Table 6. Simulated pre-monitoring value... | Emerald Publishing

Table 6.

Simulated pre-monitoring value assessment matrix (Humber Bridge Anchorage)

	Question	Very unlikely or not at all	Not likely	Neutral, i.e. may or may not occur	Likely	Very likely/certain	Comments
	Question	1	2	3	4	5	Comments
SHM engineer	How likely is it that the required accuracy of the proposed measurements can be ascertained?				X		The datasheet for digital relative humidity (RH) and temperature sensors was available.
	How likely is it that the specified system can be designed to be sufficiently robust such that it can be maintained over the life of the monitoring project?					X	The system was planned for a three-year deployment. The only maintenance required for the sensors is to change the batteries. The data-logger has been replaced since the original research project. The system has now been in place for 9 years (as of 2016).
	How likely is it that the appropriate auditing will be conducted by a third party to certify that the gathered data are reliable? (For example, monthly reports that give details of calibrations undertaken and ‘sanity checking’ of collected data.)			X			Data were made available to the asset owner on a web-page that is still in operation No active ‘auditing’ was undertaken, but the data can be readily checked.
Structural engineer	How likely is it that relevant values of appropriate threshold values will be assigned in consultation with the asset owner so as to ensure that the owner will act if these values are realised in the field?					X	A critical relative humidity (RH) value of 60% was suggested by the asset owner.
	How likely is it that the critical monitoring locations on the structure can be determined?				X		Sensor locations were chosen on an ad-hoc basis – either near the strands, near the wired sensors, or at locations suitable for relaying data from one sensor to another. While this approach was successful it cannot be said if it was optimised or not.
	How likely is it that the data be used for validation (or falsification) of structural models which may assist with the design of more efficient future structures for the asset owner?		X				System just measures relative humidity of the anchorage chamber. While a basic ‘model’ is needed to establish this threshold little structural performance/behaviour can be monitored using this simple system.
Owner/Asset manager	How likely is it that the necessary actions (or decisions) will be taken if threshold (trigger) values are exceeded/reached?				X		The obtained RH values may be used to check that the dehumidification system is working (and, for example, if the hatch is left open).
	How likely is it that the data to be collected will be able to inform a maintenance regime?		X				A well-established trigger value was available and continued exceedance may lead to increased maintenance or intervention but the causal link is not very clear.
	How likely is it that there will be a secure budget necessary for the intended period of operation of the monitoring project?					X	After the initial 3-year research project ended, funds were made available by Humber Bridge Board to continue the system.
Average		3·8					Project likely to yield value to the asset owner/manager.

	Question	Very unlikely or not at all	Not likely	Neutral, i.e. may or may not occur	Likely	Very likely/certain	Comments
	Question	1	2	3	4	5	Comments
SHM engineer	How likely is it that the required accuracy of the proposed measurements can be ascertained?				X		The datasheet for digital relative humidity (RH) and temperature sensors was available.
	How likely is it that the specified system can be designed to be sufficiently robust such that it can be maintained over the life of the monitoring project?					X	The system was planned for a three-year deployment. The only maintenance required for the sensors is to change the batteries. The data-logger has been replaced since the original research project. The system has now been in place for 9 years (as of 2016).
	How likely is it that the appropriate auditing will be conducted by a third party to certify that the gathered data are reliable? (For example, monthly reports that give details of calibrations undertaken and ‘sanity checking’ of collected data.)			X			Data were made available to the asset owner on a web-page that is still in operation No active ‘auditing’ was undertaken, but the data can be readily checked.
Structural engineer	How likely is it that relevant values of appropriate threshold values will be assigned in consultation with the asset owner so as to ensure that the owner will act if these values are realised in the field?					X	A critical relative humidity (RH) value of 60% was suggested by the asset owner.
	How likely is it that the critical monitoring locations on the structure can be determined?				X		Sensor locations were chosen on an ad-hoc basis – either near the strands, near the wired sensors, or at locations suitable for relaying data from one sensor to another. While this approach was successful it cannot be said if it was optimised or not.
	How likely is it that the data be used for validation (or falsification) of structural models which may assist with the design of more efficient future structures for the asset owner?		X				System just measures relative humidity of the anchorage chamber. While a basic ‘model’ is needed to establish this threshold little structural performance/behaviour can be monitored using this simple system.
Owner/Asset manager	How likely is it that the necessary actions (or decisions) will be taken if threshold (trigger) values are exceeded/reached?				X		The obtained RH values may be used to check that the dehumidification system is working (and, for example, if the hatch is left open).
	How likely is it that the data to be collected will be able to inform a maintenance regime?		X				A well-established trigger value was available and continued exceedance may lead to increased maintenance or intervention but the causal link is not very clear.
	How likely is it that there will be a secure budget necessary for the intended period of operation of the monitoring project?					X	After the initial 3-year research project ended, funds were made available by Humber Bridge Board to continue the system.
Average		3·8					Project likely to yield value to the asset owner/manager.