Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Mathematical Modelling

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apm

Dynamic responses of Euler–Bernoulli beam subjected to

moving vehicles using isogeometric approach
Vuong Nguyen Van Do a,∗, Thanh Hai Ong b,∗, Chien H. Thai c,d
a
Sustainable Developments in Civil Engineering Research Group, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh
City, Vietnam
b
Department of Analysis, Faculty of Mathematics Computer Science, University of Science, VNU-HCMC, Nguyen Van Cu Street, District 5,
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
c
Division of Computational Mechanics, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
d
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Dynamic analysis of beam structures subjected to moving vehicles using an isogeomet-
Received 31 March 2016 ric Euler–Bernoulli formulation is presented in this paper. The method utilizes B-Splines
Revised 7 May 2017
or Non-Uniform Rational–Splines (NURBS) as the basis functions for both geometric and
Accepted 24 June 2017
analysis implementation. The rotation-free technique has been incorporated into the for-
Available online 4 July 2017
mulation by using only one deflection variable with excluding the rotational degrees of
Keywords: freedom adopted for each control point. Then, it enables to use a few degrees of freedom
Euler–Bernoulli beam (Dofs) to achieve a highly accurate solution. The validations of the proposed method in-
Dynamic behavior cluded a complicated moving vehicle and rough pavement effects are compared to the pre-
Moving vehicles cisely analytical results. Compared with most existing methods of finite element method
Irregular roughness surface (FEM) and readily analytical solutions, the present technique indicated the effectiveness of
NURBS function present isogeometric method and its well accurate prediction for suitable simulating the
Isogeometric analysis (IGA) interaction model of the bridge structures and complicated vehicles.
© 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The isogeometric analysis (IGA) was first proposed by Hughes et al. [1] in 2005 as describing the powerful and reliable
tool for computation and simulation of engineering problems. This method enables to overcome the shortcomings that are
impossible to achieve under the conventional Finite element method (FEM). For instance, a meshing generation is the first
step to transform the physical domain into a suitable geometry [1], then this issue producing an accurate geometry has been
encountered. Re-meshing process may be repeated until an approximation of the original geometry. As a result, an adequate
geometric reproduction is obtained only after a dense division making into finite elements and this work would take much
of time.
Isogeometric analysis has conducted a complicated NURBS geometry which is introduced from the basis of most Com-
puter Aided Design (CAD) packages Piegl [2]. In contrast to the standard FEM using the Lagrangian interpolation, IGA uses
the basis functions of B-splines or Non-Uniform Rational B-splines (NURBS) to exactly describe from the geometry to the ap-
proximate solutions. The exact geometry is therefore only given by the coarsest level of few control points and such a level

∗
Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: donguyenvanvuong@tdt.edu.vn (V.N. Van Do), othai@hcmus.edu.vn (T.H. Ong).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2017.06.037
0307-904X/© 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
406 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

is performed with a remeshing procedure without any CAD communication. Based on the advantages of the isogeometric
approach, the various practical problems have been employed such as incompressible linear and non-linear elasticity and
plasticity using higher-order NURBS elements [3], dynamic vibrations of beam and plate [4], Reissner–Mindlin plate bending
problems [5] and isogeometric shell analysis [6–9]. So far, in this way, the governing equations of fluid or solid mechanics
application [10–11] could also be easily possible on the exact CAD geometry.
Many kinds of beam are the most famous and simplest solid structures that have become widely used in engineer-
ing fields and modern industries. Among many different beam theories, a well-known Euler–Bernoulli beam [12] was in-
vestigated as a benchmark problem. The C1 -continuity requirement for the general displacement field is not easy task to
implement in FEM regarding to the fourth-order problems. Therefore, to overcome this encounter, this theory had been
constructed through the cubic Hermitian functions with including the transverse and rotation degrees of freedom per each
node [13]. Besides that, several meshfree methods such as the moving least square (MLS) [14], and the radial point in-
terpolation method (RPIM) [15] can also be satisfied for this condition. However, the consecutive conditions in mesh-free
approach were only occurred at the local set of scattered points [16]. In this study, a higher order of B-splines/NURBS could
lead a finite element analysis be easily acceptable without mentioning the rotation variable. In such the way, a rotation-free
technique [17] is taken into account the isogeometric approach that only the traversed deflection degrees of freedom are
presented. Consequently, an amount of applications were developed for these solid structures with many efforts from special
structural elements such as one-dimensional (1D) problems [18–20], IGA beam vibration [21], plane-curved beam [22] and
Timoshenko beam problem via isogeometric collocation methods [23]. The other interesting results of a wide range of vibra-
tion and wave propagation, fluid-structure interaction [24] and various extended studies [25–28], etc. were also introduced
in the literatures. Particularly, the explicit elasto-dynamic problems were successfully employed by the framework of the
classical Galerkin methods [29–30]. Within this context, a comprehensive study on the dynamics moving vehicle applying
for thin beam structures is interested in currently the object of extensive research.
The behavior of beam structures under a moving vehicle system has been proposed and implemented continuously over
a century. The first analytical problem of a single beam where its mass was negligible by imposing a constant speed moving
force was introduced by Timoshenko [31]. The relating problems were considered the effects of elastic foundations, moving
mass and deflection dependent moving load [32,33]. Several types of railway bridges traversed by steam locomotives were
presented by Inglis [34] using harmonic analysis. The exact solution of the dynamic response of bridges under moving loads
was reviewed in detail by Timoshenko [31]. An analytical solution with a succession of massless point loads for an Euler–
Bernoulli beam had been produced by Savin [35]. Yeong et al. [36] had investigated the dynamic vibration of simple beams
due to the high speed trains and also identified the various factors for making an optimal design. Subsequent were the para-
metric studies which consisted of moving mass and mass of the girder for the dynamic responses based on investigations
of Mechaltsos [37–39]. The large deflection theory was employed by Wang and Chou [40] to derive the motion equations of
Timoshenko beam due to the coupling effect of an external force with the weight of the beam.
Latter the works, the vehicle–bridge finite element (FE) models were successfully presented by Lin and Tretheway
[41] for the arbitrary spring-mass-damping of vehicle system. The nonlinear models for the impact analysis of stayed ca-
ble bridge were conducted by Huang and Wang [42]. A Five-axle moving vehicle model was developed by Henchi et al.
[43] for the interaction between the bridge structural and moving mass. The model applied the continuum mechanics of
dynamic analysis to multi span beams under moving loads by Finite element expressions. A model of a rigid body and
four wheel–axle sets was researched by Li and Su [44] for the resonant vibration of high speed trains traversing over the
simply supported beam. A multi-lane continuous bridge due to the moving load on the top deck surface was investigated
by Law and Zhu [45]. Pesterev et al. [46] developed a general linear MDOF system with a technique be able to deter-
mine the effect of a local road surface irregularity for the dynamic behavior. The geometrically nonlinear dynamic analysis
of an eccentrically pre-stressed simply supported damped beam subjected to a concentrated moving harmonic load [47].
Besides that, some investigations of vehicle–bridge interaction for the road irregularities were also estimated in the ran-
dom phases using the power spectral density (PSD) to improve the accuracy in calculating the dynamic responses of bridge
structures [48–52].
Through all above researches, it is realized that the dynamic responses of moving vehicle on beam generated from finite
element analysis have some exposed difficulties. It is found in the simulation which interacts between moving mass and
beam, the mass acceleration and velocity of vehicle at the contact point require the derivatives of the shape function could
make the unsymmetrical stiffness matrix and difficulties in numerical analysis. The higher order continuity of the shape
function in the finite element method is not easy to obtain as using the Lagrangian interpolations. Moreover, the theoretical
solutions for the complicated vehicle–beam system are few not enough to completely evaluate this general model [37–
38,53]. Therefore, the more analyzed results are considered the implementation of numerical analyses regarding to the
higher order IGA method are significantly necessary.
In this work, a new theory with a frame work of the isogeometric analysis method is first developed for a single-foot
dynamic system moving on an elastic beam. The resonant vibration is also explained when the multiple discrete moving
concentrated loads traversed over the supported beam. The second one is expanded to simulate the two-axle vehicle system.
Finally, the IGA method is applied to a realistic irregular roughness surface for a complicated vehicle system to evidence
the utility of the isogeometric analysis method. In view of the above results, IGA is clearly to suggest itself as efficient
implementation and a viable of the main IGA basic concepts to an improved accuracy and thus a promising approach.
A discussion in numerical examples is shown to validate high performance of the proposed method.
 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428 407

Fig. 1. Initial conditions when the moving forces entering the beam.

2. A analytical formulation of Euler–Bernoulli beam (strong form)

2.1. The brief analytical Euler–Bernoulli beam solution

The analytical Euler–Bernoulli beam solution can be solved by two cases. Firstly, the analytical solutions (as exact results)
of one concentrated load for dynamic responses of displacement and bending moment without including the damping effect
are given as [53,54].
∞
   
2F 1  ω jπ x
w(x, t ) = sin (ωt ) − sin(ω j t ) sin
mL ω2j − ω2 ωj L
j=1
∞     (1)
FL 8 1  α jπ x
m(x, t ) = sin (ωt ) − sin(ω j t ) sin
4 π 2 j 2 (1 − α 2 / j 2 ) j L
j=1

where j is the mode number, ωj is the circular frequency regarding to the j − th mode of vibration, α = π v/ω1 L is the
dimensionless speed parameter. F is a concentrated moving load, m is a weight per unit length L, ω is the circular frequency.
Secondly, the analytical solutions of multiple moving concentrated loads apply to simply supported beam. Assuming in
Fig. 1, two moving concentrated forces are presented with a constant distance d and velocity v from left to right of a beam.
Considering a group of concentrated Fi (t) travels on an Euler–Bernoulli beam, i.e. two moving constant forces are inves-
tigated in this study. A given time-varying intensity f(x, t) with a constant speed v is introduced as the Dirac delta function
δ (x). The partial differential governing equation of motion is expressed as a following form
Np
∂ 2 w(x, t ) ∂ w(x, t ) ∂ 4 w(x, t ) 
ρA +c + EI = f (x, t ) = Fi (t )δ (x − vti ),
(2)
dt 2 dt d x4
k=1
(k = 1, 2, . . . , NF ), ∀x ∈  × (0, T )
where w is the transverse displacement of a thin beam, ρ is a density per unit length, E is Young’s modulus, A is cross-
section area, L is length of beam and I is second moment of area.
The simply supported boundary conditions of a beam subjected by a moving concentrated load are imposed by
∂ 2 w(x, t )
w(0, t ) = w(L, t ) = 0, = 0, at x = 0 and x = L. (3)
∂ x2
The initial conditions as shown in Fig. 1 are established at the instant when F2 starts entering the beam from the left
support, the equation can be given as follows:
∞
      
2F1 1  d ω d jπ x
w(x, 0 )|t=0 = sin ω − sin ω j sin (4)
mL ω j − ω i=1
2 2 v ωj v L

and
       
∂ w(x, t )  2F1 ω ∞
d d jπ x
= cos ω − cos ω sin , at t = 0 (5)
∂ t t=0 mL ω2j − ω2 i=1 v j
v L

Each term of the above Eq. (2) is multiplied by sin (jπ x/L) and then integrated with respecting to x between 0 and L
following the method of finite Fourier transformation [55]. A transformation made from vertical displacement field w(x, t)

can be derived by separation of variables, i.e. w(x, t ) = 2L ∞j=1 V ( j, t ) sin ( j π x/L ). According to the sinus Fourier transform
[55], the following differential equation of a simply supported beam with boundary and initial conditions is becoming.
   
j4 π 4 jπ vt jπ (vt + d )
mV̈ ( j, t ) + 2mωbV˙ ( j, t ) + EI V ( j, t ) = F2 sin + F1 sin (6)
l4 L L
where ωb is circular frequency of damping of the beam and ωb is considered to be negligible, d is a distance of loads F1
and F2 . Eq. (6) is rearranged by
F2 F1
V̈ ( j, t ) + ω2j V ( j, t ) = sin ωt + sin(ω + φ )t (7)
m m
408 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

The circular frequency ωj at the j − th mode of vibration can be given as

jπ 2 EI ωj
ωj =( ) , fj = j = 1, 2, 3, . . . , (8)
L m 2π
The circular frequency is following as
πv jπ d
ω= , φ= , (9)
L L
The homogeneous and particular solutions are respectively defined as the sinus form
Yh ( j, t ) = A j sin ω j t + B j cos ω j t,
(10)
Yp ( j, t ) = C j sin ωt + D j cos ωt
Yp solution is substituted into Eq. (7), then the Cj , Dj coefficients are equating for each term of sin ωt and cos ωt.

F2 + F1 cos φ F1 sin φ
Cj = , Dj = , j = 1, 2, 3 . . . (11)
m(ω2j − ω2 ) m(ω2j − ω2 )

The complete form combined between the homogenous and particular solution is derived as
F2 + F1 cos φ F1 sin φ
Y ( j, t ) = A j sin ω j t + B j cos ω j t + sin ωt + cos ωt (12)
m(ω2j − ω2 ) m(ω2j − ω2 )

The inverse Fourier transformation [55] leads Eq. (12) in rearrangement and uses the initial boundary conditions from
Eqs. (4) to (5), the dynamic deflection of the beam can be taken with final form as
∞

 
F1  1 F2 jπ d
w(x, t ) = sin 2π j f t + sin + 2π j f t
2π 2 mL f 2 − ( j f )2 F1 L
i=1 i
    
if F2 d iπ x
− sin 2π fit + sin 2π fi t + sin (13)
fi F1 v L

3. A beam formulation based on NURBS basis function (weak form)

3.1. Brief B-Spline and NURBS basis function

In constructing the B-spline and NURBS, two things need to be defined. The first one is a knot vector
= {ξ 1 , ξ 2 , …,
ξ n + p + 1 } which is non-decreasing sequence of parameter values ξ i ∈ R, i = 1, …, n + p and ξ i is i − th knot belongs to the
parametric space. The second one is a number of control point n and a polynomial degree p needed to describe the B-
spline. The knot vector is called open as the first and the last knots are repeated p + 1time [1]. A B–Spline function is
Cp − 1 continuity at single knot meanwhile Cp continuity is inside in knot span.
The B-spline basis functions Ni, p (ξ ) of degree p starts at order p = 0 are defined by the following recursion

1 if ξi ≤ ξ < ξi+1
Ni,0 (ξ ) = (14)
0 else
For p ≥ 1, the recursion formula are defined as
ξ − ξi ξ −ξ
Ni,p (ξ ) = N (ξ ) + i+ p+1 N (ξ ) (15)
ξi+ p − ξi i,p−1 ξi+ p+1 − ξi+1 i+1,p−1
It is realized that basis functions corresponding to p = 0, 1 become to a piecewise constant and a linear finite elements,
respectively, while when p ≥ 2, the B-Spline is always satisfied the Cp − 1 continuity requirement. For examples, a set of one-
dimensional linear, quadratic, cubic and quartic corresponding to open uniform knot vectors
= [0, 0, 1, 1],
= [0, 0, 0, 1,
1, 1],
= [0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1],
= [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1], respectively, is exhibited in Fig. 2.
The p order B-spline curve regarding to open knot vector
is expressed as form

n
C (ξ ) = Ni,p (ξ )Pi (16)
i=1

where Pi is the control point and Ni, p (ξ ) is a B-Spline basis function with p − th degree.
For an instance, a given knot vector
= {0, 0, 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 0.8, 1, 1, 1} is used to construct the basis functions
according to Eq. (16) as shown in Fig. 3. The one dimensional B-Spline curve with a set of control point coordinates P=[03;
1.55.5; 2.54.5; 4.55.5; 31.5; 7.51.5; 63.5; 8.54.5] is plotted in Fig. 4 in which the sequence of them is displayed in red color.
 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428 409

Fig. 2. Example some B-Spline basis functions: linear, quadratic, cubic and quartic.

Fig. 3. B-Spline basis functions of order p = 2 on the uniform knot vector

= {0, 0, 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 0.8, 1, 1, 1} with inner continuity C0 at ξ = 0.8.

In order to exactly model the geometry with arbitrary curved domain (i.e. circles, cylinders etc.), the basis functions with
weight wi value are added in each control points for the open knot vector
. The Non-uniform Rational B-Splines (NURBS)
functions can be formulated as
Ni,p (ξ )wi
Ri,p (ξ ) = n (17)
j=1 N j,p (ξ )w j

Then, a NURBS curve from Eq. (16) can be rewritten as


n
C (ξ ) = Ri,p (ξ )Pi (18)
i=1

The NURBS basis function is to become the B-Spline form when the individual weight of each control point is equaled
constant wi = const, ∀i = 1, …, n. The derivatives of NURBS are described in [1] and more complicate than those of B-Spline.
410 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

Fig. 4. Quadratic B-Spline curve and control points with unit weights wi .

Therefore, the main advantage of NURBS is easily obtainable exact conic intersections while B-Splines is impossible for
typical engineering shapes.

3.2. The NURBS Euler–Bernoulli beam formulation

Using the NURBS basis functions of degree p with open knot vector
and control points, the x-coordinate is parameter-
ized as

n
xh ( ξ ) = C ( ξ ) = Ri (ξ )Pi (19)
i=1

Similarly, the displacement field u of the Euler–Bernoulli beam is approximated as


n
uh ( ξ ) = Ri ( ξ )qi (20)
i=1

where n is the number of basis functions, Ri is rational basis function, Pi is control points and qi = wi is the nodal degree of
freedom regarding to the control point i.
The relationship between strain and displacements is described by

∂ 2w
εTp = (21)
∂ x2
By substituting Eqs. (21) into (20), the in-plane strains can be rewritten as

n 
n
εTp = RTi,xx (ξ )qi = BTi qi (22)
i=1 i=1

A weak form of the static model for the plates under transverse loading q0 can be expressed as

δεTp EIε p d = δ wq0 d (23)
 
The dynamic equation considered the free vibration analysis can be obtained by a weak form as

δεTp EIε p d = δ uρ Aüd (24)
 
where EI is the flexural rigidity, m = ρ A is mass per unit length
Finally, substituting Eq. (20) and Eq. (22) into Eq. (23) and Eq. (24), respectively, the static can be derived by

Kq = F (25)
And, the natural frequencies ωn of the thin beam can be given by the weak form

( K − ω 2 M )q = 0 (26)
 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428 411

Fig. 5. An elastic beam subjected to one-axle moving vehicle system.

where the global stiffness and mass matrices are as following

K = EI BT Bd, b f M = ρ A RT Rd, (27)
 
and the global load vector F is computed by

F= q0 Ri d  (28)

where ω ∈ R + is the natural frequency.
It is seen from Eq. (27) the Ri,xx involves the second order derivative of NURBS shape functions. This means the approx-
imate displacement field should be C1 -continuity. Therefore, the present method ensures with the order of p ≥ 2 is always
satisfied C1 requirement in the proposed formulations. It is noted that the present method always confirms this continuity
condition.
Boundary conditions:
Since the beam formulation is used with rotation-free, thus this special technique needs to be applied to enforce the
rotation boundary conditions [56]. Two types of boundary condition are used in this study including two cases
Simply supported (S):
w=0 at x = 0, l (29)
Clamped (C):
w = w,n = 0 (30)
The Dirichlet boundary condition of only one variable w can be easily imposed as in the conventional FEM. For the
derivation of displacements w, n , it is also directly enforced by assigning zero of the transverse displacement at adjacent
points at both ends of thin beam. In order to apply this way, the compact form of the normal slope at the boundary is as
following
∂w w(n(xD ) + n ) − w(n(xD ))
= lim =0 (31)
∂ n n → 0 n
Namely, when w(n(xD )) = 0 at xD , the deflection variables at control points xi adjacent to the boundary control points xD
and w(xD ) are set to be equal zero. It is shown that a simple modification is more facilitated than the other ways in Ref.
[57] which make increasing unknown variables and higher consuming computational cost.

3.3. Elastic beam subjected to a moving concentrated force

For the dynamic response of an elastic beam subjected to a moving concentrated force, the governing discretization
equation of motion is normally given as:
   
[M] d̈ + [C ] d˙ + [K ]{d} = {f} (32)
where [M] is the structural mass matrix, [C] is the structural damping matrix, [K] is the structural stiffness matrix, {f} is the
interaction force vector and {d¨}, {d˙},{d} are denoted as the acceleration, velocity and displacement vectors, respectively.
A linear differential equation system indicated in Eq. (32) used the NURBS basis functions as the interpolation function
for the computational formulation. Herein, the isogeometric approach is developed to verify the finite element approach and
proved analytical formulations. A discussion of them will be presented in the Section 4.

3.4. Elastic beam subjected to a moving one-axle dynamic system

The schematic of the problem is presented in the Fig. 5 where the vehicle of the two degrees of freedom traverses over
the simply supported beam. The moving system is assumed to be without losing contact on the beam surface. The beam
412 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

has a constant cross-section A, a length L and a second moment of inertia I. The material characteristics of the beam are
Young’s modulus E, and the mass density ρ .
The governing equation systems for the interaction model between beam and single axle vehicle using isogeometric
analysis formulations can be obtained as following
   
[M] d̈ + [C ] d˙ + [K ]{d} = {f} (33)

m1 ẅ1 + c1 (w˙ 1 − w˙ 2 ) + k1 (w1 − w2 ) = 0 (34)

and
m2 ẅ2 − c1 (w˙ 1 − w˙ 2 ) − k1 (w1 − w2 ) + k2 (w2 − w3 ) = 0 (35)
where w1 , w2 , w3 are the vertical motions of the masses measured from the static position, k1 , k2 are the springs connecting
two masses and c1 is a damping coefficient of viscous dampers of vehicle.
The external force F(t) > 0 can be derived from the above equations. It is noted that F(t) is defined positive as its direction
is upward on the beam. The contact force can be expressed as
F (t ) = (m1 + m2 )g + k2 (w2 − w3 ) (36)
with the condition
k2 ( w2 − w3 ) ≥ 0 (37)
where first term is the dead weight of vehicle on the right hand side of Eq. (36) and the other term represents the stiffness
effect when tie m2 moves on a beam.
The deformation between the contact point and the elastic beam may be neglected, therefore the displacement w(x, t)
of beam at the contact point is equal together. The displacement at the contact point consists of two components: one is
the displacement of the beam w(x(t), t) and the other is the road irregularity r(x(t)). The total displacement can be generally
written as
w3 (x, t ) = w(x(t ), t ) + r (x(t )) (38)
The system from Eqs. (33) to (36) can be rewritten into the compact form
⎛ ⎞⎧ ¨ ⎫ ⎛ ⎞⎧ ˙ ⎫
[M ] 0 0 ⎨d⎬ [C ] 0 0 ⎨d⎬
⎝ 0 m1 0 ⎠ ẅ1 + ⎝ 0 c1 −c1 ⎠ w˙ 1
⎩ ⎭ ⎩ ⎭
0 0 m2 ẅ2 0 −c1 c1 w˙ 2
⎛ ⎞⎧ ⎫ ⎧ ⎫
[K ] + k2 [R][R]
T
0 −k2 [R] ⎨ d ⎬ ⎨((m1 + m2 )g − k2 r (x ))[R]T ⎬
T

+⎝ 0 k1 −k1 ⎠ w1 = 0 (39)
⎩ ⎭ ⎩ ⎭
−k2 [R] −k1 k1 + k2 w2 k2 r ( x )
For the simple case, as the spring of wheel tie k2 is removed in the moving system equations and then the mass m2
is directly contacted to the surface of thin beam with including the road irregularity. The fully system equations including
vehicle and beam with only the motion of spung mass m1 is remained
m1 ẅ1 + c (w˙ 1 − w˙ 2 ) + k(w1 − w2 ) = 0 (40)
And the interaction force is computed as
F (t ) = (m1 + m2 )g − m2 ẅ0 + k(w1 − w2 ) + c (w˙ 1 − w˙ 2 ) (41)
The magnitude of the vertical dynamic deflection of variable w2 now is equal to that of the simply supported beam at
the contact point. Substituting the Eq. (40) into the Eq. (41), the transmitted force, F(t) can also be resulted as
F (t ) = m1 (g − ẅ1 ) + m2 (g − ẅ2 ) (42)
Assuming that the vehicle is without losing contact with the beam, i.e. the interaction force is positive, F(t) > 0. The
total displacement for variable w2 can be generally derived as
w2 (x, t ) = w(x(t ), t ) + r (x(t )) (43)
The first derivative of w2 is obtained as
∂w ∂w ∂r
w˙ 2 (x, t ) = x˙ + + x˙ (44)
∂x ∂t ∂ x
and the second derivative is given as
∂ 2w 2 ∂ 2w ∂w ∂ 2w ∂ 2r 2 ∂ r
ẅ2 (x, t ) = x˙ + 2 x˙ + ẍ + + x˙ + ẍ (45)
∂x 2 ∂ x∂ t ∂x ∂ t 2 ∂ x2 ∂x
 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428 413

Fig. 6. Four degree of freedom vehicle system moving on an elastic beam.

where w˙ 2 (x, t ), ẅ2 (x, t ) are described as vertical velocity and acceleration of the unsprung mass, respectively, x˙ and ẍ are
the vehicle velocity and acceleration of traversing along longitudinal direction, w(x, t) is the dynamic motion of the beam
and r(x) is the surface irregularity profile. The first term in Eq. (45) shows the effect of beam curvature, the second term
denotes the Coriolis acceleration and the fourth effect is the acceleration in the vertical direction of the contact point.
Supposing that the surface roughness of pavement is negligible. The final compact form of the simple case when mass
m2 directly contacts is rewritten as
     
[M] + m2 [R][R]
T
{0 } d¨ T T
[C ] + 2m2 x˙ [R] [R]x + c1 [R] [R]x −c1 [R]T d˙
+
0 m1 ẅ1 −c1 [R] c1 w˙ 1
 T T T T T
 
[K ] + m2 x˙ 2 [R] [R]xx + m2 ẍ[R] [R]x + k1 [R] [R] + c1 x˙ [R] [R]x −k1 [R] d
+
−c1 x˙ [R]x − k1 [R] k1 w1
 
[R ] ( m 1 + m 2 ) g
T
= (46)
0

3.5. Elastic beam subjected to a moving two-axles dynamic system

Fig. 6 depicts a more complicated model which a four degree of freedom of moving vehicle travels on an Euler–Bernoulli
beam of length L. The geometric parameters of vehicle structure are given in which the sprung system is simulated by
two vertical and rotation motions as two degrees of freedom at the center of gravity of vehicle. Two remaining degrees of
freedom belong to masses m1 and m2 with assuming vertical deflections w1 and w2 , respectively. The generalized forcing
function of the moving vehicle is exhibited on the support beam and defined following along the direction as indicated in
Fig. 6. Supposing that two axles of moving vehicle are always contacted with a beam surface and a uniform velocity v is
available in this study.
The isogeometric formulations are used here to analyze the dynamic response of an elastic beam. Since there are two
contact legs acting on the beam element, the dynamic interaction forces are calculated with the NURBS shape functions
at the locations where two axles are acting on. During the time period when the entry or departure of two-axle vehicle
remains as only one foot moving within the beam, the interaction equation system can be derived as the previous section
of single moving load.
The system equations presented below are included by the second derivative equation of elastic beam and the following
four equations of sprung and unsprung masses corresponding to four degrees of freedom of general vehicle. The motion of
vehicle is expressed as

Iθ̈ + c1 b1 (y˙ − w˙ 1 + b1 θ˙ ) + k1 b1 (y − w1 + b1 θ ) − c2 b2 (y˙ − w˙ 2 − b2 θ˙ ) − k2 b2 (y − w2 − b2 θ ) = 0

mv ÿ + c1 (y˙ − w˙ 1 + b1 θ˙ ) + k1 (y − w1 + b1 θ ) + c2 (y˙ − w˙ 2 − b2 θ˙ ) + k2 (y − w2 − b2 θ ) = 0
(47)
m1 ẅ1 − c1 (y˙ − w˙ 1 + b1 θ˙ ) − k1 (y − w1 + b1 θ ) + k1s (w1 − w1s ) = 0
m2 ẅ2 − c2 (y˙ − w˙ 2 − b2 θ˙ ) − k2 (y − w2 − b2 θ ) + k2s (w2 − w2s ) = 0

where t is the time, w1s , w2s are the vertical displacements of unsprung parts of vehicle. y, θ are a vertical displacement and
a rotation of sprung part mv , respectively. w1 , w2 are the vertical translational displacements of masses m1 , m2 . c1 , c2 , k1 ,
k2 are the viscous dampings and constant springs of two axles. k1s , k2s are the constant springs of ties. The overdot stands
for the derivative with respect to time. b1 and b2 are the horizontal distances of front and rear wheel from the centroid of
the vehicle. The initial conditions for above system equations are all set to zero.
414 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

The interaction forces at the positions where two axles contact onto the elastic beam can be derived by following
formulations
(m1s ẅ1s − k1s (w1 − w1s ) − fy1 g + F1 (t ))b1 + fθ 1 θ̈ = 0
(48)
(−m2s ẅ2s + k2s (w2 − w2s ) + fy2 g − F2 (t ))b2 + fθ 2 θ̈ = 0
where
b2 b1 b1 b2
f y1 = m1 + mv , f y2 = m2 + mv , f θ 1 = Iv , fθ 2 = Iv , (49)
b1 + b2 b1 + b2 b1 + b2 b1 + b2
g is the acceleration due to gravity.
A matrix form of two-axle vehicle successively describes through the two vertical motions of the unsprung masses while
the vertical and rotation deflections of sprung mass combine with bending derivative equation of an elastic beam. The
matrix system of vehicle can be derived as
⎡ ⎤⎧ ⎫ ⎡ 2 2 ⎤⎧ ⎫
Iv 0 0 0 ⎪ θ̈ ⎪ 2
i=1 ci bi (−1 )i+1 ci bi −c1 b1 c2 b2⎪ θ˙
⎪
⎨ ⎪
⎬ ⎢
i=1
2 ⎪ ⎪
⎥⎨ ⎪
⎬
⎢0 mv 0 0 ⎥ ÿ ⎢ 2 (−1 )i+1 ci bi −c1 −c2 ⎥ y˙
⎢ ⎥ + ⎢ i=1 i=1 ci
⎣0 ⎦ ⎥
0 m1 0 ⎪⎪ẅ ⎪ ⎣ −c1 b1 −c1 0 ⎦⎪ w˙ ⎪
⎩ 1⎪ ⎭ c1 ⎪
⎩ 1⎪ ⎭
0 0 0 m2 ẅ2 c2 b2 −c2 0 c2 w˙ 2
⎡ 2 2 i+1
⎤⎧ ⎫ ⎧ ⎫
ki b2i (−1 ) ki bi −k1 b1 k2 b2 ⎪ θ⎪ ⎪ 0 ⎪
⎢2
i=1 i=1
2 ⎪
⎥⎨ ⎬ ⎨⎪ ⎪ ⎪
⎬
⎢ (−1 )i+1 ki bi i=1 ki −k1 −k2 ⎥ y 0
+⎢ i=1 ⎥ = (50)
⎣ −k1 b1 −k1 k1 + k1s 0 ⎦⎪ ⎪w ⎪ ⎪ k ([R ]d + r (x1 ))⎪
⎩ 1⎪⎭ ⎪ ⎩ 1s 1 ⎪
⎭
k2 b2 −k2 0 k2 + k2s w2 k2s ([R2 ]d + r (x2 ))

The form of bending vibration of Euler–Bernoulli beam is expressed as following

∂ 2 w(x, t ) ∂ w(x, t ) ∂ 4 w(x, t ) 

2
ρA +c + EI = Fi (t )δi (51)
dt 2 dt d x4
i=1

where δ 1 , δ 2 are distinguished by two direct delta functions as δ 1 = δ (x − vt − (b1 + b2 )), δ 2 = δ (x − vt)
Aforementioned in references [31,41], the contact forces of the unsprung masses are assumed to be positive when sprung
masses m1 , m2 move downward as compressive. The displacements of these unsprung masses as in contacting with the
elastic beam are equal to the beam deflection at the each contact coordinate point. In order to consider the derailment
problem, the separation and interaction effects of the wheel and the target beam have been involved, then the contact
conditions for two axles are described as
• The maximum wheel derailment ratio of the lateral and vertical contact forces can be expression as [50]

Q/P = Max(Qi /Pi ), i = 1, n (52)

where Qi and Pi are the horizontal and vertical forces of i − th wheelset, n indicates the total number of wheels for the
vehicle.
• Moving force at the i − th axle acts on beam at point xi

F̄i (t ) = ki ūi (t ) ≥ 0 and (53)

in which

ūi (t ) = wi (t ) − ε̄i w(xi , t ) − r (xi ) ≥ 0, i = 1, 2 (54)

where i = 1, 2 is defined to i − th axle, the quantities wi (t) corresponding to the vertical displacements of masses m1 , m2 .
w(xi , t) and r(xi ) are the deflection and surface roughness at two contact points.
The mutual factor ε̄i of the i − th axle and beam can be given as

1 f or 0 ≤ xi ≤ L
ε̄i = (55)
0 else

The contact force F̄i (t ) must be positive or zero, therefore if ūi (t ) is negative, F̄i (t ) in the Eq. (53) must set to be equal
zero. The case of vertical load F̄i (t ) < 0 and Qi = 0, which means that one or two wheels encounter the jumping condition,
is not considered due to the negative force being impossible in contact between the vehicle and beam.
In the special case, the masses of m1 and m2 , springs of k1s and k2s are ignored from the two-axle vehicle system. The
road irregularity r(x) is also not considered and assumed that two-axle vehicle never losses contact on the road surface.
Therefore, the vehicle is of two degrees of freedom regarding to the rest of vertical and rotational motion equations of the
 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428 415

Fig. 7. Comparison the convergence rate of FEM, IGA (p = 2, 3, 4) with analytical solutions at natural frequency of Mode 10.

sprung mass mv . At the locations connecting to each axle contact to the beam, the rotational force equation for each of
them at an individual point can be given respectively by
(m1 ẅ1 − c1 (y˙ − w˙ 1 + b1 θ˙ ) − k1 (y − w1 + b1 θ ) − fy1 g + F1 (t ))b1 + fθ 1 θ̈ = 0
(56)
(−m2 ẅ2 + c2 (y˙ − w˙ 2 − b2 θ˙ ) − k2 (y − w2 − b2 θ ) − fy2 g − F2 (t ))b2 + fθ 2 θ̈ = 0
The above equations are rearranged and derived by
F1 (t ) = − fy1 ÿ + fy1 g − fθ 1 θ̈ /b1
(57)
F2 (t ) = − fy2 ÿ + fy2 g + fθ 2 θ̈ /b2
The matrix system of coupled vehicle-beam interaction is reduced as following
⎛ 2 2 ⎞⎧ ¨⎫ ⎛ ⎞⎧ ⎫
[M ]
T
[Ri ] fyi
T
[Ri ] fθ i⎨d ⎬ [C ] 0 0 ⎨d˙ ⎬
i=1 i=1
⎝ 0 mv 0 ⎠ ÿ + ⎜ ⎝
2
i=1 −c i [R i ]
2
i=1 c i
2
i=1 ( −1 ) i+1
c i b i
⎟ ˙
⎠ y
⎩ ⎭ 2 2 2 ⎩θ˙ ⎭
0 0 Iv θ̈ i=1 (−1 ) ci bi [Ri ]
i
i=1 (−1 )
i+1
ci bi i=1 ci bi
2
⎛ ⎞⎧ ⎫ ⎧ ⎫
[K ] 0 0 2
⎨d ⎬ ⎨ i=1 [Ri ] fyi ⎬
T

⎜ 2 2 2 i+1 ⎟
+⎝ i=1 − (ci x˙ [Ri,x ] + ki [Ri ] ) i=1 ki i=1 (−1 ) ki bi ⎠ y = 0 (58)
2 2 2 ⎩ ⎭ ⎩ ⎭
i=1 ( −1 )i
( c b R
i i [ i,x ] x˙ + k b R
i i[ i] ) i=1 ( −1 ) i+1
k b
i i k
i=1 i ib2 θ 0

4. Discussion

4.1. Verify IGA for Euler–Bernoulli beam with FEM and analytical theory

Let us consider an Euler–Bernoulli beam with length L = 34 m and a simply supported boundary condition (SS). The fol-
lowing parameters are given such as the Young’s modulus multiplying moment inertia EI = 9.92 × 1010 Nm2 and the weight
of beam m = 11400 kg/m. A validation is to consider a higher order smooth continuity of isogeometric method for comput-
ing the natural frequencies of an Euler–Bernoulli beam. In this example, three approaches such as analytical theory, finite
element (FE) method and isogeometric analysis (IGA) have been conducted for comparing to their obtained results. The
same number of degrees of freedom (Dofs) using by FE method and isogeometric analysis (IGA) is investigated to analyze
the free vibration of thin beam for comparison purpose. Mode tenth of dynamics vibration in which the accuracy of various
numerical methods becomes difficult to verify, is chosen to calculate. The convergence rate of FEM and IGA of orders p = 2,
3, 4 in analyzing simply supported thin beam is revealed in Fig. 7. The general observation proved that the convergence
rate conducting by FEM for Hermitian beam [60,61] with C1 continuity is worse than that of IGA as p = 2, meanwhile the
highest accurate natural frequencies as comparing to analytical method are given by the orders of p = 3, 4. The increasing
higher order Cp − 1 continuous of isogeometric method is smooth with a much higher accuracy due to finer mesh parameter
h and higher degree p over the global domain, i.e. the value of degree p = 4 will lead to higher accurate natural frequen-
cies than lower order NURBS basis functions as p = 3. For linear modal analysis, IGA turns out that the inherent instabilities
416 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

Fig. 8. The first six mode shapes for a pinned-pinned Euler–Bernoulli Beam.

Table 1
Comparisons of the computational time between FEM and IGA.

Computational time (s)

Numerical methods Number of Dofs Assembly time (s) Eigen solver time (s) Total time (s) Numerical results Analytical (Mode 1)

FEM 502 0.438950 0.4769300 0.915880 4.008322 4.008348

IGA(p = 2) 252 0.659710 0.0900610 0.749771 4.008375
IGA(p = 3) 24 0.098927 0.0010651 0.099992 4.008348
IGA(p = 4) 14 0.051354 0.0 0 05053 0.051859 4.008348

in the high frequencies which so-called the spectrum optic branch of higher order FEM do not occur when using the B-
spline/NURBS with higher smoothness instead of piecewise polynomials [62]. It can be also seen that the shapes of first six
modes described through the control points in red circle are very smooth as shown in Fig. 8.
Beside the convergence rate and accuracy, the computational time is the second important issue in the numerical anal-
yses. The time-consuming is described in Table 1 by two stages of assembly and eigen-value solver for FEM and IGA
(p = 2, 3, 4) with respecting to the same accuracy at the first frequency of thin beam. The numerical models of FEM with
Ndofs = 502, the quadratic, cubic and quartic orders of IGA with Ndofs = 252, 24, 14, respectively, are chosen for the com-
putational time comparison. It can be observed that, IGA utilized with smaller Dofs than FEM for the same accurate solution
and the total time of IGA is dramatically shorter than that of FEM model. Closer looking into Table 1, it is illustrated that
IGA (p = 2) is rapidly in eigen-value solver, however the more computationally expensive at the assembly stage, even though
the Ndofs of IGA is smaller two times than that of FEM. Depending on the order of splines (p = 2, 3, 4), the computational
time of IGA becomes costly as using the same number degrees of freedom with FEM in various numerical studies. General
speaking, IGA tool regarding to higher order splines using on the coarser mesh with a few Dofs can give the highly accurate
solutions than FEM and considerably reduces the time-consuming in numerical calculation. This is the main advantage of
IGA which is presented in the current manner.

4.2. Analysis of one or two moving concentration force for elastic beam

A realization of the isogeometric technique is developed for dynamic responses of Euler–Bernoulli beams subjected to
moving loads as described in this section. Dynamic analysis of concentrated moving loads can be presented by follow-
ing cases: (1) a concentrated force traverses on beam with different constant velocities; (2) one and two dynamic moving
 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428 417

Fig. 9. Central dynamic displacement of a simply supported beam subjected to a concentrated load moving with various constant speeds.

Table 2
Comparison of impact factors for different theories.

Impact factor

Tf /τ Exact [64] FEM [41] FEM IGA (p = 2) IGA (p = 3) IGA (p = 4)

0.1 1.050 1.053 1.05216 1.04097 1.05199 1.05187

0.5 1.250 1.252 1.25857 1.24405 1.25823 1.25850
1.0 1.707 1.705 1.70503 1.69309 1.70494 1.70503
1.234 1.743 1.730 1.73250 1.71701 1.73191 1.73219
1.5 1.710 1.704 1.70143 1.68960 1.70145 1.70142
2.0 1.550 1.550 1.54792 1.53514 1.54799 1.54788

forces consider with a varying acceleration and the distance of concentrated loads. The attained numerical results of analyt-
ical, finite element and isogeometric methods are displayed below and served to assess the capabilities of these developed
approaches.
The first example is employed here to study a dynamic behavior of an elastic beam imposed by a concentrated moving
load in which the influence of the inertia of the vehicle mass is negligible. The beam characteristics are of length L = 34m,
10 2
$= 9.92 × 10 Nm and weight for unit length m = 11400kg/m. The force is set by 3470 0 0N and the critical velocity
stiffness EI
vcr = π /L EI/m [55]. The consistent mass and stiffness matrices are derived from the NURBS interpolation function. The
support beam structure is discretized into m nodes regarding to the number of control points connected by m − p beam
elements depending on the p = 2, 3, 4.
The verification for a concentrated moving load is evidenced by FEM and IGA to evaluate the dynamic response of thin
beam under various constant velocities. Such obtained solutions from above methods are compared to the other FEM derived
by Lin and Trethewey [41] and exact results examined by Warburton [64]. The different values of Tf /τ are evaluated at the
central deflection of elastic beam. The symbol Tf designates the fundamental period of beam and τ denotes the whole of
travel time for the moving load from left end to right end position. In Fig. 9, when the speed of moving force is sufficiently
low, i.e. the dynamic behavior at the central position is small and approximated to the static displacement. This is apparent
as the curve regarding to the speed parameter at T f /τ = 0.1. When the speed becomes further decreased, the dynamic
behavior closely approaches to the static deflection. Table 2 also displays the results of dynamic deflection factor which is
defined as the ratio of the maximum dynamic displacement dividing to the maximum static displacement at the central
elastic beam. A very good agreement is compared between the analytical results [64] and those achieved from developed FE
model and proposed isogeometric analysis. This work illustrates that the computational implementation has been successful
in simulations of isogeometric and finite element methods.
The second example is investigated the increasing accelerations of moving force on elastic beam corresponding to various
constant velocities. The dynamic behavior of an elastic beam under a traveling load regarding to variable velocity for a
single or multi-load is described in detail. Namely, the beam span is L = 100m, the weight per unit length is m = 150 kN/m
and the moment of inertia is I = 0.8m4 . The magnitude of loading is 760 KN moving over the beam with initial speed
parameters of 20, 30, 40 m/s and the accelerations regarding to each of them γ = 0, 3, 6, 9 and 12 m/s2 , respectively. The
other characteristics of two-axle are h = 1.5m, d = 8m where h is the height of vehicle and d is the distance of two-axle.
418 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

Table 3
Dimensionless deflections at the central elastic beam considering the increasing acceleration γ for one and two
axles.

One axle Two axle

v γ Michaltsos [37] Analytical IGA Michaltsos [37] Analytical IGA

20 0.00 0.0367220 0.03662070 0.0364647 0.0314440 0.031417294 0.03123769

0.11 0.0374035 – 0.0394899 0.0336308 – 0.03464836
0.22 0.0409037 – 0.0421567 0.0368054 – 0.03758441
0.33 0.0435678 – 0.0443946 0.0395225 – 0.040 0 0734
0.44 0.0455301 – 0.0462176 0.0418376 – 0.04196442
30 0.00 0.0472969 0.04763343 0.0476307 0.0394842 0.041297839 0.04129332
0.11 0.0490444 – 0.0490514 0.0416449 – 0.04285093
0.22 0.0502667 – 0.0502027 0.0435067 – 0.04414885
0.33 0.0510234 – 0.0511241 0.0450923 – 0.04521076
0.44 0.0516009 – 0.0518603 0.0464272 – 0.04607688
40 0.00 0.0543276 0.05382942 0.0537947 0.0468736 0.04683996 0.04678840
0.11 0.0547343 – 0.0542366 0.0478551 – 0.04730632
0.22 0.0548834 – 0.0545607 0.0487004 – 0.04772244
0.33 0.0548121 – 0.0547833 0.0494222 – 0.04805089
0.44 0.0545605 – 0.0549189 0.0500296 – 0.04830487

Table 4
Parameters of a moving one-axle moving vehicle and elastic support beam.

Parameters for the beam Parameters for one-axle moving vehicle

L = 47 in m1 = 0.02514 lb s2 /in
ρ = 2.7701(10−1 ) lb s2 /in4 k = 47659 lb/in
E = 15.2(106 ) psi, I = 22.7 in4 c = 0.99334 lb s/in
A = 7.90625 in2 (uniform)

The mathematic model of an elastic beam is produced for analytical solution as solved in Eq. (13) and isogeometric
analysis. The obtained results from two mentioned methods are compared to the Refs of Michaltsos [37] for both one and
two-axle traveling on beam. Table 3 revealed that the results are good agreement between IGA and analytical solution and
also demonstrated that the IGA results are better than those given by Michaltsos [37]. Fig. 10 concerns the behavior of cen-
tral dynamic deflection of an elastic beam. It can be seen that the relationship between the non-dimensional deflection and
the total time in conjunction with various accelerations. Each velocity of 20, 30 and 40 m/s is addressed by corresponding
acceleration parameters of 0, 3, 6, 9 and 12 m/s2 , respectively. The first column of this figure is represented for one-axle
moving force whereas the second one is figured out for two-axle moving vehicle excluding the damping effects. In these
figures, the increasing of acceleration in each constant speed could lead to higher dynamic impact factors, i.e. the gradually
increasing dynamic deflections when the acceleration is increased from the 0 to 12 m/s2 regarding to the case of 20 m/s2 .
The rest of other constant velocities, the trends of dynamic response are similarly increasing and the higher impact factors
can be received.

4.3. Analysis of the one-axle moving mass dynamic system

In this verification, the dynamic interaction between a one-foot dynamic system and Euler–Bernoulli beam is considered
as shown in Fig. 5. The moving systems are of spring mass m1 in which its stiffness k and damping c are presented. The
spring of tie k2 and mass m2 are not included in the vehicle model. To facilitate the numerical implementation, Eq. (46) can
be applied to evaluate the requirement of mass, damping and stiffness matrix matrices. All of these matrices are dependent
on time, and changed within the system matrix when the moving sprung mass travels from starting point to end point of
the beam. The characteristics of a fixed-fixed elastic beam subjected to a moving one-axle system are used for simulation
with a constant velocity as following Table 4.
The central dynamic deflection responses of a fixed-fixed beam for various constant speeds are plotted in Fig. 11. The
comparisons between the numerical results from the isogeometric analysis and those obtained from FEMs derived by Lin
and Trethewey [41] are well coincided together. It is interesting noticed from the Fig. 11, as the travel velocity is sufficiently
low, namely T f /τ = 0.1, the dynamic response gains to the static analysis. It is due to the effects of boundary conditions on
the stiffness of the elastic beam, the clamped both ends of beam can make its stiffness be higher meanwhile the simply
supported beam has smaller stiffness. It is also demonstrated that the magnitude of dynamic deflections at middle of simply
supported beam is higher than the fixed-fixed boundary condition as shown in Fig. 12 at T f /τ = 0.1. However, the trends of
dynamic responses of the other constant velocities are totally different and smaller than that of fixed-fixed beam solutions.
In addition, the vertical dynamic response of sprung mass is plotted in Fig. 13. The maximum deflection of sprung mass
is delayed when the speed of one-axle moving system increases. Table 5 presents the obtained numerical results of FEM and
IGA comparing to the FE solutions derived by Lin and Trethewey [41]. The dynamic impact comparisons of fixed-fixed beam
 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428 419

Fig. 10. The dimensionless dynamic deflection for various variable velocities 20 30, 40 m/s under increasing acceleration step 0, 3, 6, 9, 12 m/s, respectively,
corresponding to one-axle force (in column 1) and two-axle force (in column 2).
420 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

Fig. 11. Dynamic displacement response for fixed-fixed beam under different constant speeds comparing between IGA (p = 4) and FEM [41].

Fig. 12. Dynamic displacement response for simply supported beam under different constant speeds comparing between IGA (p = 4) and FEM [41].

Fig. 13. The isogeometric analysis response of sprung mass of moving system with different velocities.
 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428 421

Table 5
The impact factors of middle displacement for fixed-fixed beam subjected to one-foot
moving mass.

Impact factor

Tf /τ Lin and Trethewey [41] FEM IGA (p = 2) IGA (p = 3) IGA (p = 4)

0.1 1.028 1.0303 1.0213 1.0304 1.0303

0.5 1.206 1.2182 1.2132 1.2180 1.2189
1.0 1.533 1.5372 1.5491 1.5366 1.5384
1.5 1.460 1.4589 1.4870 1.4600 1.4615
2.0 1.307 1.3062 1.3114 1.3070 1.3072

Table 6
Parameters for simulation of two-axle system model interacting to the elastic
beam.

Parameters for the beam Parameters for two axle vehicle

L = 47 in b1 = 13.7005 in
ρ = 2.7701(10−1 ) lb s2 /in4 b2 = 14.6029 in
E = 15.2(106 ) psi m1 = 0.02514 lb s2 /in
A = 7.90625 in2 (uniform) c1 = 0 lb s/in f or Case 1
I = 22.7 in4 c1 = 0.5064 lb s/in f or Case 2
ζ 1 = 0 for Case 1 and ζ 1 = 2% for Case 2 c2 = 0 lb s/in f or Case 1
ζ 2 = 0 for Case 1 and ζ 2 = 5% for Case 2 c1 = 0.4478 lbs/in f or Case 2
k1 = 12356.66 lb/in
k2 = 10297.74 lb/in
J = 5.0297 lb in s2

are very good agreement between IGA (p = 2, 3, 4) and those published in Refs. [41]. Considerable savings are concluded
that the proposed method is completely reasonable to reduce the computational time and stable solutions in requiring for
implementation.

4.4. Analysis of the two-axle moving dynamic system

The next example for analyzing an elastic beam subjected to four degree of freedom of two-axle moving system in
which three investigations are studied. Firstly, a validation of a two-axle vehicle moving with a constant speed is employed
and the numerical results are compared to those published in the literatures. Secondly, the proposed isogeometric analysis
formulation considered a complicated moving system with including the irregular roughness surface as shown in Fig. 18,
is verified to exact results [65]. Thirdly, the analysis of a two-axle moving system is subjected to a real random variable
road irregularity. The forcing functions will be changed in each case of several typical road irregularities as reported by
ISO standard 8608 [51,63]. The Eqs. (50) and (51) are utilized to determine the dynamic response of an elastic beam and a
two-axle moving system.

4.4.1. Two-axle dynamic system moving with a constant speed

The first task is carried out to validate the proposed isogeometric approach for dynamic responses of couple beam-vehicle
interaction. The coupled model is simulated as shown in Fig. 6, however the masses of m1 and m2 , springs of ties k1s , k2s
are ignored, then the model only exists two degrees of freedom in which vertical and rotational motion are given.
Dynamic analyses are performed for a simply supported beam imposed by two-axle moving vehicle. Parameters used to
simulate the coupled model are tabulated in Table 6. In this Table, these parameters are separated into two cases. Case 1
presents the model without incorporating to damping effect meanwhile Case 2 mentions a damping following a Rayleigh
formulation of [C] = α [M] + β [K] in which the first two modes of natural frequency are applied to elastic beam. In this
example, the systems of Eqs. (50) and (51) are adopted to solve the numerical solutions of such mentioned cases.
For Case 1, the isogeometric simulation is performed by plotting in Figs. 14 to 16. Fig. 14 presents the dynamic behaviors
of simply supported beam at middle point regarding to various constant speeds. The dynamic deflections at each speed
parameter are well fixed to that be available in the reference [41]. The vertical displacement and rotational angle of two axle
moving vehicle are also exhibited in Figs. 15 and 16, respectively. In these Figures, the validation of proposed isogeometric
formulation can be comprehensive from the rotation response of moving vehicle. The rotational angle of the general vehicle
is obtained the maximum response around t/τ = 0.5 and described as clockwise rotation when the right wheel travels on
beam while the left wheel is not yet entered. The zero point figured out that the left and right wheels are equally removed
from the left and right ends of the beam. This is obviously interpreted at the time T f /τ = 0.31. The dynamic rotational angles
in the rest velocities of T f /τ = 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0 tend similarly as stated problem. It is shown that the extreme positions
of maximum rotational response are shifted depending on the velocity which is sufficiently high. The above observations
422 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

Fig. 14. The dynamic behavior of simply supported beam at the middle point subjected to two-axle moving vehicle with various constant speeds.

Fig. 15. The vertical deflection of sprung mass for two-axle moving vehicle.

in these figures evidenced that the proposed isogeometric formulation applied to subsequent implementations have been
successful.
The impact factors of maximum dynamic deflection dividing to maximum static deflection are summarized in Table 7.
The IGA numerical results achieved in Case 1 and 2 are highly accurate when comparing to the reported solutions [41]. The
maximum impact factors of dynamic deflections are found at T f /τ = 2.0. In Table 7, when the damping effects are taken
into account the interaction model between beam and two-axle moving vehicle, the magnitudes of dynamic response are
significantly reduced. It is implied that the primary vibration of the elastic beam is decreased as these damping parameters
are included, as expected in the practical engineering.

4.4.2. Verification with road irregularity roughness surface

The next example is considered a full model of general vehicle and elastic beam as shown in Fig. 6 to validate the present
isogeometric approach. The vehicle has four degrees of freedom traveling with a uniform speed v on a length L of elastic
beam. The parameters for this interaction model are tabulated in Table 8. The approximate solutions are obtained by a set of
equation systems from Eqs. (50) to (58) which detail described such as the vertical and rotational motions of sprung mass,
vertical deflections of unsprung masses and the dynamic bending vibration of the thin beam.
The general vehicle is modeled by two wheel elements, two spring-damped element and a lumped mass interacts on an
elastic beam. Its velocity is assigned 30 m/s, the time step length is 0.001 s and considering with/without road irregularity.
 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428 423

Fig. 16. The rotation motion of sprung mass for two-axle moving vehicle.

Table 7
Impact factor comparisons with/without damping effect for Case 1 and Case 2.

Tf /τ Impact factor

Case 1 Case 2

Lin and Trethewey [41] IGA (p = 3) IGA (p = 4) Lin and Trethewey [41] IGA (p = 3) IGA (p = 4)

0.31 1.246 1.2473 1.2473 1.173 1.1961 1.1961

1.0 1.381 1.3816 1.3814 1.342 1.3464 1.3463
1.5 1.582 1.5861 1.5862 1.535 1.5431 1.5431
2.0 1.665 1.6669 1.6669 1.616 1.6177 1.6177
2.5 1.651 1.6489 1.6490 1.601 1.6013 1.6012
3.0 1.590 1.5902 1.5907 1.550 1.5525 1.5524

Table 8
Parameters of simply supported beam and full model of general vehicle.

Parameters Description Value

L Length of the beam 25 m

E Young’s modulus of the beam 2×1011 Pa
G Total weight of the beam 47.5×103 (kg)
mv Mass of spring part of vehicle 18×103 kg
m1 , m2 Mass of unspring part of vehicle 1.0×103 kg
f(1) First natural frequency of the unload beam 4.3652 Hz
k1s , k2s Spring constant of ties 2 × 1010 N/m
K1 , K2 Spring constant of two axles 8 × 106 N/m
g Acceleration of gravity 9.8 m/s2
Iv Mass moment of vehicle inertia 1×105 m4
D = b1 + b2 Vehicle axle base 1 m or 14 m
b1 , b2 Horizontal distance between the centroid of sprung mass and unsprung mass 0.5 m or 7 m

C1 , C2 Viscous damping for the two axles 2×104 Ns/m

ωb Circular frequency of beam damping 0

The variation of the wheel distance (D) is set to 14 m and 1 m. The present isogeometric method is employed to compare
both of finite element [65] and Fybra’s analytical solutions [53] by following 2 Cases. Case 1 is pointed out in Fig. 17 for the
dynamic displacements of beam and mass centers without including the road irregularity. Since the dashed and solid line
are overlapped, this figure evidences the three solutions are almost identical.
The most complicated verification in Case 2 is performed with the similar parameters given in Table 8 under the irregu-
larity of road surface. The uniform irregularity of road surface formulation is used for validation as following
ar
rr ( x ) = sin(2π X /Lr ) (59)
2
where ar is an amplitude of the rail irregularity and Lr is a wavelength of the road irregularity, X is the positions of front
and rear wheels contact to the roughness surface.
424 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

Fig. 17. Comparisons between IGA, FEM, analytical solutions for dynamic central deflection of vehicle with variation of wheel distance 1 m and 14 m moving
on smooth surface.

Fig. 18. Comparisons for dynamic behavior of IGA and analytical solutions with uniform road irregularity.

In this example, the road irregularity parameters in Eq. (59) are ar = 0.02 (m) and Lr = 2 (m). Fig. 18 shows that the iso-
geomeric approach produces the dynamic behaviors to be very excellent agreement as indicated by FEM results of Ju et al.
[65].

4.4.3. Analyzing general moving system with typical types of irregular roughness surfaces
Finally, the dynamic bending vibrations of an elastic beam under three real types of random roughness surface such as A,
B, C are investigated. The different classes of road profiles assuming by a random% profile of road surface roughness function
N
of r (x ) = i=1 Ai sin(i x − φi ), where the amplitude Ai is given as follows, Ai = (i ) π , i = 1, . . . , N [58,59], present
several types of roads. The value of roughness coefficients Sd (f0 ) based on the road classifications according to the ISO 8608
standard [58]. The first three classes of pavements are different qualities of the road surface such as A = very good, B = good
and C = average corresponding to the values of Sd (f0 ) = 1 × 10 − 6 , 4 × 10 − 6 , 16 × 10 − 6 [51], respectively, for studying. Based
on the power spectral density function (PSD), the random typical profiles of pavements are given in Fig. 19.
 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428 425

Fig. 19. Type A, B, C, rough surface profiles.

The sum of original road profile r(x) and the deflection of the beam excites the vehicle to make higher dynamic impact
on this structure. Thus the interaction forces in these cases are continuously changed through the beam surface. The dy-
namic behaviors at middle position of an elastic beam are increased when the quality of irregular surface is decreased. It
is obviously illustrated in Fig. 20 for comparison. The dynamic deflections at the central beam is increasing 25% for type B
comparing to type A, whereas over 80% dynamics impact factor for the dynamics response of type C comparing to type A.
It is concluded that the irregular roughness surface of road pavements has the large effect on the dynamic vibration of the
Euler–Bernoulli beam as well as the vibration of vehicle model. Then, the designing of vehicle-bridge interaction considered
random of road irregularity is indispensable in practical calculations.
426 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

Fig. 20. Comparison for dynamic central deflection responses regarding to different types A, B, C of road irregularities.

5. Conclusion

The dynamic behaviors of an Euler–Bernoulli beam under moving vehicle are developed by present isogeometric
approach can be drawn as following
• Rotation-free novel theory has been successfully applied for the Euler–Bernoulli beam. The development of proposed
method can modeled with a few degrees of freedom however the accuracy is excellent agreement to the analytical
results. The unknown degree of freedom using in isogeometric analysis for Euler–Bernoulli beam is only one variable
at each node (control point) and achieves higher order continuity. It means that the proposed isogeometric method can
reduced the computational time, cost and also stable implementation.
• The Euler–Bernoulli beam has existed drawbacks in analyzing the high-frequency vibration, therefore dealing with Tim-
oshenko beam is a solution to solve the existing shortcomings of Euler–Bernoulli beam. Moreover, this study also devel-
oped the beam element in two dimension, however vehicles or trains are responded into three-dimensional schemes,
then the extensively exploiting for these models in the three dimensional beam is crucial to assess the dynamic
responses of the beams under the complicated moving loads as a next study.
• The second derivatives of the displacement field can be easily to derive by IGA approach, then it implied that the stress
state of the Euler–Bernoulli is better with smoothness continuity over the boundary of each element. However, as such
is to become constant in finite element analysis. Therefore, the larger errors when calculated by finite element method
are possible.
• In the general problem, the moving vehicle system on the irregularity of surface roughness has been successfully verified.
The dynamic behaviors of bridge structures traveling by the moving vehicles consider with typical surface irregularities
and earthquakes conditions regarding to the derailment issues using the proposed IGA method at which the future works
are aimed.
• The comparison results of analytical formulation, finite element method and isogeometric approach proved that the iso-
geometric method is suggested itself as the effective tool in computational dynamic behaviors of solid structures as
Euler–Bernoulli beam.

Acknowledgments

This research is funded by Vietnam National Foundation for Science and Technology Development (NAFOSTED) under
grant number 107.02-2016.19.

References

[1] T.J.R. Hughes, J.A. Cottrell, Y. Bazilevs, Isogeometric analysis: CAD finite elements NURBS exact geometry and mesh refinement, Comput. Methods Appl.
Mech. Eng. 194 (2005) 4135–4195.
[2] L.A. Piegl, W. Tiller, The NURBS Book, 2nd ed, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997.
[3] T. Elguedj, Y. Bazilevs, V.M. Calo, T.J.R. Hughes, B-and F-projection methods for nearly incompressible linear and non-linear elasticity and plasticity
using higher-order NURBS elements, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 197 (2008) 2732–2762.
[4] J.A. Cottrell, A. Reali, Y. Bazilevs, T.J.R. Hughes, Isogeometric analysis of structural vibrations, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 195 (2006) 5257–5296.
[5] L. Beirão da Veiga, A. Buffa, C. Lovadina, M. Martinelli, G. Sangalli, An isogeometric method for the Reissner–Mindlin plate bending problem, Comput
Methods Appl Mech. Eng. 209–212 (2012) 45–53.
 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428 427

[6] D.J. Benson, Y. Bazilevs, M.C. Hsu, T.J.R. Hughes, Isogeometric shell analysis: the Reissner–Mindlin shell, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 199 (2010)
276–289.
[7] J. Kiendl, Y. Bazilevs, M.C. Hsu, R. Wüchner, K.U. Bletzinger, The bending strip method for isogeometric analysis of Kirchhoff–Love shell structures
comprised of multiple patches, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 199 (2010) 2403–2416.
[8] D.J. Benson, Y. Bazilevs, M.C. Hsu, T.J.R. Hughes, A large deformation, rotation-free, isogeometric shell, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 200 (13–16)
(2011) 1367–1378.
[9] N. Nguyen-Thanh, H. Nguyen-Xuan, S.P.A. Bordas, T. Rabczuk, Isogeometric analysis using polynomial splines over hierarchical T-meshes for two-di-
mensional elastic solids, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 200 (2011) 1892–1908.
[10] Y. Bazilevs, V.M. Calo, T.J.R. Hughes, Y. Zhang, Isogeometric fluid-structure interaction: theory, algorithms and computations, Comput. Mech. 43 (2008)
3–37.
[11] Ch. Heinrich, B. Simeon, St. Boschert, A finite volume method on NURBS geometries and its application in isogeometric fluid-structure interaction,
Math. Comput. Simul. 82 (2012) 1645–1666.
[12] O.C. Zienkiewicz, R.L. Taylor, The Finite Element Method For Solid and Structural Mechanics, 6th ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, London, UK, 2005.
[13] J.R. Rieker, Y.H. Lin, M.W. Trethewey, Discretization considerations in moving load finite element beam models, Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 21 (1996)
129–144.
[14] P. Lancaster, K. Salkauskas, Surfaces generated by moving least squares methods, Math. Comput. 37 (1981) 141–158.
[15] G.R. Liu, X. Zhao, K.Y. Dai, Z.H. Zhong, G.Y. Li, X. Han, Static and free vibration analysis of laminated composite plates using the conforming radial
point interpolation method, Compos. Sci. Technol. 68 (2008) 354–366.
[16] J.G. Wang, G.R. Liu, A point interpolation meshless method based on radial basis functions, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 54 (2002) 1623–1648.
[17] N. Nguyen-Thanh, J. Kiendl, H. Nguyen-Xuan, R. Wüchner, K.U. Bletzinger, Y. Bazilevs, T. Rabczuk, Rotation free isogeometric thin shell analysis using
PHT-splines, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 200 (2011) 3410–3424.
[18] A. Benedetti, A.M. Tralli, A new hybrid F.E. model for arbitrarily curved beam. I. Linear analysis, Comput. Struct. 33 (6) (1989) 1437–1449.
[19] C. Gontier, C. Vollmer, A large displacement analysis of a beam using a CAD geometric definition, Comput. Struct. 57 (6) (1995) 981–989.
[20] R. Echter, M. Bischoff, Numerical efficiency, locking and unlocking of NURBS finite elements, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 199 (5–8) (2010)
374–382.
[21] O. Weeger, U. Wever, B. Simeon, Isogeometric analysis of nonlinear Euler–Bernoulli beam vibrations, Nonlinear Dyn. 72 (2013) 813–835.
[22] A. Cazzani, M. Malagù, E. Turco, Isogeometric analysis of plane-curved beams, in: Math. Mech. Solids, 2014, pp. 1–16.
[23] L. Beirão da Veiga, C. Lovadina, A. Reali, Avoiding shear locking for the Timoshenko beam problem via isogeometric collocation methods, Comput.
Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 241–244 (2012) 38–51.
[24] Y. Bazilevs, V.M. Calo, T.J.R. Hughes, Y. Zhang, Isogeometric fluid-structure interaction: theory, algorithms, and computations, Comput. Mech. 43 (1)
(2008) 3–37.
[25] Y. Bazilevs, L. Beirão de Veiga, J.A. Cottrell, T.J.R. Hughes, G. Sangalli, Isogeometric analysis: approximation stability and error estimates for h-refined
meshes, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 16 (7) (2006) 1031–1090.
[26] M.R Dörfel, B. Jüttler, B. Simeon, Adaptive isogeometric analysis by local h-refinement with t-splines, Comput Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 199 (5–8)
(2010) 264–275.
[27] T.J.R. Hughes, A. Reali, G. Sangalli, Efficient quadrature for NURBS-based isogeometric analysis, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 199 (5–8) (2010)
301–313.
[28] A.V. Vuong, C. Gianelli, B. Jüttler, B. Simeon, A hierarchical approach to adaptive local refinement in isogeometric analysis, Comput. Methods Appl.
Mech. Eng. 200 (49–52) (2011) 3554–3567.
[29] F. Auricchio, L. Beirão da Veiga, T.J.R. Hughes, A. Reali, G. Sangalli, Isogeometric collocation for elastostatics and explicit dynamics, Comput. Methods
Appl. Mech. Eng. 249–252 (2012) 2–14.
[30] J. Kiendl, F. Auricchio, T.J.R. Hughes, A. Reali, Single-variable formulations and isogeometric discretizations for shear deformable beams, Comput. Meth-
ods Appl. Mech. Eng. 284 (2015) 988–1004.
[31] S.P. Timoshenko, On the forced vibration of bridges, Philos. Mag. 43 (257) (1922) 1018–1019.
[32] J.T. Kenny, Steady state vibrations of beam on elastic foundation for moving load, J. Appl. Mech. 21 (1954) 359–364.
[33] RaoN.S.V Kameswara, One set of separation between a beam and a tensionless foundation due to moving loads, J. Appl. Mech. 41 (1974) 303–305.
[34] C.E. Inglis, A Mathematical Treatise On Vibration in Railway Bridges, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1934.
[35] E. Savin, Dynamic amplification factor and response spectrum for the evaluation of vibration of beams under successive moving loads, J. Sound Vib.
248 (2) (2001) 267–288.
[36] Y.B. Yang, J.D Yau, L.C. Hsu, Vibration of simple beams due to trains moving at high speeds, Eng. Struct. 19 (1997) 936–944.
[37] G.T. Michaltsos, Dynamic behavior of a single-span beam subjected to loads moving with variable speeds, J. Sound Vib. 258 (2) (2002) 359–372.
[38] G. Michaltsos, D. Sophianopoulos, A.N. Kounadis, The effect of a moving mass and other parameters on the dynamic response of a simply supported
beam, J. Sound Vib. 191 (3) (1996) 357–362.
[39] G.T. Michaltsos, A.N. Kounadis, The effects of centripetal and coriolis forces on the dynamic response of light bridges under moving loads, J. Vib.
Control 7 (2001) 315–326.
[40] R.T. Wang, T.H. Chou, Non-linear vibration of Timoshenko beam due to a moving force and the weight of the beam, J. Sound Vib. 218 (1) (1998)
117–131.
[41] Y.H. Lin, M.W. Trethewey, Finite element analysis of elastic beams subjected to moving dynamic loads, J. Sound Vib. 136 (1990) 323–342.
[42] D. Huang, T.L. Wang, Impact analysis of cable-stayed bridges, Comput. Struct. 43 (1992) 897–908.
[43] K. Henchi, M. Fafard, G. Dhatt, M. Talbot, Dynamics behavior of multi-span beams under moving loads, J. Sound Vib. 199 (1) (1997) 33–50.
[44] J.Z. Li, M.B. Su, The resonant vibration for a simply supported girder bridge under high-speed trains, J. Sound Vib. 224 (1999) 897–915.
[45] S.S. Law, X.Q. Zhu, Bridge dynamic responses due to road surface roughness and braking of vehicle, J. Sound Vib. 282 (3–5) (2005) 805–830.
[46] A.V. Pesterev, L.A. Bergman, C.A. Tan, B. Yang, Assessing tire forces due to roadway unevenness by the pothole dynamic amplification factor method,
J. Sound Vib. 279 (2005) 817–841.
[47] M. Simsek, T. Kocaturk, Nonlinear dynamic analysis of an eccentrically pre-stressed damped beam under a concentrated moving harmonic load, J.
Sound Vib. 320 (1–2) (2009) 235–253.
[48] Y.B. Yang, B.H. Lin, Vehicle-bridge interaction analysis by dynamic condensation method, J. Struct. Eng. 121 (1995) 1636–1643.
[49] Y.B. Yang, J.D Yau, Vehicle-Bridge interaction element for dynamic analysis, J. Struct. Eng. 123 (1997) 1512–1518.
[50] Y.B. Yang, Y.S Wu, Dynamic stability of trains moving over bridges shaken by earthquakes, J. Sound Vib. 258 (1) (2002) 65–94.
[51] S.Q. Wu, S.S. Law, Vehicle axle load identification on bridge deck with irregular road surface profile, Eng. Struct. 33 (2) (2011) 591–601.
[52] O. Kropáč, P. Múčka, Classification scheme for random longitudinal road unevenness considering road waviness and vehicle response, Shock Vib. 16
(3) (2009) 273–289.
[53] L. Fryba, Vibration of Solids and Structures Under Moving Load, Thomas Telford, London, 1999.
[54] B. Dyniewicz, C.L Ba. yer, Moving loads-analytical and numerical approaches, Theor. Found. Civil Eng. (2006) 37–48.
[55] A.V. Metrikine, S.N. Verichev, J. Blaauwendraad, Stability of a two-mass oscillator moving on a beam supported by a visco-elastic half-space, Int. J.
Solids Struct. 42 (3–4) (2005) 1187–1207.
[56] F. Auricchio, L. Beirao da Veiga, A. Buffa, C. Lovadina, A. Reali, G. Sangalli, A fully locking-free isogeometric approach for plane linear elasticity prob-
lems: a stream function formulation, Comput Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 197 (2007) 160–172.
428 V.N. Van Do et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 51 (2017) 405–428

[57] J.Y. Cho, Y.M. Song, Y.H Choi, Boundary locking induced by penalty enforcement of essential boundary conditions in mesh-free methods, Comput.
Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 131 (2008) 1167–1183.
[58] M. Agostinacchio, D. Ciampa, S. Olita, The, vibrations induced by surface irregularities in road pavements – a Matlab® approach, Eur. Transp. Res. Rev.
6 (2014) 267–275.
[59] R. Karoumi, Response of Cable-Stayed and Suspension Bridges to Moving Vehicles, Doctoral Thesis, 1998.
[60] J.C.O. Nielsen, T.J.S. Abrahamsson, Coupling of physical and modal components systems on general beam structures for analysis of moving nonlinear
dynamics, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 33 (1992) 1843–1859.
[61] S.H. Ju, Y.S. Ho, C.C. Leong, A finite element method for analysis of vibration induced by maglev trains, J. Sound Vib. 331 (2012) 3751–3761.
[62] J.A. Cottrell, T.J.R. Hughes, A. Reali, Studies of refinement and continuity in isogemetric analysis, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 196 (2007)
4160–4183.
[63] G. Lombaert, J.P. Conte, Random vibration analysis of dynamic vehicle-bridge interaction due to road unevenness, J. Eng. Mech. 138 (2012) 816–825.
[64] G.B. Warburton, The Dynamical Behaviour of Structures, 2nd ed, Pergamon Press Ltd., Oxford, 1976.
[65] S.H. Ju, H.T. Lin, C.C. Hsueh, S.L. Wang, A simple finite element model for vibration analyses induced by moving vehicles, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng.
68 (2006) 1232–1256.