Professional Documents
Culture Documents
06 Manus Sedlacek 1 Background Document To en 1991 Part 2 - Traffic Loads For Road Bridges
06 Manus Sedlacek 1 Background Document To en 1991 Part 2 - Traffic Loads For Road Bridges
Part A
Part B
Part C
Objectives
2.
Basic procedure
3.
Evaluation of measured traffic data to construct the traffic load model for ULSassessments
3.1
History of measurements
3.2
Results of measurements and evaluations
3.2.1 Choice of representative traffic
3.2.2 Measurements of axle weights and conclusions for axle loads
3.2.3 Measurements of distance of axles
3.2.4 Measurements of vehicle weights
3.2.5 Definition of flowing and congested traffic
3.2.6 Results of simulations with influence lines
3.2.7 Composition of load models LM1 and LM2
4.
5.
6.
Procedure for the dynamic analysis of bridges under the loads of single
vehicles
6.1
General
6.2. The mechanical models
6.2.1. General
6.2.2 The mechanical model of the bridge
6.2.3 The vehicle model
6.2.4 Model for the roadway roughness
6.3
Calibration of the models with test results
6.4
Parameter studies to determine physical impact factors
6.4.1 Impact factors for the ultimate limit state verification
6.4.1.1
Local dynamic effects
6.4.1.2
Dynamic effects of individual vehicles
3
7.
8.
6.4.1.3
Dynamic effects with several vehicles
6.4.2 Impact factors for fatigue assessments
6.4.3 Conclusions for loading codes
Dynamic simulations for justifying the load models in EN 1991-2
7.1
Procedure and assumptions
7.2
Results of the simulations for LM1 and LM2
7.3
Determination of representative values
7.4
Dynamic simulations for fatigue assessments
7.4.1 General procedure
7.4.2 Span factor a
7.4.3 Factors 2 ,3 , 4
7.3.4 Results of simulations
Braking and acceleration forces
8.1
Code provisions
8.2
Calculative model for braking forces on stiff bridges
8.3
Dynamic effects from braking
8.4
Determination of braking forces in dependence of the bridge length
8.5
Specification of braking forces in EN 1991-2, 4.4.1 and conclusions
1.
Objectives
(1)
This Part A of the background report deals with actions on road bridges and
gives the results of studies that justify the rules and recommendations for
traffic loads on bridges, see EN 1991-Part 2.
(2)
(3)
The background document to the vertical traffic loads is structured such that it
gives in its section 2 to 5 the basic justification for the development of the load
pattern and of the amplitudes of the loads by evaluations of traffic with static
influence lines and in its sections 6 to 7 by using dynamic analysis of bridges.
2.
Basic procedure
(1)
The basis for the preparation of the traffic loads model in EN 1991-Part 2 has
been developed in parallel at various locations in Europe with studies
performed at SETRA, LCPC, University of Pisa, University of Liege, RWTH
Aachen, TU Darmstadt, Flint & Neill, London that comprised the following
steps:
Step 1:
Step 2:
Step 3:
Step 4:
(2)
3.
Evaluation of measured traffic data to construct the traffic load model for
ULS assessments
History of measurements
3.1
(1)
Until 1970 singular vehicles were taken from the flowing traffic and weighed on
movable weigh-bridges, so that the statistical relevance of data was doubtful.
(2)
Since 1970 the LCPC used weigh-bridges for weigh in motion measurements
so that automatic records of axle loads with time gaps were possible.
(3)
(4)
Since 1980 the LCPC has worked with piezo-electric measuring methods to
simplify the measurements.
(5)
From 1988 on the data available from measurements in Europe were collected
by the Eurocode-working group to identify the development and distribution of
the vehicle weights.
3.2
Results of the measurements and evaluations
3.2.1 Choice of representative traffic
(1)
The fig. 3-1 gives a survey on the measurements that were carried out a
different European locations, which comprise different types of roads as
highways
other roads
urban roads
(3)
Fig. 3-3 shows the accumulated distribution of the axle loads as measured. In
this figure n10 is the number of axle loads with PA 10 kN. In fig. 3-4 also the
accumulated distribution of total vehicle loads is given, where n30 is the
number of vehicles with G 30 kN.
(4)
It is apparent, that the traffic at Auxerre does not exhibit the largest axle loads
but the largest frequency of large axle loads; this is in particular caused by the
large frequency of articulated vehicles in the traffic, see fig. 3-1.
Figure 3-2:
(5)
In conclusion the data from the Auxerre traffic were selected as the basis for
the development of the Eurocode traffic load model.
Figure 3-3:
Figure 3-4:
(6)
Justification for choosing the Auxerre traffic data as basis for the
European traffic loading model
Fig. 3-5 gives as an example the frequency distribution of loads for axle no 2
of an articulated vehicle in Rheden.
The frequency distribution is bimodal caused by the frequencies of unloaded
and loaded vehicles.
(2)
Figure 3-5:
(3)
From the extreme values PA 14 kN an extreme value distribution as in fig. 36 for the Caronte-bridge can be derived that allows to extrapolate
representative values for the code.
Figure 3-6:
(4)
y=
1
2
Z2
2
where
z=
x xo
x=Q
x o = Qo
=
f
( x x o )2 f
Qo = 90 kN
= 32 ,64 kN
Such extrapolations have been carried out for various locations where
measured data were available, see fig. 3-7.
Figure 3-7:
(6)
On the basis of fig. 3-7 the characteristic value of the axle load in Load-Model
1 LM1 of EN 1991-2 was taken as
Q = 300 kN
It is also the basis for the axle load in Load-Model LM2, Q = 400 kN .
(7)
The model for the axle load in LM1 includes a certain dynamic factor resulting
from the roughness of the road surface where the measurements were made.
The magnitude of the dynamic factor has been determined according to fig. 38 from dynamic simulations of the flowing traffic at the points of
measurements.
Figure 3-8:
(8)
Determination
measurements
of
dynamic
factor
implicite
in
weight
For Load-Model LM2 the amplification factor = 1.14 for axle loads was
considered to be not sufficient. From dynamic simulations with a local
irregulatory as given in fig. 3-9 on additional amplification factor of 1.3 was
obtained, that leads to the value
Figure 3-9:
(9)
the characteristic value of the axle load in LM1 is about 2,5 times
higher than the legally permitted load. This is a result of systematic
overloading,
the characteristic value of the axle load in LM1 differs from location to
location,
the variation of the characteristic value of the axle load in LM1 with
time is small.
between
axles
for
(2)
According to fig. 3-10 the distances between axles 1 and 2 are in the range of
x 1,20 m .
(3)
Therefore for the double axle in Load-Model LM1 a distance of 1,20 m was
chosen.
For determining the effects of traffic for lengths of influence areas greater than
10 m the statistics of vehicle loads and of the inter-vehicle distance are
necessary.
9
(2)
As reference location for the measured data Auxerre was chosen, because of
the following reasons, see fig. 3-1:
-
(3)
In fig. 3-11 the most important types of vehicles from the full traffic are isolated
as given in fig. 3-2 for which this figure also shows the distribution of these
vehicle to lane 1 and lane 2 if the full lorry traffic is reduced to these 4 types of
vehicles.
Figure 3-11: Reduction of full lorry traffic to 4 important types of vehicles and
distributions of these types to lane 1 and lane 2 of the 4 lane
highway at Auxerre
(4)
Fig. 3-12 gives the distributions of weights for those 4 vehicle types.
10
(6)
of
distributions
as
measured
by
normal
In fig. 3-14 the statistical data of the distributions are given from the data as
measured. In fig. 3-15 the statistical data are corrected after filtering out the
dynamic effects. This filtering influences mainly the standard deviations.
11
Figure 3-14: Statistical data for the lorry-traffic in lane 1 and lane 2 at Auxerre
from measured data
Figure 3-15: Statistical data of lorry-traffic in lane 1 and lane 2 at Auxerre after
filtering out dynamic effects
(8)
Furthermore the distributions of the vehicle loads on the various axles and the
distribution of the distances of axles can be described in statistical terms, see
fig. 3-16.
12
(10)
(11)
From the Auxerre traffic a characteristic weight of the type 3-vehicle can be
determined in this way with a total weight of 880 kN, see fig. 3-17.
(13)
To this end traffic simulations have been carried out using a two lane box
girder type bridge and shapes of influence lines along the bridge axis with
varying values of lengths as indicated in fig. 3-18.
13
(15)
These conditions are by 1 step more severe than the conditions measured in
Auxerre. One could imagine that for bridges with 2, 3 or 4 lanes in each lane
congestions of only lorries could occur. This case has however not been
considered in the loading model because of the low probability of occurrence.
14
(2)
For defining flowing traffic the distances between vehicles depending on the
speed must be known.
(3)
k
x k 1 e x
(k )
where
x=d
xo = d o
xn = d n
1
xo xn
xo
k=
xo xn
(k )
is the Gamma-function of k
15
Another possibility for density distributions is given in fig. 3-20, where the
constant part between 20 m and 100 m covers the probability of development
of convoy and a linear increase up to 20 m is due to the minimum distance.
The exponentially decreasing part for distances greater than 100 m covers
free flowing traffic.
The -value in fig. 3-20 gives the probability of occurrence for lorry distances
less than 100 m, and the -value has been obtained from traffic records of 24
representative traffics in Germany.
(7)
A simplified solution that could also be used for the inter-vehicle distance is
the minimum distance that results from the reaction time of a driver to avoid a
collision with the front vehicle in case of braking. Assuming a minimum braking
reaction time Ts = 1 s of the driver, the minimum distances is give by
16
a=
v
Ts
From the simulations that have been carried out to obtain-load effects, e.g. the
bending moment M or the shear force V , the equivalent load Q effecting
these load effects can be determined by
Q' =
M
k
L
or Q' = V k
where
k
(2)
Fig. 3-21 and fig. 3-22 give these characteristic equivalent loads for traffic on
one lane and the associated values from Load-Model LM1.
17
Fig. 3-23 gives the single loads Q [kN] and the uniformly distributed loads q
[kN/m] that result from various influence lines.
Fig. 3-24 demonstrates the effects of the Auxerre traffic as measured (25 %
lorries, 75 % cars), that can be represented for flowing traffic by
QK = 800 + 12 L
QK = 800 + 31L
For traffic on more than 1 lane the studies have shown, that for L > 30 m
always congested traffic is relevant.
(6)
Fig. 3-25 and fig. 3-26 give the equivalent loadings for 2 lane traffic.
Fig. 3-27 and fig. 3-28 give the relevant equivalent loads for 4 lane traffic.
20
For other influence curves the results are in between these extreme values.
(9)
Fig. 3-29 gives the single loads Q [kN] and the uniformly distributed loads q
[kN/m] that result from various influence lines and numbers of lane.
Figure 3-29: Characteristic values of traffic loads for 2, 3 and 4 lane traffic
21
(10)
The fig. 3-30 and fig. 3-31 demonstrate the effect of the characteristic vehicle
in fig. 3-16 on the equivalent value Q' . Such a vehicle could be used for the
assessment of existing bridges.
The Load-Model LM2 is simply a single axle representing the impact effect of a
characteristic axle load from irregularities on the road surface.
4.
4.1
(1)
Other representative values of traffic loads than characteristic values are non
frequent values, frequent values and quasi permanent values.
(2)
The non frequent or rare values are those having a mean return period of 1
year from either flowing or congested traffic, e.g. considered for the limit state
of decompression in concrete.
23
(3)
The frequent values have a mean return period of 1 week. They are based
on frequent traffic situations as e.g. flowing traffic and good surface quality of
road. The extreme situations applied for the determination of characteristic
loads are not considered for frequent values.
(4)
For quasi-permanent values of traffic (e.g. for creeping effects) usually the
values are zero.
(5)
y=
z2
2
where
z=
x x0
x
xo
The values x o and are adjusted in such a way that the correlation coefficient
is maximized.
(6)
x R = x0 + z R = x0 1
z R
x0
1
2
zR
z2
2
dz =
1 Ts
2 N S TR
where:
NS =
TS
TR
4.2
Results of extrapolation
(1)
24
Figure 4-1:
(2)
Fig. 4-2 gives in the scale of half-normal distributions straight lines with
intersection points for the return periods required, where xo and hence z o are
adjustment values for the effect considered (best fit parameters, see fig. 4-1).
Figure 4-2:
(3)
Fig. 4-3 gives the results of many simulations of the Auxerre traffic. In this
figure x K corresponds to a return period of 1000 years. The factor
2N s
nL
25
where n L is the number of lorries used in the simulation varies between 1 and
4, but z R various only by 10 % for short return periods (1 day) and by 5 % for
long return periods (1 year).
Figure 4-3:
Factors
xR
xk
to
determine
representative
values
from
Conclusions
(1)
Taking account of the results in fig. 4-3 the following choices have been made
in EN 1991-2:
-
5.
5.1
(1)
(2)
(3)
The same reasons that apply for the choice of the Auxerre traffic for the
development of the load models LM1 and LM2 also apply for the preparation
of the Load-Models for fatigue.
(4)
2.
3.
4.
(5)
5-
6.
Figure 5-1:
(6)
For steel structures and for reinforcing and prestressing steel the fatigue
strength curves according to fig. 5-2 may be used.
Figure 5-2:
(7)
The fatigue strength curves for welded steel structures are defined by the
fatigue strength category c (fatigue strength at 2 106 cycles) and the
constant amplitude fatigue limit D at 5 106 cycles.
For stress ranges above D the slope m of the curve in a double logarithmic
scale is m = 3 . Stress ranges below D dont produce fatigue if the maximum
stress range max D .
28
For stress spectra with stress range above D and below D the damage
accumulation may be performed with a modified fatigue resistance curve with
a slope m = 5 for stress ranges below D . This modification takes into
account that the constant amplitude fatigue limit D is reduced by damage
effects from stress ranges > D
For stress ranges of the stress range spectrum which are below the cut-offlimit L at 108 cycles it may be assumed that these stress ranges do not
contribute to the calculated cumulated damage.
(8)
Figure 5-4:
(9)
(10)
(11)
In the following the effects of the counting method and of the damage
accumulation hypothesis (Miner Rule) are explained in more detail.
5.2
Counting method
(1)
The following counting methods give the same results and can also identify the
mean stress level for each cycle
-
(2)
The reservoir method, see fig. 5-5 and also fig. 5-1 defines a cycles by the
difference of water level in emptying a reservoir. Secondary stress ranges
originate by water pockets left when starting with emptying the reservoir at the
lowest point. The method is easily understood but difficult to programme.
Figure 5-5:
(3)
Reservoir method
A method more suitable for programming is the rainflow method, see fig. 5-6.
This method follows the flow of rain-drops from the top of a fictive roof as
explained by the example in fig. 5-6.
Figure 5-6:
30
5.3
(1)
For a given stress-range histogramme (spectrum) the application of the MinerRule for a stress spectrum that has stress ranges above and below the
constant amplitude endurance limit D , is demonstrated in fig. 5-7.
Figure 5-7:
(2)
fat .
ni 23
i>
n D D3
i>
ni i5
L
n D D5
(3)
5.4
(1)
The use of the Miner-rule together with the fatigue resistance curve allows to
transfer any stress range spectrum with variable stress ranges into a damage
equivalent spectrum with constant stress-ranges e .
(2)
For a fatigue resistance curve with an unlimited slope m and a spectrum with
(
D=
m
i
ni
2 10
m
c
31
(
D=
m
i
ni
cm 2 10 6
em ne
cm 2 10 6
and reads
e = m
(3)
m
i
ni
ne
ne
(4)
(5)
Fig. 5-8 shows that very high loads do not contribute to damage because of
their small number, and small loads with large numbers do not contribute
because of their small amplitudes.
32
Figure 5-8:
(6)
There are various possibilities to define the damage equivalent load ranges
S e depending on the choice of ne .
Examples are:
-
D
n
max S m
(D S )
D
i
33
neg
D
=
S egm
D
=
( D S )
m +1
eg
(6)
Fig. 5-8 gives the results of a damage calculation for an axle load
histogramme and shows the values S eg and S e .
The definition S eg gives larger values than S en resulting in less conservatism
in particular where the values of S e are close to L , see fig. 5-9 and fig. 510.
(7)
All definitions of S e are equivalent and based on the same fatigue damage
S em ne = Di = D
Figure 5-9:
34
(1)
n1 , n 2 , n 3
n30
Qd
Qf
Qg
of less
than 1 % of the total damage. This load can be
interpreted as the frequent value for fatigue
=
load level that produces the maximum damage Di in the
Di -
ng
signifies
the damage equivalent load
=
number of cycles that together with Q g produce the total
the
(2)
The results of the evaluations are given in fig. 5-11 for single loads, fig. 5-12
for tandem loads, fig. 5-13 for tridem loads and in fig. 5-14 for the full vehicles.
35
36
= 1.37 ;
ng
0.43 0.5
n30
= 0.42 0.5
vehicle:
469 kN
ng
nL
3.
= 0.75
= 0.43 0.5
ng
n ref
n ref
nL
EN 1991-2 specifies as fatigue Load-Model LM3 a four axles vehicle, see fig.
5-15-
38
(5)
This model has a total weight of 480 kN and therefore is slightly heavier than
the most damaging equivalent fatigue load of 469 kN in Auxerre, see fig. 5-14.
This model has 4 axles, as 4 axles represent a lorry in the mean, see
n1
in
nL
fig. 5-11.
The tandem load of 240 kN corresponds approximately to the most damaging
equivalent load for tandem axles 252 kN, and the single axle load of 120 kN is
approximately the value of the most damaging single load of 131 kN
When compared with the damage equivalent loads defined by the number of
vehicles Load-Model 3 is conservative except for single axles.
(6)
(7)
These load models LM2 and LM4 which are assembled in fig. 5-16 give also
more precise contact surfaces of the wheels needed for local assessment, see
fig. 5-17.
39
The damage equivalent load Q g representing the most damaging weight has
the advantage, that it is less sensitive to a variation of the slope of the fatigue
resistance curves than the value Qe related to ne = ni , see fig. 5-18.
40
5.6
Simulation of bridge responses for static fatigue actions
5.6.1 Purpose of the simulation
(1)
The simulation of bridge responses to traffic, that has been performed for
determining characteristic values of load effect, as described in 3.26 has also
been used to determine the frequent Fatigue Load-Model (with 1 % fatigue
damage only) and to check the damage equivalent fatigue loading models as
described in 5-5 in view of the dependency on the shape and size of influence
lines.
(2)
AMT
AJ 1T
(3)
As the recorded axle loads from Auxerre contain already a certain amount of
dynamic impact from good surface quality, no additional dynamic impact
factor was applied, see fig. 5-19.
The results of the simulation of damage equivalent loads are valid for lengths
of influence lines L > 10 m , so that local effects of single axles are not
considered but only effects from full vehicles.
(5)
42
Figure 5-20: Example for calculative service life of composite box girder
bridges for different span length and deck widths for (1)
continuous girders with reinforcements at supports, (2)
continuous girders, (3) single span girders
5.6.2 Results for fatigue loads dependant on span L
(1)
Fig. 5-21 gives the total frequent fatigue load Q f and the damage equivalent
load Q g related so the length L of single span bridges for the flowing traffic and
the congested traffic chosen.
(2)
The frequent fatigue load is composed of a single load of 600 kN which is the
frequent load of a lorry and a uniformly distributed load that depends on the
type of traffic being either 9 kN/m for flowing traffic or 22 kN/m for congested
traffic.
If frequent loads for fatigue are related to flowing traffic only, then the
frequent values can be defined by coefficients applied to the characteristic
traffic loads:
1Q
to axle loads Qk :
1q
1 = 0 ,8 (~ 0 ,75 )
1 = 0 ,30 (~ 0 ,40 )
The values 1Q and 1q for frequent loading for fatigue are very close to the
frequent values defined by a return period of 1 week in 4.3 (see values in ( )).
(4)
Fig. 5-22 gives a comparison of frequent and damage equivalent fatigue load
models from fig. 5-19.
Figure 5-21 also gives the damage equivalent loads Q g , with the maximum
damaging effect together with
ng
nL
Fig. 5-23 shows for traffic other than in Auxerre that for fatigue the critical intervehicle distance is not as for congested traffic, e.g. for a inter-vehicle distance
of 4,8 m, but in the range of 24 m.
ne
represent more or less the ratio of the number ne of loaded
nL
lorries to the total number n L of lorries.
The values
For larger span lengths L > 50 m resp. L > 20 m the fatigue load grows slowly,
see figure 5-23, so that an adjustment is necessary.
5.6.3 Comparison of the fatigue effects of the Auxerre traffic with the fatigue
load models in EN 1991-2
(1)
(2)
Fig. 5-24 gives the ratio of moment ranges due to Fatigue Load Model
(LM1) M f ,LM 2 which is the frequent fatigue model related to the
characteristic Load-Model (LM1), and the frequent fatigue value M fA from
the Auxerre traffic, for different slopes m
45
(4)
M fLM 2
M f , A
46
M e ,LM 3
for ne = n L
M e , A
47
(6)
(7)
M g ,LM 3
M g ,A
if ne is modified by
ne = k 1 k 2 k 3 n L
where
k1 =
k2 =
k3 =
4
for 1,18 L 10 m
L
48
(8)
It is evident that for LM3 and ne = k 1 k 2 k 3 n L the scatter and the influence of m is
smaller; however the use for influence line M 2 is still unsafe for m = 5 and
m = 9.
(9)
This additional vehicle does not modify the values as given for influence lines
M 0 , M 1 , M 3 but improves substantially the results for influence line M 2 , see
fig. 5-27, in which the second vehicle has already been taken into account.
(11)
The fatigue load model FLM4 gives 5 types of equivalent vehicles, see fig. 5M e ,LM 4
16, for which the ratios
, are given in fig. 5-29.
M e , A
This model is mainly used for local assessments as in orthotropic steel decks.
49
5.7
Conclusions
(1)
EN 1991-2 gives fatigue loads, from which FLM1 and FLM2 are mainly
intended to perform a check for infinite durability:
frequent D
This check is always relevant for a large number of cycles as e.g. experienced
in short spans and structural components of the deck.
Note: If each lorry produces a stress range cycle this would lead to 1000 to
8000 cycles per working day, e.g. 25 to 200 millions of cycles for 100 years.
For small components loaded by axles or wheels this number is even higher.
(2)
Fig- 5-30 shows the cut-off by the fatigue frequent Load-Models FLM1 and
FLM2.
(4)
(5)
The supplementary vehicle to FLM3 and any preparation of time histories and
cycle counting can be avoided, if FLM3 is used together with damage
equivalent factors , directly obtained from the Auxerre traffic for different
types of influence lines.
(6)
Any fatigue assessment both for infinite durability and limited service life needs
partial factors for reliability sake. These partial factors are specified in the
material related fatigue codes or bridge design codes.
50
(7)
A feature that controls the value of the partial factor is robustness for fatigue
damages which is expressed in terms of damage-tolerance. The relationship
between several levels of damage tolerance and the partial factors is specified
in the material related fatigue codes.
6.
Procedure for the dynamic analysis of bridges under the loads of single
vehicles
General
6.1
(1)
This section deals with a procedure used to determine the dynamic effects of
traffic loads in the development of a European load model for road bridges. On
the basis of the results of experimental tests carried out on bridges loaded with
defined moving vehicles a dynamic simulation program has been developed
which allows to predict the dynamic behaviour of road bridges loaded with
moving traffic loads.
(2)
In the following first the mechanical models which have been used in the
program are described. After that the results of parameter studies to determine
the magnitudes and dependences of the dynamic increments for road bridges
under the actions of single vehicles are presented.
6.2
The mechanical models
6.2.1 General
(1)
Road bridges and their structural elements react to moving vehicles. The
dynamic behaviour of the bridges is mainly determined by firstly the vehicles,
which by themselves represent dynamic systems, secondly the unevenness of
the road surface and thirdly the dynamic characteristics of the bridge. Hence
the total mechanical model is subdivided into three submodels which
represent the bridge, the vehicles and the roadway roughness.
(2)
For the solution of both problems the differential equations for the deflection of
the bridge are needed which are obtained by considering the kinematic
equilibrium. For general continuous Systems these differential equations in
general cannot be defined and resolved analytically. Therefore numerical
procedures are used where the structure is subdivided in discrete elements.
This leads to the use of the Finite Element Method. To reduce the expenditure
efforts in discretization for the dynamic calculation of the bridge under moving
traffic the following simplications have been made:
-
(3)
(4)
Figure 6-1:
(5)
[M (t )] + [D]& U& + [K ] U = F (t )
(6)
Here [M] is the mass matrix, [D ] is the damping matrix and [K ] is the stiffness
matrix of the total system. , U& and U are the vectors of acceleration, speed
and translatory displacements of the discrete nodes. F (t ) represents the
vector of the time dependent external forces on the nodes which are given by
the actions of the wheels of the vehicles. Due to the moving masses of the
vehicles the mass matrix is not constant but time dependant.
(7)
The solution of the differential equations is achieved numerically for time steps
t by using a direct integration method (Newmark) [2]. From this solution the
values of the translatory displacements, speeds and accelerations of each
node for the time t are obtained by which the action effects in the bridge can
be fully described.
52
(8)
The afore described modelling of the structure allows the simulation for
different bridge structures as shown in fig.6-2. Simple and continuous beams,
frames and arch bridges as well as truss bridges may he analysed including
also secondary structural elements as e.g. cross-beams and stringers of
orthotropic decks.
Figure 6-2:
53
Figure 6-3:
The vehicles represent the exciters of the vibrating system bridge', and have
to be described as vibrating systems for themselves. Due to the roughness of
the roadway the vehicles are excited and produce dynamic wheel loads. The
frequency spectrum of the wheel loads is controlled by:
-
(2)
(3)
Two types of vehicles are discerned according to fig.6-3 : On one hand single
vehicles with a set of individual axles which are connected to a rigid body
54
mass, on the other hand articulated vehicles where the trailor is connected to
the motor tractor by an elastic coupling.
(4)
For each individual axle the idealized tire suspension system according to fig.
6-4 is assumed. The mass of the wheels and the axle structure of each axle
are represented by a concentrated mass between the tire spring and the
suspension structure. The suspension structure is idealised as a parallel
system consisting of a linear elastic spring for the suspension, a friction
element and a viscous damper. The body mass is considered as a rigid
element with translatory and rotatory mass inertia.
Figure 6-4:
(5)
The degrees of freedom of the vibrating system of the vehicle are determined
by the vertical translatory displacements of the axle and the translatory and
rotatory movements of the rigid body mass. Using the equilibrium conditions
the following coupled differential equation can be obtained
[M F ] &z& + [D F ] z& + [C F ] z = FF (t )
where
[M F ]
[DF ]
[C F ]
(6)
These differential equations formally are identical with those of the bridge
system and therefore are resolved with the same numerical time step method.
55
(7)
(8)
The inter-leaf friction can result in vibrations where the leaf spring between the
axles and the rigid body may be blocked and only the tire springs may act.
Due to the small damping effect of the tires then great dynamic effects may be
caused also for even road surfaces. This particular behaviour of the leaf spring
is considered by a nonlinear load deflection characteristic according to fig. 6-5,
which represents the "friction hysteresis".
(9)
In this vehicle model all significant parameters of the vehicle which influence
the dynamic behaviour are considered. These parameters are:
-
Figure 6-5:
56
(2)
U ( ) e ix d
Figure 6-6:
(3)
The fourier spectrum displays the amplitudes and phase relations of the
different harmonic components of the unevenness. In assuming a Gaussian
distribution of the irregular unevenness and the applicability of a stationary and
ergodic random process a relation between the square of the mean value of
the unevenness profile and its power spectral density may be derived.
1
x 2 X
u 2 = lim
+X
u 2 ( x ) dx =
( ) d
(4)
Hence it follows that the power spectral density indicates how the squares of
the mean values of small frequency ranges are distributed in dependence of
the frequencies. It represents a scale for the intensity of the unevenness in
different ranges of wave lengths.
(5)
57
Figure 6-7:
(7)
upper
limit
<
2
<
8
< 32
< 128
< 512
58
(8)
(9)
As the power density distribution does not contain any information on the
phase difference of the different components of the fourier series, the phase
angles for the different harmonic waves are determined by the Monte-CarloMethod on the base of a Gaussian normal distribution. Roughness profiles
which have been generated that way showed a good approximation to the
input power spectral density distributions and allow to consider the stochastic
roadway roughness in a realistic way.
6.3
(1)
The mechanical models of the bridge, the vehicles and the roadway surface as
described above and their interaction were used for the development of a
computer program. This computer program can simulate the crossing of one
or more vehicles on a bridge. The results of the simulation are time histories of
any displacements, forces or action effects of the vehicle or the bridge. The
main interest is in the bridge response, in particular in the ratio of the extreme
dynamic response in the bridge to the static response of the bridge which by
definition is the dynamic increment or the impact factor.
(2)
(3)
59
Figure 6-8:
(4)
For the numerical simulations of the tests the bridge was modelled as a frame
[7]. The discretisation of the system allowed for 32 beam-elements with 72
degrees of freedom. The vehicle was modelled as a two-axle single vehicle
with nonlinear behaviour the dynamic characteristics of which were
determined in vibration tests. The roughness profiles used in the simulations
were those directly recorded.
(5)
Fig. 6-9 shows a plot of the dynamic increments of the mid-span deflection in
the third span versus the vehicle speed. The figure presents the measured
and the calculated values. The strong variations of the dynamic increments
reveal that there is no significant functional dependence between the dynamic
increment of a bridge and the crossing speed of the vehicles. There are great
values of dynamic increments for small speeds between 10 and 20 km/h. The
reason for this effect is the inter-leaf friction of the leaf suspension which
causes frequent blockings of the leaves for small speeds by which the total
vehicle vibrates on the tires which exhibit only a small damping. The
60
Figure 6-9:
(6)
Fig. 6-10 and fig. 6-11 allow to compare the measured and calculated time
histories of the deflections for two different crossing speeds. The time histories
demonstrate similar functions from measurements and calculations in
particular in view of the change of phases with predominant excitement and
phases with reduced dynamic responses. These changes of phase are mainly
caused by the different local distributions of exciting roughnesses and the
position of the vehicle. The frequency analysis of the time histories from
measurements and calculations demonstrates that the vibrations of the bridge
are composed of the natural vibrations of the bridge and the excited vibrations
due to the vehicle excitement.
61
6.4
Parameter studies to determine physical impact factors
6.4.1 Impact factors for the ultimate limit state verification
(1)
In order to clarify the mechanical causes for the observed dynamic responses
of road bridges and the main controlling parameters, parameter studies were
carried out.
(2)
(3)
6.4.1.1
(1)
62
In general the stringers have short influence lengths which result in very high
eigenfrequencies. Therefore these structural parts are not excited to significant
eigenvibrations by the dynamic wheel loads of the crossing vehicles. Hence
there is no dynamic interaction between the vibrations of the stringers and the
vibration of the vehicles. The dynamic stresses in the stringers are mainly
determined by the dynamic wheel loads and therefore controlled by the
dynamic properties of the vehicle, the speed and the surface roughness. Fig.
6-13 demonstrates that the dynamic wheel loads increase with the square of
the speed. The same functional dependence can be observed between the
speed and the dynamic increment of the load effects in the stringers.
63
(3)
As the dynamic properties of the vehicles vary in a large range, the maximum
values of the dynamic increments have a large scatter. Fig. 6-14 gives the
scatter and the extreme values of the calculated dynamic increments versus
the type of vehicle and the roughness of the surface for a maximum speed of
100 km/h. It seems not to be justifiable to differentiate according to structural
parameters, as e.g. cross beam distance or stringer stiffness.
6.4.1.2
(1)
For the dynamic action effects of the main girders of a bridge with mean or
long spans the frequency contents of the wheel load variation which influences
the resonance behaviour has greater influence than the maximum values of
the wheel loads.
(2)
Therefore the dynamic behaviour of the total vehicle plays an important role
and the dynamic increment of the bridge is mainly controlled by the interaction
of vehicle and bridge.
(3)
These mechanical processes shall be first considered for the case of a single
vehicle crossing the bridge. The calculations have been carried out for three
span bridges with equal span lengths where the geometry and stiffness were
chosen such that a wide spectrum of usual span lengths and eigenfrequencies
64
were represented. Each dot in fig. 6-15 is referred to one of 35 bridges that
were investigated in the study.
Figure 6-15: Relation between the fundamental frequency and span length of
investigate bridges
(4)
As the regression curve, which from empirical studies gives a relation between
the fundamental frequency of a bridge and its span length [6], is independent
on the type of material and way of construction, the following results are
applicable to steel bridges, reinforced concrete bridges and composite
bridges.
-
(5)
The dynamic increments for the deflections are greater than those for
the bending moments. The dynamic increments for the hogging
moments are greater than those for the mid-span moments.
The damping of the bridge has less importance than the other
influence-parameters.
Figure 6-16: Relation between the fundamental frequency and span length of
investigate bridges
(6)
(7)
The resonance effects are caused by the fundamental vibrations of the bridge
and the eigenfrequencies of the rigid body masses and the axle masses of the
vehicles. The frequency ranges with low dynamic increments are outside the
excitement ranges of the vehicles. The results of the calculations are in good
agreement with the results of experimental tests [6].
(8)
66
Fig. 6-18 shows a reduction of the resonance effects in the range of lower
frequencies due to articulated vehicles. Only for bridges with short Spans the
dynamic increments are increased due to critical frequencies caused by the
sequence of double and triple axles.
67
6.4.1.3
(1)
A third item of the parameter study was devoted to determine the dynamic
effects caused by the simultaneous action of several vehicles of equal
dynamic properties. The study was carried out for a convoy of 32t-vehicles
with four axles and an inter-vehicle distance of 5.0 with by a maximum speed
of 40 km/h.
(2)
The results of the study demonstrate that the magnitudes of the impact factors
due to resonance with the rigid body eigenfrequency of the vehicles are
significantly reduced and the dependences on the fundamental frequency of
the bridge is less significant than for single vehicles, see fig. 6-19. The reason
for this result is the wide band spectrum of excitation where the dynamic
effects of different vehicles are partly compensated. The influence of the span
length of the bridge becomes more important. In fig. 6-20 the results are
therefore plotted versus the span length. The tendency of the dynamic
increments decreasing with increasing span length can be clearly identified.
This is caused by the decreasing influence of the vehicle dynamics in relation
to the static vehicle effects with increasing span length.
68
Road bridges are loaded by varying traffic loads and have to be verified in
view of sufficient fatigue safety. In the fatigue assessment the fatigue loading
effects during the expected service life have to be accumulated and introduced
into a damage calculation. As the fatigue strength of steel parts is mainly
defined in terms of stress ranges, the traffic influences on fatigue have to be
described by loading ranges which include dynamic increments. The dynamic
increments to be used for the fatigue assessment do not represent extreme
values but have to be derived from damage calculations with actual time
histories where the dynamic response of the structure is considered. Due to
lack of knowledge in this field the fatigue impact factors so far had been
estimated only. In the following a damage equivalent impact factor for the
stringers of an orthotropic deck is determined.
(2)
When a vehicle crosses a certain section of the stringer a set of stress ranges
i and cyclic numbers ni is effected. The damage caused by this crossing
can be determined as
di =
(
i
ni
/ i ) N c
m
(3)
Here m is the slope of the S-N-curve and c is the reference fatigue strength
for a certain detail for N c = 2 106 cycles. The consideration of the dynamic
influence means that in relation to the spectrum of stress ranges i ; which is
obtained for static loading only another spectrum of stress ranges i
including dynamic effects is necessary. The fatigue impact factor can be
derived from a comparison of the different damages caused by these spectra.
(4)
This comparison of damage is carried out for single vehicles. The definition of
the damage equivalent impact factor of a single vehicle is such, that the
damage yielding from a static calculation with a vehicle load multiplied with
69
E =
n (M )
n (M )
i ,dyn
i ,dyn
i ,stat
i ,stat
(5)
The moment ranges which are used for the determination of E , have been
derived from the time histories for the bending moment by using the rainflow
counting method.
(6)
The magnitude of the damage equivalent impact factor for local effects is
controlled by the same parameters as the impact factor for ultimate limit state
verifications. These parameters are the type of vehicle, the vehicle speed and
the roadway roughness. The fatigue impact factor however represents
approximately an average dynamic increment and not an extreme value, due
to the effect of the damage calculation. This also applies to the scatter of
dynamic influences arising from vehicle characteristics. Fig. 6-21 shows the
maximum values of the damage equivalent impact factor as well as the density
distribution of the values depending on the type of vehicle. The distribution
assumed is a Gaussian distribution.
Figure 6-21: Damage equivalent impact factor for the bending moment of the
stringers of an orthotropic deck as a function of vehicle type and
quality of pavement
(7)
For a mean pavement quality and a speed of 100 km/h the mean value for the
damage equivalent impact factor for the fatigue assessment of a stringer of an
orthotropic deck is in the range E = 1.28.
(2)
The basis of the study are deterministic traffic scenarios that give an insight
into this interaction.
(3)
(4)
Therefore the results of dynamic analysis need statistical evaluations that may
lead to
-
(5)
If dynamic impact factors are then defined as the ratios between e.g. the
characteristic values of action effects from the dynamic analysis on one hand
and from the static analysis on the other hand they are in general no more
related to the behaviour of the same vehicle but to the behaviour of different
vehicles and therefore may substantially differ from the dynamic impact factor
as defined for deterministic loading situations as assumed in this section, see
fig. 6-22.
71
7.
7.1
(1)
The simulation program explained in section 6 of this report has been used to
determine dynamic response histories of structures under moving traffic
-
(2)
The basis of such dynamic simulations were the statistical data of traffic as
indicated in fig. 3-15 that were filtered from dynamic amplification factors by a
numerical simulation of the measured data at the measurement point at
Auxerre, see fig. 3-8.
(3)
This filtering was achieved by calculating the dynamic wheel loads and vehicle
loads from the axle weights with dynamic effects as recorded with assuming a
good surface roughness of the road at the point of measurement, so that
dynamic increments could be obtained, that then could be subtracted from the
dynamic wheel loads and vehicle loads in order to get the static wheel loads
and vehicle loads.
(4)
Table 7-1:
(5)
72
(6)
Table 7-2 gives a survey on the bridges that fulfil the frequency conditions as
given in fig. 6-15, that were used for the simulations for
-
Table 7-2:
(7)
Fig. 7-1 gives a survey on the action effects as bending-moments and shear
forces that were determined by the simulation.
73
Figure 7-1:
(8)
In the transverse direction a constant value of the influence line was assumed
which corresponds to box girder type bridges.
(9)
good
average
poor
( o ) = 4.0 cm
( o ) = 16.0 cm
( o ) = 64,0 cm
(10)
Traffic 2 (measured):
Traffic 3 (measured)
Traffic 4 (artificial):
(11)
Depending on the deck width the allocations of the various types of traffic to
the lanes are given in fig. 7-2.
These assumptions correspond to the assumptions made for the evaluation of
static influence lines, see 3.2.4(14).
Figure 7-2:
(12)
(13)
In total for each type of bridge, each width of bridge deck, each surface quality
and speed of vehicle 100 simulations were performed with about 25 vehicles
selected according to the Monte-Carlo method.
For each simulation the static and dynamic maximum values were determined
and plotted in a diagramme with an accumulated normal frequency
distribution.
Using the data from Auxerre the characteristic value was determined by
extrapolating the distributions to the 1 1.5 10 8 fractiles which in the normal
distribution corresponds to the mean value plus 5 x standard deviations. For
the extrapolation only the half-normal distribution fitted to the upper part of the
real distribution was used.
(14)
Fig. 7-3 shows the example of a bridge response (static and dynamic) for 10
vehicles with a speed v = 80 km / h and the selection of the maximum static and
dynamic values.
75
Figure 7-3:
(15)
From 100 extreme values determined for the situation in fig. 7-3 the
accumulated frequency distributions as given in fig. 7-4 were determined that
could be further evaluated to get characteristic values, see fig. 7-4.
Figure 7-4:
(16)
Various simulations have shown that flowing traffic (with a speed of vehicle
v = 60 km / h 80 km / h ) is relevant for span lengths L 20 m , whereas
congested traffic (10 km / h 20 km / h ) or jam situations (0 km / h ) are relevant
for span lengths L 30 m , see fig. 7-5.
76
Figure 7-5:
(17)
Fig. 7-6 shows the influence of different surface qualities and flowing and
congested traffic on the bridge responses, and fig. 7-7 gives the associated
dynamic factors.
Figure 7-6:
77
Figure 7-7:
(18)
lane 1 v = 80 km / h
lane 2 v = 10 km / h
lane 1
lane 2
lane 3
lane 4
v=
v=
v=
v=
10 km / h
80 km / h
80 km / h
10 km / h
(1)
78
Figure 7-8:
Figure 7-9:
(2)
(3)
Dynamic factors for 1 lane flowing traffic, with average surface quality are
given in fig. 7-10.
79
Figure 7-10: Dynamic factors for single lane bridges for average surface
quality and flowing traffic
(4)
In using the maximum value = 1.70 applied to the characteristic axle load 270
kN according to fig. 3-6 the extreme characteristic value for a single axle is for
LM2.
Q K = 2.70
(5)
279
= 402 kN
1.14
Other dynamic factors that have been used in the evaluation of static influence
lines are given in fig. 7-11 and fig. 7-12.
80
Figure 7-11: Dynamic factor for 4 lane bridges for average surface quality and
flowing traffic
Figure 7-12: Dynamic factor for 4 lane bridges for average surface quality and
congested traffic
(6)
The additional impact factor from a local irregularity is given in fig. 7-13.
81
Figure 7-13: Impact factor for a local irregularity (see fig. 3-9) in addition to
the dynamic effect from average surface quality
(7)
Figure 7-15: Comparison of characteristic action effects for influence line DLT
3 (fig. 7-1) from dynamic simulations and Load Model LM1
7.3
(1)
= 1 2 3 4 5
where the factors i are related to
(2)
1
2
3
4
=
=
=
=
TR return period
surface quality of road
frequency of jam per year
p composition of traffic
1 =
E Re turn period
E1000 years
may be taken from evaluations as given in fig. 7-16, that result in a range
1 = 0 .7 0 .8 .
83
2 =
E dyn ,good
E dyn ,average
84
(5)
The factor 3 accounts for the frequency of jams per year. In applying an
estimation of the frequency of jam per year (related to the highway BAB 9
between Nuremberg and Munich)
= 3 10 3 jams / km day
3 = 0 ,95
may be taken.
(6)
( p)
(100% )
where p is the percentage of lorries in the traffic and 100 % means traffic with
lorries only as presumed for the slow lane 1.
(7)
Fig. 7-18 gives the 4 -values depending on the percentage of lorries and the
return period, where p is 4 only and TR is the combined effect of 1 and
p.
TR ( p , flowing )
TR ( p , congested )
Results are given in fig. 7-19 using the values TR in fig. 7-18 as reference
values showing the dependence on the number of lanes.
85
(10)
jam situations = TR p
(11)
86
1 0.45
whereas infrequent loads are related to jam situations
1 0.80
7.4
Dynamic simulations for fatigue assessments
7.4.1 General procedure
(1)
The fatigue assessment in general is two-dimensional as it uses both stressranges i and cycle numbers ni . Hence the verification format reads
D Ed =
i > D
(2)
ni i3
n D D3
i > L
ni i5
n D D5
D Rd
(7-1)
c
Mf
(7-2)
where
Ff
Mf
(3)
(7-3)
where
1
2
3
4
max
is the span-factor taking into account the shape of influence line and the
span length and the type of traffic on which the damage calculation is
based
is the factor for the volume of traffic
is the factor for the service life required
is the factor taking account of traffic on more than 1 lane
is a limit resulting from the constant amplitude endurance limit D of
the fatigue resistance curve, see fig. 7-22.
For determining max the maximum value max of the stress range
spectrum, see fig. 7-22, which normally is expressed by frequent fatigue
loads, is used.
max D or equivalently
max LM C
(7-4)
max = 1.357
(5)
max
(7-5)
LM
reference traffic is the Auxerre traffic; other types of traffic would lead to
other 1 -values
the factors 2 , 3 , 4 are taken equal 1 for the following conditions
2 = 1.0
3 = 1.0
4 = 1.0
used
1 -values is composed of two components
1 = '1 '1'
where
(2)
'1
results from equality of damage of the Auxerre traffic and the Eurocode
fatigue load model D FLM = DiA
'1'
N
DiA = sim
ND
'1 FLM
(7-6)
and reads
1 = m
N D DiA D
N sim
FLM
(7-7)
89
where
D , N D
N sim
FLM
(3)
c = FLM 11
(7-8)
with 1 =
(7-9)
(7-10)
=5
N (T )
ND
(7-11)
)3
(7-12)
=3
ND
NC
(7-13)
1 = 5
(4)
N (T ) N D
3
ND
NC
(7-14)
In conclusion 1 is
1 = m
N D DiA D
N
N (T )
5
3 D
N sim
FLM
ND
Nc
(7-15)
7.4.3 Factors 2 ,3 , 4
(1)
2 = 5
(2)
N obs
3 = 5
(3)
(7-16)
0.5 10 6
TS
100
(7-17)
Ni
N1
LM ,i
LM ,1
Ni
N1
i
1
= 5 1+
N2
N1
i
N
+ .. n n
N 1 1
1
i =1
i =1
(7-18)
(7-19)
where
LM ,i
n
Ni
i ( = f ( i ))
In the following the results of simulations are given for the single fatigue
loading model FLM 3.
(2)
from extreme positions on the full influence line neglecting any secondary
stress range. (e.g. from waterpockets of the reservoir method)
(3)
Fig. 7-23 gives the equivalence factor 1 for sagging moments and hogging
moments.
91
92
(7)
max values may be taken from fig. 7-25 and fig. 7-26.
93
94
8.
8.1
(1)
(2)
The characteristic value of Qik , limited to 900 kN for the total width of the
bridge, should be calculated as a fraction of the total maximum vertical loads
corresponding to the Load Model 1 likely to be applied on Lane Number 1, as
follows:
Q1k = 0 ,6 Q1 (2Q1k ) + 0 ,10 q1 q1k w1 L
where
L is the length of the deck or of the part of it under consideration.
Note 1: For example Q1k = 360 + 2 ,7 L ( 900 kN ) for a 3 m wide lane and for a
loaded length L > 1,2 m, if factors are equal to unity.
Note 2: The upper limit (900 kN) may be adjusted in the National Annex. The
value 900 kN is normally intended to cover the maximum braking force of
military vehicles according to STANAG6.
8.2.
(1)
(2)
2.
(8-1)
where
v0 =
95
tR =
(3)
reaction time for the driver after observing the braking lights of
the vehicle travelling in front of him.
F (t ) = F0 = G a = constant
(8-2)
where
G=
A=
A=
mass of vehicle
breaking deceleration assumed to be
5 m/sec2.
Figure 8.1:
(4)
v0 = 90 km / h = 25 m / sec .
the deceleration time is
tB =
v0
a
and with the reaction time t R = 1,0 sec . the number of vehicles is
(8-3)
96
This means that there is an upper boundary value for the accumulation of
braking forces Fi from various vehicles braking simultaneously depending
on their number.
(5)
Fig. 8-2:
(6)
(8-4)
where
(1)
For determining the dynamic braking actions on a fixed bearing (F.B.) the
behaviour of the bridge in the longitudinal direction may be modelled according
to fig. 8-3.
97
Figure 8-3:
(2)
In fig. 8-3 C L is the reaction force at the stiff bearing and C u the reaction force
in the flexible bearing.
(3)
(4)
M
Cu
(8-5)
In the following the dynamic amplification factor (ratio between the dynamic
and the static bearing reaction) is determined by numerical simulations of the
dynamic horizontal movements of the bridge under the impulses F (t ) from the
various vehicles.
The parameters controlling the results are:
-
(5)
the impulse-length: t B
the time gap between individual impulses: t R = 1,0 sec.
the number n of impulses acting simultaneously
the eigen-period T of the bridge including abutments and piers
the damping coefficient: = 0 ,07 .
The figures 8-4 to 8-18 illustrate the time-histories of the dynamic and static
reaction forces. The eigen-period of the longitudinal bridge system is the
dominant parameter controlling the results.
98
For high eigen-frequencies (bridges, which are horizontally fixed) the dynamic
effect of the n-th vehicle has died down, when the (n + 1) th vehicle starts
with braking ; hence the dynamic amplification is governed by the dynamic
impact from a single vehicle only. For low eigen-frequencies (bridges with tall
piers and fixed bearings on the middle piers) the worst situation occurs when
the gap between impulses t R corresponds to the eigen-period T. Then there is
an accumulation of dynamic effects of various vehicles. The maximum is
obtained when for t R = 1 sec. the eigen-period is T = 1,0 sec .
99
T = 1,0 sec.
T = 3,0 sec.
T = 5 sec.
8-4
8-8
8-12
8-5
8-9
8-13
8-17
8-6
8-10
8-14
8-18
8-7
8-11
T = 0,1 sec.
8-16
8-15
Table 8-1:
(6)
Table 8-1 gives the dynamic amplification factors calculated for bridges which
are horizontally flexible or stiff. The maximum value for any system is = 1,80 .
(7)
Table 8-2:
(8)
In the following the amplification factors given in table 8-3 are used
Table 8-3:
8.4.
(1)
Further input values for the determination of braking forces are the following:
=
=
tR
G
=
=
lF
(2)
12,0 m
5 m/sec.2
see table 8-3
1,0 sec.
200 400 kN per vehicle.
From the speed v0 for the vehicles the number n of vehicles and the bridge
length are determined in table 8-4.
Table 8-5 gives the braking forces F for the various weights of vehicle and the
number n of vehicles.
102
Table 8-5:
(4)
Fig. 8-19 illustrates the braking forces versus the bridge length and the mass
of vehicle
(1)
Fig. 8-20 demonstrates the results from the fig. 8-19 together with the
specification of the characteristic values of braking forces in EN 1991-2, 4.4.1.
(2)
For bridges with small spans the bearing forces are caused by single vehicles.
This is reflected by the minimum breaking force F = 180 kN = 180 kN for L <
1,20 m and F = 360 kN for L < 1,20 m resulting form a vehicle mass of 400 kN.
103
(5)
(6)
The braking forces in EN 1991-2, 4.4.1 have been specified as a portion of the
traffic loads Q1k and q1k to install an automatic system of adaption where other
characteristic are values Q1k and q1 chosen than those recommended.
104
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1]
JACOB, B., BRULS, A., SEDLACEK, G.: European Traffic Samples. Report at
Working-Group 2 of Eurocode 9, Part. 12, " Traffic Loads for Road Bridges ".
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
105