PSI - Issue 62

Fabrizio Paolacci et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 62 (2024) 732–737 Paolacci F., Quinci G., Marta L., Moretti M. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

733

2

1. Introduction

The advancement of methodologies and tools for implementing Bridge Management Systems (BMS) in Italy is relatively recent, mainly due to the newfound interest in studying the structural and seismic behaviors of existing bridges (Alessandri et al., 2013; Abbiati et al., 2015; De Risi et al., 2017; Pallante et al. 2024, Quinci et al. 2022). Initiated in 2007, the ReLUIS consortium, funded by the Italian Civil Protection, embarked on a three-year project dedicated to scrutinizing existing bridges, resulting in guidelines and an application manual for seismic assessment (Pinto et al., 2009). Concurrently, the Bridge Management System of the Autonomous Province of Trento (APTBMS) stands out as a collaboration between the Roads Management Service, Road and Railway Works Service of the Autonomous Province of Trento, and the Department of Civil Environmental and Mechanical Engineering (DICAM) at the University of Trento, uniquely recognized by the International Association for Bridge Maintenance and Safety (IABMAS) (Adey et al., 2014). Recent initiatives, like the Fabre University Consortium, engage in research and applications for bridge and viaduct safety. Driven by the Polcevera bridge collapse in Genova in 2018, substantial efforts in applied research for bridge safety in Italy resulted in guidelines by the Italian Ministry of Transportation (MIT) (MIT 17/04/2020), presently in an experimental validation phase. Although MIT guidelines compute static risk through a simplified assessment, they lack specific instructions for seismic risk evaluation. Within this context, the MLAZIO project, a collaboration between the Department of Engineering of Roma Tre University and the Lazio Region, takes a prominent position nationally. It aims to establish a methodology for static and seismic risk assessment in the Lazio region, providing regional guidelines for asset management and assessing MIT guidelines' efficiency on Lazio region bridges. This paper elucidates the MLAZIO project's framework and updates its status. With a focus on seismic risk evaluation, it introduces a probabilistic method based on limited input data, offering an initial assessment of the regional bridge network's vulnerability. This aids in identifying bridges for more in-depth analyses, proposing a simplified Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering (PBEE) methodology. 2. MLAZIO project framework: the regional model for the effective bridge management The MLAZIO project sets out to formulate an effective methodology for the risk assessment and economic management of bridges in the Lazio region, laying the groundwork for a regional Bridge Management System (BMS) based on the guidelines outlined by MIT (MIT 17/04/2020). Adhering to the multi-level architecture of these guidelines, the project is compartmentalized into six distinct Work-Packages (WPs), aligning with each level specified in the Italian guide line. The guideline-defined levels of analysis (ranging from level 0 to level 5) exhibit a progressively detailed examination, each demanding varying sets of information. WP1 (Level 0) is dedicated to executing a Level 0 analysis, centering on an exhaustive inventory of bridge and viaduct types across the regional territory. This involves collecting pertinent information and documentation crucial for constructing a database, facilitating infrastructural mapping through a Geographic Information System (GIS) tool. Additionally, it aids in the initial development of Building Information Modeling (BIM) models corresponding to identified bridge and viaduct types. WP2 is tasked with devising a procedure for the Level 1 analysis, involving inspections to identify defect levels in bridges and viaducts. Customized defect schedules, referencing the Italian guidelines, are crafted to accommodate the unique characteristics of regional bridges. Integration of data from the database, GIS tool, and BIM model is essential in this stage. WP3 and WP4 are dedicated to qualitative and quantitative risk analyses for bridges, encompassing static and seismic loads. WP3 focuses on establishing a procedure for regional classification of bridges and viaducts, rapidly estimating the risk factor based on MIT Guidelines' defined class of attention. Conversely, WP4 employs simplified numerical models to determine a quantitative risk factor, aiding in the identification of critical bridges.