Risk-based method for selecting bridge scour countermeasures

Peggy Ann Johnson, Sue L. Niezgoda

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Bridge engineers are often faced with the task of selecting and designing effective bridge scour countermeasures. The selection of an appropriate countermeasure is dependent on whether the problem is local scour at the pier or abutment, contraction scour across the bed at the bridge opening, reach-wide channel degradation, or lateral channel movement. Confidence in a given countermeasure depends on prior experience in using the measure, cost, maintenance, and the ability to detect failure. The use of countermeasures often introduces uncertainty due to a lack of systematic testing and unknown potential for failure. In this paper, a risk-based method for ranking, comparing, and choosing the most appropriate scour countermeasures is presented using failure modes and effects analysis and risk priority numbers (RPN). Failure modes and effects analysis incorporates uncertainty in the selection process by considering risk in terms of the likelihood of a component failure, the consequence of failure, and the level of difficulty required to detect failure. Risk priority numbers can provide justification for selecting a specific countermeasure and the appropriate compensating actions to be taken to prevent failure of the countermeasure.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)121-128
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Hydraulic Engineering
Volume130
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2004

Fingerprint

Scour
scour
Failure modes
Uncertainty analysis
Piers
uncertainty analysis
pier
contraction
ranking
Engineers
Degradation
method
Testing
cost
Costs
effect

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Civil and Structural Engineering
  • Water Science and Technology
  • Mechanical Engineering

Cite this

@article{111c5581718243a79c16957ed1f8e2c8,
title = "Risk-based method for selecting bridge scour countermeasures",
abstract = "Bridge engineers are often faced with the task of selecting and designing effective bridge scour countermeasures. The selection of an appropriate countermeasure is dependent on whether the problem is local scour at the pier or abutment, contraction scour across the bed at the bridge opening, reach-wide channel degradation, or lateral channel movement. Confidence in a given countermeasure depends on prior experience in using the measure, cost, maintenance, and the ability to detect failure. The use of countermeasures often introduces uncertainty due to a lack of systematic testing and unknown potential for failure. In this paper, a risk-based method for ranking, comparing, and choosing the most appropriate scour countermeasures is presented using failure modes and effects analysis and risk priority numbers (RPN). Failure modes and effects analysis incorporates uncertainty in the selection process by considering risk in terms of the likelihood of a component failure, the consequence of failure, and the level of difficulty required to detect failure. Risk priority numbers can provide justification for selecting a specific countermeasure and the appropriate compensating actions to be taken to prevent failure of the countermeasure.",
author = "Johnson, {Peggy Ann} and Niezgoda, {Sue L.}",
year = "2004",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2004)130:2(121)",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "130",
pages = "121--128",
journal = "Journal of Hydraulic Engineering",
issn = "0733-9429",
publisher = "American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)",
number = "2",

}

Risk-based method for selecting bridge scour countermeasures. / Johnson, Peggy Ann; Niezgoda, Sue L.

In: Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 2, 01.02.2004, p. 121-128.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risk-based method for selecting bridge scour countermeasures

AU - Johnson, Peggy Ann

AU - Niezgoda, Sue L.

PY - 2004/2/1

Y1 - 2004/2/1

N2 - Bridge engineers are often faced with the task of selecting and designing effective bridge scour countermeasures. The selection of an appropriate countermeasure is dependent on whether the problem is local scour at the pier or abutment, contraction scour across the bed at the bridge opening, reach-wide channel degradation, or lateral channel movement. Confidence in a given countermeasure depends on prior experience in using the measure, cost, maintenance, and the ability to detect failure. The use of countermeasures often introduces uncertainty due to a lack of systematic testing and unknown potential for failure. In this paper, a risk-based method for ranking, comparing, and choosing the most appropriate scour countermeasures is presented using failure modes and effects analysis and risk priority numbers (RPN). Failure modes and effects analysis incorporates uncertainty in the selection process by considering risk in terms of the likelihood of a component failure, the consequence of failure, and the level of difficulty required to detect failure. Risk priority numbers can provide justification for selecting a specific countermeasure and the appropriate compensating actions to be taken to prevent failure of the countermeasure.

AB - Bridge engineers are often faced with the task of selecting and designing effective bridge scour countermeasures. The selection of an appropriate countermeasure is dependent on whether the problem is local scour at the pier or abutment, contraction scour across the bed at the bridge opening, reach-wide channel degradation, or lateral channel movement. Confidence in a given countermeasure depends on prior experience in using the measure, cost, maintenance, and the ability to detect failure. The use of countermeasures often introduces uncertainty due to a lack of systematic testing and unknown potential for failure. In this paper, a risk-based method for ranking, comparing, and choosing the most appropriate scour countermeasures is presented using failure modes and effects analysis and risk priority numbers (RPN). Failure modes and effects analysis incorporates uncertainty in the selection process by considering risk in terms of the likelihood of a component failure, the consequence of failure, and the level of difficulty required to detect failure. Risk priority numbers can provide justification for selecting a specific countermeasure and the appropriate compensating actions to be taken to prevent failure of the countermeasure.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=1342309859&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=1342309859&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2004)130:2(121)

DO - 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2004)130:2(121)

M3 - Article

VL - 130

SP - 121

EP - 128

JO - Journal of Hydraulic Engineering

JF - Journal of Hydraulic Engineering

SN - 0733-9429

IS - 2

ER -