Bridge technical condition evaluation method and system

Abstract

The invention relates to a bridge technical condition evaluation method and system. The method comprises the steps that bridge basic information input by a user is acquired; generating bridge structure information according to the bridge basic information; determining a disease type and a disease index of each part according to a bridge disease library; according to the disease type and the disease index of each part, calculating the score of each part deducted according to the disease; calculating the score of each part type in each structure according to the score of each part deducted according to the disease; redistributing the weight of each part type in each structure, and obtaining the technical condition score of each structure based on the score of each part type in each structure; performing weighted calculation on the technical condition score of each structure to obtain an overall technical condition score of the bridge; and determining a technical condition grade according to the overall technical condition score of the bridge. According to the invention, automatic evaluation of the bridge state is realized, and the efficiency and accuracy of bridge maintenance and management are greatly improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the field of bridge technical condition assessment, and in particular, to a bridge technical condition assessment method and system. Background Art

[0002] As an important component of transportation infrastructure, the safety and stability of bridges are crucial to transportation and the safety of people's lives and property. As bridges age, factors such as aging, corrosion, and external loads may cause damage to bridge components and structures, which in turn affects the overall safety of the bridge. Regular technical condition assessments of bridges can promptly identify and address existing problems with the bridges and ensure their safe operation. Traditional methods for assessing the technical condition of bridges rely mainly on manual inspections and manual records, which have certain limitations. Manual inspections usually require a lot of time and effort and are easily affected by subjective factors of the inspectors, resulting in unstable or inaccurate assessment results. In addition, as the number of bridges increases, manual inspections are difficult to cover all bridges, making real-time monitoring and evaluation of bridge status more difficult.

[0003] Existing technical solutions generally focus on the inspection and evaluation of various bridge components, but there are still deficiencies in the integration of different bridge component data, disease information, automated processing, calculation of assessment scores, and data export, which affects the accuracy and efficiency of the assessment and the subsequent use of the data. Summary of the Invention

[0004] In order to overcome at least one deficiency in the prior art, the present application provides a bridge technical condition assessment method and system.

[0005] In a first aspect, a bridge technical condition assessment method is provided, comprising:

[0006] Get the basic information of the bridge input by the user;

[0007] Generate bridge structure information based on basic bridge information, where the bridge structure information includes various structures, types of parts included in each structure, and the number and location of various parts included in each part type;

[0008] Determine the type of damage and damage index of each part according to the bridge damage database;

[0009] According to the disease type and disease index of each part, calculate the score deducted for each part based on the disease; calculate the score of each part type in each structure based on the score deducted for each part based on the disease;

[0010] The weights of each part type in each structure are redistributed, and the technical condition score of each structure is obtained based on the scores of each part type in each structure;

[0011] The technical condition scores of each structure are weighted to obtain the overall technical condition score of the bridge; and the technical condition grade is determined based on the overall technical condition score of the bridge.

[0012] In one embodiment, based on the disease type and disease index of each part, the score deducted based on the disease of each part is calculated using the following formula:

[0013] U k =DP k , x=1

[0014]

[0015] Among them, U k is the score deducted for the kth part of a certain part type based on the disease, DP k is the disease deduction value corresponding to the kth part, and x is the number of parts included in a certain part type.

[0016] In one embodiment, the score of each part type in each structure is calculated based on the score deducted for each part according to the disease, including:

[0017] The various structures include: superstructure, substructure and bridge deck system;

[0018] The scores for each site type in each structure were calculated using the following formula:

[0019]

[0020] Among them, PCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the superstructure, is the mean of the scores deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the superstructure, PMCI min is the minimum value of the score deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the superstructure, and t is a coefficient related to the number of structures;

[0021] BCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the lower structure, BMCI is the average of the scores deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the substructure. min is the minimum value of the score deducted based on the disease of all parts of the i-th part type in the substructure;

[0022] DCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system, is the average of the scores deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the bridge deck system, DMCI minIt is the minimum value of the score deducted based on the disease of all parts of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system.

[0023] In one embodiment, the weights of the various part types in each structure are redistributed, and based on the scores of the various part types in each structure, a technical condition score of each structure is obtained, including:

[0024] The weights of each part type in each structure are redistributed using the following formula:

[0025] W newi =W oldi +(W oldi / (1-∑W lack )·∑W lack )

[0026] Among them, W newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in a structure, W oldi is the original weight of the i-th part type in a structure, ∑W lack is the sum of the original weights of all missing part types in a structure;

[0027] The technical condition score of each structure is obtained using the following formula:

[0028]

[0029] Among them, SPCI is the technical condition score of the superstructure, m1 is the number of types of parts in the superstructure, PCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the superstructure, SBCI is the technical condition score of the substructure, m2 is the number of part types in the substructure, BCCI is i is the score of the i-th part type in the substructure, BDCU is the technical condition score of the bridge deck system, m3 is the number of part types in the bridge deck system, DCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system; W 1newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in the superstructure, W 2newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in the lower structure, W 3newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system.

[0030] In one embodiment, the technical condition scores of each structure are weighted to obtain the overall technical condition score of the bridge using the following formula:

[0031] D r =BDCI×W D +SPCI×W SP +SBCI×W SB

[0032] Among them, D r is the overall technical condition score of the bridge, SPCI is the technical condition score of the superstructure, SBCI is the technical condition score of the substructure, BDCI is the technical condition score of the bridge deck system, and W D is the weight of the bridge deck system in the whole bridge, W SP is the weight of the superstructure in the whole bridge, W SB is the weight of the substructure in the entire bridge.

[0033] In one embodiment, the method further comprises:

[0034] The bridge structure information, the coefficient t related to the number of structures, the type and description of the disease of each part, the disease index, the standard deduction value determined according to the disease type and disease index, the score deducted for each part based on the disease, the score of each part type, the technical condition score of each structure, the original weight of each part type, the new weight of each part type, and the overall technical condition score of the bridge are saved to the database and generated into an Excel standard file.

[0035] Secondly, a bridge technical condition assessment system is provided, comprising:

[0036] Project management module, used to store bridge calculation data information;

[0037] Data input module, used to obtain basic bridge information input by users;

[0038] An automatic generation module is used to generate bridge structure information based on basic bridge information, where the bridge structure information includes various structures, types of parts included in each structure, and the number and location of various parts included in each part type;

[0039] The disease selection module is used to determine the disease type and disease index of each part according to the bridge disease database;

[0040] The scoring calculation module is used to calculate the score deducted for each part based on the disease type and disease index of each part; and calculate the score of each part type in each structure based on the score deducted for each part based on the disease;

[0041] Redistribute the weights of each part type in each structure, and obtain the technical condition score of each structure based on the scores of each part type in each structure;

[0042] Perform weighted calculation on the technical condition scores of each structure to obtain the overall technical condition score of the bridge; and determine the technical condition grade based on the overall technical condition score of the bridge;

[0043] The output module is used to output the overall technical condition score and technical condition grade of the bridge.

[0044] In one embodiment, the system also includes: a data export module, which uses the high-performance data spreadsheet tool chain EPPlus to export the bridge information stored in the database into an Excel standard file, supporting the generation of standardized reports of bridge inspection results; the bridge information includes bridge structure information, a coefficient t related to the number of structures, the type of disease and disease description of each part, disease indicators, standard deduction values ​​determined according to the disease type and disease indicators, the score deducted for each part based on the disease, the score of each part type, the technical condition score of each structure, the original weight of each part type, the new weight of each part type, and the overall technical condition score of the bridge.

[0045] In a third aspect, a computer-readable storage medium is provided, wherein the computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the above-mentioned bridge technical condition assessment method is implemented.

[0046] In a fourth aspect, a computer program product is provided, comprising a computer program / instruction, which, when executed by a processor, implements the above-mentioned bridge technical condition assessment method.

[0047] Compared with the existing technology, the present application has the following beneficial effects: the bridge technical condition assessment method and system of the present application combines the modules of bridge information input, automatic generation of component and location information, defect selection, score calculation, output and data export, which comprehensively improves the accuracy and efficiency of bridge assessment; by integrating the database and the front-end interface, the system can automatically generate bridge structure information, select the corresponding defect type, perform accurate calculations based on standard files and scoring rules, and output the bridge's full bridge score and evaluation results. Users can also export the assessment results in a standard Excel format for subsequent analysis and archiving. The present application adopts modern programming technology and data processing methods to solve the defects of traditional manual inspection and assessment methods, realize the automated assessment of bridge status, and greatly improve the efficiency and accuracy of bridge maintenance and management. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0048] The present application may be better understood by referring to the following description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, which together with the following detailed description are incorporated into and form a part of this specification. In the drawings:

[0049] Figure 1 A flow chart of a bridge technical condition assessment method is shown;

[0050] Figure 2 Shows the structural block diagram of the bridge technical condition assessment system;

[0051] Figure 3 Shown is a diagram of the system technical architecture. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0052] Exemplary embodiments of the present application are described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. For the sake of clarity and conciseness, not all features of actual embodiments are described in this specification. However, it should be understood that in the process of developing any such actual embodiment, many implementation-specific decisions may be made to achieve the developer's specific goals, and these decisions may vary from one implementation to another.

[0053] It is also necessary to explain here that, in order to avoid obscuring the present application due to unnecessary details, the accompanying drawings only show the device structure closely related to the solution according to the present application, while other details that are not closely related to the present application are omitted.

[0054] It should be understood that the present application is not limited to the described embodiments due to the following description with reference to the accompanying drawings. In this document, where feasible, the embodiments may be combined with each other, features between different embodiments may be replaced or borrowed, and one or more features may be omitted in one embodiment.

[0055] The present application embodiment provides a method for evaluating the technical condition of a bridge. Figure 1 A flowchart of the bridge technical condition assessment method is shown in Figure 1 , methods include:

[0056] Step S1: Obtain basic information of the bridge input by the user.

[0057] Specifically, the basic information of the bridge includes: number of spans, number of beams, number of supports, number of columns, number of bridge deck pavements, number of expansion joints, and number of sidewalks.

[0058] Step S2: Generate bridge structure information based on basic bridge information. The bridge structure information includes various structures, part types of each structure, and the number and location of each part of each part type. Each structure includes a superstructure, a substructure, and a bridge deck system.

[0059] Here, a WebSocket connection is established through SignalR, and the backend calculation is triggered within 0.5 seconds after the user enters the parameters. The automatically generated bridge structure information and quantity generation rules are shown in Table 1.

[0060] Table 1

[0061]

[0062]

[0063] Step S3: Determine the damage type and damage index of each part according to the bridge damage database.

[0064] A three-level defect database, based on the JTG / T H21-2011 "Highway Bridge Technical Condition Assessment Standard," provides a searchable database of bridge defects. Users can select the corresponding defect type and indicator based on the generated location information for each part. Furthermore, to improve system responsiveness, defect data is stored using a Redis cache mechanism, ensuring efficient query performance.

[0065] Step S4, calculating the score deducted from each part based on the disease type and disease index of each part; and calculating the score of each part type in each structure based on the score deducted from each part based on the disease.

[0066] Specifically, the score deducted for each part based on the disease is calculated using the following formula:

[0067] U k =DP k , x=1

[0068]

[0069] Among them, U k is the score deducted for the kth part of a certain part type based on the disease, DP k is the disease deduction value corresponding to the kth part, and x is the number of parts included in a certain part type.

[0070] Here, according to the disease type and disease index of each part, D is determined according to Table 2. k Each disease type corresponds to a highest level index. For example, the highest level index corresponding to the disease type of the kth part is Class 3, and the disease index is Class 2, then DP k The value of is 20.

[0071] Table 2

[0072]

[0073] Specifically, the scores of each part type in each structure are calculated using the following formula:

[0074]

[0075] Among them, PCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the superstructure, is the mean of the scores deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the superstructure, PMCI minis the minimum value of the score deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the superstructure, and t is a coefficient related to the number of structures;

[0076] BCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the lower structure, BMCI is the average of the scores deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the substructure. min is the minimum value of the score deducted based on the disease of all parts of the i-th part type in the substructure;

[0077] DCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system, is the average of the scores deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the bridge deck system, DMCI min It is the minimum value of the score deducted based on the disease of all parts of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system.

[0078] Step S5: redistribute the weights of the various part types in each structure, and obtain the technical status score of each structure based on the scores of the various part types in each structure.

[0079] Specifically, first, the weights of each part type in each structure are redistributed using the following formula:

[0080] W newi =W oldi +(W oldi / (1-∑W lack )·∑W lack )

[0081] Among them, W newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in a structure, W oldi is the original weight of the i-th part type in a structure, which is a known value, ∑W lack is the sum of the original weights of all missing part types in a structure. Here, the missing part type in a structure refers to the part type with a quantity of 0. For example, according to Table 1, for the lower structure, when the number of wing walls and ear walls is 0, and the number of cone slopes and slope protection is also 0, if the original weight of the wing wall and ear wall part type is 0.2, and the original weight of the cone slope and slope protection part type is 0.2, then, ∑W lack Equal to 0.2+0.2=0.4.

[0082] Then, the technical condition score of each structure is obtained using the following formula:

[0083]

[0084] Among them, SPCI is the technical condition score of the superstructure, m1 is the number of types of parts in the superstructure, PCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the superstructure, SBCI is the technical condition score of the substructure, m2 is the number of part types in the substructure, BCCI is i is the score of the i-th part type in the substructure, BDCI is the technical condition score of the bridge deck system, m3 is the number of part types in the bridge deck system, DCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system; W 1newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in the superstructure, W 2newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in the lower structure, W 3newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system.

[0085] Step S6: Perform weighted calculation on the technical condition scores of each structure to obtain the overall technical condition score of the bridge; and determine the technical condition grade based on the overall technical condition score of the bridge.

[0086] Specifically, the following formula is used:

[0087] D r =BDCI×W D +SPCI×W SP +SBCI×W SB

[0088] Among them, D r is the overall technical condition score of the bridge, SPCI is the technical condition score of the superstructure, SBCI is the technical condition score of the substructure, BDCI is the technical condition score of the bridge deck system, and W D is the weight of the bridge deck system in the whole bridge, W SP is the weight of the superstructure in the whole bridge, W SB is the weight of the substructure in the entire bridge.

[0089] Table 3 shows the weight of each structure in the full bridge.

[0090] Table 3

[0091] Bridge parts Weight superstructure 0.40 Substructure 0.40 Bridge deck system 0.20

[0092] Determine the technical condition level according to Table 4.

[0093] Table 4

[0094]

[0095] This embodiment utilizes a dynamic weight allocation mechanism for calculating structural scores, redistributing weights by determining the presence of components in all locations within each structure. A three-tiered weighting system is employed for calculating the overall bridge score: component, subassembly, and bridge-wide. An adaptive mechanism is also introduced to dynamically adjust influencing factors. By setting a t-value parameter (dependent on the number of structures), a variable-weighted hierarchical analysis method is employed to ensure that the impact of specific component defects on the overall score is accurately reflected.

[0096] Furthermore, the bridge technical condition assessment method also includes:

[0097] The bridge structure information, the coefficient t related to the number of structures, the type and description of the disease of each part, the disease index, the standard deduction value determined according to the disease type and disease index, the score deducted for each part based on the disease, the score of each part type, the technical condition score of each structure, the original weight of each part type, the new weight of each part type, and the overall technical condition score of the bridge are saved to the database and generated into an Excel standard file.

[0098] In summary, the bridge technical condition assessment method of this application has the following technical effects:

[0099] The system combines the modules of bridge information input, automatic generation of component and location information, defect selection, score calculation, output and data export, which comprehensively improves the accuracy and efficiency of bridge assessment. By integrating the database with the front-end interface, the system can automatically generate bridge structure information, select the corresponding defect type, perform accurate calculations based on standard files and scoring rules, and output the bridge's full bridge score and evaluation results. Users can also export the assessment results in a standard Excel format for subsequent analysis and archiving. This application uses modern programming technology and data processing methods to solve the defects of traditional manual inspection and assessment methods, realize the automated assessment of bridge status, and greatly improve the efficiency and accuracy of bridge maintenance and management.

[0100] The present application also provides a bridge technical condition assessment system. Figure 2 The structural diagram of the bridge technical condition assessment system is shown in Figure 2 , the system includes:

[0101] Project management module, used to store bridge calculation data information;

[0102] The data input module is used to obtain basic bridge information input by the user; specifically, the basic bridge information includes: number of spans, number of beams, number of supports, number of columns, number of bridge deck pavements, number of expansion joints, and number of sidewalks.

[0103] The data input module utilizes structured fields to automatically derive bridge topology based on key parameters such as the number of spans and beams. Compared to traditional systems that require manual entry of all components, this system reduces manual input fields by 70% through parametric modeling. It also supports automatic generation of special configurations such as span variations (e.g., a configuration with six beams in the first span and eight beams in the second span).

[0104] An automatic generation module is used to generate bridge structure information based on basic bridge information, where the bridge structure information includes various structures, types of parts included in each structure, and the number and location of various parts included in each part type;

[0105] The disease selection module is used to determine the disease type and disease index of each part according to the bridge disease database;

[0106] The defect selection module establishes a standardized defect database based on JTG / T H21-2011, "Highway Bridge Technical Condition Assessment Standard," and innovatively incorporates a Redis cache mechanism to achieve millisecond-level data response. When a user selects a bridge pier or column, the system automatically associates 12 typical defect categories, such as crack width and concrete spalling, with their severity levels, improving query efficiency by over five times compared to traditional SQL queries.

[0107] The scoring calculation module is used to calculate the score deducted from each part based on the disease type and disease index of each part; and calculate the score of each part type in each structure based on the score deducted from each part based on the disease.

[0108] The weights of each part type in each structure are redistributed, and the technical condition score of each structure is obtained based on the scores of each part type in each structure;

[0109] The technical condition scores of each structure are weighted to obtain the overall technical condition score of the bridge; and the technical condition grade is determined based on the overall technical condition score of the bridge.

[0110] The scoring module employs a dynamic weighting mechanism for the structural scoring calculation, redistributing weights by determining the presence of components in all locations within each structure. A three-tiered weighting system is employed for the overall bridge scoring: component, subassembly, and bridge-wide. An adaptive mechanism is also introduced to dynamically adjust influencing factors. By setting a t-value parameter (dependent on the number of structures), a variable-weighted hierarchical analysis method (AHP) is employed to accurately reflect the impact of missing components on the overall score.

[0111] The output module is used to output the overall technical condition score and technical condition grade of the bridge.

[0112] Here, the data output module automatically divides the scoring results into five technical levels, which is fully compatible with the JTG / T H21 standard.

[0113] Furthermore, the system also includes: a data export module, which uses the high-performance data spreadsheet tool chain EPPlus to export the bridge information stored in the database into an Excel standard file, supporting the generation of standardized reports of bridge inspection results; bridge information includes bridge structure information, coefficient t related to the number of structures, the type of disease and disease description of each part, disease indicators, standard deduction values ​​determined according to the disease type and disease indicators, the score deducted for each part based on the disease, the score of each part type, the technical condition score of each structure, the original weight of each part type, the new weight of each part type, and the overall technical condition score of the bridge.

[0114] Figure 3 The system's technical architecture is shown. Based on the Microsoft Visual Studio development platform, it utilizes a Microsoft SQL Server database, the C# language, and the .NET Framework to implement intelligent bridge technical condition assessment. The overall design utilizes a layered architecture. The front-end interface utilizes the WPF framework for highly responsive interaction, while the back-end utilizes ASP.NET Core as the framework for front-end and back-end interaction. In particular, the system integrates SignalR technology via a RESTful API for real-time data synchronization, effectively addressing the data lag issues of traditional systems.

[0115] In summary, this application addresses the challenges of traditional systems, including redundant component generation, delayed data updates, and rigid scoring, through three key innovations: simplified input, automated generation of bridge structural information, and dynamic weight assignment. Practical engineering applications have demonstrated a 60% reduction in assessment cycles and a 45% reduction in database storage requirements. This system is particularly well-suited for the technical evaluation of multi-span, special-shaped bridges.

[0116] An embodiment of the present application also provides a computer-readable storage medium, which stores a computer program. When the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the above-mentioned bridge technical condition assessment method.

[0117] An embodiment of the present application also provides a computer program product, including a computer program / instruction, which, when executed by a processor, implements the above-mentioned bridge technical condition assessment method.

[0118] The above descriptions are merely examples of various embodiments of the present application, but the scope of protection of the present application is not limited thereto. Any modifications or substitutions that can be readily conceived by a person skilled in the art within the technical scope disclosed in the present application should be included within the scope of protection of the present application. Therefore, the scope of protection of the present application should be based on the scope of protection of the claims.

Claims

1. A bridge technical condition assessment method, characterized in that: include: Get the basic information of the bridge input by the user; Generating bridge structure information according to the basic bridge information, wherein the bridge structure information includes various structures, types of parts included in each structure, and the number and location of various parts included in each part type; Determine the type of damage and damage index of each part according to the bridge damage database; Calculate the score deducted for each part based on the disease type and disease index of each part; Calculate the score of each part type in each structure according to the score deducted for each part according to the disease; Redistributing the weights of the various types of parts in each structure, and obtaining a technical condition score of each structure based on the scores of the various types of parts in each structure; The technical condition scores of the various structures are weightedly calculated to obtain an overall technical condition score of the bridge; and the technical condition grade is determined based on the overall technical condition score of the bridge.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein in, According to the disease type and disease index of each part, the score deducted for each part based on the disease is calculated using the following formula: U k =DP k ,x=1 Among them, U k is the score deducted for the kth part of a certain part type based on the disease, DP k is the disease deduction value corresponding to the kth part, and x is the number of parts included in a certain part type.

3. The method according to claim 1, wherein in, The scores for each part type in each structure are calculated based on the points deducted for each part based on the disease, including: The various structures include: a superstructure, a substructure and a bridge deck system; The scores for each site type in each structure were calculated using the following formula: Among them, PCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the superstructure, is the mean of the scores deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the superstructure, PMCI min is the minimum value of the score deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the superstructure, and t is a coefficient related to the number of structures; BCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the lower structure, BMCI is the average of the scores deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the substructure. min is the minimum value of the score deducted based on the disease of all parts of the i-th part type in the substructure; DCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system, is the average of the scores deducted based on the disease of all parts in the i-th part type in the bridge deck system, DMCI min It is the minimum value of the score deducted based on the disease of all parts of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system.

4. The method according to claim 1, wherein in, The weights of each part type in each structure are redistributed, and based on the scores of each part type in each structure, a technical condition score of each structure is obtained, including: The weights of each part type in each structure are redistributed using the following formula: IN newi =In oldi +(W oldi / (1-∑W lack )·∑W lack ) Among them, W newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in a structure, W oldi is the original weight of the i-th part type in a structure, ∑W lack is the sum of the original weights of all missing part types in a structure; The technical condition score of each structure is obtained using the following formula: Among them, SPCI is the technical condition score of the superstructure, m1 is the number of types of parts in the superstructure, PCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the superstructure, SBCI is the technical condition score of the substructure, m2 is the number of part types in the substructure, BCCI is i is the score of the i-th part type in the substructure, BDCI is the technical condition score of the bridge deck system, m3 is the number of part types in the bridge deck system, DCCI i is the score of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system; W 1newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in the superstructure, W 2newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in the lower structure, W 3newi is the new weight of the i-th part type in the bridge deck system.

5. The method according to claim 1, wherein in, The technical condition scores of each structure are weighted to obtain the overall technical condition score of the bridge using the following formula: D r =BDCI×W D +SPCI×W SP +SBCI×W SB Among them, D r is the overall technical condition score of the bridge, SPCI is the technical condition score of the superstructure, SBCI is the technical condition score of the substructure, BDCI is the technical condition score of the bridge deck system, and W D is the weight of the bridge deck system in the whole bridge, W SP is the weight of the superstructure in the whole bridge, W SB is the weight of the substructure in the entire bridge.

6. The method according to claim 1, wherein The method further comprises: The bridge structure information, the coefficient t related to the number of structures, the type and description of the disease of each part, the disease index, the standard deduction value determined according to the disease type and disease index, the score deducted for each part based on the disease, the score of each part type, the technical condition score of each structure, the original weight of each part type, the new weight of each part type, and the overall technical condition score of the bridge are saved to the database and generated into an Excel standard file.

7. A bridge technical condition assessment system, characterized in that: include: Project management module, used to store bridge calculation data information; Data input module, used to obtain basic bridge information input by users; An automatic generation module is used to generate bridge structure information based on the basic bridge information, wherein the bridge structure information includes various structures, part types included in each structure, and the number and location of various parts included in each part type; The disease selection module is used to determine the disease type and disease index of each part according to the bridge disease database; A scoring calculation module is used to calculate the score deducted for each part based on the disease type and disease index of each part; Calculate the score of each part type in each structure according to the score deducted for each part according to the disease; Redistributing the weights of the various types of parts in each structure, and obtaining a technical condition score of each structure based on the scores of the various types of parts in each structure; Performing weighted calculation on the technical condition scores of the various structures to obtain an overall technical condition score of the bridge; and determining a technical condition grade based on the overall technical condition score of the bridge; The output module is used to output the overall technical condition score and technical condition grade of the bridge.

8. The system according to claim 7, wherein: The system also includes: a data export module, which uses the high-performance data spreadsheet tool chain EPPlus to export the bridge information stored in the database into an Excel standard file, supporting the generation of standardized reports on bridge inspection results; the bridge information includes bridge structure information, a coefficient t related to the number of structures, the type and description of the disease at each part, disease indicators, standard deduction values ​​determined based on the disease type and disease indicators, the score deducted for each part based on the disease, the score of each part type, the technical condition score of each structure, the original weight of each part type, the new weight of each part type, and the overall technical condition score of the bridge.

9. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that The computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the bridge technical condition assessment method according to any one of claims 1 to 6.

10. A computer program product, characterized in that The method comprises a computer program / instruction, which, when executed by a processor, implements the bridge technical condition assessment method according to any one of claims 1 to 6.

Images