NZ618052B2 - Structure modelling and maintenance scheduling - Google Patents
Structure modelling and maintenance scheduling Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- NZ618052B2 NZ618052B2 NZ618052A NZ61805212A NZ618052B2 NZ 618052 B2 NZ618052 B2 NZ 618052B2 NZ 618052 A NZ618052 A NZ 618052A NZ 61805212 A NZ61805212 A NZ 61805212A NZ 618052 B2 NZ618052 B2 NZ 618052B2
- Authority
- NZ
- New Zealand
- Prior art keywords
- maintenance
- rating
- component
- components
- paint
- Prior art date
Links
- 238000007689 inspection Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 136
- 239000003973 paint Substances 0.000 claims abstract description 64
- 230000001419 dependent Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 7
- 230000000007 visual effect Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 5
- 229910000831 Steel Inorganic materials 0.000 claims description 17
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 claims description 17
- 239000010959 steel Substances 0.000 claims description 17
- 239000000203 mixture Substances 0.000 claims description 5
- 239000011248 coating agent Substances 0.000 abstract description 31
- 238000000576 coating method Methods 0.000 abstract description 31
- 239000000463 material Substances 0.000 description 17
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 description 9
- 238000005260 corrosion Methods 0.000 description 7
- 238000009877 rendering Methods 0.000 description 7
- 238000003860 storage Methods 0.000 description 7
- JEIPFZHSYJVQDO-UHFFFAOYSA-N iron(III) oxide Inorganic materials O=[Fe]O[Fe]=O JEIPFZHSYJVQDO-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 4
- 239000011253 protective coating Substances 0.000 description 4
- 239000003086 colorant Substances 0.000 description 3
- 238000010422 painting Methods 0.000 description 3
- 230000001360 synchronised Effects 0.000 description 3
- CWFOCCVIPCEQCK-UHFFFAOYSA-N Chlorfenapyr Chemical compound BrC1=C(C(F)(F)F)N(COCC)C(C=2C=CC(Cl)=CC=2)=C1C#N CWFOCCVIPCEQCK-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 2
- 239000004593 Epoxy Substances 0.000 description 2
- 230000005587 bubbling Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000005336 cracking Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000002950 deficient Effects 0.000 description 2
- 125000003700 epoxy group Chemical group 0.000 description 2
- 230000001747 exhibiting Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000001264 neutralization Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000004044 response Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000001133 acceleration Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000000654 additive Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000004220 aggregation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000002776 aggregation Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000005284 basis set Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000006399 behavior Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000004364 calculation method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000001413 cellular Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000004040 coloring Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000000356 contaminant Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000003344 environmental pollutant Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000011229 interlayer Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000009114 investigational therapy Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000010410 layer Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000002184 metal Substances 0.000 description 1
- 231100000719 pollutant Toxicity 0.000 description 1
- 238000001454 recorded image Methods 0.000 description 1
- 150000003839 salts Chemical class 0.000 description 1
- 239000011780 sodium chloride Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000004901 spalling Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000007921 spray Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000010186 staining Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000001960 triggered Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000011179 visual inspection Methods 0.000 description 1
- XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N water Substances O XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
- G06F30/10—Geometric CAD
- G06F30/13—Architectural design, e.g. computer-aided architectural design [CAAD] related to design of buildings, bridges, landscapes, production plants or roads
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/10—Office automation; Time management
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/20—Administration of product repair or maintenance
Abstract
Embodiments of the invention generally relate to computational systems and methods for managing maintenance of a complex structure. A model of the structure is created and stored, which may be a 3D model of the structure including a 3D map, the model defined with reference to components of the complex structure. Maintenance parameters associated with the components are also stored. Examples of possible maintenance parameters include condition rating, criticality rating, access method and cost. Inspection data is input and received by the computational system. A maintenance plan is generated dependent on the maintenance parameters and the inspection data. The model is displayable as part of a 3D map provides a visual representation of information relating to the structure, which may include aspects of the inspection data, the maintenance parameters and the maintenance plan. Embodiments of the invention also relate to a computational system and method for managing maintenance of a painted or coated structure. A paint or coating condition model for at least one element of the structure has a deterioration that progresses as a function of x4, where x is the proportion of the life span of paint or coating that has elapsed. Based on this model a maintenance plan of proposed maintenance is generated and output. ex structure. Maintenance parameters associated with the components are also stored. Examples of possible maintenance parameters include condition rating, criticality rating, access method and cost. Inspection data is input and received by the computational system. A maintenance plan is generated dependent on the maintenance parameters and the inspection data. The model is displayable as part of a 3D map provides a visual representation of information relating to the structure, which may include aspects of the inspection data, the maintenance parameters and the maintenance plan. Embodiments of the invention also relate to a computational system and method for managing maintenance of a painted or coated structure. A paint or coating condition model for at least one element of the structure has a deterioration that progresses as a function of x4, where x is the proportion of the life span of paint or coating that has elapsed. Based on this model a maintenance plan of proposed maintenance is generated and output.
Description
Structure Modelling and Maintenance Scheduling
Field of the invention
The invention generally relates to the field of computer assisted modelling of structures
and to the field of computer assisted scheduling of maintenance activities in relation to a
structure.
Background of the invention
The maintenance of structures is an ongoing and resource intensive activity. It is
therefore necessary to carefully plan and implement maintenance activities. The cost of a
deficient maintenance program can be very high, and may result in early replacement of the
structure or of expensive component parts of the structure. In addition, a deficient maintenance
program may reduce the aesthetic appeal of buildings or iconic structures.
The identification and scheduling of maintenance activities is assisted by the use of
computers. Computer systems allow for the storage and retrieval of information regarding a
structure and the maintenance performed on that structure, as well as providing tools for
prompting maintenance actions. However, current computer systems that the inventors are aware
of have limitations and deficiencies, which means that there is substantial room for increased or
better use of computer systems to assist with the management of maintenance of a structure.
Summary of the invention
According to a first aspect of the invention there is provided a computational system for
managing maintenance of a structure comprising a plurality of components with associated
component features, the system comprising: computer hardware, computer software and
computer memory containing information for defining a 3D model of the plurality of
components and their associated component features; the computer software including
instructions to: a) provide an interface via the computer hardware to: i) receive and store
maintenance parameters associated with one or more of the component features, the maintenance
parameters including a paint condition model, the paint condition model comprising a plurality
of condition states representing progression through the useful life of the paint, with an
exponential deterioration curve over time; and ii) display a map of the 3D model; b) generate for
output a maintenance plan for components to be maintained, wherein the maintenance plan is
1001304538
dependent on the paint condition model; and c) display on the map a visual representation of
information selected from a group consisting of: the maintenance parameters and the
maintenance plan.
According to a second aspect of the invention there is provided a computer implemented
method for generating a maintenance plan for a structure comprising a plurality of components
with associated component features, the method comprising: storing information defining the
components and their associated component features and maintenance parameters associated
with one or more of the component features, the maintenance parameters including a paint
condition model for at least one of the plurality of the components, the paint condition model
comprising a plurality of condition states representing progression through the useful life of the
paint, with an exponential deterioration curve; and generating a maintenance plan for one or
more of the plurality of said components, the maintenance plan generated based on the
maintenance parameters.
Arrangements of the present disclosure generally relate to computational systems and
methods for managing maintenance of a complex structure. A model of the structure is created
and stored, which may be a 3D model of the structure including a 3D map, the model defined
with reference to components of the complex structure. Maintenance parameters associated with
the components are also stored. Examples of possible maintenance parameters include condition
rating, criticality rating, access method and cost. Inspection data is input and received by the
computational system. A maintenance plan is generated dependent on the maintenance
parameters and the inspection data. The model is displayable as part of a 3D map provides a
visual representation of information relating to the structure, which may include aspects of the
inspection data, the maintenance parameters and the maintenance plan.
1001304538
In certain arrangements, maintenance priorities are determined with reference to the
maintenance parameters and the model may be displayed to visually represent the priority
assigned to the maintenance activities.
In certain arrangements, activities are completed via the 3D map. For example, inspection
data may be input by displaying the component to be inspected on a display, selecting that
component using a suitable user interface, and then entering inspection data for the component in
a form that is displayed in response to the selection of that component from the 3D map. In
another example, past inspection data for a component may be viewed by selecting the
component from the 3D map.
In certain arrangements the model is displayable to visually represent different
information. For example, the model is displayable to visually represent the highest priority
components for maintenance or the components that would be maintained if a defined amount of
resources were spent on maintenance.
Arrangements of the present disclosure relate to a computational system and method for
managing maintenance of a painted or coated structure. A paint or coating condition model for at
least one element of the structure has a deterioration that progresses as a function of x where x
is the proportion of the life span of paint or coating that has elapsed. Based on this model a
maintenance plan of proposed maintenance is generated and output.
Further embodiments of the invention over those described in the preceding paragraphs
will become apparent from the following description, given by way of example and with
reference to the accompanying drawings.
Brief description of the drawings
Figure 1A is a schematic representation of a maintenance system used for maintaining a
complex structure.
Figure 1B shows a segment of the complex structure of Figure 1A.
Figure 1C shows a component identification display.
Figure 2A is a diagrammatic representation of the hardware of the maintenance system
shown in Figure 1.
1001304538
Figure 2B is a diagrammatic representation of the software units of the maintenance
system of Figure 1.
Figure 2C is a main user interface dialog for the software unit of Figure 2B.
Figure 2D shows the inspection menu.
Figure 2E shows the reports menu.
Figure 2F shows the maintenance menu.
Figure 2G is an example of a 3D map of the structure.
Figure 2H is an example of a 3D map used in the maintenance system.
Figure 3 is a flow diagram of the inspection-maintenance process performed by the
maintenance system of Figure 1A.
Figure 4A is an entity-relationship model of a database forming part of the maintenance
system of Figure 1.
Figure 4B shows the paint deterioration rate.
Figure 4C shows a paint deterioration model.
Figure 5A shows an inspection report dialog box.
Figure 5B shows an inspection history panel.
Figure 6A shows a maintenance schedule dialog box.
Figure 6B shows a scheduled maintenance form.
Figure 6C shows a maintenance completed dialog box.
Figure 6D shows a maintenance history dialog box.
Figure 6E shows an maintenance report dialog box.
Figure 6F shows a member report dialog box.
1001304538
Figure 6G shows a rating report dialog box.
Figure 6H shows a rating factor report dialog box.
Figure 6I shows a rating report spread sheet.
Figure 6J shows an inspections due form.
Figure 6K shows an area report spreadsheet.
Figure 6L shows a predicted condition report dialog box.
Figure 6M shows a weighting report dialog box.
Figure 7A shows an archiving dialog box.
Figure 7B shows an archive retrieval dialog box.
Figures 8A shows a maintenance type form.
Figure 8B shows a maintenance treatment dialog box.
Figure 8C shows a materials form.
Figure 8D shows an inspection defects form.
Figure 8E shows another inspection report dialog box.
Figure 8F shows a further inspection report dialog box.
Figure 8G shows a help dialog box.
Figure 8H shows a re-inspection intervals form.
Detailed description of the embodiments
1. System overview
A maintenance system 100 for maintaining a complex structure is shown in Figure 1A.
The structure 110, a bridge in this case (the Sydney Harbour Bridge), consists of a plurality
components. In this specification and accompanying claims a ‘component’ refers to the
1001304538
inspection unit for the structure 110 and a group of components is called a ‘segment’. An
example of a component is the outer face 132 of the outer southeast segment 130 that forms part
of the south pylon 112 of the bridge 110 as shown in Figure 1B. A component includes one or
more elements that require maintenance.
Large structures like bridges may have many thousands of components. Each component
is characterised by one or more component features, and the maintenance system 100 maintains a
record of the component features associated with each component. These component features are
determined for the specific structure. An example of a component feature recorded for the outer
face 132 is the way that access is obtained to the component (the access identification, or
ACCESS_ID 142): via “13 Southeast crane” as shown in the component identification display
140 in Figure 1C.
For the embodiment shown in Figure 1A, component features associated with the
components of the bridge 110 also include coating and structural features, and what the cost
estimate is for relevant maintenance. Another component feature is the criticality of the
component: how critical the condition and maintenance of that specific component is. For the
bridge 110 shown in Figure 1, which is an iconic structure, criticality is determined in part by the
visibility of the component to the public. The more visible the component is, the higher the
priority is for maintenance on that component.
Each component and each segment typically undergoes an inspection cycle that may take
up to, for example, 2 years. The components are maintained as a result of the inspection/s.
During the inspection phase a component/segment is inspected to ascertain its condition,
resulting in an inspection report and possibly also photographic inspection data.
An element of a component is the maintenance unit. Herein a group of elements is called
a ‘node’. For this example, an element associated with the outer face 132 is the bottom chord
134, and the node 144 is called “18_16”. In this embodiment, maintenance relates specifically to
the coating and steelwork on the bridge 110, and makes use of a database that includes all of the
elements that make up the bridge and which require maintenance relating to the coating or
steelwork. A record of the history of each element is maintained, recording details of inspections
and maintenance. The recording of this information enables the inspection and maintenance of
1001304538
the structure to be more effectively scheduled. It also aids in planning maintenance access and
activity as well as the development of cost estimates.
The maintenance system 100 therefore includes, or has access to, a hierarchical
categorisation of parts of the complex structure that requires planning, review, analysis,
management and/or recording of maintenance activities. Each part requiring maintenance (an
element) is included as part of an inspection unit (a component), which facilitates, for example
planning and recording of inspection activities. A component may be one of a plurality of
components that form a segment. The segment facilitates higher level inspection related
activities. In some embodiments, a component includes a plurality of sub-components, which
facilitate lower level inspection related activities.
In addition, each element may be part of a node. A node therefore facilitates, for example
planning and recording of maintenance activities. A node may correspond to a segment in the
sense of consisting of the same elements. Alternatively, a node may not correspond to a segment,
which facilitates independent operations for maintenance activities and inspection activities.
Referring to Figure 1A, when an inspection of various components of the south pylon
112 is performed, the inspection data is logged using a computer 116. In the same way,
inspection data from the main span north deck 114 is logged using another computer 118. The
computers 116 and 118 are connected to a main computer 120 via a network 122 such as a
digital cellular network, the internet, a proprietary network, an intranet or a combination of these
networks. The main computer 120 is connected to a storage device 124 that contains one or more
databases relating to the bridge and maintenance of the bridge. The main computer 120 and
computers 116, 118 have a master-slave relationship, and synchronise available data: the slaves
upload new inspection data to the master, and in turn download updated maintenance and
inspection data as required. In an alternative embodiment the inspection data is entered directly
into the main computer 120.
In another alternative embodiment, the inspection/maintenance process is not
implemented in a master-slave arrangement with a main computer 120 connected to other
computers. A single computer is used, and inspection data is entered and accessed directly via
that computer’s user interface.
1001304538
2. Computer hardware
The computer hardware required for the computers 116, 118 and/or the main computer
120 typically comprises suitable components necessary to receive, store and execute appropriate
computer instructions. The hardware structure of the system may be understood with reference to
Figure 2A. The hardware components include a central processing unit (CPU) 202, a graphics
processor 204 (for example a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590), memory 206, storage 124, a network
interface 208 and an input-output interface 210 (such as a keyboard and monitor which are
associated with the software user interface 224 as described below). Standard hardware also
includes a bus 212 for communication between hardware components. The computer hardware
operates with a software component 200 of the maintenance system 100 (described in further
detail below), which is stored in the memory 206 and is executed by the CPU 202.
Apart from a standard operating system such as Windows, other software suitable to
support the operation of a maintenance system as described herein include Microsoft® .NET
Framework and a geographic information system such as ArcGIS v9.3 ArcEditor.
The storage device 124 interfaces with the hardware shown in Figure 2A and could
comprise any storage device suitable for the amount of data relevant to the specific structure.
The storage device may therefore be a hard disk, a RAID system or other direct-attached storage.
It will be appreciated that there are many different possible computer architectures that
may be used to implement the present invention and that the foregoing description is only one
example architecture. The term ‘computer’ is used herein in a general sense and includes,
without limitation the computational devices of personal computers, personal digital assistants,
smart phones, tablet computers and servers. Those skilled in the relevant arts will immediately
recognise which of these classes of computer can be used for each aspect of the maintenance
system 100. For example, personal digital assistants, smart phones and tablet computers may be
suitable alternatives to the laptop computers shown in Figure 1 for the computers 116 and 118,
but may not be suitable for the computer 120.
3. Software structure and process
The software component 200 of the maintenance system 100 may be understood with
reference to Figure 2B. The software component 200 comprises a number of software units. The
1001304538
maintenance system 100 is initialised with structural information used to generate an initial 3D
model using a 3D model generator 220. The model updating unit 222 updates the 3D model
using inspection data input via the user interface 224. The data used by the 3D model generator
220 and model updating unit 222 comprises both an image representation called a 3D map 226
and a relational database 228. The 3D map 226 includes 3D rendering and colouring. The 3D
map displays characteristics of the structure 110 using different colours, for example by using
different colours for certain condition ratings (described in further detail below). The relational
database 228, described further below with reference to Figure 4A, is generated using a suitable
database computer language such as SQL. The software component 200 also includes a
maintenance plan generator 230 that uses maintenance parameters (input via the user interface
224) together with data from the relational database 228 in order to generate a maintenance plan.
The maintenance plan is stored as part of the database and is output (e.g. displayed or printed)
via the user interface 224 associated with the hardware I/O interface 210.
Figure 2C shows a main user interface dialog 250 according to one embodiment of the
invention. This main dialog 250 is used to access a number of different dialogs and menus
relating to the inspection-maintenance process as described in more detail elsewhere herein. The
information button 251 is used to view the 3D map of the structure. The map, in turn, shows the
different areas of the structure, and when a user selects one of these areas (for example by
clicking on the area), information relating to the components in that area is viewed. Information
that can be viewed includes inspection and maintenance data, as well as structural data including
calculated attributes such as the component area, A length width .
When a user selects inspection button 252 an inspection menu 260 (shown in Figure 2D)
is displayed from which selections can be made to display the inspection report 500 (shown in
Figure 5A), the inspection history 550 (shown in Figure 5B), the inspections due, or view
images. The synchronisation function can also be accessed from the inspection menu 260.
When a user selects the reports button 254 a reports menu 270 (shown in Figure 2E) is
displayed from which selections can be made to display a ratings report, access report,
maintenance report, member report, structural reports, area report predictive rating report or
weighting report. These are described in more detail below with reference to Figures 6E-6I. Lists
of components or elements can also be shown from which reports can be selected. Statistical data
formulated from the report data can also be viewed. It will be appreciated that the types of
1001304538
reports available will depend on the specific structure and circumstances, and may include other
types of reports such as an area report
When a user selects the maintenance button 256 a maintenance menu 280 (shown in
Figure 2F) is displayed from which selections can be made to display the maintenance related
dialog boxes described below with reference to Figures 6A-6D: maintenance schedule,
completed maintenance and maintenance history dialogs.
The administration button 258 is used for administering and editing user details, access
details to elements, the relational database and importing/exporting data. The options button 259
is used for setting the synchronisation options when master-slave synchronisation is performed
as described elsewhere herein. It will be appreciated that the main user interface dialog 250 may
comprise more or less or different buttons to access relevant functions.
A software process 300 implemented by the software component 200 is shown in Figure
3. After the initial data is input at step 302 the 3D model is generated at step 304 by the model
generator 220. Inspection data is input 306 periodically for each component via the user interface
224 using an inspection report 500, following which the database is updated at step 308 by the
model updating unit 222 that saves the data as part of the 3D map 226 and as part of the
relational database 228. Subsequently, as part of the inspection-maintenance-inspection cycle,
maintenance requirements are input via the user interface 224 and a maintenance plan is
generated 312 by the maintenance plan generator 230. The maintenance plan is saved to the
database and output via the user interface 224.
3.1 3D model and 3D map
A 3D model is used to maintain and update information available about the bridge 110.
The 3D model is used to generate a 3D map that the user can use to inspect the information
relating to the bridge 110.
The information used to generate the 3D model and for other processes of the
maintenance system 100 is typically provided by subject matter experts such as a bridge
engineer, maintenance manager, inspector and drafts persons. The information includes bridge
drawings, the types of maintenance conducted (maintenance type) on the bridge, the types of
1001304538
inspections conducted on the bridge (inspection type) and for each bridge component the
following data:
location, node name;
component name;
how the component is accessed (access method);
surface area;
aesthetic rating;
environmental rating;
expected life span;
structural fatigue factor;
structural rating;
segment name and the structural criticality;
weighting; and
paint system.
The information may further include types of bridge access, types of maintenance, types
of inspection, location of each component, subcomponent details, defect types, coating type,
inspection image types, rating criteria, staff table, staff permission type, and material type.
The 3D model is used to generate a 3D map for visual inspection of the information
relating to the bridge 110. An example of a 3D map 240 is shown in Figure 2G. Figure 2D is a
colour drawing showing colour rendering displayed on the 3D map. The 3D map 240 shows
colour rendering associated with the structural condition rating of the components.
The colours shown depend on the version of the 3D map that is being viewed by the user.
Versions include:
the condition ratings (coating, material or structural) of the various components;
weighting factor, predictive condition or access method of components;
inspection requirements (when inspections are due); and
maintenance completed, maintenance required and/or maintenance planned.
Each of these versions of the 3D map displays a differently rendered coloured map. The
section below describing the reports generated by the maintenance system describes how the user
1001304538
inputs the required parameters into dialog boxes in order to generate and view one or more of the
above versions of 3D maps.
Figure 2H shows a close up of one node 271 in a 3D map selected to display maintenance
planned. The colour rendering indicates that the upright portions 272 have been scheduled for
maintenance.
In certain embodiments, activities are completed via the 3D map. For example, inspection
data may be input by displaying the component to be inspected on a display, selecting that
component using a suitable user interface, and then entering inspection data for the component in
a form that is displayed in response to the selection of that component from the 3D map. In
another example, past inspection data for a component may be viewed by selecting the
component from the 3D map.
3.2 Relational database
The relational database maintained by the maintenance system 100 can be described by
the entity-relationship model (ERM) 400 shown in Figure 4A. The entities in the model include
the elements 402, components 404 and sub-components 406 of the structure 110, where each
sub-component 406 is associated with area, costs, other relevant factors and access information
408. In embodiments without sub-components 406, then the area, costs, other relevant factors
and access information is associated with the components.
This information 408 together with ratings and images 410 of the components/sub-
components are used for a maintenance proposal 412. The ratings and images 410 are obtained
from structural reports 414 following structural investigation 416, as well as from biannual
inspections 418. Following the maintenance proposal 412, completed maintenance data 420
together with the relevant ratings and images 410 are placed in archive 422 (described below in
further detail). The structural information input into the system forms part of the relational
database, together with a weighting that influences the priority of the maintenance.
The weighting allows users to prioritise and allocate maintenance. Two components with
the same condition rating, for example, may be maintained differently due to their weightings.
This is a significant improvement from the common practice of having a maintenance schedule
based on criticalities identified in inspection reports. For example, if 20 elements have the
1001304538
highest steel corrosion criticality rating of 4, asset managers are able to prioritise the
maintenance schedule based on the weighting of each element. The use of aspects other than the
condition rating (e.g. environmental and aesthetical weightings) in prioritising the maintenance
schedule allows asset managers to approach asset management in a strategic manner. The
weighting ensures all stakeholder interests are considered in the maintenance prioritisation e.g.
structural engineers’ concerns are addressed by the structural rating, the political aspect is
addressed in aesthetic rating and the paint chemist’s concerns are addressed in the environmental
rating.
The weighting is determined according to the following formula:
environment_ rating aesthetic_ rating structural_ rating
weighting ( 1) ( 1) ( 1)
10 10
Each rating has a value from 1 to 4 to indicate the following level of importance:
1 – neutral
2 – moderate
3 – very important
4 – (only for structures) critical
It will be appreciated that any number of appropriate ratings may be used to determine
the value of the weighting depending on the specific circumstances, and these may or may not
include the three shown in the above equation. Also, the weighting may be determined in any
number of ways in order to assist with the appropriate prioritisation of maintenance tasks. For
example, instead of using a weighting value calculated to be between 1 and 2, the weighting may
be calculated as a percentage.
The user can either enter a previously calculated weighting value directly into the dialog
box, or the user can enter the variables of the weighting (e.g. the environmental, aesthetic and
structural ratings), in which case the system will calculate the weighting in order to incorporate it
into the maintenance plan. The manner in which the weighting is calculated, for example by
using the above formula, is incorporated into the software of the system. It is possible to amend
the formula used by the system, as well as add or remove one or more of the variables.
1001304538
The condition rating of a specific element is multiplied by the weighting for that element,
and the system then lists the scheduled maintenance tasks in order of priorities from the highest
weighted rating to the lowest, enabling the relevant decision maker to schedule maintenance
according to the calculated priorities.
The database includes a number of tables from which features are selected to describe the
attributes associated with the various components, elements maintenance procedures and other
aspects relating to the maintenance of the structure. Some of the relevant tables are listed in
Table 1.
1001304538
Table descriptor Data in the table
Maintenance Type Method of maintenance such as patch
Inspection Type Types of inspection that can be performed e.g. coating and structural
4 different defect levels are possible, from 1- no defect to 4- severe
Defect Level
defect
Coating Type A list of possible types of coating that can be applied to an element
Access Type The various access methods
Image Stores photos and images that are taken by inspectors
Permission User permission for application
Rating Inspection rating levels 1-4
Defect Types List of defect types: structure, timber, concrete, fixtures
Bridge Data The Bridge structure components and weightings
Bridge Inspections Inspection record for each component
Bridge Location The values for location in Bridge Data
Bridge Maintenance Maintenance record for each component
Bridge Subcomponents Identification of Components which have subcomponents
Bridge Synchronisation Synchronisation data
Bridge Staff Staff list
Bridge Ratings Help Help data
Zone The table that is used to calculate averages in specific zones
Treatment Maintenance treatments for each material such as spray seal
Material List of Materials making up structure
Area Component Area calculation
Table 1 Database tables and related data
4. Entering inspection data
The user interface 224 provides for the input and output of information:
Information input includes inspection data entered into the system, as described in
this section.
Information input also relates to parameters defining the reports required by the
user. These reports together with relevant 3D maps are then output (displayed on a
screen and/or printed), as described in the next section.
1001304538
In the embodiments described herein, the input of inspection information is performed by
a number of dialog boxes, such as Windows forms. Other inspection information entered via the
user interface 224 include the date, operator name, and component location, as well as
information relating to the condition of a component. This information includes a rating level,
condition items such as peeling or cracking, structural characteristics such as cross-sectional area
and crack length, and the details about the required maintenance activity such as the cost and
schedule. Other information includes the visibility of the component to the public, as well as how
access is obtained to the component. Some aspects of this information may be entered when the
maintenance system 100 is first formed, while other aspects may be null until later, for example
until the first inspection has been completed.
Following each inspection, each component is allocated a rating for the specific type of
condition being rated. The rating has a value between 1 and 4 that is also associated with the
percentage of the component’s area affected by that rating. In other words, a component in very
sound condition will have 100% of its area as rating 1. Another component, having 75% of its
area in sound condition and 25% in very poor condition will be 75% rating 1 and 25% rating 4.
These values will be entered into the database.
Each component is assigned a percentage of its total area for each rating level. The
resulting rating values are combined for all the components in a node to give a single rating
value for that node. The rating value for the component can be the average rating or the worst
rating. As an example: if a component has a rating of 4 over 1% of its area and a rating of 1 over
99% of its area, then the value of the average rating assigned is 1 whereas the worst rating value
assigned is 4.
4.1 Paint condition rating
The equation below (Eq. 1) quantifies the behaviour of paint deterioration, derived
through empirical testing performed on the Sydney Harbour Bridge.
Y 100 X Eq.1
The coefficient “z” is a number that specific to each condition state which essentially
defines the parameter of each condition state used by the asset manager. In turn, “z” determines
the rate of transition between each condition state with reference to the “paint system factor” and
1001304538
the “environmental rating factor” of the infrastructure in question. In one embodiment the
coefficient “z” is between 100,000 and 10,000,000. “X” is the percentage of the life span
elapsed which will be discussed below.
A paint rating system classifying paint condition within a scale of 1 to 4 is used. When
paint is applied to the bridge steelwork the initial rating is set at 1. Over time the paint will age
and towards the end of its useful life the rate of deterioration will increase. This gives rise to an
exponential deterioration curve. A condition rating of 4 represents the end of the paint’s useful
life and the upper limit to the deterioration curve. Thus the paint condition can be described in
the following example equation Eq. A which is derived from Eq. 1:
-8 4
Paint Condition Rating, Y = 1 + (3 10 X ), if X>100 then Y=4 Eq. A
where X is the percentage of the life span that has elapsed where life span of paint is defined as
follows:
Life span = 10 (Paint system factor) (2 - 0.5 Environmental Rating factor) Eq. B
where the paint system factor is as follows:
Chlorinated Rubber system = 1
Epoxy system = 2
and the environmental rating factor is as follows:
Neutral impact = 0
Important impact = 1
Very important impact = 2 (harsh environmental conditions)
Figure 4B shows the paint deterioration rate 440 according to Eq. A.
Using Eq. B, the paint life span varies, for example from 10 to 40 years, in 5 year
increments. With detailed paint deterioration records becoming available over time,
consideration may be given to adjusting both factors defined above. Irrespective of the life span
for any particular element component, the shape of the deterioration curve according to Eq. 1
remains constant.
1001304538
As the paint on a component ages, it is expected that some parts of that component will
deteriorate at a different rate. This may be due to parts being relatively more sheltered from the
environment, or subject to quality inconsistencies or local damage. Hence, from the time a
component is painted, the paint condition rating at a future date may comprise a percentage in
each of the four condition states, possibly including 0% and 100%. The deterioration curve
therefore represents a line of best fit for a combined average of the four condition states.
The variability in the paint’s performance over time is represented by the Paint
Deterioration Model 430 shown in Figure 4C. The acceleration in the deterioration is defined by
exponential curves to the power of 4 marking the transition of one condition rating into another
and which are calibrated against known paint deterioration data.
For example, on the Sydney Harbour Bridge the following equations have been used to
define each condition state used by the asset manager:
The curve dividing condition state 1 and 2 is defined as:
Percent in condition state, Y = 100 – (1/450,000) X
The curve dividing condition state 2 and 3 is defined as:
Percent in condition state, Y = 100 – (1/1,000,000) X
The curve dividing condition state 3 and 4 is defined as:
Percent in condition state, Y = 100 – (1/2,000,000) X
X = % of life span elapsed
At 100% of the ultimate life, all paint on an element component of the bridge will be in
condition state 3 and 4. Beyond this time some residual paint may still be providing protection to
the steel until the point when no paint remains but it is considered that the paint system as a
whole has failed and renewal of the system needs consideration. Depending on asset
management target condition states, maintenance painting intervention is likely to be triggered at
some point before the ultimate paint life is reached.
1001304538
When a user inputs the inspection data for paint condition, the user can enter the rating
value between 1 and 4 directly into the inspection dialog box. In a further embodiment, the
variables required to calculate the paint condition as described above are entered, and the system
calculates the inspection data according to the above equations: the system calculates the paint
life span that has elapsed and/or the system calculates the paint condition. For this, the user will
enter a value for the environmental rating and/or the paint system factor.
In a further embodiment the system calculates the rate of paint deterioration according to
Eq. A, an example of which is shown in Figure 4B.
In a further embodiment, the equations used by the system to determine the paint
condition, paint life span and rate of paint deterioration may be amended by the user, including
adding or removing one or more variables.
4.2 Coating condition rating
The coating defects rating values are determined as per table 2 below:
1001304538
Rating Description
1 The protective coating is generally sound and unbroken. Some minor
chalking and water staining may be evident.
The protective coating is exhibiting:
Minor speckled white or red rusting, and/or
Localised pinhead rusting, and/or
2 Localised peeling and/or flaking.
The top coat may exhibit one or more of the following conditions:
Loss of thickness
Primer exposed over localised areas
Shrinkage lines with minor localised splitting
Surface checking with slight localised splitting
Minor unbroken blistering.
Rivets may be exposed at scattered locations.
The protective coating is exhibiting:
3 Speckled white rusting in areas >2% and <5% of total surface area.
Speckled red rusting in areas >0.5% and <5% of total surface area.
The top coat may exhibit one or more of the following conditions:
Primer exposed over large areas.
Splitting and peeling (loss of adhesion)
Heavily checked blistering over large areas.
Numerous rivets may be exposed.
4 The protective coating is no longer effective, signs include:
Speckled rust >5% (red and white)
Failure of primer over large areas.
Table 2 Coating defects guide
1001304538
4.3 Steel condition rating
The steel corrosion rating values are determined as per table 3 below:
Rating Description
1 There is no evidence of corrosion.
Surface rust or minor pitting has formed or is forming.
There may be exposed metal but there is no measurable loss of section.
There may be minor deformations that do not affect the integrity of the
element and there are no cracks in the steel or welds.
Corrosion is moderate - heavy pitting may be present.
3 Some measurable section loss is present locally, but not critical to the
structural integrity and/or serviceability of the component.
There are minor cracks and/or deformations in the steel or welds which
have been assessed as being not sufficient to impact on the ultimate
strength and/or serviceability of the component.
Corrosion is advanced.
4 Section loss is sufficient to warrant analysis to ascertain the impact on the
ultimate strength and/or serviceability of either the element or the bridge.
There are cracks and/or deformations in the steel or welds, which may
impact on the ultimate strength and/or serviceability of the component.
Table 3 Steel corrosion guide
It will be understood that a number different component features may be allocated
ratings, and that the ratings may be allocated according to a variety of scales and characteristics,
as applicable to the specific complex structure being maintained.
4.4 Entering inspection data into the system
Referring to Figure 5A, inspection data is input to the system via an inspection report
dialog box 500. A new inspection report can be generated if the New field 524 is selected, or an
existing inspection report number 526 can be entered to retrieve the appropriate report that will
be updated. Other options available for the user to retrieve the appropriate inspection report for
entering inspection data are as follows:
1001304538
1. A component identification name or number 528 can be entered to search the relevant
component;
2. Selecting a location 522 (typed in or selected from the drop down menu) will provide a
list of elements 520, segments 518, nodes 516 and/or components 514 that can be
selected. The components 514 may be associated with one or more of the elements 520,
segments 518 and/or nodes 516 so that the user is able to cross-reference and use
available information to search for the required component;
3. If the user selects the Select from Map 540 button then a 3D map is displayed on the
screen to allow the user to visually inspect the bridge 110 in order to select (e.g. by
clicking on) a specific segment or component.
Auxiliary information relevant to the inspection report includes the inspector details 530,
the inspection type 532, and the inspection date 534. Inspection types include coating and steel
inspection of the component’s paint and steel condition, structural inspection of the structural
capability of a component, and inspection of components such as concrete and stonework.
Consequently the inspection data relates to the coating, structural condition or
concrete/stonework condition of a component 514. It will be understood that other types of
inspection reports may be used as appropriate to the circumstances of the specific structure.
The inspection report 500 shown in Figure 5A is used for entering coating condition data.
With respect to the coating, data that is input and stored in inspection tables includes the coating
rating 510 and the steel rating 512. For both of these, a rating between 1 and 4 is available, and
for each one of these ratings the percentage of the surface area associated with the rating is
entered using the four drop down menus.
Data relating to user defined defect type such as coating defects 502 includes the
percentage of surface area subject to one or more of chalking, bubbling, cracking, checking,
peeling, an exposed inter layer, and exposed primer layer, and exposed steel.
Data relating to user defined defect such as corrosion 504 includes the percentage of
surface area subject to a user deterioration condition such as one or more of surface rust, pitting,
delaminating and section loss.
1001304538
The presence of user defined contaminants 506 can be recorded for debris, moisture, salts
and/or pollutants. The presence of other defects 508 can be recorded for structure, timber,
concrete or fixtures.
Images are stored in an image table. To record an image the user selects the Record
Image button 534. To view a recorded image the user selects the View Image button 536. Other
relevant comments can be entered into the comments field 538.
With respect to the structural condition, the data that is input and stored includes the
structural rating, the structural factor and image data. The structural factor is an engineering
factor of safety. For an element that is less then 1.0 it means the element is under designed
(capacity) and if over 1.0 the component is overdesigned (capacity). The structural factor may
change with time according to the load that the bridge is exposed to if the load the bridge
experienced was significantly less at the time of design than the load that the bridge experiences
at a later stage.
The inspection history can also be viewed via the system user interface by accessing the
inspection history panel 550 shown in Figure 5B.
Generating a maintenance plan
From the main menu, the user is also able to access a maintenance interface for
specifying maintenance parameters, viewing maintenance options, and selecting a maintenance
plan.
The maintenance process involves three main steps:
first selecting the required maintenance parameters for which a list of possible
maintenance options is then generated showing the inspection data for the relevant
components;
selecting maintenance options from the list for a final maintenance plan; and
then performing the maintenance and updating the inspection data for the components
that have been maintained.
1001304538
Referring to Figure 6A, maintenance parameters are entered using the maintenance
schedule dialog box 660. Specific maintenance parameters can be entered if the “Show Specific”
662 button is selected. The user can select a certain rating value to view inspection data for
elements or nodes that share a certain rating in order to include those elements/nodes in the
maintenance plan. For example, the user may select to view coating ratings below 2.
In alternative embodiments available options in the dialog box for selecting maintenance
parameters include selecting a specific access route, a criticality rating and/or a condition rating.
Additionally, the user may select to view coating ratings below 2 that are associated with nodes
that have a high criticality rating (where high criticality ratings relate, for example, to nodes that
are visible to the public or are structurally critical). Alternatively, inspection data can also be
viewed according to the access method associated with the specific element or node as shown in
the scheduled maintenance form 670 in Figure 6B.
When scheduling the maintenance, the user can also view inspection data associated with
a certain proposed cost for the maintenance. This includes the cost of full maintenance access
setup, painting and access dismantling. A specific cost limit can be entered, for example a dollar
value. Alternatively, as shown in Figure 6B, the required maintenance type 664 can be selected,
and each is associated with a certain cost factor 666.
As will be understood from the above description, a maintenance plan can be based on
one of, or a combination of the following maintenance parameters:
a condition rating,
a criticality rating,
an access method and/or
a proposed cost.
The scheduled maintenance form 670 in Figure 6B shows the list of maintenance options
according to the maintenance parameters input by the user. The user is able to select the
maintenance options required for the maintenance plan from this list, or to select the entire list.
Once the user has selected the maintenance to be scheduled, the proposed maintenance data is
saved in the database and can also be viewed on a maintenance 3D map (for example, as seen for
node 271 in Figure 2H).
1001304538
The scheduled maintenance can be altered using the maintenance completed dialog box
680 shown in Figure 6C. For example, for each element maintenance may be revoked or marked
as completed in which case the completed condition rating 682 is changed to, for example, 1
(pristine condition). All inspections recorded as a result of maintenance are entered into the
inspection table using a “Maintenance Inspector” function.
The maintenance history of each element can be viewed using the maintenance history
dialog box 690 shown in Figure 6D. If maintenance is carried out that is not an outcome from an
inspection, the components are selected using the drop down menus for location 692, element
694 etc., and the maintenance details are filled in and saved.
6. Reports available for the user
From the main menu the user is also able to access a number of reports that include
information about how a component is accessed, inspection data relating to component features,
e.g. the condition of each component (for example using rating levels), and the criticality of each
component. Criticality can be determined according to the requirements of the structure 110 and
may be based on, for example, visibility of the component: the more visible the component is,
the more critical it is to prioritise the maintenance of that component.
6.1 Maintenance Report
Referring to Figure 6, a user uses the maintenance report interface 650 to specify the
parameters for which a maintenance report will be generated and displayed, printed and/or saved.
In particular, the user specifies if the report must include data relating to maintenance completed
652, the proposed maintenance 654 and/or the maintenance required at a future time,
extrapolated maintenance 656. In the maintenance report dialog box 650 the user specifies
relevant start and stop dates 658. A spreadsheet 657 and/or 3D map 659 of the bridge can then be
viewed showing proposed and/or completed maintenance of the various components. The 3D
map shows the proposed and/or completed maintenance as different coloured shading of the
various components.
6.2 Member Report
Referring to Figure 6F, the member report 602 displays the inspections that have been
carried out on a particular node. The user enters location 604, element 606, segment 608 or node
1001304538
610 details to access the relevant inspection and maintenance data. Data can be limited according
to the earliest date selected by the user as well as the number of years selected.
Reports can also be generated by referring to the 3D map. If the 3D map is used, then the
location, element, segment or node is selected by clicking on the relevant area on the 3D map.
If a node has been selected and the maintenance data for that node has been displayed,
then the detailed data for each element can also be accessed. Each of the components making up
the node is displayed with its rating data.
6.3 Condition Rating Report
Referring to Figure 6G, a report showing the rating values for each component can be
created using the rating report dialog box 620. The report is output as a spreadsheet 622 or
coloured on the 3D map 624. Rating reports can be generated according to the aspect that is rated
626, for example coating, steel, structural condition or criticality.
The average and/or worst rating can be displayed on the 3D map and provided in a
spreadsheet output. The spreadsheet is opened when the report is available to view. The report
can be saved or discarded after viewing.
A subset list of ratings can be reported. For example, if the user selects a “comparison”
function, then having a rating equal to, above or below the selected rating will be shown (e.g.
choosing above or equal to and the value 3 will select all components having a current rating of 3
or 4).
A user-definable colour is displayed for each rating on the 3D map. The user can also
remove the colour rendering from the 3D map and the image will be displayed in grey-scale.
Rendering is not a function of the 3D modelling platform (ARCobjects). Rather, the user defines
the colour associated with an attribute via a command in the 3D modelling software.
Referring to Figure 6H, if the user has chosen a structural report 630 then the report is
generated using a pair of limits 632 on the structural factor of a component. The structural factor
is described elsewhere herein in more detail. The rendering is divided into the number of colour
bands 634 selected by the user (for example 4 bands for a rating between 0.5 and 0.7).
1001304538
6.4 Area Report
A report showing the total area for each rating value and the area per rating per access
method can be output to the user. This is in the form of a spreadsheet 640 containing the data for
each rating as shown in Figure 6I.
6.5 Access Report
A report of the access method for each bridge component is available. This report shows
the access by shading the components of the 3D map. The user selects an access zone to display
and a colour to represent it by using an access report dialog box. Reports may be generated
according to a node or location selected by the user, for example by selecting a location using the
3D map. Alternatively, the user can select an access method to produce a report of the elements
or nodes accessible via the particular access method. These reports can be saved and accessed
again at a later stage.
6.6 Inspections due report
Using the inspections due form 696 as shown in Figure 6J, a user can specify a certain
time frame for which details of inspections due is required. The list of inspections due is for
painting maintenance and/or fatigue maintenance.
When an inspection is completed, the date of the next inspection is set according to a
predefined inspection interval using the drop down menus 698. For example, the next inspection
may be set as one year from the date of inspection. The next inspection date may be specified by
an asset manager. In this case it may be displayed as a default value, with or without an option to
amend. The fatigue date is ascertained by the bridge engineers and set in the database.
6.7 Area report
A report showing the total area for each rating value, and the area of each rating per
access method can be displayed by selecting the rating areas button 623 on the rating report
dialog box 620.
This generates a spreadsheet 625 as shown in Figure 6K which shows the total number of
elements 627 in each rating value as well as an aggregation of the area 629 in each rating value.
This gives the maintenance manager an idea of the total health of the structure.
1001304538
The area report also gives the maintenance manager an idea of the maintenance
requirement in relation to each of the access methods 681. The access based values 681 are set
out in the lower part of the spreadsheet 625 and show the sum of the areas for each rating value
683. This advantageously assists the maintenance manager in allocating resources for
maintenance based on availability of the access methods.
6.8 Predictive rating report
Users are able develop a forward maintenance plan based on a possible condition in a
future period created through the predicted condition report dialog box 631. The users can select
average percentage rating 633 or component percentage rating 635 for a specific zone or
component 637 and either include 639 or exclude 641 scheduled maintenance. The output can be
displayed on 3D map, spreadsheet or PDF format.
6.9 Weighting report
The Weighting Report can be generated through the weighting report dialog box 651 to
show the weighting factor for each component 653 on a structure or the components which lie
within a particular weighting factor range. If the weightings are being rendered on the 3D model
then a set of colour bands can be chosen 667 to create a graded colour scheme. If necessary the
values 669 shown in the 3D Model can be grouped by weighting value 669 or by the count of
components 671 having a weighting within a particular range in the 3D Model Table of
Contents. This will affect the colour they are assigned.
7. Master-slave synchronisation
If the system is implemented in an embodiment comprising a master 120 and slave
computers 116, 118 as shown in Figure 1, then inspection data entered into the local database of
a slave computer 116, 118 needs to be uploaded to the master computer 120. This process is
called synchronisation, and includes updating the mirror database on the slave.
Referring to the slave computers 116, 118, the 3D map displayed on each of these
computers is connected to a slave database residing on the local hard-disk and so is one of many
such databases that are resident on other slave computers forming part of the system 100. Each
1001304538
slave database needs to be updated or synchronised with the master database prior to the addition
of any new information.
During the synchronisation process, inspection and maintenance data from the slave
database are transferred to the master database. At the same time, records from the master
database are transferred back to update the slave database.
Before any inspection data is saved, the local database is synchronised with the master
database via the network 122. To carry out synchronisation the slave computer 116, 118 is first
connected to the network 122, the master database is then located over the network, and the
synchronisation function of the system 100 is enabled. Once the slave database has been
synchronised, new inspections can be saved and existing ones updated. The slave database will
also contain inspection and maintenance data entered by all other slave computers forming part
of the maintenance system 100.
8. Archiving
For a complex structure comprising thousands of individual components, a complete
inspection cycle takes about 2 years. Referring again to Figure 4A and the archive entity 422,
once a component has undergone a cycle of inspection-maintenance-and inspected again, the
first inspection and the maintenance that has been completed become redundant and are
archived.
Referring to Figure 7A, the user interface 224 includes a dialog box 700 to facilitate
archiving. The inspection data as well as the completed maintenance tasks that the user wishes to
archive can be selected using the archiving dialog box. To assist in the task of archiving records,
a graph of the accumulated records can be produced. This allows the most suitable archive date
to be chosen.
In order to archive records, the user selects an archive database 704. The software
program provides a list of directories from which an appropriate database can be selected.
Following this, an archive date 706 is selected by the user. The system includes an option to
view the number of records associated with the user’s selection.
Records in the archive database may be loaded back into the user database for
comparison and other history gathering uses by using the dialog box 710 shown in Figure 7B. To
1001304538
load records from the archive, two dates 712 are selected by the user (from and to) to select
which records to load. All the archive records between these dates will be loaded. An option to
view the number of records associated with the user’s selection is included.
As used herein, except where the context requires otherwise, the term "comprise" and
variations of the term, such as "comprising", "comprises" and "comprised", are not intended to
exclude further additives, components, integers or steps.
It will be understood that the invention disclosed and defined in this specification extends
to all alternative combinations of two or more of the individual features mentioned or evident
from the text or drawings. All of these different combinations constitute various alternative
aspects of the invention.
9 Maintenance Types
The List of Maintenance Types stored in the Database is kept up to date using form 800
as shown in Figure 8A. Each maintenance type 802 has a material 804, a full coat indicator 806
(for coating types of maintenance only) and a cost factor 808. The cost factor 808 is a multiplier
which is applied to the base cost of the component maintenance which more accurately reflects
the true maintenance cost for this Type. For the Sydney Harbour Bridge the component cost is
specified as a coating patch coat cost (this cost is stored in the BAASIS_DATA database table).
The other maintenance types multiply this cost by the Cost Factor.
Treatment
Each maintenance type has a number of treatments which may be applied or carried out
as part of the Maintenance Type as shown in the maintenance treatment dialog box 810 in Figure
8B. For example, the Sydney Harbour Bridge the maintenance type “Top coat only” may be
done with an epoxy paint treatment or a chlorinated rubber treatment.
Each treatment 812 has a factor 814 applied to it to further modify the cost stored in the
DATA table. A more expensive treatment has a higher factor.
1001304538
Materials
There can be any number of Materials – also referred to as Inspection Types which are
available to the Inspectors and Maintenance users. Material will appear in inspection forms 820
and reports as shown in Figure 8C.
Inspection Defects
The types of defects will be required to be defined for each material. For example, steel
can have a rust defect and concrete may have a spalling defect.
The defects 832 are specified in the inspection defects form 830 shown in Figure 8D
together with their location on the Inspection report 840. Each defect 832 has the material 834
which it affects, the type 836 and the position 838. The type 836 and position 838 refer to the
location of the defect on the inspection report dialog box 840 as shown in Figure 8E.
There are two defects sections 842 on the inspection report dialog box 840 – one with
eight possible defects 844 and the other with four possible defects 846. There is also an Other
Defects section 848 but these are not changed by the user.
The defect type refers 836 to whether the defects belongs to the first defect section 844
for Type 1 850 or the second defect section 846 for Type 2 852. The positions 838 refer to the
location of the defect within that area on the report 840. In the example in Figure 8E chalking
854 is in Position 1, bubbling 856 in Position 2 etc.
When a defect is added 862 a new field 860 is appended to the Inspection Table 830 in
the database. If a defect is removed 864 then this field and all the associated data is removed
from the Table 830. Updating 866 a defect only changes the name on the form.
Note that it is not necessary to have defects for all material types. If a material type has
no defects possible, then the area on the form is blank. For example, cable on the report 870 in
Figure 8F has no defects.
1001304538
Inspection Levels
Each inspection is given an inspection level depending upon the qualifications of the
inspector to do that kind of inspection. The available levels are designated in the inspection
levels form.
Inspection Help
For each type of material (Inspection Type) a rating help description must be input. The
software may be pre-loaded with coating and steel rating help but it is unlikely that these will
apply to all structures. Therefore further rating help may be added.
For each material and rating level there is help text 882 and an example photo 884 as
shown in help box 880 in Figure 8G. The form allows you to edit the text of the help 882 and
change the photo 884.
Re-Inspection Intervals
Most of the coating materials on a bridge are reinspected on a basis set by the type of
coating on the component and the current age. However, there are some components which are
inspected regularly regardless of their current condition or maintenance. The two flag poles on
the Sydney Harbour Bridge are examples of this.
The re-inspection intervals form 890 is used to set a component to have a regular
inspection interval. To add a component 892 to this list the user must first get it’s
COMPONENT_ID value 894. This can be found by using the identify button on the Main Menu.
1001304538
Claims (23)
1. A computational system for managing maintenance of a structure comprising a plurality of components with associated component features, the system comprising: computer hardware, computer software and computer memory containing information for 5 defining a 3D model of the plurality of components and their associated component features; the computer software including instructions to: a) provide an interface via the computer hardware to: i) receive and store maintenance parameters associated with one or more of 10 the component features, the maintenance parameters including a paint condition model, the paint condition model comprising a plurality of condition states representing progression through the useful life of the paint, with an exponential deterioration curve over time; and ii) display a map of the 3D model; 15 b) generate for output a maintenance plan for components to be maintained, wherein the maintenance plan is dependent on the paint condition model; and c) display on the map a visual representation of information selected from a group consisting of: the maintenance parameters and the maintenance plan.
2. The system of claim 1 wherein the computer software further includes an end of the 20 useful life for paint on the at least one of the plurality of the components, wherein the paint condition model includes a transition between a first condition state and a second condition state that intersects the end of the useful life, whereby at the end of the useful life component is classified as being entirely in the second condition state.
3. The system of claim 1 or claim 2 wherein the computer software further includes 25 instructions to receive and store inspection data for the at least one of the plurality of the components, the inspection data identifying one of the plurality of condition states for a component, wherein the map is dependent on the inspection data. 1001304538
4. The system of any one of claims 1 to 3 wherein the maintenance parameters include a component criticality rating that effects a weighting of maintenance priority for the at least one of the plurality of components relative to other components with a different component criticality rating, the component criticality rating comprising one or a combination of ratings selected from 5 the group consisting of: an environmental rating, an aesthetic rating and a structural rating.
5. The system of claim 4 wherein the maintenance plan includes maintenance priorities determined based on the criticality rating parameter.
6. The system of any one of claims 1 to 5 wherein the maintenance parameters additionally comprise access method and/or cost parameters. 10
7. The system of any one of claims 1 to 6 wherein the computer software further includes instructions to colour code the map by the maintenance parameters, and/or the maintenance plan.
8. The system of claim 7 when dependent on claim 3, wherein the computer software further includes instructions to colour code the map based on the inspection data.
9. A computer implemented method for generating a maintenance plan for a structure 15 comprising a plurality of components with associated component features, the method comprising: storing information defining the components and their associated component features and maintenance parameters associated with one or more of the component features, the maintenance parameters including a paint condition model for at least one of the plurality of the components, 20 the paint condition model comprising a plurality of condition states representing progression through the useful life of the paint, with an exponential deterioration curve; and generating a maintenance plan for one or more of the plurality of said components, the maintenance plan generated based on the maintenance parameters.
10. The computer implemented method of claim 9 further comprising determining a current 25 condition state for a component from the plurality of conditions states responsive to entered inspection data. 1001304538
11. The method of claim 9 or claim 10 wherein the maintenance parameters include a plurality of component criticality ratings and wherein generating a maintenance plan comprises increasing the priority of maintenance of components with a higher criticality rating.
12. The method of any one of claims 9 to 11 wherein the maintenance parameters further 5 comprise an access method.
13. The method of any one of claims 9 to 12 wherein the maintenance parameters further comprise cost of maintenance.
14. The method of any one of claims 9 to 13 further comprising generating a 3D map of the structure and colour coding the map by said maintenance parameters. 10
15. The method of any one of claims 9 to 13 further comprising generating a 3D map of the structure and colour coding the map by said inspection data.
16. The method of any one of claims 9 to 13 further comprising generating a 3D map of the structure and colour coding the map by said maintenance plan.
17. A computational system according to any one of claims 1 to 8, wherein the structure is a 15 steel structure.
18. A computer implemented method according to any one of claims 9 to 16, wherein the structure is a steel structure.
19. A computational system according to claim 17, wherein the structure is in the form of a bridge.
20 20. A computational system according to claim 17, wherein the structure is in the form of a building.
21. A computer implemented method according to claim 18, wherein the structure is in the form of a bridge.
22. A computer implemented method according to claim 18, wherein the structure is in the 25 form of a building. 1001304538
23. A computer implemented method comprising generating a maintenance plan for a structure based on a paint deterioration model substantially as herein described with reference to
Applications Claiming Priority (3)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
AU2011901846 | 2011-05-13 | ||
AU2011901846A AU2011901846A0 (en) | 2011-05-13 | Structure modelling and maintenance scheduling | |
PCT/AU2012/000526 WO2012155194A1 (en) | 2011-05-13 | 2012-05-11 | Structure modelling and maintenance scheduling |
Publications (2)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
NZ618052A NZ618052A (en) | 2016-01-29 |
NZ618052B2 true NZ618052B2 (en) | 2016-05-03 |
Family
ID=
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US20150134545A1 (en) | Structure Modelling and Maintenance Scheduling | |
Akanni et al. | Impact of environmental factors on building project performance in Delta State, Nigeria | |
Hilorme et al. | Formation of risk mitigating strategies for the implementation of projects of energy saving technologies | |
Wesz et al. | Planning and controlling design in engineered-to-order prefabricated building systems | |
US20070124186A1 (en) | Method of managing project uncertainties using event chains | |
US8219435B2 (en) | Determining task status based upon identifying milestone indicators in project-related files | |
Tulke et al. | 4D construction sequence planning–new process and data model | |
San Santoso et al. | Assessment of risks in high rise building construction in Jakarta | |
US20120316930A1 (en) | Integrated system and methods for tracking and reporting construction, completion, and inspection status | |
US20170206510A1 (en) | Spatially-keyed, consolidated-data-controlled apparatus and method | |
Palaneeswaran et al. | Client satisfaction and quality management systems in contractor organizations | |
US11550308B2 (en) | Dynamic value stream management | |
Sousa et al. | Conceptual design of performance measurement and management systems using a structured engineering approach | |
CN116051055A (en) | Digital project management system | |
KR20180109785A (en) | Method and apparatus for assisting strategy map management based on schedule-assessment item and todo-assessment item | |
Erdoğan et al. | More effective sprint retrospective with statistical analysis | |
Sing et al. | A theoretical framework for classifying project complexity at the preconstruction stage using cluster analysis techniques | |
Kisi | Estimation of optimal productivity in labor-intensive construction operations | |
KR20180013474A (en) | Method and apparatus for assisting strategy map management based on schedule-assessment item and todo-assessment item | |
JP2006202082A (en) | Production line management system, production line management program, recording medium, and method for managing production line | |
Huang et al. | Implementation of GIS/GPS-Based Airport Pavement Management System—A Case Study | |
Dadashi Haji et al. | An automated BIM and system dynamics tool for assessing safety leading indicators in construction projects | |
Bakshi et al. | Exploratory Analysis of Project Selection through MCDM | |
NZ618052B2 (en) | Structure modelling and maintenance scheduling | |
WO2016163003A1 (en) | Asset management system and asset management method |