Probabilistic NDT data fusion of Ferroscan test data using Bayesian

Inference
Mayank Mishra
Graduate Student, Department of Geotechnical and Structural Engineering
Università degli Studi della Basilicata, Potenza, Italy

Chavon Grande
Structural Engineering Contractor & Project Engineer
CH2M HILL, Portland, Oregan, USA

ABSTRACT: The main objective of this paper is to combine test data gathered from non-destructive testing
(NDT) and fuse it using Bayesian inference. The Bayesian updating technique is applied to data obtained from
Ferroscan testing which is used to estimate the depth of concrete cover (cc) left. The tests were done while
performing the seismic verification of one of the university buildings at university of Padua, Italy. In monuments
and heritage sites its not always feasible to take out samples from the core for laboratory testing as the art work,
graffiti, paintings etc. needs to be preserved, so NDT is always a better option for these class of buildings.
The NDT test data has many uncertainties present in it and to deduce meaningful information out of it is a
challenging task which is addressed in this paper. Bayesian approach is more rational as it gives more realistic
value as compared with other approaches which result in a more conservative estimate. The research will help
engineering community working in inspection field to choose parameters based on a data from limited number of
NDT data tests. Vague information about the structure can be supplemented with the help of experimental data to
arrive to a posterior distribution of concrete cover and hence to estimate 95% confidence interval for parameter
of interest (clear concrete cover). A Matlab toolbox was also developed (Ramos et al. 2015) to combine NDT
test data without having obligation for practitioners to understand the complex mathematics involved behind
the Bayesian black box . A posterior probability density function is derived in this case for concrete cover (cc)
taking into account the NDT test data from Ferroscan testing. This paper only uses data from Ferroscan test but
the same methodology can be adapted to different data sets.

1 INTRODUCTION detailing of reinforced concrete column along with

In Donghi building (which is one of the university
buildings inspected for seismic verification), it was
not possible to carry out destructive tests due to
guidelines laid by ICOMOS (ICOMOS 2005) of
minimum intrusion and one has to convert data
obtained from NDT tests into meaningful informa-
tion. Structures made of reinforced concrete were
present only in some parts of the building built
quiet recently (in period from 1955 to 1965). They
were found exclusively in the parts of most recent
construction (hydraulic laboratory, roofed shed in the
courtyard, and industrial chemistry place anchesso in
the inner courtyard and sminterrato assembly hall).
The two laboratories on the East side, built during the
same period have a structure made up of reinforced
concrete frame. Figure 1 shows construction drawing
of column dating back to 1954 representing the
clear cover used in the hydraulic laboratory.
The information obtained from different NDT tests
needs to be combined from different sources into an
uniform format. Whenever more testing is done to
find information about the structure, it is always ben-
eficial to consider previous information in order to ar-
rive to a more rational result. A posterior probability
density function is derived in this case for concrete
cover (cc) taking into account the data from ferroscan
testing. Data fusion is defined as synergistic use of
information coming from different sources to under-
stand the phenomenon (Gros 1996). The main role
of data fusion through several publications (Sykora
2008, Miranda et al. 2009, Mishra 2013) is its ability
to manage uncertainties and improve the accuracy of
the system. The flowchart shown in figure 2 demon-
strates data fusion system used in this case for com-
 Is database of concrete clear cover
available from construction drawings ?

Yes No

Use Jeffreys Prior Use Conjugate Prior

Find Posterior Parameters for

population of concrete cover

Plot the posterior density

function to help practitioner
pick value of clear cover

Figure 2: Illustration of data fusion centre to combine data using

Bayesian inference into a fused data set

data collection and finally update the posterior to its

final form. One of the challenges can be to combine
the results of different NDT techniques with different
reliability and fuse them together to obtain value for
engineers and scientists for decision making.

Figure 1: Construction drawing representing the details of col-

umn used in the hydraulic laboratory

bining data from literature knowledge (Clear concrete

cover at time when concrete column was cast) and
ferroscan test data. Bayesian approach provides a ra-
tional way to combine data particularly useful when
data obtained is limited (Gros 1996). Bayesian in-
terface to combine data from different tests is pre-
sented and explained in this paper. The data collec-
tion data is done from ND testing reports of Donghi
building (Agzamova et al. 2013) related to its struc-
tural condition and conservation. The tests were car-
ried out in two days (21-12-2012 and 16-01-2013) on
the Donghi building with the help of Italian master
Figure 3: Testing of wall by Ferroscan (Location: Donghi Build-
students. A simple Graphical User Interface (GUI) ing, Padova, Italy) (Dates: 21-12-2012 and 16-01-2013)
is also presented in Matlab (MATLAB 2012) to ex-
plain and carry out this fusion process of combin-
ing data. Some previous research papers using NDT
data fusion for example Kanzler et al. (2012) used
bayesian approach for risk management of nuclear 2 DESCRIPTION OF FERROSCAN TESTING
power plants and Capra et al. (2006) using Bayes
to evaluate reliability of NDT methods. It had been Ferroscan is battery powered equipment which deter-
used in area of NDT which also includes assess- mines the position of reinforcement, measures depth
ment of bridges for concrete cover and yield bar di- of the concrete cover within 100 mm of concrete
ameter (Sykora 2008). Other approaches using NDT (Salman 2011) and estimates the diameter of the re-
are in estimating characteristic concrete compressive bars and detects the presence of metal pipes in a struc-
strength (Mirza et al. 1979, ISO13822 2010, Caspeele ture in a non-destructive manner (Irie et al. 2008). Its
and Taerwe 2012) and to update geomechanical pa- principle of operation is based on generation and de-
rameters and uncertainty quantification (Kryviak and tection of electromagnetic fields by conductive mate-
Scanton 1986, Haas and Einstein 2002) to name a few. rial in which the intensity of the field generated de-
Further development in this area includes data fusion pends on the depth and diameter of rebar. While per-
to improve evaluation of concrete structures by com- forming test, first step is to place the grid on the area
bining data from several NDT tests (Marie-AudePloix to be scanned. Then, the scanner is moved (Figure 3)
et al. 2009) and Bayesian approach to do data fu- following the path of grid lines in horizontal and ver-
sion of images (Feron & Mohammad-Djafari 2003). tical direction. The live feed of scan is viewed on the
Instead of choosing some random value of parame- monitor to get an idea on when to stop the scan. The
ter for modelling purposes the model proposed in this image finally obtained after performing the scan in
paper incorporates some criteria to select a more cer- both x and y directions are stored in Ferro scan as a
tain value of parameter. Also, this paper proposes a file and is analysed in software Ferroscan available
method to combine information in different stages of with equipment CDRoM.
3 DATA COLLECTION AND FUSION
The data was extracted by analysing file in the
Ferroscan software in which we snapped a total of 20
points (11 in Horizontal and 9 in vertical direction)
and will use them to generate a posterior distribution.
The data points to update the prior information for
concrete cover in mm are - (20 24 25 43 33 26 24
41 46 33 25 39 28 30 41 24 26 33 31 44). Test data
of diameter of rebar from horizontal and vertical
direction can also be used in Bayes but for scope of
this work only clear cover data is used for Bayesian
analysis. There are many methodologies of data
fusion namely Bayesian, Neural network, Fuzzy
logic (Zhang & Yuan 2008) etc. but we have focused
only on Bayesian fusion approach in this paper. Prob-
abilistic methods rely on the probabilistic distribution
functions (PDF) to express data uncertainty. The
most commonly used is Bayesian fusion which fuses
pieces of data from various sources. One can apply
Bayes estimator each time and update the PDF by
fusing it with new piece of information. The data
fusion algorithm implemented in this case took the
form of probabilistic inference processes such as the
Bayesian inference theory. Data fusion in general can
occur basically at three levels (Gros et al. 1995)
1. First Level (Raw data): This step involves fusion
of raw data. Most of the applications involving
multi-sensor data fusion (Chair & Varshney 1986)
(For e.g. weighing each signal according to their
reliability) are focused in this level.
2. Second Level (Decision): Fusion at Decision level.
In this format data may be different scale and type
but needs to be converted to the same format desired
to qualify for fusion. For e.g. voltage (in V) needs
to be converted to crack width (in mm) in case of
readings from crack width monitoring.
3. Third Level (Fusion): This is the last level in which
the processed data obtained from P
step 1 & 2 has to
be fed in Data fusion center ( ) and combined by a
mathematical algorithm (Bayesian in this paper) to
produce a coherent global result.
Level 3 is addressed in this paper. After collecting
data from Ferroscan test, it was analyzed and carried
forward for the data fusion process. The first thing
suggested is that the type of data should be same i.e
if the data from source is telling some other parame-
ter then it must be converted into equivalent data by
developing some regression relationship or by using
some empirical formulas/conversion charts (level 2
fusion). Ang & Tang (1984) suggested a three step
procedure. The initial prior is obtained by combining
the indirect test data with prior pdf to obtain the pos-
terior PDF. The posterior PDF is considered as a prior
for the second set of data and another updated poste-
rior is obtained. This posterior got from two indirect
test data is considered as prior when we combine this
with the direct test data to obtain the final posterior
distribution which takes into account all types and sets
of data.
4 BAYESIAN INFERENCE
Bayesian methods deal with uncertainties into a
mathematical form by using probability functions
(Ditlevsen & Madsen 1996) for the random variables
and these functions are updated as more and more in-
formation is available. The whole process comprises
of 3 steps: (1) Setting up of a joint probability dis-
tribution function; (2) Update the prior knowledge as
more data is obtained to compute the posterior; (3)
Evaluate the model to see if conclusions from it make
sense and analysing how results change considering
several modelling assumptions. First, the prior is cho-
sen with the help of some professional judgement or
test results from previous knowledge including some
uncertainties (rather than randomness). The choice of
prior can be Jeffrey’s prior if no knowledge about
prior is available or a conjugate prior where some ini-
tial concrete cover is known from construction draw-
ings. The flowchart show in Figure 4 can be referred
to calculate posterior density function with different
knowledge about initial prior.As the data is gathered
concerning the parameters it is updated to a posterior.
The main key for performing a bayesian analysis is to
update the prior as the new data is obtained.
Is database of concrete clear cover
available from construction drawings ?
Yes No
Use Jeffreys Prior Use Conjugate Prior
Find Posterior Parameters for
population of concrete cover
Plot the posterior density
function to help practitioner
pick value of clear cover
Figure 4: Flowchart in the updating process for calculating con-
crete cover
Choice of prior can vary from very accurate prior
with less standard deviation to even no knowledge
which is non-informative Jeffrey’s prior. It is reason-
able to assume prior as a normal distribution (for
mathematical considerations) for modelling of many
mechanical parameters LNEC Report (1983). When
the posterior and the prior have the same paramet-
ric form is called conjugacy. For example, the Gaus-
sian family is conjugate to itself (or self-conjugate)
with respect to a Gaussian likelihood function. If the
likelihood function is Gaussian, choosing a Gaussian
prior over the mean will ensure that the posterior dis-
tribution is also Gaussian. A conjugate prior is an
 preference of the values available from literature is
known so 50% weightage was given to both of them
in the mathematical algorithm used to arrive to a pos-
terior. The data fusion center shown in figure 5 sum-
marises all the results with their respective values in
case of conjugate prior. Table 2 can be referred for de-
tailed results on all parameters after Bayesian updat-
Figure 5: Data Fusion system using Bayesian approach for up- ing using Jeffreys and conjugate prior. The clear cover
dating clear cover using data obtained from Ferroscan instrument obtained from conjugate prior (40.59 mm) was found
using conjugate prior to be more conservative value than obtained from Jef-
freys prior (29.35 mm). This was expected as data
algebraic convenience, giving a closed-form expres- from Jeffreys prior reports only the readings at the
sion for the posterior: otherwise a difficult numeri- present state of the building without taking into ac-
cal integration may be necessary. All members of the count the clear cover at the time of construction which
exponential family have conjugate priors. For details is a higher value. Figure 6 presents the posterior prob-
of the bayesian algorithm used to combine NDT test ability distributions of the population of clear cover
data and fusion operator (Miranda et al. 2009, Mishra considering the mean values of the mean and standard
2013, Ramos et al. 2015) can be referred. deviation. The main aspect to focus on when compar-
ing the posterior results for the population of cc using
Table 1: Posterior distributions considering Jeffrey’s and Conju- the Jeffreys and conjugate priors is that the variance is
gate prior distributions
higher for the latter. In fact, as it is clearly illustrated
Posterior Normal Distribution in figure 6, the uncertainty is higher for the conjugate
Jeffrey’s µ, σ 2 − N (31.15, 7.622 /20) distributions. This fact is due to the consideration of
(n − 1)s2 /σ 2 − 1102.6/σ 2 − > χ2n−1 the prior information uncertainty which does not exist
Conjugate µ, σ 2 |X − N (40.5, σ 2 /40) when using Jeffreys prior.
1/σ 2 − γ(40.5, 1/3905.1)
Table 2: Posterior estimates of clear cover in mm using Jeffreys
and Conjugate prior
0.04 Parameter Jeffreys Conjugate
Normal Posterior−Jeffreys

0.035
Normal Posterior−Conjugate µ 30.26 40.58
σ(µ) 3.89 1.41
0.03
σ 7.89 8.84
0.025 σ(σ) 1.31 1.01
Probability Density

95% confidence for 23.86-36.66 38.26-42.89

0.02
mean
0.015 µpop 29.35 40.59
σpop 12.01 10.31
0.01
95% confidence for 9.60-49.10 23.63-57.54
0.005 population mean
0
−10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Value of concrete clear cover (cc) in mm

Figure 6: Fused Posterior density functions for clear cover using

Jeffreys and Conjugate Prior

5 RESULTS

The posterior distributions considering Jeffreys and

conjugate prior take the forms presented in Table 1.
Prior information about the concrete cover was taken
from project specifications, which was 50 mm and
is assumed to vary 10 mm of the nominal value (i.e
50±10 mm) to create a normal prior distribution for
the conjugate prior. Mean and standard deviation of Figure 7: Snapshot of Graphical User Interface (GUI) developed
clear concrete cover was found which combined pre- for updating clear cover using conjugate prior
vious knowledge of cover from the construction draw-
ings and posterior was obtained. Since no weight or
6 CONCLUSIONS
It was indicated that the posterior mean (29.35 &
40.58 mm) is significantly lower than the initial value
(50 mm) at the time of construction which is indica-
tive of degradation in the concrete columns. This pa-
per takes only data of clear cover from ferroscan tests
as a case study to fuse data using Bayesian infer-
ence but the same methodology mentioned here can
be adapted to many different NDT data sets. Using
Bayesian approach to combine information and deal-
ing with certain levels of uncertainty to formulate the
reasonable concrete clear cover can be considered as
main contribution of this paper. The fusion from NDT
test results would not gain much importance in the
posterior if the results are poor from the input data
i.e. with larger standard deviation and less weightage
associated with them. In the advanced NDT fusion
system proposed many uncertainties could be coupled
with information provided from different data sources
to make inferences. The result of data fusion is to
present the final parameter in a numerical format eas-
ily interpretable by the practitioners. Also, the prior
and posterior can be plotted on same graphs (Refer
snapshot of Matlab toolbox NDT FUSION shown in
figure 7) so as to make comparison on amount of loss
of concrete cover. A new application of data fusion is
presented in this paper to improve the values obtained
from NDT tests based on probability theory. The the-
ory can also be applied to other NDT tests particularly
in case of imprecise and uncertain data. Also, differ-
P MATLAB (2012). The mathworks, inc., natick, massachusetts,
ent shapes of distributions and Bayesian operator ( )
can be analysed to test the approach proposed in this
paper.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to express his gratitude to
Adeliya Agzamova and Giulia Bettiol from Univer-
sity of Padova, Italy for their contribution to the ex-
perimental program of this study.
REFERENCES
Agzamova, A., C. Grande, & M. Mishra (2013). Seismic verifi-
cation and inspection of donghi building: A case study. Mas-
ter’s thesis, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Ang, A. & W. Tang (1984). Probability concepts in engineering.
Number v. 2. John Wiley and Sons Inc.
Capra, B., J. L. Drogo, & V. Wolff (2006). Corrosion of rein-
forced concrete in nuclear plants: application of bayesian net-
works to the risk management of cooling towers.
Caspeele, R. & L. Taerwe (2012). Bayesian assessment of the
characteristic concrete compressive strength using combined
vague–informative priors. Construction and Building Mate-
rials 28(1), 342–350.
Chair, Z. & P. Varshney (1986, Jan). Optimal data fusion in
multiple sensor detection systems. Aerospace and Electronic
Systems, IEEE Transactions on AES-22(1), 98–101.
Ditlevsen, O. & H. Madsen (1996). Structural Reliability Meth-
ods. John Wiley Sons Inc.
View publication stats
Feron, O. & A. Mohammad-Djafari (2003). A hidden markov
model for bayesian data fusion of multivariate signals. Fifth
Int. Triennial Calcutta Symposium on Probability and Statis-
tics.
Gros, X. E. (1996). NDT Data Fusion. New York, NY, USA:
Halsted Press.
Gros, X. E., P. Strachan, & D. W. Lowden (1995). Theory and
implementation of ndt data fusion. 6(4), 227–236.
Haas, C. & H. Einstein (2002). Updating the decision aids for
tunneling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Man-
agement 128(1), 40–48.
ICOMOS (2005). International committee on analysis and
restoration of structures of architectural heritage. Recommen-
dations for the analysis and restoration of structures of archi-
tectural heritage.
Irie, H., Y. Yoshida, Y. Sakurada, & T. Ito (2008). Non-
destructive-testing methods for concrete structures. NTT, Ac-
cess Network service system laboratories, Tsukubashi, 305-
0805 Japan.
ISO13822 (2010). Bases for design of structures – assessment of
existing structures. Subcommittee SC 2, Reliability of struc-
tures.
Kanzler, D., C. Muller, J. Pitkanen, & U. Ewert (2012).
Bayesian approach for the evaluation of the reliability of non-
destructive testing methods: Combination of data from artifi-
cial and real defects. 18th World Conference on Nondestruc-
tive Testing, Durban, South Africa.
Kryviak, G. J. & A. Scanton (1986). Bayesian analysis of in-
situ data for estimating the compressive strength of existing
structures. Master’s thesis, University of Alberta, Canada.
LNEC (1983). Report, lnec collaboration in the geotechnics
and geotechnical studies concerning the hydraulic circuit of
venda nova ii, technical report 47/1/7084, lisbon, portugal.
Marie-AudePloix, V. Garnier, D. Breysse, & J. Moysan (2009).
Possibilistic ndt data fusion for evaluating concrete struc-
tures. Non-Destructive Testing in Civil Engineering Nantes,
France, NDTCE’09.
united states. R2012a.
Miranda, T., A. G. Correia, & L. R. e Sousa (2009). Bayesian
methodology for updating geomechanical parameters and
uncertainty quantification. International Journal of Rock Me-
chanics and Mining Sciences 46(7), 1144 – 1153.
Mirza, S. A., J. G. MacGregor, & M. Hatzinikolas (1979). Sta-
tistical descriptions of strength of concrete. ASCE Journal of
the Structural Division 105, 1021–1037.
Mishra, M. (2013). A bayesian approach to ndt data fusion for
st. torcato church. Master’s thesis, Universidade do Minho,
Portugal.
Ramos, L. F., T. Miranda, M. Mishra, F. M. Fernandes, &
E. Manning (2015). A bayesian approach for ndt data fu-
sion: The saint torcato church case study. Engineering Struc-
tures 84, 120–129.
Salman, A. A. (2011). Non-destructive test of concrete structures
using: Ferroscan. Eng and Tech. Journal 29(14).
Sykora, M. (2008). Assessment of existing bridges using
bayesian updating. Reliability, safety and diagnostics of
transport structures and means.
Zhang, Y. & L. Yuan (2008). Application of fuzzy neural net-
works in data fusion for mobile robot wall-following. Pro-
ceedings of the 7th world congress on intelligent control and
automation, Chongqing, China.