Integrating multi-source data for life-cycle risk assessment of bridge networks: a system digital twin framework

被引:0
作者
Geng, Ziheng [1 ]
Zhang, Chao [2 ]
Jiang, Yishuo [3 ]
Pugliese, Dora [1 ]
Cheng, Minghui [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Miami, Dept Civil & Architectural Engn, Coral Gables, FL 33146 USA
[2] Hunan Univ, Coll Civil Engn, Changsha 410082, Peoples R China
[3] Cornell Univ, Syst Engn, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA
[4] Univ Miami, Sch Architecture, Coral Gables, FL 33146 USA
来源
JOURNAL OF INFRASTRUCTURE PRESERVATION AND RESILIENCE | 2025年 / 6卷 / 01期
关键词
System digital twin; Life-cycle risk assessment; Infrastructure management; System reliability; Bayesian network; CIVIL INFRASTRUCTURE; RELIABILITY; RESILIENCE; PERFORMANCE; EARTHQUAKE; MANAGEMENT; VARIABLES; HAZARDS;
D O I
10.1186/s43065-025-00121-7
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Bridges are critical infrastructure assets that face a variety of stressors throughout their service life, requiring a life-cycle approach to assess their risk profile. Recent advancements in sensing and monitoring technologies provide a powerful data foundation to improve the accuracy of life-cycle risk assessment (LCRA). However, existing works that incorporate data for probabilistic risk assessment typically focus on individual bridges and rely on single-source data, limiting their scope and applicability. To this end, a system digital twin (SDT) framework based on Bayesian network (BN) is proposed to integrate multi-source data for LCRA of bridge networks. Specifically, the SDT can capture correlations and interdependencies across various scales, including within individual components (e.g., multiple failure modes), between components within a system (e.g., bridges along a route), and across interconnected systems (e.g., bridge and hydraulic systems). It integrates data from various sources including bridge inspections, traffic monitoring facilities, and water watch stations. A coastal bridge network in Miami-Dade County, FL, is used as an illustrative example to demonstrate how the SDT integrates multi-source data for risk assessment. Additionally, several future scenarios are hypothesized to showcase the applicability and flexibility of the proposed framework in supporting risk management for infrastructure systems.
引用
收藏
页数:20
相关论文
共 80 条
[1]   Simplified methodology for indirect loss-based prioritization in roadway bridge network risk assessment [J].
Abarca, Andres ;
Monteiro, Ricardo ;
O'Reilly, Gerard J. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DISASTER RISK REDUCTION, 2022, 74
[2]   Concrete bridge deck condition assessment using IR Thermography and Ground Penetrating Radar technologies [J].
Abu Dabous, Saleh ;
Yaghi, Salam ;
Alkass, Sabah ;
Moselhi, Osama .
AUTOMATION IN CONSTRUCTION, 2017, 81 :340-354
[3]   Creation of a Mock-up Bridge Digital Twin by Fusing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Data into Bridge Information Model (BrIM) [J].
Adibfar, Alireza ;
Costin, Aaron M. .
JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT, 2022, 148 (09)
[4]   Toward life-cycle reliability-, risk- and resilience-based design and assessment of bridges and bridge networks under independent and interacting hazards: emphasis on earthquake, tsunami and corrosion [J].
Akiyama, Mitsuyoshi ;
Frangopol, Dan M. ;
Ishibashi, Hiroki .
STRUCTURE AND INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING, 2020, 16 (01) :26-50
[5]   Reliability of Bridges under Tsunami Hazards: Emphasis on the 2011 Tohoku-Oki Earthquake [J].
Akiyama, Mitsuyoshi ;
Frangopol, Dan M. ;
Arai, Megumi ;
Koshimura, Shunichi .
EARTHQUAKE SPECTRA, 2013, 29 :S295-S314
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1977, Manual of User Benefit Analysis of Highway and Bus-Transit Improvements
[7]  
[Anonymous], 1992, National Bridge Inventory (NBI)
[8]   Probabilistic Modeling of Bridge Deck Unseating during Hurricane Events [J].
Ataei, Navid ;
Padgett, Jamie E. .
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING, 2013, 18 (04) :275-286
[9]  
Bensi M, 2011, STRUCT SAF, V33, P317
[10]   A comparison of methods for discretizing continuous variables in Bayesian Networks [J].
Beuzen, Tomas ;
Marshall, Lucy ;
Splinter, Kristen D. .
ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWARE, 2018, 108 :61-66