Abstract
Existing reinforced concrete (RC) bridges that were designed in the decades between 1950 and 1990 exhibit inadequate structural safety with reference to both traffic loads and hazard conditions. Competent authorities are planning extensive inspections to collect data about these structures and to address retrofit interventions. In this context, Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPASs) represent a prospect to facilitate in-situ inspections, reducing time, cost and risk for the operators. A practice-oriented methodology to perform RPAS-based surveys is described. After that, a workflow to perform an in-situ RPAS inspection oriented to a photogrammetric data extraction is discussed. With the aim to connect the advantages of the RPAS technologies to the seismic risk assessment of bridges, a simplified mechanic-based procedure is described, oriented to map the structural risk in road networks and support prioritization strategies. A six-span RC bridge of the Basilicata road network, representing a typical Italian bridge typology is selected to practically describe the operating steps of the RPAS inspection and of the simplified seismic risk assessment approach.
Highlights
In most developed countries, existing roadway and railway bridges built between the 1950s and1990s exhibit structural deficiencies that could limit the safety and serviceability of the transportation networks
This highlights the vulnerability of the existing bridge portfolios, which could affect the resilience of entire areas in a post-event emergency phase
In order to overcome the turbulent effects of the wind near and under the bridge, if not in possession of multi rotor aircraft with head-mounted cameras and appropriate anti-collision sensors, it is preferable to acquire the images in hovering mode or using the zoom function to keep the vehicle at a suitable distance
Summary
In most developed countries, existing roadway and railway bridges built between the 1950s and. It is worth mentioning that, as claimed in [2], the natural remainder of the data collection phase is a quantitative structural assessment It usually requires a finite element modeling phase together with an accurate numerical analysis to evaluate the structural bearing capacity in terms of traffic loads, remaining service-life, and vulnerability to given hazard condition such as earthquakes. Structural analysis based on an FEM approach requires a considerable amount of time and computational effort, if non-linear analyses should be performed for seismic vulnerability evaluation purposes These strategies can be difficultly applied for seismic vulnerability assessment of high-populated bridge portfolios, unless resorting to robust automated workflows and soaring computational capabilities [3]. In the process automation prospectus, the proposed work highlights the advantages and limitations that have emerged from this new approach applied to bridge management and control, and the need to structure a methodical programme to test and validate several types of structures
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
