Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Automation in Construction
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/autcon

BIM-based design and setup of structural health monitoring systems

Chiara Gragnaniello, Giulio Mariniello ∗, Tommaso Pastore, Domenico Asprone
Department of Structures for Engineering and Architecture, University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudio, 21, Naples, 80125, Italy

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The adoption of a BIM-based approach for the design and setup of a Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) system
BIM is an unexplored topic in the scientific literature. This paper presents a methodology designed to optimize
SHM the information management of the entire process using Building Information Modeling (BIM), defining the
LoIN
exchange information requirements (EIRs), Process Map, and Levels of Information Need (LoINs).
IDS
Moreover, to verify the consistency of the information exchanged, this paper employs the information
Information management
delivery specification (IDS) standard, developing a script that, using LoINs and the BIM model as input, verifies
the desired requirements at each stage of the process.
The proposed approach is applied to a viaduct on the Naples-Salerno highway, achieving a fully digital
and interoperable platform for stakeholders involved in the processes. The results highlight the advantages of
the proposed methodology over traditional approaches.

1. Introduction
For infrastructural engineers, preserving the safety of aging in-
frastructures is a task of capital importance. Accordingly, in the past
decade, Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) has received increasing
attention [1] due to an ever-growing need of controlling deteriorating
infrastructures. Farrar and Worden [2] define SHM as ‘‘the process of
implementing a damage identification strategy’’ which acquires and an-
alyzes data, to infer knowledge regarding the condition of the structure,
and possibly detect anomalies [3].
Nowadays, there is an increasing demand for SHM, and its success-
ful implementation depends upon the interplay of complex choices,
such as the detailed design of sensors type and positioning, the acquisi-
tion systems involved, the use of controllers, cables, etc. These complex
choices and the resulting characteristics of the system are constrained
by the objectives of monitoring activities, the structural behavior of the
infrastructure, and the quantities to be measured.
Within the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) in-
dustry, BIM represents an information technology used to improve a
project’s success, as it brings benefits in terms of faster delivery and
lower costs, enabling higher productivity [4–7].
The strength of this digital revolution is the clarity and acces-
sibility of information stored in three-dimensional models [8], that
positively affected different areas over time [5,9] such as architec-
tural design processes, information exchange, project management,
standards verification and compliance, as-built data, and technology
management [10].
This trend can be explained by both the need of improving the
project management phase and the increasingly massive use of the
Internet of Things (IoT) that generates a raising data flow collected
from structures and infrastructures.
Data collected on the structures are the core of SHM, and their
inclusion in BIM models enhances the capability of analysis and eval-
uation of structural engineers. Along these lines, exploiting Industry
Foundation Classes (IFC), Rio et al. [11] carried out a case study where
monitoring data are included in a BIM model and made available to
share for structural analyses.
IFC is recognized and standardized by ISO 16739-1:2018 [12],
which defines it as an ‘‘open international standard for BIM data that
is exchanged and shared among software applications used by the
various participants in a building construction or facility management
project’’. Specifically, IFC is a schema of data, translated into EXPRESS
Language or Extensible Markup Language (XML), that defines rules and
constraints for the relationship between objects. Objects represent, geo-
metrically and informatively, the elements of a construction. Over time,
IFC has been implemented to extend it to contain information about
infrastructure and structural monitoring [13–15]. Biancardo et al. [16]
explored IFC to apply BIM methodologies to road infrastructures using
visual programming software and BIM tools emphasizing the advan-
tages of utilizing procedural modeling at the same time pointing out the
limited availability of libraries of infrastructure components. Delgado
et al. [17] highlighted the lack of guidelines and consolidated standards

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: giulio.mariniello@unina.it (G. Mariniello).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2023.105245
Received 21 June 2023; Received in revised form 14 December 2023; Accepted 15 December 2023
Available online 19 December 2023
0926-5805/© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
C. Gragnaniello et al.
to employ the BIM approach for monitoring. Starting from this consid-
eration, the authors proposed an approach that employs proxy elements
and user-defined sets of properties, formalizing a process to model
monitoring systems. Within the same aim, Theiler and Smarsly [1]
described an extension of the IFC schema called ‘‘IFC Monitor’’ to detail
monitoring information and not lose information in the exchange.
Moreover, a recent stream of research addresses the implementation
of BIM in infrastructural asset management. Two relevant examples can
be respectively found in the works of Ciccone et al. [18] and Hage-
dorn et al. [19]. Ciccone et al. [18] presented and validated a BIM
approach for the digitization and asset management of an Italian rail-
way line, while Hagedorn et al. [19] defined a BIM-based solution
for managing infrastructure resources. Specifically, in Hagedorn et al.
[19], the authors developed a web-based platform that uses ICDD
(Information Container for linked Document Delivery) information con-
tainers, standardized in ISO 21597-1:2020 [20], aiming to enable both
optimized information exchange and the tracking of infrastructure
assets and issues. These two aims are also extremely relevant in the
commissioning of an SHM system, and its related information man-
agement. Nevertheless, the processes proposed in the literature do not
delve in the complexities that characterize the interactions between the
stakeholders taking part in the design and setup of SHM.
Monitoring systems are not suitable to be standardized as each sys-
tem is dependent on the structure behavior, degradation, and expected
damages [21–23]. For such a complex process, only the management of
information exchanges between the various contributing stakeholders
and the verification of the consistency of the delivered products can
be standardized. In addition, the BIM model also becomes the core of
information exchange in the design phase, containing the SHM system
information, and in the setup and supervision phase that ends with the
definition of an As-Built model of the SHM system.
The objective of the proposed approach is to offer a procedure
to manage even such a complex process as an SHM system commis-
sioning in an optimized manner. Accordingly, this study explores the
capabilities of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in achieving a
successful design and setup of an SHM system, providing a holistic ap-
proach aimed to the optimization and validation exchange information
management in all phases of an SHM system commissioning.
The paper is structured as follows: Section 2 provides an overview of
the traditional processes related to SHM systems design and setup, high-
lighting the information exchanges problems encountered by the stake-
holders in each phase. Section 3 presents a BIM-based methodology for
the design and setup of SHM systems, exploring OpenBIM standards
and their integration in SHM workflows using an IDS_Generator script.
The proposed approach was applied in Section 4 to the SHM system
commissioning of the Canalone bridge, a highway viaduct located in
the south of Italy. Finally, Sections 5 and 6 discuss how the current
proposal improves the traditional process for the design and setup of
an SHM system.
2. Traditional approach for SHM system
The design of an SHM system is a complex task that requires the
interaction between different disciplinary areas and a deep knowledge
of both operational and environmental conditions; it entails the study
of the behavior that the structure has to achieve, and involves both the
design of a preliminary project and the definition of an executive one.
This section presents a discussion of the current knowledge of
traditional SHM systems, based on technical guidelines, and a review
of both the scientific literature and current engineering practices.
According to Rücker et al. [24] and Glisic [25] and UNI/TR 11634:
2016 [26] all the phases involved in the implementation of an SHM
system can be summarized as follows (see Fig. 1):
1. Preliminary design;
2. Executive design;
2
Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245
3. Setup.
Each one of these phases implies the interaction between different
actors. The following paragraphs define the actors involved and their
respective responsibilities.
2.1. Actors involved
The processes consist of activities that require specific expertise,
thus entailing the definition of figures who hold precise technical
abilities. Thus, a clear specification of tasks and responsibilities makes
it possible to better manage the activities involved in an SHM system.
The processes consist of a sequence of tasks, for which the following
responsible figures are expected to be present:
Client/Owner: is the recipient of the monitoring work and com-
missions the project. It coincides with the owner or operator of
the work;
Structural design team: is responsible for analyzing and veri-
fying the structure in its existing state, through the definition
of numerical models that describe the structural behavior. From
the analyses, the team identifies both the need to design an
SHM system, and which parameters should be controlled in the
monitoring process;
Monitoring system design team: is responsible for making the
preliminary design of the monitoring system according to the
specifications of the structural design team, i.e., according to the
needs of the structure. The team or individual designer must have
adequate technical skills to choose the type, number, and location
of sensors;
Executive design team: is responsible for the executive design,
i.e., the technical specifications of all components of the moni-
toring system, as preliminarily defined by the monitoring system
design team;
Supplier(s): is one or more entities responsible for supplying the
system components, with related certifications;
Installer(s): is one or more entities responsible for the proper
setup of the system. The setup must be carried out according to
the specifications defined in the executive project;
Technical supervisor: directs and coordinates the supply and
setup phases of the system. Supervises the correct supply of the
necessary components (before the setup) and is responsible for
the testing and commissioning of the system;
2.2. Traditional design and setup of an SHM system
According to Farrar and Worden [2], the main objectives of an SHM
system are (i) to understand the structural behavior of complex and
innovative structures, (ii) the evaluation of the current condition of the
structure (damage detection), and (iii) the identification of degradation
processes to which it might be subjected.
The design of an SHM system is an iterative process and requires
several empirical steps to be successfully accomplished. The first step
involves determining the primary objective of the monitoring system.
Indeed, the selection of components should align with this objective.
Drawing from the designer’s expertise and on-site inspections, this
phase focuses on a thorough assessment regarding potential damages
or structural deficiencies that may arise during the residual life of the
structure.
At this stage, the creation of a numerical model of the structure is es-
sential. Such numerical representation allows simulating the structure’s
behavior and identifying the specific parameters that need monitoring.
Once the monitoring target is properly defined, it is possible to
determine the components of the monitoring system and their optimal
placement. This task can be accomplished through practical experience
or, even better, by employing optimization techniques as outlined in
the work of Ostachowicz et al. [27].
C. Gragnaniello et al.
Fig. 1. Traditional approach for SHM system design and setup.
According to this studies, and as previously mentioned in Section 2,
the iterative process of designing and setting up SHM systems can be
subdivided into:
Preliminary Design: The preliminary design of an SHM system
should consider the technical requirements of the instrumenta-
tion, the type and number of measurements required, the correct
placement of sensors, the accuracy levels of the acquired data,
and, above all, a thorough knowledge of the structure.
Executive Design: The executive design of an SHM system can be
defined on the basis of the specifications contained in the prelim-
inary design. The output of the executive design phase contains
all the details needed for the system’s setup. It is important to
point out that the final design may highlight incompatibilities
and potential issues related to the placement of sensors on the
structure.
System setup: The setup of an SHM system is conducted using the
detailed information and specifications contained in the executive
design. The proper accomplishment of the setup phase is essential
to realize a system that meets the degree of accuracy defined in
the preliminary design phase.
Furthermore, the activities include testing the operation of all sys-
tem components and producing certificates by the technical supervi-
sors. At the setup and deployment stage of the monitoring system,
problems related to inconsistencies between design and implementation
may arise (unreachable locations, impossibility of sensor placement,
insufficient length of wiring, etc.).
2.3. Current challenges of the traditional approach of an SHM system
The major identifiable issue in the traditional approach consists
of the lack of connections between the various phases of the process
and the actors therein involved. In fact, the different actors do not
have a well-defined workflow to follow and often their only infor-
mation exchange takes place with the owner. This aspect causes a
significant need for the optimization of information exchange between
the relevant actors, and the continuity of information at every stage
of the process. Increasing the continuity fosters the coherence of the
information produced starting from the preliminary design, carried
3
Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245
forward in the executive design, and completed in the setup and testing
of the monitoring system.
It should also be considered that the traditional process involves the
use of 2D/CAD graphic documents, which have intrinsic shortcomings
such as being limited when it comes to error visualization capabilities,
or not having an overall 3D image of the objects. Furthermore, for the
coordination of the different phases of the process and the produced
designs, the determination of inconsistencies and intersections is done
manually. This can lead to late issue identifications, causing delays in
system execution and losses in terms of time and costs.
Another limitation of the traditional process is found in how in-
formation is exchanged. This task mainly occurs through manual ex-
change, such as e-mail or shared databases. Within this context, the
lack of automation can lead to a possible loss of documentation or
the absence of a jointly agreed-upon file encoding. Moreover, design
projects are exchanged through closed file formats, requiring the use of
specific software. It is worthy to note that this limitation also represents
disadvantages in terms of efficiencies loss.
It is evident that the traditional process of design and setup an SHM
system represents a field where BIM could be applied to improve: the
interdisciplinary coordination among the actors involved, the exchange
of information (through 3D models), and the verification of coherence
of the information content exchanged.
3. The BIM-approach for information management in SHM work-
flows
In a BIM-Based approach, when a contractor defines project objec-
tives, it must communicate the required information to the external
stakeholders involved in the processes, and how they have to exchange
them. This information exchange can be summarized as in Fig. 2.
The core of the process of Fig. 2 is composed of exchange infor-
mation requirements (EIRs), that describe the developer’s needs to
achieve the defined objectives. In the BIM approach, EIRs are defined
for each project, according to ISO 19650-1:2019 [28], specifying the
information management of the project, containing procedures for the
production and delivery of information by the actors involved. The
delivered information is approved if it corresponds to the EIRs defined
for the project. To define the EIRs of a project, the following inputs are
considered:
C. Gragnaniello et al.
Fig. 2. BIM-Based approach for information management.
• Level of Information Need (LoIN);
• Interactions Map (IM);
• Processes Map (PM).
These elements contribute to defining EIRs of an SHM project, that
are then needed to produce the content, the organization, and rules of
an information model. The information model is what is produced and
should be delivered, and consists of information containers. Information
containers, defined in ISO 19650–1:2018 [28], are sets of structured or
unstructured information, such as: a geometric model, a document, or
a table.
Within the context of a BIM-based approach, if the EIRs answer the
question on how required information should be produced, the infor-
mation model identifies what should be actually delivered, therefore
representing the actualization of the EIRs.
The information model is generally represented by a digital BIM
model exchanged within in a digital platform.
In this interplay between requests and execution, there is a need to
verify information content produced. The Information Delivery Spec-
ification (IDS) addresses this need, automating the verification of the
information model delivered.
It is essential to emphasize the importance of the three components
that contribute to the developer’s definition of EIRs: PM,IM and LoIN.
The Process and Interaction Maps are regulated by ISO 29481-
1:2016 [29], while the LoIN concept is introduced by UNI EN 17412-
1:2021 [30].
An Interaction Map is typical for team-based project activities, such
as those characterizing the design of SHM systems, because it defines
the relevant roles and the link between them. Each actor is assigned
a role and a required contribution. An IM is a representation of all
transactions for the exchange of required contributions. In an IM there
is a distinction between the roles of the initiator who makes a request
(design, setup, etc.) and the executor who addresses it. A transaction
ends when the executor completes the requested communication [29].
A PM defines the order in which the activities are performed, for
each role, in each part of the process. A PM places activities within
specified boundaries for each process step, dependent on the defined
exchange requirements. The two maps – IM, and PM – are represented
as diagrams, giving a direct view of the purpose for which they are
made: to define roles, interactions, and flow of activities [29].
When following a BIM-approach, it is not only necessary to define
the roles, responsibilities, and the activities to be performed, but also
the Level of Information Need. The LoIN is an input that enhances
information exchange for a project, providing indications concerning
4
Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245
the proper delivery of information. It also defines the granularity of
the information to be exchanged. To define a LoIN, it is necessary to
know: the purpose and the deadline of information delivery; the actors
requesting and delivering the information; and the objects constituting
the information delivery. LoIN contains the geometric, alphanumeric,
and documentary information to be produced for the delivery of project
information, and specifies the degree of information depth for each
phase [30]. Functionally, the Information Delivery Specification (IDS)
are what make the LoIN of practical application.
The IDS standard was developed by buildingSMART, a non-profit
company which among its main purposes conceives standards that
facilitate the digital transition in AEC sector. The IDS is a standard that
translates information exchange needs into a machine-readable format.
It can be seen as the computer formalization of the LoIN, which is
inserted in the EIRs defined by the owner.
In this way, the IDS becomes a pivotal tool in a BIM approach.
Its working principle relies on the use of digital models with fully-
automated information exchange.
The IDS has three main purposes:
• Definition of information requirements;
• Guidance for creation of project information models;
• Validation of the information content produced.
The main purpose of IDSs is to translate the LoIN into machine
readable language, and to verify the presence and coherence of the
information provided with BIM models. From the technical standpoint,
IDS are the XML language, and are one of distinguishing features of the
Open BIM approach, which aims to establishing a set of common prin-
ciples based on the use of open data format, to foster the development
of the free market and interoperability.
Therefore, the working principle of IDSs relies on the use of the
Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) standard format, the most popular
standard developed by buildingSMART. The IFC is an open and neu-
tral data format which has the purpose of processing the information
content of a building, favoring the exchange of models containing
information as geometry, materials, specifications, drawings, etc.
There is a close link between LoIN, IDS, and IFC. The LoIN defines
the level of information required for each phase, the IDS translates the
LoIN into a language that can be understood by a computer, and it is
used to guide the creation of the information model in IFC. Finally, the
IDS checks the consistency of the information model produced.
As mentioned, the concept of LoIN is standardized by UNI EN
17412-1:2021 [30], while that of IDS is not currently standardized,
C. Gragnaniello et al.
yet there is an increasing focus on its definition in the international
context. For this reason, this study focuses on the use of this standard
to highlight the advantages it can bring in the exchange of information
content and verification of information consistency in a target process.
The following section details a thorough proposal on how to apply
a BIM-based methodology for the design and setup of an SHM system.
3.1. The application of the BIM-approach to SHM systems
Given the current challenges of the traditional processes for the
design and setup of an SHM System, and the advantages that BIM can
bring in this contest, this section applies the approach described in
Section 3 to the case of an SHM System.
As also described previously for information management, within a
BIM-based approach for SHM, the PM aims to creating an uncluttered
workflow to optimize the process that starts with the preliminary
design, carries through the executive design and setup, and is finalized
with the supervision of an SHM System.
This whole process originates with a request by an owner and ends
with all the deliverable. The proposed methodology is applicable both
for an existing structure and a new construction. In these two cases, the
difference is the life-cycle stage which the structure belongs to: for an
existing structure, a monitoring system is defined in the management
phase and an information model is delivered. In the other hand for
a new construction, the information model is defined in the design
phase. In the management phase of an existing structure, a BIM model
of the structural As-Built may already be available, and can be used
as a support for modeling the SHM system. Nevertheless, for both
types of structure, the methodology remains unchanged. Therefore it
is necessary to detail the PM used in this application, clarify the LoIN
for all phases of the process, and turn them in IDSs.
In this methodology the implementation of IDSs is achieved through
a script, that specify the proprieties for the digital model produced
in each phase. The scripts define IDSs with a correlation among the
different disciplines. IDSs are used by the owner to provide informa-
tion requirements to an actor, and to verify the compliance of the
information model with IDS.
The Process Map described is based on the guidelines specified
for monitoring systems as detailed in the Italian standard UNI/TR
11634:2016 [26].
The process map is defined as a Business Process Modeling Notation
(BPMN) diagram, a widely used concept in the context of project
management. It represents a complete diagram of the activities to be
accomplished, from the actors assigned to produce the initial drafts,
to those responsible of managing the system. In a BPMN diagram, the
activities are connected with unidirectional arrows to specify the order
in which the tasks follow each other.
The PM represented in Fig. 3 articulates its structure in five sections.
Each section contains the specific tasks for each distinct actor. The
workflow described by PM progresses from top to bottom, the individ-
ual work areas are represented by the horizontal rectangles, finally the
flow of activities in the work areas proceeds from left to right.
In addition, Fig. 3 details the files involved in the information
exchange between actors, and the information content validation gates.
Gates control whether the information content is verified and consistent
with the requests. If this check is affirmative, the process contin-
ues; otherwise, the requesting actors issues new correction or inte-
gration requests, so that the information produced complies with the
corresponding gate.
The first section contains the activities to be performed by the owner
of the structure. This section also represents the beginning and end
stages of the process, as the owner is the actor requesting and receiving
the information content produced at the end of each stage.
The first activity involves decision-making strategies, based on the
requirements of the owner’s organization. At this stage, system’s re-
quirements are determined. In addition, EIRs are identified for each
5
Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245
actor involved. Throughout the process, the owner defines specific IDSs
for each phase of the PM: IDS L1, IDS L2, IDS L3, corresponding
to preliminary design, executive design, and setup, respectively. As
stated previously, the granularity of information content increases as
the design level increases, because the information need of the LoIN
increases.
The second section of the PM is defined for the preliminary design
team of the system. This phase begins with the handover of the IDS
L1 by the owner. The information content requirements are used to
model the system. This stage corresponds to Work in Progress (WIP)
state in a Common Data Environment (CDE), because the information
model is developed by a specific task group, the preliminary design
BIM model of the SHM system is produced, containing the sensors
and the DAQ system, and related preliminary information (axis, min.
sensitivity, preliminary costs, etc.).
Subsequently, the model is transferred to shared folder of CDE
where it can be verified in accordance with the information require-
ments specified in IDS L1. If the model is approved by the gate, it
becomes validated, moving on published folder of CDE. Otherwise, the
inconsistency are addressed by corrections or by integrating the model
with additional information, coming back to Project team WIP.
The preliminary BIM model with the SHM system specification is
used to implement the IDS L2 of the executive design. The IDS L2
is provided by the owner, but it is linked to the preliminary model in
order to have consistency of information through consecutive stages.
Indeed, the validation of the preliminary model, through the script,
allows the direct transition from preliminary to executive design.
The third section of the PM corresponds to the executive design
of the SHM system. The executive design team creates in their WIP
the executive BIM model, which contains the second level design
information (location of the electrical system and wiring, excitation
voltage, need for specific technologies, costs, etc.). The requirements
of this level are established by the corresponding IDS. The validation
of the model moved to the shared folder in the CDE and the need for
possible corrections are handled through the logic gates.
The executive BIM model is employed to finalize the system supply
requirements, and to deploy the IDS L3. As detailed for preliminary
and executive phase, the IDS ensures the consistency of information
between the executive phase and the system setup phase.
Indeed, the IDS L3 is used to define the information requirements
for the SHM As-Built system model.
Once the executive model is validated, it provides the definition of
the supplies needed, such as: the number of sensors and acquisition
systems, the length of the cables, the type of connection, the type of
components, etc.
For setting up the system, installers are supported by the three-
dimensional digital model, which can be consulted on site from a tablet,
smartphone, or virtual reality devices, to solve any technical problems
that may arise. Installers must also provide the SHM system As-Built
Model, in their WIP, which correspond to the system configuration
on the structure. The As-built Model must integrate all corrections
representing the minor changes occurred during the installation, such
as the positioning of a subset of sensors. Moreover, the As-built Model
also reports the validation of system, as performed at the testing stage,
and shared in CDE, for the validation model. Also in this case if the
validation model process is successful the SHM System As-Built Model
is shared in published folder in the CDE.
Indeed, the last stage takes on the testing of the installed SHM
system and reporting the corresponding results into the model.
Ultimately, the consistency of information fostered by the PM is of
capital importance in a context such as the design and setup of an
SHM system. With the proposed methodology, the actors in different
phases do not necessarily have direct interactions, but can automati-
cally consult the BIM models of the previous phase, and the information
requirements provided by the owner.
C. Gragnaniello et al.
Fig. 3. Process map for BIM-based design and setup of a SHM system.
3.2. Information requirements setting for SHM system: from LoIN to IDS
with IDS-SHM-generator
The proposed methodology uses IDS standards to ensure the con-
sistency of the information produced with the LoINs defined by the
owner. This section explains the relationship between the required
information, the LoIN and IDSs, and how the IDSs of the different
phases are related to each other.
For designing and setting up an SHM system, it is necessary to define
three different LoINs:
LoIN - Preliminary Design: the object are the sensors and the
acquisition system. Simplified 3D geometric information of the
objects is required. The geometric representation must be digital
and provided through digital models in open format (e.g., IFC).
6
Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245
The required alphanumeric information is related to object iden-
tification codes and the preliminary information required for the
sensors and the system. The required documentary information
is the original works, reports, cost estimation, and preliminary
drawings. The project information model corresponds to the pre-
liminary BIM model of the SHM system, containing the object
pertaining to this phase;
LoIN - Executive Design: the object are all the components of the
monitoring system, sensors, acquisition systems, cables, antennas,
routers, controllers, etc. Specific digital 3D geometric information
is required for each object, provided through digital models in
open format. There is a faithful representation of the designed
element at the execution stage. The alphanumeric information
includes the information of the preliminary design, adequately
expanded and implemented according to the executive specifica-
tions. The documentary part holds the executive drawings of the
C. Gragnaniello et al.
Fig. 4. From LoIN to IDS.
system, technical drawings of the wiring, reports, cost valuations,
the assembly and installation manuals, and the technical spec-
ification manuals. The model corresponds to the executive BIM
model of the SHM system, containing the object of this phase;
LoIN - Setup: the object, and the geometric and alphanumeric
information are the same as those involved in the executive phase.
For the setup, the difference lies in the definition of the object
properties, which must correspond to what has been installed and
tested. The documentary information required is the acceptance
certificate, the work and inspection reports, and the user manual.
The model corresponds to the BIM As-Built model of the SHM
system, containing the object of this phase.
As described in Section 3, the proposed methodology developed a
script that takes the information contained in the LoINs as input and
outputs an IDS (see Fig. 4).
Algorithm 1 describes the procedure to generate an IDS file accord-
ing to a specific LoIN definition. Given the LoIN, the script generates
an XML instruction file for each property for the IDS file.
Similarly, Algorithm 2 produces an IDS file according to the LoIN,
the coordination rules, and the information model. In this case, the
procedure checks if the property is coordinated with a previously
defined field in the information model, and enforces a further test in
the property value.
The scripts are reported in Algorithms 1 and 2.
Algorithm 1 IDS - L1 Generation
1: procedure Generation(𝐿𝑜𝐼𝑁)
2: for 𝑖 = 1 to length(𝑃 𝑟𝑒𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑔𝑛) do
3: IDS-requirements(Pset(i),Property(i))
4: end for
5: end procedure
7
Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245
Algorithm 2 IDS - L2 Generation
1: procedure Generation(LoIN, ifc.PreDesign)
2: for 𝑖 = 1 to length(LoIN.PreDesign) do
3: if LoIN.Coordination[i] == 𝑇 𝑟𝑢𝑒 then
4: if LoIN.Condition[i] == ‘‘min’’ then
5: Value = Readproperty(Pset(i),Property(i),ifc.
PreDesing)
6: IDS-Requirements(Pset(i),Property(i),‘‘min’’,Value)
7: end if
8: if LoIN.Condition[i] == ‘‘max’’ then
9: Value = Readproperty(Pset(i),Property(i),ifc.
PreDesing)
10: IDS-Requirements(Pset(i),Property(i),‘‘max’’, Value)
11: end if
12: if LoIN.Condition[i] == ‘‘equal’’ then
13: Value = Readproperty(Pset(i),Property(i),
ifc.PreDesing)
14: IDS-Requirements(Pset(i),Property(i),‘‘equal’’, Value)
15: end if
16: else
17: IDS-requirements(Pset(i),Property(i))
18: end if
19: end for
20: end procedure
4. Case study
This section reports a case study implementing the proposed ap-
proach in designing and setting up an innovative SHM system. The
structure subject to monitoring is the Canalone Viaduct, an reinforced
concrete upper-arch viaduct on the Naples-Salerno highway, in the
South of Italy. The design and setup of the monitoring project were
completed through the creation of digital models of the structure with
authoring software, using a collaborative platform to support inter-
operability, exchanging information content with open file formats,
controlling the coordination between different disciplinary models,
verifying the consistency of information content through IDSs, and by
timely supervising the structure and related problems.
The Canalone Viaduct is 110 m long and consists of 11 spans.
The deck is supported by 6 longitudinal beams of 35 × 152 cm and
20 × 152 cm, for external and internal girders, respectively. Reinforced
concrete frames, directly founded on the ground, sustain the lateral
bays, while the central bays, those subject to monitoring, are supported
by an arched reinforced concrete structure from which the vertical
elements supporting the deck elevate. The sections of the vertical
support elements are 50 × 40 cm and 44 × 40 cm in the case of external
columns while being 50 × 30 cm and 44 × 30 cm for internal columns.
The aim of this case study is to validate the approach in a real-world
context and evaluate the proposed methodology when compared to the
traditional approach.
The first step for a BIM-based SHM system design is the creation of
a Common Data Environment (CDE). The CDE built for the case study
consists of folders organized according to ISO19650 [28] within an in-
teroperability platform, the usBIM.platform (owned by ACCAsoftware).
The platform was chosen to: have controlled access to the CDE, track
tasks to be accomplished, define project workflows, integrate files in
open and proprietary formats, attach structure-related documents, and
use IDSs for checking information consistency.
The CDE is structured into 4 folders:
Work in progress: in which the actors involved in the SHM
system process contributed separately. This folder hosted the
material related to the design of the preliminary and executive
phases. After an initial internal check of the produced models,
the content is uploaded to the shared folder.
C. Gragnaniello et al.
Fig. 5. LoIN definition in the case study.
Shared: is a folder for sharing the information content, with the
purpose of checking the consistency of the produced information.
In this section, the developer can access and verify the models
produced by the actors and their correspondence with the defined
EIRs. After the consistency check between the preliminary and
executive phases, the verified executive model is moved into the
published folder.
Published: contains the deliverable, consisting of the executive
model with sensor specifications for the setup of the system;
Archive: represents the project’s background, containing all sup-
porting documentation and log files, which are not part of the
deliverables, but were utilized or hold a trace of the process.
In the preliminary phase, a BIM model was generated in IFC4x3
format and uploaded on the CDE. Additionally, the LoINs for each phase
were identified as shown in Fig. 5. Once defined the LoINs, are used by
the application developed in this study to generate the IDS L1, IDS
L2, and IDS L3, which are used for the request and validation of the
models produced by the preliminary and executive design team and the
SHM system installers. As an example of the syntax generated IDS for
Preliminary Design, Fig. 6 shows an XML file reporting a single property
to be checked. In this context, the choice of showing only one property
was conducted for the sake of brevity.
The digital model created was posted in the shared folder of CDE
through a file format IFC4x3 (Fig. 7).
4.1. Preliminary design of the SHM system
The preliminary design phase of the SHM system was led by the
University of Naples Federico II, using an updated numerical model
of the viaduct. Operational modal analysis (OMA) was performed to
dynamically identify the structure and enhance the accuracy of sim-
ulations, considering the effects of damages [31]. In this case study,
the operations employed innovative stress sensors, that also found
application in previous works [32,33]. Specifically, these are parallel-
plate capacitive sensors, with Kapton as dielectric layer. These sensors
detect the compressive and tensile stresses applied to the sensitive
surfaces of the plates. The preliminary design team of the SHM system
defined the placement of:
• n. 6 accelerometers on the deck;
• n. 16 stress sensors on columns;
• n. 16 stress sensors on the arch.
8
Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245
All possible technical and economic issues were considered in the
design, and a preliminary assessment of the costs was provided. In
addition, this stage defined also all necessary system characteristics,
such as maximum sampling rate, power consumption, periodicity of
acquisition, the power supply, and the dust and water protection rating.
The knowledge of the specifications is essential to define the execu-
tive design. Sensors have been defined as IFC entities to be included
in the structural BIM model. Since currently IFC standard lacks IFC
entities related to specific sensors for SHM, the elements representing
accelerometers and stress sensors were created ad hoc. Within an IFC
model, three elements coexist: entities (i.e., objects), relationships be-
tween entities, and property sets attributed to individual entities. In the
proposed case study, sensors were geometrically represented as cubes
or small cylinders and defined as an IfcSensor entity, i.e., an entity used
for the generic measurement device. Sensors were inserted into the IFC
model, placing them on the IfcElements (beams, columns, and arches).
This generates a relationship in the IFC structure described in Fig. 8.
Lastly, the Pset_Sensor_Requirements, a set of sensor and data
acquisition system (DAQ) properties, was defined and populated with
the specifications for preliminary design, according to the requirements
defined in the LoIN and contained in IDS L1 (Fig. 9).
As the last step of this phase, the preliminary design model was
uploaded into the shared folder of the CDE, where verification of
requirements was conducted by the owner of the infrastructure. To
check the consistency of the model with IDS L1, the owner used
the usBIM.IDS software. After the validation, the Preliminary BIM
Model with SHM system is shared in published folder of the CDE This
application allows one to check that the information is contained in
the model and that it complies with any thresholds defined in the IDSs.
The validated model was used to generate the IDS L2, as contained in
Algorithm 2, which was delivered to the executive design team.
4.2. Executive design, setup and supervision phase of the SHM system
The infrastructural owner commissioned a team, led by the Univer-
sity of Naples, to carry out the executive design. At this stage, the SHM
system executive design team had access to the Preliminary BIM Model
with SHM system in published folder of CDE, containing the placement
of the sensors and minimal requirements needed for the sensors and
acquisition system. This phase defined the topological architecture
of the system, i.e., the physical connection of the components. In
addition, the analog-to-digital conversion systems, collectors, sensors,
and acquisition devices were identified, based on design specifications,
using the information provided by the IDS L2. Moreover, the expenses
C. Gragnaniello et al. Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245

Fig. 6. Portion of XML file generated by IDS_Generator.

Fig. 7. Structural BIM model.

for the system were also estimated by summing the costs due to the shared folder of CDE. Also, at this stage, the owner used usBIM.IDS
sensors, setup operations, and maintenance. Once defined the sensors in a consistency check of the model and IDS L2 (Fig. 10). This
and acquisition systems, the specifications of the executive system check consists in verifying the presence of the required data and in
were included in the executive design BIM model and uploaded to the checking the fulfillment of the requirements of the preliminary design

9
C. Gragnaniello et al.
Fig. 8. IfcSensor relationship in IFC schema.
level, incorporated into IDS L2 at the time of its generation. Fig. 10
shows that in model validation lacks some sensors’ requirements in two
accelerometers on the dack.
After the validation, the model was shared in the published folder
of the CDE. Lastly, the model was used by the infrastructural owner
to generate the IDS L3, which was delivered to the SHM system
installation team.
The setup phase was assigned to the company that supplied the sys-
tem components. The executive BIM model was used at the construction
site, using a tablet as a supporting device for visualizing the sensor
locations and system specifications. In addition, the installation manual
containing drawings and diagrams related to the work was available for
consultation.
The manual is complete with instructions for installing all hard-
ware and software components. At this stage, the BIM model allowed
the visualization of all possible structural and installation constraints;
graphic tables of cable routes; illustrative connector diagrams, and
other instructions, without needing printed material.
In addition, the manual reported methods for checking the oper-
ation of the network and the quality of the completed installation.
Accordingly, after completing the setup, the SHM system was checked
and tested.
A supervisor executed the technical testing, checking the manu-
facturer’s certifications and performing installation-related tests (op-
eration for sensors preinstalled in structural components, calibrations,
settings, and continuity of the wiring network).
The successful accomplishment of testing operations produced the
test certificate. All the documentation related to the installation, test-
ing, maintenance, and system’s operation manual was linked to the
10
Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245
As-built BIM model of the SHM system, produced by the system in-
staller.
Ultimately, the As-Built BIM model contained all the specifications
defined in the IDS L3 and was uploaded into the shared folder where
it was validated by the developer, by checking the consistency between
the information and the IDS L3.
5. Discussion
The use of BIM in design and setup of an SHM system offers
several advantages. By employing open IFC file formats, any software
supporting them can be used, eliminating the need for a single software
for SHM system design and setup. This flexibility is particularly advan-
tageous when dealing with multiple disciplines and specific software
requirements related to structures or sensors.
In our case study, we showcased the structural BIM modeling of
the project, including the modeling of sensors and acquisition units
using IFCSensor. To optimize information exchange, it would be bene-
ficial to have an IFC specification for sensors, which could be utilized
in monitoring projects. The implementation of IFC aims to enhance
interoperability across disciplines and facilitate business processes.
Collaboration among project stakeholders was achieved through a
collaborative environment within a Common Data Environment (CDE),
housing models and system-related processes. The information and
models produced by each stakeholder were manually published in the
WIP, shared, published folders of the CDE. In addition, Inconsistencies
in the various system models (preliminary, executive, and as-built)
were managed and coordinated within the CDE, aided by the use
of the IDS standard for model verification. A script was developed
to generate and verify IDSs, ensuring consistency in the information
content produced by different participants throughout the process. The
digital environment facilitated system supervision, linking SHM system
certificates and verifications to the BIM model.
Our study compares the traditional approach with the BIM ap-
proach, specifically applying the proposed methodology to a real mon-
itoring system installed on a highway viaduct. Leveraging the us-
BIM.platform, we established a workflow that streamlined the use of
a single execution environment. Through specific activities outlined in
the defined process map, information exchange and accessibility were
improved.
By employing the BIM methodology, we created a complete digital
ecosystem encompassing information, models, documents, and pro-
cesses for the design and setup of SHM systems. The advantages pre-
sented in our case study compared to the traditional approach are
summarized in Fig. 11.
6. Conclusions
This paper details a BIM-based methodology to optimize SHM de-
sign and setup. The topic of using BIM in AEC-related process man-
agement, is extensively discussed in the Scientific Literature, through
the evaluation of benefits. However, from the perspective of SHM
systems, there is a lack of a solution, based on BIM, to: translate project
information requirements into machine-readable needs; implement the
design phase of the SHM system with three-dimensional digital models;
use applications to verify the consistency of digital models with the
required information requirements; optimize the coordination of the
different disciplines involved; support the setup and supervision phase
of the system with digital consultation of information content; and
obtain the As-Built model of the installed system with tested specifi-
cations. The core of this study was the definition of a methodology for
checking the models produced, at the preliminary executive and setup
phases, through the use of IDS standards. This provides a BIM-based
approach for managing the entire development of an SHM system, with
the creation of a process map to relate the activities of the stakeholders
involved to the tools to be used. The approach was applied to a case
C. Gragnaniello et al. Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245

Fig. 9. Pset_Sensor_Requirements definition for each sensor and DAQ system.

Fig. 10. IDS L2 check for executive design.

study, for the implementation of a monitoring system for a highway CRediT authorship contribution statement
viaduct. The case study showed the possibility of design and setup of an
SHM system with full BIM support. Aiming to optimize the information Chiara Gragnaniello: Writing – original draft, Methodology, Data
exchange among actors of the process during the commissioning of curation, Conceptualization. Giulio Mariniello: Writing – original
SHM systems, the proposed workflow adopts an intermediate level of draft, Software, Methodology, Conceptualization. Tommaso Pastore:
granularity. This implies that the description of the methodology does Writing – review & editing, Supervision. Domenico Asprone: Supervi-
not take into account the specific activities of the designer, while being sion, Funding acquisition.
focused only on the design delivery, and this is the main limitation of
the discussion herein presented. Nevertheless, in addition to bringing Declaration of competing interest
the benefits of a BIM methodology in the design phase of a monitoring
system, the proposed approach could also result in benefits to the op-
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
erational phase of monitored structures. Indeed, the availability in the
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
monitoring phase of a validated information model ensures accessibility
influence the work reported in this paper.
to technical details of the SHM system, clarifying also all information
related to system maintenance (such as a change of a sensor, a cable,
or a battery). Moreover, through the definition of suitable Psets, the Data availability
AsBuilt model could serve as a natural host of visualization and analysis
operations. The python codes for the generation of IDSs are shared as supple-
In this first release of the scripts, IDS_Generator requires, albeit very mentary material.
limited, programming skills, as the current version lacks a graphical
user interface. In this regard, future developments may be the imple- Appendix A. Supplementary data
mentation of the code in order to create a graphical interface for the
management of data derived from the SHM system, which integrates Supplementary material related to this article can be found online
the use of IDS for the verification of the exchanged information. at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2023.105245.

11
C. Gragnaniello et al.
Fig. 11. Difference in traditional approach and BIM-based approach for SHM processes.
References
[1] Michael Theiler, Kay Smarsly, IFC Monitor – An IFC schema extension for
modeling structural health monitoring systems, Adv. Eng. Inform. 37 (2018)
54–65, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2018.04.011.
[2] Charles R. Farrar, Keith Worden, An introduction to structural health monitoring,
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 365 (1851) (2006) 303–315, http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/
rsta.2006.1928.
[3] Aftab A. Mufti, Baidar Bakht, Gamil Tadros, Andrew T. Horosko, Gordon Sparks,
Civionics — A new paradigm in design, evaluation, and risk analysis of civil
structures, J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 18 (8) (2007) 757–763, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1177/1045389x06074572.
[4] Yong Han Ahn, Young Hoon Kwak, Sung Joon Suk, Contractors’ transformation
strategies for adopting building information modeling, J. Manage. Eng. 32 (1)
(2016) http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000390.
[5] David Bryde, Martí Broquetas, Jürgen Marc Volm, The project benefits of
Building Information Modelling (BIM), Int. J. Proj. Manage. 31 (7) (2013)
971–980, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.12.001.
[6] Ali Ghaffarianhoseini, John Tookey, Amirhosein Ghaffarianhoseini, Nicola Nai-
smith, Salman Azhar, Olia Efimova, Kaamran Raahemifar, Building Information
Modelling (BIM) uptake: Clear benefits, understanding its implementation, risks
and challenges, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 75 (2017) 1046–1053, http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.083.
[7] Bilal Succar, Building information modelling framework: A research and delivery
foundation for industry stakeholders, Autom. Constr. 18 (3) (2009) 357–375,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2008.10.003.
[8] Rafael Sacks, Charles Eastman, Ghang Lee, Paul Teicholz, BIM Handbook, John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2018, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781119287568.
[9] Salman Azhar, Building information modeling (BIM): Trends, benefits, risks, and
challenges for the AEC industry, Leadersh. Manag. Eng. 11 (3) (2011) 241–252,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(asce)lm.1943-5630.0000127.
[10] Mehmet Yalcinkaya, Vishal Singh, Patterns and trends in Building Information
Modeling (BIM) research: A latent semantic analysis, Autom. Constr. 59 (2015)
68–80, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.07.012.
[11] J. Rio, B. Ferreira, J. Poças-Martins, Expansion of IFC model with structural
sensors, Inf. Constr. 65 (530) (2013) 219–228, http://dx.doi.org/10.3989/ic.12.
043.
[12] ISO 16739-1:2018, Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) for Data Sharing in
the Construction and Facility Management Industries - Part 1: Data Schema,
Standard, International Organization for Standardization, 2018, URL https://
www.iso.org/standard/70303.html, (last access: 2023-16-11).
[13] Alex Bradley, Haijiang Li, Robert Lark, Simon Dunn, BIM for infrastructure: An
overall review and constructor perspective, Autom. Constr. 71 (2016) 139–152,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.08.019.
[14] Aaron Costin, Alireza Adibfar, Hanjin Hu, Stuart S. Chen, Building Information
Modeling (BIM) for transportation infrastructure – Literature review, applica-
tions, challenges, and recommendations, Autom. Constr. 94 (2018) 257–281,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.07.001.
12
Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245
[15] Reihane Shafie Panah, Mahdi Kioumarsi, Application of Building Information
Modelling (BIM) in the health monitoring and maintenance process: A systematic
review, Sensors 21 (3) (2021) 837, http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21030837.
[16] Salvatore Antonio Biancardo, Alessandra Capano, Sara Guerra de Oliveira,
Andrej Tibaut, Integration of BIM and procedural modeling tools for
road design, Infrastructures 5 (4) (2020) 37, http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
infrastructures5040037.
[17] Juan M. Davila Delgado, Liam J. Butler, Niamh Gibbons, Ioannis Brilakis,
Mohammed Z.E.B. Elshafie, Campbell Middleton, Management of structural
monitoring data of bridges using BIM, Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. - Bridge Eng. 170
(3) (2017) 204–218, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/jbren.16.00013.
[18] Angelo Ciccone, Sabrina Di Stasio, Domenico Asprone, Antonio Salzano, Maurizio
Nicolella, Application of openBIM for the management of existing railway
infrastructure: Case study of the cancello–benevento railway line, Sustainability
14 (4) (2022) 2283, http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su14042283.
[19] Philipp Hagedorn, Liu Liu, Markus König, Rade Hajdin, Tim Blumenfeld, Markus
Stöckner, Maximilian Billmaier, Karl Grossauer, Kenneth Gavin, BIM-enabled
infrastructure asset management using information containers and semantic web,
J. Comput. Civ. Eng. (2023) http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.
0001051.
[20] ISO 21597-1:2020, Information Container for Linked Document Delivery —
Exchange Specification — Part 1: Container, Standard, International Organization
for Standardization, 2020, URL https://www.iso.org/standard/74389.html, (last
access: 2023-16-11).
[21] Paolino Cassese, Giuseppina De Luca, Antonio Bonati, Carlo Rainieri, Antonio
Occhiuzzi, A preliminary qualification approach for structural health monitoring
systems, in: European Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring, Springer
International Publishing, Cham, ISBN: 978-3-031-07322-9, 2023, pp. 635–644.
[22] Maria Giuseppina Limongelli, et al., Toward the development of standardized
procedures for structural health monitoring, in: IABSE Symposium Guimaraes
2019, ISBN: 978-385748163-5, 2019, pp. 1720–1727.
[23] Ming Liu, Dan M. Frangopol, Kihyon Kwon, Fatigue reliability assessment
of retrofitted steel bridges integrating monitored data, Struct. Saf. (ISSN:
0167-4730) 32 (1) (2010) 77–89, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2009.08.
003.
[24] W. Rücker, F. Hille, R. Rohrmann, Guideline for the assessment of existing
structures, 2006, URL http://www.samco.org/network/download_area/ass_guide.
pdf, (last access: 2023-16-11).
[25] B. Glisic, Fiber optic sensors for subsea structural health monitoring, in: Subsea
Optics and Imaging, Elsevier, 2013, pp. 434–470, http://dx.doi.org/10.1533/
9780857093523.3.434.
[26] UNI/TR 11634:2016, Technical Report – Linee Guida Per Il Monitoraggio
Strutturale, Standard, Ente Italiano di Normazione, 2016, URL https://store.uni.
com/uni-tr-11634-2016, (last access: 2023-16-11).
[27] Wieslaw Ostachowicz, Rohan Soman, Pawel Malinowski, Optimization of sensor
placement for structural health monitoring: A review, Struct. Health Monit. 18
(3) (2019) 963–988, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1475921719825601.
C. Gragnaniello et al.
[28] ISO 19650–1:2018, Concepts and Principles. Organization and Digitization of
Information About Buildings and Civil Engineering Works, Including Building
Information Modelling (BIM) - Information Management Using Building Informa-
tion Modelling, Standard, International Organization for Standardization, 2019,
URL https://www.iso.org/standard/68078.html, (last access: 2023-16-11).
[29] ISO 29481-1:2016, Building Information Models — Information Delivery Man-
ual — Part 1: Methodology and Format, Standard, International Organization
for Standardization, 2016, URL https://www.iso.org/standard/60553.html, (last
access: 2023-16-11).
[30] UNI EN 17412-1:2021, Building Information Modelling - Livello Di Fabbisogno
Informativo - Parte 1: Concetti E Principi, Standard, Ente Italiano di Nor-
mazione, 2021, URL https://store.uni.com/uni-en-17412-1-2021, (last access:
2023-16-11).
13
Automation in Construction 158 (2024) 105245
[31] Alessandro Lubrano Lobianco, Marta Del Zoppo, Carlo Rainieri, Giovanni Fab-
brocino, Marco Di Ludovico, Damage estimation of full-scale infilled RC frames
under pseudo-dynamic excitation by means of output-only modal identification,
Buildings 13 (4) (2023) 948, http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/buildings13040948.
[32] Giulio Mariniello, Tommaso Pastore, Domenico Asprone, Edoardo Cosenza,
Layout-aware extreme learning machine to detect tendon malfunctions in pre-
stressed concrete bridges using stress data, Autom. Constr. 132 (2021) 103976,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103976.
[33] Lidia La Mendola, Maria Concetta Oddo, Maurizio Papia, Francesco Pappalardo,
Agatino Pennisi, Gabriele Bertagnoli, Fabio Di Trapani, Alessia Monaco, Fulvio
Parisi, Simone Barile, Performance of two innovative stress sensors imbedded
in mortar joints of new masonry elements, Constr. Build. Mater. 297 (2021)
123764, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123764.