Workshop Bridge Health Monitoring for the ‘End of Service

RWS ONGECLASSIFICEERD

Workshop Bridge Health Monitoring for the ‘End of Service Life’ of bridges

The Hague, 22-23 October 2015

RWS UNCLASSIFIED page 2 of 23

Colofon

Issued by Rijkswaterstaat

Information Leo Klatter Willy Peelen

Phone +31 6 50 41 94 52 +31 6 30 64 51 61

E-mail [email protected] [email protected]

Date February 2016

Status Final

RWS ONGECLASSIFICEERD page 3

of 23


Inhoud

1 Introduction—5

2 Strategy and problem statement by road authorities—6 2.1 Netherlands—6 2.2 Denmark—7 2.3 Germany—8 2.4 Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA)—8 2.5 Summarized problem statement—9

3 The state-of-the-art in SHM for EoSL—10 3.1 Pre-stressing - Hammersmith Flyover—10 3.2 Vibration - The Zwartewaterbrug—11 3.3 Steel deck fatigue - Van Brienenoordbrug—12 3.4 ASR - Bridge 0072-0-0033 near Vosnæsvej—13 3.5 Framework For Bridge Performance & Health Monitoring – prof. Emin Aktan—14

4 Analysis of SoTA and RA problem statement—16 4.1 Highlights of the work sessions—16 4.2 Further analysis of the work session results—17 4.3 Follow-up—20 A.1 Participants—21 A.2 The program of the Workshop—22



of 23


1 Introduction

Ageing infrastructure possess a new challenge for Road Authorities (RA). Significant

parts of the network will reach end of service life (EoSL) the coming decades, while

a high level network performance is required, loads are increasing and budgets are

limited. The scientific communities of bridge management and Structural Health

Monitoring (SHM) are aiming at developing technologies to help RA to tackle these

problems, as expressed by the Bridge Management and Structural Health Monitoring

committees of IABMAS and by ISHMII.

However RA strategies to deal with these EoSL issues and their requirements in

terms of information need are not well specified or formulated and differ widely. On

the other hand SHM development is mostly technology driven and communication

between RA and SHM developers and practitioners is limited.

Rijkswaterstaat (RWS) organized a two-day workshop in which first an overview of

the EoSL strategies of 4 different RA were presented and an analysis of the

information need is performed. In a second part relevant reference projects (cases)

of Bridge Monitoring were presented. Finally in a third part these projects were

analyzed in break-out groups with respect to their relevance for the EoSL

information requirements, in terms of; - Applicable now: useful applications

- Applicable near future: development

- Longer term: research agenda

At the end of the workshop synergy was sought with national or international

programs to include these results. The participants are listed in appendix 1 and the

full program of the workshop is shown in Appendix 2.

Here a summary of the workshop is presented.

Figure 1 The three levels of relevance, research, development and application at

which the monitoring systems were evaluated.



2 Strategy and problem statement by road authorities

Four RA presented on their EoSL strategy and their information need. Common

topics in the presentations were information on the specific stock of bridges of the

RA, the specific EoSL issues they are confronted with and the way the RA has

organized dealing with the issue.

2.1 Netherlands

Stock and EoSL issues

Most of the Dutch bridges were constructed between 1960 and 1980, and are

mainly concrete bridges with a total length less than 200 m. The largest problems

encountered in relation to EoSl are due to: - Technical condition of the bridges that reaches low level

- Outdated technology; regulations/ maintainability

- Economics; excessive cost of maintenance (LCC)

Until now the most urgent issues were: - with steel bridges, mainly cracking orthotropic bridge deck.

- a number of sub-standards bridges in combination with increased traffic

loads.

Organization

To tackle renovation and replacement efficiently, RWS introduced the program

‘Renovation and Replacement’, which consists of the actual execution of these

project as well as a ‘research’ part in which experience with these structures is

gathered and analyzed and consequences for budgets are estimated.

Part of the approach is to identify issues, which can be researched and solved at a

‘group’ level as in contrast to object level. The issue of the substandard bridges, is

presented in more detailed.

Figure 2 General approach to tackle EoSL issues as presented by Rijkswaterstaat

In this approach an inspection and research program into the issues is defined from

a problem definition and working assumption. In the working assumption, nature,

extent and scope of the problem is defined. Based on these findings the working

assumption is updated and solutions are developed and executed. In managing and

renovating bridges availability, is of predominant importance, due to the very large

economic consequences of non-availability. Therefore robustness is a precondition

for the solutions


of 23


2.2 Denmark


The Denmark Road Directorate is responsible for the maintenance of 3,189 small

structures and 54 major bridges and tunnels. The majority are concrete structures.

For two circumstances monitoring is important for DRD: - For assessing the load carrying capacity (proof loading).

- In case of a reduce of load carrying capacity in time, due to deterioration.

Then DRD is interested in the rate and the remaining service life.

In terms of EoSL issues the deterioration of the waterproofing, with a typical

lifespan of 40 years, between the asphalt and the concrete structure is paramount.

This causes accelerated concrete deterioration of the structure. The two main

degradation mechanisms are chloride induced corrosion and Alkali Silica Reaction

(ASR)1. In case of corrosion, repair and of postponing the repair is usually

considered not that costly. Therefore the demands on corrosion information are not

that strict, and SHM can brings additional information to existing inspections, but

limited. The cost of repair of bridge decks subject to ASR is very high. However, the

load carrying capacity of a bridge deck showing ASR may be acceptable. Therefore

here benefits of an accurate assessment are high and monitoring can bring

additional information to routine inspections. SHM should in these two cases bring; - The load carrying capacity of the bridge

- Detection of non-compliance with a given acceptable state

o Large deflections/deformations

o Large water content

o Large chloride concentration

o Initiation of corrosion

As a conclusion it is the wish of DRD to have a measurement of the load carrying

capacity of the bridge and, in case of deterioration, a prediction of of the load

carrying capacity and a criterium for an acceptable capacity.

Figure 3 Slide from the Vejdirektoratet presentation; Measuring load carrying

capacity is paramount

1 Alkalikiselreaktion (AKR) in Danish



Organization

When planning repair, a number of different repair strategies must be described and

the cost of performing the repair strategy is determined. Information gained from

monitoring must be included in the inspection part of the strategy. For each strategy

the net present value is determined. The repair strategy with the lowest Net Present

Value is performed.

2.3 Germany


In Germany a majority of bridges are pre-stressed concrete structures, the majority

(93%) of which have a span smaller than 100 m. The condition of German bridges is

expressed by a rating system. According to this system rates are decreasing due to

ageing. As result of maintenance and renewal programs the number of bridges in

the worst condition is decreasing, while at the same time the average condition of

the bridge stock is decreasing. Problems related to EoSL are threefold; relatively

many bridges were designed for lower traffic loads than actually occurring, in

combination with slim cross-section being used starting from the end of the 60’s,

and deterioration. The main deterioration mechanisms are; corrosion and spalling,

fatigue cracks in steel and moisture damages.

Figure 4 On average bridge condition is decreasing is Germany, graph from

presentation from BMVI (Germany)

SHM should bring: - better informed asset management & advanced analysis of structures or

groups of structures

- high-quality and documented load & performance data

Several current applications of monitoring in Germany are available, which are often

local and short-term solutions. For instance to monitor loading or climatological

conditions or deformations in order to do perform troubleshooting (something

happened) or risk assessment of poorly understood structures.

Organization

To tackle these problems a Special Program „Bridge Refurbishment“ for projects

with costs ≥ 5 Mill. EUR is established which offers additional funds to existing

budgets.

2.4 Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA)



of 23


The Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) oversees and manages the tolls from the seven

Caltrans-owned, operated and maintained toll bridges in the San Francisco Bay Area

which are part of a network of 1,400 miles of freeway with more than 700.00 daily

crossings. Toll income is spent on bridge operations and maintenance, on other

transit projects and on retrofitting the bridges with respect to seismic risks.

Organization

The seismic retrofitting was executed in a $9 Billion program for all 7 bridges.

Different design strategies for different bridges with respect to earthquakes

resilience were aimed for. These were: (i) no collapse strategy;

(ii) repairable after earthquake;

(iii) to be reopened to traffic quickly - this is valid for so called “lifeline

structure”.

The major EoSL challenges for BATA are a lack of insight into the service life and

maintenance need of bridge decks, and insight in resilience with respect to collisions

with ships and climate change, e.g. sea level rising.

Paramount in the BATA EoSL strategy is that some bridges need to be maintained

from the viewpoint that they will never be replaced (e.g. iconic ones, e.g. Golden

Gate). Furthermore closure of bridges is inacceptable, so bridges need to be

replaced before closed.

Figure 5 BATA’s Seven bridge system, slide from presentation by BATA.

2.5 Summarized problem statement 1) Information is needed to assess how much money needs to be spent, where

and when in time and on what element, structure, problem.

2) Information of bridge condition, loads and safety (now) is needed.

3) Information on bridge strength problems, present and emerging, is needed.

Until now the following mechanisms have been identified; Sub-standard

bridges, decks with problems; water proofing, ASR, corrosion, fatigue,

earthquakes

4) More information on traffic loads is important in all these cases

5) Information on effects and durability of retrofitting/strengthening



3 The state-of-the-art in SHM for EoSL

Four monitoring systems were presented during the workshop. These were the

monitoring of; - The Hammersmith Flyover in London, because of concerns with the

structural integrity due to corrosion of the pre-stressing and performance of

the bearings.

- The Zwartewaterbrug in the Netherlands, a steel arch bridge built in 1969

(span of 104 m 10 m€ replacement value), of which design information is

lost, including the design loads.

- The Van Brienenoordbrug in the Netherlands, with an orthrotopic steel deck

with fatigue cracks, of which the remaining service life and the optimal

inspection interval is unknown.

- Bridge 0072-0-0033 near Vosnæsvej with Alkali Silica Reaction concrete

damage, at which a methodology to determine the load carrying capacity

was performed.

These cases will now be elaborated separately.

3.1 Pre-stressing - Hammersmith Flyover

The Hammersmith Flyover is a major arterial rout from Heathrow Airport to Central

London, and in 2012 to the main venue of the Olympic games in East London. It’s

safety and availability during that period was of paramount importance. The

monitoring systems was envisaged to answer two questions; - Rate & location of deterioration due to corrosion of the pre-stressing

tendons by detecting wire breaks, and from that rate of deterioration in

order to make predictions about remaining life

- Are piers moving as expected, or is movement restrained and thus

generating locked in forces? If there are locked in forces, can we estimate

their magnitude?

Figure 6 Pre-stressing wire breaks as determined by the Acoustic Emission system

on the Hammersmith Flyover.

RWS ONGECLASSIFICEERD page

11 of 23


To answer the first question an Acoustic Emission system was designed and applied

with which wire breaks can be detected reliably. With this damage rate can be

detected in a straight forward way. Since the number of broken wires at the start of

the monitoring is unknown the actual condition (number of broken wires) of the pre-

stressing strand is unknown.

For the other question a SHM system was applied. It tracked structural behavior and

provided a warning system for critical events. A loss of compression in a span, due

to failing pre-stressing, would result in an increased deflection at mid-span,

compared to other spans. Various sensors monitoring mid-span deflection were

therefore installed. A loss of compression would also result in opening of joints, so

strain gauges were installed at critical locations to detect this. The structure also

responds to temperature which must be accounted for in the interpretation of the

above results, so temperature measurements were also included in the system.

Locked in forces would result in strain and rotation at the top of the piers which

were therefore measured. Locked in forces could lead to restraints in movement of

the piers which were also monitored.

The results of the SHM system were that mid-span deflection and critical joint

openings did not show abnormal results. From this it was concluded that the

structure safety was assured. No bearing movement was observed which makes the

presence of locked in forces likely. The AE results showed an increasing rate of wire

breaks. Investigations instigated based on these results led to the closure of the

bridge for emergency repairs on December 23, 2011.

The monitoring system provided the benefits as shown in table 1.

Table 1 Outcome of the monitoring and benefits for TfL.

3.2 Vibration - The Zwartewaterbrug

The biggest part of the Zwartewaterbrug is a steel arch bridge which was built in

1969, with a length of 104m. Based on the available information about the bridge

structure and design load the load capacity can only approximately be assessed. The

owner, the province Overijssel, is interested in any information on the behavior of

the bridge because of the substantial replacement costs of M€ 10. The monitoring

system aimed at supporting the evaluation of the actual risk of the bridge, and to

give some additional information, which regular inspections aren’t able to give with

such detail. Also, it was expected to be able to contribute to identifying possible

interventions.



The aim of the project was to demonstrate the added value of a relatively low-cost

system to standard inspections. Measurements were performed between October

2014 and July 2015. A sensor network was installed at one arch of the bridge, and

measurements were made during operation of the bridge. One dataset per hour was

received, which allowed to analyze the vibration behavior caused by traffic once per

hour.

Figure 7 Discussion of the possibilities and limitation of vibration based monitoring,

slide from presentation by Thomas Siebel (Fraunhofer).

The conclusions of the project and benefits of the monitoring system are that it is

possible to have a practical measurements system which is easy to install and has

low cost and gives information on a regular base. The measured information is easy

to interpret, for example to determine the modal shapes and frequencies

(vibration). A change in modes and frequencies can give an indication for damage.

This pilot monitoring case has worked well, but longer tests will be needed to

develop the system further (compare, analyses, have more reference data).

Attention should be given to scalability, system specification, cable needed, and to

adjusting simulation models.

3.3 Steel deck fatigue - Van Brienenoordbrug

Fatigue, as the governing degradation mechanism in steel bridge decks, can lead to

non-inspectable cracks under the welded intersections of stiffeners to the deck

plate. As a result, estimation of the remaining service life becomes more uncertain,

and optimization of the maintenance of the decks becomes a great challenge.

Therefore often these decks are renovated or replaced.

To decrease this uncertainty, the location of the cracks, their current and future

number and size, and the stress levels they undergo is important to known. With

this information a possible critical condition with respect to traffic safety can be

predicted. To obtain such information without disturbing the traffic on the bridge is

generally a challenging task. Conventional inspection techniques require asphalt

removal, with associated high cost and reduced traffic capacity, or have undesirably

large detection limits of 100 mm length or more.


13 of 23


The development and implementation of a SHM system comprising of Acoustic

Emission (AE), strain, temperature, and humidity measurements on a test bridge

deck subject to fatigue loading. Additionally one–off or periodical crack size

measurement of a limited number of cracks are needed. The crack location is

obtained from a passive quasi-beamforming (QBF) AE system, while crack size is

estimated using an active GW system or Phased Array measurements. Using a FEM

model of the structure, the stress distribution at the crack area is calculated from

the strain measurement. The information obtained is ultimately fed into a crack

growth model, which delivers crack size predictions. From the predicted crack size

distribution and the correlations between the measured input parameters on the

instrumented part of the bridge and the non-monitored part, a prediction of the

number of cracks with a critical length (taken here to be 500 mm) is given.

Figure 8 The use of time degradation models and updating techniques to come to

predictive monitoring systems, slide from presentation by Willy Peelen (TNO).

3.4 ASR - Bridge 0072-0-0033 near Vosnæsvej

ASR leads to delamination of the concrete and a substantial reduction of the load

carrying capacity of the bridge. The problem is serious in bridges with no shear

reinforcement. A methodology was developed to determine the load carrying

capacity. The methodology is used to determine whether bridge 0072-0-0033 has

sufficient load carrying capacity.

The lowest value of the capacity is measured destructively in an area with

substantial delamination due to ASR. In three out of four tests, the test specimen

failed due to shear. In one test the failure was due to a combination of bending and

shear. The tests indicate that the shear capacity of a bridge deck subject to ASR is

lower than for an undamaged bridge deck. The load bearing capacity of the bridge is

acceptable and the cost of repair is reduced substantially. The tests and

measurements performed satisfactory and can be generalized for use at other

bridges.



Figure 9 Method to evaluation load carrying capacity on the basis of tests, slide from

presentation by Svend Engelund, (COWI A/S).

3.5 Framework For Bridge Performance & Health Monitoring – prof. Emin Aktan

First the state of the art in bridge management in the US is presented, including

how traditional bridge performance is defined and assessed. This is re-assessed in a

broader perspective including bridge characteristics affecting Utility, Functionality,

Serviceability, Safety, Resilience and Lifecyle Cost. Looking from this perspective, at

the moment we have heuristic knowledge, but we do not extract meaningful

information from bridge management systems in a formalized way. This is partly

due our limited ability to differentiate between code and reality. To change this, calls

for the awareness in education that different expertise within bridge management is

called for and the availability of new technologies.

Next an overview of a 6 steps framework to come to a Bridge Performance & Health

Monitoring (BPHM) system was given. An example, i.e. the Burlington County Bridge

is presented also. Another example was presented in which a Bridge-Specific

Maintenance Manual for movable bridges was developed partly based on

experiences with the Tacony Palmyra Bascule bridge.


15 of 23


Figure 10 Life cycle performance management of infrastructure, as presented by

Emin Aktan (Drexel university).



4 Analysis of SoTA and RA problem statement

First some facts and the highlights of the work sessions in which state-of-the-art

monitoring was compared to the problem definition of bridge owners are given. Next

an analysis of the results is given. Finally the discussion on the follow-up of the

workshop is given.

Figure 11 Photograph of slides from the work sessions

4.1 Highlights of the work sessions

In short, the issue with the Hammersmith Flyover was structural safety assurance,

related to the level of pre-stress or concrete compression in an existing bridges. In

general the lessons learned from this case were that bridge design must account for

meaningful inspection and for future rehabilitation (replaceable tendons, for

example). The case also demonstrates the possibility to reduce the required margin

of safety through monitoring

In the work session on vibration monitoring (Zwartewaterbrug) the knowledge need

at owners organizations and monitoring practitioners was discussed necessary for

implementing monitoring. Owners in general go for short term results and work on

monitoring systems is currently done by motivated individual employees. Structural

models, which are often involved in monitoring, are rarely used by engineering

companies and practitioners.

The work session on steel fatigue in bridge decks addressed (among others) the

further application and dissemination of the knowledge and capabilities already

obtained. Examples such as updating standard procedures for inspections and a

guidance document providing an overview of possible application of crack

monitoring based on current bridge maintenance information.

In the work session on ASR, ways of structuring further development and

application of the monitoring system were discussed from which a more generally

applicable approach was obtained. The information need for the EoSL issues can be

differentiated into information on: 1. Material; degradation mechanism, condition or damage

2. Element; structural behavior of an element or component

3. Structure; structural safety of the structure

4. Service Life; EoSL prediction


17 of 23


Monitoring traffic loads has not been addressed explicitly in the four cases. In

general reducing uncertainty in traffic load models or traffic load history can be

involved in EoSL assessment of structures, if this is formulated as a structural safety

assessment. Traffic load information can be used in principle together with

information from all above mentioned levels (material, element, structure, service

life). For the first this does, maybe, not seem obvious, but in case of e.g. fatigue,

traffic load effect (stress) is important information.

The four levels of information need described above, together with the three

categories applicable now, pilot phase and research needed, provides a structure to

analyze monitoring systems.

4.2 Further analysis of the work session results

One of the aims of the workshop was to analyse to what extent the presented

monitoring systems are already applicable for EoSL issues. The EoSL problem

statement obtained during the workshop however, is not object specific. It is more

general (e.g. fatigue damage, or more information on loads). The presented

monitoring systems give object or even component specific information. It remains

unclear to what extent this information is applicable for other objects with EoSL

issues. So in order to judge the value of a system for EoSL issues a categorization

was developed, within the break-out session for ASR, which is presented here

slightly modified below.

The monitoring systems have been analyzed in the break-out sessions, and this can

be reported using these four information needs. With some additional insights

obtained after the workshop, this is summarized below in Table 2. In figure 2 the

same is indicated, In this graph also the preferred development direction has been

indicated.

Table 2 Readiness for applications of the four systems

Ready, pilot phase or research needed, with an indication whether information is given on points 1 to 4 as

defined above.

Monitoring Cases Ready now pilot research

Vibration monitoring 2* 2 1, 3, 4

Fatigued bridge deck 1, 2 4 2, 3

ASR concrete damage 2 1 3, 4

Hammersmith 1 2, 3 4

*For some elements

Vibration measurements look promising for application on element level, slender

steel members, bearings, stay cables and possibly for fatigue damage.

Fatigued bridge deck system predicts material condition on a component level, i.e.

orthotropic deck. The main issue is traffic safety but also integrity of the deck. The

system (models) for service life prediction is now available as a prototype on one

bridge (Van Brienenoord bridge). Development to a system which delivers

information on the integrity of the entire structure, so also the load bearing

structure is a major research effort. This would then only be feasible for fatigue.

The method for assessing the effects of ASR on integrity of a component (wing) was

demonstrated and may be further developed to bridge level. The method now is

destructive, but after validation can be made non-destructive.

The main development point for the pre-stressing system is the assessment of the

condition of the pre-stressing level at the start of the monitoring. When known it is

feasible to develop a system which can predict service life.



Figure 2. Readiness of the systems for application for obtaining information on a material, element, structure and service life prediction level. The arrows reflect the development opportunities.

Figure 2 (continued). Readiness of the systems for application for obtaining information on a material,

element, structure and service life prediction level. The arrows reflect the development opportunities.


19 of 23


In summary, all systems are ready for application on element level, and the pre-

stressing and fatigue system also give information on material condition and

degradation. In case of ASR and pre-stressing assessing structural safety was

shown to be, more or less, in pilot phase. A research effort is needed to obtain an

EoSl prediction form these systems.



4.3 Follow-up

In the discussion on the follow-up of the workshop two different directions could be

distinguished. One was directed towards organizing a committee within IABMAS

and/or ISHMII on these topics, aimed at further development and application of

monitoring for the EoSL issue. The other was directed to first present the results of

the findings of the workshop to the committees of structural health monitoring and

bridge maintenance of IABMAS and to ISHMII and to invite them for a response.

Also it was suggested that RA could initiate or intensify collaboration with each

other, monitoring practitioners and knowledge providers on one or more of the

cases presented, or others. Activities by the RA which were addressed during the

workshop included; - Proof loading

- Weight in Motion (WIM) and Bridge Weight in Motion (BWIM)

- Crack monitoring in concrete and steel

- Bearings

- Corrosion in decks

Rijkswaterstaat for instance will continue with proof loading and steel fatigue

monitoring and will seek cooperation with others.

In general it was concluded that intensive contact between RA, practitioners and

knowledge providers, such as a two day workshop, is needed for an efficient

development of monitoring techniques for the EoSL issue. Such opportunities such

be envisaged within national and international programs.


21 of 23


A.1 Participants

Name Organization Country

Mazen Wahbeh Alta Vista Solutions USA

Emin Aktan Drexel University USA

Jens Sandager Jensen COWI A/S Denmark

Svend Engelund COWI A/S Denmark

Rasmus Bang Vejdirektoratet Danish Road Directorate Denmark

James Brownjohn University of Exeter UK

Andrew Fremier Bay Area Toll Authority CAL

Metropolitan Transportation Commission

USA

Peter Haardt BASt Germany

Gero Marzahn BMVI Bundesministeriums für Verkehr und Digitale Infrastruktur

Germany

Thomas Siebel Fraunhofer LBF Germany

Andreas Hartmann Universiteit Twente Netherlands

Peter Jones Transport for London UK

Jörg Unger BAM Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und -prüfung

Germany

Marcel de Wit Advitam Belgium

Leo Klatter Rijkswaterstaat Netherlands

Adri Vervuurt TNO Netherlands

Willy Peelen TNO Netherlands

Giel Klanker Rijkswaterstaat Netherlands

Ane de Boer Rijkswaterstaat Netherlands

Mark van der Ven Rijkswaterstaat Netherlands

Agnieszka Bigaj-van Vliet TNO Netherlands

Marloes van Put TNO Netherlands

Louise Michon TNO Netherlands

Mariette Snijders RWS Netherlands

Arend Kremer Prorail Netherlands

Bas de Ruiter IV-infra Netherlands

Han Roebers RSW Netherlands

Jaap Bakker RWS Netherlands



A.2 The program of the Workshop

Structural Health Monitoring for End of Service Life of Bridges.

Date: 22nd

– 23rd

of October 2015,

Venue: Anna van Buerenplein 29, 2595 DA Den Haag, at the Hague Central Station

PROGRAM DAY 1 THURDAY

11:00 - 12:45 Arrival and Sandwich lunch

12:45 – 13:00 Opening

Plenary session; EoSL problem statement and solution directions/ Road authorities

13:00 – 13:30

End of Service Life Strategy of Rijkswaterstaat Netherlands

Leo Klatter, Rijkswaterstaat

13:30 – 14:00

End of Service Life Strategy of Danish Road Directorate

Svend Engelund, COWI for Danish Road Authorities

14:00 – 14:30

End of Service Life Strategy of the German Bundesministerium für Verkehr (BMVI)

Gero Marzahn, BMVI and Peter Haardt, BASt

14:30 – 15:00

End of Service Life Strategy of the BATA in the US

Andrew Fremier with California BATA

15:00 – 15:30 Coffee

15:30 – 17:00

Plenary discussion on similarities, differences and inspection and monitoring need

17:00 – 17:15

Wrap-up

18:30 Workshop dinner - TBA


23 of 23


PROGRAM DAY 2 FRIDAY

8:30 – 9:00 Arrival with coffee

9:00 – 9:10 Short summary of first day

Plenary State-of-the-art Monitoring cases

9:10 – 9:30

Use of Structural Health Monitoring in the Management of Hammersmith Flyover London

Peter Jones – Transport for London, UK

9:30 – 9:50

Experiences with monitoring of the ‘Zwartewaterbrug’ in the Netherlands

Thomas Siebel, Fraunhofer-Institut, Germany

9:50 – 10:10

Monitoring of fatigue issues in steel bridges

Willy Peelen, TNO The Netherlands

10:10 – 10:30 Coffeebreak

10:30 – 10:50

Evaluation of the load carrying capacity on the basis of tests – Vosnæsvej

Svend Engelund, COWI Denmark

10:50 – 11:10

Discussion on Structural Health Monitoring

Emin Aktan, Drexel University, US

11:10 – 11:30 Summary cases - division into working groups

11:30 – 13:00 Parallel work sessions comparing cases and EoSL strategies

13:00 – 14:00 Sandwich lunch

14:00 – 14:45 Plenary presentation of work session results and discussion

14:45 – 15:30 Lessons learned - research needs for monitoring EoSL

15:30 – 15:45 Wrap-up, follow-up and closure

15:45 End of workshop and coffee

Documents

Workshop Bridge Health Monitoring for the ‘End of Service