Life-cycle thinking and performance-based design of bridges: A state-of-the-art review

Abstract

Given the growing emphasis on life-cycle analysis in bridge design, the design community is transitioning from the concept of performance-based design in structural engineering to a performance-based design approach within a life-cycle context. This approach considers various indicators, including cost, environmental impact, and societal factors when designing bridges. This shift enables a comprehensive assessment of structural resilience by examining the bridge's ability to endure various hazards throughout its lifespan. This study provides a comprehensive review of two key research domains that have emerged in the field of bridge life-cycle analysis, namely life-cycle sustainability (LCS) and life-cycle performance (LCP). The discussion on the LCS of bridges encompasses both assessment-based and optimization-based studies, while the exploration of LCP focuses on research examining structures subjected to deterioration over their service life due to deprecating phenomena such as corrosion and relative humidity changes, as well as extreme hazards like earthquakes and floods. Moreover, this study discusses the integration between LCS and LCP, highlighting how combined consideration of these factors can minimize damage costs, improve resiliency, and extend the lifespan of the structure. A detailed evaluation encompasses various life-cycle metrics, structural performance indicators, time-dependent modelling techniques, and analysis methods proposed in the literature. Additionally, the research identifies critical gaps and trends in life-cycle analysis within the realm of bridge engineering, providing a concise yet thorough overview for advancing considerations in the life-cycle design of bridges.

Keywords

Life-cycle analysis / Life-cycle sustainability / Life-cycle performance / Multiple-hazards / Resiliency / Climate change

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Alaa Al Hawarneh: Writing - review & editing, Writing - original draft, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Conceptualization. M. Shahria Alam: Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization. Rajeev Ruparathna: Writing - review & editing, Methodology, Conceptualization. Stavroula J. Pantazopoulou: Writing - review & editing, Conceptualization.

Declaration of interest statement

The authors are presenting a research study that is purely scientific without any conflict of interest.

Acknowledgment

The financial contribution of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada through the Alliance Mission grant was critical to conducting this research and is gratefully acknowledged.

References

[1] Al Hawarneh A, Alam MS. Novel time-dependent seismic fragility assessment tool for existing rc bridges in a multi-hazard environment considering regular maintenance. Eng Struct 2025;330:119868.

[2] Al Hawarneh A, Alam MS, Pantazopoulou SJ.Seismic drift estimates of corroded piers: a multihazard approach utilizing 3D-IDA analysis with time stamps considering climate change effects. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2024.

[3] Al Hawarneh A, Alam MS. Maintenance optimization model for existing reinforced concrete bridge piers based on an integrated life-cycle cost and performance-based design approach. J Struct Eng 2025 accepted.

[4] Statistics Canada Canada’s Core Public Infrastructure Survey:roads, bridges, and tunnels, 2016. Canada: The Daily Statistics Canada’s official release bulletin; 2018.

[5] Canada Infrastructure Report Card. Monitoring the State of Canada’s core public infrastructure. Monitoring the State of Canada’s core public infrastructure, 2019; 2019.

[6] Dong Y, Frangopol DM, Saydam D. Time-variant sustainability assessment of seismically vulnerable bridges subjected to multiple hazards. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2013; 42(10):1451-67.

[7] Val DV, Stewart MG, Melchers RE. Life-cycle performance of RC bridges: probabilistic approach. Comput-Aid Civi Infrastruct Eng 2000; 15(1):14-25.

[8] Strauss A, Bergmeister K, Hoffmann S, Pukl R, Novák D. Advanced life-cycle analysis of existing concrete bridges. J Mater Civi Eng 2008; 20(1):9-19.

[9] Sung YC, Huang CH, Liu KY, Wang CH, Su CK, Chang KC. Life-cycle evaluation of deteriorated structural performance of neutralised reinforced concrete bridges. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2010; 6(6):741-51.

[10] Cavaco ES, Neves LA, Casas JR. On the robustness to corrosion in the life cycle assessment of an existing reinforced concrete bridge. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2018; 14(2):137-50.

[11] Biondini F., Camnasio E., & Palermo A. 2012. “Life-cycle performance of concrete bridges exposed to corrosion and seismic hazard. ” In Structures Congress 2012, 1906-18.

[12] Yanweerasak T, Pansuk W, Akiyama M, Frangopol DM. Life-cycle reliability assessment of reinforced concrete bridges under multiple hazards. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2018; 14(7):1011-24.

[13] Xu JG, Feng DC, Wu G. Life-cycle performance assessment of aging bridges subjected to tsunami hazards. J Bridg Eng 2021; 26(6):04021025.

[14] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.AASHTO lrfd bridge design specifications. 8th ed. AASHTO; 2017.

[15] Canadian Standards Association (CSA). Canadian highway bridge design code. CSA S6-14, Rexdale, ON 2014.

[16] Stewart MG. Reliability-based assessment of ageing bridges using risk ranking and life cycle cost decision analyses. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 2001; 74(3):263-73.

[17] Lounis Z, Daigle L. Multi-objective and probabilistic decision-making approaches to sustainable design and management of highway bridge decks. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2013; 9(4):364-83.

[18] Frangopol DM, Kong JS, Gharaibeh ES. Reliability-based life-cycle management of highway bridges. J Comput Civi Eng 2001; 15(1):27-34.

[19] Hassanain MA, Loov RE. Cost optimization of concrete bridge infrastructure. Can J Civi Eng 2003; 30(5):841-9.

[20] Penadés-Plà V, García-Segura T, Martí JV, Yepes V. A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods applied to the sustainable bridge design. Sustainability 2016; 8(12):1295.

[21] Martínez-Muñoz D, Martí JV, Yepes V. Steel-concrete composite bridges: design, life cycle assessment, maintenance, and decision-making. Adv Civi Eng 2020;2020.

[22] Navarro IJ, Penadés-Plà V, Martínez-Muñoz D, Rempling R, Yepes V. Life cycle sustainability assessment for multi-criteria decision making in bridge design: a review; 2020.

[23] Alaloul WS, Altaf M, Musarat MA, Javed MF, Mosavi A. Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost analysis in infrastructure projects: a systematic review; 2021.

[24] Ehlen MA. Life-cycle costs of fiber-reinforced-polymer bridge decks. J Mater Civi Eng 1999; 11(3):224-30.

[25] Zaharia RM, Zaharia R. Triple bottom line. Palgr Handb Corp Soc Respons 2021:75-101.

[26] Al Hawarneh A, Bendak S, Ghanim F. Construction site layout planning problem: past, present and future. Expert Syst Appl 2021;168:114247.

[27] Dhillon BS. Life cycle costing for engineers. Crc Press; 2009.

[28] Guinee JB, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Zamagni A, Masoni P, Buonamici R, Rydberg T. Life cycle assessment: past, present, and future; 2011.

[29] Mohammadi J, Guralnick SA, Yan L. Incorporating life-cycle costs in highway- bridge planning and design. J Transport Eng 1995; 121(5):417-24.

[30] Holm-Nielsen JB, Al Seadi T, Oleskowicz-Popiel P. The future of anaerobic digestion and biogas utilization. Bioresour Technol 2009; 100(22):5478-84.

[31] Navarro IJ, Yepes V, Martí JV. Social life cycle assessment of concrete bridge decks exposed to aggressive environments. Environ Impact Assess Rev 2018;72: 50-63.

[32] Singh D, Tiong RL. Development of life cycle costing framework for highway bridges in Myanmar. Int J Proj Manage 2005; 23(1):37-44.

[33] Daigle L, Lounis Z. Life cycle cost analysis of high performance concrete bridges considering their environmental impacts. Institute for Research in Construction; 2006. Report No. NRCC-48696.

[34] Kendall A, Keoleian GA, Helfand GE. Integrated life-cycle assessment and life-cycle cost analysis model for concrete bridge deck applications. J Infrastruct Syst 2008; 14(3):214-22.

[35] Eamon CD, Jensen EA, Grace NF, Shi X. Life-cycle cost analysis of alternative reinforcement materials for bridge superstructures considering cost and maintenance uncertainties. J Mater Civi Eng 2012; 24(4):373-80.

[36] Hammervold J, Reenaas M, Brattebø H. Environmental life cycle assessment of bridges. J Bridg Eng 2013; 18(2):153-61.

[37] Soliman M, Frangopol DM. Life-cycle cost evaluation of conventional and corrosion- resistant steel for bridges. J Bridg Eng 2015; 20(1):06014005.

[38] Pedneault J, Desjardins V, Margni M, Conciatori D, Fafard M, Sorelli L. Economic and environmental life cycle assessment of a short-span aluminium composite bridge deck in Canada. J Clean Prod 2021;310:127405.

[39] Penadés-Plà V, Martí JV, García-Segura T, Yepes V. Life-cycle assessment: a comparison between two optimal post-tensioned concrete box-girder road bridges. Sustainability 2017; 9(10):1864.

[40] Penadés-Plà V, Martínez-Muñoz D, García-Segura T, Navarro IJ, Yepes V. Environmental and social impact assessment of optimized post-tensioned concrete road bridges. Sustainability 2020; 12(10):4265.

[41] Martínez-Muñoz D, Martí JV, Yepes V. Comparative life cycle analysis of concrete and composite bridges varying steel recycling ratio. Mater (Basel) 2021; 14(15):4218.

[42] Mistry M, Koffler C, Wong S. LCA and LCC of the world’s longest pier: a case study on nickel-containing stainless steel rebar. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2016; 21(11):1637-44.

[43] Cadenazzi T, Dotelli G, Rossini M, Nolan S, Nanni A. Life-cycle cost and life-cycle assessment analysis at the design stage of a fiber-reinforced polymer-reinforced concrete bridge in Florida. Adv Civi Eng Mater 2019; 8(2):20180113.

[44] Cadenazzi T, Lee H, Suraneni P, Nolan S, Nanni A. Evaluation of probabilistic and deterministic life-cycle cost analyses for concrete bridges exposed to chlorides. Clean Eng Technol 2021;4:100247.

[45] Shen L, Soliman M, Ahmed SA. A probabilistic framework for life-cycle cost analysis of bridge decks constructed with different reinforcement alternatives. Eng Struct 2021;245:112879.

[46] Pang B, Yang P, Wang Y, Kendall A, Xie H, Zhang Y. Life cycle environmental impact assessment of a bridge with different strengthening schemes. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2015; 20(9):1300-11.

[47] Wang Z, Dong Y, Jin W. Life-cycle cost analysis of deteriorating civil infrastructures incorporating social sustainability. J Infrastruct Syst 2021; 27(3):04021013.

[48] Navarro IJ, Yepes V, Martí JV. Sustainability life cycle design of bridges in aggressive environments considering social impacts. Int J Comput Method Exper Measure 2021; 9(2):93-107.

[49] Zoutendijk G. 1960. “Methods of feasible directions. ” Cambridge University Press, 126p.

[50] Madhkhan M, Kianpour A, TORKI HM. Life-cycle cost optimization of prestressed simple-span concrete bridges with simple and spliced girders; 2013.

[51] Penadés-Plà V, García-Segura T, Martí JV, Yepes V. An optimization-LCA of a prestressed concrete precast bridge. Sustainability 2018; 10(3):685.

[52] Du A, Ghavidel A. Parameterized deep reinforcement learning-enabled maintenance decision-support and life-cycle risk assessment for highway bridge portfolios. Struct Safe 2022;97:102221.

[53] Capacci L, Biondini F. Probabilistic life-cycle seismic resilience assessment of aging bridge networks considering infrastructure upgrading. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2020; 16(4):659-75.

[54] Pang Y, Wei K, Yuan W. Life-cycle seismic resilience assessment of highway bridges with fiber-reinforced concrete piers in the corrosive environment. Eng Struct 2020;222:111120.

[55] Xu JG, Cai ZK, Feng DC. Life-cycle seismic performance assessment of aging RC bridges considering multi-failure modes of bridge columns. Eng Struct 2021;244:112818.

[56] Wu Z, Luo Z. Life-cycle system reliability-based approach for bridge pile foundations under scour conditions. KSCE J Civi Eng 2020; 24(2):412-23.

[57] Briaud JL, Ting FC, Chen HC, Gudavalli R, Perugu S, Wei G. SRICOS: prediction of scour rate in cohesive soils at bridge piers. J Geotechn Geoenviron Eng 1999; 125(4):237-46.

[58] Vanmarcke E.H. 1983. “Random fields:analysis and synthesis. ” MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.

[59] Oliver J, Linero DL, Huespe AE, Manzoli OL. Two-dimensional modeling of material failure in reinforced concrete by means of a continuum strong discontinuity approach. Comput Method Appl Mech Eng 2008; 197(5):332-48.

[60] Ang AH, Cho HN, Lim JK, An JS. Reliability-based life cycle cost analysis for optimal seismic upgrading of bridges. Comput Struct Eng 2001; 1(1):59-69.

[61] Estes AC, Frangopol DM. Bridge lifetime system reliability under multiple limit states. J Bridg Eng 2001; 6(6):523.

[62] Huang YH, Adams TM, Pincheira JA. Analysis of life-cycle maintenance strategies for concrete bridge decks. J Bridg Eng 2004; 9(3):250-8.

[63] Kumar R, Gardoni P, Sanchez-Silva M. Effect of cumulative seismic damage and corrosion on the life-cycle cost of reinforced concrete bridges. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2009; 38(7):887-905.

[64] So KK, Cheung MM, Zhang EX. Life-cycle cost management of concrete bridges. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Bridge Engineering, September, 162. Thomas Telford Ltd; 2009. p. 103-17.

[65] Padgett JE, Dennemann K, Ghosh J. Risk-based seismic life-cycle cost-benefit (LCC- B) analysis for bridge retrofit assessment. Struct Safe 2010; 32(3):165-73.

[66] Bocchini P, Saydam D, Frangopol DM. Efficient, accurate, and simple Markov chain model for the life-cycle analysis of bridge groups. Struct Safe 2013;40: 51-64.

[67] Dong Y, Frangopol DM. Probabilistic time-dependent multihazard life-cycle assessment and resilience of bridges considering climate change. J Perform Construct Facilit 2016; 30(5):04016034.

[68] Zheng Y, Dong Y, Li Y. Resilience and life-cycle performance of smart bridges with shape memory alloy (SMA)-cable-based bearings. Construct Build Mater 2018;158:389-400.

[69] Wang Z, Jin W, Dong Y, Frangopol DM. Hierarchical life-cycle design of reinforced concrete structures incorporating durability, economic efficiency and green objectives. Eng Struct 2018;157:119-31.

[70] Dong Y. Performance assessment and design of ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) structures incorporating life-cycle cost and environmental impacts. Construct Build Mater 2018;167:414-25.

[71] Shekhar S, Ghosh J, Padgett JE. Seismic life-cycle cost analysis of ageing highway bridges under chloride exposure conditions: modelling and recommendations. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2018; 14(7):941-66.

[72] Navarro IJ, Yepes V, Martí JV. Life cycle cost assessment of preventive strategies applied to prestressed concrete bridges exposed to chlorides. Sustainability 2018; 10(3):845.

[73] Chen E, Berrocal CG, Löfgren I, Lundgren K. Comparison of the service life, life-cycle costs and assessment of hybrid and traditional reinforced concrete through a case study of bridge edge beams in Sweden. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2022; 19(1):39-57.

[74] Lemma MS, Gervásio H, Pedro JO, Rigueiro C, da Silva LS. Enhancement of the life-cycle performance of bridges using high-strength steel. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2020; 16(4):772-86.

[75] Zheng Y, Dong Y. Performance-based assessment of bridges with steel-SMA reinforced piers in a life-cycle context by numerical approach. Bull Earthq Eng 2019; 17(3):1667-88.

[76] Li S, Hedayati Dezfuli F, Wang J, Alam MS. Performance-based seismic loss assessment of isolated simply-supported highway bridges retrofitted with different shape memory alloy cable restrainers in a life-cycle context. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 2020; 31(8):1053-75.

[77] Valigura J, Liel AB, Sideris P. Life-cycle cost assessment of conventional and hybrid sliding-rocking bridges in seismic areas. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2021; 17(5):702-19.

[78] Javidan MM, Kim J. An integrated system for simplified seismic performance evaluation and life-cycle cost analysis. J Build Eng 2022;45:103655.

[79] Wanniarachchi S, Prabatha T, Karunathilake H, Zhang Q, Hewage K, Shahria Alam M. Life cycle thinking-Based decision making for bridges under seismic conditions. I: methodology and framework. J Bridg Eng 2022; 27(6):04022043.

[80] Wanniarachchi S, Prabatha T, Karunathilake H, Li S, Alam MS, Hewage K. Life cycle thinking-based decision making for bridges under seismic conditions. II: a case study on bridges with superelastic SMA RC piers. J Bridg Eng 2022; 27(6):04022044.

[81] Shekhar S, Ghosh J. A metamodeling based seismic life-cycle cost assessment framework for highway bridge structures. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 2020;195:106724.

[82] Messore MM, Capacci L, Biondini F. Life-cycle cost-based risk assessment of aging bridge networks. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2020; 17(4):515-33.

[83] Mortagi M, Ghosh J. Consideration of climate change effects on the seismic life-cycle cost analysis of deteriorating highway bridges. J Bridg Eng 2022; 27(2):04021103.

[84] Torti M, Venanzi I, Laflamme S, Ubertini F. Life-cycle management cost analysis of transportation bridges equipped with seismic structural health monitoring systems. Struct Health Monitor 2022; 21(1):100-17.

[85] Kong JS, Frangopol DM. Life-cycle reliability-based maintenance cost optimization of deteriorating structures with emphasis on bridges. J Struct Eng 2003; 129(6):818-28.

[86] Almeida JO, Teixeira PF, Delgado RM. Life cycle cost optimisation in highway concrete bridges management. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2015; 11(10):1263-76.

[87] Roelfstra G. Modèle d’évolution de l’état des ponts-routes en béton. EPFL; 2001.

[88] Orcesi AD, Cremona CF. Optimization of management strategies applied to the national reinforced concrete bridge stock in France. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2009; 5(5):355-66.

[89] Devaraj D. 2009. “Application of non-homogeneous Markov chains in bridge management systems. ” Wayne State University.

[90] Liu M, Frangopol DM. Multiobjective maintenance planning optimization for deteriorating bridges considering condition, safety, and life-cycle cost. J Struct Eng 2005; 131(5):833-42.

[91] Sabatino S, Frangopol DM, Dong Y. Sustainability-informed maintenance optimization of highway bridges considering multi-attribute utility and risk attitude. Eng Struct 2015;102:310-21.

[92] Tapia C, Padgett JE. Multi-objective optimisation of bridge retrofit and post-event repair selection to enhance sustainability. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2016; 12(1):93-107.

[93] Sabatino S, Frangopol DM, Dong Y. Life cycle utility-informed maintenance planning based on lifetime functions: optimum balancing of cost, failure consequences and performance benefit. Struct Infrastruct Eng 2016; 12(7):830-47.

[94] Xie HB, Wu WJ, Wang YF. Life-time reliability based optimization of bridge maintenance strategy considering LCA and LCC. J Clean Prod 2018;176:36-45.

[95] Saad L, Aissani A, Chateauneuf A, Raphael W. Reliability-based optimization of direct and indirect LCC of RC bridge elements under coupled fatigue-corrosion deterioration processes. Eng Fail Anal 2016;59:570-87.

[96] García-Segura T, Yepes V, Frangopol DM, Yang DY. Lifetime reliability-based optimization of post-tensioned box-girder bridges. Eng Struct 2017;145:381-91.

[97] Li YJ, Li HN. Interactive evolutionary multi-objective optimization and decision-making on life-cycle seismic design of bridge. Adv Struct Eng 2018; 21(15):2227-40.

[98] Tao W, Lin P, Wang N. Optimum life-cycle maintenance strategies of deteriorating highway bridges subject to seismic hazard by a hybrid Markov decision process model. Struct Safe 2021;89:102042.

[99] Han X, Frangopol DM. Life-cycle risk-based optimal maintenance strategy for bridge networks subjected to corrosion and seismic hazards. J Bridg Eng 2023; 28(1):04022128.

[100] Guinée J.B. (2002). Handbook on life cycle assessment: operational guide to the ISO standards (Vol. 7). Springer Science & Business Media.