A bridge data collection and monitoring strategy for use with performance frameworks

S Bush, T Henning, P Omenzetter, P McCarten

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter (peer-reviewed)

Abstract

Strategic decision makers (Policy makers and implementers) are placing pressure on asset managers (tactical decision makers) to delivery on strategic goals, as well as wider functionality and safety ideals. To meet these requirements more advanced performance measure frameworks are being developed, where performance management is considered to be a subset of asset management. These are considered to be an extension of the basic performance frameworks and condition focused paradigms that currently exist. By implementing the extended performance frameworks it will be allow asset managers to answer the network level service level questions being raised by policy makers. This paper details performance frameworks that have been created, and the data that is required to meet the needs of these frameworks. These data requirements are then used to extend traditional bridge data collection frameworks, such that a more holistic approach is adopted. By adopting this approach it will be possible to report on the strategically developed performance measures, and therefore to report on policy development. The data collection strategy introduces three levels including core, intermediate, and advanced. Depending on the bridges importance asset managers are therefore able to choose how much data they collect. This approach has been taken as data collection is both time consuming and expensive and not all bridges and networks require the same data collection intensity. Further to this not all network managers are starting from the same point of development. By introducing the tiered approach it allows asset managers to focus on the highest criticality routes and bridges. The monitoring strategy defines the roles of visual inspections, non-destructive evaluation, and structural health monitoring in the data collection process. The use and integration into the strategy of these tools offsets the acknowledged weaknesses of visual inspections and more fully utilizes their benefits in the performance assessment process.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of the 90th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board
Number of pages14
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 23 Jan 2011

Fingerprint

Managers
Monitoring
Inspection
Asset management
Core levels
Structural health monitoring

Cite this

Bush, S., Henning, T., Omenzetter, P., & McCarten, P. (2011). A bridge data collection and monitoring strategy for use with performance frameworks. In Proceedings of the 90th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4543.6483

A bridge data collection and monitoring strategy for use with performance frameworks. / Bush, S; Henning, T; Omenzetter, P; McCarten, P.

Proceedings of the 90th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board. 2011.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter (peer-reviewed)

Bush, S, Henning, T, Omenzetter, P & McCarten, P 2011, A bridge data collection and monitoring strategy for use with performance frameworks. in Proceedings of the 90th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4543.6483
Bush S, Henning T, Omenzetter P, McCarten P. A bridge data collection and monitoring strategy for use with performance frameworks. In Proceedings of the 90th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board. 2011 https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4543.6483
Bush, S ; Henning, T ; Omenzetter, P ; McCarten, P. / A bridge data collection and monitoring strategy for use with performance frameworks. Proceedings of the 90th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board. 2011.
@inbook{dc561e1d68044cff8c5de4a8d47de1dd,
title = "A bridge data collection and monitoring strategy for use with performance frameworks",
abstract = "Strategic decision makers (Policy makers and implementers) are placing pressure on asset managers (tactical decision makers) to delivery on strategic goals, as well as wider functionality and safety ideals. To meet these requirements more advanced performance measure frameworks are being developed, where performance management is considered to be a subset of asset management. These are considered to be an extension of the basic performance frameworks and condition focused paradigms that currently exist. By implementing the extended performance frameworks it will be allow asset managers to answer the network level service level questions being raised by policy makers. This paper details performance frameworks that have been created, and the data that is required to meet the needs of these frameworks. These data requirements are then used to extend traditional bridge data collection frameworks, such that a more holistic approach is adopted. By adopting this approach it will be possible to report on the strategically developed performance measures, and therefore to report on policy development. The data collection strategy introduces three levels including core, intermediate, and advanced. Depending on the bridges importance asset managers are therefore able to choose how much data they collect. This approach has been taken as data collection is both time consuming and expensive and not all bridges and networks require the same data collection intensity. Further to this not all network managers are starting from the same point of development. By introducing the tiered approach it allows asset managers to focus on the highest criticality routes and bridges. The monitoring strategy defines the roles of visual inspections, non-destructive evaluation, and structural health monitoring in the data collection process. The use and integration into the strategy of these tools offsets the acknowledged weaknesses of visual inspections and more fully utilizes their benefits in the performance assessment process.",
author = "S Bush and T Henning and P Omenzetter and P McCarten",
year = "2011",
month = "1",
day = "23",
doi = "10.13140/2.1.4543.6483",
language = "English",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 90th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - A bridge data collection and monitoring strategy for use with performance frameworks

AU - Bush, S

AU - Henning, T

AU - Omenzetter, P

AU - McCarten, P

PY - 2011/1/23

Y1 - 2011/1/23

N2 - Strategic decision makers (Policy makers and implementers) are placing pressure on asset managers (tactical decision makers) to delivery on strategic goals, as well as wider functionality and safety ideals. To meet these requirements more advanced performance measure frameworks are being developed, where performance management is considered to be a subset of asset management. These are considered to be an extension of the basic performance frameworks and condition focused paradigms that currently exist. By implementing the extended performance frameworks it will be allow asset managers to answer the network level service level questions being raised by policy makers. This paper details performance frameworks that have been created, and the data that is required to meet the needs of these frameworks. These data requirements are then used to extend traditional bridge data collection frameworks, such that a more holistic approach is adopted. By adopting this approach it will be possible to report on the strategically developed performance measures, and therefore to report on policy development. The data collection strategy introduces three levels including core, intermediate, and advanced. Depending on the bridges importance asset managers are therefore able to choose how much data they collect. This approach has been taken as data collection is both time consuming and expensive and not all bridges and networks require the same data collection intensity. Further to this not all network managers are starting from the same point of development. By introducing the tiered approach it allows asset managers to focus on the highest criticality routes and bridges. The monitoring strategy defines the roles of visual inspections, non-destructive evaluation, and structural health monitoring in the data collection process. The use and integration into the strategy of these tools offsets the acknowledged weaknesses of visual inspections and more fully utilizes their benefits in the performance assessment process.

AB - Strategic decision makers (Policy makers and implementers) are placing pressure on asset managers (tactical decision makers) to delivery on strategic goals, as well as wider functionality and safety ideals. To meet these requirements more advanced performance measure frameworks are being developed, where performance management is considered to be a subset of asset management. These are considered to be an extension of the basic performance frameworks and condition focused paradigms that currently exist. By implementing the extended performance frameworks it will be allow asset managers to answer the network level service level questions being raised by policy makers. This paper details performance frameworks that have been created, and the data that is required to meet the needs of these frameworks. These data requirements are then used to extend traditional bridge data collection frameworks, such that a more holistic approach is adopted. By adopting this approach it will be possible to report on the strategically developed performance measures, and therefore to report on policy development. The data collection strategy introduces three levels including core, intermediate, and advanced. Depending on the bridges importance asset managers are therefore able to choose how much data they collect. This approach has been taken as data collection is both time consuming and expensive and not all bridges and networks require the same data collection intensity. Further to this not all network managers are starting from the same point of development. By introducing the tiered approach it allows asset managers to focus on the highest criticality routes and bridges. The monitoring strategy defines the roles of visual inspections, non-destructive evaluation, and structural health monitoring in the data collection process. The use and integration into the strategy of these tools offsets the acknowledged weaknesses of visual inspections and more fully utilizes their benefits in the performance assessment process.

U2 - 10.13140/2.1.4543.6483

DO - 10.13140/2.1.4543.6483

M3 - Chapter (peer-reviewed)

BT - Proceedings of the 90th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board

ER -