X hits on this document

PDF document

WORK PACKAGE 9: PRACTICAL BRIDGE MANAGEMENT - page 46 / 67

182 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

46 / 67

SAMCO Final Report 2006 F09 Report on Bridge Management

The Table 23 shows that app. 80 % of the bridges were built with reinforced concrete and Table 24 shows that app. 80 % of the bridges are small bridges and that only 4 % of the bridges are classified as large bridges.

The end-users were also asked to give an overview of the distribution of their main- tenance costs (as this would pinpoint the monitoring and inspection needs, seen from a market-based point-of-view). The precise cost allocation differed from one end-user to another, both due to the differences in bridge types and also due to the details in their answers in the questionnaires, but an overview is indicated in Table 25.

Causes of required maintenance Defect moisture protection (not steel bridges) Defect surface protection (steel bridges) Chloride induced corrosion (concrete bridges) Carbonation (concrete bridges) Fatigue (steel bridges) Defective joints in concrete bridges Impact from high vehicles Approximate cost share up to 50 % up to 20 % up to 95 % up to 15 % up to 60 % up to 30 % up to 40 % Table 25. Cost allocation in annual budgets.

The end-users spend annually considerable costs on the inspections, assessments and maintenance activities as shown in Table 26 for the selected end-users, who answered the questionnaire.

Activity

Annual budget (total and distribution)

Budget for inspection and assessment 22 million EURO

Budget for maintenance

450 million EURO

5% 95 %

Table 26. Annual budgets for the end-users, who answered the questionnaire.

The Table 25 identifies the main causes for the required maintenance and points towards the areas where efficient inspections, assessments and predictions are needed most. These causes and other lead to large costs for the end-users, who answered the questionnaire, due to these and other causes, as indicated in Table 26, however, the total costs in the EU are much larger.

The end-users (and their consultants, contractors, specialists etc.) have therefore used a number of Non-Destructive Test-methods (NDT) for the more detailed inspec- tions, with more or less success as seen in Table 27.

www.samco.org

Page 46 of 67

Document info
Document views182
Page views182
Page last viewedSat Dec 10 10:18:44 UTC 2016
Pages67
Paragraphs1327
Words16715

Comments