Comparison of Condition Rating Systems for Bridges in Three European Countries

Matos, José C.; Nicoletti, Vanni; Kralovanec, Jakub; Sousa, Hélder S.; Gara, Fabrizio; Moravcik, Martin; Morais, Maria J. · 2023 · DOAJ

DOI: 10.3390/app132212343

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This paper addresses the critical need for standardized bridge condition assessment across Europe, motivated by the aging infrastructure built in the post-war era and recent high-profile bridge failures, such as the 2018 collapse of the Viadotto Polcevera in Genoa. The authors argue that while European countries share common design standards (Eurocodes), their methodologies for assessing existing bridge health vary significantly. These discrepancies can lead to inconsistent decision-making regarding maintenance, rehabilitation, and safety. The study aims to highlight these differences to encourage the development of a unified European condition rating system, which would facilitate objective comparisons of infrastructure health and support efficient allocation of economic funds for rehabilitation. The research employs a comparative analysis of the current bridge condition rating systems in Italy, Slovakia, and Portugal. This work stems from an international collaboration among universities in these three countries. The authors describe the specific code prescriptions, methodologies, and parameters used in each nation to determine the state of existing bridges. The analysis focuses on how each country classifies bridges into attention or risk classes, detailing the procedural steps from initial data collection to final safety verification. In Italy, the assessment follows a multilevel approach (Levels 0–5) defined by 2020 guidelines, resulting in a "Class of Attention" (CoA) based on four risk typologies: structural/foundational, seismic, landslide, and hydraulic. The CoA is determined by evaluating hazard, vulnerability, and exposure, with five levels of increasing risk. Bridges with high or medium-high CoA require in-depth evaluations and potentially permanent Structural Health Monitoring. In Slovakia, classification relies on a load-carrying capacity coefficient, categorizing bridges into seven classes. In Portugal, assessment uses a "condition state" indicator with six classes, evaluating damages based on severity, extension, development, and consequences. The paper details the specific logical paths and parameters used in the Italian system, such as damage level classification and traffic exposure metrics, while outlining the structural frameworks for Slovakia and Portugal. The significance of this study lies in its contribution to the standardization of bridge health assessment within the European Union. By explicitly defining the methodological differences among these three countries, the paper provides a foundational reference for policymakers and engineers aiming to harmonize assessment procedures. Standardization is presented as essential for ensuring public safety, enabling objective cross-border comparisons of infrastructure conditions, and optimizing the prioritization of maintenance and modernization efforts. The authors conclude that a common rating system would mitigate the risks associated with fragmented assessment practices and better address the challenges posed by Europe’s aging bridge network.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• comparative international