Life-Cycle Cost Implications of Alternative Bridge Inspection Planning

Routine bridge inspections in the United States are primarily conducted via visual inspection on a fixed two-year cycle. Although this strategy has generally produced a safe bridge network, a variety of research has been conducted to study enhanced inspection planning processes that could more efficiently use inspection resources, consider the importance and risk associated with structures, and incorporate nondestructive evaluation (NDE). This report describes one proposed technique for inspection planning based on the principle that bridge inspections should be conducted when the uncertainty about bridge condition is high and the inspection conducted should collect data that can help reduce the uncertainty about condition. The proposed method is applied to a hypothetical bridge scenario considering both corrosion-induced bridge deck damage and fatigue crack growth in a girder to develop an inspection plan for 20 years. The proposed bridge inspection plan uses variable time periods between inspection and nondestructive evaluation methods. The life-cycle costs of the bridge inspection plan are compared with the life cycle costs of the standard visual inspections on a two-year cycle. Although NDE-based inspections usually cost more than visual inspections, when considered on a life cycle basis, the new inspection plan is cost-effective. The uncertainty-based bridge inspection planning framework is a novel planning approach that offers a multitude of advantages. It provides flexibility to adapt inspection schedules, optimizes resource allocation, mitigates risks, and leads to cost savings. Furthermore, it encourages long-term planning, data-driven decision-making, and adaptive management, ultimately improving safety and environmental considerations. This approach enhances public confidence in bridge infrastructure by demonstrating a commitment to proactive maintenance and resilience. This inspection planning framework helps to conduct bridge inspection only when needed, which will save resources and, with the types of inspection tools, provide the most useful information.

• Record URL:
  https://www.ugpti.org/resources/reports/details.php?id=1157
• Record URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/74244
• Summary URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/74402
• Supplemental Notes:
  • This document was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Transportation, University Transportation Centers Program.
• Corporate Authors:

  Colorado State University, Fort Collins

  Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
  Fort Collins, CO  United States  80525

  Mountain-Plains Consortium

  North Dakota State University
  Fargo, ND  United States  58108

  Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology

  University Transportation Centers Program
  Department of Transportation
  Washington, DC  United States  20590
• Authors:
  • Abdallah, Abdelrahman
  • Atadero, Rebecca
  • Ozbek, Mehmet E
• Publication Date: 2023-9

Language

• English

Media Info

• Media Type: Digital/other
• Edition: Final Report
• Features: Figures; References; Tables;
• Pagination: 40p

Subject/Index Terms

• TRT Terms: Bridges; Corrosion; Fatigue cracking; Inspection; Life cycle costing; Nondestructive tests; Uncertainty
• Subject Areas: Bridges and other structures; Highways; Maintenance and Preservation; Planning and Forecasting;

Filing Info

• Accession Number: 01916819
• Record Type: Publication
• Report/Paper Numbers: MPC-533, MPC 23-504
• Files: UTC, NTL, TRIS, USDOT
• Created Date: Apr 26 2024 8:54AM