2013 Ibracon Biondini 3

55
th
Brazilian Congress on Concrete
3
rd
Symposium on Subway, Railway and
Highway Infrastructure
Gramado, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
November 1st, 2013
Life-Cycle Reliability Assessment of
Concrete Bridges Exposed to Corrosion

Fabio Biondini
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Politecnico di Milano
Fabio Biondini 55th CBC 2013
2
Aging and Deterioration of Bridges
The life-cycle performance of bridge and infrastructure systems
is affected by time-variant deterioration effects of aging and damage
processes of materials and components.
Deterioration mechanisms are generally complex and their effects
over time depend on both the damage process and type of
materials and structures.
For concrete bridges the main sources of damage include chemical
processes associated to sulfate and chloride attacks and alkali-silica
reactions, physical processes due to freeze/thaw cycles and thermal
cycles, and mechanical processes such as cracking, abrasion,
erosion, and fatigue.
3
(Clifton and Knab 1989)
Deterioration Processes

In total, one in nine of the nations bridges are rated as structurally deficient,
while the average age of the nations 607,380 bridges is currently 42 years.

5
Italian Networks:
Railways 16,000 km
Highways 3,400 km
Roads 26,700 km
6
Life-Cycle Probabilistic Approach
The condition rating of stocks of existing bridges and infrastructure
networks indicates that the economic impact of deterioration is
exceptionally high and emphasizes the importance of proper
maintenance and repair of structurally deficient bridges.
These problems present a major challenge to bridge engineering,
since the classical time-invariant structural design criteria and methods
need to be revised to account for a proper modeling of the structural
system over its entire life-cycle by taking the effects of deterioration
processes, time-variant loadings, maintenance actions and repair
interventions into account.
In addition, because of the uncertainty in material and geometrical
properties, in the physical models of deterioration processes, and in the
mechanical and environmental stressors, a measure of the time-variant
performance is realistically possible only in probabilistic terms.
7
Current State of Practice
In recent years, relevant advances have been accomplished in the
fields of modeling, analysis, design, maintenance, monitoring, and
management of deteriorating bridges.
Despite this research trend, life-cycle concepts are not yet explicitly
addressed in design codes and the checking of system performance
requirements is referred to the initial time of construction when the
system is intact.
In this approach, design for durability of concrete structures with
respect to chemical-physical damage phenomena is based on simplified
criteria associated with classes of environmental conditions.
Such criteria introduce threshold values for concrete cover, water-
cement ratio, amount and type of cement, among others, to limit the
effects of local damage due to carbonation of concrete and corrosion
of reinforcement.
8
Model Code for Service Life Design
fib Bulletin No. 34, 2006, pp. 116

1. General
2. Basis of design
3. Verification of Service Life Design
4. Execution and its quality management
5. Maintenance and condition control
9
Research Needs
A durable design cannot be based only on indirect evaluations of
the effects of structural damage (material quality, concrete cover, etc.),
but also needs to take into account the global effects of the local
damage phenomena on the overall performance of the structure.
A global approach to life-cycle assessment and design of concrete
bridges under damage should consider, among others:
The quality of structural detailing
The type of structural scheme
The interaction of mechanical and environmental stressors
The effects of maintenance and repair interventions
10
Aggressive Environment
Life-Cycle Prediction Models
Target
Reliability
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

I
n
d
e
x

Ti me t
T
t
0
Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, iFirst, 2013
Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 7(1-2), 2011
Structural Safety, 31, 2009
Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 4(5), 2008
Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 23(4), 2008
Structural Engineering International, IABSE, 16(3), 2006
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 132(5), 2006
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 130(11), 2004
11
Research Cooperation
12
Modeling of Structural Damage
Nonlinear Analysis of Deteriorating Concrete Structures
Simulation of Diffusion Processes
Time-variant Performance and Lifetime Assessment
Effects of Repair Interventions
Life-Cycle Cost and Maintenance Planning
Conclusions
Outline
13
Uniform Corrosion
D0
( ) = 2
s
x p 2 =
0
D
p
=
0
)] ( 1 [ ) (
s s s
A A =
4 /
2
0 0
D A
s
=
14
Val - Melchers Rodriguez
R =4 8 (natural corrosion)
R =5 13 (accelerated corrosion)
D0 D0
< +
+
=
1 2 1 , 1
2 1 0 ,
2 1
2 1

s s
s s
s
( ) 2 1 2
2
1
2
1 1

=
s
( )
2
2
2
2

=
s
2
0
0
1 2 = =
D
b
x
x
R
max
=
max
x p =
( ) = 2
s
0
D
p
=
Pitting Corrosion
15
(Almusallam et al., 2001)
(Apostolopoulos & Papadakis 2008)
Reduction of Steel Ductility
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
S
t
e
e
l

u
l
t
i
m
a
t
e

s
t
r
a
i
n
s
u
(
t
)
/
s
u
(
0
)
[
-
]
Damage index
s
(t) [-]
(1) (2) (3)
<
<
=
1 0.016 , 1521 . 0
016 . 0 0 ,
0
4583 . 0
0
s su s
s su
su

(1) Almusallam(2001)
(2) Kobayashi (2006)
(3) Apostolopoulos& Papadakis(2008)

16
Longitudinal cracking and spalling of concrete cover
D
C
f ct
pr
f ct
0
0
)] ( 1 [
)] ( 1 [
c c c
c c c
f f
A A

=
=
Deterioration of Concrete (1/2)
[Zhang et al. 2009]
Scaling
Delamination
Border effects
17
b
i
n
bars
= 6

(Vidal et al., 2004)
(Vecchio & Collins, 1986)
0
0
1
c
c
c
f
f
+
=
i
bars
i
b
w n
b
b
=
( )
0 0 s s s w
A w =
2
3
0
0
0
0
10 32 . 9 53 . 7 1 1
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+ =
D
c
D
R
s
Deterioration of Concrete (2/2)

0
)] ( 1 [
c c c
f f =
18
+ = + =
k
sk sk k
T
k sk
A
c
T
c s c
A t t E dA t y x y x y x t y x E t t t
c
) ( ) ( ) , , ( ) , ( ) , ( ) , , ( ) ( ) ( ) ( b b b b H H H
H=H(t) global secant stiffness matrix
H
c
=H
c
(t) concrete secant stiffness matrix
H
s
=H
s
(t) steel secant stiffness matrix
(x
k
, y
k
) location of the k
th
reinforcement bar
E
c
=E
c
(x, y, t) secant modulus of the concrete matrix at point (x, y)
E
sk
=E
sk
(t) secant modulus of the k
th
reinforcement bar
b(x,y) =[ 1 y x

]
T
=(1)
) ( ) ( ) ( t t t e H r =
r =r(t) =[ N M
x
M
y
]
T
vector of the stress resultants at the time instant t
e =e(t) =[
0

x

y
]
T
vector of the global strains at the time instant t
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF DAMAGED REINFORCED CONCRETE SECTIONS
y
x
G
y
G
y
d
1
0
x
y
x
N
M
x
G
1
0
N
z
M
y
c0
A =A (t )
0 c
x
d
f
c t
c
f
c
c u
c1
E
c0
arctg
c t u
c t 1

19
Deteriorating R.C. Beam Element
w
z
z1
1
w
y1
v
1
v
y
l
u
w
z2
2
v
2
y2
u
2 x1
x2
x
0
0
0
u
1
x

) ( ) ( ) ( ) (
) ( ) ( ) (
0
t t dx t t
t t t
s c
l
T
M
G M
K K B H B K
K K K
+ = =
+ =
) ( ) ( ) ( t t t s K f =
Biondini F., Bontempi F., Frangopol D.M., Malerba P.G., 2004.
Cellular Automata Approach to Durability Analysis of Concrete
Structures in Aggressive Environments. Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, 130(11), 1724-1737.
Cellular
Grid
) , ( ) , ( ) , ( t x t x t x
s c
H H H + =
r =r(t) =[ N M
x
M
y
]
T

e =e(t) =[
0

x

y
]
T

) ( ) ( ) ( t t t e H r =

y
x
G
y
G
y
d
1 0
x
N
M
x
c0
A =A (t )
0 c

y
x
G
1
0
N
z
M
y

x
d
20
Legendre
Lobatto
1
1
-1
-1
x'
z'
y'
Lobatto
Legendre
y'

= = =

= =
m
i
n
j
n
k
j j i k j i
f w w w d d d f I
1 1 1
1
1 -
1
1
1
1
) , , ( ) , , (
Isoparametric Sub-Domains
21
(Rodriguez et al., 1997)
Numerical Validation Beams
22
p
(
t
)
D0
Numerical Validation Corrosion
23
c
28

210

Numerical Validation Results
24
c
48

412

Numerical Validation Results
25
(Castel et al., 2000)
Simply supported beam L=2.80m under concentrated load at midspan
Cross-section 150x280mm, 216 +212, cover 10 mm
Material strengths f
c
=65 MPa and f
y
=500 MPa
Exposed to natural environment for 14 years
B1T = No corrosion

B1CL= Corroded beam
(Average corrosion level 20%)
Validation under Natural Corrosion
26
t
t
u
1
0
(t)
t
(a)
cr
C(t )=C
0
C=C(t)
0
)] ( 1 [ ) (
c c c
dA t t dA =
0
)] ( 1 [ ) (
s s s
A t t A =
Damage Indices
of the Materials
0 (t) 1
0 =Undamaged
1 =Full damaged
(t)
t
C(t)
(b)
c,s
C t
c,s
1
Rate of
Damage
0
)] ( 1 [
c c c
f t f =
Damage Modeling
27
Corrosion Rate [m/year] vs Concentration
of Aggressive Agents
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Concentration C [SO
2
, mg/m
3
- Cl
, mg/m
2
day]
C
o
r
r
o
s
i
o
n

R
a
t
e

m
/
y
e
a
r
]
Chloride
Sulfate
Sulfate=Chloride
Corrosion Rate
Industrial
Marine
Industrial
Marine
Urban
Urban
Marine
Rural
(Adapted from: Pedeferri & Bertolini, 1996)
28
t
C
D
C
=
1
2
C =Concentration
D =Diffusivity
t =Time
Simplified approach Solution of the 1D problem

fib Bulletin No. 34, 2006
Ficks second law (1D, 2D, 3D)

0
( , ) 1
2
e
x
C x t C erf
D t
(
| |
= ( |
|
(
\ .

Simulation of the Diffusion Process
29
Validation of the Diffusion Model
30
Validation of the Diffusion Model
31
Coupling between Diffusion and Damage
( )
0
1 D D + =
Stochastic Effects and
Evolutionary Rule
(A) Symmetrical
Distributions
in Uncracked Concrete
(B) Skewed
Distributions
in Cracked Concrete
4 3
2 1
G
f ()
1.0
a
1.0
b
b

a
2
a b
c
= 0
=
(a)

f ()
1.0
a
1.0
b
b

a
2
0
(b)

non cracked cracked
concrete concrete
32
Continuous T-Beam
L=3.00 m
H=0.40 m
h=0.25 m
B=0.40 m
b=0.15 m
g=10 kN/m
g
L L

H

b

h
d

2 14
2 12

H

b

h
d

2 14
2 12

33
4 30
years years
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [ years ]
C
o
n
c
r
e
t
e

D
a
m
a
g
e

I
n
d
e
x

[
-
]

Diffusion and Mechanical Damage
34
g
L L
A
B

(a)
(c)
0
12
25
50 years
Life-Cycle Performance
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [ years ]
B
e
n
d
i
n
g

M
o
m
e
n
t

[
K
N
m
]

Section A

Section B
35
A structure is safe when the effects of the applied actions S
are no larger than its resistance R:

or when the safety factor = R / S is no lower than unity:
S R
1
Safety Factor and Load Multiplier
36
The probability of failure P
F
, or the reliability index , can be evaluated
by the integration of the density function f
() within the failure domain D:

) ( d ) ( ) 1 (

= = < =
D
F
f P P { } 1 < = D
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0
.
0
1
.
0
2
.
0
3
.
0
4
.
0
5
.
0
6
.
0
7
.
0
Safety Factor
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

D
e
n
s
i
t
y

D
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n

f
)
) ( =
F
P

Probability of Failure and Reliability Index
37
Target
Reliability
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

I
n
d
e
x

Time t
T

( ) { }
=

0
min t t T
0

*
Residual Lifetime
38
Arch Bridge
39
p
Structural Model
Biondini, F. & Frangopol, D.M. 2008. Probabilistic Limit Analysis and Lifetime Prediction
of Concrete Structures, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 4(5), 399-412.
40

4528

4528

Span 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A
s
2128
1308
4828
1308
4228
1308
3028
1308
2428
1308
4828
1308
4828
1308
4528
1308
3328
1308
A
s
2128 3028 4228 2428 2428 2128 3628 2728 2428

Characteristics of the Cross-Sections
41
Characteristics of the Cross-Sections
42
Limit Analysis of the Bridge
43
Concentration Maps
44

1 2 3 4
5
9 8 7 6
3/4 a a/2 a/2 a
Time-variant Performance
45
-12.0
-9.0
-6.0
-3.0
0.0
3.0
6.0
9.0
12.0
-120.0 -100.0 -80.0 -60.0 -40.0 -20.0 0.0 20.0
Axial Force N [MN]
B
e
n
d
i
n
g

M
o
m
e
n
t

M

[
M
N
m
]

46
t =0 years
Axial Force

Bending Moment

Collapse Mechanism
(
c
=4.28)

t =50 years
Axial Force

Bending Moment

Collapse Mechanism
(
c
= 1.42)

47
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Abscissa x [m]
T
i
m
e

[
y
e
a
r
s
]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Abscissa x [m]
T
i
m
e

[
y
e
a
r
s
]
Beam

Arch
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
0 10 20 30 40 50
Ti me t [years]
C
o
l
l
a
p
s
e

M
u
l
t
i
p
l
i
e
r

c
48
0
200
400
600
800
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Top Displacement [m]
T
o
t
a
l

B
a
s
e

S
h
e
a
r

F

[
k
N
]

"Column-Sway" "Beam-Sway"
t=0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years
Biondini F., Palermo A., Toniolo G., 2011. Seismic Performance of Concrete
Structures Exposed to Corrosion: Case Studies of Low-Rise Precast Buildings,
Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 7(1-2).
Seismic Capacity Design
49
62 . 7 = =
Probabilistic Analysis
50
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [year]
C
o
l
l
a
p
s
e

M
u
l
t
i
p
l
i
e
r

min/max
0
10
20
30
40
50
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Load Multiplier
S
e
r
v
i
c
e

L
i
f
e

T

[
y
e
a
r
s
]
P* =0.50
0.25-0.75
0.00-1.00
P * 0 P * 1

Probabilistic Lifetime Assessment
51
Target
Reliability
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

I
n
d
e
x

Time t
T

0

*
d
T T
Design Strategy 2
Design Strategy 1
T
d
Design Lifetime
52
Bridge over the Breggia river (Cernobbio, Italy)
Arch Bridge
53
Concrete Spalling
Steel Corrosion
Deck Deterioration
Damage State
54
Bridge
Arches
Ties
Deck
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11
12
13
15 14
16
17
18
273 279 280 280 280 280 280 279 273
384
480
548
225

9 8 7 6 5 1 2 3 4
11
12
13 14
10
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
310
210

40
580

160
580
200

Structural Model
55
12 years 25 years 37 years 50 years Actual State
Concentration Maps : Arches
56
12 years
25 years 37 years 50 years
Actual State
Concentration Maps: Ties
57
12 years
25 years
37 years
50 years
Aggressive Agent under the Deck
Actual State
Concentration Maps: Deck
58
Arches
Ties
Deck
Diffusion vs Damage
59
Repair Intervention
60
Target
Reliability
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

I
n
d
e
x

Time t
T T
P
T
P+E
0

*
essential
maintenance
preventive
maintenance
without
maintenance
Role of Maintenance
61
Certosa Cable-Stayed Bridge
Biondini, F., Frangopol, D.M. & Malerba, P.G. 2006b. Time-variant Performance of the Certosa
Cable-stayed Bridge. Structural Engineering International, IABSE, 16(3), 2006, 235-244
62
Straight cross-section.

Skewed cross-section.

Skewed cross-section on the transversal beam.
Deck Cross-sections
63

spalling and
initial steel
corrosion
Pylons
64
The concrete cover has been restored
by a multilayered repair in order to protect
the structure from future diffusive attacks
of external aggressive agents.
(1) Sandblasting.
(1)
(3)
(2)
(2) Local sutures with tixotropic, anti-shrinkage,
polypropylene fiber reinforced mortar.
(3) Skin protection with high adhesion and high
elasticity sealing cement mortar, reinforced with
double or simple skin mesh.
Repair Interventions
65
Structural Model and Exposure Scenario
66
Concentration
Maps
C(x,t)/C
0

(a)
Damaged
Structure

(b)
Rehabilitated
Structure
67

0.090
0.100
0.110
0.120
0.130
0.140
0.150
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [year]
Y
i
e
l
d
i
n
g

M
o
m
e
n
t

m
y
Damaged Structure
Rehabilitated Structure
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.125
0.150
0.175
0.000 0.200 0.400 0.600 0.800 1.000 1.200
Dimensionless Curvature
z
[-]
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s

B
e
n
d
i
n
g

M
o
m
e
n
t

m
z

[
-
]
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.125
0.150
0.175
0.000 0.200 0.400 0.600 0.800 1.000 1.200
Dimensionless Curvature
z
[-]
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s

B
e
n
d
i
n
g

M
o
m
e
n
t

m
z

[
-
]
68
Random Variable (t=t
0
) Type

Concrete strength f
c
Lognormal f
c,nom
5 MPa
Steel strength f
sy
Lognormal f
sy,nom
30 MPa
Coordinates of the nodal points (y
i
, z
i
) Normal (y
i
, z
i
)
nom
5 mm
Coordinates of the steel bars (y
m
, z
m
) Normal (y
m
, z
m
)
nom
5 mm
Diameter of the steel bars
m
Normal
m,nom
0.10
m,nom
Diffusivity coefficient D Normal D
nom
0.10 D
nom
Concrete damage rate q
c
Normal q
c,nom
0.30 q
c,nom
Steel damage rate q
s
Normal q
s,nom
0.30 q
s,nom
Probabilistic Model
69
0,050
0,075
0,100
0,125
0,150
0,175
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [year]
Y
i
e
l
d
i
n
g

M
o
m
e
n
t

m
y
min/max

0,050
0,075
0,100
0,125
0,150
0,175
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [year]
Y
i
e
l
d
i
n
g

M
o
m
e
n
t

m
y
min/max

Damaged Structure Rehabilitated Structure
Probabilistic Time-variant Performance
70
=
+ =
n
i
i
t t t
1
0
) ( ) ( ) (

= =
=
+
=
n
i
i
n
i
t
i
C
v
C
C
i
1
0
1
) 1 (

i
= modification of the reliability index associated
with the intervention i=1,n applied at time t
i

C
i
=Cost of the intervention i at time t
i

C
0i
=Cost C
i
referred to the initial time t
0

v = Discount rate
i i
C =
Target
Reliability
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

I
n
d
e
x

Ti me t
T T
P
T
P+E
0

*
essential
maintenance
preventive
maintenance
without
maintenance
Maintenance Costs
71
820 cm
130
900 cm
130
Bridge Axis
50 40 40 50
640
40
20
40
110
60
600
60
20
110
Steel Bars
Bridge Pier Reinforced with a Total of
18 +
(62+62)
160
30 =408 248
30
(32+32) 18
107.5
45
46
46
46
46
46
18 (8+8)
46
Biondini, F., Bontempi, F., Frangopol, D.M. & Malerba, P.G. 2006.
Probabilistic Service Life Assessment and Maintenance Planning of
Concrete Structures, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 132(5).
Bridge Pier
72
Structural Model and Exposure Scenario
73
t = 10 years t = 20 years t = 30 years

C(x,t)/C
0

t = 40 years t = 50 years

Concentration Maps
74
0.000
0.020
0.040
0.060
0.080
0.100
0.120
0.000 0.020 0.040 0.060 0.080 0.100 0.120
Resistant Moment m
z
[-]
R
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
t

M
o
m
e
n
t

m
y

[
-
]
t =0 years
Resistant
Moment m
r
t =50 years
m
y
=M
y
/(|f
c
|A
c0
d
z
)
m
z
=M
z
/(|f
c
|A
c0
d
y
)
N=100 MN
(t=2 years)
Resistance Domains M
y
-M
z

75
m
y

m
z

=(t)
Random Variable (t=t
0
) Type

Concrete strength f
c
Lognormal f
c,nom
5 MPa
Steel strength f
sy
Lognormal f
sy,nom
30 MPa
Coordinates of the nodal points (y
i
, z
i
) Normal (y
i
, z
i
)
nom
5 mm
Coordinates of the steel bars (y
m
, z
m
) Normal (y
m
, z
m
)
nom
5 mm
Diameter of the steel bars
m
Normal
m,nom
0.10
m,nom
Diffusivity coefficient D Normal D
nom
0.10 D
nom
Concrete damage rate q
c
Normal q
c,nom
0.30 q
c,nom
Steel damage rate q
s
Normal q
s,nom
0.30 q
s,nom
Acting
Moment

=0.050
=0.10
Probabilistic Model
76
0.00
0.15
0.30
0.45
0.60
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [years]
M
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
a
n
c
e

C
o
s
t

C

[
-
]
0.00
0.15
0.30
0.45
0.60
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [years]
M
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
a
n
c
e

C
o
s
t

C

[
-
]
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [years]
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

I
n
d
e
x

Reliability Target
Essential Maintenance
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [years]
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

I
n
d
e
x

Reliability Target
Preventive Maintenance
C
E
/C
P
=10
v =0.06
Maintenance Scenarios
77
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [years]
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

I
n
d
e
x

0.00
0.15
0.30
0.45
0.60
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [years]
M
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
a
n
c
e

C
o
s
t

C

[
-
]
{ } ) , ( min
arget t
t C
Optimal Maintenance
78
Conclusions (I)
Damage processes in concrete bridges are usually investigated based
on simplified models of diffusion processes and through the study of
the local deterioration of the materials, concrete and steel, with limited
attention paid to the global effects of these local phenomena on the
overall performance of the structural system.
This is clearly not consistent with the actual nature of the problem,
since the simulation of diffusion processes should be able to account for
complex geometrical and mechanical boundary conditions, which
generally characterize engineering applications.
Moreover, the local deterioration mechanisms interact with the
global structural response. As a consequence, the structural scheme
plays a fundamental role in the assessment of deteriorating structures,
particularly for redundant systems, where damage may lead to time-
variant redistributions of the internal actions.
79
Conclusions (II)
These aspects can be consistently taken into account by means of the
proposed general methodology for life-cycle reliability assessment,
maintenance and rehabilitation of concrete structures exposed to the
diffusive attack from environmental aggressive agents, with
emphasis on concrete bridges under corrosion.
The proposed probabilistic formulation allows:
1. To evaluate the time-variant structural reliability or, conversely, the
remaining service life which can be assured under prescribed reliability
levels without maintenance (ASSESSMENT).
2. To plan a rehabilitation of the structure in order to achieve a
prescribed target value of the service life (REHABILITATION).
3. To select an optimal maintenance scenario among different
economic alternatives (MAINTENANCE).
IABMAS Italy Group

Foundation Meeting
IABMAS 2012 The Sixth International Conference on
Bridge Maintenance, Safety and Management
Stresa, Lake Maggiore, Italy | July 9th, 2012
Ispezione, Manutenzione,
Sicurezza e Gestione dei Ponti
Bridge Inspection, Maintenance,
Safety and Management

1 Workshop Gruppo Italiano IABMAS
Politecnico di Milano, 14-15 Ottobre 2013
http://www.iabmas-italy.it
82
http://www.iabmas-italy.it
Thank you for kind attention!

55
th
Brazilian Congress on Concrete
3
rd
Symposium on Subway, Railway and
Highway Infrastructure
Gramado, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
November 1st, 2013

2013 Ibracon Biondini 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2013 Ibracon Biondini 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

55

Deterioration of Concrete (2/2)

() within the failure domain D:

You might also like