Abstract
Bridge infrastructures are continuously subject to degradation due to aging and excess loading, placing users at risk. It has now become a major concern worldwide, where the majority of bridge infrastructures are approaching their design life. This compels the engineering community to develop robust methods for continuous monitoring of bridge infrastructures including the loads passing over them. Here, a moving load identification method based on the explicit form of Newmark-β method and Generalized Tikhonov Regularization is proposed. Most of the existing studies are based on the state space method, suffering from the errors of a large discretization and a low sampling frequency. The accuracy of the proposed method is investigated numerically and experimentally. The numerical study includes a single simply supported bridge and a three-span continuous bridge, and the experimental study includes a single-span simply supported bridge installed by sensors. The effects of factors such as the number of sensors, sensor locations, road roughness, measurement noise, sampling frequency and vehicle speed are investigated. Results indicate that the method is not sensitive to sensor placement and sampling frequencies. Furthermore, it is able to identify moving loads without disruptions when passing through supports of a continuous bridge, where most the existing methods fail.
Highlights
When a bridge is subjected to a moving vehicle exposed to a forced vibration test, there is no need for traffic interruption and extensive experimental arrangements
Et al [15] carried out an experimental study to compare four different methods of moving load identification
To explore the effect of vehicle speed on the accuracy of moving load identification, the car was pulled over the bridge at speeds of 0.47, 0.75 and 0.94 m/s, and the sampling frequency was set at 200 Hz
Summary
Condition assessment of bridge structures based on vibration measurements has attracted increasing interest among researchers. Uncertainty in the bridge structural responses due to road surface roughness, and the effect of measurement noise, and speed were not studied They did not consider the modal characteristic of the vehicle, including mass, damping and stiffness, and the method did not investigate a multispan continuous bridge. Et al [27] proposed a state space method based on the Galerkin weak formulation and compared the method with a conventional state space method and the explicit form of the Newmark-β method They verified their results numerically by a single-span supported truss subject to a moving force, but the physical properties of the vehicle, speed, the road surface roughness and the effect of the number of spans were not included in their study.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
