Understanding structural health monitoring data to support decision-making processes and service life management of mass timber buildings. A preliminary study on use of data scaffolding
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online February, 2023
Understanding structural health monitoring data to support decision-making processes and service life management of mass timber buildings. A preliminary study on use of data scaffolding
Structural health monitoring (SHM) can be used to support decision-making processes leading to improved building management plans. With advanced engineered wooden buildings on the rise, SHM has emerged as a critical tool to document behaviour of these structures. However, monitoring data need to be easily accessible and understandable to support informed decisions. This study explores the potential benefits of an intentionally designed data scaffolding to support interpretation of SHM data for timber structures. Results suggest that appropriate scaffolding (e.g. pinpointing critical parameter ranges) can enable lay users to better interpret monitoring data of timber structures. Results also suggest that, for more highly educated users, access to graphs linked to metadata can be beneficial. Overall, it appears that documentation related to the monitored phenomena and context, as well as more explicit reference to building performance requirements, could improve data-driven decision making for all knowledge levels for the building maintenance sector.
AndersonR, DawsonE, MuszynskiL.2021. International mass timber report. The Forest Business Network.
2.
Arda BuyuktaskinHA, YataganMS, Erol SoyozG, TanacanL, DilmaghaniM.2019. Experimental investigation of the durability of load bearing timber-glass composites under the effects of accelerated aging. J Green Build. 14(2):45–59.
3.
BaasEJ, RiggioM, BarbosaAR.2021. A methodological approach for structural health monitoring of mass-timber buildings under construction. Constr Build Mater. 268:121153. DOI:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121153.
4.
BaasEJ, RiggioM, SchmidtE, MugaboI, BarbosaAR.2019. Living lab at Peavy Hall: structural health monitoring of mass timber buildings. 5th International Conference on Structural Health Assessment of Timber Structures; Sep 25–28; Guimarães, Portugal.
5.
BjörngrimN, HagmanO, WangXA.2016. Moisture content monitoring of a timber footbridge. BioResources. 11:3904–3913.
6.
BowenGM, RothWM.2005. Data and graph interpretation practices among preservice science teachers. J Res Sci Teach. 42(10):1063–1088.
7.
Brand-GruwelS, KammererY, Van MeeuwenL, Van GogT.2017. Source evaluation of domain experts and novices during web search. J Comput Assist Learn. 33(3):234–251.
8.
CanhamM, HegartyM.2010. Effects of knowledge and display design on comprehension of complex graphics. Learn Instr. 20(2):155–166.
9.
CarpenterPA, ShahP.1998. A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension. J Exp Psychol Appl. 4(2):75–100.
10.
CarswellCM.1992. Choosing specifiers: an evaluation of the basic tasks model of graphical perception. Hum Factors. 34(5):535–554.
11.
ChangSJ, WiS, KangSG, KimS.2020. Moisture risk assessment of cross-laminated timber walls: perspectives on climate conditions and water vapor resistance performance of building materials. Build Environ. 168:106502.
12.
ChiMT, FeltovichPJ, GlaserR.1981. Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cogn Sci. 5(2):121–152.
13.
CiribiniA, PasiniD, TagliabueC L, ManfrenM, DaniottiB, RinaldiS, De AngelisE.2017. Tracking users’ behaviors through real-time information in BIMs: workflow for interconnection in the Brescia Smart Campus demonstrator. Proc Eng. 180(2017):1484–1494.
14.
CohenJ.1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Routledge.
15.
CurcioFR.1987. Comprehension of mathematical relationships expressed in graphs. J Res Math Educ. 18(5):382–393.
16.
De AmicisR, RiggioM, Shahbaz BadrA, FickJ, SanchezA C, PratherA. E2019. Cross-reality environments in smart buildings to advance STEM cyberlearning. Int J Interact Des Manuf (IJIDeM). 13(1):331–348.
17.
DietschP, FrankeS, FrankeB, GamperA, WinterS.2015. Methods to determine wood moisture content and their applicability in monitoring concepts. J Civil Struct Health Monit. 5(2):115–127.
18.
EliasM, BezerianosA.2011. Exploration views: understanding dashboard creation and customization for visualization novices. IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction; September. Berlin: Springer. p. 274–291.
19.
FastP, GafnerB, JacksonR, LiJ.2016. Case study: An 18 storey tall mass timber hybrid student residence at the university of British Columbia, Vancouver. In Proceeding of the World Conference on Timber Engineering (WCTE); August 22–25; Vienna, Austria.
20.
FebrettiA, GarzottoF.2009. Usability, playability, and long-term engagement in computer games. CHI'09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems; Apr 4–9; Boston, MA, USA. p. 4063–4068.
21.
FrankeB, SchiereM, FrankeS.2018. Stress developments in large timber cross sections in relation to geometry and encountered climate. In World Conference on Timber Engineering; Aug 20–23; Seoul, Republic of Korea.
22.
GiordanoPF, PrendergastLJ, LimongelliMP.2020. A framework for assessing the value of information for health monitoring of scoured bridges. J Civil Struct Health Monit. 10(3):485–496. DOI:10.1007/s13349-020-00398-0.
23.
GlaserSD, TolmanA.2008. Sense of sensing: from data to informed decisions for the built environment. J Infrastruct Syst. 14(1):4–14.
24.
GlassSV, ZelinkaSL.2010. Chapter 4 - moisture relations and physical properties of wood. In: Ross RJ, editor. Wood handbook - wood as an engineering material. Vol. 1. GTR-190. Madison, WI: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. p. 1–20.
25.
GlisicB, YarnoldM, MoonF, AktanA.2014. Advanced visualization and accessibility to heterogenous monitoring data. Comput-Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng.29, 382–398.
26.
GranelloG, PalermoA.2020. Monitoring dynamic properties of a Pres-Lam structure: Trimble Navigation Office. J Perform Constr Facil. 34(1):04019087.
27.
GrossmanPUA.1976. Requirements for a model that exhibits mechano-sorptive behavior. Wood Sci Technol. 10:163–168.
28.
HallGD, FlockSK.2008. In situ moisture testing of building products as a predictor of actual conditions. Proceedings of the BEST1 Conference; June 10–12; Minneapolis, MN, United States.
29.
HerrmannMR, BrumbyDP, OreszczynT, GilbertXM.2018. Does data visualization affect users’ understanding of electricity consumption?Build Res Inf. 46(3):238–250.
30.
JohannessenV T, FuglsethM. A2014. The effectiveness of data presentation formats: an exploratory study. Nokobit 2014, norsk konferanse for organisasjoners bruk av IT, Fredrikstad, Norway.
31.
KimNJ, BellandBR, WalkerAE.2018. Effectiveness of computer-based scaffolding in the context of problem-based learning for STEM education: Bayesian meta-analysis. Educ Psychol Rev. 30(2):397–429.
32.
KohnenAM, MertensGE.2019. “I'm always kind of double-checking”: exploring the information-seeking identities of expert generalists. Read Res Q. 54(3):279–297.
33.
KordzielS, PeiS, GlassSV, ZelinkaS, Tabares-VelascoPC.2019. Structure moisture monitoring of an 8-story mass timber building in the pacific northwest. J Archit Eng. 25(4):04019019.
34.
LanataF.2019. Long-term monitoring of the highest 100% timber building in France. In: Branco JM, Poletti E, Sousa HS, editors. Structural health assessment of timber structures (SHATiS). ISISE, Institute of Science and Innovation for Bio-Sustainability (IB-S), Department of Civil Engineering, University of Minho; Guimarães, Portugal; p. 327–336.
35.
LeyderC, ChatziE, FrangiA.2015. Structural health monitoring of an innovative timber building. In: Second International Conference on Performance-Based and Lifecycle Structural Engineering; Brisbane, Australia. p. 1383–1392.
36.
LongmanRP, XuY, SunQ, TurkanY, RiggioM.2023. Digital twin for monitoring In-service performance of post-tensioned self-centering cross-laminated timber shear walls. J Comput Civ Eng. 37(2). DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0001050.
37.
MaichleU.1994. Cognitive processes in understanding line graphs. In: Schnotz W, Kulhavy RW, editors. Advances in psychology, Vol. 108. North-Holland; p. 207–226.
38.
McCalleyLT, MiddenCJ.2002. Energy conservation through product-integrated feedback: the roles of goal-setting and social orientation. J Econ Psychol. 23(5):589–603.
39.
MorrisHW, ZhuM, WangM.2011. The long-term instrumentation of the NMIT arts building–EXPAN shear walls. N Z Timber Design J. 20(1):13–24.
40.
MoxleyJH, EricssonKA, CharnessN, KrampeRT.2012. The role of intuition and deliberative thinking in experts’ superior tactical decision-making. Cognition. 124(1):72–78.
41.
MustaphaG, KhondokerK, HigginsJ.2018. Structural performance monitoring technology and data visualization tools and techniques – featured case study: UBC tallwood house. 1st International Conference on New Horizons in Green Civil Engineering (NHICE-01); April 25–27; Victoria, BC, Canada.
42.
MuszyńskiL, LagaňaR, DavidsW, ShalerSM.2005. Comments on the experimental methodology for quantitative determination of the hygro-mechanical properties of wood. Holzforschung. 59(2):232–239.
43.
NapolitanoR, BlythA, GlisicB.2018. Virtual environments for visualizing structural health monitoring sensor networks, data, and metadata. Sensors. 18(1):243.
44.
NiklewskiJ, IsakssonT, Frühwald HanssonE, ThelanderssonS.2018. Moisture conditions of rain-exposed glue-laminated timber members: the effect of different detailing. Wood Mat Sci Eng. 13(3):129–140.
45.
NorthC, ShneidermanB.2000. Snap-together visualization: can users construct and operate coordinated visualizations?Int J Hum Comput Stud. 53(5):715–739.
46.
PattersonRE, BlahaLM, GrinsteinGG, LiggettKK, KaveneyDE, SheldonKC, HavigPR, MooreJA.2014. A human cognition framework for information visualization. Comput Graph. 42:42–58.
47.
PinkerS.1990. A theory of graph comprehension. In: FreedleR, editor. Artificial intelligence and the future of testing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; p. 73–126.
48.
ReingoldEM, CharnessN, PomplunM, StampeDM.2001. Visual span in expert chess players: evidence from eye movements. Psychol Sci. 12(1):48–55.
49.
RiggioM, AnthonyRW, AugelliF, KasalB, LechnerT, MullerW, TannertT.2014. In situ assessment of structural timber using non-destructive techniques. Mater Struct. 47(5):749–766.
50.
RiggioM, DilmaghaniM.2020. Structural health monitoring of timber buildings: a literature survey. Build Res Inf. 48(8):817–837.
51.
RothW-M, McGinnMK.1998. Inscriptions: A social practice approach to “representations”. Rev Educ Res. 68:35–59.
52.
SchmidtE, RiggioM.2019. Monitoring moisture performance of cross-laminated timber building elements during construction. Buildings. 9(6):144.
53.
SchmidtEL, RiggioM, BarbosaAR, MugaboI.2019. Environmental response of a CLT floor panel: lessons for moisture management and monitoring of mass timber buildings. Build Environ. 148:609–622.
54.
SerranoE, EnquistB, VessbyJ.2010. Vertical relative displacements in a medium-rise CLT-building. In: Cruz PJS, editor. ICSA 2010-1st International Conference on Structures & Architecture. Guimaraes, Portugal: Taylor & Francis; p. 113–113.
55.
ShahP, FreedmanEG.2011. Bar and line graph comprehension: an interaction of top-down and bottom-up processes. Topics Cogn Sci. 3(3):560–578.
56.
ShmulskyR, JonesPD.2011. Wood and water. In: Forest products and wood science: an introduction, 6th ed. Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley Blackwell. p. 141–174. doi:10.1002/9780470960035.ch.
57.
ShahP, HoeffnerJ.2002. Review of graph comprehension research: implications for instruction. Educ Psychol Rev. 14:47–69.
58.
ShneidermanB, HochheiserH.2001. Universal usability as a stimulus to advanced interface design. Behav Inf Technol. 20(5):367–376.
59.
SinhaA, UdeleKE, CappellazziJ, MorrellJJ.2020. A method to characterize biological degradation of mass timber connections. Wood Fiber Sci. 52(4):419–430.
60.
StraubD, ChatziE, BismutE, CourageWMQ, DohlerM, NielselMH, KohlerJ, LombaertG, OmenzetterP, PozziM, 2017. Value of information: A roadmap to quantifying the benefit of structural health monitoring. 12th International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability (ICOSSAR 2017); Vienna, Austria.
61.
StraubD, FaberM.2005. Risk based inspection planning for structural systems. Struct Saf. 27(4):335–355. doi:10.1016/j.strusafe.2005.04.001.
62.
TorattiT.1992. Creep of timber beams in a variable environment [doctoral dissertation]. Helsinki University of Technology.
63.
Vazquez-IngelmoA, Garcia-PenalvoFJ, TheronR.2019. Information dashboards and tailoring capabilities-a systematic literature review. IEEE Access. 7:109673–109688.
64.
WangJ, KarshE, FinchG, ChenM.2016. Field measurement of vertical movement and roof moisture performance of the wood innovation and design centre. World Conference on Timber Engineering (WCTE); August 22–25; Vienna, Austria.
65.
WangM, WuB, ChenNS, SpectorJM.2013. Connecting problem-solving and knowledge-construction processes in a visualization-based learning environment. Comput Educ. 68:293–306.
66.
YiJS.2012. Implications of individual differences on evaluating information visualization techniques. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 45(6):619–637.
67.
YuanB, WangM, KushnirukAW, PengJ.2017. Deep learning towards expertise development in a visualization-based learning environment. J Educ Technol Soc. 20(4):233–246.
68.
YunTJ, JeongHY, KinnairdP, ChoiS, KangN, AbowdGD.2010. Domestic energy displays: an empirical investigation. ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings; Pacific Grove, California, USA; vol. 7; p. 348–360.
69.
ZabelRA, MorrellJJ.1992. Wood microbiology: decay and its prevention. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Zikmund-FisherBJ, FagerlinA, UbelPA.2005. What's time got to do with it? Inattention to duration in interpretation of survival graphs. Risk Anal Int J. 25(3):589–595.
72.
ZontaD, GlisicB, AdriaenssensS.2014. Value of information: impact of monitoring on decision-making. Struct Control Health Monit. 21(7):1043–1056. DOI:10.1002/stc.1631.
