See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/233493725

Studies on the Vibration of Pedestrian Bridges

Conference Paper · September 2000

DOI: 10.2749/222137900796297798

CITATIONS READS

0 637

3 authors, including:

Patrick Paultre
Université de Sherbrooke
187 PUBLICATIONS   3,113 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Hybrid testing of RC walls View project

Évaluation de la vulnérabilité sismique des ponts routiers au Québec réhabilités avec l’utilisation d’isolateurs en caoutchouc naturel View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Patrick Paultre on 23 January 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 16TH CONGRESS OF IABSE, LUCERNE, 2000

Studies on the Vibration of Pedestrian Bridges

Frédéric LÉGERON Manuel LE MOINE Patrick PAULTRE

Bridge Engineer Structural Engineer Professor
SETRA CETMEF University of Sherbrooke
Bagneux, France Compiègne, France Sherbrooke, Canada

Summary
This paper presents a study on the vibration of footbridges under pedestrian loading. For such
structures, comfort of users is usually a prime consideration in the design. It is important to account
for the vibrations that can result from resonance of the footbridge with excitation from pedestrians.
After a comparison of comfort criteria found in various design codes, brief theoretical
considerations relevant to vibration of footbridges are presented. Based on these, methods included
in major design codes for vibration check of footbridges are compared. Finally, a numerical
example is presented.
Keywords: Vibrations; pedestrian bridge; dynamic of structures; comfort; acceleration.

1. Introduction
In recent years, due to the use of high performance materials, vibrations of pedestrian bridges have
become a real problem that design engineers should consider early in the design process.
Traditionally, vibration design of footbridges is carried out in order to limit the vertical acceleration
of the structure to an acceptable level for the user. The design process is divided into two parts: (i)
compute the vertical acceleration; and (ii) ensure it is within acceptable limits, usually referred as
the comfort criteria. The objective of this article is to present some important current regulations
that account for pedestrian induced vibration of footbridges. An example is presented to highlight
this code review. Some recommendations are provided to account for this kind of problem.

2. Comfort Criteria
Comfort criteria, acrit, are approximate limits of acceptability for vibration acceleration given in
design codes. Table 1 presents values of acrit given by four design codes. While the British Standard
BS 5400, the Eurocode 2 Part 2 (EC2-2), and the Ontario Bridge Code (ONT83) give criteria
related to the fundamental natural frequency, f0, the Eurocode 5 Part 2 and the ISO/DIS 10137 give
constant values of comfort criteria. For walking frequency, around 2 Hz, all codes give values
between 0.59 and 0.70 m/s² except the Ontario Bridge Code, which gives a lower value of
0.43 m/s². For design purposes, a value between 0.6 and 0.7 seems appropriate for walking.
However, for frequencies higher than 2 Hz, significant differences arise. Based on experimental
evidence, it has been proposed that comfort criteria should be related to the fundamental frequency.
In this paper, we will use the EC2.2 criteria:
1
a crit = f0
2

3. Computation of maximum acceleration

3.1 Theoretical Basis

3.1.1 Acceleration for a single pedestrian

It is possible to represent pedestrian loading with a time varying function with a moving point of
application. Using the function δ(x-vt) which has a value of 1 when x = vt , and 0 elsewhere,
 16TH CONGRESS OF IABSE, LUCERNE, 2000

Table 1 - Comparison of different comfort criteria

Code a crit
BS5400 and EC2.2 1
f0
2
Ontario Code (ONT83) 1 0, 78
f0
4
EC5.2 0.70

ISO/DIS 10137 0.59

this loading may be expressed as:

P ( x, t ) = P (t )δ ( x − vt ) (1)

where P (t ) is the load function of the pedestrian at the point of application x. It is possible to
decompose this function in Fourier series as:
∞
é ù
P(t ) = P ê1 + å α k sin(kω t − ϕ k )ú (2)
ë k =1 û

where ω is about 4π for walking. A complete solution of the response of a pedestrian bridge under
this loading is not generally possible. However, it is instructive to compute the response of a simply
supported beam with span L and mass per unit length m . The flexural modes of such beams are
given by:
2 nπ x
φ n ( x) = sin (3)
mL L
and the natural circular frequencies are given by:
EI
ω n = n²π ² (4)
mL4

For a single mode n, we assume that the harmonic k is in resonance with the loading. First, let us
consider the case where the pedestrian is stepping in place without moving at the position
x = L / 2n for a period of time equivalent to that required to cross the footbridge, L / v . Then the
generalised load for mode n is:
2
p n (t ) = P (1 + α k sin (ω n t ) )∆(t ) (5)
mL
where ∆ (t ) = 1 when 0 < t < L / v and 0 elsewhere. The response of the footbridge is:
α P
u(
L
2n
( ) æ xö
, t ) = k 1 − e −ξ nω nt cos(ω t ) sin ç nπ ÷
ξ n mL Lø
(6)
è
where ξ n is the critical damping ratio for mode n . The vertical acceleration reaches a maximum for
x = L / 2n for all values of t . The time when cos ω n ( L / v − ε ) = 1 is equal to ε . Assuming that
 16TH CONGRESS OF IABSE, LUCERNE, 2000

L / v >> ε and since the exponent is not influenced by the value of ε, the maximum acceleration is
approximately given by:
αk P
a max =
ξ n mL
(
1 − e −ξ ω T )
n n
(7)

where T = L / v . It is also possible to express T as a function of N , the number of steps of the

pedestrian on the footbridge, and ω n : N = L / L p , where L p is the average step length,
v = ω n L p / 2π and T = 2π N / ω n . Then, the maximum acceleration is:

αk P
a max =
ξ n mL
(
1 − e −2π ξ nN
) (8)

We have for the first harmonic of walking α 1 = 0.4 and for the first harmonic of running α 1 = 1.6 .
The other harmonics are generally negligible. For a pedestrian actually moving on the footbridge,
we need to consider a moving effect. Figure 1 shows the results of the analysis for a footbridge with
a fundamental frequency of 2.45 Hz for one pedestrian. Five diagrams are presented corresponding
to: (i) acceleration at mid-span resulting from a constant load P moving at a speed v ; (ii)
acceleration from the first harmonic; (iii) total acceleration at mid-span; (iv) acceleration felt by the
pedestrian walking on the bridge; (v) acceleration felt by a pedestrian stepping in place. It is
evident from this figure that the static part of P(t) produces a negligible acceleration. The first
harmonic contributes for the most part of the response of the footbridge. The ratio of the maximum
acceleration felt by the pedestrian crossing the footbridge (Fig. 1d) to the maximum acceleration at
mid-span (Fig. 1c) is about 0.8. The shape of the total acceleration at mid span when the pedestrian
is crossing the footbridge (Fig. 1c) is similar to the shape of the acceleration felt by the pedestrian
stepping in place (Fig. 1e) with the ratio of the maximum values being 0.7. Therefore the ratio of
the acceleration felt by a pedestrian crossing the footbridge (Fig. 1d) to the acceleration at mid-span
due to a pedestrian stepping in place without moving (Fig. 1e) is λ = 0.8 × 0.7 ≈ 0.6 . The maximum
acceleration at mid-span for a pedestrian crossing the footbridge can therefore be calculated by
multiplying the maximum acceleration at mid-span for one pedestrian stepping in place by the
factor λ .

3.1.2 Generalisation to other types of structure

For a footbridge that can be assumed to behave as a simply supported beam, the vertical
acceleration is
αk P
a max =
ξ n mL
(1 − e − 2π ξ nN
)λ (9)

We account for a footbridge with different configuration by using a configuration factor K given in
Table 2 and which depends on the number of spans and span ratios. Then, the acceleration may be
written as:
αk P
a max =
ξ n mL
(1 − e −2π ξ nN
)λ K (10)

3.1.3 Acceleration resulting from a crowd

In the case of several pedestrian, it is simpler to separate the problem in three distinct ones:

1) Small number of pedestrians walking in synch, in place, on a line perpendicular to the

longitudinal axis of the bridge. We assume that the acceleration resulting from n pedestrians, a max,n
can be expressed as a function of the acceleration resulting from one pedestrian, a max :
a max,n = n a max (11)
 16TH CONGRESS OF IABSE, LUCERNE, 2000

4
(a) Static component resulting from a walking pedestrian

Acceleration (m/s²)
2

-2

-4
4
(b) Dynamic component resulting from a walking pedestrian
Acceleration (m/s²)

-2

-4
4
(c) Total acceleration resulting from a walking pedestrian
Acceleration (m/s²)

-2

-4
4
(d) Acceleration felt by a walking pedestrian
Acceleration (m/s²)

-2

-4
4
(e) Acceleration felt by a pedestrian stepping in place
Acceleration (m/s²)

-2

-4
0 5 10 15
Time (s)

Fig. 1 - Mid-span acceleration

2) Small number of pedestrians out of synch. Assuming the frequency of the pedestrian stepping
frequency to have a statistical distribution following a Poisson law, it can be shown [2] that the
maximum acceleration is:
a max,n = n a max (12)

3) Continuous flow of pedestrians. We assume that a steady state and resonance can be reached.
Experimental investigations by Fujino et al. [2] have shown that on a footbridge crossed by a
crowd, pedestrians have a tendency to synchronise their steps and that the amplification factor for
the previous case ( n ) is not applicable in this case. Based on the work by Fujino et al. [2] we can
use:
a max,n = 0.2 n a max (13)
The difference between 0.2 n and n is significant for a large number of pedestrians. For 25
pedestrians and more, 0.2 n is larger. This equation is based on the observations of lateral vibrations
of a footbridge, and since horizontal and vertical motions of a flexible footbridge are generally
interrelated, we assume it to be applicable to vertical vibration. For practical applications, it is
 16TH CONGRESS OF IABSE, LUCERNE, 2000

reasonable to consider that the footbridge is loaded by 1 pedestrian/m² walking at a speed of 1.5 m/s
at a pace of 2 Hz. In some cases, 1.6 to 1.8 pedestrian/m² may be reached. With 1 pedestrian/m², we
obtain:
a max,n = 0.2 S a max (14)
where S is the loaded surface of the deck. Equation (14) leads to important accelerations. There is a
need, however, for more experimental data to confirm values of dynamic amplification factors from
the work of Fujino et al. [2]. We have, up to now, considered vertical vibration of pedestrian
bridges. It should be noted that for a crowd, lateral vibrations of footbridges could also be of
significance on the comfort of pedestrians.

3.2 Comparison of Codes

3.2.1 Eurocode 2 part 2 (EC2-2)

The proposed general method consists of applying a sinusoidal force F = 280 sin(2π f 0 t ) moving at
a speed v = 0.9 f 0 , with F in Newton, f 0 in Hertz and v in m/s. No simplified method is
recommended in EC2-2.

3.2.2 Eurocode 5 part 2 (EC5-2)

The acceleration from a single pedestrian is computed by applying a force F = 280 sin(2π f vert t )
moving at a speed v = 0.9 f vert , with f vert in Hertz and v in m/s. The EC5-2 also provides a
simplified method to compute the vertical acceleration for a single pedestrian:
a vert , 1 =
165K 1
M ζ
(1 − e −2π nζ ) m/s² (15)

where M is the mass of the footbridge in kg, n = L / 0.75 is the number of steps required to cross
the main span of length L . Equation (15) is similar to equation (10) with K , the configuration
factor given in Table 2 and the constant 165 is 700 × 0.4 × λ , with λ = 0.59 . To compute the vertical
acceleration resulting from a group of pedestrians or a crowd, the following equations are proposed:
ìïa vert ,1 k vert , f For a few pedestrians
a vert = í (16)
ïî0.027 Lba vert ,1 k vert , f For a continuous flow of pedestrians
where k vert is the dynamic amplification factor given in Fig. 2.
This factor can account for a small group of about ten persons who are not walking in pace, since
10 ≈ 3 . A dynamic amplification is obtained if the fundamental frequency of the footbridge is
close to 2 Hz. This seems logical since the pace of walking is centred around 2 Hz and it is quite
unlikely that a group of pedestrians would walk at an average pace of 3 Hz.

For a continuous flow of pedestrians, the factor 0.027 corresponds to a density of 0.4 person/m²
from the equation from Fujino et al. [2] and is dense enough for usual cases. Denser crowd could be
accounted for with the same equation.
The EC5-2 also proposes a similar method to compute lateral vibration.
 16TH CONGRESS OF IABSE, LUCERNE, 2000

Fig. 3 -.Dynamic amplification

Fig. 2 - Dynamic amplification factor kvert, f (EC5-2). factor ψ (BS 5400)

3.2.3 BS5400 and ONT83

In the BS5400 Code, a sinusoidal force similar to the one in EC2-2 represents the effect of a
pedestrian. For a simple footbridge, the vertical acceleration is computed as:
a = 4π 2 f 02 y s Kψ (17)
where:
K = configuration factor given in Table 2,
ψ = dynamic amplification factor (Fig. 3), function of the logarithmic decrement, δ=2πξ, where ξ
is the damping ratio,
y s = maximum vertical displacement under a static force of 700 N applied at mid-span.

PL3 EI
For a simply supported beam y s = and the natural circular frequency is ω 0 = π ² .
48EI mL4

Table 2 - Configuration factor K (BS 5400)

 16TH CONGRESS OF IABSE, LUCERNE, 2000

Substituting in Eq. (17), we obtain:

π4 P
a= Kψ (18)
48 mL
Identifying with Eq. (8) and taking α k = 0.4 , we find:

ψ=
19,2
(
λ 1 − e − 2π ξ N ) (19)
π ξ
4

For L pas = 0.9 m, L = 50 m and δ = 0.03 we find ψ = 15.3 from Fig. 3. This leads to a value of
λ = 0.457 . For a simply supported beam using the sinusoidal force, we find λ = 0.57 . The
simplified equation is not confirmed by the general method using the sinusoidal force. Hence, it is
not recommended to use the simplified method.

3.3 Comparison of Code methods

From Eq. (2) for the first harmonic and for a pedestrian weighting 700 N, the dynamic amplitude of
the force is 0.4 × 700 = 280 N , where 0.4 is the Fourier coefficient of the first harmonic. This value
is the one adopted in EC5-2. The origin of the term 180 sin(ω t ) in EC2-2 and BS 5400 is unclear.
Hence, for dynamic analysis of footbridges, a time varying force of 280 sin(ω t ) should be used as
proposed in EC5-2.
For the simplified method, EC5-2 is based on theoretical background whereas BS5400 does not
lead to result similar to their proposed general method using a sinusoidal force. The vertical
acceleration is underestimated by BS5400.
Groups and crowd are only taken into consideration in EC5-2 and the method reflects quite well the
current knowledge. Heavier loads can be accounted for dense crowd. EC5-2 is the only code
proposing a complete approach for vibration of footbridges.

4. Numerical example
We consider a footbridge constructed in France for which the dynamic behaviour was not
considered at the time of design. The footbridge is made of two steel I-beams spanning 30 m across
a highway. The linear mass of the deck is 353 kg/m and the inertia is 0.00352 m4. The total mass of
the deck is 10.6 t and the effective deck surface is 45 m². The static deflection under a 700 N load at
mid-span is 5.6x10-4 m.
The circular frequencies of the footbridge are, from Eq. (4):
EI 200000 × 0.00352
ω n = n 2π 2 = n 2π 2 = 15.5 n 2
mL4
353 × 30 4

The frequency of the first mode is 2.5 Hz. The second mode has a frequency over 5 Hz and will not
generate discomfort. A continuous flow would represent 45 x 0.4 = 18 pedestrians with an average
weight of 18x70=1260 kg, which is small, compared to the mass of the structure. If we consider this
additional mass, the first mode would shift from 2.5 to 2.3 Hz.
The simplified methods are applicable for this bridge. Equation (15) from EC5-2 gives:

165 × 1.0 æ 30
0.005 ö
165K 1
(1 − e − 2π nζ ) =
1 − 2π
a vert , 1 = × × ç1 − e 0, 75 ÷ = 2.3 m/s²
M ζ 10600 0.005 çè ÷
ø
 16TH CONGRESS OF IABSE, LUCERNE, 2000

Eq. (17) from BS5400 gives:

a = 4π 2 f 02 y s Kψ = 4π 2 × 2.5 2 × 5.6 ⋅ 10 −4 × 1 × 11.3 = 1.6 m/s²

Both methods predict acceleration levels far above comfort criteria. This is in agreement with
observed behaviour. However, BS5400 give values smaller than EC5-2. Using a time history
dynamic analysis, the maximum vertical acceleration is found to be 2.2 m/s² for a pedestrian
weighting 700 N with steps of 0.75 m moving with at a 2.5 Hz pace rate. It can be seen that the
result is close to the simplified method proposed by EC5-2.
For crowd loading, using Eq. (16) from EC5-2, we find:
a vert = a vert ,1 k vert , f = 2.2 × 3 = 6.6 m/s²

a vert = 0.027 Lba vert ,1 k vert , f = 0.027 × 45 × 6.6 = 8 m/s²

Clearly, these accelerations are not acceptable. However, for this particular bridge, neither group
nor crowd loading is possible and the single pedestrian case is the only one that should be
considered. These results would have lead to change in the design for another bridge.

5. Conclusions
Some theoretical backgrounds to understand the dynamic behaviour of pedestrian bridges were
discussed. Comparisons of proposed design codes methods were also presented. Due to the average
frequency range for walking and running, critical acceleration computations should be computed
when the natural frequency of the bridge is lower than 5 Hz. This could lead to change in the design
or addition of tuned mass dampers to control vibrations. The methods proposed in EC5-2 are
recommenced since they are simple and reflect the current state of knowledge. More research is
needed, in particular for crowd loading, which is not properly accounted for in many design codes.
Full scale dynamic tests carried out on several pedestrian bridges could lead to a well documented
data base that is required to understand their dynamic behaviour.

6. References
[1] LÉGERON, F. “Calcul transitoire des passerelles sous chargements ponctuels : approche
analytique” SETRA Report, 1999.
[2] FUJINO Y., PACHECO B., NAKAMURA S. and WAARNITCHAI, P. “Synchronization of
human walking observed during lateral vibration of a congested pedestrian bridge”,
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 22, Sept. 1993, pp. 741-758.
[3] ENV1992-2,“Design of Concrete Structures - Part 2: Concrete Bridges”, European
Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 1996.
[4] ENV1995-2, “Design of Timber Structures - Part 2 : Bridge”, European Committee for
Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 1997.
[5] British Standard “Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges : Specifications for Loads”, British
Standard BS 5400, Part 2, 1978.
[6] ISO/DIS 10137 “Bases for Design of Structures - Serviceability of Buildings against
Vibration”, International Standard Organization, Geneva
[7] ONT83 “Ontario Highway Bridge Design Code”, Highway Engineering Division, Ministry of
Transportation and Communication, Toronto, Canada, 1983.

View publication stats