PSI - Issue 84

Vittorio Palma et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 84 (2026) 630–637

635

(short drains), Scarichi ostruiti (obstructed drains), Scarichi danneggiati (damaged drains) and Distacco tampone (detached buffer) were considered (Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti (MIT) 2020). The rating is therefore determined by assigning Priority Level 1 to structures with a High level of structural defectiveness and Priority Level 2 to structures with a Medium-High level of structural defectiveness. For structures with a Medium, Medium-Low and Low level of defectiveness, the Priority Levels were determined as shown in Table 1 and Table 2, in which the priority value is obtained from the data described above, such as safety, durability and defectiveness. Table 1 Priority for Medium or Medium-Low defectiveness. Durability Safety 5 or more defects Fewer than 5 defects but more than one At most one defect 5 or more safety findings 3 4 7 Fewer than 5 safety findings but more than one 4 6 8 At most one safety findings 7 8 9

Table 2. Priority for low defectiveness

Durability

5 or more defects

Fewer than 5 defects but more than one

At most one defect

Safety

5 or more safety findings

5 7 8

7 8 9

8 9

Fewer than 5 safety findings but more than one

At most one safety findings

10

While this integrated classification proved effective in synthesizing heterogeneous degradation phenomena into a single priority scale, its application in large-scale network-level asset management highlighted some practical limitations, particularly in clearly distinguishing between interventions driven by immediate user-safety concerns and those related to structural or durability-oriented maintenance planning. 5.2 Updated methodology for prioritization: Separated classification for local interventions (structural defectiveness and durability) and user safety The updated methodology for the prioritization of local interventions, repairs or durability improvements, is based exclusively on the assessment of the intrinsic defects of the structures. By its very nature, this classification should not be used to define the priority of major strategic investments, such as demolition, reconstruction, adaptation or overall structural improvement of the structures. This updated formulation was therefore introduced to improve the clarity and usability of the prioritization process, by explicitly separating strategic maintenance planning from the rapid management of localized safety-critical issues, which require independent and timely decision-making. For the purposes of this classification, only works on which interventions are already underway, including local ones, are excluded. It has been prepared following a hierarchical approach based on two factors: • structural defects , a key parameter for calculating the attention classes of the structure. Based on the level detected, five priority classes have been defined: • Priority Level 1 : LOW structural defectiveness; • Priority Level 2 : MEDIUM-LOW structural defectiveness; • Priority Level 3 : MEDIUM structural defectiveness; • Priority Level 4 : MEDIUM-HIGH structural defectiveness; • Priority Level 5 : HIGH structural defectiveness. • durability-related defects are considered as a further selection and refinement criterion. These issues affect the inherent durability of the structure, specifically malfunctions in the bridge deck drainage system, which could accelerate material degradation and, consequently, compromise the structure's service life. For each structure, this factor is quantified by counting the elements exhibiting the following specific defects: Scossalina permeabile o assente (permeable or absent flashing), Convogliamento acque assente (absent water