PSI - Issue 62

Anna Rosa Tilocca et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 62 (2024) 1043–1050 A.R. Tiloccai et al. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

1050

8

an exhaustive approach in this focus, principally because it is based on a road infrastructure detailing, especially not considering the over-structures railway entity and its secondary elements (binaries, ballasts, walkway and water disposal) with the same importance respect the other ones. This means that the degradation lever here estimated do no represent in a specific/complete mode the current state of that kind of infrastructure. For the level 2, some assumptions have been done for the structural-foundational and seismic attention classes, in order to apply the Italian Guideline for a railway bridge. More choices along the flowcharts of the approach have been selected considering an equivalent structure as a road bridge, as there are in fact no specific details in this regard. In particular, the traffic-load (commercial and civil) were estimated in vehicle/day, considering that the network is designed principally for the civil use. This assumption is quite general and not consider the fact that train/day is substantially different respect to vehicle/day. Other aspects are related to the specific design codes selected, knowing that Italian Guidelines approach does not consider railway bridges category/load limitations, static scheme and seismic criteria adopted (the possible spans number involved in a collapse could be affect from the binaries effect). Furthermore, alternative way and strategicity level were fixed considering the current network and how this network work, depending on the emergency plans of civil protection. So, to this end, the infrastructure here treated was classified strategic and without alternative ways considering this rail connection is the only one specific high-speed in Italy. In sight of this, the authors consider the multi-level multi-risk approach, described in the Italian Guideline, applicable with assumptions and interpretations, for obtain a simple and expeditious classification in case of railway bridge; Author signalize besides, for a clear and suitable implementation, to increase the defect list and add specific ones. Acknowledgements The financial support of Italian Department of Civil Protection (ReLUIS 2022-2024 Grant - WP3 Analysis, review and updating of the guidelines - Task 3.2) is gratefully acknowledged. References Pregnolato, M. Bridge safety is not for granted — A novel approach to bridge management. Eng. Struct. 2019, 196, 109193. Santarsiero, G.; Masi, A.; Picciano, V.; Digrisolo, A. The Italian Guidelines on Risk Classification and Management of Bridges: Applications and Remarks on Large Scale Risk Assessments. Infrastructures 2021, 6, 111. Santarsiero, G.; Masi, A.; Picciano, V. Durability of Gerber Saddles in RC Bridges: Analyses and Applications (Musmeci Bridge, Italy). Infrastructures 2021, 6, 25. Pellegrino, C.; Pipinato, A.; Modena, C. A simplified management procedure for bridge network maintenance. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 2011, 7, 341 – 351. Dinh, T.H. Maintenance prioritization method for networked bridges. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 2009, 5, 381 – 394. Sasmal, S.; Ramanjaneyulu, K.; Lakshmanan, N. Priority ranking towards condition assessment of existing reinforced concrete bridges. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 2007, 3, 75 – 89. Rokneddin, K.; Ghosh, J.; Dueñas-Osorio, L.; Padgett, J.E. Bridge retrofit prioritisation for ageing transportation networks subject to seismic hazards. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 2013, 9, 1050 – 1066. Guidelines on Risk Classification and Management, Safety Assessment and Monitoring of Existing Bridges; Ministry of Infrastructure, CSLP: Rome, Italy, 2020 Ministry of Infrastructure Decree no. 578 del 17/12/2020. Enforcement of the Guidelines on risk classification and management, safety assessment and monitoring of existing bridges (in Italian: Adozione delle linee guida per la gestione del rischio dei ponti esistenti e per la definizione di requisiti ed indicazioni relativi al sistema di monitoraggio dinamico). Calvi, G.M.; Moratti, M.; O’Reilly, G.J.; Scattarreggia, N.; Monteiro, R.; Malomo, D.; Calvi, P.M.; Pinho, R. Once upon a Tim e in Italy: The Tale of the Morandi Bridge. Struct. Eng. Int. 2019, 29, 198 – 217. Bazzucchi, F.; Restuccia, L.; Ferro, G.A. Considerations over the Italian road bridge infrastructure safety after the Polcevera viaduct collapse: Past errors and future perspectives. Frat. Integrità Strutt. 2018, 46, 400 – 421. NTC2018 — Ministry of Infrastructure Decree, DM 17 gennaio 2018: Aggiornamento delle Norme tecniche per le costruzioni, Suppl. or. n.30 alla G.U. n.29 del 4/2/2008 (in Italian), 2018. CIRCOLARE 21 Gennaio 2019, n. 7 C.S.LL.PP. Istruzioni per L’applicazione dell’«Aggiornamento Delle “Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni”» di cui al Decreto Ministeriale 17 Gennaio 2018 (Commentary of NTC2018). RFI – Manuale di progettazione delle opere civili, Parte II – Sezione 2 Ponti e Strutture, 31/12/2020.