Reliability Index for Structural Health

Monitoring of Aging Bridges

P. B. R. Dissanayake* and P. A. K. Karunananda

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Peradeniya

Peradeniya 20400, Sri Lanka

This paper presents a reliability-based methodology for health monitoring of aging bridges. Initially,
critical failure criteria are proposed depending on the type of bridge. Safety margins are then defined
based on these criteria. It is assumed that quantities in the failure criteria are random variables that are
normally distributed. Based on this assumption, elementary reliability indices and thereby elementary
failure probabilities are estimated for each critical failure mode. Having found the elementary failure
probability values, system failure probability of the bridge is calculated for the period under
consideration. Finally, the system failure probability is used to obtain a system reliability index of the
bridge. The system reliability index is a quantative way to express the condition of the bridge for the
period under consideration. As a case study to illustrate the proposed reliability procedure, a wrought
iron railway bridge was selected from the national railway bridge network of Sri Lanka. For this bridge,
fatigue and corrosion were selected as the most critical forms of failure. Application of the proposed
methodology showed that the present condition of bridge was satisfactory for current loading
conditions. Predicting reliability, as opposed to damage, is a positive outlook approach to health
monitoring that is useful for infrastructure management.

Keywords structural health monitoring
condition estimation
maintenance
reliability

index
failure probability

1 Introduction infrastructure that directly affects the industrial

In today’s rapidly changing world, the quality
of human life and the economic progress of a
country depend on the quantity, quality, and
efficiency of its infrastructure [1]. Civil infrastruc-
ture is often in need of maintenance, rehabili-
tation, or replacement [2], irrespective of the
location around the world. In particular, high-
ways and associated ground transportation
systems constitute a considerable investment in
productivity of a country.
Most current bridge maintenance strategies
are based on visual inspections made by bridge
inspectors at varying time intervals [3]. Since
human inspection depends on the individual ins-
pector, there exists a degree of uncertainty in the
results obtained. Therefore, absolute dependence
on inspection reports is not reliable and may lead
to incorrect decision-making, which results in
high maintenance costs for bridge owners.

Copyright ß SAGE Publications 2008

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore
E-mail: ranjith@civil.pdn.ac.lk Vol 7(2): 0175–9
Figure 3 appears in color online: http://shm.sagepub.com [1475-9217 (200806) 7:2;175–9 10.1177/1475921708090555]

175

Downloaded from shm.sagepub.com at UNIV PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND on February 22, 2015
176 Structural Health Monitoring 7(2)

The cost of maintenance should be optimized Therefore, depending on the bridge type, critical
based on the remaining service life of a bridge. failure modes are proposed. These failure modes
On the other hand, the capability of bridge define the mathematical procedure to evaluate
inspectors to find structural and nonstructural the structural health of bridges. The safety margin
defects, damages, and deterioration processes Mi for the ith mode of failure of the bridge is
should not be neglected. In fact, human experi- defined as:
ence should always be incorporated into main-
tenance decisions, but with sufficient subjective Mi ¼ ZRi  ZSi i ¼ 1; 2;. . . ; n ð1Þ
knowledge. Only then, can any strategy have
acceptable performance. Current procedures in where ZRi is the strength variable and ZSi is the
structural health monitoring of bridges have a load variable. When ZRi 4ZSi , the bridge is in a
number of shortcomings and prevailing uncer- safe state and when ZRi 5ZSi , the bridge is in a
tainties. The results of insufficient knowledge failure state. If the means and standard devia-
about structural health monitoring and bridge tions of the resistance and load variables are
maintenance are causing significant financial loss known, then a reliability index can be found for
due to frequent maintenance activities, unforeseen the ith failure mode as [6,7]:
bridge damages, and accidental bridge failures.

These losses in terms of financial, physical, and ZRi  ZSi
other resources are unacceptable, irrespective of
i ¼ rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

 : i ¼ 1; 2;. . . ; n: ð2Þ
the wealth of a country. The complexity of 2
Z R þ Z S 2
i i
structural life prediction and general health mon-
itoring involving bridge maintenance has ener-
In (2), mZRi and  ZRi are the mean and the
gized researchers into formulating general
standard deviation of the strength variable, while
methods of life prediction and cost optimized
mZSi and  ZSi are the mean and the standard
maintenance strategies for bridges.
deviations of the load variable. The reliability
Thus, any proposed methodology for health
index expresses the condition of a bridge as the
monitoring and maintenance should be based on
mean value of the safety margin divided the
results of field studies as well as subjective under-
standard deviation of the safety margin.
standings accepted by practicing engineers. Since
Generally, the higher the value of reliability
there are many uncertainties existing in current
index, the better the condition of the bridge. It is
procedures, a probabilistic approach is advanta-
assumed here that both strength and load vari-
geous over deterministic approaches. In this
ables are normally distributed. The assumption of
situation, reliability-based methods can provide a
normality in variables simplifies calculation of
rational approach to use scarce resources effi-
failure probability while maintaining a satisfac-
ciently while maintaining a prescribed level of
tory accuracy.
reliability of a structure throughout its designated
If the reliability index is known, failure
service life [4].
probability Pfi can be calculated as:
Pfi ¼ ð
i Þ i ¼ 1; 2 . . . ; n ð3Þ
2 Methodology where / is the standard unit normal
distribution. Substituting Equation (2) into
2.1 Mathematical Procedure Equation (3) yields [6,7]:
Bridges can fail due to a number of critical 2
3
failure modes, depending on the type of bridge. 6 ZRi  ZSi 7
For steel bridges, fatigue is the dominant failure Pfi ¼ 1  6
4rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi


7
5 : i ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; n:
mode. But corrosion also has a considerable Z2 R þ Z2 S
i i
impact on the life of steel bridges. Reinforced con-
crete bridges are influenced by moment and shear. ð4Þ

Downloaded from shm.sagepub.com at UNIV PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND on February 22, 2015
 Dissanayake & Karunananda Structural Health Monitoring of Aging Bridges 177

The physical meaning of the failure probabil-
ity is that it conveys the idea of how close the
failure state is. Hence, higher values for failure
probabilities imply greater chance of failure.
According to Equation (4), for each failure
mode (i ¼ 1, 2, . . . , n), the elementary reliability
index and the elementary failure probability can
be calculated. The next step is to calculate the
system failure probability. The actual failure of a
bridge can be attributed to several failure modes.
Thus, a system model has to be built up. In this
context, it is assumed that all failure modes are
combined with a series system. Hence, it is
possible to calculate the system failure probability
from a simple bound as [6,7],
n Y
n  
Max Pfi  PF  1  1  Pfi :
i¼1;2
i¼1
The lower bound of (5) represents the situa-
tion where all n failure modes are uncorrelated
and the upper bound represents the case when all
n failure modes are correlated. Having found the
system failure probability, it is possible to convert
it to get a system reliability index as follows [6,7],

S ¼ 1 ðPF Þ:
This system reliability index can be used to
express the present condition of the bridge.
As outlined in the above equations, the system
reliability index of the bridge can be calculated at
any given time.
2.2 Graphical Representation of the
Reliability Procedure
The graphical representation of the reliability
procedure is given in Figure 1.
The procedure in Figure 1 can be followed
at suitable time intervals to calculate the
system reliability index. This value is compared
with the target reliability index of the bridge.
ð5Þ The target reliability index is the lowest permis-
sible value that a bridge can fail. If the current
value of the index is higher than the target value,
no major maintenance is required. However,
routine maintenance is advisable at this stage.
When the current system reliability index is
higher than the target reliability index, major
maintenance should be carried out to increase the
current reliability index to a value greater than
ð6Þ target reliability index.

Determine types of failure modes

Estimate elementary reliability index

Estimate elementary failure probability

Determine system failure probability

If b current < b target

Estimate system reliability index Do routine maintenance

If b current < b target

Do major maintenance activity

Figure 1 Flow chart of the reliability algorithm.

Downloaded from shm.sagepub.com at UNIV PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND on February 22, 2015
178 Structural Health Monitoring 7(2)
2.3 Target Reliability Index
The value of the target reliability index used
by researchers differs. The American Association
of State and Highway Transportation Officials
specifications for the remaining life of steel bridges
is based on the use of a reliability-oriented
approach. In this guide, two levels of risk are
considered. For a redundant bridge, a reliability
index of 2.0 is used. For a nonredundant bridge,
a reliability index of 3.0 is used [5]. In this study,
the target reliability index value used is 3.0.
2.4 Variation of the System
Reliability Profile
The nature of the system reliability index of a
bridge is that it reduces with time. However, it
has an initial time period of constant value. The
length of this period depends on the loading
conditions of the particular bridge and environ-
mental factors at the site. With proper mainte-
nance activities, the service life of the bridge can
be extended well beyond the design life of the
bridge. The variation of the system reliability
index with time referenced to maintenance activ-
ities is illustrated in Figure 2.
Initially, the value of the reliability index (
0)
after construction is a high value (46.0) and for a
time period T1 it remains constant. After time T1,
System reliability index
(bcurrent)
T1
T3
b0
a Db1
T2
Without maintenance
Figure 2 System reliability variation of a typical bridge.
Downloaded from shm.sagepub.com at UNIV PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND on February 22, 2015
the reliability index starts to reduce. During this
period, the important aspect of study is the rate
reduction of the reliability index (). The value of
 is dependent on the how degradation process
have affected the particular bridge. For example,
a steel truss bridge located on a coastal environ-
ment has higher  than a steel bridge located
inland as the salt environment triggers early
corrosion of steel. When the reliability index
reaches the target reliability index (
target), some
form of maintenance should be performed to
maintain the safety of the bridge. This will
increase the reliability index by an amount

.
The increase of

is accompanied with a certain
cost. Hence, it is generally essential to optimize
the increase of reliability index with the cost of the
maintenance activity. The increase of the reliabil-
ity index is higher for an essential maintenance
activity which accounts for a major repair than
that of a preventive maintenance activity that
accounts for routine maintenance procedure. The
increase of the reliability index is constant for a
period of time T3. After that, the reliability index
goes down again with a reduced rate of degrada-
tion of    where  is called the reduction
of deterioration rate due to maintenance activity.
Its effect continues for a time period T4. Then,
the degradation rate becomes  again. When it
reaches
target again, maintenance should be
performed to improve the safety of the structure.
With maintenance
T4
a–d
btarget
T5
Time
 Dissanayake & Karunananda
3 Case Study Application
As a case study, a steel truss bridge was
selected and reliability modeling was implemented.
In this case, fatigue and corrosion are the most
dominant forms of failure. When a member in a
bridge undergoes cyclic loading in a repetitive
manner, it is liable to fail by fatigue. Generally,
fatigue is considered to be the one of the most
significant failure modes of steel bridges.
For a member as mentioned above, the
failure can be modeled using the reliability
approach as:
M1 ¼ Nf  Nn
where M1 is the safety margin for fatigue failure
of the member and it is the criteria used to
express how close the element is to failure. Nf is
the total number of stress cycles that can be
applied to the bridge material. Nn is the number
of stress cycles applied up to now. Both variables
are assumed to follow normal distributions.
When Nf  Nn, M1  0 and the member is in the
safe region. If Nf5Nn, M150, the member is in
the failure region.
Based on these values, the reliability index
for the first mode of failure can be found as:
 
Nf  Nn

1 ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi :
ðN 2 þ 2 Þ
f Nn
Here, Nf and Nf are the mean and the
standard deviation of variable Nf. Similarly Nn
and Nn are the mean and the standard deviation
of variable Nn [6,7]. Having found the reliability
index as Equation (8), it is then possible to find
the failure probability of the element that is
subjected to fatigue. The failure probability is
given by [6,7]:
2
3
l  lN n
6 Nf 7
Pf1 ¼ 1  /4qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi5
2
ðrNf þ rNn Þ 2
where / is the standard unit normal distribution
function.
Downloaded from shm.sagepub.com at UNIV PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND on February 22, 2015
Structural Health Monitoring of Aging Bridges 179
Corrosion is another form of deterioration in
steel bridges. For corrosion, the reliability model
can be proposed based on steel area as:
M2 ¼ ðAs Þcurrent ðAs Þrequired ð10Þ
where M2 is the safety margin for the corrosion
mode of failure, and (As)current is the steel area
present at the time of consideration, and
(As)required is the steel area required to carry the
load on the bridge. When (As)current  (As)required,
M2  0 the bridge is in a safe condition. When
(As)current 5 (As)required, M250 and the bridge is
in a failure condition. Both variables are assumed
ð7Þ to behave as normally distributed variables.
Based on the mean and standard deviation of the
two variables, the reliability index of corrosion
failure can be expressed as:
h i
ðAs Þcurrent  ðAs Þrequired

2 ¼ rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
h i: ð11Þ
2 2
ðAs Þcurrent þ ðAs Þrequired
Having converted M to the standard nor-
mally distributed variable, the relationship
between failure probability and reliability index
can be found as:
8 h i 9
>
> >
< ðAs Þcurrent  ðAs Þrequired > =
Pf2 ¼ 1   rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
h i>: ð12Þ
ð8Þ >
> >
: 2 2 ;
ðAs Þcurrent , þ ðAs Þrequired
If mean values and standard deviations of the
two variables can be found, the probability of
corrosion failure can be calculated. Thus, elemen-
tary reliability indices of fatigue and corrosion
can be used to find the system failure probability
as in Equation 5 and the system reliability index
as in Equation (6).
Nowak and Szerszen [8] have studied model-
ing of fatigue and corrosion. In fatigue, they have
used the same reliability model in Section 2.1.
For corrosion effects, three corrosion rates;
ð9Þ low, medium and high have been studied. Their
effects on moment capacity and shear capacity
have been considered. However, the combined
effects of fatigue and corrosion have not been
studied in detail.
180 Structural Health Monitoring 7(2)

The bridge selected for study was one of the sets so that the behavior of the bridge under
longest and the busiest railway bridges in Sri loading can be interpreted easily with the use of
Lanka spanning 160 m over two banks of the these different member sets. Figure 4 shows the
Kelani river situated close to the capital elevation of the truss and its different member
Colombo. It is an eight-span bridge with Warren sets [9]. Figure 5 shows the plan view of the bridge
type trusses, and semi through and double lane
rail trucks. Bridge piers are made of Cast Iron Table 1 Variation of number of trains over
caissons with infilled concrete. The bridge was time.
constructed in 1885 by British engineers and Period No of trains/day
some modifications were made later on. A pre-
1995–Present 80
sent view of the bridge is shown in Figure 3. 1985–1995 72
Table 1 shows the increase in the number of 1975–1985 64
trains over the bridge with time. 1970–1975 56
The selected bridge consists of members 1950–1970 42
having different shapes and sections, which belong 1930–1950 32
1910–1930 24
to different sets. In the structural analysis of the
1885–1910 20
bridge, it is important to identify these different

Figure 3 A view of the case study bridge (Dissanayake & Karunannanda).

SET2 SET2 SET2 SET2 SET3 SET3 SET4 SET4 SET4

SE

SE
SE

SE

N
SE

SE
N

IN

SE
IN

N
IN

7I
5I

9I
T9

T9

T9
T

T8
T8
T6

T9
T

T9
T
6O

7O

T
SE
SE

SE
SE

SE
O
SE

IN
U

U
U

T
T

T
SET1

Z
T
SE
SE

SE
SE

SE

SE
IN

U
IN

IN
IN
IN

IN

O
T7

T
T6

T
T9

T9
T

T8

T9

T
T5

T6

T9
8O

9O
7O

9O
SE
O

SE

SE
SE

O
SE

SE

SE
U
U

U
U

U
T
T

T
T

SET2 SET2 SET2 SET2 SET3 SET3 SET4 SET4 SET4

X

Figure 4 Member set numbering for the truss.

Downloaded from shm.sagepub.com at UNIV PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND on February 22, 2015
 SET7VAR
SET7VAR

SET7VAR
SET2 SET2 SET2 SET2 SET3 SET3 SET3 SET4 SET4 SET4

L5
x3
,5x
5/8

VAR2
VAR2
VAR2
VAR2
VAR2
VAR2
VAR2
VAR2

SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9

L4

8
x3

/8

3/
x3

x3

x
/8

x3

x3
1/

L4

L4
, 5x
x3

SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8

,5
L3

SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9

L
L4
L3
8

4x
x3 3/

3
x

3x
x3

x3
/8 x3

/8
3/8
Dissanayake & Karunananda

L3

8 L3

SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8

3/ x3

/8
x x3

x3
x3 / 8
L3

x3

SET1
L4
SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9
L3
,5 8
x
8

3, x3/
3/

5x

L4
L4
3x

x3
1/
x

2
x

x3
L4
3x

SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8
SET8

L4

SET8

x3
3/

/8
8

SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9 SET9

/8 Y
x5
x 3,5
L5

Downloaded from shm.sagepub.com at UNIV PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND on February 22, 2015
VAR1
VAR1
VAR1
VAR1
VAR1
VAR1
VAR1

VAR1

SET2 SET2 SET2 SET2 SET3 SET3 SET3 SET4 SET4 SET4
X

SET7VAR
SET7VAR
SET7VAR
Structural Health Monitoring of Aging Bridges

Figure 5 Member set numbering for the bridge deck.

181
182 Structural Health Monitoring 7(2)

Table 2 Present elementary reliability indices of the different member sets for fatigue and
corrosion failures.

Reliability Reliability index

Member set index for fatigue for corrosion
Set 2 (Main girder) 9.60 8.00
Set 3 (Main girder) 7.30 8.00
Set 4 (Main girder) 4.33 7.50
Set 8 (Cross girder) 4.33 7.50
Set 9 (Rail bearers) 4.85 9.00
Set 6 out (Diagonal tension members) 7.09 9.00
Set 7 out (Diagonal tension members) 7.12 9.00
Set 8 out (Diagonal tension members) 6.84 9.00
Set 9 out (Diagonal tension members) 6.96 9.00

deck with its member sets also defined accord- Table 3 Calculated final values of system reliability
ingly. These two figures give an idea of different indices of different member sets.
member sets and their respective locations in the
bridge. Out of these different member sets, there System reliability
Member set index
are nine sets of members liable for fatigue
failure [9]. These are set 2 (main girder), set 3 Set 2 (Main girder) 8.00
(main girder), set 4 (main girder), set 8 (cross Set 3 (Main girder) 7.30
Set 4 (Main girder) 4.33
girder), set 9 (rail bearers), set 6 out (diagonal
Set 8 (Cross girder) 4.33
tension members), set 7 out (diagonal tension Set 9 (Rail bearers) 4.85
members), set 8 out (diagonal tension members), Set 6 out (Diagonal tension members) 7.09
and set 9 out (diagonal tension members) [9]. Set 7 out (Diagonal tension members) 7.12
Set 8 out (Diagonal tension members) 6.84
Set 9 out (Diagonal tension members) 6.96
3.1 Results
Considering the loading history of the bridge
as shown in Table 1, for the first mode of failure
(fatigue), reliability indices at present were calcu- it is time to replace them with new members. The
lated and are summarized in Table 2. research findings have been applied to existing
Similarly, the bridge was studied for the bridges and based on results life estimation can be
current condition of corrosion. Based on this done satisfactorily.
inspection, elementary reliability indices of indivi- The proposed methodology can be applied to
dual members were found and are shown in life estimation of the bridge. Plotting the system
Table 2. reliability index over time will allow prediction of
By applying the methodology introduced, the remaining service lives of the different
system reliability indices were calculated and it is member sets of the bridge.
shown in Table 3.
From the above, it can be concluded that,
presently all member sets are safe since their 4 Conclusions
reliability values are above the target reliability
index value (3.0). However, reliability indices of This study was focused on how to estimate
some members are relatively low compared to the health of wrought iron bridges using a
others. The level of corrosion of these members reliability index. To formulate the index, fatigue
should be monitored and fatigue accumulation and corrosion were selected as the critical failure
should continuously be checked. Once these values modes. Reliability models were proposed based
reach the target value of the reliability index, on these failure modes. Using the index, failure

Downloaded from shm.sagepub.com at UNIV PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND on February 22, 2015
 Dissanayake & Karunananda
probability of a wrought iron bridge can be
found and used to express the condition of the
bridge. A case study was selected from the
national railway network of Sri Lanka. It was
found that the current state of the bridge is
satisfactory even though signs of corrosion
appeared. With the theoretical understanding as
illustrated in the paper, improved bridge main-
tenance and health monitoring can be carried out
for wrought iron bridges.
Acknowledgment
The authors of this paper would like to express their sincere
acknowledgement to the National Science Foundation of
Sri Lanka for the financial support given through the
research grant no: NSF/SCH/2005/02 and RG/2002/E/01.
References
1. Kong, J.S. and Frangopol, D.M. (2004). Cost–reliability
interaction in life–cycle cost optimization of deteriorat-
ing structures. Journal of Structural Engineering, 130(11),
1704–1712.
Downloaded from shm.sagepub.com at UNIV PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND on February 22, 2015
Structural Health Monitoring of Aging Bridges 183
2. Kong, J.S. and Frangopol, D.M. (2004). Prediction of
reliability and cost profile of deteriorating bridges under
time and performance-controlled maintenance. Journal
of Structural Engineering, 130(12), 1865–1874.
3. Sommer, A., Nowak, A.S. and Christensen, P.T. (1993).
Probability based bridge inspection strategy. Journal of
Structural Engineering, 119(12), 3520–3536.
4. Estes, A.C. and Frangopol, D.M. (2005). Load rating
versus reliability analysis. Journal of Structural
Engineering, 131(5), 843–847.
5. Yang, J. and Dewolf, J.T. (2002). Reliability assessment
of highway truss sign supports. Journal of Structural
Engineering, 128(11), 1429–1438.
6. Christensen, P.T. and Baker, J. (1982). Structural
Reliability Theory and its Applications, Berlin,
Germany: Springer-Verlag.
7. Christensen, P.T. and Murotsu, J. (1986). Application of
Structural Systems Reliability Theory, Berlin, Germany:
Springer-Verlag.
8. Nowak, A.S. and Szerszen, M.M. (2001). Life Cycle Cost
Analysis and Design of Civil Infrastructure Systems,
pp. 239–250, USA: American Society of Civil Engineers.
9. Ranaweera, M.P., Aberuwan, H., Mauroof, A.L.M.,
Herath, K.R.B., Dissanayake, P.B.R., Siriwardane,
S.A.S.C. and Adasooriya, A.M.N.D. (2002). Structural
appraisal of the railway bridge at Colombo over Kelani
river, Engineering Design Centre, University of
Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka.