You are on page 1of 13

Shock and Vibration 11 (2004) 383–394 383

IOS Press

Sensitivity of dynamic methods for damage
detection in structural concrete bridges

M. Breccolottia,∗ , G. Franceschini b and A.L. Materazzia
a
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
b
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy

Abstract. A critical analysis of the available methods for the assessment of structural concrete bridges through the observation
of their dynamic response is carried out. A mathematical model for the evaluation of the natural frequencies shift due to bridge
damage is applied to the case of an existing reinforced concrete bridge. The numerical results, along with the general structure
of the mathematical problem, allow discussing some limitation and drawbacks of the dynamic methods. Namely the need for a
reference set of the bridges dynamic properties before the onset of damage and the effect of the ambient temperature variation
may lead, in many cases, to unreliable estimates of the structural condition of the investigated bridges.

Keywords: Bridge engineering, dynamic tests, structural concrete, damage assessment

1. Introduction

The management of road networks is a complex task that involves technical, economic and environmental aspects.
A relevant issue is preserving the properties of bridges, maintaining them at the quality and performance level
expected by the community. Bridges, in fact, are an important part of the property of a public institution and so the
economic resources needed to maintain them efficient and safe must be allocated properly.
Road bridges are exposed, during their service lives, to the combined effects of aggressive environmental actions
and mechanical damage due to vehicular traffic which can cause structural degradation.
Therefore they continuously ask for maintenance and rehabilitation works, to make them able to accommodate
the vehicle traffic that becomes more and more fast and severe. Sometimes adjustments to new safety standards,
new environmental issues and new needs of service are also needed.
Organized systems for the management of bridges are already operative in the USA and in Canada, while in
Europe the EU funded specific research projects, like the “BRIdge Management in Europe – BRIME” [7].
Software packages are also available to manage the activities of inventory, inspection and maintenance of bridges,
such as PONTIS [7]. They allow the agencies owning the bridges to carefully record inventory and inspection
report practically without limits. The codes can foresee the deterioration progress of every bridge based on agency
experience and external environment characteristics. According to the economical situation foreseen for the next
years they allow also to allocate scarce resource in the best way to maintain bridges network functionality and safety
at acceptable levels.
However the evaluation of bridges is largely based on the acquisition of data from visual inspections carried out
periodically to control concrete deterioration and steel corrosion and to check and survey crack patterns.
This type of control can be affected by some shortcomings. First of all only visible defects can be revealed.
Furthermore the evaluations are based on individual judgment which can vary from one operator to another one.

∗ Corresponding author. E-mail: breccolotti@strutture.unipg.it.

ISSN 1070-9622/04/$17.00  2004 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved

The oldest papers asserted that changes in vibration frequencies are good estimators of structural damage [19] while. much more useful to determine and localize the damage. which was artificially damaged before its destruction. excitation method etc. other studies demonstrated that frequencies changes alone are poor damage indicators [25]. are listed in Farrar et al. whose memory the special issue of Shock and Vibration containing this paper is dedicated to. based on the increase of the structural flexibility near the damage location. paying particular attention to bridge structures. In 2000 Maeck et al. Current methods and techniques available for the damage prognosis. The first method uses an updating algorithm based on the stiffness characteristics which depends. The second method. The results showed that the classical dynamic parameters (such as eigenfrequencies. Dynamic tests in the diagnosis of bridges Since early 60’s the scientific community has directed his attention to the detection of the structural damage through the identification of changes in the dynamic parameters (such as eigenfrequencies. such as changes in temperature. Also the late Prof. The dynamic behavior of the undamaged bridges was determined from a twin bridge located near the damaged one. Different opinions emerged about the effectiveness of dynamic methods for damage identification. Bruno Piombo. to be detectable by means of dynamic methods. The same techniques were also used by Fr ýba and Pirner in 2001 to evaluate damage from the comparison between undamaged and damaged structural response. in hind sight. The Authors. called direct stiffness calculation. therefore. eigenvectors and damping). Modal shapes seemed to be. In particular the COMAC method was used with success by the Authors to assess the efficiency of repair works in a three span prestressed concrete segmental bridge. asserting that relative variations of modal shapes are not good damage indicators when applied to experimental data. paying special attention to the relevant case of structural concrete bridges. Other methods can be used to determine the presence and the location of damage. wind speed. not only in civil engineering structures. in the wider frame of a research on the application of experimental modal analysis to bridge dynamics [13. in 1994 compared the results obtained from several tests based on changes of modal shapes. should be so relevant that in same cases it could cause the collapse of the structure even for small vehicular load [12. which can affect the quality of the experimental measures. [12]. Alampalli et al. in several cases. Farrar and Doebling in 1997 described the experiences relative to the dynamic tests carried out on the I-40 bridge over the Rio Grande at Albuquerque (NM). The Authors believed that the variations on eigenfrequencies could indicate the existence of the damage but the variations on modal shape were not enough sensible to indicate the position of the damage. as some issues can affect the results of the dynamic tests. subsequently. traffic loading. Moreover some researchers underlined the fact that damage.22]. 25]. However Salawu et al. A wide literature survey about these methods.21. / Sensitivity of dynamic methods To overcome these problems researchers are trying to develop objective methods of assessment based on the observation of bridge dynamic properties. according to some hypothesis. . Breccolotti et al. seemed to be able to detect and localize the damage. 2. is able to detect and localize damage through modal shape determination. eigenvectors and damping) were not enough sensible to damage but other algorithms. The present study is a contribution to the discussion on advantages and drawbacks of the use of dynamic tests for the assessment of road bridges. was carried out by Doebling et al.384 M. The application of these methods is unfortunately not straightforward. described two methods for the determination of the stiffness decrease of structural concrete beams due to damage. like the Modal Assurance Criterion (MAC) and the Coordinate Modal Assurance Criterion (COMAC) during repeated tests on a simply supported steel and concrete composite beam. The bridge was artificially damaged with saw cuts on the steel beams.. This method uses only eigenfrequencies and is. in 1995 used standard modal analysis methods. in 1996. dealt with this subject in 1995. underlined also the importance of environmental factors. impossible to distinguish asymmetric damage in a symmetric structure. which was taken as reference. on structural damage and on the comparison between the undamaged and the damaged structural response.

The damage is supposed to be distributed over a unique . Brincker et al.27]. acquired with traditional acquisition system.16. 1. The technique used to determine the damage. In 2002 Ebert and Bucher investigated the influence of stochastic material properties on the damage process of crack evolution to show the importance of this effect on dynamic testing. Breccolotti et al. called Enhanced Frequency Domain Decomposition (FDD). the structural behavior may be represented using a linear elastic model. neglecting the influence of environmental factor such as temperature on modal properties. artificially realized on the Z-24 bridge in Switzerland. recent studies report promising results obtained by advanced techniques based on statistical analysis of the dynamic response. The structural damping and the temperature effects are neglected. Even if real bridge cases behave often as reinforced plate-like structures. 1). The Authors. razed and replaced by a new bridge. ice forming. eigenvectors and damping changes. Anyway all the Authors agree on the fact that the damage detection in bridge structures using dynamic methods is a difficult task. the effect of non-structural masses added during the bridge service life. believe that they can determine the presence of damage even for small changes of modal parameters. was based on the determination of eigenfrequencies. A simple mathematical model can be used to establish a relation between the variation of the structural characteristics and the variation of the frequencies. boundaries condition changes. but it requires the knowledge of the undamaged dynamic behavior. 4. with the corresponding one. Many parameters are involved in the process and often the variation of the dynamic properties behavior may be so small to be confused with the effect of changes in other non-mechanical parameters. computed by means of the finite element technique and mode superposition. Hu and al. The use of natural frequencies in bridge damage evaluation All assessment methods are based on the observation of the changes of the bridge natural frequencies with respect to a known reference condition. [3] reported their experience in 15 progressive damage tests. Sketch of the model of the simple beam. on neural networks and on model updating [15. However. 3. on suitable damage indicators. Simple beams Let us consider a simple supported reinforced concrete beam (Fig. proved this technique to be able to correctly determine even little damage values. / Sensitivity of dynamic methods 385 Fig. Some simulations realized on a simply supported beam. measurement errors and uncertainties always present when dealing with experimental data. As the dynamic excitation is supposed to produce low amplitude stresses. position and amount of damage in bridge structures. like ambient temperature. M. in 2002 used the Matched Damage Processing technique to determine presence. The results of their experimental tests showed that the influence of stochastic material properties affect quite heavily the dynamic properties of the 20 equal reinforced concrete beams used in their investigation. The algorithm compares the real structural response. moisture contents. simple supported beams and cantilever beams will be considered in this paper as representative of bridge structures.26.

m(x) = m) the pulsations are:  ωr = r2 π 2 EJ/mL4 (3) and the corresponding normalized modal shapes are:  Yr (x) = 2/mL sin(rπx/L) (4) In the general case. m(x) is the mass per unit length and the purely imaginary eigenvalue. E is the modulus of elasticity. Breccolotti et al. The eigenvalue equation for the damaged beam becomes:   d2 d2 [Yr + ∆Yr ] E[J(x) + ∆J(x)] = m(x)[λr + ∆λr ][Yr + ∆Yr ] (7) dx2 dx2 which can be developed as:    d2 d2 Yr d2 Yr d2 ∆Yr d2 ∆Yr E J(x) 2 + ∆J(x) 2 + J(x) + ∆J(x) dx2 dx dx dx2 dx2 (8) = m(x)[λr Yr + Yr ∆λr + λr ∆Yr + ∆λr ∆Yr ] Taking into account the Eq. / Sensitivity of dynamic methods portion of the beam of length b and centered at a distance a from the left hand support. (1) and neglecting the higher order terms.386 M. The eigenvalue equation for a beam of length L. without other alterations of the inertia characteristics. integrating over the whole length of the beam and considering the boundary conditions. The damage is modelled as a variation of the structural characteristics. (9) becomes:  L  2 2  L d Yr d2 Yr d2 ∆Yr E∆J(x) dx + EJ(x) dx 0 dx2 0 dx2 dx2  L  L (10) = λr m(x)Yr (x)∆Yr (x)dx + ∆λr m(x)Yr (x)2 dx 0 0 . In the case of a prismatic beam. Therefore the previously stated boundary conditions are still valid. Eq. λ. we have:  L m(x)Yr (x)Ys (x)dx = δrs (5) 0 and  L d2 Yr d2 Ys EJ(x) dx = λr δrs (6) 0 dx2 dx2 where δrs is the Kronecker delta which is 1 for r = s and 0 for r = s. can be solved through variables separation from the equation of the free vibration:   d2 d2 Y EJ(x) = λm(x)Y (1) dx2 dx2 where Y (x) is the modal shape. The boundary conditions are those associated with simple bearings at the end of the beam: d2 Y d2 Y Y (0) = Y (L) = 0. without damping. as a consequence the eigenvalues and the modal shapes undergo the variation ∆λ r and ∆Yr (x). respectively. (0) = (L) = 0 (2) dx2 dx2 A numerable infinity of eigenvalues. Eq. is the square of the pulsation ω. can be obtained. J(x) the section moment of inertia. by means of the decrement of the moment of inertia ∆J(x). It is also supposed that the damage does not affect the supports. A first order perturbation procedure is applied to the eigenvalue problem. along with the corresponding modal shapes. It is represented by a suitable reduction of the flexural stiffness of the beam. (8) becomes:    d2 d2 Yr d2 ∆Yr E ∆J(x) + J(x) = m(x)[Yr ∆λr + λr ∆Yr ] (9) dx2 dx2 dx2 Multiplying by Y r . for the normalized modal shapes. having constant cross section (J(x) = J.

(13) becomes:  2E∆J rπ . The same result stands still for fixed-fixed beam or for fixed-pinned beams. Assuming that the variation of the structural characteristics. M. It is obvious that the variation is more relevant for the eigenvalues associated with modal shapes displaying greater curvature around the damaged zones. centered in a point at x = a. Eq. / Sensitivity of dynamic methods 387 Using the normalization conditions of Eqs (5) and (6):  L m(x)Yr (x)∆Yr (x)dx = 0 (11) 0    2 L d2 Yr d2 ∆Yr 1 L d2 Yr EJ(x) 2 dx = ∆λr − E∆J(x) dx (12) 0 dx dx 2 2 0 dx2 the following expression can be obtained:  L  2 2 d Yr ∆λr = E∆J(x) dx (13) 0 dx2 Under the assumed hypotheses. ∆J(x). (13) determines the increment of the r-th eigenvalue in relation to the decrement of the structural characteristics. Eq. may be modeled as a constant decrement ∆J of the moment of inertia in a portion of beam of length b. Breccolotti et al.

4 a+b/2 rπx .

the same frequency variation can be found in all the cases in which F (α. if the relation a s br = ar bs among the geometric parameters is valid. Since F (α. with the same relative variation of the structural characteristics. The dependency of the relative variation of the r-th frequency on the structural geometry through the products ra and rb shows that. correlations can be found among the relative variations of different frequencies for determined geometries of the damage. but also its position. but shows the limits of a survey based only on frequencies.2 ∆λr = sin dx (14) mL L a−b/2 L Taking into account that ∆λr = 2ωr ∆ωr (15) the corresponding variation of the pulsation is:   r2 π 2 ∆J E b L rπb 2rπα ∆ωr = − sin cos (16) L3 Jm 2 2πr L L and the relative variation of the pulsation is: ∆ωr 1 ∆J = (β − sin β cos α) (17) ωr 2πr J where the dimensionless geometric parameters α = 2rπa/L and β = rπb/L have been introduced. (17) expresses the relative variation of the r-th natural pulsation as the product of the relative variation of the structural characteristics by the function F (α. β) = (β − sin β cos α) (18) that depends on r. β) is constant. (17) can be derived also that. It is clear from the symmetry of the model. . (17) any difference of behavior if the center of the damage is located at x = a or at x = L − a. the relative frequency’s decrement is proportional to the length of the damaged zone. The Eq. From Eq. on the damage’s geometry and on the extent and position of the center of the damaged zone. This observation allows establishing a relation of equivalence between different damage conditions that can be useful in order to reduce the number of different cases. As an example the variation of the r-th frequency turns out to be equal to that of the s-th frequency. with the same damage. for other positions of the damaged zone the deviation from the proportionality decreases for increasing values of r. the frequency’s relative decrement corresponds to a decrement of the structural characteristics. β) is always positive for β > 0. If the center of the damaged zone is located at L/4 from the support. if the scope is to characterize not only the magnitude of damage. as the ratio sin β/β tends to zero. that is not possible to detect with Eq.

6941/L.8751/L. By substituting Eqs. Sketch of the model of the cantilever beam. 5. 4.8548/L. 2 (L) = 0. (19) and (5) becomes:  L  2 cosh(γr L) + cos(γr L) m· C · cosh(γr x) − cos(γr x) − 2 (sinh(γr x) + sin(γr x)) dx = 1 (23) 0 sinh(γr L) + sin(γr L) For every modal shape the coefficient C is equal to: 1 C= (24) m · 12 The circular frequencies for a uniform cantilever beam are [4]: . 3. 7. (0) = 0. 4. 5.388 M.9960/L. 3 (L) = 0 (21) dx dx dx Modeling the damage as already done for the simply supported beam. 6. 10. 2.2788/L for r = 1. The boundary conditions of the cantilever beam are: dY d2 Y d3 Y Y (0) = 0. (17) can be easily extended to the case of cantilever beams (Fig. Cantilever beams The result of Eq. / Sensitivity of dynamic methods Fig.1372/L and 17. x) − (sinh(γr x) + sin(γr x)) (19) sinh(γr L) + sin(γr L) where C is an arbitrary constant and γ r L are the roots of the equation: cos(γL) cosh(γL) = −1 (20) From this equation γ r is equal respectively to 1. The modal shapes are given by the following expression [4]:   cosh(γr L) + cos(γr L) Yr (x) = C · cosh(γr x) − cos(γ. 14. 2. (13) becomes:  L  cosh(γr L) + cos(γr L) 2 ∆λr = E∆J(x) · C 2 · rr2 · cosh(γr x) + γr2 · cos(γr x) − (γ 0 sinh(γr L) + sin(γr L) r 2 · sinh(γr x) + γr · sin(γr x)) 2 dx (22)   a+b/2 cosh(γr L) + cos(γr L) = E∆J · C · ·2 γr4 cosh(γr x) + cos(γr x) − a−b/2 sinh(γr L) + sin(γr L) 2 (sinh(γr x) + sin(γr x)) dx The coefficient C can be used to normalize the modal shapes with respect to the mass distribution. 2). Breccolotti et al. Eq.

). The effect of damage is represented by a decrease of the moment of inertia estimated following the classical linear analysis of RC sections which assumes as null the tensile strength of concrete and uses the homogenization . 19.165 t/m 3 . suitably increased to take into account the structural self weight and the weight of the superstructure (pavement. Longitudinal cross section of the bridge. 3). The moment of inertia of the undamaged structure.3282 m 2 . cross-section area A = 3. 3.75 m long. The following structural parameters have been assumed: Young’s modulus of concrete E = 35 kN/mm 2 . (15). mass density ρ = 3. Juncr . sidewalk. Application to a case study The results of the previous chapter have been applied to a reinforced concrete bridge over the Tiber river. flexural moment of inertia J = 0. / Sensitivity of dynamic methods 389 Fig. parapet. The previous densities are “equivalent values”. The simple supported internal span of the bridge. . M. the variation in the pulsation is:  a+b/2 L2 E ∆ωr = · ∆J · γr · 4 [cosh(γr x) + cos(γr x) 6(2n − 1)2 π 2 Jm a−b/2 (26) cosh(γr L) + cos(γr L) − (sinh(γr x) + sin(γr x))]2 dx sinh(γr L) + sin(γr L) and consequently:  ∆ωr ∆J · γr2 · L2 a+b/2 = · [cosh(γr x) + cos(γr x) ωr 6J(2n − 1)2 π 2 a−b/2 2 (27) cosh(γr L) + cos(γr L) − (sinh(γr x) + sin(γr x)) dx sinh(γr L) + sin(γr L) 6. has been calculated for the uncracked section. The transverse cross-section is indicated in Fig.7 Kg/m. located near the town of Rieti (Italy) and built between 1948 and 1949. was considered (Fig. 4. mass density per unit length m = 10533. EJ ωr = (γr L)2 (25) mL4 Recalling Eq. Breccolotti et al. neglecting the presence of the rebars. .9948 m 4 . .

0. J ave .476 −0.75 m) ∆ω/ω[%] b = 0.01s−1.0 m.0 m a = 4.05s−1. a = 2.708 6 −0. the dynamic behavior is more damage sensitive. using the first vibration mode.0 and L/2 m.45s−1. In order to study the behavior of a cantilever beam.5 m (span L = 19.654 −0.284 −0. J ave .717 2 −0. The effect of damage is naturally greater in the case of Table 2 than in the case of Table 1.006 5 −0. The second one refers to a damage extent of b = 2.713 m 4 . with a decrement with respect to the undamaged section equal to approximately 28%. which is an upper bound.390 M. The first one refers to a damage that extends for b = 0. figures which both depend on the geometric characteristics and on the steel content of the beam. (27) has been applied to a structure 19.03s−1 ω5 = 1150. The analysis of the upper modes appears useful to detect damage located between the midspan and the supports: generally the frequency more affected by variation is the one which corresponding eigenvector displays its maximum value at the damage location. When the damage extents along a finite portion of a beam. Transverse cross section of the bridge.229 −0.010 −0. J d was used herein instead of the correct average value of the moment of inertia.707 −0. 4. displays an intermediate value between J d . The relative variations of eigenfrequencies are summed up in Tables 3 and 4. 4.013 Fig. Eq. In the case of b = 0. in order to obtain an upper bound of the damage effect on the dynamic properties. Breccolotti et al. In both cases the damage may be detected at the best when it is located at the midspan. .5 m Mode no.254 −0. fully cracked sections are separated by uncracked regions and thus the average moment of inertia of the damaged part. while in the case of b = 2. like the one suggested by the ACI 318 (2002). with a maximum frequency shift of −2. which is a lower bound.0 m. / Sensitivity of dynamic methods Table 1 Simple supported beam: Eigenpulsation variations for b = 0. ω2 = 184. ω3 = 413. having the same cross section and the same parameters as considered previously for the simple supported beam.070 −0.636 −0.70s−1 The application of the procedure previously outlined leads to the results of Tables 1 and 2.99s−1.650 −0.0 m a = L/2 1 −0.002 3 −0. However. and J uncr .5 m the maximum frequency shift is −0. ω6 = 1656. the first six pulsations of the undamaged structure may be found from Eq. Under this hypothesis the moment of inertia reduces to J d = 0.75/2 m long. Several expressions are available in literature to estimate J ave . Under this assumption. at locations a = 2.714 4 −0.717%.628 −0.253 −0. technique. (3): ω1 = 45. ω4 = 736. In the tables the relative variations of the first six natural frequencies for the various geometries of damage are showed.845%.5 m along the beam.

while the bottom side of the bridge is supposed to be in contact with air at 25 ◦ C.987 −1.0 m 1 −0.841 −2. a = 2.095 3 −1. Breccolotti et al.849%. while in the case of b = 2.5 m the maximum frequency shift is −0. supposing that the reference concrete temperature is 25 ◦ C. In the case of b = 0.037 −0. Thermal map of the cross section after 240 minutes of exposure to heat.054 −0.039 5 −0.5 m Mode no. the analysis of the upper modes appears to add little to the information of damage obtained through the use of the first mode.357 −0. The role of the temperature on the dynamic field tests Both the actual boundary conditions and the temperature of the structural elements play an important role in the determination of the dynamic characteristics of bridges.444 4 −0.119 −0.280 −0.0 m.324 2 −0.335 −0.0 m a = 4. under the solar rays. / Sensitivity of dynamic methods 391 Table 2 Simple supported beam: Eigenpulsation variations for b = 2.300 −1. 7.725 Table 3 Cantilevered beam: Eigenpulsation variations for b = 0.326 −1.391 −2.5 m ∆ω/ω[%] b = 0.275 6 −0. and with the data supplied by the Eurocode 2 for the thermal properties of concrete. .0 m Mode no.536 −2.020 −2. With this boundary conditions.488 Fig.845 2 −1. A simple numerical simulation is carried out to evaluate the influence of the temperature on the stiffness properties of the structure.0 m (span L = 19. The same bridge used in the sample analysis of the previous paragraph is supposed to have no damage.056 −0.0 m a = 2.194 3 −0.75 m) ∆ω/ω[%] b = 2.5 m and b = 2.644 −0. a = 1. As a realistic thermal condition.0 m the damage is detected at the best using the first vibration mode when it is located near the support or at a = 2. The relative variations of the eigenfrequencies as a consequence of temperature changes with respected to a reference value are computed. In both cases of b = 0. 5.041 −2.336 6 −1.033 −0. the maximum frequency shift is −3.397 −0. the upper surface of the deck is suppose to reach 60 ◦ C. Unlike the simple beams.144 −0.849 −0.304 −0.0 m.661 4 −2.357 5 −2.542 −0.0 m a = 4. a thermal analysis is carried out by means of the FEM software FIRES T3 [18].028 −0. M.0 m a = L/2 1 −0.456 −0.413%.

413 −2.002 −1. As it is well known the Young’s modulus of concrete varies with the temperature T. the stiffness EJ decreases while the temperature is growing.B.5%. in 1991 suggested the use of the following correlation: E(T ) = E20◦ C · (1. This figure is of the same order of magnitude as most values reported on tables 1 to 4 for the damaged beams of the example. It can be noted that after four hours of exposition (t = 240 minutes) the decrease of the global stiffness is greater than 1.E.956 −1. with respect to the initial stiffness EJ(t 0 ) versus time is showed in Fig. / Sensitivity of dynamic methods Table 4 Cantilevered beam: Eigenpulsation variations for b = 2. (3) with respect to EJ. was carried out for a time duration of 240 minutes.804 −0.177 3 2 1 EJ(t)/EJ(t0) 0 -1 -2 -3 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Time (minutes) Fig.0 m 1 −3.0 m a = 2.544 4 −1. The analysis. a = 1. Breccolotti et al.256 −0.092 6 −1.0 m a = 4. taken as a variable: r2 π 2 ∆EJ ∆ωr = √ √ (29) mL4 2 EJ Dividing Eq.142 −1.003 · T ) (28) Applying this relation. The Model Code 90 issued by the C.476 −1. The relative variation of the stiffness at time t. EJ(t). Relative variation of the stiffness EJ with the time exposure to heat. 5 is reported the thermal map of the cross section at the end of the computation.0 m ∆ω/ω[%] b = 2. under steady thermal boundary conditions. (29) by Eq. Thus temperature changes may shadow in many cases the frequency variations due to the mechanical damage. the decrease observed in the global stiffness ∆EJ leads to a lessening of 0.594 −1. (3).75% in the pulsations of the beam.0 m Mode no.392 M.316 2 −1. The frequency variation due to the variation of the stiffness ∆EJ = EJ(t)−EJ(t 0 ) can be obtained differentiating Eq.807 3 −1. .549 5 −1. 6.06 − 0.412 −0.157 −1. the ratio between the frequency variation and the frequency becomes: ∆ωr ∆EJ = (30) ωr 2EJ Then. In Fig.068 −0.126 −0. 6.

F. 103–110. The temperature-driven shift of the natural modes proved to be not negligible and sufficient to overshadow. S.W. Proc. pp. . M. may be. Schultze. Prentice-Hall. 1995. Load test and modal analysis of bridges. but this technique surely adds uncertainties to the whole assessment process. such as those relying on pattern recognition. Farrar. prENV 1992-1-2: Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures. 1996. on the mechanical properties of the structural concrete. 1997. Switzerland. 205. The effect of the variation of the ambient temperature on the dynamic response of bridges has been evaluated under reasonable hypotheses of the air temperature.W. M.W. N. M. 2000. 1991. Dillon. Los Alamos.M. Damage prognosis: current status and future needs. Chopra.M. 1995. Other methods. Bucher. Shevitz. Brincker. J. Marchesiello and E. 125–137. Sorrentino. Engineering Structures 23 (2001). Fasana. [15] L. CEN/TC 250/SC 2.R. Doebling. Identification and level I damage detection of the Z24 highway bridges. G. [7] E. [4] A. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 17(1) (2003). Cantieni. pp. Therefore the dynamic methods for bridge monitoring and assessment based only on the detection of frequencies and modal shapes changes should be used with prudence. [3] R. 351–370.K. 203.N. EURODYN-2002. Proc. CEB/FIP Model Code 90 (Final Draft). ITI Technical report n. Proceeding IMAC-1995. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 17(1) (2003). New Mexico. A viable solution could be to use FEM analysis to numerically compute the dynamic response of the undamaged structure. Damage effects on the dynamic properties of R/C beams – Experimental and numerical investigation. Damage identification using changes of eigenfrequencies and mode shapes. Link.R. Experimental techniques. Sohn. 153–161. [6] Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN). H. Czepiel. 2001. 1433–1438. 1999. Hemez. Lieven and A. C. Doebling. 204. Part 1–2: Structural Fire Design. Proc. / Sensitivity of dynamic methods 393 8. P. Cone. CEB Bulletin D’Information No. Alampalli. Los Alamos National Laboratories. In the present paper a mathematical model which allows evaluating in closed form the shift of the natural frequencies with the location and the extent of damage has been proposed. [9] M. [14] L. Stanford. Ebert and C. [10] C. in many cases. report LA-14051-MS. [11] C. pp. instead. Farrar and K. [12] C. [5] Comité Euro-International du Beton (CEB). Garibaldi. Lessons learned from application of vibration-based damage identification methods to a large bridge structures. pp. statistical analysis and neural networks. E. model updating. Workshop on Structural Health Monitoring. Dynamic of Structures. 2002.J. Intl. Farrar and S.T. Vibration testing of the I-40 bridge before and after the introduction of damage. 102–109. Prime and D. Los Alamos.R. Blacksburg. B. References [1] American Concrete Institute (ACI) Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary. M. Giorcelli.R. Görl and M. Scaled model analysis of a traffic excited bridge.B. 2003. Conclusions Dynamic methods for assessing structural concrete bridges are based on the observation of the structural response to a known dynamic input. P. Andersen and R. Cornwell. Bement. Doebling. Northwestern University BIRL Industrial Research Laboratory. Fu and E. Anderson. Frýba and M. Pirner. Los Alamos National Laboratories. The other major drawback of the procedure is the influence of ambient factors. On the Use of Measured Vibration for Detecting Bridge Damage. on the modal analysis of data and on the comparison with a reference response. Farrar. the effects of damage. [16] E. report LA-13070-MS. [8] S.W. Breccolotti et al. Identification and up-dating over the Z24 benchmark. A first problem in this process is the knowledge of the dynamic properties of the investigated structure before the onset of damage. 1995. during which the model has been applied to an existing reinforced concrete bridge. 203–209. Bonisoli. The damage is modeled as a suited variation of the inertia properties. Damage identification and health monitoring of structural and mechanical system from changes in their vibrational characteristic: a literature review. Piombo and S. [2] S. CA. Bridge Management System: literature review and search. showed that the magnitude of the frequency shift barely reaches 3%. which change the structures dynamic response. like temperature variations. New Mexico. S. because the dynamic inspections are not usually carried out at the end of the construction and because in many cases the mass and stiffness of bridges change in time due to modifications of the superstructure or refurbishing works. A parametric analysis. This information is not always available. 2002. Robertson. F. Fourth International Bridge Engineering Conference.C. more efficient and reliable. [13] A. 1999 ASME Mechanics and materials conference. 11. Lausanne. ACI 318-02/318R-02.W. 1995.

J. Marchesiello. B. Interna- tional Workshop on structural damage assessment using advanced signal processing procedures. Peeters. Marchesiello and M. Abdel Wahab. Riva. De Visscher. Ndambi and J. M. 5th International Conference on Damage Assessment of structures. Fasana. Proc. 2003. Spyrakos. (1999). Chen. Monitoring bridge framework: dynamic identification assessing structural damages. L. 75–89. [25] C. 541–561. Lifshitz and A. Italy. 1990. [20] J. 2002. 19–26. Engineering Structures 22 (2000). A computer program for the fire response of structures.P. 1339–1349. Dynamics of multi-span continuous straigth bridges subjected to mdof moving vehicles excitation.S. Journal of Composites Materials 3 (1969). Elsevier Applied Science. pp. Computers and Structures 80(25) (2002). URITC FY99-12. Iding. [18] R. L. Fire Research Group. J. Evaluating Structural Deterioration Using Dynamic Response Characterization. De Roeck. Breccolotti et al. Piombo and A. Salawu and C. Hillier and P. Intelligent Structures.-L. S. Bresler and Z. report n. B. Damage assessment by FE model updating using damage functions. [23] A. 1995. July 1–3. Nizamuddin. De Wilde. Ruzzene. 137–154.M. Govidaraj. 933–939. Piombo. University of California. Southampton. Mechanical systems and signal processing 14(1) (2000). Rotem. A. [22] B. 1869–1879. Proc. pp.S. 1977. [21] S. Berkeley. Vantomme. Teughels. G. Maeck. Stephens and V. Stepanishen. Fasana. B. Piombo. [26] A. . Damage assessment of the Z24 bridge by FE model updating. Maeck and G. Data analysis and detection method for on-line health monitoring of bridge structures. Proceeding IMAC-1994.L. University of Rhode Island. De Roeck. Pescara. Hu. G. Williams. Damage identification in reinforced concrete structures by dynamic stiffness determination. Teughels. Modelling and identification of the dynamic response of a supported bridge. FIRES-T3. Damage location using vibration mode shapes. Garibaldi and B.-M. Garibaldi. 1994. Determination of reinforcement unbonding of composites by a vibration technique. Journal of Sound and vibrations 224(3). pp. H. De Roeck. [24] O. / Sensitivity of dynamic methods [17] S. T. W. [27] A.Thermal. J. DAMAS 2003. UK.394 M. J. J. [19] L.

hindawi.com Volume 2014 in Engineering Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.com Journal of Journal of Electrical and Computer Robotics Hindawi Publishing Corporation Engineering Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www. International Journal of Rotating Machinery International Journal of The Scientific Engineering Distributed Journal of Journal of Hindawi Publishing Corporation World Journal Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Sensors Hindawi Publishing Corporation Sensor Networks Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 Journal of Control Science and Engineering Advances in Civil Engineering Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.hindawi.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.com Volume 2014 http://www.com Volume 2014 http://www.com Volume 2014 http://www.com Volume 2014 Engineering Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 Submit your manuscripts at http://www.com Volume 2014 International Journal of International Journal of Antennas and Active and Passive Advances in Chemical Engineering Propagation Electronic Components Shock and Vibration Acoustics and Vibration Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.hindawi.hindawi.hindawi.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.hindawi.com http://www.com Volume 2014 http://www.com Volume 2014 http://www.com Volume 2014 .com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.hindawi.hindawi.hindawi.hindawi.hindawi.com Volume 2014 VLSI Design Advances in OptoElectronics International Journal of International Journal of Modelling & Simulation Aerospace Hindawi Publishing Corporation Volume 2014 Navigation and Observation Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2010 Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.hindawi.