Article Article
Life-Cycle NDT Planning of Fatigue-Critical Bridge Details Based on Discounted Discounted Utility Theory

Bridges are subjected to fatigue damage during their service life. Non-destructive testing (NDT) can detect fatigue cracks in bridges. The information obtained from NDT can update the life-cycle performance of fatigue-sensitive bridges. This information can also support decisions regarding repair actions to ensure serviceability and safety of bridges during their service life. As NDT brings in additional cost, NDT-based inspection should be carefully planned to maximize life-cycle performance and minimize life-cycle cost. In this paper, a novel method based on discounted utility theory (DUT) is proposed to assist in decision making of NDT planning, including the type of inspections and the inspection times. Compared to conventional inspection planning methods, the proposed method considers the preference of decision-makers for inspection times among schedules with similar life-cycle cost and similar life-cycle performance. Considering similar life-cycle cost and lifecycle performance, decision makers prefer shorter inspection/repair intervals and sooner return of investment. For this purpose, DUT is employed to quantify this preference and incorporate it into the framework of life-cycle NDT planning. The proposed method is illustrated by conducting NDT planning for a fatigue-critical detail of a steel bridge.

References

 

  • Kim, S., and Frangopol, D. M., 2017, “Efficient Multi -Objective Optimisation of Probabilistic Service Life Management,” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., 13 (1), pp. 147– 159.
  • Kim, S., and Frangopol, D. M., 2011, “Optimum Inspection Planning for Minimizing Fatigue Damage Detection Delay of Ship Hull Structures,” Int. J. Fatigue, 33 (3), pp. 448– 459.
  • Sabatino, S., and Frangopol, D. M., 2017, “Decision Making Framework for Optimal SHM Planning of Ship Structures Considering Availability and Utility,” Ocean Eng., 135, pp. 194– 206.
  • Soliman, M., Frangopol, D. M., and Mondoro, A., 2016, “A Probabilistic Approach for Optimizing Inspection, Monitoring, and Maintenance Actions against Fatigue of Critical Ship Details,” Struct. Saf., 60, pp. 91– 101.
  • Soliman, S. M., and Frangopol, D. M., 2014, “Life -Cycle Management of Fatigue-Sensitive Structures Integrating Inspection Information,” J. Infrastruct. Syst., 20 (2), pp. 04014001, 1– 13.
  • Yang, D. Y., and Frangopol, D. M., 2018, “Probabilistic Optimization Framework for Inspection/Repair Planning of Fatigue-Critical Details Using Dynamic Bayesian Networks,” Comput. Struct., 198, pp. 40– 50.
  • Yang, D. Y., and Frangopol, D. M., 2018, “Evidence -Based Framework for Real-Time Life-Cycle Management of Fatigue-Critical Details of Structures,” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., 14 (5), pp. 509– 522.
  • Cha, E. J., and Ellingwood, B. R., 2012, “Risk -Averse Decision-Making for Civil Infrastructure Exposed to Low-Probability, High-Consequence Events,” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 104, pp. 27– 35.
  • Fishburn, P. C., and Rubinstein, A., 1982, “Time Preference,” Int. Econ. Rev., pp. 677– 694.
  • Samuelson, P. A., 1937, “A Note on Measurement of Utility,” Rev. Econ. Stud., 4 (2), pp. 155– 161.
  • Zhao, Z., Haldar, A., and Breen Jr, F. L., 1994, “Fatigue -Reliability Evaluation of Steel Bridges,” J. Struct. Eng., 120 (5), pp. 1608– 1623.
  • Zhao, Z., and Haldar, A., 1996, “Bridge Fatigue Damage Evaluation and Updating Using Non -Destructive Inspections,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 53 (5), pp. 775– 788.
  • Paris, P., and Erdogan, F., 1963, “A Critical Analysis of Crack Propagation Laws,” J. Basic Eng ., 85 (4), pp. 528– 533.
  • Forsyth, D. S., and Fahr, A., 1998, “An Evaluation of Probability of Detection Statistics,” Conference Proceedings: Airframe Inspection Reliability under Field/Depot Conditions, RTO-MP-10, AC/323 [AVT] TP/2, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Rae, J., 1905, The Sociological Theory of Capital, MacMillan, London.
  • Koopmans, T. C., 1960, “Stationary Ordinal Utility and Impatience,” Econom. J. Econom. Soc., pp. 287– 309.
  • Frederick, S., and Loewenstein, G., 2002, “Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review,” J. Econ. Lit., p. 95.
  • Fuchs, V. R., 1980, Time Preference and Health: An Exploratory Study, National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge, Mass., USA. (19) Hausman, J. A., 1979, “Individual Discount Rates and the Purchase and Utilization of Energy-Using Durables,” Bell J. Econ., 10 (1), pp. 33– 54.
  • Connor, R. J., and Fisher, J. W., 2001, Report on Field Measurements and Assessment of the I-64 Kanawha River Bridge at Dunbar, West Virginia, Lehigh University, ATLSS Engineering Research Center, Bethelehem, PA.
  • Soliman, M., Frangopol, D. M., and Kim, S., 2013, “Probabilistic Optimum Inspection Planning of Steel Bridges with Multiple Fatigue Sensitive Details,” Eng. Struct., 49, pp. 996– 1006.
Metrics
Usage Shares
Total Views
58 Page Views
Total Shares
0 Tweets
58
0 PDF Downloads
0
0 Facebook Shares
Total Usage
58