Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A framework for assessing the value of information for health monitoring of scoured bridges

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It is generally accepted that climate change is leading to increased frequency of extreme weather events worldwide, and this is placing heavier demands on an already aging infrastructure-network. Bridges are particularly vulnerable infrastructure assets that are prone to damage or failure from climate-related actions. In particular, bridges over waterways can be adversely affected by flooding, specifically the washing away of foundation soils, a mechanism known as scour erosion. Scour is the leading cause of failure for bridges with foundations in water as it can rapidly compromise foundation stiffness often resulting in unacceptable movements or even collapse. There is growing interest among asset managers in applying health monitoring approaches to assess the real-time performance of bridges under damaging actions, including scour. Sensor-based approaches involve the acquisition of data such as dynamic measurements, which can be used to infer the existence of scour or other damage without the laborious requirements of undertaking visual inspections. In this paper, a framework is proposed to assess the benefit obtained from health monitoring systems as compared to the scenario where no monitoring system is employed on a bridge, to ascertain how useful these systems are at assisting decision-making. Decisions typically relate to the implementation of traffic restrictions or even partial or complete bridge closure in the event of damage being detected, which has associated consequences for a network. A case study is presented to demonstrate the approach postulated in this paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hamill L (1999) Bridge Hydraulics. E. & F.N Spon, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Maddison B (2012) Scour failure of bridges. Proc ICE Forensic Eng 165:39–52

    Google Scholar 

  3. Prendergast LJ, Hester D, Gavin K, O’Sullivan JJ (2013) An investigation of the changes in the natural frequency of a pile affected by scour. J Sound Vib 332:6685–6702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2013.08.020i

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Prendergast LJ, Hester D, Gavin K (2016) Determining the presence of scour around bridge foundations using vehicle-induced vibrations. J Bridg Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Klinga JV, Alipour A (2015) Assessment of structural integrity of bridges under extreme scour conditions. Eng Struct 82:55–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.07.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Forde MC, McCann DM, Clark MR et al (1999) Radar measurement of bridge scour. NDT&E Int 32:481–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Anderson NL, Ismael AM, Thitimakorn T (2007) Ground-penetrating radar : a tool for monitoring bridge scour. Environ Eng Geosci 13:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Yu X (2009) Time domain reflectometry automatic bridge scour measurement system: principles and potentials. Struct Heal Monit 8:463–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475921709340965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hunt BE (2009) NCHRP synthesis 396: monitoring scour critical bridges—a synthesis of highway practice. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  10. De Falco F, Mele R (2002) The monitoring of bridges for scour by sonar and sedimetri. NDTE Int 35:117–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zarafshan A, Iranmanesh A, Ansari F (2012) Vibration-based method and sensor for monitoring of bridge scour. J Bridg Eng 17:829–838. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Nassif H, Ertekin AO, Davis J (2002) Evaluation of bridge scour monitoring methods. CAIT, Trenton

    Google Scholar 

  13. Prendergast LJ, Gavin K (2014) A review of bridge scour monitoring techniques. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 6:138–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2014.01.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fisher M, Chowdhury MN, Khan A, Atamturktur S (2013) An evaluation of scour measurement devices. Flow Meas Instrum 33:55–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.flowmeasinst.2013.05.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Doebling S, Farrar C, Prime MB, Shevitz DW (1996) Damage identification and health monitoring of structural and mechanical systems from changes in their vibration characteristics: a literature review. Los Alamos, New Mexico

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Chen C-C, Wu W-H, Shih F, Wang S-W (2014) Scour evaluation for foundation of a cable-stayed bridge based on ambient vibration measurements of superstructure. NDT E Int 66:16–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2014.04.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bao T, Andrew Swartz R, Vitton S et al (2017) Critical insights for advanced bridge scour detection using the natural frequency. J Sound Vib 386:116–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2016.06.039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bao T, Liu Z (2016) Vibration-based bridge scour detection: a review. Struct Control Heal Monit. https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.1937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Foti S, Sabia D (2011) Influence of foundation scour on the dynamic response of an existing bridge. J Bridg Eng 16:295–304. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Prendergast LJ, Gavin K, Hester D (2017) Isolating the location of scour-induced stiffness loss in bridges using local modal behaviour. J Civ Struct Heal Monit 7:483–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-017-0238-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fitzgerald PC, Malekjafarian A, Cantero D et al (2019) Drive-by scour monitoring of railway bridges using a wavelet-based approach. Eng Struct 191:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.04.046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fitzgerald PC, Malekjafarian A, Bhowmik B et al (2019) Scour damage detection and structural health monitoring of a laboratory-scaled bridge using a vibration energy harvesting device. Sensors. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19112572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Xiong W, Cai CS, Kong B et al (2017) Identification of bridge scour depth by tracing dynamic behaviors of superstructures. KSCE J Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-017-1409-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Xiong W, Kong B, Tang P, Ye J (2018) Vibration-based identification for the presence of scouring of cable-stayed bridges. J Aerosp Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0000826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Xiong W, Cai CS, Kong B et al (2019) Bridge scour identification and field application based on ambient vibration measurements of superstructures. J Mar Sci Eng 7:1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Prendergast LJ, Hester D, Gavin K (2016) Development of a vehicle-bridge-soil dynamic interaction model for scour damage modelling. Shock Vib. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/7871089

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pozzi M, Der Kiureghian A (2011) Assessing the value of information for long-term structural health monitoring. SPIE Press, San Diego

    Book  Google Scholar 

  28. Pozzi M, Zonta D, Wang W, Chen G (2010) A framework for evaluating the impact of structural health monitoring on bridge management. In: Bridge Maintenance, Safety, Management and Life-Cycle Optimization: Proceedings of the Fifth International IABMAS Conference. CRC Press, Philadelphia

  29. Straub D (2014) Value of information analysis with structural reliability methods. Struct Saf 49:75–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Thons S, Faber M (2013) Assessing the value of structural health monitoring. ICOSSAR, New York

    Google Scholar 

  31. Zonta D, Glisic B, Adriaenssens S (2014) Value of information: impact of monitoring on decision-making. Struct Control Heal Monit 21:1043–1056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Thöns S, Stewart MG (2019) On decision optimality of terrorism risk mitigation measures for iconic bridges. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 188:574–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2019.03.049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Long L, Döhler M, Thöns S (2020) Determination of structural and damage detection system influencing parameters on the value of information. Struct Heal Monit. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475921719900918

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Skokandić D, Ivanković AM, Thöns S (2019) Quantifying the value of b-wim : assessing costs and benefits for value of information analysis. In: IABSE Symposium.

  35. Bayane I, Long L, Thöns S, Brühwiler E (2019) Quantification of the conditional value of SHM data for the fatigue safety evaluation of a road viaduct. In: 13th International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering (ICASP) Seoul, Korea.

  36. Iannacone L, Gardoni P, Giordano PF, Limongelli MP (2019) Decision making based on the value of information of different inspection methods. In: Chang FK, Guemes A, Kopsaftopoulos F (Eds) Structural Health Monitoring 2019: Enabling Intelligent Life-Cycle Health Management for Industry Internet of Things (IIOT) Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring. DEStech Publications Inc, Lancaster.

  37. Raiffa H, Schlaifer R (1961) Applied statistical decision theory. John Wiley & Sons, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1947) Theory of games and economic behaviour. Princeton University Press, New Jersey

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Bayes T (1763) An essay toward solving a problem in the doctrine of chances. Philos Trans R Soc Lond 53:370–418

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Bolognani D, Verzobio A, Tomelli D, et al (2017) Quantifying the benefit of SHM: what if the manager is not the owner? In: 11th International Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring.

  41. Verzobio A, Bolognani D, Zonta D, Quigley J (2019) Quantifying the benefit of SHM: can the VoI be negative? In: 13th International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, ICASP13 Seoul, Korea.

  42. Richardson EV, Harrison LJ, Richardson JR, Davies SR (1993) Evaluating scour at bridges. Publ. FHWA-IP-90-017, Federal Highway Administration, US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC

  43. Ghosn M, Moses F, Wang J (2003) Design of highway bridges for extreme events. National Cooperative Highway Research Program, NCHRP Report, p 489

    Google Scholar 

  44. BD 97/12 (2012) The assessment of scour and other hydraulic actions at highway structures. Design manual for roads and bridges, highway structures: Inspection and maintenance assessment (Vol. 3, Section 4, Part 21). London

  45. Imam B, Chryssanthopoulos MK (2012) Causes and Consequences of Metallic Bridge Failures. Struct Eng Int 22:93–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Faber MH (2008) Risk assessment in engineering—principles, system representation & risk criteria. JCSS Joint Committee on Structural Safety

  47. National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) (2007) Risk-based management guidelines for scour at bridges with unknown foundations. NASEM, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  48. API (2007) RP2A: recommended practice for planning, designing and constructing offshore platforms Working stress design. API, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  49. Chortis G, Askarinejad A, Prendergast LJ et al (2020) Influence of scour depth and type on p–y curves for monopiles in sand under monotonic lateral loading in a geotechnical centrifuge. Ocean Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Ditlevsen O, Madsen H (1996) Structural reliability methods. John Wiley and Sons Ltd, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  51. Prendergast LJ, Limongelli MP, Ademovic N et al (2018) Structural health monitoring for performance assessment of bridges under flooding and seismic actions. Struct Eng Int 28:296–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/10168664.2018.1472534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Sohn H (2007) Effects of environmental and operational variability on structural health monitoring. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci 365:539–560. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2006.1935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Malekjafarian A, Prendergast LJ, OBrien EJ (2019) Use of mode shape ratios for pier scour monitoring in two-span integral bridges under changing environmental conditions. Can J Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2018-0800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Johnson PA, Dock DA (1998) Probabilistic bridge scour estimates. J Hydraul Eng 124:750. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1998)124:7(750)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Hydraulic Engineering Centre (1986) Accuracy of computed water surface profiles. Hydraulic Engineering Centre, Davis

    Google Scholar 

  56. World Meteorological Organization (2008) Guide to hydrological practices (WMO No. 168) Volume 2 chapter 5: extreme Value Analysis. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was partially funded by the Italian Civil Protection Department within the project DPC-RELUIS 2019-RS4 ‘Monitoring and satellite data’. The second author would like to thank the Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham for funding to enable this collaboration.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Architecture, Built Environment and Construction Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133, Milan, Italy

    Pier Francesco Giordano & Maria Pina Limongelli

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK

    Luke J. Prendergast

Authors
  1. Pier Francesco Giordano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Luke J. Prendergast
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria Pina Limongelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pier Francesco Giordano.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Giordano, P.F., Prendergast, L.J. & Limongelli, M.P. A framework for assessing the value of information for health monitoring of scoured bridges. J Civil Struct Health Monit 10, 485–496 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-020-00398-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-020-00398-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation