Abstract
In light of ageing infrastructure, structural condition assessment is a key prerequisite for the provision of reliable, safe and performant infrastructure networks. However, full systematic condition inspections across large transport networks are extremely resource intensive. Thus, network-wide continuous structural monitoring is hardly feasible using classical engineering assessment methods. Modern remote sensing techniques open up new possibilities for infrastructure assessment and monitoring. Three different methods for rapid, contactless and non-invasive infrastructure deformation monitoring are evaluated: (1) satellite radar interferometry (InSAR), (2) airborne laser scanning (ALS) using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) and (3) vehicle-mounted mobile laser scanning (MLS). All methods are tested at an integral concrete bridge in Vienna, Austria, and results are contrasted to reference measurements available from several water-level gauges. In addition, thermal deformation is modelled based on the prevailing environmental conditions. Results show that all methods are well capable of detecting general deformation trends, albeit exhibiting different stages of maturity. While the main application of InSAR lies in long-term continuous deformation measurement of the overall structure, MLS and ALS have the benefit of providing a wealth of data through measurement campaigns. All three contactless measurement methods are suitable for supplementing current structural condition assessments.
Zusammenfassung
Fernerkundungstechniken für die Überwachung von Brückenverformungen im Millimeterbereich. Angesichts alternder Infrastruktur stellt die Zustandserfassung von Ingenieurtragwerken eine wichtige Voraussetzung für die Bereitstellung zuverlässiger, sicherer und leistungsfähiger Infrastrukturnetze dar. Vollständige systematische Inspektionen in großen Verkehrsnetzen sind jedoch äußerst ressourcenintensiv. Daher ist eine netzweite, kontinuierliche Bauwerksüberwachung mit klassischen Bewertungsmethoden kaum machbar. Moderne Fernerkundungstechniken eröffnen neue Möglichkeiten für die Bewertung und das Monitoring von Tragwerken. Drei verschiedene Methoden zum schnellen, berührungslosen und nicht-invasiven Deformationsmonitoring werden bewertet: (1) Satelliten-Radarinterferometrie (InSAR), (2) Airborne Laser Scanning (ALS) mit unbemannten Luftfahrzeugen (UAV) und (3) fahrzeuggestütztes mobiles Laserscanning (MLS). Alle Methoden werden an einer integralen Betonbrücke in Wien getestet, und mit Referenzmessungen eines Schlauchwaagensystems verglichen. Zusätzlich wird die thermische Verformung der Brücke unter Berücksichtigung der vorherrschenden Umweltbedingungen modelliert. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass alle Methoden trotz unterschiedlichen Genauigkeitspotentials gut in der Lage sind, allgemeine Verformungstrends zu erkennen. Während die Hauptanwendung von InSAR im langfristigen, kontinuierlichen Deformationsmonitoring der Gesamtstruktur liegt, haben MLS und ALS den Vorteil, im Rahmen von Messkampagnen umfassende Daten über den Zustand des Bauwerks bzw. der Fahrbahnoberfläche zu liefern. Alle drei Fernerkundungsmethoden eignen sich daher gut als Ergänzung der aktuellen Zustandsbewertung.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data and Code Availability
Sentinel-1 data are freely accessible online, e.g. through the Copernicus Open Access Hub (https://scihub.copernicus.eu/) or via the Alaska Satellite Facility (https://asf.alaska.edu/). A supplementary animation showing vertical bridge deformation of Seitenhafenbrücke (Vienna, Austria) based on Sentinel-1 InSAR (PSI) and in-situ measurements is available on Figshare at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.20035364.
References
Alemdar ZF, Browning J, Olafsen J (2011) Photogrammetric measurements of RC bridge column deformations. Eng Struct 33(8):2407–2415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.04.015
Arastounia M (2016) Automated as-built model generation of subway tunnels from mobile LiDAR data. Sensors 16(9):1486. https://doi.org/10.3390/s16091486
Arsoy S (2008) Proposed mathematical model for daily and seasonal thermal bridge displacements. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2050(1):3–12. https://doi.org/10.3141/2050-01
Bao Y, Chen Z, Wei S, Xu Y, Tang Z, Li H (2019) The state of the art of data science and engineering in structural health monitoring. Engineering 5(2):234–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2018.11.027
Bekaert D, Walters R, Wright T, Hooper A, Parker D (2015) Statistical comparison of InSAR tropospheric correction techniques. Remote Sens Environ 170:40–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2015.08.035
Besl P, McKay ND (1992) A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 14(2):239–256. https://doi.org/10.1109/34.121791
BEV (2022) APOS-Austrian Positioning Service. https://www.bev.gv.at/portal/page?_pageid=713,3175360&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
Casas JR, Cruz PJS (2003) Fiber optic sensors for bridge monitoring. J Bridge Eng 8(6):362–373. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1084-0702(2003)8:6(362)
Cleveland RB, Cleveland WS, McRae JE, Terpenning I (1990) STL: a seasonal-trend decomposition procedure based on LOESS. J Off Stat 6(1):3–73
Cleveland WS, Grosse E, Shyu WM (2017) Local regression models. In: Statistical Models in S, pp 309–376. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203738535-8
Crosetto M, Solari L, Mróz M, Balasis-Levinsen J, Casagli N, Frei M, Oyen A, Moldestad DA, Bateson L, Guerrieri L, Comerci V, Andersen HS (2020) The evolution of wide-area DInSAR: from regional and national services to the European Ground Motion Service. Remote Sens 12(12):2043. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12122043
Delgado Blasco J, Foumelis M, Stewart C, Hooper A (2019) Measuring urban subsidence in the Rome metropolitan area (Italy) with Sentinel-1 SNAP-StaMPS persistent scatterer interferometry. Remote Sens 11(2):129. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11020129
Delgado Blasco JM, Foumelis M (2018) Automated SNAP Sentinel-1 DInSAR processing for StaMPS PSI with open source tools. 10.5281/ZENODO.1308835
EPOSA (2022) Echtzeit positionierung austria. https://www.eposa.at
ESA (2021) Sentinel-1 SAR Technical Guide: Level-1 Interferometric Wide Swath SLC Products. https://sentinels.copernicus.eu/web/sentinel/technical-guides/sentinel-1-sar/products-algorithms/level-1/single-look-complex/interferometric-wide-swath
ESA/ATG medialab (2014) Sentinel-1 radar vision. https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2014/01/Sentinel-1_radar_vision
Foumelis M, Blasco JMD, Desnos YL, Engdahl M, Fernandez D, Veci L, Lu J, Wong C (2018) ESA SNAP-StaMPS integrated processing for Sentinel-1 persistent scatterer interferometry. In: IGARSS 2018-2018 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/igarss.2018.8519545
Friedman JH (1984) A variable span smoother. Laboratory for Computational Statistics, Stanford University, Tech Rep Technical Report No.5
Geier R, Mack T, Krebes E (2014) Monitoring der seitenhafenbrücke in wien. Beton Stahlbetonbau 109(7):486–495. https://doi.org/10.1002/best.201400023
Genolini C, Alacoque X, Sentenac M, Arnaud C (2015) kmlandkml3d:RPackages to cluster longitudinal data. J Stat Softw. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v065.i04
Hooper A, Bekaert D, Spaans K, Arıkan M (2012) Recent advances in SAR interferometry time series analysis for measuring crustal deformation. Tectonophysics 514–517:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2011.10.013
Hyndman RJ, Khandakar Y (2008) Automatic time series forecasting: the forecast package for R. J Stat Softw. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v027.i03
Kalenjuk S, Lienhart W, Rebhan M, Marte R (2019) Large-scale monitoring of retaining structures: new approaches on the safety assessment of retaining structures using mobile mapping. In: Wang KW, Sohn H, Huang H, Lynch JP (eds) Sensors and smart structures technologies. SPIE. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2513856
Kral H, Kuhnle T, Spindlböck S, Kolik G (2012) Die seitenhafenbrücke in wien. Beton Stahlbetonbau 107(3):183–191. https://doi.org/10.1002/best.201100087
Lazecky M, Hlavacova I, Bakon M, Sousa JJ, Perissin D, Patricio G (2017) Bridge displacements monitoring using space-borne X-band SAR interferometry. IEEE J Sel Top Appl Earth Obs Remote Sens 10(1):205–210. https://doi.org/10.1109/jstars.2016.2587778
Li Z, Hou G, Wang K, Hu J (2021) Deformation monitoring of cracked concrete structures based on distributed optical fiber sensing technology. Opt Fiber Technol 61(102):446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yofte.2020.102446
Macchiarulo V, Milillo P, Blenkinsopp C, Giardina G (2022) Monitoring deformations of infrastructure networks: a fully automated GIS integration and analysis of InSAR time-series. Struct Health Monit. https://doi.org/10.1177/14759217211045912
McElhinney CP, Kumar P, Cahalane C, McCarthy T (2010) Initial results from European road safety inspection (eursi) mobile mapping project. In: International archives of photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences, vol XXXVIII. International society of photogrammetry and remote sensing (ISPRS), Newcastle upon Tyne, pp 440–445
Middleton CR, Fidler PR, Vardanega PJ (2016) Bridge monitoring: a practical guide. ICE Publishing, London
Moorty S, Roeder CW (1992) Temperature-dependent bridge movements. J Struct Eng 118(4):1090–1105. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(1992)118:4(1090)
Mukupa W, Roberts GW, Hancock CM, Al-Manasir K (2016) A review of the use of terrestrial laser scanning application for change detection and deformation monitoring of structures. Surv Rev. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396265.2015.1133039
Nothegger C (2011) Improving completeness of geometric models from terrestrial laser scanning data. In: Proceedings of the 23rd CIPA Symposium, CIPA, Prague, Czech Republic
Praxmarer L, Reiterer M (2007) Bauwerkserhaltung am beispiel der murbrücke st. lorenzen. In: Brückentagung, Österreichische Vereinigung für Beton und Bautechnik, Wien
Puente I, González-Jorge H, Martínez-Sánchez J, Arias P (2013) Review of mobile mapping and surveying technologies. Measurement 46(7):2127–2145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2013.03.006
QGIS Association (2022) QGIS Geographic Information System. http://www.qgis.org
Qin X, Li Q, Ding X, Xie L, Wang C, Liao M, Zhang L, Zhang B, Xiong S (2021) A structure knowledge-synthetic aperture radar interferometry integration method for high-precision deformation monitoring and risk identification of sea-crossing bridges. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 103(102):476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2021.102476
Rashidi M, Mohammadi M, Kivi SS, Abdolvand MM, Truong-Hong L, Samali B (2020) A decade of modern bridge monitoring using terrestrial laser scanning: review and future directions. Remote Sens 12(22):3796. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12223796
Roeder CW (2003) Proposed design method for thermal bridge movements. J Bridge Eng 8(1):12–19. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1084-0702(2003)8:1(12)
Sanio D, Mark P, Ahrens MA (2017) Temperaturfeldberechnung für brücken. Beton Stahlbetonbau 112(2):85–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/best.201600068
Schlögl M, Widhalm B, Avian M (2021) Comprehensive time-series analysis of bridge deformation using differential satellite radar interferometry based on Sentinel-1. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 172:132–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2020.12.001
Schlögl M, Gutjahr K, Fuchs S (2022) The challenge to use multi-temporal InSAR for landslide early warning. Nat Hazards. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05289-9
Selvakumaran S, Webb G, Bennetts J, Middleton C, Rossi C (2019) Waterloo bridge monitoring: comparing measurements from earth and space. In: International conference on smart infrastructure and construction 2019 (ICSIC). ICE Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1680/icsic.64669.639
Seo J, Hu JW, Lee J (2016) Summary review of structural health monitoring applications for highway bridges. J Perform Constr Facil 30(4):04015072. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cf.1943-5509.0000824
Wang X, Zhao Q, Xi R, Li C, Li G, Li L (2021) Review of bridge structural health monitoring based on GNSS: from displacement monitoring to dynamic characteristic identification. IEEE Access 9:80043–80065. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2021.3083749
Wickham H (2016) ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer, New York
Wright MN, Ziegler A (2017) Ranger: a fast implementation of random forests for high dimensional data in C++ and R. J Stat Softw. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v077.i01
Xi R, Jiang W, Meng X, Chen H, Chen Q (2018) Bridge monitoring using BDS-RTK and GPS-RTK techniques. Measurement 120:128–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2018.02.001
Ye C, Acikgoz S, Pendrigh S, Riley E, DeJong M (2018) Mapping deformations and inferring movements of masonry arch bridges using point cloud data. Eng Struct 173:530–545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.06.094
Yu C, Li Z, Penna NT, Crippa P (2018) Generic atmospheric correction model for interferometric synthetic aperture radar observations. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 123(10):9202–9222. https://doi.org/10.1029/2017jb015305
Zan FD, Guarnieri AM (2006) TOPSAR: Terrain observation by progressive scans. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 44(9):2352–2360. https://doi.org/10.1109/tgrs.2006.873853
Zhou Y, Xia Y, Chen B, Fujino Y (2020) Analytical solution to temperature-induced deformation of suspension bridges. Mech Syst Signal Process 139(106):568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2019.106568
Zhou Y, Xia Y, Fujino Y (2021) Analytical formulas of beam deflection due to vertical temperature difference. Eng Struct 240(112):366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112366
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the Austrian Research Promotion Agency FFG for financial support through the project VerBewIng (FFG 871524: ‘Deformation-based Assessment of Engineering Structures’). Visualisations were created using ggplot2 (Wickham 2016) and QGIS 3.24 (QGIS Association 2022).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
MS: conceptionalisation of the study, draft manuscript creation, InSAR analysis, visualisation; PD: UAV-ALS analysis; MK: thermal deformation modelling, FE modelling; MR: MLS analysis; RS: MLS analysis. All authors were jointly involved in discussing the results as well as writing the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schlögl, M., Dorninger, P., Kwapisz, M. et al. Remote Sensing Techniques for Bridge Deformation Monitoring at Millimetric Scale: Investigating the Potential of Satellite Radar Interferometry, Airborne Laser Scanning and Ground-Based Mobile Laser Scanning. PFG 90, 391–411 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41064-022-00210-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41064-022-00210-2