Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Interaction Analysis of
Railway Bridges
Numeri cal and Experimen tal Results
ABB AS ZANGENEH K A MA LI
Dynamic Soil-Structure
Interaction Analysis of
Railway Bridges
Numerical and Experimental Results
Akademisk avhandling som med tillstånd av KTH i Stockholm framlägges till offentlig
granskning för avläggande av teknisk licentiatexamen fredagen den 13 april kl. 09:30 i
konferensrum M108, KTH, Brinellvägen 23, Stockholm. Avhandlingen försvaras på engelska.
In the memory of my father,
Bahram
Abstract
The work reported in this thesis presents a general overview of the dynamic
response of short-span railway bridges considering soil-structure interaction.
The study aims to identify the effect of the surrounding and underlying soil
on the global stiffness and damping of the structural system. This may lead
to better assumptions and more efficient numerical models for design.
A simple discrete model for calculating the dynamic characteristics of the
fundamental bending mode of single span beam bridges on viscoelastic
supports was proposed. This model was used to study the effect of the
dynamic stiffness of the foundation on the modal parameters (e.g. natural
frequency and damping ratio) of railway beam bridges. It was shown that
the variation in the underlying soil profiles leads to a different dynamic
response of the system. This effect depends on the ratio between the flexural
stiffness of the bridge and the dynamic stiffness of the foundation-soil
system but also on the ratio between the resonant frequency of the soil layer
and the fundamental frequency of the bridge.
The effect of the surrounding soil conditions on the vertical dynamic response
of portal frame bridges was also investigated both numerically and
experimentally. To this end, different numerical models (i.e. full FE models and
coupled FE-BE models) have been developed. Controlled vibration tests have
been performed on two full-scale portal frame bridges to determine the modal
properties of the bridge-soil system and calibrate the numerical models. Both
experimental and numerical results identified the substantial contribution of the
surrounding soil on the global damping of short-span portal frame bridges. A
simplified model for the surrounding soil was also proposed in order to define a
less complicated model appropriate for practical design purposes.
Keywords
i
Sammanfattning
Nyckelord
iii
Preface
The research work presented in this thesis has been carried out at the
Division of Structural Engineering and Bridges, Department of Civil
and Architectural Engineering at KTH Royal Institute of Technology.
The research has been financed by the Swedish Research Council
Formas. This support is gratefully acknowledged. The field
measurements presented in this thesis were partly financed by
Trafikverket and performed by Dr. Andreas Andersson, Mr. Stefan
Trillkott, Mr. Claes Kullberg and the author.
v
Publications
Appended papers:
vii
List of abbreviations
SSI Soil-Structure Interaction
FEM Finite Element Method
BEM Boundary Element Method
2D Two Dimensional
3D Three Dimensional
HST High-Speed Train
PML Perfectly Matched Layer
DSM Direct Stiffness Method
SS Simply Supported
ES Elastically Supported
VS Viscoelastically Supported
FRF Frequency Response Function
CWT Continuous Wavelet Transform
ICE InterCity Express Train
HSLM High-Speed Load Model
SI System Identification
ix
Contents
Abstract i
Sammanfattning iii
Preface v
Publications vii
List of abbreviations ix
1. Introduction ................................................................................. 1
1.1. Background ................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Previous work ............................................................................................. 2
1.2.1. Simply supported beam bridges ......................................................................2
1.2.2. Portal frame bridges ........................................................................................3
1.3. Aims and scope .......................................................................................... 4
1.4. Research contribution ............................................................................... 5
1.5. Outline of the thesis ................................................................................... 6
xi
2.3.2. Substructure approach .................................................................................. 16
2.4. Concepts of period lengthening and foundation damping .................. 19
2.5. Impedance functions of shallow foundations ....................................... 19
xii
6.3. Experimental validation of numerical models ....................................... 61
6.4. Further research ....................................................................................... 61
6.4.1. Simple beam bridges ..................................................................................... 62
6.4.2. Portal frame bridges ...................................................................................... 62
References ..................................................................................... 65
Paper I ............................................................................................ 69
Paper II ........................................................................................... 77
xiii
1. Introduction
1.1. Background
f0d
ν cr = (1.1)
i
where f0 is the fundamental frequency of the bridge, d is the
characteristic axle distance and i is an integer multiple.
∂e ∂ 2u
(λ + G ) + G∇ 2ui =ρ 2i , i = x, y, z (2.1)
∂i ∂t
2Gν
λ= (2.2)
(1 − 2ν )
1 ∂ 2e
∇ 2e = 2 2 (2.3)
Vp ∂t
∂ui ∂u j
2
1 ∂ wij
∇ 2 wij = , wij (
= − ) (2.4)
Vs 2 ∂t 2 ∂j ∂i
where wij is the rotation about the normal axis of the ij-plane and Vp
and Vs are the dilatational and shear wave velocity, respectively.
G λ + 2G 2 − 2ν
Vs = ,=Vp = Vs (2.5)
ρ ρ 1 − 2ν
The dilatational and shear waves, labeled as body waves, are the only
wave types that can propagate in a homogenous infinite medium. In
general, the shear waves are slower than the dilatational waves. Fig.
2.1a-b depicts the character of the motion associated with each of
these two waves. Table 2.1 presents the typical values of the shear
wave velocity and compression wave velocity for different materials.
PRINCIPLES OF DYNAMIC SSI | 9
Table 2.1. Indicative values of P- and S- wave velocity for different soils [15]
P-Wave velocity S-Wave velocity
Soil type
(m/s) (m/s)
Ice 3000-3500 1500-1600
Water 1480-1520 0
Granite 4500-5500 3000-3500
Sandstone, Shale 2300-3800 1200-1600
Fractured Rock 2000-2500 800-1400
Moraine 1400-2000 300-600
Saturated Sand and Gravel 1400-1800 100-300
Dry Sand and Gravel 500-800 150-350
Clay below GW level 1480-1520 40-100
Organic soils 1480-1520 30-50
0.862 + 1.14ν
VR ≈ Vs (2.6)
1 +ν
2.1.2. Vibration attenuation
Direction (a)
of particle
motion
Wavelength
(b)
Direction
of particle
motion
Direction
(c)
of particle
motion
Fig. 2.1. Particle motion variation for wave type: (a) compression wave; (b) shear
wave; (c) Rayleigh wave [20]
PRINCIPLES OF DYNAMIC SSI | 11
G
= *
G (1 + 2iξs ) (2.7)
(λ + 2G )* =
(λ + 2G )(1 + 2iξ p ) (2.8)
G
Vs,eq = (2.9)
ρeq
(V Vs,eq ) − 2
2
ρ p,w
ρeq = ρ + (1 − ) ρ w , ν eq = (2.10)
ρg 2 (V Vs,eq ) − 2
2
p,w
where ρg =2650 kg/m3 and ρw =1000 kg/m3 are the mass density of
gravel grains and pore water, respectively and Vp,w=1500 m/s is the
compression wave velocity for water.
12 | PRINCIPLES OF DYNAMIC SSI
Typical values for shear wave velocity for different materials are
presented in Table 2.1.
For granular soil, the following relation is often used to estimate the
small strain shear modulus Gmax in kPa [24, 25]:
504cu
Gmax = (2.13)
wL
G
= 208 + 250 c
max I u (2.14)
p
Even at very small strains, soil materials are not perfectly elastic and
reveal some energy dissipation capacity during cyclic loading. This is
referred to as soil material damping. The small strain material damping,
ξs, ranges between 2 and 6 percent for different types of soil [27, 28].
As the dissipation capacity of the soil medium through its material
damping may be considerably lower than radiation damping, the
accurate assessment of the former is typically irrelevant except for
some special cases (e.g. vertical oscillations of foundations on a
shallow soil stratum at low frequencies) [29].
FE model of
the structure
FE model of
the foundation FE model of
the soil
Transmitting
boundaries
Fig. 2.2. Schematic illustration of the direct method in the soil-structure analysis
Dt = rVs Atrib.
Dn = rVp Atrib.
Vp
Lr ≥ (2.15)
f min
where Lr is the shortest path in the finite domain from the region of
interest to the boundaries and fmin is the lowest frequency of interest.
1 1 Vs
le, max ≤ − lmin , λmin = (2.16)
5 8 f max
where le,max is the maximum element size and fmax is the highest
frequency of interest. According to Lysmer (1978) [42], eight linear
elements (nine nodes) per wavelength will provide about 90%
accuracy on wave amplitudes in the highest frequency range of
interest.
16 | PRINCIPLES OF DYNAMIC SSI
(K g
ff (ω ) + iω Cffg (ω ) ) .U f (ω ) =
Pf (ω ) (2.17)
(b) P s , Us
Ps , U s
(c)
P f , Uf Ps , Us
= (a)
+ = Uf
Pf , Uf
Ug
Ug
K ss K sf M M sf
s
− ω 2 ss
K fs K ff M fs M ff
C Csf U s (ω ) + Ps (ω )
+iω ss = (2.18)
Cfs Csff U f (ω ) −Pf (ω )
K ss K sf 2
M ss M sf
− ω
K fs K sff + K ffg (ω ) M
fs M ff
C Csf U s (ω ) Ps (ω )
+iω ss = (2.19)
Cfs Csff + Cffg (ω ) U f (ω ) 0
k n , dn
k t , dt
Z=K+i.wC Z=K+i.wC
Fig. 2.5. Schematic illustration of the simplified FE model
PRINCIPLES OF DYNAMIC SSI | 19
(ω ) K (ω ) + iωC (ω )
Z= (2.20)
2K
Chysteretic = ( )ξs (2.22)
ω
where ξs is the damping ratio of the soil material. The expression for
Chysteretic in Eq. 2.22 is an approximation based on the correspondence
principle of viscoelasticity [21].
1 1.5
(b)
Cv,rad / Cv,0
0
Kv / Kv,0
(a)
1
-1 Dry ν =0.3
Saturated νeq , ρeq
-2 0.5
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
ωB/Vs ωB/Vs
Fig. 2.6. Normalized vertical dynamic stiffness and radiation damping coefficients
for rectangular surface foundations with L/B=2, resting on a homogenous half-space
ρVs 2 Af B 3
K v,0 (halfspace)
= (0.73 + 1.54( ) 4 ) (2.23)
2 B(1 −ν ) L
where B, L and Af are the semi-width, semi-length and the area of the
foundation, respectively.
In Eq. 2.24 VLa is the Lysmer’s analog wave velocity [57] which is
defined based on Lysmer's frequency-independent analog for a
circular rigid foundation vibrating vertically on the surface of a half-
space [58]:
3.4Vs
VLa = (2.25)
π (1 −ν )
22 | PRINCIPLES OF DYNAMIC SSI
Dry soil
Saturated soil
) K (ω ) − ω 2 ∆M
Re( Z= (2.26)
Af
∆M ≈ 2.4π (ν − 0.3) ρ ( )1.5 (2.27)
π
The variation of the normalized radiation damping coefficient is not
affected by the presence of ground water, as shown in Fig. 2.6b.
However, due to higher values for Lysmer’s analog wave velocity as
well as equivalent soil density for the saturated soils, the magnitude
of the radiation damping coefficient, Cv,radiation is slightly higher than
in the case of dry soils.
1 2
Cv,rad / Cv,0
0.5
Kv / Kv,0
1
0 H/B=16
H/B=8
(a) (b)
-0.5 H/B=4 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
f / fc f / fc
Fig. 2.7. Normalized vertical dynamic stiffness and radiation damping coefficients
for rectangular surface foundations with L/B=2, resting on homogenous stratum
over bedrock
rVs 2 Af B 3 B H
K v,0 (stratum)= (0.73 + 1.54( ) 4 ) 1 + ( 2.28)
2 B(1 −ν ) L (0.5 + B L)
VLa
fc = (2.29)
4H
3. Discrete model for beams on viscoelastic
supports
The dynamic response of short-span railway beam bridges at
resonance is governed by their fundamental vertical bending mode
[60-62]. To study the influence of soil-structure interaction on the
modal properties of railway beam bridges in a systematic manner,
derivation of closed-form expressions to calculate the natural
frequency and modal damping ratio of the bridge-foundation-soil
system is helpful. In this chapter, a discrete 2 degrees of freedom
model is proposed, and analytical closed-form expressions are
derived to estimate the natural frequency and modal damping ratio of
single-span beam bridges with viscoelastic supports. These
expressions provide a tool that can be used for a better understanding
of the phenomena, for determining when the effect of SSI is
important and for parametric studies of the effect of various
foundation-soil types on the dynamic behavior of the bridge.
π x u
, t ) Φ.d ≅ 1 sin( ) f
u ( x= (3.1)
L ub
d ∂T ∂U ∂D
+ + 0,
= j = f, b (3.2)
dt ∂u j ∂u j ∂u j
kv cv EI, m, L cv kv
ub
EI, m, L
uf uf
kv cv m, L cv kv
The kinetic and potential energy of the system are evaluated using Eq.
3.3 and 3.4, respectively. The dissipation energy corresponding to the
material and geometrical damping of the foundation-soil system is
given by Eq. 3.5:
2
1 L du 1 4u u u 2
T
= m ∫ d= x mL uf 2 + f b + b (3.3)
2 0 dt 2 π 2
2
L d u 1 π 4 EI 2
2
1 1
U= EI ∫ 2 dx + (2k v )uf = 3 ub + 2k v uf 2
2
(3.4)
2 0
dx 2 2 2L
1
D = (2cv )uf 2 (3.5)
2
+ Kd + Cd =
Md 0 (3.6)
where
2k v 0
uf 1 2 π 2cv 0
d = , M = mL , K=
π 4 EI , C =
ub 2 π 1 2 0
0 0
2 L3
(K + λC + λ 2 M )d = 0 → det(K + λC + λ 2 M ) = 0 (3.7)
Inserting the obtained mass, stiffness and damping matrices into Eq.
3.7, gives the quartic polynomial in Eq. 3.8 as the complex
eigenvalue equation.
28 | DISCRETE MODEL FOR BEAMS ON VISCOELASTIC SUPPORTS
(π 2 − 8) 2 4
2
γ λ + βγλ 3 + γ (1 + D)λ 2 + 2β Dλ + 2 D =
0 (3.8)
2π
mL π 4 EI c
where γ = , D= 3 , β = v
kv 2 L kv kv
By calculating the real and imaginary parts of the complex roots for
Eq. 3.8 (λr and λi) using general solution for quartic polynomials, the
closed-form expressions for the undamped natural frequency and
modal damping ratio of the fundamental bending mode of the system
is obtained.
ω n
= λr 2 + λi 2 (3.10)
ξ n = − λr ω n (3.11)
π2 β 1
λ1,2 =− −S ± −4 S 2 − 2 p + q S (3.12)
2(π − 8)γ
2
2
π2 β 1
λ3,4 =− +S± −4 S 2 − 2 p − q S (3.13)
2(π − 8)γ
2
2
Where:
2
2π 2 (1 + D) π2 β
=p − 1.5 2
(π 2 − 8)γ (π − 8)γ
DISCRETE MODEL FOR BEAMS ON VISCOELASTIC SUPPORTS | 29
3
π6 β 2π 4 β (1 + D) 4π 2 β D
q =2 − +
(π − 8)3 γ (π 2 − 8) 2 γ2 (π 2 − 8) γ 2
12(π 2 − 8) 2
D 0 = ( D + 1) γ − 6 β γ D +
2 2 2
γ D
π2
432 72(π 2 − 8) 3
D= 2( D + 1) γ
3 3
+ β γ
2 2
D 36 + 36 − D − γ D(1 + D)
π 2
1
π2
(
)
2
3 0.25 ∆ + ∆ 2 − 4∆ 3 + ∆0
1 2 2π 2 1 1 0
S= − p+
3(π − 8)γ 2
( )
2
2 3 2
3 0.5 ∆ + ∆ − 4∆ 3
1 1 0
Based on the sign of the discriminant (4∆03−∆12), the equation has one
or two pairs of complex conjugate roots [65, 66]. As it will be proved
in the verification studies in section 3.1.2, the real and imaginary
parts of the lowest eigenvalue for the fundamental bending mode of
the system can be obtained by Eq. 3.14 and 3.15, considering only the
real part of the term S.
π2 β
λr =
− + sgn S (3.14)
2(π 2 − 8)g
1 2 q
λi
= 4 S + 2 p + sgn (3.15)
2 S
where
Once the real and imaginary parts of the complex eigenvalue are
evaluated, closed-form expressions for the natural frequency and
modal damping ratio of viscoelastically supported (VS) beams can be
obtained from Eq. 3.16 and Eq. 3.17, respectively:
30 | DISCRETE MODEL FOR BEAMS ON VISCOELASTIC SUPPORTS
2
π2 β 2 p q
ω0,VS = − + sgn S + S + + sgn (3.16)
2(π − 8)g
2
2 4S
1 π2 β
ξ 0,VS =
− − + sgn S (3.17)
ωn ,VS 2(π − 8)g
2
The closed-form expression in Eq. 3.16 is not valid for the case of
beams on elastic supports (ES beams). Neglecting the damping terms
in Eq. 3.8, results in a real-valued eigenvalue problem as shown in
Eq. 3.18. The fundamental natural frequency of the ES beam is
always the lowest root of the quartic equation in Eq. 3.19.
(π 2 − 8) 2 4
2
γ ω − γ (D+ 1)ω 2 + 2 D =
0 (3.18)
2π
D + 1 − ( D + 1) 2 − 4 D(π 2 − 8) π 2
ω0,ES = (3.19)
γ (π 2 − 8) π 2
3.1.2. Verification
6 100
(a) (b) Closed-from
ξ0 (%) Analytical [67]
[63]
ffn0 (Hz)
4 50
2 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
cv .L mEI (-) cv .L mEI (-)
st
Fig. 3.2. Modal properties of the 1 bending mode for a free-free beam (kv≈0) for
increasing cv, (a) undamped natural frequency, (b) modal damping ratio
2.3 3
(a) (b)
2.25 2
ffn0 (Hz)
ξ0 (%)
Closed-from
2.2 1
Analytical [67]
[63]
2.15 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
cv .L mEI (-) cv .L mEI (-)
st
Fig. 3.3. Modal properties of the 1 bending mode for an elastically supported beam
(kv=550 MN/m) for increasing cv, (a) undamped natural frequency, (b) modal
damping ratio
k = π 4 EI (2 L3kv,0 ) (3.20)
1 s = L. f 0,SS Vs (3.21)
=f f=
0,SS f c 4 Hf 0,SS VLa (3.22)
0.95
(a)
f0 / f0,SS
0.9
L=10 m
0.85 L=20 m
0.8 L=40 m
ES beam
0.75
15
10
ξξ0 (%)
(%)
(b)
5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
k (-)
Fig 3.4. Variation of the (a) fundamental frequency and (b) foundation damping
ratio vs. relative stiffness parameter (k) for beams supported by half-space medium
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
1/σ (-)
Fig 3.5. Foundation damping ratio variation as a function of wave parameter (1/σ)
for beams supported by half-space medium
0.95
f0 / f0,SS
0.9
(a)
0.85
15 L=10 m
L=20 m
(b)
10 L=40 m Half-space
(%)
ξξ0 (%)
values
5 Negligible
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
f (-)
Fig 3.6. Variation of (a) fundamental frequency and (b) foundation damping ratio as
a function of the relative frequency parameter (f) for beams supported by stratum
over bedrock
First, the effect of the shear wave velocity of the supporting half-
space medium on the train-induced resonant response of the beam is
studied. Four different shear wave velocities for the half-space
medium are considered, including an infinitely rigid soil which
represents fixed supports. The results are presented in Fig. 3.7. As can
be seen, the predicted maximum acceleration for the case with
infinitely rigid soil exceeds the serviceability limit state for the
vertical acceleration [5]. In the presence of SSI, the resonant speeds
are slightly decreased due to the frequency shortening of the system.
Furthermore, the resonant amplitudes gradually decrease as the soil
becomes softer, due to an increase in the dissipation capacity of the
foundation-soil system.
38 | DISCRETE MODEL FOR BEAMS ON VISCOELASTIC SUPPORTS
10
C
Vss=inf
= inf
8
C
Vss=600
= 600m/s
m/s
amax (m/s2)
6 C
Vss=300
= 300m/s
m/s
4 C
Vss=150
= 150m/s
m/s
2
0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450
v (km/h)
Fig. 3.7. Effect of the shear wave velocity of the half-space medium on the
maximum acceleration at mid-span for the case study bridge (L=10 m), under
passing of the ICE3 train
Further, the effect of the depth of the supporting stratum on the train-
induced resonance response is also investigated. In this analysis, the
shear wave velocity of the soil is assumed to be constant as Vs=300
m/s. Four different depths of the stratum are considered, including
zero depth which represents fixed supports. As shown in Fig. 3.8, the
behavior of the system is consistent with the findings in section
3.2.2.2.
10
m (f =0)
H=0(fs/fc=0)
H=0
8
m (f =0.4)
H=4(fs/fc=0.4)
H=4
amax (m/s2)
6 H=9 m (f =1.0)
H=9(fs/fc=1.0)
H=16
H=16(fs/fc=1.8)
m (f =1.8)
4
0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450
v (km/h)
Fig. 3.8. Effect of the stratum depth (VS=300 m/s) on the maximum acceleration at
mid-span of the bridge (L=10m), under passing of the ICE3 train
For H=4 m, since the frequency of the bridge is far lower than the
resonance frequency of the stratum, f0,SS/fc < 0.5, the amplitude of the
peak response was only affected by the hysteretic damping of the soil
while the peak was shifted to lower speeds due to frequency
shortening. In the case of H=16 m, when the f0,SS/fc >1.5, similar
results are obtained as for the beam supported by half-space (see Fig.
3.7). Furthermore as discussed in section 3.2.2.2, if the natural
DISCRETE MODEL FOR BEAMS ON VISCOELASTIC SUPPORTS | 39
ξs kv,eq
kv,eq = kv,0(halfspace) , cv,eq
= cv,0 + (3.23)
πf 0,SS
ξs kv,eq
kv,eq = kv,0 (stratum) , cv,eq = (3.24)
πf 0,SS
3
kv(ω), cv(ω)
Closed-from
2
kv,eq, cv,eq[63]
Analytical
(m/s2)
max
1
a
0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450
v (km/h)
Fig. 3.9. Maximum acceleration at mid-span of the beam (L=10m) under
passing of ICE3 train, based on equivalent constant impedance values for a
supporting half-space with VS=300 m/s
6 3
Equi. static ksv, csv (a) kv,eqstatic
Equi. , cv,eqksv, csv (b)
k(f), c(f) kv(ω
k(f), ), cv(ω)
c(f)
4 2
amax (m/s2)
amax (m/s2)
2 1
0 0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
v (km/h) v (km/h)
Fig. 3.10. Maximum acceleration at mid-span of the beam (L=10m) under
passing of ICE3 train, based on equivalent constant impedance values for a
supporting stratum (a) f 0,SS < 1.5VLa 4 H , (b) f 0,SS > 1.5VLa 4 H
4. Dynamic SSI analysis of portal frame bridges
Portal frame (integral) bridges are the most common type of
underpasses along modern railway lines. This type of bridge is
designed as a reinforced concrete rigid frame with integral wing walls
and is surrounded by an embankment. Theoretically, the dynamic
response of these partially-buried stiff structures is expected to be
governed by the surrounding soil. However, the effect of the soil is
usually disregarded in the train-induced vibration analysis due to the
high computational cost and lack of efficient simple models. The
presence of backfill soil may provide an additional stiffness to the
system which leads to an increase in the fundamental natural
frequency and thus shifts the critical resonant speed to a higher value.
The dissipation capacity of the backfill soil could also lead to an
increase in the global damping of the system and consequently reduce
the amplitude of the resonant response of the bridge.
In paper II, the results of the SSI analysis of a portal frame bridge
using a direct approach (full FE modeling) have been presented in
detail. In this chapter, the effect of the surrounding soil, especially
backfill soil, on the dynamic response of portal frame bridges is
investigated using two different substructure approaches. First, a 3D
coupled Finite Element-Boundary Element (FE-BE) model is
developed (section 4.1). Using this model, the effect of the
surrounding soil conditions on the modal properties and resonant
response of a case study bridge is investigated. In section 4.2, the
reliability of a proposed simplified model aimed at representing the
interaction between embankment and abutments is examined.
Tq U -1 (ω ) ( I +T(ω ) )
K gff (ω ) + i ωCgff (ω ) = (4.1)
z
y
(a)
x
(b)
= +
(c)
Fig 4.1. (a) Configuration of the coupled FE-BE models, (b) FE mesh, (c) BE
mesh
DYNAMIC SSI ANALYSIS OF PORTAL FRAME BRIDGES | 43
It should be noted that the geometry of the bottom slabs was not
properly modeled in the current coupled model. This is due to the
coupling issues related to the embedded parts of the foundation slabs.
In addition, the effect of the integrated wing-walls was also
disregarded. In future studies, the coupled model should be developed
to properly model these components.
4.1.1. Verification
Psin( ωt) 4
FE model
d (mm/MN/Hz)
BE mesh Real
2
2m Vs = 150 m/s 0
--------------------------
2m Vs = 250 m/s
------------------------- Imag.
Half -2
Vs = 350 m/s
-space 0 10 20 30 40 50
(a) (b) f (Hz)
Fig 4.2. (a) Configuration of the flexible surface foundation on a layered half-
space, (b) calculated real and imaginary part of the vertical receptance at the
center of the flexible foundation using the implemented FE-BE model (black solid
line) and the solution by Coulier et al. [72] (red circles)
44 | DYNAMIC SSI ANALYSIS OF PORTAL FRAME BRIDGES
t=0.5 6
VS=250 m/s
t=0.5 z
y
ν=0.2
x
ρ = 1800 kg/m3
5
Rigid VS=400 m/s, ν=0.48
ρ = 2000 kg/m3
6
2 (a) (b)
Fig 4.3. (a) Geometry of the case study bridge, (b) configuration and properties
of the surrounding soil
DYNAMIC SSI ANALYSIS OF PORTAL FRAME BRIDGES | 45
K(ω ) = K ss +K ffg (ω )
(4.2)
C(ω=
) Css + Cffg (ω )
Having solved Eq. 4.3, the natural frequency and damping ratio of the
nth mode are evaluated using Eq. 3.10 and 3.11, respectively. The
procedure repeats steps 2 to 4 until the difference between initial and
estimated natural frequencies becomes negligible.
Fig. 4.4 illustrates some of the calculated mode shapes of the studied
46 | DYNAMIC SSI ANALYSIS OF PORTAL FRAME BRIDGES
bridge for case 1. The estimated modal parameters of the system, for
the three different cases, are presented in Table 4.1.
(a) 1st bending (b) 1st torsional (c) 2nd bending (d) 1st plate mode
Fig 4.4 Calculated mode shapes for case 1 (No SSI)
Table 4.1. Calculated natural frequencies and damping ratios for the
studied bridge
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
Mode (No SSI) (No subsoil) (Full model)
f(Hz) ξ(%) f(Hz) ξ(%) f(Hz) ξ(%)
1st bending 24.5 26.6 6.6 25.4 13.1
1st torsional 31.9 34.4 6.1 36.2 8.1
2.0
2nd bending 58.4 -* > 30 -* > 40
1st plate mode 63.6 64.1 2.4 64.1 2.4
* was not converged
As can be seen, the stiffness and damping of the surrounding soil lead
to considerable changes in the modal properties of the fundamental
(vertical) bending mode of the case study bridge. The calculated
modal damping ratios for the vertical bending and the torsional modes
were considerably higher than for the plate mode. This is most likely
due to the stronger effect of soil-structure interaction for the bending
and torsional modes. Comparison between calculated modal
properties of the plate mode for different cases showed that this mode
was not considerably affected by SSI. This is due to the small relative
motion between deck and abutments. On the other hand, the
configuration of the vertical bending modes of the deck, by structural
compatibility, is associated to bending of the abutment walls. Hence,
the presence of the backfill soil will significantly affect the modal
properties of these modes. This effect is obviously depending on the
relative stiffness between deck and walls. A detailed discussion
concerning the effect of the SSI on the modal parameters of different
modes in portal frame bridges was presented in the appended papers.
DYNAMIC SSI ANALYSIS OF PORTAL FRAME BRIDGES | 47
0.6 10
(a) Case 1 (b)
a (m/s /kN)
8
0.4 Case 2 amax (m/s )
2
6
2
Case 3
4
0.2
2
0 0
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
f (Hz) v (m/s)
Fig. 4.5. Influence of surrounding soil conditions on the dynamic response of the
studied bridge, (a) FRFs at mid-span, (b) maximum train-induced acceleration at
mid-span due to the HSLM-A2 train
Fig. 4.6 shows the comparison between the results evaluated using the
simplified model on one hand and the coupled FE-BE model on the
other hand. A reasonably good agreement between the results
obtained using the two models can be noted in as far as the overall
shape and vibration amplitudes are concerned. However, a more
detailed comparison between the predicted vibration amplitudes (see
Fig. 4.6a-b), indicates that the simplified model slightly overestimates
the modal damping ratios. The reason for this discrepancy lies in the
approximate nature of the simplified model which should be
investigated more in future studies. Note also that, the comparison
was restricted to case 2 due to the improper geometry of the
foundation slabs in the current coupled FE-BE model.
0.8
a (m/s /kN)
0.4
(a) 2 (b)
0.2
0 0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
f (Hz) v (m/s)
Fig. 4.6. Comparison between predicted results by the coupled FE-BE model and
simplified model, (a) vertical accelerance at mid-point, (b) maximum train-induced
acceleration at mid-span due to the HSLM-A2 train
5. Experimental validation of numerical models
Despite recent development in advanced mathematical models aimed
at evaluating the dynamic stiffness of the structure-soil systems, the
lack of reliable validation of numerical models against in-situ
measurements is still noticeable. To overcome this shortcoming,
system identification (SI) techniques are helpful. SI is a powerful tool
for inverse estimation of the dynamic properties (i.e. frequency
response functions and, modal properties) of a real bridge-soil system
[75]. The principal aim of SI is to obtain information from an
experiment and use it to validate a numerical model by adjusting its
parameters and minimizing the deviation between simulated and
measured results [76].
significant features of the structure and surrounding soil for both case
studies are summarized in Fig. 5.3. The basic information about the
geotechnical properties of the geo-materials at the site, such as type of
backfill material, elevation of bedrock and ground water level, were
found in the geotechnical reports and as-built drawings of the project
(see Fig. 5.3).
(a) (b)
Fig. 5.1. (a) photo of the Faresmyran bridge, (b) view of the hydraulic exciter
(a) (b)
Fig. 5.2. (a) photo of the Degersmyran bridge, (b) view of the hydraulic exciter
In each dynamic test, the force amplitude was constant, and a linear
frequency sweep was carried out at an adequately small rate to
achieve a steady-state response. A HBM MGCPlus data acquisition
system was used for collecting data with a sampling frequency of
1200 Hz. A low-pass filter at 80 Hz was used to remove the high
frequency contents from the measured signals. To obtain high-
precision measurement with good coherence, most of the tests were
repeated at least two times. The dynamic tests were performed in the
time intervals between regular traffic in service. Thus, the
experimental results were not affected by train passages. In this
report, a summary of the experimental results and identified modal
parameters based on the forced vibration tests is presented. More
detailed information about the post-processing of the experimental
52 | EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION OF NUMERICAL MODELS
(a)
a5 a6 a7 a8
3.65 (3.55)
P2
a9 a10 a11
3.65 (3.55)
P1
a1 a2 a3 a4
)
.2
(6
0.5 a12
L=8 (7) (b)
~ 0.6, Ballast
~ 0.6, Sub-Ballast 0.62 (0.55)
0.5
a13 a15
1.7
a14 a16
Exciter
Backfill material
5.5 (5.9)
1:
1.
5
Filling
Material 2.8 (3.4) 0.7
G.W.L
Compacted fill ~ 1.2 (0.75)
~ 5 (0) Moraine
Fig. 5.3. Geometry, surrounding soil properties and instrumentation, (a) Plan, (b)
Elevation (units are in m). The values in parentheses belong to Degersmyran bridge.
Fig. 5.4. Experimental mode shapes (a) 1st bending mode, (b) 1st torsional mode, (c)
1st plate mode, (d) 2nd plate mode
4- For both bridges, the estimated modal damping ratios for the
bending and torsional modes were considerably higher than for
the plate modes. This is most likely due to soil-structure
interaction effects which are more pronounced for the bending
and torsional modes. As shown in Fig. 5.4 and 4.5, the
configuration of the plate mode of the deck was rather
independent of the movement of the abutments.
the plate modes of the deck for two bridges. In both cases, the
amplification is especially noticeable for the first and last bogies
which have a wheelbase (2.4 m) that is an exact multiple of the
sleeper distance (0.6 m).
5 5
a2 (m/s )
a2 (m/s )
2
2
0 0
-5 -5
160 160
140 140
Pseudo - f (Hz)
120
Pseudo - f (Hz)
120
100 100
80 80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
t (s) t (s)
(a) (b)
Fig. 5.5. Time history of the vertical acceleration during train passage at sensor
location 2 and corresponding time-frequency scale-space of the signal by CWT,
(a) Faresmyran bridge, (b) Degersmyran bridge
In the case of the Faresmyran bridge, a 3D solid model for the bridge
and part of the track over the bridge deck was used (see Fig. 5.6). The
model was built in Abaqus/Standard (V6.14) [81]. The simplified
substructure method, using impedances and Winkler-based
spring/dashpots (as discussed in sections 2.3.2.2 and 4.2) was used to
model the SSI.
56 | EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION OF NUMERICAL MODELS
Fig. 5.6. Configuration of the FE model & boundary conditions, Faresmyran bridge
Fig. 5.7. General configuration of the full FE model of the bridge-soil system,
Degersmyran bridge
Table 5.2. Updated identification variables for two calibrated bridge-soil models
Subsoil
Concrete Ballast Backfill
(Saturated)
Bridge
Ec ρc ξc Ebl ρbl VS,bk* VS,s
3 3
(GPa) (t/m ) (%) (GPa) (t/m ) (m/s) (m/s)
Faresmyran 39 2.3 2.5 0.11 1.4 318 385
Degersmyran 37.5 2.3 1.7 0.12 1.5 311 445
* Average value
0.8
Measurement (Test P1)
(a) Updated FE model
|a| (m/s2/kN)
0.6
0.4 (b)
0.2
0
20 30 40 50 60 70
f (Hz)
Fig. 5.8. Comparison between experimental and numerical FRFs at sample sensor
location 2, test P1, for (a) Faresmyran bridge (b) Degersmyran bridge
-5
0.15 0.5 1 1.5 1.85
t (s)
0.6
Measurement
(b) Simulation, wheel model
0.4 Simulation, moving force
a2 (m/s /Hz)
2
0.2
0
0 50 100 150 200
f (Hz)
Fig. 5.9. Comparison between measured and simulated train-induced accelerations
at sensor location 2 for Degersmyran bridge (a) time signal (b) frequency content
6. Discussion and conclusion
In this chapter, the results of the work on dynamic soil-structure
interaction analysis of railway bridges presented in this thesis will be
discussed and some general conclusions will be presented.
This work also includes the in-situ dynamic testing on two portal
frame railway bridges and the experimental validation of their
numerical models. A series of controlled vibration tests were
performed to identify the modal parameters of the tested bridge-soil
systems. In both case studies, the measured modal damping ratios of
the bending and torsional modes were considerably higher than the
plate modes, due to the stronger effect of soil-structure interaction.
While the measured modal damping ratios for torsional and plate
modes of the two investigated bridges were rather close, the
difference between the modal damping ratios for the 1st bending
modes was substantial. The reason for this is probably related to the
depth of the subsoil stratum which was the main dissimilarity
between the two bridges.
[1] ERRI D-214, 1999b. Rail bridges for speeds over 200Km/h, Final Report. European Rail Research
Institute (ERRI).
[2] L. Fryba, 1999. Vibration of Solids and Structures under Moving Loads, London, Thomas Telford
[3] H. Xia, N. Zhang, W. Guo, 2006, Analysis of resonance mechanism and conditions of train–bridge
system. Journal of Sound and Vibration 297 (3), 810–822.
[4] M. Zacher, M. Baeßler, 2009, Dynamic behaviour of ballast on railway bridges, In: Dynamics of
High-Speed Railway Bridge, Taylor & Francis Group, London, pp. 99-112.
[5] EN1991-2, Eurocode 1, Actions on Structures. Part2: Traffic loads on Bridges, 2003.
[6] A. Sextos, ICT applications for new generation seismic design, construction and assessment of
bridges, Struct. Eng. Int., 24(2), 173–183 (2014).
[7] A. Romero, M. Solís, J. Domínguez, P. Galvín, Soil-structure interaction in resonant railway bridges,
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 47 (2013) 108-116.
[8] M. Ülker-Kaustell, R. Karoumi, C. Pacoste, Simplifed analysis of the dynamic soil-structure
interaction of a portal frame railway bridge, Engineering structures 32 (11) (2010) 3692-3698.
[9] A. Doménech, M. D. Martínez-Rodrigo, A. Romero, P. Galvín, On the basic phenomena of soil-
structure interaction on the free vibration response of beams : Application to railway bridges,
Engineering structures 125 (2016) 254-265.
[10] C. Svedholm, C. Pacoste-Calmanovici, R. Karoumi, Modal properties of simply supported railway
bridges due to soil-structure interaction, in: Conference of 5th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on
Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, COMPDYN 2015, pp.
1709-1719.
[11] A.Fraile, L.Hermanns, F.Chirino, E.Alarcon, Dynamic effects of high speed trains on underpasses,
Proceedings ICCST’02 Sixth Conference on Computational Structures Technology, Civil-Com Press,
Edinburgh,UK, 2002
[12] J. Vega, A. Fraile, E. Alarcon, L. Hermanns, Dynamic response of underpasses for high-speed train
lines, Journal of sound and vibration 331 (2012) 5125-5140.
[13] P. Galvin, J. Dominguez, High-speed train-induced ground motion and interaction with structures,
Journal of Sound and Vibration 307 (2007) 755–777.
[14] J.D. Achenbach. Wave propagation in elastic solids, volume 16 of North-Holland Series in Applied
Mathematics and Mechanics. North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1973
[15] J. Houbrechts, M. Schevenels, G. Lombaert, G. Degrande, W. Rucker, V. Cuellar, A. Smekal, 2011,
Test procedures for the determination of the dynamic soil characteristics, RIVAS (Railway Induced
Vibration Abatement Solutions Collaborative) project.
[16] S. L. Kramer, 1996, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall
[17] H. Lamb, 1904, On the propagation of tremors over the surface of an elastic solid, Philosophical
Transaction of the Royal Society, London, Serie A, Vol. 203, pp. 1-42.
[18] L. Hall, Simulation and analyses of train-induced ground vibration: a comparative study of two and
three dimensional calculations with actual measurement, PhD dissertation, Stockholm (Sweden):
KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 2000.
[19] A.C. Eringen and E.S. Suhubi. Elastodynamics, Volume 2, Linear theory. Academic Press, New
York, USA, 1975.
[20] B. A. Bolt, 1976, Nuclear Explosions and Earthquakes: The Parted Veil, W. H. Freeman and Co.
66 | REFERENCES
[21] DR. Bland,1960, The theory of linear viscoelasticity, New York, NY: Pergamon Press
[22] F.J. Rizzo and D.J. Shippy. An application of the correspondence principle of linear viscoelasticity
theory. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 21(2):321–330, 1971.
[23] M.A. Biot. Theory of propagation of elastic waves in a fluid-saturated porous solid. I. low-
frequency range. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 28(2):168–178, 1956.
[24] H.B. Seed, I.M. Idriss, 1970, Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analyses,
Report EERC 70-10, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkley,
CA, US.
[25] Swedish Transport Administraion, Trafikverkets tekniska råd för geokonstruktioner-TR Geo 13 (in
Swedish), 2016.
[26] R. Larsson and M. Mulabdic. Shear moduli in Scandinavian clays; measurement of initial shear
modulus with seismic cones. Technical Report 40, Swedish Geotechnical Institute, 1991.
[27] R.V. Whitman, F.E. Richart, 1967, Design procedures for dynamically loaded foundations, Journal
of Soil Mechanical and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. 93, No. SM6, pp. 169-192
[28] W. P. Stewart, R. G. Campanella, 1991, In situ measurements of damping in soils, Proceedings, 2nd
International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil
Dynamics, St. Louis, MO, pp. 83-92
[29] G. Gazetas. 1998, Foundation vibrations, in: H. Y. Fang (Eds.), Foundation Engineering Handbook,
Springer Science+Business, Newyork 1998, pp. 553-593
[30] J. P., Wolf, 1989, Soil-structure interaction analysis in time domain, Nucl. Eng. Des., 111(3), 381–
393.
[31] J. P., Wolf, C. Song, 1996, Finite Element Modelling of Unbounded Media, Wiley
[32] E. Kausel, 1988, Local transmitting boundaries, Journal of Engineering Mechanics , ASCE, 1011-
1027
[33] D. Givoli, 1992, Numerical Methods for Problems in Infinite Domains, Elsevier, Amesterdam.
[34] J. Lysmer, R.L. Kuhlemeyer, Finite dynamic model for infinite media, Journal of Engineering
Mechanic Division, ASCE 95 (1969) 859–877
[35] U. Basu, A.K. Chopra. Perfectly matched layers for time-harmonic elastodynamics of unbounded
domains: theory and finite-element implementation. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 192
(2003) 1337-1375.
[36] S. Kucukcoban, L.F. Kallivokas. Mixed perfectly-matched-layers for direct transient analysis in 2D
elastic heterogeneous media. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 200 (2011) 57-76.
[37] E. Kausel, J.M. Barbosa. PMLs: A direct approach. Int J Numer Meth Engng 90 (2012) 343-352.
[38] J. Josifovski. Analysis of wave propagation and soil-structure interaction using a perfectly matched
layer model. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 81 (2016) 1-13.
[39] COMSOL Multiphysics Reference Manual, version 5.3, COMSOL, Inc, www.comsol.com
[40] E. Kausel, 2015, Short course on dynamic soil-structure interaction, UME graduate school, Pavia,
Italy
[41] J. Zhang, Y. Tang, 2006, Evaluating radiation damping of shallow foundations on nonlinear soil
medium for soil-structure interaction analysis of bridges, US-Japan Bridge Engineering Workshop,
Seattle, WA.
[42] J. Lysmer, 1978, Analytical procedures in soil dynamics, Proceedings, ASCE Geotechnical
Engineering Division Specialty Conference, Pasadena, CA, Vol. 3, pp. 1267-1317
[43] M. Bonnet, 1995, Boundary Integral Equation Methods for Solids and Fluids. John Wiley and Sons:
Chichester, United Kingdom.
[44] E. Kausel. Fundamental solutions in elastodynamics: a compendium. Cambridge Univer-sity Press,
New York, 2006.
[45] E. Kausel and J.M. Roësset. Stiffness matrices for layered soils. Bulletin of the Seismo-logical
Society of America, 71(6):1743–1761, 1981.
[46] R.F. Scott, 1973, Earthquake-induced pressures on retaining walls, Proc. 5th World Conf on
Earthquake Eng., Rome, Italy, II, 1611-1620.
[47] S. K. Jain, R. F. Scott, Seismic analysis of cantilever retaining walls, in: Proc. of Structural
Mechanics in Reactor Technology, Anaheim, Calif., (1989) pp. 241-246
REFERENCES | 67
[48] A.S. Veletsos, A.H. Younan, 1995, Dynamic soil pressures on vertical walls, in: Proceedings: 3rd
Int. Conf. on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, (1995)
Volume Ill, St. Louis, Missouri
[49] A.S. Veletsos, A.H. Younan, 1997, Dynamic response of cantilever retaining walls, J.Geotech
Engrg., ASCE, 123 (2) 1090-0241
[50] A.H. Younan, A.S. Veletsos, 2000, Dynamic response of flexible retaining walls, J.Earthquake
engineering and structural dynamics vol.29, 1815-1844
[51] J. P. Stewart et al., 2013, Soil-structure interaction for building structures, report NISTGCR-12-917-
21, ATC-83, Rep. Prepared for the Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA.
[52] Givens, M.J., 2013, Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction of Instrumented Buildings and Test
Structures, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of
California, Los Angeles, California.
[53] J. G. Sieffert, F. Cevaer, 1992, Handbook of Impedance Functions, Surface Foundations, s.l.: Ouest
Éditions Presses Académiques.
[54] A. Pais, E. Kausel, 1988, Approximate formulas for dynamic stiffnesses of rigid foundations, Soil
Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 213-227.
[55] G. Mylonakis, S. Nikolaou, G. Gazetas, 2006, Footings under seismic loading: Analysis and design
issues with emphasis on bridge foundations, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 26, pp.
824-853.
[56] M. Schevenels, S. François, G. Degrande, EDT: An ElastoDynamics Toolbox for MATLAB.
Computers & Geosciences 2009; 35(8):1752–1754. Available from:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2008.10.012.
[57] R. Dobry, G. Gazetas,1986, Dynamic response of arbitrarily shaped foundations, J. Geotech.
Engrg., ASCE, 112(2), 109-135.
[58] J. Lysmer, F. E. Jr. Richart, 1966, Dynamic Response of Footing to Vertical Loading, Journal of the
Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. 92, No. SMI, pp. 65-91.
[59] J. P., Wolf, 1994, Foundation Vibration Analysis Using Simple Physical Models, Prentice Hall
[60] C. Svedholm, 2017, Efficient Modelling Techniques for Vibration Analyses of Railway Bridges, In
TRITA-BKN. Doctoral thesis 145, Stockholm (Sweden): KTH Royal Institute of Technology.
Available online: http://www.diva-portal.org/.
[61] P. Museros, E. Moliner, M. D. Martínez-Rodrigo, 2013. Free vibrations of simply-supported beam
bridges under moving loads: Maximum resonance, cancellation and resonant vertical acceleration.
Journal of Sound and Vibration 332 (2), 326–345.
[62] J.D. Yau, Y.S. Wu, Y.B. Yang, 2001, Impact response of bridges with elastic bearings to moving
loads, Journal of Sound and Vibration 248 (1) (2001) 9–30.
[63] G. Lallement, D.J. Inman, A tutorial on complex eigenvalues, Proceedings of 13th IMAC,
Nashville, TN (1995), pp. 490-495.
[64] G. Cardano, 1545, Ars magna The Rules of Algebra, Dover, 1993, ISBN 0-486-67811-3
[65] E. L. Rees, 1922, Graphical Discussion of the Roots of a Quartic Equation, The American
Mathematical Monthly. 29 (2): 51–55. doi:10.2307/2972804. JSTOR 2972804.
[66] D. Lazard, 1988, Quantifier elimination: Optimal solution for two classical examples, Journal of
Symbolic Computation. 5: 261–266. doi:10.1016/S0747-7171(88)80015-4.
[67] C. Svedholm, A. Zangeneh, C. Pacoste, S. François, R. Karoumi, Vibration of damped uniform
beams with general end conditions under moving loads, Engineering Structures 126 (2016) 40-52
[68] C. Johansson, A. Andersson, J. Wiberg, M. Ülker-Kaustell, C. Pacoste, R. Karoumi, 2010,
Höghastighetsprojekt-bro: Delrapport i: Befintliga krav och erfarenheter samt parameterstudier
avseende dimensionering av järnvägsbroar för farter över 200 km/h. Tech. Rep. 139, KTH
Brobyggnad (in Swedish)
[69] D. Dooms, M. Jansen, G. De Roeck, G. Degrande, G. Lombaert, M. Schevenels, S. François, A
finite element toolbox for Matlab (StaBIL). Technical report BWM-2010–**. Department of Civil
Engineering, KU Leuven; June 2010
[70] S. François, M. Schevenels, G. Degrande, Matlab toolbox for boundary elements in elastodynamics
(BEMFUN), report BWM-2009-**, Department of Civil Engineering, KU Leuven; May 2009
68 | REFERENCES
[71] S. François, 2008, Nonlinear modelling of the response of structures due to ground vibrations, PhD
dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, KU Leuven
[72] P. Coulier, S. François, G. Lombaert, G. Degrande, 2014, Coupled finite element–hierarchical
boundary element methods for dynamic soil–structure interaction in the frequency domain, Int. J.
Numer. Meth. Engng 2014; 97:505–530
[73] F. Tisseur, K. Meerbergen, 2001, The quadratic eigenvalue problem, SIAM Rev. Vol. 43, Number 2,
2001, pp. 235–286.
[74] MATLAB 2013a, Natick, Massachusetts, The MathWorks Inc., 2013
[75] A. Sextos P. Faranonis, V. Zabel, F. Wuttke, T. Arndt, P. Panetos, Soil–Bridge System Stiffness
Identification through Field and Laboratory Measurements, J. Bridge Eng., 2016, 21 (10)
[76] A. Morrasi, S. Tonon, Dynamic testing for Structural Identification of a Bridge, J. Bridge Eng.,
2008, 13 (6), p. 573-585
[77] A. Andersson, M. Ülker-Kaustell, R. Borg, O. Dymén, A. Carolin, R. Karoumi, Pilot testing of a
hydraulic bridge exciter, in: MATEC Web of Conferences, Vol. 24, EDP Sciences, 2015, p. 02001.
[78] D. J. Ewins, 2000, Modal testing: Theory, practice and application, 2nd Ed., Research Studies Press
Ltd., Baldock, Hertfordshire, U.K.
[79] Mallat S, Wavelet A. Tour of signal processing - the sparse way. 3rd ed. Academic Press, 2008.
[80] MATLAB Wavelet Toolbox, The MathWorks, 2010.
[81] Dassault Systmes, ABAQUS/Standard User’s Manual, 6.14 ed., Providence, RI, USA, 2014.
Paper I
Identification of Soil-Structure
Interaction Effect in a Portal Frame
Railway Bridge through Full-Scale
Dynamic Testing
Engineering Structures, volume 159, pages 299-309, 2018
List of Bulletins from the Department of Structural
Engineering, The Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm
TRITA-BKN. Bulletin.
Hallgren, M., Flexural and Shear Capacity of Reinforced High Strength Concrete
Beams without Stirrups.
Licentiate Thesis, 1994. Bulletin 9.
Krus, J., Betongbalkars lastkapacitet efter miljöbelastning.
1994. Bulletin 10.
Sanne, L., Information Transfer Analysis and Modelling of the Structural Steel
Construction Process.
Licentiate Thesis, 1994. Bulletin 12.
Ansell, A., Frequency Dependent Matrices for Dynamic Analysis of Frame Type
Structures.
Licentiate Thesis, 1996. Bulletin 20.
Eriksson, A., and Sandberg, G., (editors), Engineering Structures and Extreme
Events − proceedings from a symposium, May 1997. Bulletin 26.
Paulsson, J., Effects of Repairs on the Remaining Life of Concrete Bridge Decks.
Licentiate Thesis, 1997. Bulletin 27.
Nilsson, U., Load bearing capacity of steel fibree reinforced shotcrete linings.
Licentiate Thesis, 2000. Bulletin 56.
Racutanu, G., The Real Service Life of Swedish Road Bridges - A case study.
Doctoral Thesis, 2000. Bulletin 59.
Wäppling, M., Behaviour of Concrete Block Pavements - Field Tests and Surveys.
Licentiate Thesis, 2000. Bulletin 61.
Getachew, A., Trafiklaster på broar. Analys av insamlade och Monte Carlo
genererade fordonsdata.
Licentiatavhandling, 2000. Bulletin 62.
James, G., Raising Allowable Axle Loads on Railway Bridges using Simulation and
Field Data.
Licentiate Thesis, 2001. Bulletin 63.
Johansson, U., Fatigue Tests and Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Bridge Deck
Models.
Licentiate Thesis 2004. Bulletin 76.
Broms, C.E., Concrete flat slabs and footings New design method for punching and
detailing for ductility.
Doctoral Thesis 2005. Bulletin 80.
Pettersson, L., G., Full Scale Tests and Structural Evaluation of Soil Steel Flexible
Culverts with low Height of Cover.
Doctoral Thesis 2007. Bulletin 93
Malm, R., Predicting shear type crack initiation and growth in concrete with non-
linear finite element method.
Doctoral Thesis 2009. Bulletin 97
Bayoglu Flener, E., Static and dynamic behavior of soil-steel composite bridges
obtained by field testing.
Doctoral Thesis 2009. Bulletin 98
Gram, A., Numerical Modelling of Self-Compacting Concrete Flow
Licentiate Thesis 2009. Bulletin 99
Wiberg, J., Railway bridge response to passing trains. Measurements and FE model
updating.
Doctoral Thesis 2009. Bulletin 100
Andersson, A., Capacity assessment of arch bridges with backfill – Case of the old
Årsta railway bridge
Doctoral Thesis 2011. Bulletin 107
Gonzalez Silva, I., Study and Application of Modern Bridge Monitoring Technique
Licentiate Thesis 2011. Bulletin 110
Safi, M., LCC Applications for Bridges and Integration with BMS
Licentiate Thesis 2012. Bulletin 111
Guangli, D., Towards sustainable construction, life cycle assessment of railway
bridges
Licentiate Thesis 2012. Bulletin 112
Hedebratt, J., Industrial Fibre Concrete Slabs – Experiences and Tests on Pile-
Supported Slab
Doctoral Thesis 2012. Bulletin 113
Le, T., N., Corotational formulation for nonlinear dynamic analysis of flexible
beam structures
Licentiate Thesis 2012. Bulletin 115
Leander, J., Refining the fatigue assessment procedure of existing steel bridges
Doctoral Thesis 2013. Bulletin 118
Le, T., N., Nonlinear dynamics of flexible structures using corotational beam
elements
Doctoral Thesis 2013. Bulletin 119
Wennström, J., Life Cycle Costing in Road Planning and Management: A Case
Study on Collisionfree Roads
Licentiate Thesis 2014. Bulletin 125
Du, G., Life Cycle Assessment of bridges, model development and Case Studies
Doctoral Thesis 2015. Bulletin 129
Zhu, J., Towards a Viscoelastic Model for Phase Separation in Polymer Modified
Bitumen
Licentiate Thesis 2015. Bulletin 130
Chen, F., The Future of Smart Road Infrastructure. A Case Study for the eRoad.
Licentiate Thesis 2015. Bulletin 131
Ahmed, L., Models for analysis of young cast and sprayed concrete subjected to
impact-type loads
Doctoral Thesis 2015. Bulletin 132
Wallin, J., Systematic planning and execution of finite element model updating
Licentiate Thesis 2015. Bulletin 134
Ali, M., M., Use of Macro Basalt Fibre Concrete for Marine Applications
Licentiate Thesis 2016. Bulletin 140
Khan, A., Fundamental investigation to improve the quality of cold mix asphalt
Licentiate Thesis 2016. Bulletin 142
Elgazzar, H., End-Shield Bridges for Highspeed Railway – Full scale dynamic
testing and numerical simulations
Licentiate Thesis 2017. Bulletin 148
Sousa Neves, A. C., Structural Health Monitoring of Bridges: Model-free damage
detection method using Machine Learning
Licentiate Thesis 2017. Bulletin 149
Sjölander, A., Analyses of shotcrete stress states due to varying lining thickness and
irregular rock surfaces
Licentiate Thesis 2017. Bulletin 150
Heng, P., Simplified Mechanical Models for the Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of
Elasto-plastic Steel Structures Impacted by a Rigid Body
Doctoral Thesis 2017. Bulletin 151
The department also publishes other series. For full information see our homepage
http://www.byv.kth.se
ISBN
TRIT LT
www.kth .se