Torsional moments and shear stresses are not calculated correctly in the framework analysis software SCIA Engineer for cross-sections with a shear centre eccentricity. The aim of this research is to analyze and solve this problem.

The use of non-destructive tests for assessing the material status of concrete structures in the Netherlands remains relatively uncommon, despite the growing demand for the preservation of existing structures under the VenR policy of Rijkswaterstaat. Skepticism towards NDTs is reflected in the scarcity of documented case studies in publicly available literature and in the absence of rules and guidelines. In this research, following an extensive literature review on the current state of assessing the material status of reinforced concrete structures using NDTs, a large-scale non-destructive inspection was carried out on the Sluinerweg viaduct. The research aimed to address the practical challenges associated with these methods. These challenges serve to formulate a practical methodology to facilitate future inspections. Limitations include the use of specific NDTs: GPR, UPE, rebound hammer, UPV, half-cell potential, resistivity, and corrosion current density. Following the inspection, a data analysis was conducted, accompanied by a destructive verification of the methods. The integration of GPR with UPE technology showed promise for tendon duct inspections. However, a 12 mm borehole used for destructive verification proved to be too small to make accurate judgments. Additionally, the absence of grouting defects made evaluation of the method challenging. GPR provided a more accurate estimation of the cover depth compared to previous measurements conducted on the Sluinerweg viaduct using a standard cover meter. However, it was impossible to measure through the cathodic protection coating. The data's correlation with the provided drawings is promising, especially given that drawings are often unavailable. The key finding regarding the estimation of compressive strength using the rebound hammer and UPV is the strong recommendation to avoid using SonReb models unless they are specifically calibrated for the structure under inspection. No active corrosion sites were found, which posed challenges to evaluating the methods. Resistivity values measured using the Proceq Resipod consistently showed lower readings than those obtained with the Gecor-10 Wenner probe. A laboratory investigation ruled out moisture content as the cause. Fortunately, the differences are less pronounced with corroded reinforcement; however, further investigation is necessary. The previous inspection regimes in the Liggerkoppen project were found to be suboptimal in some aspects but were deemed reasonable considering the complexity of the project. This research demonstrated the effectiveness of several NDTs in-situ, which should help to build trust in the reliability of these methods for future inspections. Based on the findings of this research, it is strongly recommended to conduct further large-scale inspections to improve the practical methodology, gain further experience and develop improved codes and guidelines. While there is still much to accomplish, Rijkswaterstaat's support for investigations such as the one conducted for the Sluinerweg viaduct demonstrates their commitment to a better future.

The use of non-destructive tests for assessing the material status of concrete structures in the Netherlands remains relatively uncommon, despite the growing demand for the preservation of existing structures under the VenR policy of Rijkswaterstaat. Skepticism towards NDTs is reflected in the scarcity of documented case studies in publicly available literature and in the absence of rules and guidelines. In this research, following an extensive literature review on the current state of assessing the material status of reinforced concrete structures using NDTs, a large-scale non-destructive inspection was carried out on the Sluinerweg viaduct. The research aimed to address the practical challenges associated with these methods. These challenges serve to formulate a practical methodology to facilitate future inspections. Limitations include the use of specific NDTs: GPR, UPE, rebound hammer, UPV, half-cell potential, resistivity, and corrosion current density. Following the inspection, a data analysis was conducted, accompanied by a destructive verification of the methods. The integration of GPR with UPE technology showed promise for tendon duct inspections. However, a 12 mm borehole used for destructive verification proved to be too small to make accurate judgments. Additionally, the absence of grouting defects made evaluation of the method challenging. GPR provided a more accurate estimation of the cover depth compared to previous measurements conducted on the Sluinerweg viaduct using a standard cover meter. However, it was impossible to measure through the cathodic protection coating. The data's correlation with the provided drawings is promising, especially given that drawings are often unavailable. The key finding regarding the estimation of compressive strength using the rebound hammer and UPV is the strong recommendation to avoid using SonReb models unless they are specifically calibrated for the structure under inspection. No active corrosion sites were found, which posed challenges to evaluating the methods. Resistivity values measured using the Proceq Resipod consistently showed lower readings than those obtained with the Gecor-10 Wenner probe. A laboratory investigation ruled out moisture content as the cause. Fortunately, the differences are less pronounced with corroded reinforcement; however, further investigation is necessary. The previous inspection regimes in the Liggerkoppen project were found to be suboptimal in some aspects but were deemed reasonable considering the complexity of the project. This research demonstrated the effectiveness of several NDTs in-situ, which should help to build trust in the reliability of these methods for future inspections. Based on the findings of this research, it is strongly recommended to conduct further large-scale inspections to improve the practical methodology, gain further experience and develop improved codes and guidelines. While there is still much to accomplish, Rijkswaterstaat's support for investigations such as the one conducted for the Sluinerweg viaduct demonstrates their commitment to a better future.

The use of non-destructive tests for assessing the material status of concrete structures in the Netherlands remains relatively uncommon, despite the growing demand for the preservation of existing structures under the VenR policy of Rijkswaterstaat. Skepticism towards NDTs is reflected in the scarcity of documented case studies in publicly available literature and in the absence of rules and guidelines. In this research, following an extensive literature review on the current state of assessing the material status of reinforced concrete structures using NDTs, a large-scale non-destructive inspection was carried out on the Sluinerweg viaduct. The research aimed to address the practical challenges associated with these methods. These challenges serve to formulate a practical methodology to facilitate future inspections. Limitations include the use of specific NDTs: GPR, UPE, rebound hammer, UPV, half-cell potential, resistivity, and corrosion current density. Following the inspection, a data analysis was conducted, accompanied by a destructive verification of the methods. The integration of GPR with UPE technology showed promise for tendon duct inspections. However, a 12 mm borehole used for destructive verification proved to be too small to make accurate judgments. Additionally, the absence of grouting defects made evaluation of the method challenging. GPR provided a more accurate estimation of the cover depth compared to previous measurements conducted on the Sluinerweg viaduct using a standard cover meter. However, it was impossible to measure through the cathodic protection coating. The data's correlation with the provided drawings is promising, especially given that drawings are often unavailable. The key finding regarding the estimation of compressive strength using the rebound hammer and UPV is the strong recommendation to avoid using SonReb models unless they are specifically calibrated for the structure under inspection. No active corrosion sites were found, which posed challenges to evaluating the methods. Resistivity values measured using the Proceq Resipod consistently showed lower readings than those obtained with the Gecor-10 Wenner probe. A laboratory investigation ruled out moisture content as the cause. Fortunately, the differences are less pronounced with corroded reinforcement; however, further investigation is necessary. The previous inspection regimes in the Liggerkoppen project were found to be suboptimal in some aspects but were deemed reasonable considering the complexity of the project. This research demonstrated the effectiveness of several NDTs in-situ, which should help to build trust in the reliability of these methods for future inspections. Based on the findings of this research, it is strongly recommended to conduct further large-scale inspections to improve the practical methodology, gain further experience and develop improved codes and guidelines. While there is still much to accomplish, Rijkswaterstaat's support for investigations such as the one conducted for the Sluinerweg viaduct demonstrates their commitment to a better future.

The use of non-destructive tests for assessing the material status of concrete structures in the Netherlands remains relatively uncommon, despite the growing demand for the preservation of existing structures under the VenR policy of Rijkswaterstaat. Skepticism towards NDTs is reflected in the scarcity of documented case studies in publicly available literature and in the absence of rules and guidelines. In this research, following an extensive literature review on the current state of assessing the material status of reinforced concrete structures using NDTs, a large-scale non-destructive inspection was carried out on the Sluinerweg viaduct. The research aimed to address the practical challenges associated with these methods. These challenges serve to formulate a practical methodology to facilitate future inspections. Limitations include the use of specific NDTs: GPR, UPE, rebound hammer, UPV, half-cell potential, resistivity, and corrosion current density. Following the inspection, a data analysis was conducted, accompanied by a destructive verification of the methods. The integration of GPR with UPE technology showed promise for tendon duct inspections. However, a 12 mm borehole used for destructive verification proved to be too small to make accurate judgments. Additionally, the absence of grouting defects made evaluation of the method challenging. GPR provided a more accurate estimation of the cover depth compared to previous measurements conducted on the Sluinerweg viaduct using a standard cover meter. However, it was impossible to measure through the cathodic protection coating. The data's correlation with the provided drawings is promising, especially given that drawings are often unavailable. The key finding regarding the estimation of compressive strength using the rebound hammer and UPV is the strong recommendation to avoid using SonReb models unless they are specifically calibrated for the structure under inspection. No active corrosion sites were found, which posed challenges to evaluating the methods. Resistivity values measured using the Proceq Resipod consistently showed lower readings than those obtained with the Gecor-10 Wenner probe. A laboratory investigation ruled out moisture content as the cause. Fortunately, the differences are less pronounced with corroded reinforcement; however, further investigation is necessary. The previous inspection regimes in the Liggerkoppen project were found to be suboptimal in some aspects but were deemed reasonable considering the complexity of the project. This research demonstrated the effectiveness of several NDTs in-situ, which should help to build trust in the reliability of these methods for future inspections. Based on the findings of this research, it is strongly recommended to conduct further large-scale inspections to improve the practical methodology, gain further experience and develop improved codes and guidelines. While there is still much to accomplish, Rijkswaterstaat's support for investigations such as the one conducted for the Sluinerweg viaduct demonstrates their commitment to a better future.

The use of non-destructive tests for assessing the material status of concrete structures in the Netherlands remains relatively uncommon, despite the growing demand for the preservation of existing structures under the VenR policy of Rijkswaterstaat. Skepticism towards NDTs is reflected in the scarcity of documented case studies in publicly available literature and in the absence of rules and guidelines. In this research, following an extensive literature review on the current state of assessing the material status of reinforced concrete structures using NDTs, a large-scale non-destructive inspection was carried out on the Sluinerweg viaduct. The research aimed to address the practical challenges associated with these methods. These challenges serve to formulate a practical methodology to facilitate future inspections. Limitations include the use of specific NDTs: GPR, UPE, rebound hammer, UPV, half-cell potential, resistivity, and corrosion current density. Following the inspection, a data analysis was conducted, accompanied by a destructive verification of the methods. The integration of GPR with UPE technology showed promise for tendon duct inspections. However, a 12 mm borehole used for destructive verification proved to be too small to make accurate judgments. Additionally, the absence of grouting defects made evaluation of the method challenging. GPR provided a more accurate estimation of the cover depth compared to previous measurements conducted on the Sluinerweg viaduct using a standard cover meter. However, it was impossible to measure through the cathodic protection coating. The data's correlation with the provided drawings is promising, especially given that drawings are often unavailable. The key finding regarding the estimation of compressive strength using the rebound hammer and UPV is the strong recommendation to avoid using SonReb models unless they are specifically calibrated for the structure under inspection. No active corrosion sites were found, which posed challenges to evaluating the methods. Resistivity values measured using the Proceq Resipod consistently showed lower readings than those obtained with the Gecor-10 Wenner probe. A laboratory investigation ruled out moisture content as the cause. Fortunately, the differences are less pronounced with corroded reinforcement; however, further investigation is necessary. The previous inspection regimes in the Liggerkoppen project were found to be suboptimal in some aspects but were deemed reasonable considering the complexity of the project. This research demonstrated the effectiveness of several NDTs in-situ, which should help to build trust in the reliability of these methods for future inspections. Based on the findings of this research, it is strongly recommended to conduct further large-scale inspections to improve the practical methodology, gain further experience and develop improved codes and guidelines. While there is still much to accomplish, Rijkswaterstaat's support for investigations such as the one conducted for the Sluinerweg viaduct demonstrates their commitment to a better future.