Maintenance Planning for Deteriorating Concrete Bridges
Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 125, Issue 12
Abstract
In an effort to prioritize the repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of existing bridges, bridge management programs have been developed. In recent years, reliability-based optimum-maintenance planning strategies applicable to bridges have been proposed. Optimum inspection and repair times can be identified using these strategies. In this study, the effect of repair on time-variant failure probability is illustrated for several repair/replacement strategies. Time-variant reliability computations are performed using a combined technique of adaptive importance sampling and numerical integration. Several repair strategies are investigated for a typical bridge in Colorado. For this bridge, it is shown that for a single repair performed about halfway through the design life, the postrepair strength must be at least 80% of the original strength for the repair to have a significant influence on the system failure proability of the bridge during its remaining service life. Also, for maintenance using shotcrete, multiple repairs appear to have little influence on the lifetime system failure probability. Also presented are optimal maintenance strategies in which optimal inspection/repair times are identified based on minimum expected cost within prescribed reliability constraints. It is shown that the optimum repair time is dependent on the failure cost of the bridge and that the discount rate influences the optimum repair time and life-cycle cost. As the discount rate increases, the optimum repair time increases until it reaches an upper bound that is dependent on the system failure probability constraint. The results can be applied to the prediction of optimal lifetime maintenance planning strategies for concrete bridges under corrosion.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
“ASCE gives poor grades to nation's infrastructure.” (1998). ASCE News, 23(4), 1–3.
2.
Bridge inspection cost estimates. (1998). Construction Technology Laboratories, Skokie, Ill.
3.
Chase, S. B., and Washer, G. (1997). “Nondestructive evaluation for bridge management in the next century.” Public Roads, July/August, 16–25.
4.
Clear, K. C. (1992). “Measuring rate of corrosion of steel in field concrete structures.” TRR 1211, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 28–37.
5.
Ellis, H., Jiang, M., and Corotis, R. B. (1995). “Inspection, maintenance, and repair with partial observability.”J. Infrastruct. Sys., ASCE, 1(2), 92–99.
6.
Enright, M. P. ( 1998). “Time-variant reliability of reinforced concrete bridges under environmental attack,” PhD thesis, Dept. of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colo.
7.
Enright, M. P., and Frangopol, D. M. (1998a). “Probabilistic analysis of resistance degradation of reinforced concrete bridge beams under corrosion.” Engrg. Struct., 20(11), 960–971.
8.
Enright, M. P., and Frangopol, D. M. (1998b). “Service-life prediction of deteriorating concrete bridges.”J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 124(3), 309–317.
9.
Enright, M. P., and Frangopol, D. M. (1998c). “Failure time prediction of deteriorating fail-safe structures.”J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 124(12), 1448–1457.
10.
Enright, M. P., and Frangopol, D. M. (1999a). “Condition prediction of deteriorating concrete bridges using Bayesian updating.”J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 125(10), 1118–1125.
11.
Enright, M. P., and Frangopol, D. M. (1999b). “Reliability-based condition assessment of deteriorating concrete bridges considering load redistribution.” Struct. Safety, Amsterdam, 21(2), 159–165.
12.
Estes, A. C. ( 1997). “A system reliability approach to the lifetime optimization of inspection and repair of highway bridges,” PhD thesis, Dept. of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colo.
13.
Frangopol, D. M., and Estes, A. C. (1997). “Lifetime bridge maintenance strategies based on system reliability.” Struct. Engrg. Int., Zurich, 7(3), 193–198.
14.
Frangopol, D. M., Lin, K. Y., and Estes, A. C. (1997). “Life-cycle cost design of deteriorating structures.”J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 123(10), 286–297.
15.
Inspection costs for Colorado L-18-BG. (1998a). Staff Bridge Inspection Branch, Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, Colo.
16.
Kay, T. (1992). Assessment and renovation of concrete structures. Wiley, New York.
17.
LRFD bridge design specifications. (1994). 1st Ed., American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C.
18.
“Management and Monitoring Systems; Proposed Rule.” (1993). Federal Register, 58(No. 39).
19.
Markow, M. J., Madanat, S. M., and Gurenich, D. I. (1993). “Optimal rehabilitation times for concrete bridge decks.” TRR 1392, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 62–71.
20.
Menzies, J. B. ( 1996). “Bridge safety targets and needs for performance feedback.” Structural reliability in bridge engineering, D. M. Frangopol and G. Hearn, eds., McGraw-Hill, New York, 156–161.
21.
Mori, Y., and Ellingwood, B. (1993). “Methodology for reliability-based condition assessment: Application to concrete structures in nuclear plants.” NUREG/CR-6052, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
22.
Nowak, A. S. (1993). “Calibration of LRFD bridge design code.” Final Rep., NCHRP 12-33, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
23.
Practical Solutions for Bridge Strengthening and Rehabilitation. (1997). NSF Workshop Proceedings, March 24–25, Kansas City, Mo., National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.
24.
Repair costs for Colorado Bridge K-18-CD. (1998b). Staff Bridge Design Branch, Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, Colo.
25.
SAP Users Manual. (1989). Computers and Structures Inc., Berkeley, Calif.
26.
Soltani, M. ( 1995). “Statistical bridge inspection.” Applications of statistics and probability, Lemaire, Favre, and Mebarki, eds., Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 387–391.
27.
Somerville, G. (1986). “The design life of concrete structures.” The Struct. Engr. 64A(2), 60–71.
28.
Sommer, A. M., Nowak, A. S., and Thoft-Christensen, P. (1993). “Probability-based bridge inspection strategy.”J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 119(12), 3520–3536.
29.
Sørensen, J. D. ( 1993). “Reliability-based inspection planning for structural systems.” Reliability and optimization of structural systems, P. Thoft-Christensen and H. Ishikawa, eds., Elsevier, Amsterdam, 31–46.
30.
Thoft-Christensen, P., and Sørensen, J. D. ( 1987). “Optimal strategy for inspection and repair of structural systems.” Civ. Engrg. Sys., 4, Butterworth & Co. Ltd., London, 94–100.
31.
Vorster, M. C., Bafna, T., and Weyers, R. E. (1991). “Model for determining the optimum rehabilitation cycle for concrete bridge decks.” TRR 1319, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 62–71.
32.
Whiting, D. A., Stejskal, B. G., and Nagi, M. A. (1993). “Condition of prestressed concrete bridge components: Technology review and field surveys.” FHWA-RD-93-037, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C.
33.
Yanev, B. ( 1996). “The management of bridges in New York.” Structural reliability in bridge engineering, D. M. Frangopol and G. Hearn, eds., McGraw-Hill, New York, 78–89.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 125 • Issue 12 • December 1999
Pages: 1407 - 1414
History
Received: Sep 15, 1998
Published online: Dec 1, 1999
Published in print: Dec 1999
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.