Hindawi

Mathematical Problems in Engineering

Volume 2022, Article ID 1395543, 10 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/1395543

Research Article
Impact Response Spectrum for Vessel-Bridge Collision Design

Tao Fu ,1 Jianpu Hou,1 Kai Wang,1 Xiaoqian Ren,1 Zhixin Zhu,1 and Lingxiao Meng2
1
School of Transportation Engineering, Shandong Jianzhu University, Jinan, China
2
China State Construction Infrastructure Corporation, Beijing, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Tao Fu; greenvillage_17@163.com

Received 27 January 2022; Accepted 24 March 2022; Published 23 April 2022

Academic Editor: Łukasz Jankowski

Copyright © 2022 Tao Fu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

An equivalent static method is employed in calculating the impact response of vessel-bridge collisions, in which the dynamic
characteristics of vessel-bridge collisions are ignored. An impact response spectrum for vessel-bridge design is proposed according
to the principle of the earthquake response spectrum. The impact force time-histories are obtained through a numerical
simulation method using finite element software. The relationship between the displacement amplification factor of the single-
degree-of-freedom, period, and damping ratio under the excitation of impact force-time histories is obtained. The regularity of the
displacement amplification is summarized. The characteristics of the vessel-bridge collision are given. The three-stage expression
and specific application steps of the impact response spectrum for the design of vessel-bridge collision are provided.

1. Introduction are based on specific model tests or special formulas dedi-

Many high-input and high-tech bridges have been built for
crossing inland rivers, estuaries, and seas. At the same time,
the tonnage and the size of shipping have also been in-
creasing. On busy route segments, the collision between
vessels and bridges could occur frequently. According to
statistics [1], the collapse of bridges being hit by vessels is a
frequent occurrence. Vessels colliding with bridges not only
cause significant economic loss and casualty but also brings
negative political consequences and serious environmental
disruption. The collision-related safety of channel bridges is
manifested in many aspects, such as bridge damage, vessel
damage, loss of life, waterway interruption, environmental
pollution, economic loss, and social impact.
At present, vessel-bridge collisions are receiving wide-
spread attention [2]. The concerned research mostly focused
on impact force estimation [3], finite element numerical
simulation [4–6], improvement in the design of bridge anti-
collision measures [7–9], and vessel-bridge collision risk
assessment [10–12]. For the static method, the estimation
formula used in the design of vessel-bridge collision to
determine the impact force might give inaccurate quanti-
tative results, especially for elastic-plastic problems associ-
ated with complex systems. Most of the estimation formulas
cated to a single bridge. Therefore, the impact force obtained
by different estimation formulas is not universal. Moreover,
there could be controversy in the design of vessel-bridge
collision. The dynamic characteristics of vessel-bridge col-
lision are also ignored by this method. The finite element
analysis of vessel-bridge collisions which is mostly carried
out for typical tonnages and speeds lacks universal adapt-
ability due to the difficulty in the data processing. During the
finite element simulation process, numerous complex fac-
tors need to be considered, such as the nonlinear constitutive
relationship of the structure, the nonlinearity of boundary
conditions, the contact type in collision processes, and block
damping. As a higher level of numerical simulation is re-
quired for users, it is not widely used in engineering design.
To deduce the dynamic response of vessel-bridge col-
lisions, the static equivalent method is usually adopted in
most specifications [13–15]. Wang and Fan proposed that
vessel-bridge collision design should transit from a static to a
dynamic design method [16]. Wang et al. established the
simplified collision model and forced vibration model,
which promoted the application of dynamic analysis
methods and finite element analysis in bridge engineering
design [17]. [20] established the barge impact spectrum
model while considering the dynamic amplification effect
2 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

under vessel impact [18–21]. Fan et al. proposed the WAS were built. The finite element model of a typical vessel bow is
method to understand the maximum response of the shown in Figure 1. The vessels were forced to impact rigid
structure [22]. Wang and Yu established the vessel impact walls at different speeds. A total of 72 impact force time-
spectrum model based on 81 impact force time-history history curves were obtained and were applied to the single-
samples [23]. Wang et al. proposed the SUM method to degree-of-freedom system [26]. The single-degree-of-free-
superpose modes. The SUM method was transformed into dom system is shown in Figure 2. Several impact force time-
the IFM method, after further simplification. The precision history curves are plotted as shown in Figure 3. Under the
evaluation was conducted to verify the feasibility of the two impact force P(t), the dynamic equation of single-degree-of-
methods [24]. Consolazio et al. extended the application freedom system is as follows:
range of the impact spectrum method. The method was able
to solve the nonlinear response based on the equivalent mU(t)′′ + cU(t)′ + kU(t) � P(t) � Pm · P(t). (1)
linearization technique while improving the computational
efficiency [18]. A mass point collision method and forced (1) can also be expressed as
vibration method for vessel collision impact calculation were P(t) Pm · P(t)
stipulated followed by Specifications for Collision Design of U(t)″ + 2ξωU(t)′ + ω2 U(t) � �
m m
Highway Bridges (JTG/T 3360-02-2020) [25]. Moreover, the
model selection and the damping ratio of structural vibra- c
ξ � √���, (2)
tion mode for each method were also stipulated. 2 km
Most vessel-bridge collision accidents only cause local 􏽳��
damage to the bridge structure, while leaving the whole k
bridge structure in an elastic state. During the seismic ω� ,
m
analysis of the structure, the seismic acceleration response
spectrum defines the relationship between maximum where, m, c, and k denote the quality of the particle, system
acceleration response and the natural vibration period of damping, and stiffness of single-degree-of-freedom system,
the single-degree-of-freedom(SDOF) system, which have respectively. ξ and ω denote the system damping ratio and
different damping ratios and natural vibration periods circle frequency of single degree of freedom. P(t) and U
under the action of ground motion time-history curve. represent the impact force time-history and displacement,
Then, the universal adaptive response spectrum was ob- respectively. Pm is the maximum value of P(t), and P(t) is
tained according to a large number of seismic acceleration equal to P(t)/Pm . The dynamic response of equation (2) can
response spectrum statistics. Referring to the seismic be calculated by the Duhamel integral:
response spectrum and vessel impact force time-history
1 t
curve, the maximum displacement of the single-degree- U(t) � 􏽱����� 􏽚 P(τ)exp
of-freedom system was calculated, which has different ωm 1 − ξ 2 0
natural vibration periods under the action of vessel col- (3)
lision force time-history. Thus, the amplification dis- 􏽱�����
placement coefficient spectrum can be obtained by [−ξ(t − τ)]sin ω 1 − ξ 2 (t − τ)dr.
measuring the ratio between displacement and static
displacement under a maximum impact force. According The displacement amplification coefficient (β) is used to
to the function fitting, the response impact spectrum of describe the maximum dynamic response of the SDOF
vessel-bridge collision with statistical significance can be system, which is defined as the ratio between the maximum
deduced by establishing the rules of the amplified dis- dynamic displacement and the maximum static displace-
placement coefficient spectrum. ment, and the formula is as follows:
The dynamic analysis of the single-degree-of-freedom
system was carried out by using the time-history curve of Um
β� , (4)
impact force. Similar to the definition of the earthquake Ust
response spectrum, a group of response spectrums could be
obtained, while summarizing them statistically based on the where Ust represents the static displacement response of the
dynamic peak response and static peak response ratio. The system under the action of impact force time-history peak,
response impact spectrum for vessel-bridge collision design is that is, Ust is equal to Pm /mω2 and Um denotes the maxi-
the enveloped response spectrum curve which was fitted out. mum displacement response of the system under impact
force time-history.
According to the definition of β (3 and 4), β can be
2. Response Principle of Single-Degree-of- further expressed as follows:
Freedom System under Vessel Collision ω 􏼌􏼌 t
􏼌 􏽱����� 􏼌􏼌
􏼌
Force-Time History β � 􏽱����� 􏼌􏼌􏼌􏼌􏽚 P(τ)exp[−ξω(t − τ)]sin ω 1 − ξ 2 (t − τ)dτ 􏼌􏼌􏼌􏼌, (5)
1 − ξ2 0
Finite element models of eight vessels with different ton-
nages (500DWT,1000DWT, 3000-1DWT, 3000-2DWT, where | . . . | denotes absolute maximum value and damping
10000DWT, 12000DWT, 30000DWT, and 50000DWT) ratio is taken as 0.05.
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 3

(a) (b)

Figure 1: Finite element models of typical vessel. (a) 1000DWT. (b) 10000DWT.

δ
m
P (t)

k c

Figure 2: Single-degree-of-freedom system.

40 50
10000DWT 10000DWT
V=2.0 m/s V=3.0 m/s
40
30 ξ=0.5 ξ=0.5
Impact force (kN)

Impact force (kN)

30
20
20

10
10

0 0

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
T (s) T (s)
(a) (b)

Figure 3: The time-history curves of impact forces. (a) The time-history curve of impact force 1. (b) The time-history curve of impact force 2.

3. Impact Spectrum Properties of Single-
Degree-of-Freedom System
The 72 time-history curves of impact force acting on the
single-degree-of-freedom system with a damping ratio of 5%
were used to obtain the displacement amplification coeffi-
cient (β) curves with different natural vibration periods. The
natural vibration periods range from 0.01s to 10s. The curve
consisted of a logarithmic coordinate system based on 10,
whereas the transverse coordinate contained the natural
vibration period (T) and the ordinate was the displacement
amplification coefficient (β). Figure 4 shows the impact
spectrum of vessel-bridge collisions classified by tonnages.
The following conclusions were obtained through sta-
tistical analysis:
(1) Under the same collision velocity and tonnage of the
vessel, the natural vibration period of the structure
had a great influence on the displacement amplifi-
cation coefficient (β). For a relatively long period of
the natural vibration, all curves decayed regularly.
On the contrary, the time-history spectrum
4 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

2.5 2.5
3000DWT
2.0 2.0 ξ=0.05

1.5 1.5

β 1.0 β 1.0

0.5 0.5

0.0 0.0

-0.5 -0.5
10-2 10-1 100 101 10-2 10-1 100 101
T (s) T (s)
(a) (b)
2.5 2.5
10000DWT 12000DWT
ξ=0.05 ξ=0.05
2.0 2.0

1.5 1.5

β 1.0 β 1.0

0.5 0.5

0.0 0.0

-0.5 -0.5
10-2 10-1 100 101 10-2 10-1 100 101
T (s) T (s)
(c) (d)
2.5 2.5
30000DWT 50000DWT
ξ=0.05 ξ=0.05
2.0 2.0

1.5 1.5

β 1.0 β 1.0

0.5 0.5

0.0 0.0

-0.5 -0.5
10-2 10-1 100 101 10-2 10-1 100 101
T (s) T (s)
(e) (f )

Figure 4: The impact spectra of bridge-vessel collisions. (a) 1000DWT. (b) 3000DWT. (c) 10000DWT. (d) 12000DWT. (e) 30000DWT.
(f ) 50000DWT.

characteristics of impact force had a great influence duration was equivalent to an impulse and the in-
on the structure. With the increase in the natural fluence of spectral characteristics on the structure
vibration period, the impact force with a short decreased.
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
(2) The tonnage of the vessel had a great influence on the
displacement amplification coefficient under the
same impact velocity. Therefore, the influence of
vessel tonnage should be considered in curve fitting.
(3) Under the same condition of vessel tonnage, the
velocity of vessel collision had a great effect on the
displacement amplification coefficient while affect-
ing the shape of the curve minutely.
As shown in Figure 5, all β curves were plotted in the
same coordinate system to obtain the statistical shock
spectrum of each vessel tonnage under a 5% damping
ratio. It can be seen that the displacement amplification
coefficient was between 1 and 2 in most intervals of the
natural vibration period. Therefore, the equivalent static
method which is used to solve the dynamic equation
comes with risks during the practical application.
Moreover, the obtained results could be smaller. For a
longer natural structural vibration period, the β curve
decayed below 1, resulting in smaller outputs and con-
servative in practice.
The time of force acting on the structure was changed
from 0.8s to 5.0s. The shock spectrum fitting of vessel
collision can be divided into three sections as smooth in-
creased period (0 − T1 ), fluctuation period (T1 − T2 ), and
the attenuation period (T2 − ∞). With the increase in the
period, shorter natural vibration periods and centralized
displacement amplification coefficient were obtained, indi-
cating the system to be minutely influenced by load dura-
tion. During the fluctuation period, the displacement
amplification coefficient fluctuated, indicating the beginning
of load duration time effect on the reaction system. The
irregular change of load spectrum characteristics had a great
influence on the structural system. During the attenuation
period, the natural vibration increased gradually, whereas
the displacement amplification coefficient decreased, indi-
cating that the load duration was the main factor affecting
the curve. Thus, the static and dynamic characteristics were
comprehensively considered in the drawing process of the
displacement amplification coefficient curves, which in-
cluded the peak effect of collision force-time travel curve, the
duration of load, and the irregularity of load spectrum
characteristics. The resulting outputs were of practical sig-
nificance after fitting.
When the natural vibration period is less than 0.01, the
value of (β) is missing. Based on the shock spectrum image,
the value of (β) was close to 1 for the short natural vibration
period of the structure. For T equal to 0.01s, the structure
system was absolutely a rigid body when β is equal to 1.
Based on the statistical analysis, for T equal to 0 s, β (beta) is
equal to 0.
4. Vessel-Bridge Collision Impact
Spectrum Expression
According to Figure 6, the vessel-bridge collision impact
spectrum could be divided into three sections based on the
trend of the curve. The curve grows steadily when the period
of vibration is in a certain range, then the curve begins to
5
2.5
ξ=0.05
2.0
1.5
β 1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
10-2 10-1 100 101
T (s)
Figure 5: The impact spectra of bridge-vessel collisions at various
tonnages.
fluctuate frequently, and finally, the curve enters the
attenuation.
For the damping ratio of 5%, Table 1 presents the values
of T1 with different tonnages and collision velocities ob-
tained after comparing the displacement magnification
coefficient curves at different collision velocities and ton-
nages. As the values of T1 were relatively concentrated, the
mean of T1 is equal 0.07s as the periodic value of the first
feature point was considered.
Table 2 presents the values of β1 with different tonnages
and collision velocities for the damping ratio of 5％. The
scatter plot is shown in Figure 7, where the values of β1 are
discrete. Multivariate analysis shows that β1 had no obvious
relationship with vessel velocity and tonnage, and therefore
the values are discrete. Thus, the value of β1 is 1.3398.
Table 3 presents the values of T2 with different tonnages
and collision velocities for the damping ratio of 5％. The
scatter plot is shown in Figure 8. Based on statistical analysis,
T2 demonstrated a regular change with the increase in vessel
velocity and tonnage. Better fitting results were obtained
according to the statistics with different tonnage curves at
different vessel velocities. The fitted curve formula is
T2 � 0.1709DWT0.2841 V0.2850 . (6)
Table 4 presents the values of β2 with different tonnages
and collision velocities for the 5% damping ratio. The scatter
plot is shown in Figure 9. Multivariate analysis indicated that
β2 had no obvious relationship with vessel velocity and
tonnage, and therefore the values were discrete. Thus, the
value of β2 is 1.2340.
According to the above analysis, the values of β1 and β2
were discrete. The maximum values of β (βmax ) were obtained
in the first or second sections of the curve. Due to the large
fluctuation of β in the second section of the curve, the values
were unstable. To present a better envelope during the fitting,
make βmax equal to β1 and equal to β2 and take βmax as a curve
fluctuation segment. The displacement magnification coeffi-
cients of βmax for the 72 curves were extracted and are presented
in Table 5. The scatter plot of βmax is shown in Figure 10.
6 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

2.5 2.5

(1.43, 1.55861)

(0.07, 1.47671)
1000DWT

(0.07, 1.41775)

(2.88, 1.3681)
V=2.5 m/s
2.0 2.0

(0.13, 1.19267)
ξ=0.05

(0.22, 1.09443)
1.5 1.5

β 1.0 β 1.0

0.5 0.5

0.0 0.0 12000DWT

V=1.0 m/s
ξ=0.05
-0.5 -0.5
10-2 10-1 100 101 10-2 10-1 100 101
T (s) T (s)
(a) (b)

Figure 6: Feature point extraction diagrams. (a) Example of feature point 1. (b) Example of feature point 2.

Table 1: T1 at different tonnages and impact velocities.

DWT/V 500 1000 3000-1 3000-2 10000 12000 30000 50000
1 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.06 0.07 0.05 0.09
1.5 0.07 0.07 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.05 0.08
2 0.07 0.12 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.09 0.07
2.5 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.06
3 0.05 0.05 0.09 0.05 0.07 0.08 0.06 0.08
3.5 0.08 0.08 0.1 0.07 0.09 0.1 0.09 0.08
4 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.08
4.5 0.06 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.08 0.07 0.07
5 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.09

Table 2: β1 at different tonnages and impact velocities.

DWT/V 500 1000 3000-1 3000-2 10000 12000 30000 50000
1 1.4011 1.4509 1.407 1.2253 1.277 1.4767 1.3568 1.2412
1.5 1.7031 1.4617 1.4644 1.2431 1.3432 1.4107 1.4531 1.3328
2 1.9124 1.4203 1.1634 1.3256 1.4128 1.4248 1.1536 1.191
2.5 1.7429 1.4178 1.1458 1.1375 1.0982 1.2415 1.376 1.177
3 1.3666 1.4246 1.2972 1.235 1.6011 1.2408 1.4722 1.0126
3.5 1.1697 1.3008 1.1715 1.5771 1.3218 1.1169 1.3838 1.2101
4 1.2297 1.3821 1.3799 1.5633 1.558 1.0017 1.5686 1.1719
4.5 1.4021 1.4652 1.143 1.3806 1.6234 1.145 1.1309 1.0249
5 1.2076 1.4183 1.1241 1.4728 1.2794 1.1539 1.885 1.2649

Table 3: T2 at different tonnages and impact velocities.

DWT/V 500 1000 3000 10000 12000 30000 50000
1 0.9 1.21 1.37 1.73 2.88 2.98 4.02
1.5 0.83 1.39 1.59 2.23 3.22 4.87 4.68
2 0.61 1.45 1.99 2 3.44 5.07 4.73
2.5 1.36 1.43 1.47 2.96 3.47 5.36 4.49
3 1.14 1.15 1.75 3.31 3.43 5.68 5.25
3.5 1.18 1.95 2.92 3.33 3.38 5.34 5.17
4 1.78 1.96 2.55 2.98 2.92 5.1 5.17
4.5 1.52 1.87 2.72 3.13 2.73 5.06 4.93
5 1.46 1.88 3.56 3.28 4.31 5.29 5.88
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 7

2.5

2.0

1.5

β1 1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5
1 2 3 4 5
V (m/s)
500DWT 10000DWT
1000DWT 12000DWT
3000-1DWT 30000DWT
3000-2DWT 50000DWT
Figure 7: Scatter plot of β1 .

4
T2
3

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
V (m/s)
500DWT 12000DWT
1000DWT 30000DWT
3000DWT 50000DWT
10000DWT
Figure 8: Fitting plot of T2 .

Table 4: β2 at different tonnages and impact velocities.

DWT/V 500 1000 3000-1 3000-2 10000 12000 30000 50000
1 0.8248 1.2665 1.6526 1.719 1.3009 1.3681 1.0629 1.4278
1.5 1.0876 1.4895 1.5901 1.1795 1.4789 1.2995 1.1674 1.372
2 1.0952 1.4628 1.2741 1.4727 1.4359 1.3193 1.2045 1.3893
2.5 1.0175 1.5586 1.1035 1.4616 1.4446 1.1725 1.2882 1.2319
3 0.9914 1.5461 1.1025 1.3871 1.4854 1.0978 1.2783 1.2436
3.5 1.2294 1.109 1.0821 1.3372 1.175 1.2529 1.0141 1.1311
4 1.0664 1.1742 1.1773 1.4352 1.1513 1.1174 1.1281 1.0329
4.5 0.9839 1.0465 1.193 1.1624 1.16 1.0561 1.0982 1.0931
5 1.0363 1.1595 1.2136 1.3127 1.039 1.027 1.0991 1.2003
8 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

2.5

2.0

1.5
β2
1.0

0.5

0.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
V (m/s)
500DWT 10000DWT
1000DWT 12000DWT
3000-1DWT 30000DWT
3000-2DWT 50000DWT
Figure 9: Scatter plot of β2 .

Table 5: βmax at different tonnages and impact velocities.

DWT/V 500 1000 3000-1 3000-2 10000 12000 30000 50000
1 1.562 1.4742 1.6526 1.719 1.3307 1.5253 1.4406 1.5492
1.5 1.7718 1.4895 1.5901 1.5702 1.4789 1.5728 1.4531 1.4702
2 1.9124 1.4628 1.7329 1.6599 1.4128 1.7683 1.5159 1.3893
2.5 1.7429 1.5586 1.5808 1.5784 1.4441 1.569 1.376 1.3916
3 1.4365 1.5461 1.7979 1.8624 1.4854 1.4768 1.4722 1.5243
3.5 1.5591 1.5511 1.6161 1.5771 1.3266 1.4759 1.3838 1.5892
4 1.5662 1.5537 1.7372 1.5633 1.558 1.4509 1.5686 1.5576
4.5 1.7204 1.4652 1.5667 1.5279 1.6234 1.5007 1.5594 1.5880
5 1.4288 1.4129 1.6261 1.5009 1.4591 1.4814 1.885 1.7532

2.5

2.0

1.5

βmax 1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
V (m/s)
500DWT 10000DWT
1000DWT 12000DWT
3000-1DWT 30000DWT
3000-2DWT 50000DWT
Figure 10: Scatter plot of βmax .
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9

0.6 SRSS method can deduce better results for structures with
sparse natural frequencies. The paper considered the CQC
0.5 method as it is more suitable for the mode combination
rule in response spectrum analysis under vessel-bridge
collision [27]. Even though the WAS method can better
0.4
estimate the vessel-bridge collision response, the ideal
η1 vessel model based on WAS is quite different from the
0.3 actual one [20].
According to the three expressions of vessel-bridge
0.2 collision design shock spectrum, its application can be
summarized as follows:
0.1 (1) According to the peak expression of impact force
(Pm is equal to 0.07721 DW T0.57 V), the peak values
1 2 3 4 5 6
V (m/s)
of impact force were obtained by using vessel velocity
and tonnage. Subsequently, the maximum static
500DWT 12000DWT displacements were obtained.
1000DWT 30000DWT
3000DWT 50000DWT
(2) The eigenvalues of bridge structures, such as modes
10000DWT and periods, were solved.
Figure 11: Fitting plot of attenuation index η1 .
(3) The displacement response of the nth-order vibra-
tion mode of the bridge structure under the action of
the peak impact force was solved.
The analysis indicated that the values of βmax were (4) The CQC method was used to carry out the vibration
concentrated, and hence the mean values βmax a (equal to mode combination to finally obtain the vessel col-
1.5667) were taken as the values of fluctuation section β. The lision response of the bridge structure. It utilized the
data after the second feature point (T2 , β2 ) were used to fit displacement response of the first n-order array.
the attenuation curve. The curve approximately conformed
to the exponential function shape after data processing by 5. Conclusion
Origin. The fitting formula is
β � β2 exp􏼂−η1 T − T2 􏼁􏼃. (7) Based on the earthquake response spectrum, this paper
calculated the peak displacement of vessel-bridge collision
To obtain the values of the attenuation index η1 , the response. The impact force time-history curves under dif-
attenuation sections including the 72 impact force time- ferent vessel tonnages and velocities were obtained by nu-
history curves were fitted by Origin. Figure 11 shows the merical simulation of vessel-bridge collision. As they were
scatter plot of η1 . The curves of attenuation index η1 with applied to the single-degree-of-freedom system, the dis-
respect to vessel velocity and tonnage were fitted well by the placement amplification coefficients were obtained by di-
software. The fitting formula of η1 is viding the peak values of dynamic displacement and static
displacement. Through statistical analysis and fitting of a
η1 � 1.3998DWT−0.1998 􏼐0.4304V−0.6211 + 0.5820􏼑. (8) large number of displacement magnification coefficients, the
statistical law of displacement magnification coefficients was
For the damping ratio of 5%, the expression of the vessel obtained. Moreover, the characteristics of the vessel-bridge
impact spectrum is collision shock spectrum were summarized. Finally, the
three-segment curve expression and application steps of the
⎪
⎧ 7.9529T + 1, 0 ≤ T ≤ T1 􏼁 impact spectrum for vessel-bridge collision design were
⎪
⎨
β � ⎪ 1.5567, T1 ≤ T ≤ T2 􏼁 , (9) presented.
⎪
⎩
0.3227 + β2 exp􏼂−η1 T − T2 􏼁􏼃, T ≥ T2 􏼁
Data Availability
where
The data used to support the findings of this study are in-
T1 � 0.07, cluded within the article.

T2 � 0.1709DWT0.2841 V0.2850 , Conflicts of Interest

(10)
β2 � 1.2340, The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
−0.1998 −0.6211
η1 � 1.3998DWT 􏼐0.4304V + 0.5820􏼑.
Acknowledgments
Appropriate mode combination methods can be used This research was supported by National Natural Science
to solve more accurate structural overall reflection. The Funds, China (grant no. 51408339), Natural Science Funds
10
of Shandong Province (grant no. ZR2021ME227), and
Postgraduate Education Quality Improvement Program
Funds of Shandong Province (grant no. SDYAL19110).
References
[1] Z. Liu, R. Hu, C. Yao, Y. Li, and Y. Li, “State-of-the-art review
of bridge impact research in 2019,” Journal of Civil & Envi-
ronmental Engineering, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 235–246, 2020.
[2] W. Fan, R. Xie, and H. Wang, “Review on China’s bridge
engineering research: 2021,” China Journal of Highway and
Transport, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 60–63, 2021.
[3] G. Wang, Z. Ji, and Y. Li, “Analysis of ship-bridge collision
dynamic property and influential factors considering pile-soil
interaction,” Bridge Construction, vol. 51, no. 04, 2021.
[4] H. Wang, Numerical Study on Impact Behaviors of Bridge Pier
Collided by Vessels, Doctoral dissertation, Huazhong Uni-
versity of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China, 2018.
[5] H. Yin, Elaborate Numerical Simulation of Collision between
Ship and Cross-Sea Bridge, Doctoral dissertation, Harbin
Institute of Technology, Heilongjiang, China, 2019.
[6] W. Fan, Y. Sun, W. Sun, X. Huang, and B. Liu, “Effects of
corrosion and scouring on barge impact fragility of bridge
structures considering nonlinear soil-pile interaction,” Jour-
nal of Bridge Engineering, vol. 26, no. 8, p. 04021058, 2021.
[7] J. Pan, Y. Huang, T. Xia, T. Xia, X. He, and M. Xu, “Analysis of
impact response of vessel collision protection structure for
bridges based on AIS data,” Bridge Construction, vol. 50,
no. 01, pp. 32–37, 2019.
[8] J. Pan, N. Li, H. Fang, Y. Huang, and M. Xu, “Comparative
study on the crashworthiness of bridge ani-ship collision
sandwich panel structure,” Journal of Wuhan University of
Technology, vol. 43, no. 06, pp. 1027–1032, 2019.
[9] W. Shuo and Y. Liming, “Equivalent bending stiffness of a
hexagonal flexible crashworthy device for bridge piers,” Ex-
plosion and Shock, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 387–395, 2017.
[10] Y. Wang, The Dynamic Analysis of Ship Collision for Bridge
and Risk Assessment, Doctoral dissertation ,Shanghai jiaotong
University, Shanghai , China, 2020.
[11] J. Weng, Q. Meng, and X. Qu, “Vessel collision frequency
estimation in the Singapore Strait,” Journal of Navigation,
vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 207–221, 2012.
[12] W. Fan, Y. Sun, C. Yang, W. Sun, and Y. He, “Assessing the
response and fragility of concrete bridges under multi-hazard
effect of vessel impact and corrosion,” Engineering Structures,
vol. 225, p. 111279, 2020.
[13] R. A. Imbsen, “AASHTO LRFD guide specifications for
seismic design of Highway bridges,” in Sixth National Seismic
Conference on Bridges and HighwaysMultidisciplinary Center
for Earthquake Engineering ResearchSouthCarolina Depart-
ment of TransportationFederal Highway Admin-
istrationTransportation Research Board, Washington, DC,
USA, 2008.
[14] J. Guo and W. He, “Comprehensive risk assessment of ship
collision with sea crossing bridge,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 38,
no. 05, pp. 125–133, 2020.
[15] Ministry of Transport of the People’ s Republic of China,
Specification for Design of Highway Bridges and Culverts,
pp. 66-67, China Communications Press Co.,Ltd, Beijing
China, 2015.
[16] J. Wang and L. Fan, “Suggestions on the establishment of
bridge ship collision dynamic design theory and method.
China Civil Engineering Society Bridge and Structural En-
gineering Branch,”vol. 2, pp. 256–262, in Proceedings of the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
18th National Bridge Academic Conference, vol. 2, pp. 256–
262, China Communications Press, Tianjin, China, June,
2008.
[17] J. J. Wang, L. T. Bu, and D. W. Meng, “Simplified dynamic
analysis method of ship-bridge collision: simplified models,”
Computer Aided Engineering, vol. 2, p. 70, 2011.
[18] G. R. Consolazio, M. C. McVay, D. R. Cowan, M. T. Davidson,
and D. J. Getter, Development Of Improved Bridge Design
Provisions for Barge Impact Loading (No. UF Project
00051117), Gator Engineering University, Gainesville, Flor-
ida, 2008.
[19] D. R. Cowan, G. R. Consolazio, and M. T. Davidson, “Re-
sponse-spectrum analysis for barge impacts on bridge
structures,” Journal of Bridge Engineering, vol. 20, no. 12,
p. 04015017, 2015.
[20] W. Fan and W. C. Yuan, “Shock spectrum analysis method for
dynamic demand of bridge structures subjected to barge
collisions,” Computers & Structures, vol. 90-91, pp. 1–12, 2012.
[21] W. Fan, Y. Liu, B. Liu, and W. Guo, “Dynamic ship-impact
load on bridge structures emphasizing shock spectrum ap-
proximation,” Journal of Bridge Engineering, vol. 21, no. 10,
p. 04016057, 2016.
[22] W. Fan, Y. Zhang, and B. Liu, “Modal combination rule for
shock spectrum analysis of bridge structures subjected to
barge collisions,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, vol. 142,
no. 2, p. 04015083, 2016.
[23] J. J. Wang and Z. R. Yu, “Design impact spectrum for vessel-
bridge collision analysis,” Journal of Vibration and Shock,
vol. 33, no. 14, pp. 11–14, 2014.
[24] J. Wang, Y. Song, and Z. Yu, “Impact factor method for design
of bridge foundations under ship collisions,” Advances in
Structural Engineering, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 534–548, 2017.
[25] Ministry of Railways of the People’ s Republic of China,
Specifications for Collision Design of Highway Bridges;JTG/T
3360-02-2020, China Communications Press, Beijing China,
2015.
[26] J. Wang, Y. Song, and L. Bu, “Probabilistic model of impact
force-penetration for ship-bridge collision,” China Journal of
Highway and Transport, vol. 27, no. 6, p. 59, 2014.
[27] D. J. Getter, G. R. Consolazio, and M. T. Davidson,
“Equivalent static analysis method for barge impact-resistant
bridge design,” Journal of Bridge Engineering, vol. 16, no. 6,
pp. 718–727, 2011.