LCC Based Bridge Management System for Existing Concrete Bridges in Japan

Ayaho MIYAMOTO Hideaki NAKAMURA

Professor, Dr Eng.
Yamaguchi University
Ube, Yamaguchi, Japan
Ayaho Miyamoto, born 1949,
received his Dr. of Eng.
degree from Kyoto University
in 1985. His recent research
activities are in the area of
structural safety assessment
for existing bridges, and also
establishment of design
concept for concrete structures
under impact load.
Assoc. Prof., Dr Eng.
Yamaguchi University
Ube, Yamaguchi, Japan
Hideaki Nakamura, born 1961,
received his Dr. of Eng. degree
from Yamaguchi University in
1996. His recent research
interests include integrated
management system for existing
bridges, thermal stress in mass
concrete structures and
earthquake engineering.

Summary
In recently, the maintenance planning of existing bridges has become a major social concern,
because the number of deteriorated bridges is increasing owing to factors such as the increasing
volume of traffic, increasing weight of road vehicles, and structural aging. Thus, the necessity of
developing a computer-aided decision support system that includes not only a serviceability
assessment system but also a life cycle cost minimization system has been pointed out for
maintenance, diagnosis, repair and rehabilitation of existing bridges. The authors have been
developing a practical Bridge Management System that is referred to as the Japanese Bridge
Management System (J-BMS) integrated with the Concrete Bridge Rating Expert System (BREX)
that can be used to evaluate the serviceability of existing concrete bridges. The present paper
concretely demonstrates the way in which the J-BMS works on a computer. And also, a comparison
between the results of applying the J-BMS to some actual in-service concrete bridges will be shown.

1. Introduction
It is becoming an important social problem to make maintenance and rehabilitation of existing
infrastructures such as bridges, buildings, etc. in the world, because the number of deteriorated
bridges is increasing owing to factors such as the increasing volume of traffic, increasing weight of
road vehicles, and structural aging. Thus, the necessity of developing a computer-aided decision
support system that includes not only a serviceability assessment system but also a life cycle cost
minimization system has been pointed out for maintenance, diagnosis, repair and rehabilitation of
existing bridges [1,2,3].
The authors have been developing a practical Bridge Management System that is referred to as the
Japanese Bridge Management System (J-BMS) integrated with the Concrete Bridge Rating Expert
System (BREX) that can be used to evaluate the serviceability of existing concrete bridges [4,5,6].
The J-BMS uses multi-layered neural networks to predict deterioration processes in existing bridges,
construct an optimal maintenance plan for repair and/or strengthening measures based on
minimizing life-cycle cost and maximizing quality, and also estimate the maintenance cost. In this
system, the Genetic Algorithm (GA) technique was used to search for an approximation of the
optimal maintenance plan [7]. In this paper, it will be demonstrated concretely how the J-BMS
works on a computer by using some screen displays. And also, by applying this system to an
existing bridge, it has been verified that the employed system is effective.

2. Outline of J-BMS
Fig. 1 shows the overall configuration of the J-BMS. The type of bridge considered for the purposes
of this study is the reinforced concrete (RC) bridge, and main girders and deck slabs are the
members considered here. In the J-BMS, as the first step, the system was divided into three major
components according to the basic flow of maintenance (inspection→diagnosis→corrective action).
 Recording section

Bridge inventory, Data base

Investigation，
Inspection data，
etc.

(1) Data base management function

Diagnosis & Evaluation section

(2) Diagnosis & (5) Deterioration factor

evaluation function inference function

Decision & re medies section

(3) Deterioration (6) Maintenance decision

prediction function support function

(4) Maintenance decision

support function Fig. 2 Starting screen of J-BMS

Fig. 1 System configuration of J-BMS

They are the “Recording Section”, the “Diagnosis & Evaluation Section” and the “Decision &
Remedies Section”. The arrows in Fig. 1 show the directions of data flow. The data acquisition in
the J-BMS makes a combination of a large number of detailed visual inspections and some simple
non-destructive inspections for a target existing bridge, and stores inspection results into a data-base
((1)), and, using the inspection data and bridge inventory data thus obtained, performs a damage
assessment of the target bridge under consideration ((2)). Then, deterioration is predicted on the
basis of the degree of structural soundness determined through deterioration assessment ((3)). An
optimal maintenance plan is then drawn up according to a deterioration status report output by the
deterioration prediction function ((4)). The deterioration factor inference function infers damage-
causing factors from the inspection and bridge data collected thus far ((5)). Repair or strengthening
methods to be recommended are selected in view of the damage-causing factors thus inferred ((6)).
Fig. 2 shows the startup screen of the J-BMS. Clicking on one of the buttons shown starts the
corresponding system. On the screen, clicking on the "Concrete Bridge Rating Expert System
(BREX)/Maintenance Plan Optimization System" button or the "Maintenance Decision Support
System" button activates the process shown in the left half of Fig. 1 (deterioration assessment
→deterioration prediction→optimization of maintenance plan) or the process in the right half
(inference of deterioration factors→selection of maintenance measures), respectively. Clicking on
the "Data Base Management System" button starts the data-base system. Since the three systems
can be run independently, the user can start the J-BMS from any of the three systems (functions).
For example, to view a bridge inventory or inspection log or to enter new data, the user clicks on
"Data Base Management System." To use an existing inspection data file in the data-base or
perform damage assessment or maintenance planning based on new inspection data, the user starts
the “Concrete Bridge Rating Expert System (BREX)” or the “Maintenance Plan Optimization
System”. To infer factors contributing to the damage encountered or make a decision as to
maintenance actions to be taken to slow the progress of damage, the “Maintenance Decision
Support System” can be activated.
Since these systems can be run in an integrated way, the user running one system (function) can
refer to or run another function if necessary. Each of the functions of the J-BMS is described below.

3. J-BMS Data-Base Management Function

The data-base management function activated by clicking on the "Data Base Management System"
button consists of three subsystems: “Bridge Register System”, “Inspection Log System” and
“Repair & Strengthening Log System”. Brief descriptions of these subsystems are following.
 Fig. 3 Data entry screen (Flexural cracks) Fig. 4 Screen display of final diagnosis

3.1 Bridge Register System

This system makes it possible to manage, as record data, almost all items included in the bridge
register. Basic data for a particular bridge can be searched and viewed. The purpose of this system
is to provide data necessary for inspection, repair/strengthening, deterioration assessment, and
maintenance planning.
3.2 Inspection Log System
This system creates a data-base of the types and degrees of damage to different bridge members
observed during various inspections and manages such data in an integrated way. This system
makes it possible to store, as a time series record, various information obtained through inspections,
such as photographs and drawings, so that the bridge deterioration/ damage process can be
determined.
3.3 Repair & Strengthening Log System
This is a system that creates a repair and strengthening history data-base. Including data on work
details and cost information including photographs and drawings, the data-base is a reliable source
of information on which to base future maintenance plans.

4. Diagnosis Function
Clicking on the "Concrete Bridge Rating Expert System (BREX)/Maintenance Plan Optimization
System" button shown in Fig. 2 starts a system that assesses the serviceability of the main girders
and deck slabs of the bridge under consideration. Fig. 3 shows one of the data entry windows of the
system. From this and other windows, the user enters 93 or so items of data including bridge
specifications, investigation and inspection results obtained from various inspections, and data on
cracks in the deck slabs and main girders. Principal inspection-related data can be entered by
clicking on one of three subjectively defined choices given for each item. Final diagnoses obtained
through inference based on consolidated calculation of assessment process findings are displayed as
shown in Fig. 4. As shown in Fig. 4, load-carrying capability, durability and serviceability are rated
on a 100-point scale. Thus, overall assessments of the main girders and deck slabs can be visually
displayed on the screen. As a next step, clicking on the "Deterioration (Curve) Prediction" button on
the same screen activates the deterioration prediction function.

5. Deterioration Prediction Function

The deterioration prediction function, which can be activated by clicking on the "Deterioration
(Curve) Prediction" button, predicts the service life of each bridge member. Deterioration prediction
is made by calculating deterioration curves for "durability," an indicator used to make judgments as
to the necessity of repair, and "serviceability," an indicator used to make judgments as to the
necessity of strengthening. The deterioration prediction function outputs estimates of the remaining
 life of individual bridge members based
on information received from the
diagnosis function, namely, durability
and load-carrying capability ratings
(average soundness ratings, measured on
a 100-point scale) and user inputs on the
planned service life of each bridge
member. By displaying these
deterioration curves, a likely progress of
deterioration of each bridge member can
be visualized. Fig. 5 shows an example
of an output from the deterioration
prediction function. The bridge name
shown is "Miake-bashi Bridge, Span 1,"
which was 47 years old at the time of
inspection, and the bridge member under
consideration is "main girder." The
vertical axis of the output deterioration
Fig. 5 Deterioration prediction system screen curve shows average soundness in terms
(Main girder) of durability and load-carrying capability,
and the horizontal axis shows the period
of use (in years; first year=0). The zero (0) on the vertical axis represents the control limit (no
longer remain in service). The point at which a perpendicular drawn from the curve meets the
horizontal axis represents the year in which inspection was conducted, and the average soundnesses
at this point in time are the averages of the durability and load-carrying capability values calculated
by the diagnosis function. According to these deterioration curves, the remaining life is 11 years
from the standpoint of durability and 32 years from the viewpoint of load-carrying capability, and
the shorter of the two is the remaining life of the member under consideration. This indicates that
the remaining life thus determined is shorter than the planned service life of the bridge of 100 years
(yellow line shown on the screen). Clicking on the "Maintenance Planning I" button on this screen
activates the maintenance plan optimization function.

6. Maintenance Plan Optimization Function

If the deterioration prediction function described as above-mentioned has indicated that the
remaining life of a bridge member is shorter than its planned service life, maintenance measures of
one kind or another need to be taken. It is necessary, therefore, to determine when to take
maintenance measures and which measures to take by using the maintenance plan optimization
function. A multi-stage optimal maintenance plan can be drawn up using a minimization of the total
cost (life-cycle cost) of maintenance measures (first-stage optimization) and a maximization of the
quality of the bridge members restored by maintenance measures (second-stage optimization) as
objective functions. The maintenance plan optimization function activated by clicking on the
"Maintenance Planning" button receives, as inputs, indices for the durability and load-carrying
capability of the bridge member under consideration for each year after the last deterioration
assessment, and the maintenance budget's upper limit value specified by the user. Outputs include
an optimal maintenance plan, the total cost for the plan, and the degrees of recovery of the
durability and load-carrying capability indices for each bridge member under the maintenance plan.
Examples of on-screen outputs from the maintenance plan optimization function are shown below.
Clicking on the "Maintenance Planning I" button on the screen shown in Fig. 5 brings up the
window shown in Fig. 6(a). In this window, the user specifies the main girder or deck slab member
for which the user wants to draw up a maintenance plan. Clicking on the "NEXT" button calls up
the window shown in Fig. 6(b). After entering the bridge name and the member name and
specifying an objective function to be used for optimization, the user clicks on the "Make Plan
(START)" button, which starts the planning process aimed at minimizing total cost (life-cycle cost)
as first-stage optimization. After a maintenance plan is drawn up, specific maintenance measures
are shown such as Fig. 6(c). Information shown at this point includes recommended methods of
repair or strengthening, the years in which the recommended repair or strengthening should be
carried out, and costs of individual repair or strengthening methods. Clicking on the "NEXT" button
in this window brings up the window shown in Fig. 6(d). This screen shows the degree of recovery,
by each of the recommended methods, of the durability and load-carrying capability of the bridge
member concerned, and illustrates an expected tendency of deterioration in future so that the user
can see easily if the actual life is likely to be longer than the planned life. Since the maintenance
Fig. 6(a) Window in which to select the type of
Fig. 6(c) Example of optimal maintenance plan under cost minimization
member for which a maintenance plan
to be rawn up

Fig. 6(b) Window for confirming maintenance

planning parameters Fig. 6(d) Changes in bridge performance due to optimal
maintenance plan under cost minimization
plan thus drawn up calls for minimum-cost maintenance measures that will enable the bridge
member concerned to remain serviceable during its planned service life, the plan can be adopted as
is. As can be clearly seen from Fig. 6(d), however, the actual service life, in terms of both durability
and load-carrying capability, is likely to be barely as long as the planned service life, which is not
very reassuring. If, therefore, it is possible to achieve the highest possible level of quality by adding
a small amount to the total cost (see Fig. 6(c)) of the maintenance measures planned under the
condition of minimum cost, a window in which the upper limit of cost can be specified can be
called up by clicking on the "Maintenance Planning II" button at the right bottom corner of the
maintenance plan window shown in Fig. 6(d). Thus, as a second-stage optimization aimed at
achieving the highest possible quality within the expanded budget, a maintenance plan for attaining
the highest possible quality defined by an index reflecting both durability and load-carrying
capability is drawn up. Finally, the maintenance plan that has been drawn up is output, and changes
in quality over time are shown on the screen display.

7. Concluding Remarks

Sound evaluation of existing bridges based on on-site investigations and inspections often depends
on domain experts' knowledge and experience and is not necessarily made quantitatively.
Infrastructure including bridges, however, is expanding steadily, and the number of structures to be
maintained is increasing, necessitating the development of methodologies of rational and
economical maintenance. One option is to develop and put to practical use decision support systems
utilizing the computer and information technologies. In this paper, the authors did their best to show
detailed examples, wherever possible, of various elements of the newly developed bridge
management system designed mainly for concrete bridges.

References

[1] P.D. Thompson, E.P. Small, M. Johnson and A.R. Marshall, “The Pontis Bridge
Management System”, Structural Engineering International, Journal of IABSE, Vol. 8, No.
4, 1998, pp.303-308.
[2] M.K. Soderqvist, and M. Veijola, “The Finnish Bridge Management System”, Structural
Engineering International, Journal of IABSE, Vol. 8, No. 4, 1998, pp.315-319.
[3] J.E. Roberts, “Bridge Management for the 21st Century”, Maintaining the Deteriorating Civil
Infrastructures (Edited by Miyamoto, A., and Frangopol, D. A.), Yamaguchi University,
Yamaguchi, 2002, pp 1-13.
[4] Miyamoto, “Development of a Bridge Management System (J-BMS) in Japan”, Life-Cycle
Cost Analysis and Design of Civil Infrastructure Systems (Edited by Frangopol, D. A. and
Furuta, H.), ASCE, Virginia, 2001, pp 179-221.
[5] K. Kawamura, H. Nakamura, and A. Miyamoto, “Development of Concrete Bridge Rating
Expert System (BREX) in Japan”, Life-Cycle Cost Analysis and Design of Civil
Infrastructure Systems (Edited by Frangopol, D. A. and Furuta, H.), ASCE, Virginia, 2001,
pp 161-178.
[6] Miyamoto, et al, “Development of a bridge management system for existing bridges”,
Journal of Advances in Engineering Software Computers & Structures, Vol. 32/10-11, 2001,
pp. 821-833.
[7] M. Gen, and R. Chebarg, “Genetic Algorithm and Engineering Design”, John Wiley & Sons,
New York, 1997.