Method and device for evaluating operation condition of bridge structure monitoring system

Abstract

The invention provides a bridge structure monitoring system operation condition evaluation method and device, the bridge structure monitoring system comprises a plurality of subitem modules, and each subitem module comprises at least one evaluation index. The method comprises the following steps: determining whether each subitem module of the bridge structure monitoring system has a single fault index influencing the stable operation of the bridge structure monitoring system; when the single fault index does not exist in each subitem module, the scale of each evaluation index of each subitem module is determined, and a subitem condition evaluation result corresponding to each subitem module is determined based on the scale of each evaluation index of each subitem module; and determining a weight corresponding to each subitem module, and determining an overall operation condition evaluation result of the bridge structure monitoring system based on the subitem condition evaluation result corresponding to each subitem module and the weight corresponding to each subitem module. The advantages and disadvantages of the overall operation condition of the bridge structure monitoring system can be accurately evaluated.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of bridge structure monitoring systems, and in particular to a method and device for evaluating the operating status of a bridge structure monitoring system. Background Art

[0002] When the "JTG / T H21-2011 Highway Bridge Technical Condition Assessment Standard" was issued in 2011, the bridge health monitoring system had not yet been built on a large scale, so the bridge technical condition assessment was mainly for the assessment of the main structure of the bridge, and did not include the assessment of the bridge structure monitoring system. In 2021, the Ministry of Transport proposed to establish a health monitoring system for long highway bridges across the country; the "JT / T 1037-2022 Highway Bridge Structure Monitoring Technical Specification" issued in 2022 has clarified the need for daily inspections, regular (special) maintenance and emergency maintenance of the hardware facilities and software systems of the bridge structure monitoring system; in 2023, it is intended to expand the scope of implementation of the bridge health monitoring system to small and medium span bridges. With the introduction of these policies, the national bridge health monitoring market is in a booming stage. Today, bridge structure monitoring systems are widely used, and bridge health monitoring related equipment or facilities have become important electromechanical facilities for bridge structures. Bridge structure monitoring systems developed by various units are endless, but the quality of these monitoring systems is uneven; in order to avoid the phenomenon of "bad money driving out good money" and to provide a reference for the selection of bridge structure monitoring systems for bridge maintenance units, an evaluation method that can evaluate the pros and cons of the operating status of bridge structure monitoring systems is urgently needed; in addition, bridge maintenance units also need to understand the operating status of bridge structure monitoring systems, so as to guide the inspection and maintenance of bridge structure monitoring related equipment and facilities.

[0003] At present, in some existing technologies, the assessment of bridge structure monitoring systems focuses on engineering quality evaluation; while in some other existing technologies, some are based on operating status assessment of certain monitoring equipment in the bridge structure monitoring system.

[0004] In terms of project quality evaluation, the implementation project of the bridge structure monitoring system is regarded as an engineering construction project, and the construction quality of the monitoring system is evaluated by referring to the engineering quality assessment method in the "JTG F80 / 1-2017 Highway Engineering Quality Inspection and Assessment Standard", rather than evaluating the operating status of the monitoring system during long-term operation. For example, the most comprehensive and detailed discussion of the engineering quality evaluation of the monitoring system is Wuhan's local standard "DB4201 / T 624-2020 Technical Code for Safety Monitoring of Urban Bridge and Tunnel Structures". This standard divides the bridge health monitoring system into three levels: sub-projects, sub-projects and unit projects, and conducts engineering quality assessment from four aspects: basic requirements, measured items, appearance appraisal and quality assurance materials; among them, the evaluation of basic requirements is mainly to judge whether the implemented monitoring system meets the design requirements, the evaluation of measured items is mainly to judge whether the installation, connection and other construction steps of the monitoring equipment are within the allowable error, the evaluation of appearance appraisal is mainly to judge whether the surface of the monitoring equipment is intact or damaged, and the evaluation of quality assurance materials is mainly to judge whether the records of construction inspection data are true and complete; although this engineering quality evaluation method can complete the engineering evaluation, the engineering quality evaluation is only applicable to the engineering quality acceptance of the bridge structure health monitoring system, and cannot replace the evaluation of the operation status of the bridge structure monitoring system. Therefore, the engineering quality evaluation method is difficult to reflect the good operation status of the system during the long-term operation of the bridge structure monitoring system.

[0005] As for the operating status evaluation of certain monitoring equipment in the bridge structure monitoring system, the "Technical Guidelines for the Construction of Provincial Highway Long Bridge Structural Health Monitoring Platform (Draft for Comments)" published by the Highway Bureau of the Ministry of Transport in June 2022 roughly gave four categories of key indicators of the operating status of the monitoring system: online status, fault repair, alarm handling and report push, and also gave key indicators of the operating status of sensor equipment, such as the historical online rate of equipment, real-time online status, frequency of faults, etc. Jiang Yu et al. published a paper entitled "Research on Bridge Monitoring Equipment Evaluation Method Based on Fuzzy Theory" in the journal "World Bridges" in July 2024, which used fuzzy theory to establish an evaluation method for the operating status of bridge monitoring equipment. This evaluation method only focuses on evaluating the operating status of a certain monitoring equipment in the bridge structure monitoring system, and cannot complete the evaluation of the operating status of the entire bridge structure monitoring system.

[0006] In summary, the evaluation methods in the prior art are unable to accurately evaluate the performance of the entire bridge structure monitoring system; therefore, how to accurately evaluate the performance of the overall bridge structure monitoring system is a technical problem that needs to be solved urgently. Summary of the invention

[0007] In view of this, an embodiment of the present invention provides a method and device for evaluating the operating status of a bridge structure monitoring system to eliminate or improve one or more defects existing in the prior art.

[0008] One aspect of the present invention provides a method for evaluating the operating status of a bridge structure monitoring system, wherein the bridge structure monitoring system includes a plurality of sub-item modules, each of which includes at least one evaluation index, and the method includes:

[0009] Determine whether each sub-module of the bridge structure monitoring system has a single fault indicator that affects the stable operation of the bridge structure monitoring system;

[0010] When no single fault indicator exists in each of the sub-modules, the scale of each evaluation indicator of each of the sub-modules is determined, and the sub-item condition evaluation result corresponding to each of the sub-modules is determined based on the scale of each evaluation indicator of each of the sub-modules;

[0011] The weight corresponding to each of the sub-modules is determined, and the overall operation status evaluation result of the bridge structure monitoring system is determined based on the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each of the sub-modules and the weight corresponding to each of the sub-item modules.

[0012] In some embodiments of the present invention, each of the sub-item modules has multiple evaluation indicators, and the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each of the sub-item modules are determined based on the scales of the evaluation indicators of each of the sub-item modules, including:

[0013] The weight of each evaluation indicator of each sub-item module is determined, and the sub-item status evaluation result corresponding to each sub-item module is determined based on the scale of each evaluation indicator of each sub-item module and the weight of each evaluation indicator.

[0014] In some embodiments of the present invention, the calculation formula of the sub-item status evaluation result is:

[0015]

[0016] Among them, FXCI k represents the evaluation result of the sub-item status of sub-item module k, m represents the number of evaluation indicators of sub-item module k, I j represents the scale of the evaluation index j, w j Represents the weight of evaluation index j.

[0017] In some embodiments of the present invention, the overall operation status evaluation result of the bridge structure monitoring system is determined based on the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each of the sub-item modules and the weights corresponding to each of the sub-item modules, including:

[0018] Calculate the overall operation status score of the bridge structure monitoring system based on the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each of the sub-item modules and the weights corresponding to each of the sub-item modules;

[0019] Determining an overall condition grade evaluation standard based on the overall operation condition scoring interval of the bridge structure monitoring system;

[0020] The overall operating condition grade of the bridge structure monitoring system is determined based on the overall operating condition score of the bridge structure monitoring system and the overall condition grade evaluation standard.

[0021] In some embodiments of the invention, the method comprises:

[0022] When a single fault indicator exists in at least one sub-module, the overall operating status level of the bridge structure monitoring system is the level corresponding to the worst condition.

[0023] In some embodiments of the present invention, determining the scale of each evaluation indicator of each sub-module includes:

[0024] Determine the measured value of each evaluation index;

[0025] Determining a scale division standard based on the value range of each evaluation indicator;

[0026] The scale of each evaluation index is determined based on the measured value and the scale division standard.

[0027] In some embodiments of the present invention, determining the weight corresponding to each of the sub-modules includes: determining the weight corresponding to the sub-module based on a priority diagram method; and / or,

[0028] Determining the weight of each evaluation index of each sub-module includes: determining the weight of each evaluation index of each sub-module based on a priority diagram method; and / or,

[0029] The calculation formula for the overall operating status score is: Among them, S represents the overall operation status score, n represents the total number of sub-modules, and FXCI k represents the evaluation result of the sub-item status of sub-item module k, w k Represents the weight of sub-module k.

[0030] In some embodiments of the present invention, the sub-item modules are sensor modules, data acquisition and transmission modules, data storage server modules and software system modules; and / or, based on the scale of each evaluation index of each sub-item module, the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each sub-item module are determined, including:

[0031] Calculate the sub-item status score corresponding to each sub-item module based on the scale of each evaluation indicator of each sub-item module and the weight of each evaluation indicator;

[0032] Determine the sub-item status grade evaluation standard corresponding to each of the sub-item modules based on the sub-item status scoring interval corresponding to each of the sub-item modules;

[0033] The sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each sub-item module are determined based on the sub-item status scores and sub-item status grade evaluation standards corresponding to the sub-item modules.

[0034] According to another aspect of the present invention, a bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation system is also disclosed, the system comprising a processor, a memory and a computer program stored in the memory, the processor is used to execute the computer program, and when the computer program is executed, the system implements the steps of the method described in any of the above embodiments.

[0035] According to yet another aspect of the present invention, a computer-readable storage medium is disclosed, on which a computer program is stored. When the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the method described in any of the above embodiments are implemented.

[0036] The bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation method disclosed in the above embodiment of the present application evaluates the operation status of the bridge structure monitoring system based on a method combining hierarchical comprehensive evaluation with single control indicators. The scale of each evaluation indicator of the monitoring system is first evaluated, and then the sub-item operation status of each sub-module of the monitoring system is evaluated. Finally, the overall operation status of the bridge structure monitoring system is evaluated based on the sub-item status evaluation results of each sub-module. The present application can fill the research gap in the evaluation of the operation status of the bridge structure monitoring system, and can accurately evaluate the overall operation status of the bridge structure monitoring system, thereby providing a reference basis for bridge management and maintenance units when constructing bridge structure monitoring systems, and is also conducive to guiding the inspection and maintenance operations of bridge structure monitoring systems during operation and maintenance.

[0037] Additional advantages, purposes, and features of the present invention will be described in part in the following description, and will become apparent to those skilled in the art after studying the following, or may be learned from the practice of the present invention. The purposes and other advantages of the present invention may be achieved and obtained by the structures specifically indicated in the specification and the accompanying drawings.

[0038] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the objectives and advantages that can be achieved with the present invention are not limited to the above specific description, and the above and other objectives that can be achieved by the present invention will be more clearly understood from the following detailed description. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0039] The drawings described herein are used to provide a further understanding of the present invention, constitute a part of this application, and do not constitute a limitation of the present invention. The components in the drawings are not drawn to scale, but are only for illustrating the principles of the present invention. In order to facilitate the illustration and description of some parts of the present invention, the corresponding parts in the drawings may be enlarged, that is, they may become larger relative to other components in the exemplary device actually manufactured according to the present invention. In the drawings:

[0040] Figure 1 It is a flowchart of a method for evaluating the operating status of a bridge structure monitoring system according to an embodiment of the present application.

[0041] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the construction process of a bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present application.

[0042] Figure 3 Schematic diagram of evaluation indicators of a bridge structure monitoring system according to an embodiment of the present application.

[0043] Figure 4 This is a flow chart of a method for evaluating the operating status of a bridge structure monitoring system according to another embodiment of the present application.

[0044] Figure 5 A schematic diagram of weights of evaluation indicators of a bridge structure monitoring system according to an embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0045] In order to make the purpose, technical solution and advantages of the present invention more clearly understood, the present invention is further described in detail below in conjunction with the embodiments and the accompanying drawings. Here, the illustrative embodiments of the present invention and their descriptions are used to explain the present invention, but are not intended to limit the present invention.

[0046] It should also be noted that, in order to avoid obscuring the present invention due to unnecessary details, only structures and / or processing steps closely related to the solutions according to the present invention are shown in the accompanying drawings, while other details that are not closely related to the present invention are omitted.

[0047] It should be emphasized that the term “include / comprises” when used herein refers to the presence of features, elements, steps or components, but does not exclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, elements, steps or components.

[0048] It should also be noted here that, unless otherwise specified, the term "connection" in this article can refer not only to a direct connection, but also to an indirect connection with an intermediary, not only to a wired connection, but also to a wireless connection, and the specific connection can be changed based on the actual application scenario.

[0049] The following are the definitions of terms related to this application:

[0050] Bridge structure monitoring system (also known as bridge health monitoring system or bridge structure monitoring system): an electronic information system that connects various sensors, data acquisition and transmission devices, data processing and management devices, data analysis and application hardware equipment, software modules and supporting facilities distributed at the bridge site and monitoring center through network integration technology, with the functions of continuous monitoring, automatic recording, data display, alarm evaluation of bridge setting parameters, and assisting bridge management and maintenance decision-making.

[0051] Operation status of the bridge structure monitoring system: the operation status of each component of the bridge structure monitoring system and the overall system, such as the service life of the monitoring equipment, the integrity of the monitoring data, the stability of the system operation and the response of the software system.

[0052] In order to accurately evaluate the performance of a bridge structure monitoring system, the present application discloses a bridge structure monitoring system performance evaluation method and device. Before evaluating the performance of a bridge structure monitoring system, an evaluation system can be constructed based on an actual bridge structure monitoring system to achieve a specific evaluation of the performance of the bridge structure monitoring system with reference to the evaluation system. Figure 2 FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of a construction process of a bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present application. Figure 2 As shown, when constructing the evaluation system, S01: the first step is to first establish the bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation index, S02: the second step is to establish the scale division standard of the evaluation index, S03: the third step is to determine the weight of the evaluation index, S04: the fourth step is to establish the sub-item condition scoring calculation formula, S05: the fifth step is to determine the sub-item condition grade evaluation standard (also known as the sub-item condition classification boundary table), S06: the sixth step is to establish the weight of each sub-module of the monitoring system, S07: the seventh step is to establish the overall operation status scoring calculation formula, S08: the eighth step is to determine the overall condition grade evaluation standard (also known as the system overall operation status assessment classification boundary table), S09: the ninth step is to determine whether there is a fault in the single control indicator.

[0053] Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings. In the accompanying drawings, the same reference numerals represent the same or similar components, or the same or similar steps.

[0054] Figure 1 FIG. 1 is a flow chart of a method for evaluating the operating status of a bridge structure monitoring system according to an embodiment of the present invention. Figure 1 As shown, the bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation method at least includes steps S10 to S30.

[0055] Step S10: Determine whether each sub-module of the bridge structure monitoring system has a single fault indicator that affects the stable operation of the bridge structure monitoring system.

[0056] Prior to this step, the sub-modules of the bridge structure monitoring system and the evaluation indicators contained in each sub-module are determined based on the bridge structure monitoring system to be evaluated, wherein the number of sub-modules and the number of evaluation indicators in the sub-modules can be one or more.

[0057] In one embodiment, the bridge structure monitoring system can be divided into multiple sub-modules according to its components, such as Figure 3 As shown in FIG. 1 , the bridge structure monitoring system includes the following four sub-modules: sensor module, data acquisition and transmission module, data storage server module and software system module. It can be understood that the sub-modules listed in this embodiment are only examples, and other equipment or software sub-modules can be added according to the needs of the monitoring system maintenance unit, such as the monitoring system Web server sub-module; Figure 3 In the illustrated embodiment, considering that the quality of the Web server operation status will directly affect the operation status of the software level of the bridge monitoring system (ie, the software system operation status), no separate system Web server sub-module is added.

[0058] After determining the sub-modules of the bridge structure monitoring system, the evaluation indicators are further refined based on the relevant standards of the bridge structure monitoring system, that is, more detailed qualitative or quantitative evaluation indicators are formulated for each sub-module. Figure 3 The evaluation indicators of each sub-module of the bridge structure monitoring system shown in Figure 5 In addition, when determining the evaluation indicators included in each sub-module, the specific definition of each evaluation indicator should also be determined, that is, the measured value of each evaluation indicator should be determined based on the specific definition of each evaluation indicator. For example, the calculation formula of the data integrity rate S is: In the definition formula of data integrity rate S, S represents data integrity rate, p represents the number of fault measurement points, T represents the time of an inspection and evaluation cycle, in days (d), t i represents the total failure time of the ith fault measuring point in an inspection and evaluation cycle, in days (d), and N represents the number of all monitoring measuring points. It can be understood that the number and definition of evaluation indicators listed in this embodiment are only some examples. With the development of monitoring technology, other evaluation indicators can also be established according to the needs of monitoring system operation and maintenance.

[0059] After determining the evaluation index of the bridge structure monitoring system, in step S10, it is first determined whether there is a single fault index that affects the stable operation of the bridge structure monitoring system in each sub-module. If at least one sub-module has a single fault index, the overall operation status level of the bridge structure monitoring system is evaluated as the level corresponding to the worst condition. The existence of a single fault index will make it difficult for the bridge structure monitoring system to operate normally, or even crash. Therefore, the overall operation status level of the bridge structure monitoring system is directly evaluated as the worst at this time. Examples of single fault indicators include: (1) the sensors of the bridge structure monitoring system are damaged over a large area, and the acquisition and transmission module is difficult to collect monitoring data for a long time; (2) the data storage server is damaged, resulting in the loss of monitoring data; (3) the bridge structure monitoring system often has a phenomenon of insufficient software operation response, which seriously affects the user experience. It can be understood that the single fault indicators listed above are only some examples. In other cases, there may be other fault indicators that affect the normal operation of the bridge structure monitoring system, which are not listed here.

[0060] Step S20: when no single fault indicator exists in each of the sub-modules, the scale of each evaluation indicator of each of the sub-modules is determined, and the sub-item condition evaluation result corresponding to each of the sub-modules is determined based on the scale of each evaluation indicator of each of the sub-modules.

[0061] When it is determined that no single fault indicator exists in each sub-module, the scale of each evaluation indicator is further determined, and the sub-item condition evaluation result corresponding to each sub-module is determined based on the scale of each evaluation indicator.

[0062] Furthermore, determining the scale of each evaluation indicator of each sub-module may specifically include the following steps: determining the measured value of each evaluation indicator; determining the scale division standard based on the value range of each evaluation indicator; and determining the scale of each evaluation indicator based on the measured value and the scale division standard. In this embodiment, the measured value of each evaluation indicator can be calculated based on the definition formula of each evaluation indicator, and the scale division standard of each evaluation indicator (also called the grading assessment standard of the evaluation indicator) can be determined based on relevant standard requirements or expert experience and knowledge; in addition, referring to the technical condition level of the electromechanical facilities sub-item of the tunnel, the level of the scale division standard in the bridge structure monitoring system can also be set to four levels, as shown in Table 1 below, which is a grading assessment standard table corresponding to the evaluation indicator of data integrity rate;

[0063] Table 1 Grading criteria for data completeness

[0064]

[0065]

[0066] In one embodiment, the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each sub-item module are determined based on the scale of each evaluation index of each sub-item module, which may specifically include: determining the weight of each evaluation index of each sub-item module, and determining the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each sub-item module based on the scale of each evaluation index of each sub-item module and the weight of each evaluation index. In this embodiment, the weight of each evaluation index is first determined, and the weight can be in percentage; illustratively, the weight of each evaluation index of each sub-item module can be determined based on the priority diagram method; the weight determination method based on the priority diagram method is specifically that the experts first compare the importance of each evaluation index in pairs, and then calculate the weight of each evaluation index based on the importance of the evaluation index; when comparing in pairs, if evaluation index a is more important than evaluation index b, it is recorded as 1; otherwise, it is recorded as 0; if evaluation index a is equally important as evaluation index b, it is recorded as 0.5; Table 2 shows the weight calculation process of the three evaluation indicators of the software system module:

[0067] Table 2 Evaluation index weight calculation process based on the priority diagram method

[0068]

[0069] It can be understood that the method for determining the weight of the evaluation indicators listed in the above example is only an example. In other embodiments, the weight of each evaluation indicator can also be determined based on other methods, such as hierarchical analysis method.

[0070] Furthermore, the calculation formula for the evaluation results of the sub-items is:

[0071]

[0072] Among them, FXCI k represents the evaluation result of the sub-item status of sub-item module k, m represents the number of evaluation indicators of sub-item module k, I j represents the scale of the evaluation index j, w j Represents the weight of evaluation index j.

[0073] In some other embodiments, the evaluation results of the sub-item conditions corresponding to each sub-item module are determined based on the scales of each evaluation index of each sub-item module, and the following steps may also be included: calculating the sub-item condition scores corresponding to each sub-item module based on the scales of each evaluation index of each sub-item module and the weights of each evaluation index; determining the sub-item condition grade evaluation standards corresponding to each sub-item module based on the sub-item condition score intervals corresponding to each sub-item module; and determining the sub-item condition evaluation results corresponding to each sub-item module based on the sub-item condition scores corresponding to the sub-item modules and the sub-item condition grade evaluation standards. In this embodiment, the operating conditions of each sub-item module are further graded, that is, the sub-item condition scores are divided into multiple categories based on the value range of the sub-item condition scores of the sub-item modules as the grade evaluation standards of the sub-item conditions, and then the actual sub-item condition scores of the sub-item modules are used to determine which category the sub-item modules belong to. The value range of the sub-item condition scores can be, for example, [0,100]. The grade evaluation standards of the sub-item conditions can be determined based on the expert survey method. The following Table 3 is a sub-item condition grade evaluation standard table of an embodiment:

[0074] Table 3 Evaluation criteria for sub-item condition levels of bridge structure monitoring systems

[0075] Item Status Rating Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 FXCI [97,100] [92,97) [84,92) [0,84)

[0076] Step S30: Determine the weight corresponding to each of the sub-modules, and determine the overall operation status evaluation result of the bridge structure monitoring system based on the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each of the sub-modules and the weight corresponding to each of the sub-item modules.

[0077] The weight of the sub-module can refer to the weight determination method of the evaluation index, that is, the weight of each sub-module can also be determined based on the priority diagram method. In addition, the weight of the sub-module can be expressed based on the decimal format (such as 0.25). It can be understood that the use of the priority diagram method to determine the weights of the sub-modules and evaluation indicators is only an example. In addition, other methods can also be used to determine and calculate the weights, such as the analytic hierarchy process. Further, based on the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each of the sub-modules and the weights corresponding to each of the sub-modules, the overall operation status evaluation results of the bridge structure monitoring system are determined, including: calculating the overall operation status score of the bridge structure monitoring system based on the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each of the sub-modules and the weights corresponding to each of the sub-modules; determining the overall status grade evaluation standard based on the overall operation status score interval of the bridge structure monitoring system; determining the overall operation status grade of the bridge structure monitoring system based on the overall operation status score of the bridge structure monitoring system and the overall status grade evaluation standard.

[0078] The calculation formula for the overall operation status score is: Among them, S represents the overall operation status score, n represents the total number of sub-modules, and FXCI k represents the evaluation result of the sub-item status of sub-item module k, w k Represents the weight of sub-module k.

[0079] Similar to the grade evaluation criteria of the sub-modules, this step also divides the overall operating condition score interval of the bridge structure monitoring system into grades. The value range of the overall operating condition score can be exemplarily [0,100]. The overall condition grade evaluation criteria of the bridge structure monitoring system can also be determined based on the expert survey method. In order to adapt to the assessment of the technical condition of the bridge, the overall operating condition classification boundaries of the bridge structure monitoring system can be consistent with the technical condition classification boundaries of the bridge. The following Table 4 is an overall condition grade evaluation standard table of the bridge structure monitoring system of an embodiment: Table 4 Overall condition grade evaluation standard table of the bridge structure monitoring system

[0080] Overall health score Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 5 categories S [95,100] [80,95) [60,80) [40,60) [0,40)

[0081] It is understandable that in the above embodiment, the overall operation status of the bridge structure monitoring system is divided into 5 categories, which is only an example. In other embodiments, it can also be divided into other numbers of levels. In addition, among the above 5 types of operation status, the 5th category with a value range of [0,40) represents the worst level of operation status. When a single fault indicator appears in at least one sub-module in the bridge structure monitoring system, the overall operation status of the bridge structure monitoring system is directly divided into the 5th category.

[0082] Figure 4 FIG. 1 is a flow chart of a method for evaluating the operating status of a bridge structure monitoring system according to another embodiment of the present application. Figure 4 As shown in the figure, when evaluating the operation status of the bridge structure monitoring system, first determine whether the bridge structure monitoring system has any single fault indicator that affects its stable operation. If relevant, the overall operation status of the bridge structure monitoring system is directly determined to be Class 5; if no relevant situation occurs, the evaluation is carried out according to the hierarchical comprehensive evaluation process: the first step is to determine the scale of each evaluation indicator based on the measured value and scale division standard of the evaluation indicator. The second step is to calculate the sub-item condition score of each sub-module, and determine the sub-item operation status category of each sub-module in combination with the sub-item condition grade evaluation standard corresponding to the sub-module. The third step is to calculate the overall operation status score of the bridge structure monitoring system. The fourth step is to determine the overall operation status grade of the bridge structure monitoring system in combination with the overall condition grade evaluation standard of the bridge structure monitoring system.

[0083] In a specific embodiment, firstly, the operation status evaluation index of a bridge structure monitoring system is established according to the construction process of the bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation system, and the weight and scale of the evaluation index of the bridge monitoring system and the weight of the sub-module are determined, such as Figure 5 As shown in the figure, the scale of the evaluation index is determined by the measured value of the evaluation index combined with the scale division standard of the evaluation index; in this bridge structure monitoring system, no single fault index is found, and the overall operation status of the system is further evaluated according to the hierarchical comprehensive evaluation method. First, according to the formula Calculate the sub-item status score of the sub-item module, and determine the sub-item module status grade of the sub-item module in combination with the sub-item status grade evaluation standard corresponding to the sub-item module, as shown in Table 5.

[0084] Table 5: Module status rating table

[0085]

[0086] Furthermore, based on the formula The overall operating status score of the bridge monitoring system is calculated. The overall operating status score is specifically: 88.3×0.26+78.33×0.26+71.67×0.26+86.67×0.22=81.03. The overall operating status grade is further determined in combination with the overall status grade evaluation standard. The overall operating status grade of the bridge monitoring system in this embodiment is Class 2.

[0087] In the above embodiments, the operating status of the bridge structure monitoring system is evaluated by using a hierarchical weighted comprehensive evaluation method based on the constructed bridge structure monitoring system operating status evaluation system. This method not only provides a hierarchical framework for the evaluation of the operating status of the bridge structure monitoring system, but also formulates some specific evaluation indicators, calculation formulas, scale division standards, and sub-item status level evaluation standards for different sub-item modules of the monitoring system. In addition, some embodiments divide the operating status level of the bridge structure monitoring system into 5 levels, which is consistent with the number of bridge technical status levels, that is, the operating status evaluation results of the bridge structure monitoring system of the present application can be integrated with the current bridge technical status evaluation results to form an evaluation result of the comprehensive technical status of the bridge main structure and electromechanical facilities (i.e., the monitoring system). In addition, the evaluation indicators of the operating status evaluation method of the bridge structure monitoring system of the present application are extensible, not only with good practicality, but also with good extensibility. Moreover, the operating status evaluation method of the bridge structure monitoring system of the present application is not only applicable to the evaluation of the operating status of the bridge monitoring system, but also can be applied to the evaluation of the operating status of other similar S systems, such as tunnel monitoring systems, bridge construction monitoring systems, etc.

[0088] Correspondingly, the present invention also provides a bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation system, the system comprising a processor, a memory and a computer program stored in the memory, the processor is used to execute the computer program, and when the computer program is executed, the system implements the steps of the method described in any of the above embodiments.

[0089] In some other embodiments of the present application, a computer-readable storage medium is further disclosed, on which a computer program is stored. When the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the method described in any of the above embodiments are implemented.

[0090] It should be understood by those skilled in the art that the exemplary components, systems and methods described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented in hardware, software or a combination of the two. Whether it is performed in hardware or software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Professional and technical personnel can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementation should not be considered to be beyond the scope of the present invention. When implemented in hardware, it can be, for example, an electronic circuit, an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), appropriate firmware, a plug-in, a function card, etc. When implemented in software, the elements of the present invention are programs or code segments used to perform the required tasks. The program or code segment can be stored in a machine-readable medium, or transmitted on a transmission medium or a communication link via a data signal carried in a carrier.

[0091] It should be clear that the present invention is not limited to the specific configuration and processing described above and shown in the figures. For the sake of simplicity, a detailed description of the known method is omitted here. In the above embodiments, several specific steps are described and shown as examples. However, the method process of the present invention is not limited to the specific steps described and shown, and those skilled in the art can make various changes, modifications and additions, or change the order between the steps after understanding the spirit of the present invention.

[0092] In the present invention, features described and / or illustrated for one embodiment may be used in the same or similar manner in one or more other embodiments, and / or combined with features of other embodiments or replace features of other embodiments.

[0093] The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. For those skilled in the art, the embodiments of the present invention may have various modifications and variations. Any modification, equivalent replacement, improvement, etc. made within the spirit and principle of the present invention shall be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the operating status of a bridge structure monitoring system, characterized in that: The bridge structure monitoring system includes a plurality of sub-modules, each of which includes at least one evaluation index, and the method includes: Determine whether each sub-module of the bridge structure monitoring system has a single fault indicator that affects the stable operation of the bridge structure monitoring system; When no single fault indicator exists in each of the sub-modules, the scale of each evaluation indicator of each of the sub-modules is determined, and the sub-item condition evaluation result corresponding to each of the sub-modules is determined based on the scale of each evaluation indicator of each of the sub-modules; The weight corresponding to each of the sub-modules is determined, and the overall operation status evaluation result of the bridge structure monitoring system is determined based on the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each of the sub-modules and the weight corresponding to each of the sub-item modules.

2. The bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation method according to claim 1 is characterized in that: There are multiple evaluation indicators for each sub-item module, and the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each sub-item module are determined based on the scales of each evaluation indicator of each sub-item module, including: The weight of each evaluation indicator of each sub-item module is determined, and the sub-item status evaluation result corresponding to each sub-item module is determined based on the scale of each evaluation indicator of each sub-item module and the weight of each evaluation indicator.

3. The bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation method according to claim 2 is characterized in that: The calculation formula for the sub-item status evaluation results is: Among them, FXCI k represents the evaluation result of the sub-item status of sub-item module k, m represents the number of evaluation indicators of sub-item module k, I j represents the scale of the evaluation index j, w j Represents the weight of evaluation index j.

4. The bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation method according to claim 3 is characterized in that: Determining the overall operation status evaluation result of the bridge structure monitoring system based on the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each of the sub-item modules and the weights corresponding to each of the sub-item modules includes: Calculate the overall operation status score of the bridge structure monitoring system based on the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each of the sub-item modules and the weights corresponding to each of the sub-item modules; Determining an overall condition grade evaluation standard based on the overall operation condition scoring interval of the bridge structure monitoring system; The overall operating condition grade of the bridge structure monitoring system is determined based on the overall operating condition score of the bridge structure monitoring system and the overall condition grade evaluation standard.

5. The bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation method according to claim 4 is characterized in that: The method comprises: When a single fault indicator exists in at least one sub-module, the overall operating status level of the bridge structure monitoring system is the level corresponding to the worst condition.

6. The bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: Determine the scale of each evaluation indicator of each sub-module, including: Determine the measured value of each evaluation index; Determining a scale division standard based on the value range of each evaluation indicator; The scale of each evaluation index is determined based on the measured value and the scale division standard.

7. The bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation method according to claim 4 is characterized in that: Determining the weight corresponding to each of the sub-modules includes: determining the weight corresponding to the sub-module based on a priority diagram method; and / or, Determining the weight of each evaluation index of each sub-module includes: determining the weight of each evaluation index of each sub-module based on a priority diagram method; and / or, The calculation formula for the overall operating status score is: Among them, S represents the overall operation status score, n represents the total number of sub-modules, and FXCI k represents the evaluation result of the sub-item status of sub-item module k, w k Represents the weight of sub-module k.

8. The bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation method according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The sub-modules are sensor module, data acquisition and transmission module, data storage server module and software system module; And / or, determining the sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each of the sub-item modules based on the scales of each evaluation indicator of each of the sub-item modules, including: Calculate the sub-item status score corresponding to each sub-item module based on the scale of each evaluation indicator of each sub-item module and the weight of each evaluation indicator; Determine the sub-item status grade evaluation standard corresponding to each of the sub-item modules based on the sub-item status scoring interval corresponding to each of the sub-item modules; The sub-item status evaluation results corresponding to each sub-item module are determined based on the sub-item status scores and sub-item status grade evaluation standards corresponding to the sub-item modules.

9. A bridge structure monitoring system operation status evaluation system, the system comprising a processor, a memory and a computer program stored in the memory, characterized in that: The processor is used to execute the computer program. When the computer program is executed, the system implements the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 8.

10. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that: When the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 8 are implemented.

Images