TU1406: Quality Specifications for Roadway Bridges, Standardization at a European Level (BridgeSpec) Start date: 16 April 2015 José Matos TU1406 MC1, COST Office, Brussels, 16 April 2015 COST is supported ESF provides the COST Office by the EU Framework Programme through a European Commission contract
AGENDA 16/04/2015 – 1. Background Objectives – Impact 2. Reasons for the Action 8. Work and Budget Plan 3. General Information – Deliverables – COST countries – Scientific program – COST policies – Networking 4. Election – Group priorities – Chair – Engagement strategy for WG – Grant Holder members – Vice Chair – General plan of the Action 5. Horizontal Roles – Milestones – Organization – Dissemination activities – Core Group – Dissemination rules – Other Agreements – Specific goals and actions for 1 st 6. Expansion grant period – Budget for 1 st grant period COST Countries – – Near Neighbor Countries – An outlook into upcoming years – International Partner Countries – Scientific goals per WG 7. Objectives and Benefits 9. Any Other Business – Aim 10. Closing 2
1. Background The OECD noted that by 2030 “ ... a larger effort will need to be directed towards maintenance and upgrading of existing infrastructures and to getting infrastructures to work more efficiently ” bridge deck area (Mio. m²) expected condition [OECD, 2007] development without enhanced maintenance “… it is therefore extremely important for countries to prioritize their budget expenditures in this topic by improving the way infrastructures are being managed. ” grade critical deficient 3
1. Background Decay Process Efficient Public Limited Management Demands Resources Public Expectatio ns 4
1. Background Visual Inspection NDT Testing Monitoring System Performance Indicator Performance Goal Quality Control Plan 5
1. Background bridge network Recycling Life End Demounting and demolition Renovation and rebuilding Maintenance and repair Utilization Structure Technical Indicators definition level Operation Structural Environmental Construction Component Indicators Production Realization Others Design Optimization Material Material acquisition and production Raw material acquisition Criteria 6
1. Background A Bridge Management System is used to store the quality control plans of the bridge network. Some systems also store the developed maintenance actions costs and effects. Condition Initial state In order to predict the bridge Monitoring, prediction performance with time, advanced models are used. An optimization algorithm may be also used to find the Limit state best maintenance strategy. [Ministry of Ontario, 2014] Time t rep. t untimely end t service life 7
2. Reasons for the Action • Denmark – DANBRO (DANish Bridges and Roads) • Finland – FinnRABMS (Finnish National Roads Administration Bridge Management System) • Italy – SAMOA (Surveillance, Auscultation and Maintenance of Structures) • Netherlands – DISC • Sweden – BMS • United Kingdom – STEG (Structures REGister); – HiSMIS (Highway Structures Management Information System) – SMIS (Structures Management Information System) – BRIDGEMAN (BRIDGE MANagement system) – COSMOS (Computerized System for the Management Of Structures) 8
2. Reasons for the Action 9
2. Reasons for the Action A similar problem was addressed in the past for pavements. It was solved through COST 354 – Performance Indicators for Road Pavements (http://cost354.zag.si/). The main objective of the Action is the definition of an uniform European performance indicators for road pavements taking the needs of road users and road operators into account. 10
2. Reasons for the Action There is a REAL NEED to standardize the quality assessment of roadway bridges at an European Level 11
3. General Information Thank you and welcome aboard ! The 28 EU Member States EU Candidate Countries former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Iceland Republic of Serbia Turkey Other Countries Bosnia and Herzegovina Norway Switzerland COST Cooperating State Israel 12
3. General Information COST Policies • Inclusiveness • Early Stage Researchers (less then 8 years after PhD) • Gender Balance 13
4. Election Chair: Jose Matos (PT) COST Action TU 1406 Proposer Jose Matos Professor Minho University, Portugal jmatos@civil.uminho.pt 14
4. Election Grant Holder: Usually coincides with Chair Institution Minho University (PT) Scientific Representative: Grant Holder MC member Jose Matos 15
4. Election FSAC (common value) = 15% of Scientific Expenditure 170.000,00 € (overall budget) = 147.826,00 € + 22.174,00 € FSAC – Financial and Scientific Administration and Cooperation (secretariat, non-eligible VAT, general expenses) Use online COST Action management tool: e-COST 16
4. Election Vice-Chair: Joan Casas (SP) COST Action TU 1406 Proponent Joan Casas Professor Catalonya Technical University, Spain joan.ramon.casas@upc.edu 17
5. Horizontal Roles Position Name WG1: Performance Indicators Leader: Alfred Strauss (AT) Vice Leader: TBA WG2: Performance Goals Leader: Irina Stipanovic (NL) Vice Leader: TBA WG3: Quality Control Plan Leader: Rade Hajdin (SB) Vice Leader: TBA WG4: Case Study Leader: TBA Vice Leader: TBA WG5: Standardization Leader: TBA Vice Leader: TBA WG6: Dissemination Leader: TBA Vice Leader: TBA COST Policies: Inclusiveness, ESR, Gender Balance ( + Representability ) 18
5. Horizontal Roles Position Name General Secretariat Eleni Chatzi (CH) STSM Leader: Jan Bien (PL) Vice Leader: TBA Monitoring & Evaluation Leader: Raffaele Landolfo (IT) Vice Leader: TBA Innovation Leader: Andre Orcesi (FR) Vice Leader: TBA Research & Development Leader: Kenneth Gavin (IR) Vice Leader: TBA Website Institution Minho University COST Policies: Inclusiveness, ESR, Gender Balance ( + Representability ) 19
5. Horizontal Roles Management Core Group Advisory Board Committee • MC Chair • Industry/Owners/ Including: • MC Chair • MC Vice-Chair Operators • External Advisors • MC Vice-Chair • WG’s Leaders (MC Observers) • WG’s Leaders and • General Secretariat Vice-Leaders • STSM Leader • General Secretariat • M&E Leader • STSM Leader and • Innovation Leader Vice-Leader • R&D Leader • M&E Leader and MC Observers Vice-Leader • Innovation Leader and Vice-Leader • R&D Leader and • Dan Frangopol (USA) Vice-Leader • Mitsuyoshi Akiyama (JP) • Colin Caprani (AUS) An MC Observer per Continent • Matias Valenzuela (CHL) • Hans Beushauser (ZA) 20
5. Horizontal Roles Steer the COST Action on behalf of the MC Manage Coordinate matters of and manage urgency COST Action sanctioned by day-to-day the MC activities Core Group Approve and select STSM Allocate candidates approved (strategic funds Duties decision of the MC) Establish flat Organize rates for matters in lodging connection according to with destination forthcoming country MC meetings 21
5. Horizontal Roles Prepare and disseminate the assessment criteria Elaborate Scientific internal Assessment STSM of reports applications STSM Duties Circulate the Manage applications formalities to the for the issue assessment of the grant panel Inform the MC about decisions 22
5. Horizontal Roles Monitor both implementation and coordination Propose urgent Elaborate measures and a monitoring and contingency evaluation plan, when internal reports needed Monitoring & Evaluation Duties Verify the level Consider/decide of achievement performance of objectives, related milestones and measures deliverables Provide feedback and advice to the MC 23
5. Horizontal Roles Gather information on innovative industry activities Evaluate Elaborate potential use internal of innovative innovative industry reports activities Innovation Establish Provide contact with Duties feedback and industry, advice to the owners and MC operators Introduce novelties on Ensure developed information tasks exchange according to state of art 24
5. Horizontal Roles Ensure joint proposals for HORIZON 2020 Liaison with Elaborate national and internal R&D international reports R&D rolling Research & projects Development Duties Liaison with Ensure national and national International proposals committees Identify potential applications for joint proposals 25
5. Horizontal Roles E-voting (7 days, except Summer/Easter) Other Agreements Active scientific Time limit for participation of accepting e- MC members in COST invitations WGs and (two weeks) workshops 26
6. Expansion COST Countries Action represented countries Missing Countries Lithuania Romania Turkey 27
6. Expansion Near Neighbour Countries Russia Belarus Moldova Ukraine Montenegro Georgia Albania Azerbaijan Armenia Tunisia Syria Morocco Lebanon The Palestinian Authority COST Countries Jordan NN Countries Algeria Lybia Egypt 28
6. Expansion International Partner Countries USA Japan Australia Chile COST Countries South Africa International Partner Countries (MC Observers) 29
Recommend
More recommend
