An experimental investigation is carried out to verify the feasibility of using an instrumented vehicle to detect and monitor bridge dynamic parameters. The low-cost method consists of the use of a moving vehicle fitted with accelerometers on its axles. In the laboratory experiment, the vehicle–bridge interaction model consists of a scaled two-axle vehicle model crossing a simply supported steel beam. The bridge model also includes a scaled road surface profile. The effects of varying the vehicle model configuration and speed are investigated. A finite element beam model is calibrated using the experimental results, and a novel algorithm for the identification of global bridge stiffness is validated. Using measured vehicle accelerations as input to the algorithm, the beam stiffness is identified with a reasonable degree of accuracy.
BrownjohnJMWMoyoPOmenzetterP. Lessons from monitoring the performance of highway bridges. Struct Control Hlth2005; 12(3–4): 227–244.
2.
FarrarCWordenK. An introduction to structural health monitoring. Philos T R Soc A2007; 365: 303–315.
3.
CunhaACaetanoEMagalhãesF. Recent perspectives in dynamic testing and monitoring of bridges. Struct Control Hlth2013; 20(6): 853–877.
4.
FarrarCRWordenK. Structural health monitoring: a machine learning perspective. Chichester; Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2013.
5.
DoeblingSWFarrarCRPrimeMB. A summary review of vibration-based damage identification methods. Shock Vib Digest1998; 30(2): 91–105.
6.
SohnHFarrarCRHemezFM. A review of structural health monitoring literature: 1996–2001. Los Alamos National Laboratory report LA-13976-MS, February 2004. Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos National Laboratory.
7.
CardenEPFanningP. Vibration based condition monitoring: a review. Struct Health Monit2004; 3(4): 355–377.
8.
CerdaFChenSBielakJ. Indirect structural health monitoring of a simplified laboratory-scale bridge model. Smart Struct Syst2014; 13(5): 849–868.
9.
McGetrickPJKimCW. An indirect bridge inspection method incorporating a wavelet-based damage indicator and pattern recognition. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on structural dynamics, EURODYN (eds CunhaACaetanoERibeiroPMüllerG), Porto, 30 June–2 July 2014, paper no. 1217. Porto: European Association for Structural Dynamics (EASD).
10.
YangYBLinCWYauJD. Extracting bridge frequencies from the dynamic response of a passing vehicle. J Sound Vib2004; 272: 471–493.
McGetrickPJGonzálezAO’BrienEJ. Theoretical investigation of the use of a moving vehicle to identify bridge dynamic parameters. Insight2009; 51(8): 433–438.
13.
GonzálezAO’BrienEJMcGetrickPJ. Detection of bridge dynamic parameters using an instrumented vehicle. In: Proceedings of the fifth world conference on structural control and monitoring, Tokyo, Japan, 12–14 July 2010, paper no. 34. California: International Association for Structural Control and Monitoring (IASCM).
14.
YangYBChangKC. Extracting the bridge frequencies indirectly from a passing vehicle: parametric study. Eng Struct2009; 31(10): 2448–2459.
15.
LinCWYangYB. Use of a passing vehicle to scan the fundamental bridge frequencies. An experimental verification. Eng Struct2005; 27: 1865–1878.
16.
OshimaYYamaguchiTKobayashiY. Eigenfrequency estimation for bridges using the response of a passing vehicle with excitation system. In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on bridge maintenance, safety and management (IABMAS 2008), Seoul, Korea, 13–17 July 2008, pp. 3030–3037. London: CRC Press/Balkema, Taylor & Francis Group.
17.
GonzálezACoviánEMaderaJ. Determination of bridge natural frequencies using a moving vehicle instrumented with accelerometers and GPS. In: Proceedings of the ninth international conference on computational structures technology, Athens, 2–5 September 2008, paper no. 281. Stirling: Civil-Comp Press.
18.
YangYBChangKC. Extraction of bridge frequencies from the dynamic response of a passing vehicle enhanced by the EMD technique. J Sound Vib2009; 322: 718–739.
19.
ToshinamiTKawataniMKimCW. Feasibility investigation for identifying bridge s fundamental frequencies from vehicle vibrations. In: Proceedings of the fifth international conference on bridge maintenance, safety and management (IABMAS2010), Philadelphia, PA, 11–15 July 2010, pp. 317–322. London: CRC Press/Balkema, Taylor & Francis Group.
20.
KimCWKawataniM. Challenge for a drive-by bridge inspection. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on structural safety and reliability (ICOSSAR2009), Osaka, Japan, 13–17 September 2009, pp. 758–765. London: CRC Press/Balkema, Taylor & Francis Group.
21.
BuJQLawSSZhuXQ. Innovative bridge condition assessment from dynamic response of a passing vehicle. J Eng Mech: ASCE2006; 132(12): 1372–1379.
KimCWKawataniMKimKB. Three-dimensional dynamic analysis for bridge–vehicle interaction with roadway roughness. Comput Struct2005; 83: 1627–1645.
24.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 8608:1995. Mechanical vibration – road surface profiles – reporting of measured data.
25.
GonzálezAO’BrienEJMcGetrickPJ. Identification of damping in a bridge using a moving instrumented vehicle. J Sound Vib2012; 331(18): 4115–4131.
26.
CloughRWPenzienJ. Dynamics of structures. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993.
27.
FrýbaL. Vibration of solids and structures under moving loads. Groningen: Noordhoff International Publishing, 1999.
28.
ChangKCKimCWBorjiginS. Variability in bridge frequency induced by a parked vehicle. Smart Struct Syst2014; 13(5): 755–773.
29.
YangYBChengMCChangKC. Frequency variation in vehicle–bridge interaction systems. Int J Struct Stab Dy2013; 13(2): 1350019.
30.
MottersheadJEFriswellMI. Model updating in structural dynamics: a survey. J Sound Vib1993; 167(2): 347–375.
31.
FriswellMIMottersheadJE. Finite element model updating in structural dynamics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995, p. 286.
32.
BrownjohnJMWXiaPQHaoH. Civil structure condition assessment by FE model updating: methodology and case studies. Finite Elem Anal Des2001; 37(10): 761–775.
33.
XiaPQBrownjohnJMW. Residual stiffness assessment of structurally failed reinforced concrete structure by dynamic testing and finite element model updating. Exp Mech2003; 43(4): 372–378.
34.
TeughelsADe RoeckG. Structural damage identification of the highway bridge Z24 by FE model updating. J Sound Vib2004; 278(3): 589–610.
35.
RubinsteinRYKroeseDP. The cross-entropy method: a unified approach to combinatorial optimization, Monte-Carlo simulation, and machine learning. New York: Springer, 2004.
36.
HenchiKFafardMTalbotM. An efficient algorithm for dynamic analysis of bridges under moving vehicles using a coupled modal and physical components approach. J Sound Vib1998; 212(4): 663–683.
37.
KimCWKawataniM. Pseudo-static approach for damage identification of bridges based on coupling vibration with a moving vehicle. Struct Infrastruct E2008; 4(5): 371–379.
38.
DengLCaiCS. Development of dynamic impact factor for performance evaluation of existing multi-girder concrete bridges. Eng Struct2010; 32(1): 21–31.
39.
GonzálezA. Vehicle-bridge dynamic interaction using finite element modelling. In: MoratalD (ed.) Finite element analysis. Rijeka: Sciyo, 2010, pp. 637–662.
40.
YangYBYauJDWuYS. Vehicle-bridge interaction dynamics – with applications to high-speed railways. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co., 2004.
41.
BatheKJWilsonEL. Numerical methods in finite element analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1976.
42.
TedescoJWMcDougalWGRossCA. Structural dynamics, theory and applications. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1999.
MemoryTJThambiratnamDPBrameldGH. Free vibration analysis of bridges. Eng Struct1995; 17(10): 705–713.
45.
WalshBJGonzálezA. Assessment of the condition of a beam using a static loading test. Key Eng Mat2009; 413–414: 269–276.
46.
De BoerPTKroeseDPMannorS. A tutorial on the cross-entropy method. Ann Oper Res2005; 134(1): 19–67.
47.
BelayAO’BrienEJKroeseD. Truck fleet model for design and assessment of flexible pavements. J Sound Vib2008; 311: 1161–1174.
48.
PeetersBDe RoeckG. One-year monitoring of the Z 24-Bridge: environmental effects versus damage events. Earthq Eng Struct D2001; 30: 149–171.
49.
XiaYHaoHZanardoG. Long term vibration monitoring of an RC slab: temperature and humidity effect. Eng Struct2006; 28(3): 441–452.
50.
SohnH. Effects of environmental and operational variability on structural health monitoring. Philos T R Soc A2007; 365(1851): 539–560.
51.
LiuCDeWolfJ. Effect of temperature on modal variability of a curved concrete bridge under ambient loads. J Struct Eng: ASCE2007; 133(12): 1742–1751.
52.
ReyndersEWurstenGDe RoeckG. Output-only structural health monitoring in changing environmental conditions by means of nonlinear system identification. Struct Health Monit2013; 13(1): 82–93.
