Reliability, risk and lifetime distributions as performance indicators for life-cycle maintenance of deteriorating structures

Abstract

Structural capacity deterioration is among the main causes of increasing failure probabilities of structural systems, thus maintenance interventions are a crucial task for their rational management. Several probabilistic approaches have been proposed during the last decades for the determination of cost-effective maintenance strategies based on selected performance indicators. However, benefits and drawbacks of each performance indicator with respect to the others should be further analyzed. The objective of this paper is to investigate probabilistic approaches based on the annual reliability index, annual risk, and lifetime distributions for life-cycle maintenance of structural systems. Maintenance schedules are obtained for representative series, parallel, and series-parallel systems considering total restoration of component resistances whenever a prescribed threshold, based on a selected performance indicator, is reached. Effects related to different structural configurations and correlation among failure modes are investigated. The superstructure of an existing bridge is used to illustrate the presented approaches.

The effect of materials on the reliability of reinforced concrete beams in normal and intense corrosions

“…Unlike the former study, they also considered the corrosion impact on steel material. Interestingly in the present article, the same approach is recruited, will be depicted in Sec.4.Barone and Frangopol investigated the probabilistic approaches and obtained that Maintenance schedules are for life-cycle maintenance of structural systems [3]. Zhang et al presented the time-dependent probability of chloride-induced corrosion of reinforced concrete (RC) structures in marine environments, by developing the third-moment (TM) method [41].According to Simioni [31] and Pedeferri [27], often the amount of cross-sectional reduction is intense and neglecting it in the design of RC structures can lead to serious damage.…”

Risk- and Sustainability-Informed Decision Making for Structures in a Life-Cycle Context

“…Because of these uncertainties, it is imperative for structural engineers to accurately model and assess the structural performance and expected total cost within a probabilistic life-cycle context (Frangopol 2011).Furthermore, the effects of maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation on structural lifecycle performance must be quantified (Barone &Frangopol 2014b, Frangopol et al 2004, Sánchez-Silva et al 2016, Zhu & Frangopol 2012, 2013. Approaches for the life-cycle management of infrastructure systems involving reliability performance indicators consider uncertainties associated with loads and resistance, but are not able to account for the consequences incurred from structural failure.…”

“…Approaches for the life-cycle management of infrastructure systems involving reliability performance indicators consider uncertainties associated with loads and resistance, but are not able to account for the consequences incurred from structural failure. Risk-based indicators provide the means to combine the probability of structural failure with the consequences associated with this event (Ang & Tang 1984, Barone & Frangopol 2014b, Decò & Frangopol 2011. Furthermore, methodologies considering sustainability as a performance indicator are becoming relevant within the field of life-cycle engineering.…”

Assessment of the Reliability-Cost Efficiency of the Pumping Subsystems at Water Treatment Plant

“…As combined reliability and economic research for municipal systems is a novel approach, authors reviewed literature from other technical sectors such as mining industry [20] and energetic [21]. It is assumed that Life Cycle Costing (LCC [PLN]) was the most applicable [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31]. LCC analysis takes into account all costs incurred during the technical life cycle of an object.…”