Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

TR Editors' blog

Insights, opinions, and our editors' analysis of the latest in emerging technologies.

Blog Topics

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • Phineas : This is why it's so important to pick your parents.
  • daviest : It would seem that the 3 or 4 years is a key factor. question. at what point is the 3 or 4 years...
  • ... : I tried to download the app from iTunes Store (Australia) but it is available only in US at this...
  • seamountie : To answer your question about helmets, look at rugby.  I don't know of any studies like the one...
  • Reptile : I've often wondered this.  Maybe replace with leather caps to prevent abrasions.  But my query is...
Advertisement
Friday, September 07, 2007

A Glaring Technology Gap

With Congress focused on bridge inspections, it might ask why the best inspection tools aren't deployed.

At a hearing of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee earlier this week--a month after the I-35 Minneapolis bridge collapse killed 13 people--Calvin L. Scovel III, the Transportation Department's inspector general, chided the Federal Highway Administration (FHA). Scovel said the FHA needed to prioritize bridge inspections in terms of failure risk and make sure its engineers are spending sufficient time inspecting the structures.

But how well equipped are those inspectors? For answers, Scovel might do well to read this blog, by MIT civil engineer Oral Buyukozturk. Buyukozturk points out that today, many inspectors carry out their duties by pinging bridges with a hammer, or just looking at them with the naked eye. Meanwhile, far better tests--like acoustic and radar tests that peer beneath a concrete surface for evidence of decay--are well advanced but little used. At this moment of crisis, Buyukozturk notes, "the high-tech, nondestructive tools presently available for infrastructure inspection have not been embraced by the construction industry for widespread and systematic use." Given that more than 70,000 U.S. bridges are rated "structurally deficient," this inspection-technology gap might be good fodder for future hearings.

Comments

  • Privatize it?
    There is no incentive for government bridge inspectors to upgrade their technology, methods, and training.  They don't get rewarded for doing inspections efficiently, and they don't get penalized for missing defects.  Suppose they got paid per inspection?  And suppose they were held financially liable for misdiagnoses?

    Hmmm, it sounds like we're discussing health care.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    dmm
    09/10/2007
    Posts:207
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
Advertisement

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement
Technology Review January/February 2010

Current Issue

Security in the Ether
Information technology's next grand challenge will be to secure the cloud--and prove we can trust it.
•  Subscribe
Save 36%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News
» Gift Subscription
» Digital Subscription
» Reprints, Back Issues
» Subscribe
» Table of Contents
» MIT News

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2010 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.