Structural health monitoring systems have been widely implemented to provide real-time continuous data support and to ensure structural safety in the context of structural integrity management. However, the quantification of the potential benefits of structural health monitoring systems has not yet attracted widespread attention. At the same time, there is an urgent need to develop strategies, such as optimizing the monitoring period, monitoring variables, and other factors, to maximize the potential benefits of structural health monitoring systems. Considering the continuity of structural health monitoring information, a framework is developed in this article to support decision-making for structural health monitoring systems arrangement in the context of structural integrity management, which integrates the concepts of value of information and risk-based inspection planning based on an approach which utilizes a conjugate prior probability distribution for updating of the probabilistic models of structural performances based on structural health monitoring information. An example considering fatigue degradation of steel structures is investigated to illustrate the application of the proposed framework. The considered example shows that the choice of monitoring variables, the monitoring period, and the monitoring quality may be consistently optimized by the application of the proposed framework and approach. Finally, discussions and conclusions are provided to clarify the potential benefits of the proposed framework with a special view to practical applications of structural health monitoring systems.
FaberMH. Risk informed structural systems integrity management: a decision analytical perspective. In: Proceedings of the 36th international conference on ocean, offshore and arctic engineering (OMAE 2017), Trondheim, 25–30 June 2017.
2.
MoanT. Life cycle structural integrity management of offshore structures. Struct Infra E2018; 14(7): 911–927.
3.
RowleyJ. The wisdom hierarchy: representations of the DIKW hierarchy. J Inf Sci2007; 33(2): 163–180.
4.
OuJPLiH. Structural health monitoring in mainland China: review and future trends. Struct Healt Moni2010; 9(3): 219–231.
5.
QinJThönsSFaberMH. On the value of SHM in the context of service life integrity management. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering (ICASP’12). Vancouver, BC, Canada, 12–15 July 2015.
6.
ThönsS. On the value of monitoring information for structural integrity and risk management. Comput-Aided Civ Infra2018; 33(1): 70–94.
7.
PozziMDer KiureghianA. Assessing the value of information for long-term structural health monitoring. In: Proceedings of the international society of photo-optical instrumentation engineers, 2011, https://faculty.ce.cmu.edu/pozzi/files/2015/09/SPIE_SS11.pdf
8.
ThönsSFaberMH. Assessing the value of structural health monitoring. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on structural safety & reliability (ICOSSAR’2013), New York, 16–20 June 2013.
9.
OrcesiADFrangopolDM. Optimization of bridge maintenance strategies based on structural health monitoring information. Struct Saf2011; 33: 26–41.
10.
ThönsSKöhlerJSykoraM. Guideline for quantifying the value of structural health information. In: Proceedings of the 5th workshop of the COST action TU1402 on quantifying the value of structural health monitoring, Delft, 12 June 2019.
11.
LimongelliMPPrevitaliMCantiniL, et al. Lifecycle management, monitoring and assessment for safe large-scale infrastructures: challenges and needs. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference of geomatics and restoration (GEORES’2019). Milan, 8–10 May 2019.
12.
RaiffaHSchlaiferR. Applied statistical decision theory. Boston, MA: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, 1961.
13.
BhattaacharjyaDEidsvikJMukerjiT. The value of information in spatial decision making. Math Geosci2010; 42(2): 141–163.
14.
YokotaFThomposonKM. Value of information analysis in environmental health risk management (EHRM). Risk Anal2004; 24(3): 635–650.
15.
KeislerJMCollierZAChuE, et al. Value of information analysis: the state of application. Environ Syst Decis2014; 34: 3–23.
16.
BenjaminJRCornellCA. Probability, statistics and decision for civil engineers. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970.
17.
AngHSTangWH. Probability concepts in engineering planning and design. New York: Wiley, 1974.
18.
Thoft-ChristensenPSørensenJD. Optimal strategy for inspection and repair of structural systems. Civ Eng Syst1987; 4(2): 94–100.
19.
FujitaMSchallGRackwitzR. Adaptive reliability-based inspection strategies for structures subject to fatigue. Struct Saf Reliab1989; 2: 1619–1626.
20.
StraubDFaberMH. Risk based inspection planning for structural systems. Struct Saf2005; 27(4): 335–355.
21.
FaberMHThönsS. On the value of structural health monitoring. In: Proceedings of the European safety and reliability conference (ESREL’2013), Amsterdam, 29 September–2 October 2013.
22.
COST. Memorandum of understanding: TU 1402. Brussels: European Cooperation in the Field of Scientific and Technical Research, 2014.
23.
StraubD. Value of information analysis with structural reliability methods. Struct Saf2014; 49: 75–85.
24.
StraubDChatziEBismutE, et al. Value of information: a roadmap to quantifying the benefit of structural health monitoring. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on structural safety & reliability (ICOSSAR’2017), Vienna, 6–10 August 2017.
25.
PandeyMDYuanXXvan NoortwijkJM. The influence of temporal uncertainty of deterioration on life-cycle management of structures. Struct Infra E2009; 5(2): 145–156.
26.
BayraktarliYYFaberMH. Bayesian probabilistic network approach for managing earthquake risks to cities. Geor Assess Manage Risk Eng Syst Geohaz2011; 5: 2–24.
27.
ZontaDGlisicBAdriaenssensS. Value of information: impact of monitoring on decision-making. Struct Contr Healt Moni2014; 21: 1043–1056.
28.
XiangWZhouWX. Optimal sample size determination based on Bayesian reliability and value of information. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering (ICASP’13), Seoul, South Korea, 26–30 May 2019.
29.
KonakliKSudretBFaberMH. Numerical investigations into the value of information in lifecycle analysis of structural systems. ASCE/ASME J Risk Uncert Eng Syst Part Civ Eng2015; 2: 000850.
30.
LimongelliMPOmenzetterPYazganU, et al. Quantifying the value of monitoring for post-earthquake emergency management of bridges. In: Proceedings of 39th IABSE symposium-engineering (IABSE’39), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 21–23 September 2017.
31.
GouletJADer kiureghianALiB. Pre-posterior optimization of sequence of measurement and intervention actions under structural reliability constraint. Struct Saf2015; 52: 1–9.
32.
MemarzadehmMPozziM. Value of information in sequential decision making: component inspection, permanent monitoring and system-level scheduling. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2016; 154: 137–151.
33.
QinJFaberMHLiuM, et al. Value of information in resilience management of infrastructure systems. In: Proceedings of the International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering, IABSE symposium, Guimarães, 4–6 September 2019.
34.
QinJFaberMH. Resilience informed integrity management of wind turbine parks. Energies2019; 12(14): 2729.
35.
ZhangWHLuDGQinJ, et al. Life cycle management of structural systems based on the optimal SHM strategy by VoI analysis. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering (ICASP’13), Seoul, South Korea, 26–30 May 2019.
36.
ThönsSSchneiderRFaberMH. Quantification of the value of structural health monitoring information for fatigue deteriorating structural systems. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering (ICASP’12), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 12–15 July 2015.
37.
AgustaAThönsS. On the development of tools for decision analyses. In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on structural integrity for offshore energy industry, Aberdeen, 6–7 September 2018.
38.
AgustaAThönsSSørensenJD. Value of information-based inspection, monitoring, and damage detection system planning. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering (ICASP’13), Seoul, 26–30 May 2019.
39.
FaberMHEngelundSSørensenJD, et al. Simplified and generic risk based inspection planning. In: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on offshore mechanics and arctic engineering, New Orleans, LA, 14–17 February 2000.
40.
FaberMHStewartMG. Risk assessment for civil engineering facilities: critical overview and discussion. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2003; 80: 173–184.
41.
AliKQinJSørensenJD, et al. On dependencies in value of information analysis for structural integrity management. In: Proceedings of 7th international conference on structural engineering, mechanics and computation, Cape Town, South Africa, 2–4 September 2019.
42.
FaberMH. Risk and safety in civil engineering: lecture notes. Zurich: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, 2007.
43.
FaberMH. Risk based inspection: the framework. Struct Eng Int2002; 12(3): 186–194.
44.
StraubD. Generic approaches to risk based inspection planning for steel structures. PhD Thesis, Institute of Structural Engineering, ETH Zurich, 2004.
45.
HongHP. Reliability analysis with nondestructive inspection. Struct Saf1997; 19(4): 383–395.
Der KiureghianADitlevesenO. Aleatory or epistemic? Does it matter?Struct Saf2009; 31: 105–112.
48.
NielsenLGlavindSTQinJ, et al. Faith and fakes: dealing with critical information in decision analysis. Civ Eng Env Syst2019; 36(1): 32–54.
49.
LiuXWLuDGHoogenboomPCJ. Hierarchical Bayesian fatigue data analysis. Int J Fatigue2017; 100: 418–428.
50.
QinJFaberMH. Risk management of large RC structures within spatial information system. Comput-Aided Civ Infra2012; 27: 385–405.
51.
StraubDPapaioannouI. Bayesian updating with structural reliability methods. J Eng Mech2015; 141(3): 04014134.
52.
SchneiderRThönsSStraubD. Reliability analysis and updating of structural systems with subset simulation. Struct Saf2017; 64: 20–36.
53.
FrangopolDM. Life-cycle performance, management, and optimization of structural systems under uncertainty: accomplishments and challenges. Struct Infra E2011; 7(6): 389–413.
54.
LiJChenJB. The number theoretical method in response analysis of nonlinear stochastic structures. Comput Mech2007; 39: 693–708.
