Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

TitlePerformance reliability-based key performance indicators and thresholds for roadway bridges (COST TU 1406)
Author(s)Hajdin, R.
Matos, José C.
Casas, J. R.
Ivanković, A. Mandić
Strauss, A.
Issue dateDec-2016
Abstract(s)The COST Action TU 1406, Quality Control Specifications for Roadway Bridges – Standardization at a European Level (BridgeSpec) brings together experts from across Europe, to provide guidelines for setting up the Quality Control Plans by defining key performance indicators and corresponding performance goals with the purpose to ensure adequate service quality to road users at minimum costs. This Action started in June 2015. Management of road bridges comprises coordinated activities in order to generate the maximum value to the society, which involves the balance of costs, risks, opportunities and performance goals. Whether a performance goal is achieved or not, is given by the corresponding key performance indicators, which in turned can be evaluated from various underlying performance indicators. This requires a clear insight into the influence of the performance indicators to key performance indicators. Performance indicator may be a quantitative, measured parameter or a qualitative abstraction related to e. g. the condition of a bridge or its components. It can be therefore expressed either in the form of a dimensional parameter or as an ordinal index. The former quantitatively describes a specific property of the bridge (e.g. crack width), whereas the latter represent a combination of observations on and/or expert knowledge related to a particular bridge and/or its components (e.g. importance of a bridge component in the whole bridge structure). In order to determine whether the performance goals are met, thresholds or criteria must be set. A threshold constitutes a limiting criterion for purposes such as: (i) monitoring (e.g. exceeding threshold triggers different monitoring program), (ii) assessing (e.g. exceeding threshold triggers in-depth investigation), and (iii) maintenance (e.g. exceeding threshold triggers maintenance actions). A criterion can be also formulated as extremizing criterion: For instance, the criterion is met at the maximum reliability level for a given budgetary constraint. For purpose of defining the crisp key performance indicators, the identified performance indicators are categorized into technical, sustainable and socio-economic indicators. Furthermore, the performance indicators are coupled to component, system and network. This enables to more easily identify methods for their quantification and to determine their impact on a specific performance goal. This contribution provides an overview of a current effort to identify performance indicators, to define key performance indicators, to set-up corresponding performance goals and to provide a framework for the Quality Control Plan.
TypeOral presentation
AccessOpen access
Appears in Collections:ISISE - Comunicações a Conferências Internacionais

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
merged (4).pdf1,75 MBAdobe PDFView/Open

Partilhe no FacebookPartilhe no TwitterPartilhe no DeliciousPartilhe no LinkedInPartilhe no DiggAdicionar ao Google BookmarksPartilhe no MySpacePartilhe no Orkut
Exporte no formato BibTex mendeley Exporte no formato Endnote Adicione ao seu ORCID