159
Distribution of the global and local structural stiffness along the
bridge structure (MAPPING);
Energy dissipation (damping behaviour):
Dissipation pattern of the induced vibration energy,
Localization and evaluation of problematic sections;
Vibration intensity at the entire bridge deck:
Localization and classification of weak points with regard to fa-
tigue threat.
Figure 4.63 Extraction of measured dynamic state variables according to BRIMOS analysis with
regard to structural performance KPIs (Key Performance Indicators).
Integrity Operability
Schwingungsintensitt
KONRAD-ADENAUER
A
m
p
lit
u
d
e
Frequenz
6.4mm/s
64mm/s
2000mm/s
1.EF
2.EF
3.EF
4.EF
5.EF
6.EF
7.EF
8.EF
9.EF
10.EF
10000
1000
100
10
0.1 1 10 100 1000
I II
III IV
Fatigue Assessment
Darstellung der Dmpfungswerte
innen
D
m
p
f
u
n
g

i
n

%
Stationinm
0,00 0,00
0,50 0,50
1,00 1,00
1,50 1,50
2,00 2,00
2,50 2,50
3,00 3,00
3,50 3,50
4,00 4,00
4,50 4,50
5,00 5,00
5,50 5,50
6,00 6,00
6,50 6,50
7,00 7,00
7,50 7,50
8,00 8,00
8,50 8,50
9,00 9,00
9,50 9,50
10,00 10,00
10,50 10,50
11,00 11,00
0,00 25,00 50,00 75,00 100,00 125,00 165,30
1
0
.0
0
0
.5
1
0
.4
0
0
.4
4
0
.4
5
0
.4
5
0
.4
5
0
.4
4
0
.3
6
0
.3
8
1
0
.0
0
0
.3
5
0
.4
0
0
.3
6
0
.3
7
0
.3
8
0
.3
6
0
.3
6
0
.3
5
0
.3
8
1
0
.0
0
0
.3
6
0
.3
5
0
.3
7
0
.3
7
0
.3
7
0
.3
7
0
.3
8
0
.3
5
1
0
.0
0
Damage Localization Life-Cycle-Curve

Stiffness Mapping
160
I.5 Why dynamic monitoring?
Any anomalies affecting the load bearing capacity or structural performance
are detected by means of changes in the dynamic behavior. Therefore, if minor
damages do not affect the structural performance, it will not influence the mea-
surement results and the damage cannot be detected.
Vibration Monitoring under the trademark BRIMOS
was developed in order to

be applied with a minimum of limitation/restriction of use. The measurements
are always conducted under ambient (environmentally excited vibrations) con-
dition on the one hand, and under typical operational loading conditions on
the other hand. The latter usually represents the most significant impact to be
analyzed with regard to the structural performance.
The shown technology serves a wide range of applications for every phase of
structural service life and it is independent from the structural type or material.
Therefore, it is a useful tool for structural evaluation (prioritization and ranking
of structures regarding maintenance activities to be prepared) and maintenance
planning (prioritization and optimization of type of maintenance measures).
Furthermore, the results are always compared to the reference data from the
BRIMOS Database. The experience of about 1000 investigated structures
worldwide has already been incorporated into the assessment procedure.
Robert Veit-Egerer
161
II. Main lessons from the past selected case studies
II.1 SHM from customer demands to customer output (engineering
expertise)
Bridge owners expect from the SHM community:
Information instead of data,
Custom-made solutions,
Understandable results.
Typical bridge owner demand can be given by regular surveillance, eval-
uation of a suspicion of a certain problem, evaluation of a known and ex-
isting damage, and load bearing evaluation regarding an intended change
in operational conditions (e.g. loading).
What bridge owners expect is an engineering expertise addressing the
structural condition of the structure. Herein, engineering expertise
means:
Extent of load bearing capacity, safety and operability,
Risk level regarding sudden failure (Figure 4.64),
Structural measures for maintenance and/or rehabilitation,
Recommendations for remaining service life.
Figure 4.64 SHM judgment and risk level.
162
II.2 Selected case studies (= tailored solutions for specific needs)
Road Bridge KOMOANY (Czech Republic) pre-stressed concrete road
bridge from 1961
Figure 4.65 Sensitivity study
with regard to the structures
bearing capacity by means of an
identified, known truck loading of
18.9 tons total weight (example).
Key services in 2007/2008
Dynamic Analysis regarding
load-bearing capacity & operability
=> Resulting judgment and
short-term measures
Limitation for freight traffic with
a weight of more than 25 tons has
been established until a decision
about further measures is made.

SehrStarkplus_sp_glStarkplus_sp_glMittelplus_sp_gl
Schwachplus_sp_glRauschen_sp_gl
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.6
3.8
4.0
012345678
Hz
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
g
SehrStarkplus_sp_gl Rauschen_sp_gl Schwachplus_sp_gl
Mittelplus_sp_gl Starkplus_sp_gl
0.00.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4.0 4.4 4.8 5.2 5.6 6.0 6.4 6.8 7.2 7.6 8.0
Hz
0.0
2.5
5.0
7.5
10.0
12.5
15.0
17.5
20.0
22.5
25.0
27.5
30.0
32.5
35.0
37.5 g
f_1_1=0.72 Hz
f_1_2=0.08 Hz
f_2_1=1.02 Hz
f_2_2=0.10 Hz

1. 2.

Magebliche Eigenfrequenzen lt. BRIMOS Referenzmodell
1. 2.

Zeit
Frequenz
Durchb_2_1_B def orm
17:00:00 17:00:10 17:00:20 17:00:30
6.3.2007
-2.5
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5 mm
Robert Veit-Egerer
163
Monitoring and evaluation of an arch bridge over the Traun river (Austria
built in 1960) affected by the blasting of the adjacent highway bridge
Figure 4.66 Trend of stiffness over time 2005 2010 (0.2 5.5 Hz) under the influence of the bridge
blasting and after the re-opening to traffic.
Key services 2005-2010:
Baseline survey and FE-model
considering the reference
measurement in 2005
Installation of the monitoring system
one day before the blasting
Observation of the current structural
behavior under regular operation
Measurement of the closed bridge
before, during and after the blasting
Comparison of the results
Evaluation with regard to re-
opening to traffic within a given
time slot of 30 min-2 hours after the
blasting (client demand)
Subsequent analysis (office)
164
Subsequent installation of internal prestressing cables Estakda Masaryk
Praha (demo measurement for Czech Federal Railways in 2007)
Figure 4.67 Successive increase of the load-bearing capacity of the track slabs cantilevers, at several
stages of subsequent prestressing in order to simulate the reverse case of the proceeding damage.
TIME
FREQUENCY
cable
Z011201
&
Z011202
installed
cable
Z011102
installed
cable
Z011101
installed
machinery entering
=> increase of vibrating
mass
Key services 2007:
Sensitivity analysis dealing with
missing & supplementary installed
tendons in the upper slab regarding
load bearing capacity in the
transverse direction
Robert Veit-Egerer
165
III. Shortcomings and needs
III.1 Shortcomings
Strong need to support strategic decisions with regard to long term plan-
ning.
SHM can very often deliver the required information.
SHM helps to reduce the uncertainties.
You ONLY evaluate what you measure:
TAILORED SOLUTIONS demand DIFFERENT APPROACHES for
different goals.
SHM for bridges based on performance assessment instead of damage de-
tection have noticed to be more useful. In VCEs understanding, ambient
vibration monitoring represents perfectly performance assessment:
Visual deficiencies are not necessarily an issue,
The mechanical relevance of visible damage is evaluated,
The structural integrity is analyzed by extracting the effective
bending/torsional resistance from measured eigenfrequencies,
Material properties or impact of corrosion are implied.
Combinations with finite element analysis can gain added value (regard-
ing capacity/Redundancy issues).
III.2 Needs
Performance assessment instead of damage detection.
Data base driven judgment (decision support systems).
Integral approach (life cycle engineering).
166
IV. Future trends
IV.1 Decision support system
Improvement of single structure judgment by data-base driven judgment
(decision support system).
Overcome the subjectivity/uncertainty in engineering expertise by incor-
porating large reference datasets.
In the course of stating current maintenance condition/performance of an an-
alyzed structure a final decision has to be based on a comparison with similar
reference cases. Thus, the judgment on a certain structure is done in the context
with other specifically conducted bridge investigations. Queries of identical da-
tabase attributes are incorporated regarding material, cross section type, type
of static system, and infrastructures function.
Figure 4.68 Overall observation of the whole bridge stock from the BRIMOS Database
Singular observation of the independently defined major groups of structural properties
DB
Sample
[Amount]
Datenbase (DB)
Attribute
Percentage
Rated B
[%]
mean service life
at time of investigation
[years]
36 Composite bridges 64 35
111 2nd order roads 41 42
179 t-beam 32 38
259 continous beam bridge 21 40
451 Sum 35 39
1 Westbahnbrcke Linz 100 52
Robert Veit-Egerer
167
IV.2 Integrated asset management tool for highway infrastructure
To enable proper and long-term maintenance planning for a huge and hetero-
geneous set of engineering structures VCE developed an integrated life cycle
management tool that offers tailored solutions with regard to the given loca-
tion, involved materials, fabricates and the underlying design code at the time
of construction.
A probabilistic ageing model and a comprehensive cost model forms the core of
this tool. Each structural member is represented by a generic ageing function,
which is derived from the major sources of information reflecting impact on
structural ageing (visual inspection/ numerical simulation/structural monitor-
ing and freight traffic progression). Furthermore the model incorporates VCEs
50 years of experience in the field of bridge inspections and structural health
monitoring. Due to defined treatment-trigger-criteria a huge set of mainte-
nance strategies is generated leading to an extensive optimization exercise. The
final project output is composed by tailored maintenance plans for every struc-
ture.
Figure 4.69 and Figure 4.70 are representing a long-term development of an
integrated asset management tool for highway infrastructure for estimating the
remaining lifetime by analyzing the structural design, processing the data from
visual inspections, and reviewing structural monitoring campaigns. This meth-
odology is based on the statistical analysis of a large database of structures and,
consequently, the approach is realistic and empirically well-founded. In partic-
ular, this tool addresses the following issues:
Mid- and long-term maintenance as well as cost planning for freely cho-
sen time frames;
Minimizations of costs under full compliance of load bearing capacity,
serviceability, and traffic safety;
Maximization of availability;
Efficiency-comparison for different maintenance-strategies;
Comparison of life cycle costs impact on different construction types;
168
Calculation of different scenarios in terms of budget, traffic development,
and construction price development;
Consideration of external costs or factors (emission, availability costs,
macroeconomics, CO2, etc.).
Robert Veit-Egerer
169
Figure 4.69 From Stock Information to Maintenance Planning.
170
Figure 4.70 Integrated Life Cycle Engineering Developed Software Solution emphasizing modular
input & output information.
V. Conclusions
Asset management requires tools for optimization.
Monitoring & Life Cycle methodologies have reached a mature state.
Traditional approaches (visual inspection) are jointly integrated with
monitoring and NDT technologies into Life Cycle Engineering applica-
tions (LCE).
It has been observed that SHM can often deliver the required information
and helps to reduce the uncertainties.
Life Time Extension can be justified and monitored.
Robert Veit-Egerer
171
This contribution showed an integrated system for estimating the remain-
ing lifetime of engineering structures in the course of roadways, analyzing
the structural design, processing the data of visual inspections and struc-
tural monitoring campaigns.
The system also predicts the performance of structures depending on the
strategies adopted for maintenance and repair.
Both main methodologies (SHM & LCE) implemented in the system are
based on the statistical analysis of a large database of structures conse-
quently the approach is realistic and empirically well-founded.
Furthermore the entire development has been conducted in close inter-
action to the real demands from the addressed industries (infrastructure
owners/operators).
173
Sponsor Institutions
The organizing committee
gratefully acknowledges the support of
the following sponsors
174
Fundao Calouste Gulbenkian
The Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation is a Portuguese private institution of pub-
lic utility created in 1956. The Foundation acts in four areas arts, education,
science, and social welfare by giving grants and scholarships and through its
own projects and initiatives. Most activities are in Portugal but the Foundations
impact is felt more widely and it is becoming increasingly international in ful-
fillment of its founders wishes. It works extensively with other major European
Foundations.
In Lisbon, the Foundation actively pursues its statutory aims through a wide
range of direct activities and grants supporting projects and programs. In addi-
tion to the Museum containing the founders collection, the Foundation runs a
Modern Art Centre which organizes solo and collective exhibitions of work by
Portuguese and foreign artists. The Foundation has an Orchestra and a Choir
that perform throughout the year within a regular season, an Art Library and
also has an international research centre based in the outskirts of Lisbon. It also
organizes international conferences, meetings and courses, awards subsidies
and scholarships for specialist studies and doctorates in Portugal and abroad,
and supports programs and projects of a scientific, educational, artistic and so-
cial nature. Moreover, the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation is actively involved
in publishing, especially through its program for university textbooks. It also
fosters cooperation projects with Portuguese-speaking African countries and
East Timor pursuing the Millennium goals, promotes Portuguese culture abroad,
and operates a program to preserve evidence of the Portuguese presence in the
world. In addition to the activities pursued in Portugal and abroad for the pro-
motion of Portuguese culture, the Foundation supports the Armenian Diaspora
worldwide in order to preserve its language and culture. For more information,
visit www.gulbenkian.pt.
175
Brisa Auto-estradas de Portugal, S.A.
Brisa Auto-estradas de Portugal was created in 1972. In four decades it has be-
come one of the largest tolled motorway operators in the world and the largest
transport infrastructure company in Portugal.
Today, Brisa has a market capitalization around to 3,000 million Euros and its
shares are quoted on Euronext Lisbon, where it is part of the main index, the
PSI-20. It is also part of Euronext 100 an index which includes the largest
companies in France, Holland, Belgium and Portugal and the FTSE4Good, the
reference index for social responsibility.
Brisas main business area is the construction and operation of tolled motor-
ways, both through direct investments in Portugal, as well as through its na-
tional and international subsidiaries.
The remaining businesses managed by the company complement its core busi-
ness providing services associated to road safety and driving comfort in both
motorway and urban environments.
For more information, visit www.brisa.pt.
176
EP Estradas de Portugal, S.A.
The EP Estradas de Portugal, S.A. is a limited company of public capital,
whose social capital, amounting to EUR 464,000,000 is owned in its entirety
by the Portuguese State, which exercises its rights as shareholder through the
Directorate-General of Treasury and Finance.
Its mission consists in providing, in business, a public service whose object con-
sists, on one hand, financing, maintenance, operation, exploitation, requalifi-
cation and widening of the National road network and, on the other hand, in the
conception, design, construction, financing, maintenance, operation, exploita-
tion, requalification and widening of the future National road network.
For more information, visit www.estradasdeportugal.pt.
177
BETAR was created in 1973 and since then has been working in Structural De-
sign for buildings. In the early 1980s the company begins operating within the
scope of Bridge Projects, accompanying the growing development of the coun-
trys road infrastructure. In late 90s, in response to the growing demand for
Management of Infrastructures, the company develops new products GOA
(Gesto de Obras de Arte Bridge Management) dedicating this activity to
customize each clients needs. Since then the company has been the leader in
this growing market segment. In 2006, BETAR innovated once again by devel-
oping a new product for the Management of Signal Gantries, which is already
used in several road concessions. In 2007, the BETAR Group receives ISO 9001
Quality Certification.
Nowadays, Betar has offices in Mozambique and Angola and work worldwide
namely in Spain, Brazil, Algeria, Angola, Mozambique and Cape Verde. BETAR
has also performed bridge inspections in Spain, Greece, Bulgaria, Algeria and
Mozambique.
In order to provide a full range of engineering services covering areas from
structural engineering to environmental studies, BETAR coordinates all special-
ity projects, partnering with other high-profile companies.
BETAR Group relies in highly qualified experts closely knit in a dynamic orga-
nization enabling an effective and qualitative response to its clients challenges.
For more information, visit www.betar.pt.
178
FiberSensing Sistemas Avanados de Monitorizao, S.A., is a world leader
in the development and production of advanced monitoring systems based on
optical Fiber Bragg Grating (FBG) technology. The main markets are the ones
of structural health monitoring in Civil and Geotechnical Engineering, Aero-
space and Energy Industries. Founded in April 2004 as a spin-off from INESC
Porto (Institute for Systems and Computer Engineering of Porto), the company
is supported by competences in fiber optic technology, optoelectronics, digital
electronics and instrumentation, offering the most complete portfolio of FBG
sensors, measurement units and software packages. In addition, FiberSensing
provides technologically advanced solutions for monitoring, including custom
development of OEM systems and monitoring projects.
FiberSensing is proud of having addressed more than one hundred different
monitoring projects and delivered thousands of sensors and measurement units
around the world, while ensuring Innovation, Quality and Reliability.
Presently, FiberSensing has 35 collaborators working in 800 square meter state-
of-the-art facilities located very near Porto International Airport.
For more information, visit www.fibersensing.com.
179
NewMENSUS,Lda is a high technology-based company providing consultancy
and specialized works in the area of building and civil engineering. The inspec-
tion, testing, monitoring and conservation of concrete and steel structures are
the main activities. NewMENSUS was founded in May 2006 as a spin-off from
LABEST, University of Porto, being supported by high-qualified engineers and
specialists in structural health monitoring, life-cycle management, durability
and safety of civil engineering construction.
The consultancy and inspection of concrete structures, the development and
application of novel fiber optic and electric-based sensors, the design and im-
plementation of monitoring systems for structural and durability control, and
the support to advanced design solutions for new constructions and rehabilita-
tion projects are within our competencies. NewMENSUS has been carried out a
considerable number of monitoring projects applied to bridges, buildings and
dams. Presently is located in UPTEC Park of Science and Technology, Univer-
sity of Porto, www.newmensus.pt.
180
Critical Materials SA is an advanced technology company, headquartered in
Guimares, Portugal, providing technology and efficient products for monitor-
ing, diagnosis, prognosis and management of critical applications of advanced
materials to ASD (Aeronautics, Space and Defence) and Energy industries.
Critical Materials kicked-off operations in 2009 based on a joint vision of Critical
Group and two researchers from University of Minho / PIEP. The founders hold
10+ year experience in research and development in the field of structural anal-
ysis and advanced materials development and applications.
Proddia was launched based on the roots of this know-how & experience
comprising a Virtual Structural Analysis System, for monitoring and evaluation
of critical structural sub-systems based on the virtualization of the relevant
physical behavior of the specific component.
This vital information will generate important cost reductions, by increasing
asset availability, extend their lifetime and optimize planning of all operation &
maintenance interventions.
Get to know us better by visiting www.critical-materials.com.
References
1. BRIME Bridge Management in Europe, Deliverable D14: Final Report, European Commission
DG VII 4
th
Framework Programme, 2001.
2. Phares, B. M.; Wipf, T. J.; Greimann, L. F.; Lee, Y.-S. (2005). Health Monitoring of Bridge Struc-
tures and Components Using Smart Structure Technology. Volume 1, Wisconsin Highway Re-
search Program, Center for Transportation Research and Education, Iowa State University.
3. U.S. Department of Transportation. Transportation Statistics Annual Report 2010.
4. Schwab, K. (2012). The Global Competitiveness Report 2012-2013. World Economic Forum, In-
sight Report.
5. AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (2008). Bridging
the Gap: Restoring and Rebuilding the Nations Bridges. July.
6. White House Fact Sheet (2010). Renewing and Expanding Americas Roads, Railways, and Run-
ways. September.
7. HM Treasure (2011). National Infrastructure Plan 2011. November.
8. NCHRP (2012). The National Cooperative Highway Research Program Advancing transporta-
tion and meeting states needs for half a century.
9. Figueiredo, E.; Radu, L.; Park, G.; Farrar, C. R. (2011). Integration of SHM into Bridge Man-
agement Systems: Case Study Z24 Bridge. Proceedings of the 8
th
International Workshop on
Structural Health Monitoring, 13-15 September, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
10. Wenzel, H. (2009). Health Monitoring of Bridges, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
11. Andrade, A. (2002). As Estradas em Portugal: Memria e Histria, III Volume: Legislao 1910-
1933. Centro Rodovirio Portugus.
12. Dirio do Governo, Decreto-lei n. 34:593 de 11 de Maio de 1945.
13. Mar, F. (2011). Histria das Infra-estruturas Rodovirias, MSc Dissertation, Faculty of Engineer-
ing of the University of Porto.
14. Banco de Portugal. Historical Archive, retrieved from http://www.bportugal.pt, on 5 January
2013.
15. CP Comboios de Portugal. Retrieved from http://www.cp.pt, on 2 January 2013.
16. REFER Rede Ferroviria Nacional, EPE. Retrieved from http://www.refer.pt, on 2 January
2013.
17. CP Comboios de Portugal (2006). Os Caminhos de Ferro Portugueses 1856-2006.
182
18. Carneiro, M. (2011). As Casas dos Cantoneiros do Algarve: da Conservao das Estradas a Patrim-
nio a Conservar. Masters Dissertation, Universidade Aberta.
19. Regulamento Geral das Estradas e Caminhos Municipais, Lei n. 2110 de 19 de Agosto de 1961.
20. Santos, N. E. (1998). Conservao e Reabilitao de Pontes Metlicas. Masters Dissertation, Fac-
ulty of Engineering of the University of Porto.
21. INE Instituto Nacional de Estatstica (2011). Statistical Yearbook of Portugal 2010.
22. Cross, E.J.; Worden, K.; Farrar, C. (2013). An introduction to Structural Health Monitoring in the
context of civil infrastructure. To appear in Health Assessment of Engineering Structures: Bridges
and Other Infrastructure. Ed. A. Haldar. World Scientific.
23. Lauridsen, J.; Lassen, B. (1999). The Danish Bridge Management System DANBRO. In P. C. Das,
Management of Highway Structures (pp. 61-70). Thomas Telford Publishing.
24. Mendona, T. P.; Vieira, A. (2004). Bridge Management System GOA. Proceedings of the 2nd
International Conference of the International Association for Bridge Maintenance and Safety. 18-
22 October, Kyoto, Japan: Routledge USA.
25. NTSB National Transportation Safety Board (2008). Collapse of I-35W Highway Bridge. Minne-
apolis, Minnesota, August 1, 2007. Accident Report, NTSB/HAR-08/03, November.
26. Transportation, M. D. Retrieved December 30, 2009, from: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/i35w-
bridge/pdfs/bridge_inspection_report_06-15-06.pdf.
27. Walther, R. A.; Chase, S. B. (2006). Condition Assessment of Highway Structures: Past, Present,
and Future. Transportation Research Circular 50 Years of Interstate Structures: Past, Present,
and Future (E-C104), pp. 67-78.
28. Kattell, J.; Eriksson, M. (1998). Bridge Scour Evaluation: Screening, Analysis, & Countermea-
sures. United States Department of Agriculture.
29. Placzek, G.; Haeni, F. P. (2010). USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4009. Retrieved
on January 10, from USGS, Science for a Changing World: http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/bgas/
scour/#*.
30. Richardson, E. V.; Lagasse, P. F. (1999). Stream Stability and Scour at Highway Bridges. Compen-
dium of Papers from the 1991 to 1998, proceedings of the ASCE Water Resources Engineering.
31. Melville, B. W.; Coleman, S. E. (2000). Bridge Scour. Water Resources Publications, LLC.
32. FHWA Federal Highway Administration (2001). Reliability of Visual Inspection for Highway
Bridges. Report #FHWA-RD-01-020.
33. Hellier, C. (2003). Handbook of Nondestructive Evaluation, McGraw-Hill.
34. American Society for Nondestructive Testing, https://www.asnt.org.
35. Farrar, C. R.; Doebling, S. W.; Nix, D. A. (2001). Vibration-based Structural Damage Identifi-
cation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society: Mathematical, Physical & Engineering
Sciences, 356 (1778), pp. 131-149.
References
183
36. Figueiredo, E. (2010). Damage Identification in Civil Engineering Infrastructure under Opera-
tional and Environmental Conditions. Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation in Civil Engineering,
University of Porto, Faculty of Engineering.
37. Figueiredo, E. (2007). Monitoring and Assessment of the Behavior of Civil Infrastructures. Master
of Science Dissertation in Structures of Civil Engineering. University of Porto, Faculty of Engi-
neering. Advisor: Joaquim A. Figueiras.
38. Retrieved from http://www.news-medical.net, on 13
th
of May, 2013.
39. Retrieved from http://www.vce.at, on 13
th
of May, 2013.
40. Doebling, S. W.; Farrar, C. R.; Prime, M. B.; Shevitz, D. W. (1996). Damage Identification and
Health Monitoring of Structural and Mechanical Systems from Changes in their Vibration Char-
acteristics: A Literature Review. Los Alamos National Laboratory Report: LA-13070-MS.
41. Sohn, H.; Farrar, C. R.; Hemez, F. M.; Shunk, D. D.; Stinemates, D. W.; Nadler, B. R.; et al. (2004).
A Review of Structural Health Monitoring Literature from 1996-2001. Los Alamos National Lab-
oratory: LA-13976-MS.
42. Randall, R. B. (2004). State of the Art in Monitoring Rotating Machinery Part 1. Sound and
Vibration, 38 (3), pp. 14-21.
43. Randall, R. B. (2004). State of the Art in Monitoring Rotating Machinery Part 2. Sound and
Vibration, 38 (5), pp. 10-17.
44. Pawar, P. M.; Ganguli, R. (2007). Helicopter Rotor Health Monitoring A Review. Proceedings
of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 221 (5),
pp. 631-647.
45. Ko, J. M.; Ni, Y. Q. (2005). Technology Developments in Structural Health Monitoring of Large-
scale Bridges. Engineering Structures, pp. 27, 1715-1725.
46. Baruch, M. (1978). Optimisation procedure to correct stiffness and flexibility matrices using vi-
bration tests. AIAA Journal, vol. 16, n. 11, pp. 1208-1210.
47. Mottershead, J. E.; Friswell, M. I. (1993). Model updating is structural dynamics: a survey. Jour-
nal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 167, n. 2, pp. 347-375.
48. Mottershead, J. E.; Friswell, M. I. (1998). Editorial. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing,
vol. 12, n. 1, pp. 1-6.
49. 49Figueiredo, E.; Park, G.; Figueiras, J.; Farrar, C.; Worden, K. (2009). Structural Health Moni-
toring Algorithm Comparisons using Standard Datasets. Los Alamos National Laboratory Report:
LA-14393.
50. Kessler, S. S.; Spearing, S. M.; Soutis, C. (2002). Damage Detection in Composite Materials using
Lamb Wave Methods. Smart Materials and Structures, pp. 11 (2), 269-278.
51. Park, G.; Soon, H.; Farrar, C. R.; Inmar, D. J. (2003). Overview of Piezoelectric Impedance-based
Health Monitoring and Path Forward. Shock and Vibration Digest, pp. 35 (6), 451-463.
52. Ihn, J. B.; Chang, F. K. (2004). Detection and Monitoring of Hidden Fatigue Crack Growth using
a Built-in Piezoeletric Sensor/actuator Network: II. Validation using Riveted Joints and Repair
Patches. Smart Materials and Structures, pp. 13 (3), 621-630.
184
53. Sohn, H.; Park, G.; Wait, J. R.; Limback, N. P.; Farrar, C. R. (2004). Wavelet-based Signal Process-
ing for Detecting Delamination in Composite Plates. Smart Materials and Structures, pp. 13 (1),
153-160.
54. Farrar, C.; Worden, K. (2007). An Introduction to Structural Health Monitoring. Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society, pp. 365, 303-315.
55. Farrar, C. R.; Sohn, H.; Worden, K. (2001). Data Normalization: A Key to Structural Health Mon-
itoring. Proceedings of the 3
th
International Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring (pp.
1229-1238). Stanford, Palo Alto, CA: DEStech Publications, Inc.
56. Rytter, A. (1993). Vibration Based on Inspections of Civil Engineering Structures. PhD Disser-
tation, Department of Building Technology and Structural Engineering, Alborg University, Den-
mark.
57. Worden, K.; Dulieu-Barton, J. M. (2004). An Overview of Intelligent Fault Detection in Systems
and Structures. International Journal of Structural Health Monitoring, pp. 3 (1), 85-98.
58. Farrar, C. R.; Lieven, N. A. (2006). Damage Prognosis: The Future of Structural Health Monitor-
ing. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A, pp. 365, 623-632.
59. Figueiredo, E.; Todd, M. D.; Farrar, C. R.; Flynn, E. (2010). Autoregressive Modeling with State-
space Embedding Vectors for Damage Detection under Operational and Environmental Variabil-
ity. International Journal of Engineering Science, pp. 48, 822-834.
60. Figueiredo, E.; Cross, E. (2013). Linear Approaches to Modeling Nonlinearities in Long-term
Monitoring of Bridges. Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring, DOI: 10.1007/s13349-013-
0038-3.
61. Figueiredo, E.; Park, G.; Farrar, C. R.; Worden, K.; Figueiras, J. (2011). Machine Learning Al-
gorithms for Damage Detection under Operational and Environmental Variability. International
Journal of Structural Health Monitoring, pp. 10(6), 559-572.
62. Sousa, H. (2012). Data-based engineering techniques for the management of concrete bridges.
PhD dissertation, FEUP.
63. Koh, H. M.; Choo, J.F.; Kim. S; Kim C.Y. (2003). Recent application and development of structural
health monitoring systems and intelligent structures in Korea. Proceedings of the First Interna-
tional Conference on Structural Health Monitoring and Intelligent Infrastructure, Tokyo, Japan,
Nov.pp. 12-15, pp. 99-112.
64. Farrar, C.R.; Worden, K. (2012). Structural Health Monitoring: A Machine Learning Approach.
John Wiley & Sons LTD, Chichester, UK.
65. Mclinn, J. (2009). Major bridge collapses in the US, and around the world. IEEE Reliability Society
2009 Annual Technology Report.
66. 66FHWA Federal Highway Administration (2001). Reliability of Visual Inspection for Highway
Bridges. FHWA-RD-01-020, June.
67. McLinn J (2009). Major bridge collapses in the US, and around the world. IEEE Reliability Society
2009 Annual Technology Report.
68. Peeters, B.; De Roeck, G. (2001). One-year Monitoring of the Z24-Bridge: Environmental Effects
versus Damage Events. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, pp. 30, 149-171.
References
185
69. FHWA Federal Highway Administration, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/publi-
croads/09septoct/02.cfm, Retrieved on January 28, 2013.
70. Koh, H. -M.; Lee, H. S.; Kim, S.; Choo, J. F. (2008). Monitoring of bridges in Korea. Encyclope-
dia of Structural Health Monitoring: Civil Engineering Applications. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.,
pp. 1-23.
71. FHWA Federal Highway Administration (2005). Dynamic Bridge Substructure: Evaluation and
Monitoring, Report # FHWA-RD-03-089.
72. Khan, M.A. (2010). Bride and highway Structure Rehabilitation, and Repair, ISBN: 978-0-07-
154592-1, McGraw-Hill, Inc.
73. US Department of Transportation. (1995). Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inven-
tory and Appraisal of the Nations Bridges. Federal Highway Administration, Office of Engineer-
ing Bridge Division, FHWA-PD-96-001.
74. Pestana, A.; Lage, A.; Figueiredo, E.; Flix, C.; Figueiras, J. (2012). Monitorizao GNSS de um pi-
lar do Viaduto do Corgo. Encontro Nacional Beto Estrutural BE2012. FEUP, 24 a 26 de Outubro.
75. Rito, A.; Appleton, J. (2005). Rehabilitation of the Figueira da Foz Bridge. Structural Engineering
International (IABSE) Journal, Vol. 15, N. 2.
76. Rito, A.; Appleton, J. (2006). Rehabilitation of the Figueira da Foz Bridge. IABMAS 2006.
77. Rito, A.; Bispo, S.; Loureiro, M.; Ripper, T. (2006). Rehabilitation of the Barra Bridge the
strengthening side. IABMAS 2006.
78. Rito, A.; Bispo, S.; Loureiro, M.; Ripper, T.; Marques, P.; Ferreira, J. (2006). Rehabilitation of the
Barra Bridge The repair side. IABMAS 2006.
79. Rito, A. (2008). The Barra Bridge assessment and rehabilitation. 1
st
International Conference,
Construction Heritage in Coastal and Marine Environments Damage, Diagnostics, Mainte-
nance and Rehabilitation MEDACHS 08.
80. FLICKR http://www.flickr.com, retrieved on 10 December 2012.

Condition Assessment of Bridges: Past, Present and Future. A Complementary Approach

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Condition Assessment of Bridges: Past, Present and Future. A Complementary Approach

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Condition Assessment of Bridges:

Past, Present and Future

Structural Health Monitoring, and life cycle calculations, has permitted

Structural Health Monitoring is an assessment and judgment meth-

are undertaken in order to

was developed in order to

Você também pode gostar