4.7 Article

Corrosion cracking prediction updating of deteriorating RC structures using inspection information

Journal

RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY
Volume 94, Issue 8, Pages 1340-1348

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2009.02.011

Keywords

Bayesian methods; Cracking; RC structure; Inspection; Prediction

Funding

  1. Australia Research Council
  2. Cooperative Research Centre for Integrated Engineering Asset Management [ID207]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It is well known that the corrosion-induced cracking of reinforced concrete (RC) structures varies in time and space due to the inherent spatial variability of concrete cover, concrete strength, surface chloride concentration and other material, environmental and dimensional properties. A model for predicting the likelihood and extent of RC corrosion-induced cracking considering spatial variability is reviewed. The uncertainties of predictions can be reduced by the effective use of information obtained from visual inspections regarding structural performance, such as cracking proportion and crack width. The paper uses a spatial time-dependent reliability analysis combined with visual inspection data to predict the likelihood and extent of RC corrosion-induced cracking. In this study, RC slabs and beams are used to illustrate the influence of inspection information updating on the future likelihood and extent of corrosion-induced cracking. Concrete strength, concrete cover and the surface chloride concentrations are modelled as spatial variables. Monte-Carlo simulation is employed to calculate the updated cracking proportions. The analysis considers various inspection scenarios which include different inspection intervals, inspection times, cracking proportion and crack width. It was found that the occurrence or observance of cracking changes the future cracking prediction significantly. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available