Table 8. Simulated pre-monitoring value... | Emerald Publishing

Table 8.

Simulated pre-monitoring value assessment matrix (Hammersmith flyover roller bearing monitoring)

	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
	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			Sensor design life was five years. Flooding of the bearing pit did cause disruptions to the monitoring project. Monitoring was intended to be very short term, to highlight areas of concern so that further investigations could take place (varying between 2, 5 and 10 years in different locations).
	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			Some ongoing scrutiny of the data was undertaken by the investigating engineers.
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			In establishing expected performance of the bearings some consultation with the asset owner occurred.
	How likely is it that the critical monitoring locations on the structure can be determined?					X	Monitoring points for the bearing relatively simple to establish and access to the bearing pit possible.
	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		The data were compared with outputs from a basic finite-element model to explore bearing behaviour. This could provide useful information for future structural designs.
Owner/Asset manager	How likely is it that the necessary actions (or decisions) will be taken if threshold (trigger) values are exceeded/reached?			X			No firm initial plans – but the diagnosis did lead to some action.
	How likely is it that the data to be collected will be able to inform a maintenance regime?			X			No clear link to ongoing maintenance, but the diagnosis did assist with some of the upgrade work.
	How likely is it that there will be a secure budget necessary for the intended period of operation of the monitoring project?					X	Sufficient budget was available during the research and investigation phase.
Average		3·6					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
	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			Sensor design life was five years. Flooding of the bearing pit did cause disruptions to the monitoring project.Monitoring was intended to be very short term, to highlight areas of concern so that further investigations could take place (varying between 2, 5 and 10 years in different locations).
	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			Some ongoing scrutiny of the data was undertaken by the investigating engineers.
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			In establishing expected performance of the bearings some consultation with the asset owner occurred.
	How likely is it that the critical monitoring locations on the structure can be determined?					X	Monitoring points for the bearing relatively simple to establish and access to the bearing pit possible.
	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		The data were compared with outputs from a basic finite-element model to explore bearing behaviour. This could provide useful information for future structural designs.
Owner/Asset manager	How likely is it that the necessary actions (or decisions) will be taken if threshold (trigger) values are exceeded/reached?			X			No firm initial plans – but the diagnosis did lead to some action.
	How likely is it that the data to be collected will be able to inform a maintenance regime?			X			No clear link to ongoing maintenance, but the diagnosis did assist with some of the upgrade work.
	How likely is it that there will be a secure budget necessary for the intended period of operation of the monitoring project?					X	Sufficient budget was available during the research and investigation phase.
Average		3·6					Project likely to yield value to the asset owner/manager.