Final report : a software diagnostic tool for evaluating distress mechanisms in bridges exposed to aggressive environments

Durability issues of reinforced concrete construction cost millions of dollars in repair or demolition. Identification of the causes of degradation and a prediction of service life based on experience, judgement and local knowledge has limitations in addressing all the associated issues. The objective of this CRC CI research project is to develop a tool that will assist in the interpretation of the symptoms of degradation of concrete structures, estimate residual capacity and recommend cost effective solutions. This report is a documentation of the research undertaken in connection with this project. The primary focus of this research is centred on the case studies provided by Queensland Department of Main Roads (QDMR) and Brisbane City Council (BCC). These organisations are endowed with the responsibility of managing a huge volume of bridge infrastructure in the state of Queensland, Australia. The main issue to be addressed in managing these structures is the deterioration of bridge stock leading to a reduction in service life. Other issues such as political backlash, public inconvenience, approach land acquisitions are crucial but are not within the scope of this project. It is to be noted that deterioration is accentuated by aggressive environments such as salt water, acidic or sodic soils. Carse, 2005, has noted that the road authorities need to invest their first dollars in understanding their local concretes and optimising the durability performance of structures and then look at potential remedial strategies.

A framework for predicting the residual load carrying capacity of concrete structures exposed to aggressive environments

Reinforced concrete structures are susceptible to a variety of deterioration mechanisms due to creep and shrinkage, alkali-silica reaction (ASR), carbonation, and corrosion of the reinforcement. The deterioration problems can affect the integrity and load carrying capacity of the structure. Substantial research has been dedicated to these various mechanisms aiming to identify the causes, reactions, accelerants, retardants and consequences. This has improved our understanding of the long-term behaviour of reinforced concrete structures. However, the strengthening of reinforced concrete structures for durability has to date been mainly undertaken after expert assessment of field data followed by the development of a scheme to both terminate continuing degradation, by separating the structure from the environment, and strengthening the structure. The process does not include any significant consideration of the residual load-bearing capacity of the structure and the highly variable nature of estimates of such remaining capacity. Development of performance curves for deteriorating bridge structures has not been attempted due to the difficulty in developing a model when the input parameters have an extremely large variability. This paper presents a framework developed for an asset management system which assesses residual capacity and identifies the most appropriate rehabilitation method for a given reinforced concrete structure exposed to aggressive environments. In developing the framework, several industry consultation sessions have been conducted to identify input data required, research methodology and output knowledge base. Capturing expert opinion in a useable knowledge base requires development of a rule based formulation, which can subsequently be used to model the reliability of the performance curve of a reinforced concrete structure exposed to a given environment.

Strategies for minimising the whole of life cycle cost of reinforced concrete bridge exposed to aggressive environments

n design of bridge structures, it is common to adopt a 100 year design life. However, analysis of a number of case study bridges in Australia has indicated that the actual design life can be significantly reduced due to premature deterioration resulting from exposure to aggressive environments. A closer analysis of the cost of rehabilitation of these structures has raised some interesting questions. What would be the real service life of a bridge exposed to certain aggressive environments? What is the strategy of conducting bridge rehabilitation? And what are the life cycle costs associated with rehabilitation? A research project funded by the CRC for Construction Innovation in Australia is aimed at addressing these issues. This paper presents a concept map for assisting decision makers to appropriately choose the best treatment for bridge rehabilitation affected by premature deterioration through exposure to aggressive environments in Australia. The decision analysis is referred to a whole of life cycle cost analysis by considering appropriate elements of bridge rehabilitation costs. In addition, the results of bridges inspections in Queensland are presented

Evaluation of distress mechanisms in bridges exposed to aggressive environments.

There are about 2500 bridges in Queensland, Australia. Majority of these structures require significant repairs around the halfway mark of their design life with probably 1% or less reaching a 100 year design life. (Carse, 2005). This is due to the fact that bridges constructed in aggressive environments such as the coastal regions experience accelerated deterioration. As a result, maintaining the service delivery of these assets has become one of the important issues for the Queensland Department of Main Roads (QDMR).

A discrete-trial approach to the functional analysis of aggressive behaviour in two boys with autism

Intervention to reduce challenging behaviour may be enhanced when based on a prior functional analysis. The present study describes a discrete-trial approach for the functional analysis of aggressive behaviour in two boys with autism. Twenty brief assessment trials were conducted in the classroom by the teacher under each of three conditions (i.e., attention, task and tangible). The results showed a clear pattern to each child's aggressive behaviour and suggested logical intervention strategies, although the study is limited because it involved only two children. The discrete-trial approach would appear to represent a practical and ecologically valid technique for conducting a functional analysis of challenging behaviour in applied settings

Magnetic resonance spectroscopy in seizure disorders

Key points • The clinical aims of MR spectroscopy (MRS) in seizure disorders are to help identify, localize and characterize epileptogenic foci. • Lateralizing MRS abnormalities in temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) may be used clinically in combination with structural and T2 MRI measurements together with other techniques such as EEG, PET and SPECT. • Characteristic metabolite abnormalities are decreased N-acetylaspartate (NAA) with increased choline (Cho) and myoinositol (mI) (short-echo time). • Contralateral metabolite abnormalities are frequently seen in TLE, but are of uncertain significance. • In extra-temporal epilepsy, metabolite abnormalities may be seen where MR imaging (MRI) is normal; but may not be sufficiently localized to be useful clinically. • MRS may help to characterize epileptogenic lesions visible on MRI (aggressive vs. indolent neoplastic, dysplasia). • Spectral editing techniques are required to evaluate specific epilepsy-relevant metabolites (e.g. -aminobutyric acid (GABA)), which may be useful in drug development and evaluation. • MRS with phosphorus (31P) and other nuclei probe metabolism of epilepsy, but are less useful clinically. • There is potential for assessing the of drug mode of action and efficacy through 13C carbon metabolite measurements, while changes in sodium homeostasis resulting from seizure activity may be detected with 23Na MRS.

Interventions for preventing and managing aggressive patients admitted to an acute hospital setting: A systematic review

Background: Violence in health care has been widely reported and health care workers, particularly nurses in acute care settings, are ill-equipped to manage patients who exhibit aggressive traits. Aim: The aim of this systematic review was to establish best practice in the prevention and management of aggressive behaviours in patients admitted to acute hospital settings. Data Sources: An extensive search of the major databases was conducted from 1990 to 2007. The search included published and unpublished studies and papers in English. Review Methods: This review considered any quantitative research study design that evaluated the effectiveness of interventions in the prevention and management of patients who exhibit aggressive behaviours in an acute hospital setting. Each included study was quality assessed by two independent reviewers and data were extracted using the relevant tools developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Results: Ten studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The evidence identified from the studies includes: the benefit of education and training of acute care nurses in aggression management techniques; use of “as required” medications is effective in minimising harm to patients and staff; and that specific interventions such as physical restraint may play a role in managing aggressive behaviours from patients in the acute care setting. Conclusions: This review makes several recommendations for the prevention and management of aggressive behaviours in acute hospital patients. However, due to the lack of high-quality studies conducted in the acute care setting there is huge scope for future research in this area.

‘You’re a bad driver but I just made a mistake’ : attribution differences between the ‘victims’ and ‘perpetrators’ of scenario-based aggressive driving incidents

Driver aggression is an increasing concern for motorists, with some research suggesting that drivers who behave aggressively perceive their actions as justified by the poor driving of others. Thus attributions may play an important role in understanding driver aggression. A convenience sample of 193 drivers (aged 17-36) randomly assigned to two separate roles (‘perpetrators’ and ‘victims’) responded to eight scenarios of driver aggression. Drivers also completed the Aggression Questionnaire and Driving Anger Scale. Consistent with the actor-observer bias, ‘victims’ (or recipients) in this study were significantly more likely than ‘perpetrators’ (or instigators) to endorse inadequacies in the instigator’s driving skills as the cause of driver aggression. Instigators were significantly more likely attribute the depicted behaviours to external but temporary causes (lapses in judgement or errors) rather than stable causes. This suggests that instigators recognised drivers as responsible for driving aggressively but downplayed this somewhat in comparison to ‘victims’/recipients. Recipients and instigators agreed that the behaviours were examples of aggressive driving but instigators appeared to focus on the degree of intentionality of the driver in making their assessments while recipients appeared to focus on the safety implications. Contrary to expectations, instigators gave mean ratings of the emotional impact of driving aggression on recipients that were higher in all cases than the mean ratings given by the recipients. Drivers appear to perceive aggressive behaviours as modifiable, with the implication that interventions could appeal to drivers’ sense of self-efficacy to suggest strategies for overcoming plausible and modifiable attributions (e.g. lapses in judgement; errors) underpinning behaviours perceived as aggressive.

Freeway traffic oscillations : microscopic analysis of formations and propagations using Wavelet Transform

In this paper we identify the origins of stop-and-go (or slow-and-go) driving and measure microscopic features of their propagations by analyzing vehicle trajectories via Wavelet Transform. Based on 53 oscillation cases analyzed, we find that oscillations can be originated by either lane-changing maneuvers (LCMs) or car-following behavior (CF). LCMs were predominantly responsible for oscillation formations in the absence of considerable horizontal or vertical curves, whereas oscillations formed spontaneously near roadside work on an uphill segment. Regardless of the trigger, the features of oscillation propagations were similar in terms of propagation speed, oscillation duration, and amplitude. All observed cases initially exhibited a precursor phase, in which slow-and-go motions were localized. Some of them eventually transitioned into a well developed phase, in which oscillations propagated upstream in queue. LCMs were primarily responsible for the transition, although some transitions occurred without LCMs. Our findings also suggest that an oscillation has a regressive effect on car following behavior: a deceleration wave of an oscillation affects a timid driver (with larger response time and minimum spacing) to become less timid and an aggressive driver less aggressive, although this change may be short-lived. An extended framework of Newell’s CF is able to describe the regressive effects with two additional parameters with reasonable accuracy, as verified using vehicle trajectory data.

The psychosocial factors influencing aggressive driving behaviour

Many drivers in highly motorised countries believe that aggressive driving is increasing. While the prevalence of the behaviour is difficult to reliably identify, the consequences of on-road aggression can be severe, with extreme cases resulting in property damage, injury and even death. This research program was undertaken to explore the nature of aggressive driving from within the framework of relevant psychological theory in order to enhance our understanding of the behaviour and to inform the development of relevant interventions. To guide the research a provisional ‘working’ definition of aggressive driving was proposed encapsulating the recurrent characteristics of the behaviour cited in the literature. The definition was: “aggressive driving is any on-road behaviour adopted by a driver that is intended to cause physical or psychological harm to another road user and is associated with feelings of frustration, anger or threat”. Two main theoretical perspectives informed the program of research. The first was Shinar’s (1998) frustration-aggression model, which identifies both the person-related and situational characteristics that contribute to aggressive driving, as well as proposing that aggressive behaviours can serve either an ‘instrumental’ or ‘hostile’ function. The second main perspective was Anderson and Bushman’s (2002) General Aggression Model. In contrast to Shinar’s model, the General Aggression Model reflects a broader perspective on human aggression that facilitates a more comprehensive examination of the emotional and cognitive aspects of aggressive behaviour. Study One (n = 48) examined aggressive driving behaviour from the perspective of young drivers as an at-risk group and involved conducting six focus groups, with eight participants in each. Qualitative analyses identified multiple situational and person-related factors that contribute to on-road aggression. Consistent with human aggression theory, examination of self-reported experiences of aggressive driving identified key psychological elements and processes that are experienced during on-road aggression. Participants cited several emotions experienced during an on-road incident: annoyance, frustration, anger, threat and excitement. Findings also suggest that off-road generated stress may transfer to the on-road environment, at times having severe consequences including crash involvement. Young drivers also appeared quick to experience negative attributions about the other driver, some having additional thoughts of taking action. Additionally, the results showed little difference between males and females in the severity of behavioural responses they were prepared to adopt, although females appeared more likely to displace their negative emotions. Following the self-reported on-road incident, evidence was also found of a post-event influence, with females being more likely to experience ongoing emotional effects after the event. This finding was evidenced by ruminating thoughts or distraction from tasks. However, the impact of such a post-event influence on later behaviours or interpersonal interactions appears to be minimal. Study Two involved the quantitative analysis of n = 926 surveys completed by a wide age range of drivers from across Queensland. The study aimed to explore the relationships between the theoretical components of aggressive driving that were identified in the literature review, and refined based on the findings of Study One. Regression analyses were used to examine participant emotional, cognitive and behavioural responses to two differing on-road scenarios whilst exploring the proposed theoretical framework. A number of socio-demographic, state and trait person-related variables such as age, pre-study emotions, trait aggression and problem-solving style were found to predict the likelihood of a negative emotional response such as frustration, anger, perceived threat, negative attributions and the likelihood of adopting either an instrumental or hostile behaviour in response to Scenarios One and Two. Complex relationships were found to exist between the variables, however, they were interpretable based on the literature review findings. Factor analysis revealed evidence supporting Shinar’s (1998) dichotomous description of on-road aggressive behaviours as being instrumental or hostile. The second stage of Study Two used logistic regression to examine the factors that predicted the potentially hostile aggressive drivers (n = 88) within the sample. These drivers were those who indicated a preparedness to engage in direct acts of interpersonal aggression on the road. Young, male drivers 17–24 years of age were more likely to be classified as potentially hostile aggressive drivers. Young drivers (17–24 years) also scored significantly higher than other drivers on all subscales of the Aggression Questionnaire (Buss & Perry, 1992) and on the ‘negative problem orientation’ and ‘impulsive careless style’ subscales of the Social Problem Solving Inventory – Revised (D’Zurilla, Nezu & Maydeu-Olivares, 2002). The potentially hostile aggressive drivers were also significantly more likely to engage in speeding and drink/drug driving behaviour. With regard to the emotional, cognitive and behavioural variables examined, the potentially hostile aggressive driver group also scored significantly higher than the ‘other driver’ group on most variables examined in the proposed theoretical framework. The variables contained in the framework of aggressive driving reliably distinguished potentially hostile aggressive drivers from other drivers (Nagalkerke R2 = .39). Study Three used a case study approach to conduct an in-depth examination of the psychosocial characteristics of n = 10 (9 males and 1 female) self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers. The self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers were aged 24–55 years of age. A large proportion of these drivers reported a Year 10 education or better and average–above average incomes. As a group, the drivers reported committing a number of speeding and unlicensed driving offences in the past three years and extensive histories of violations outside of this period. Considerable evidence was also found of exposure to a range of developmental risk factors for aggression that may have contributed to the driver’s on-road expression of aggression. These drivers scored significantly higher on the Aggression Questionnaire subscales and Social Problem Solving Inventory Revised subscales, ‘negative problem orientation’ and ‘impulsive/careless style’, than the general sample of drivers included in Study Two. The hostile aggressive driver also scored significantly higher on the Barrett Impulsivity Scale – 11 (Patton, Stanford & Barratt, 1995) measure of impulsivity than a male ‘inmate’, or female ‘general psychiatric’ comparison group. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey (Carlson, 1982), the self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers scored equal or higher scores than the comparison group of incarcerated individuals on the subscale measures of chemical abuse, thought disturbance, anti-social tendencies and self-depreciation. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey personality profiles, seven participants were profiled ‘markedly anti-social’, two were profiled ‘negative-explosive’ and one was profiled as ‘self-centred’. Qualitative analysis of the ten case study self-reports of on-road hostile aggression revealed a similar range of on-road situational factors to those identified in the literature review and Study One. Six of the case studies reported off-road generated stress that they believed contributed to the episodes of aggressive driving they recalled. Intense ‘anger’ or ‘rage’ were most frequently used to describe the emotions experienced in response to the perceived provocation. Less frequently ‘excitement’ and ‘fear’ were cited as relevant emotions. Notably, five of the case studies experienced difficulty articulating their emotions, suggesting emotional difficulties. Consistent with Study Two, these drivers reported negative attributions and most had thoughts of aggressive actions they would like to take. Similarly, these drivers adopted both instrumental and hostile aggressive behaviours during the self-reported incident. Nine participants showed little or no remorse for their behaviour and these drivers also appeared to exhibit low levels of personal insight. Interestingly, few incidents were brought to the attention of the authorities. Further, examination of the person-related characteristics of these drivers indicated that they may be more likely to have come from difficult or dysfunctional backgrounds and to have a history of anti-social behaviours on and off the road. The research program has several key theoretical implications. While many of the findings supported Shinar’s (1998) frustration-aggression model, two key areas of difference emerged. Firstly, aggressive driving behaviour does not always appear to be frustration driven, but can also be driven by feelings of excitation (consistent with the tenets of the General Aggression Model). Secondly, while the findings supported a distinction being made between instrumental and hostile aggressive behaviours, the characteristics of these two types of behaviours require more examination. For example, Shinar (1998) proposes that a driver will adopt an instrumental aggressive behaviour when their progress is impeded if it allows them to achieve their immediate goals (e.g. reaching their destination as quickly as possible); whereas they will engage in hostile aggressive behaviour if their path to their goal is blocked. However, the current results question this assertion, since many of the hostile aggressive drivers studied appeared prepared to engage in hostile acts irrespective of whether their goal was blocked or not. In fact, their behaviour appeared to be characterised by a preparedness to abandon their immediate goals (even if for a short period of time) in order to express their aggression. The use of the General Aggression Model enabled an examination of the three components of the ‘present internal state’ comprising emotions, cognitions and arousal and how these influence the likelihood of a person responding aggressively to an on-road situation. This provided a detailed insight into both the cognitive and emotional aspects of aggressive driving that have important implications for the design of relevant countermeasures. For example, the findings highlighted the potential value of utilising Cognitive Behavioural Therapy with aggressive drivers, particularly the more hostile offenders. Similarly, educational efforts need to be mindful of the way that person-related factors appear to influence one’s perception of another driver’s behaviour as aggressive or benign. Those drivers with a predisposition for aggression were more likely to perceive aggression or ‘wrong doing’ in an ambiguous on-road situation and respond with instrumental and/or hostile behaviour, highlighting the importance of perceptual processes in aggressive driving behaviour.