 So I'm uploading this presentation just now from my USB stick and this is the point. It's very important that we have all the presentations here on this computer so that we convert it to PDF and put it on the website. So the starting point for this fact sheet was that we have in the memorandum of understanding for Working Group 2. There should be a classification of SHM strategies and the structure performance. And so I was thinking about that. We started very early thinking about that. Retaining together, he produced a statistical text analysis of our proposal we sent to Kost. So it's a little edited. Of course, some words are taken out like end and so on. So this was the first try. Actually, this is what we have on the website. But I realized that first, there are classifications around. Second, in a project with Daniel Straub together, we produced already a classification, which fits very well to the Working Group 2. So I've included this in the fact sheet. I worked a little further on the classification. And I would like to present to you what the final result of this thinking process is and was. I'm sorry. So I think the very basic classification should include a case description, the value of information for this case, the structure performance, the measurement information, and then also the measurement system deployment. So for the case description, of course, we should describe the structure, the SHM strategy. So this would be the very basic data and, of course, the technology readiness level, which is rather associated to the SHM strategy. We could then, for this case, document the value of information which has been quantified and the analysis type, how it was exactly done. We have been seeing the preposterior analysis yesterday. Of course, this is related to our topic, quantifying the value of structural health monitoring. So it should be a preposterior or value of information analysis. The second part, the structure performance. This is what we need to describe how that is taken into account, so how the structural reliability may be calculated, the structural integrity management, how is that taken into account and how the consequences and costs are modeled. For the measurement information, this goes actually to the project we have been doing with the Technical University of Munich for the German Highway Research Institute Bust. And here we classified the measurement information regarding the type, the relation to the structural performance, their temporal characteristics and their spatial characteristics. And further, I think very important for the measurement information is the precision and the costs. So I think there are quite some documentations around about measurement technologies. But when it comes to the precision, then this is more sparsely, but we just had a presentation where information about the precision of weight and motion systems were given. So I think this is very important that we account here for the measurement uncertainty but also for the operation uncertainty. It may be that we can account for the data analysis or model uncertainty and to quantify here the dependencies between the individual uncertainty models. For instance, for probability of detection, if this was done for inspection technology with a round-rollment test, then we have the measurement uncertainty and the operation uncertainty. And I think also the data analysis uncertainty covered. So this can be encompassing these three uncertainties or there can be individual models for it. For the SHM costs, I think it's important to account for the investment, the installation and the operation and maintenance of the SHM system and also to account for a design life, not only of the structure but of the structural health monitoring system and to give a lifetime or then alternatively to account for replacement costs. And the measurement system deployment, this goes to another classification which is already there, which is already documented, that comes from the area of NDT, NDE, non-destructive testing or evaluation. And here information or there's a classification which and compass the system description, what technology, what is the handling, what is the requirement for the data analysis, can it be real-time or near real-time or was there some extensive processing needed and are there extensive computational resources needed. So this was the classification but I think we should take it once a further specification and also referencing. This is of course in the fact sheets documented. I think for going through here a little, for the technology readiness level we can agree to the scale for Horizon 2020. I think this is until technology readiness level 9 or 10 starting from an idea basically, this would be one. Then 4 I think is a concept and then 7 or 8 is a prototype in the operational environment. So I think this is where we should take basis. Here the analysis type, in the best case it would be a value of information analysis but where we can have here also other types like cost-benefit analysis. There are some keywords for the structural reliability, for the structural integrity management is a time-based reliability-based, risk-based, what are the costs and consequences for component repair, failure system repair or failure. And regarding the measurement information, again this goes to the project with the German Highway Research Institute. So the classification of the type would be continuous measurement, discreet measurement or a binary measurement. So this could be an information whether a structure was damaged or not damaged. What is the relation to the structural performance models? Is it a direct input variable of a damage model? Is it a direct measurement of a damage or is it an indirectly coupled size? Temporal characteristic discreet to continuous or certain time range, spatial characteristic, is it local, is it the system, like we have it for damage detection approaches or is it a subsystem of a system? Precision, I've been going through this and yes, okay. So of course there's some more information on the measurement system deployment, what information should be given here. So how could we utilize this classification? I think as an outcome of the cost action and especially for application by industry and authorities, this extract of the table would be very informative. So that we describe the case, that we describe the structure, the SHM strategy, the technology readiness level and basically what is the value of information here and by which analysis type it was obtained. A further extract of this table could be used to select the case studies. So I think this is what has been just, which we have been discussing about already in the last year. It's working group four is active from this year in the selection of the case studies and I think this could be a way of supporting the selection so that we collect information again on the case. This is the value of information. This is what we have to achieve. This is our aim. How can we model the structural performance? I think this is very important that this is taken into account. So we have already provided a link on the website to the S-101 bridge destruction. That was a case where a bridge was decommissioned and there was a measurement campaign. This is very, very documented. But the thing for this case study is that there is up to now, I think, not very many information on the structural performance. This is what we would need here, I think. And of course there should be information about the measurement system deployment or there could be several SHM strategies and measurement systems described here. As an example, I've been taking one of my publications. This goes to the IROS project. Here we looked at an offshore wind turbine structure on monitoring of an offshore wind turbine structure and the structural performance model was a fatigue degradation. We modeled here an SN approach. The SHM strategy was hotspot strain gauge monitoring at the hotspots. And the SHM strategy model was that we assumed stress range data from rainflow counting, which were well in conjunction with the expected stress ranges from the design. The technology readiness level for that is quite high because the technology is well known. The value of information, so we could quantify here by a service life cost benefit analyzers that we can have a total life cycle cost saving up to 11%, so that includes risk reduction, structural risk reduction, and also expected cost reduction for the inspection planning. The risk reduction can be quite high if you just look at the risks and the expected cost reduction for the inspections are around 4% for this specific case study. How did we model the structural performance? We have been looking at fatigue degradation and the structural subsystem was analyzed. The time range was the service life. Structure integrity management was reliability-based inspection and repair planning and consequences components, inspection, repair and failure were accounted for. To be continued here with the table measurement information, this was a continuous measurement relation to the structural performance. We had a direct input variable of the damage model that was exactly the stress ranges as specified above. Temporal characteristic continues as spatial characteristic local and we varied the measurement uncertainty but not explicitly accounted for operation uncertainty and data analyzers uncertainty. We took into account the costs of SHM system investment, installation, operation maintenance and replacement and we did not explicitly account for. Yes, and this is data for the measurement system deployment. This is a strain gauges, well known how that is the technology and the handling and the analysis. Okay, so in conclusion, I think that the classification would facilitate consistent analysis communication comparison and dissemination of relevant information related to the value of SHM. To my understanding the main functions would be organization and performance of the value of information analysis. I think here we can utilize the complete classification and specification to get organized and to use this as an organization and communication between different experts which may be involved in such an analysis. It can be utilized for development and optimization of SHM strategies by industry and when it was there, identification of efficient SHM strategies by infrastructure, owners, operators and authorities. So this would be my idea to include the network and we could, of course, we should further develop and maybe a detail at one or the other point this classification and we, of course, can collect and document analysis which have already been performed. This we could ask, for instance, Daniela Sonder to fill out one of these tables and yes, please provide me with your feedback. Thank you for your attention. Thank you very much. We are at the end of the presentations now and I would like to invite all the speakers to come to the stage for the discussion and please go ahead with questions.