journal article·2018-07-03Open access

Application of HDS techniques to bridge inspection

Enrique Covian, Miguel Casero, Marta Menéndez, Antonio Bernardo

Abstract

This paper analyses the usefulness of high-definition survey (HDS) techniques in structural inspection. To this effect, tachymetric and HDS measurements are conducted on a beam bridge located in Avilés (Asturias, Spain) that had suffered damage from an impact, which led to the loss of part of the constituent material of one of its exterior beams. HDS techniques are primarily aimed at determining one of the edges of the damaged beam and the results are then compared with the tachymetric measures of the same element. The accuracy of HDS techniques is determined by comparison to that of the tachymetric measures. In addition, by combining HDS techniques and computer-aided design (CAD) systems, the material loss produced by the impact to the damaged beam can be quantified. For this purpose, healthy sections of that beam are compared with the damaged ones. The conducted work, despite the complexity and laboriousness of HDS processing, shows the potential of this technique in the inventory of infrastructures as well as in structural inspection through the characterisation of beam deflection and material losses.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · 3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Mining Exploitation and Prospecting, Mieres Polytechnic School, University of Oviedo , Oviedo, Spain

Department of Mining Engineering, Surveying and Structures, Upper and Technical School of Mining Engineering, University of León , Leon, Spain

References (17)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2007.10.00210.1016/j.isprsjprs.2007.10.002 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.04.01910.1016/j.engstruct.2005.04.019 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2006.12.03310.1016/j.ijsolstr.2006.12.033 ↗
4. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.413-41410.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.413-414 ↗
5. 10.1177/147592171037951710.1177/1475921710379517 ↗
6. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9453(2004)130:2(56)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9453(2004)130:2(56) ↗
7. Sumitro S · 2008 · 566
8. 10.1111/mice.2007.22.issue-110.1111/mice.2007.22.issue-1 ↗
9. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9453(2007)133:2(72)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9453(2007)133:2(72) ↗
10. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2008.10.00910.1016/j.ndteint.2008.10.009 ↗
11. 10.1111/ext.2011.35.issue-610.1111/ext.2011.35.issue-6 ↗
12. 10.1080/1058975080225900010.1080/10589750802259000 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.11.00710.1016/j.engstruct.2009.11.007 ↗
14. Kontrus H · Obras Urbanas · 2011 · 25 · 78
15. 10.1111/mice.2013.28.issue-210.1111/mice.2013.28.issue-2 ↗
16. 10.1002/978047012149810.1002/9780470121498 ↗
17. Covian E. · 2013